Emergency Act commission

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, West said:

No I don't. The government was changing their mind every five minutes and slapped on a bunch of restrictions for the crime of making a medical choice.

Yes you do. There is no such crime. Show me the official statute that makes a medical choice a crime.

[West]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yes you do. There is no such crime. Show me the official statute that makes a medical choice a crime.

Well if I dared to sit down at a table to enjoy a Tim's donut they'd call the police and have me escorted out as one of the undesirable class.. 

But nah that doesn't resemble any other time in history lol

[West]

8 minutes ago, West said:

Well if I dared to sit down at a table to enjoy a Tim's donut they'd call the police and have me escorted out as one of the undesirable class.. 

But nah that doesn't resemble any other time in history lol

A vaccinated diabetic can go to the same Tim Hortons, sit at the table, stuff their face with multiple donuts until they have to be rushed to the hospital in a diabetic shock.. 

A healthy unvaxxed individual who's already had covid and successfully fought it off at home without any medical treatment cannot go and sit at that same tim Hortons because they don't have the the pseudovax.. 

One person can sit restrictions free at the table, make poor choices, and end up taking up a hospital bed. The other cannot... science and whatnot you know 

You know... "science" and "protecting the Healthcare system"

Edited November 1, 2022 by West

[Nefarious Banana]

Bottom line:   The 'enquiry' will come to the conclusion that Trudeau did the 'right' thing but, there were a few little glitches along the way.

Precedent is set for future EMA to be unleashed for . . . . . contempt for Bill C-11, contempt for Liberal funding of media, contempt for Federal Liberals and their lunge into Marxism, contempt for Trudeau and his band of brain-dead penguins . . . . . the list is long.

Edited November 1, 2022 by Nefarious Banana

[West]

5 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Bottom line:   The 'enquiry' will come to the conclusion that Trudeau did the 'right' thing but, there were a few little glitches along the way.

Precedent is set for future EMA to be unleashed for . . . . . contempt for Bill C-11, contempt for Liberal funding of media, contempt for Federal Liberals and their lunge into Marxism, contempt for Trudeau and his band of brain-dead penguins . . . . . the list is long.

I agree... Trudeau stacked the deck. Worked to his advantage to grab more and more power. 

The next fake crisis is the environment. WEF is already going after the auto industry and you'll see further attacks on mining. All the good paying jobs.. more reliance on government. Easier to control

[eyeball]

28 minutes ago, West said:

Well if I dared to sit down at a table to enjoy a Tim's donut they'd call the police and have me escorted out as one of the undesirable class.. 

And if you'd simply driven thru the take-out you could enjoy your donuts in the comfort of your car.

In any case Tim Hortons does have the right to impose conditions on its customers and to call police if customers refuse to leave their premises.

[Moonbox]

2 hours ago, West said:

I'm the one listening to science here. You are not

What a joke.  It would be a lot more fitting to say that you ignore the scientific consensus and then elevate the small handful of dissenters (1% maybe?  I don't know) as the highest authorities on the topic.  You don't care about 99% of the science.  You only care about the doctors making the noises you want to hear.  

Edited November 1, 2022 by Moonbox

[ExFlyer]

47 minutes ago, West said:

We've discussed the science several times on here.. the vast majority of people who have died or who have been hospitalized due to the bug are the elderly, many or whom are in the system in long term care facilities; those who are already on death's doorstep . The others are folks with comorbidities. The experts royally f'd up and now want us still to follow them off a cliff and force you to hide out for something that obviously poses no significant threat to the vast majority of the population

You aren't following the science only quoting from the CBC.. Nice try

Hey... I get it that you think you know more than doctors, health officials and scientist..

What you don't get is I do not think you have any credibility.

When you finally understand that, you will be OK.

Oh and, the topic is the Emergency Act Commission.

Edited November 1, 2022 by ExFlyer

[ExFlyer]

41 minutes ago, West said:

Well if I dared to sit down at a table to enjoy a Tim's donut they'd call the police and have me escorted out as one of the undesirable class.. 

But nah that doesn't resemble any other time in history lol

Why? Are you that unkempt and emit such an offensive odour??

[eyeball]

28 minutes ago, West said:

A vaccinated diabetic can go to the same Tim Hortons, sit at the table, stuff their face with multiple donuts until they have to be rushed to the hospital in a diabetic shock.. 

A healthy unvaxxed individual who's already had covid and successfully fought it off at home without any medical treatment cannot go and sit at that same tim Hortons because they don't have the the pseudovax.. 

One person can sit restrictions free at the table, make poor choices, and end up taking up a hospital bed. The other cannot... science and whatnot you know 

You know... "science" and "protecting the Healthcare system"

You'd have a point if a diabetic shock was contagious, especially if it took excavators to keep up with the dead.

[West]

27 minutes ago, eyeball said:

And if you'd simply driven thru the take-out you could enjoy your donuts in the comfort of your car.

In any case Tim Hortons does have the right to impose conditions on its customers and to call police if customers refuse to leave their premises.

?.. 

Yes.. a Tim's can ask you to leave I'd they don't like your skin colour. Bring back whites only water fountains while you are at it...

[West]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You'd have a point if a diabetic shock was contagious, especially if it took excavators to keep up with the dead.

Well there's two ways to look at it. 

1. The vaccines work and you have nothing to worry about. I'm not putting you at risk. 

2. The vaccines don't work to stop the covid transmission and you are at risk from a guy with a pseudovax.. 

Either way your imposing of mandates against one group of people is dumb and defies any sort of reasonable logic..

Now if your argument is "protecting health care" why can that diabetic stuff his face with donuts to the point of diabetic shock and take up an emergency bed but I as a healthy person with no risk of hospitalization not be able to sit in the Tim's?

Edited November 1, 2022 by West

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, West said:

?.. 

Yes.. a Tim's can ask you to leave I'd they don't like your skin colour. Bring back whites only water fountains while you are at it...

No, Timmies can't do that at all. Stop making stuff up.

[West]

30 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Hey... I get it that you think you know more than doctors, health officials and scientist..

What you don't get is I do not think you have any credibility.

When you finally understand that, you will be OK.

Oh and, the topic is the Emergency Act Commission.

Well neither do the "experts".. just made up nonsense based on public perception

[Queenmandy85]

4 minutes ago, West said:

I as a healthy person with no risk of hospitalization not be able to sit in the Tim's?

You don't seem to understand. You will spread it to other people. You also seem to be pretty cavalier with the lives of people with co-mobidities and the elderly. 

[West]

41 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

You don't seem to understand. You will spread it to other people. You also seem to be pretty cavalier with the lives of people with co-mobidities and the elderly. 

I thought the vaxx protects them? 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, West said:

Well neither do the "experts".. just made up nonsense based on public perception

No it's based on peer review and subject to replication, correction, review, corrections more review and so on.

We'll never know for sure if the experts are wrong and you're right unless you go thru the same process. That's just how science is done. It can't be based on the amount of flummoxed anger you throw at it no matter how hard you throw it.

[eyeball]

51 minutes ago, West said:

I thought the vaxx protects them? 

It does, with around 5 times the effectiveness it has in unvaccinated people.

[Goddess]

2 hours ago, West said:

Well neither do the "experts".. just made up nonsense based on public perception

This has nothing to do with health.  It's all politics, money and power.

[Goddess]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

It does, with around 5 times the effectiveness it has in unvaccinated people.

Walensky just tested positive for covid again - for the second time in less than a month. 

Yes, really effective. ?

[Goddess]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

No it's based on peer review and subject to replication, correction, review, corrections more review and so on.

Peer review is nothing much, really.

Some of the other things you're talking about are part of the Bradford Hill criteria for causation.  There are 10 criteria.  You only have to have 5 to prove causation.

I was just going to make a post about it.  Because I'm tired of hearing you anti-science people beak off about everything being "coincidences" and "That doesn't prove causation." without knowing WTF you're talking about.

[West]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

It does, with around 5 times the effectiveness it has in unvaccinated people.

Hmmm so you shouldn't have much to worry about then. 

[West]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Walensky just tested positive for covid again - for the second time in less than a month. 

Yes, really effective. ?

Either it's effective and the mandates were dumb or it's not effective and the mandates were unnecessary

[West]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

This has nothing to do with health.  It's all politics, money and power.

Yup any other minority group and discrimination policy wouldn't be tolerated

[West]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

No it's based on peer review and subject to replication, correction, review, corrections more review and so on.

We'll never know for sure if the experts are wrong and you're right unless you go thru the same process. That's just how science is done. It can't be based on the amount of flummoxed anger you throw at it no matter how hard you throw it.

Why? It's evident by the large number of fully v'd getting covid that it's really not an effective vaxx at stopping the spread. Best case argument so far as I can tell is hospitalizations... which takes me back to my original point that a diabetic could stuff their face with donuts to the point of hospitalization with no restrictions... and also I have virtually a zero percent chance of being hospitalized based on current health status so they really don't have to be worried about me taking up a coveted hospital bed with covid

Edited November 2, 2022 by West