Jump to content

KEEP THOSE VACCINE DEATHS QUIET!


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Quite wrong.

Back in 2020 I was even saying that the people who seemed intent on railroading us into taking the vax were going to try to get young people to take it, due to the fact that young people don't die of covid. I.e., whatever group they end up in will appear to be very resistant to covid because their ultra-low death rate will bring the avg down.

FFWD to now, Statista still cites the "fully vaccinated" group as proof of success of the jab, because that group is basically chock full of people who only took the jab because they had to, even though they didn't need it. That being the young people I referenced above.

 Why don't you go back to where you think I misspoke, Aristedes?

I've made about 10,000 posts about covid, including posts about the jabs, the origin of covid, Dr Fauci, Dr Tam, Trudeau, jab safety, jab efficacy, etc, etc, etc. You and all the other leftists here hated every single one of them. "They were all wrong and I was a conspiracist". 

Surely by now there must be something that you can dig up to say "I told you so!" about... Find something, Aristedes...

"People were saying" That's not a basis to plan anything. You didn't know shit back in 2020 so don't keep claiming you did. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

"People were saying"

Where do you see that?

Quote

That's not a basis to plan anything. You didn't know shit back in 2020 so don't keep claiming you did. 

I knew that The Lancet and the NEJoM were vax-pimps. I knew that the pro-vaxers would try to vax people who didn't need it. I knew that there was a serious issue behind the BSL4 cover-up. I knew that leftard politicans were highly suspect, by going from "Meh", and "Just carry on as usual" and "Don't mask", and "banning flights is racist", and I knew that Pelosi's hugathon was the wrong thng to do in a pandemic and etc, etc, etc.

Like I said, if you think I was somehow wrong then fid examples in my 10,000 covid posts. 

I'm right here, dumbass. 

Go find some facts to discuss: I obviously don't care about your id10tic opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Where do you see that?

I knew that The Lancet and the NEJoM were vax-pimps. I knew that the pro-vaxers would try to vax people who didn't need it. I knew that there was a serious issue behind the BSL4 cover-up. I knew that leftard politicans were highly suspect, by going from "Meh", and "Just carry on as usual" and "Don't mask", and "banning flights is racist", and I knew that Pelosi's hugathon was the wrong thng to do in a pandemic and etc, etc, etc.

Like I said, if you think I was somehow wrong then fid examples in my 10,000 covid posts. 

I'm right here, dumbass. 

Go find some facts to discuss: I obviously don't care about your id10tic opinion. 

Wow, you are a freaking genius to know all that about a virus no one had ever seen before. Who needs scientists when we have you.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

Cite.

You first - you're the one who claimed everyone was thinking about it :)   ANd i asked for your cite first.  Soooo - still don't have one?

LOL - you know, fewer people would think of you as a lyin' sack o crap if you stopped lying like a sack o crap :)

At least show me a receipt! :)  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

No I didn't.

Ahhhh we're at the point where you have to deny what you said because it was so stupid that you can't defend it ;)   Well fair enough.  The sun is going down after all and we know your brain is solar powered.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

ANd i asked for your cite first.  Soooo - still don't have one?

What would be the point? If I told you shit stinks and rubbed your stupid nose in it you'd tell me a rose never smelled sweeter.

I mean you've already moved the goalposts twice without having been shown a thing.

And BTW, you're clearly not everyone - three goalposts. You're on a roll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Ahhhh we're at the point where you have to deny what you said because it was so stupid that you can't defend it

I don't need to defend the simple fact that yes people indeed did look at past pandemics, i.e. Spanish Flu when COVID hit.

Or defend against your blather that it's literally not true - nobody looked or this gem...

You go from tonnes of people did (not true) to not a single person in the whole world other than you did (also not true)

You're right, I never said these things at all. Thanks for confirming that.

and you come up with this crazy conclusion that somehow in the spanish flue period everyone went crazy so we all knew that people would go crazy now, which is false.

And yet here you are proving you're battier than Marjorie Taylor Green, the Q-anan Shaman dude and probably even WasteCanMan.

LOL!

Edited by eyeball
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

What would be the point? If I told you shit stinks and rubbed your stupid nose in it you'd tell me a rose never smelled sweeter.

Oooppps - triggered leftie is triggerd :)  not my fault you frequently deny saying something you plainly said.  if you DID tell me shit stinks, 30 minutes later you'd deny every having said such a thing.

Quote

I mean you've already moved the goalposts twice without having been shown a thing.

Move them without having been shown a thing.

Ahhh yes.  We're past sunset. We've entered the gibberish hours.

Quote

And BTW, you're clearly not everyone - three goalposts. You're on a roll.

Riiiiighhhttt.  Ok then... maybe have a cookie and a quick nap?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

What memo? Written by who? What hospital?  Who is BC United? A soccer team?

Off topic I guess but contributory in terms of the mindset I find disturbing.

This is one of several reports, many of the others are less kind:

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/harm-reductions-latest-overreach

I think you're onto something though, consulting a soccer team composed of ten year olds would likely serve us better than polling liberal voters in BC. 

 

Edited by Venandi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Venandi said:

Off topic I guess but contributory in terms of the mindset I find disturbing.

This is one of several reports, many of the others are less kind:

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/harm-reductions-latest-overreach

I think you're onto something though, consulting a soccer team composed of ten year olds would likely serve us better than polling liberal voters in BC. 

 

I read the op ed.

While I agree what is said is absurd, if the memo was actually leaked, where is it? Right now it is a couple op ed articles talking about something that is leaked....no validation that it actually exists.

Someone must have it and divulge the entire memo so it can be read in full perspective

Edited by ExFlyer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Right now it is a couple op ed articles talking about something that is leaked....no validation that it actually exists.

Covered by decidedly liberal outlets as well.

Anyway It's embedded in this article. and easily found online for those so inclined.

As you likely know from experience, rules of engagement are typically presented in a "situational context" that expands and amplifies the written directions.

Usually there are lots of questions about specific application in specific circumstances.

I'm guessing there was a lot of discussion about the parameters here and I would have hated to be the OPs guy charged with leading a combined staff discussion on the topic and defending the content. First time I've ever said that BTW, I usually enjoy conjuring up scenarios for  Op Evals and the like.

On second thought, it might have been fun but the absurdity of the presentation would likely have gotten me fired.

Edited by Venandi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Venandi said:

Covered by decidedly liberal outlets as well.

Anyway It's embedded in this article. and easily found online for those so inclined.

As you likely know from experience, rules of engagement are typically presented in a "situational context" that expands and amplifies the written directions.

Usually there are lots of questions about specific application in specific circumstances.

I'm guessing there was a lot of discussion about the parameters here and I would have hated to be the OPs guy charged with leading a combined staff discussion on the topic and defending the content. First time I've ever said that BTW, I usually enjoy conjuring up scenarios for  Op Evals and the like.

On second thought, it might have been fun but the absurdity of the presentation would likely have gotten me fired.

The article is from last year so, and from the Peace River BC area in northern BC, whatever this "memo" is implying is old and it is not known if it is direction or just a discussion memo.

Interesting sentence is "“We are not law enforcement,” the memo reads. “We have never been responsible for ensuring patients/clients are not in possession of unlawful substances.”" which sort of looks like it is from other the nurses association or some hospital administration. I agree that it is absurd. I cannot see any nurse not reporting or confiscating  illegal drugs and weapons before administering care to the patient, it would put themselves in jeopardy.

Anyway, as it is last years story, I wonder what became of the memo.

Anyway, it is off topic and sorry for continuing on with this.

Edited by ExFlyer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Aristides said:

Wow, you are a freaking genius to know all that about a virus no one had ever seen before. Who needs scientists when we have you.

What part of that is genius? Who said that I'm the only person who knew? 

I didn't break the news that there was a BSL4 lab in Wuhan, but when I found out it was there, of course I was skeptical of Fauci's story. Isn't that kinda normal? Isn't it just a little bit sinister when people's posts are being removed from social media, and people are getting banned for talking about it? Where there's smoke...?

Not because I suspected any collusion with China at that point, but so many things were happening that didn't make sense, or were counterintuitive even [stupid, fi I'm being honest] I was in highly skeptical frame of mind to begin with. 

I never said that I figured out that he was funding GoF research there at that point, that would be genius, I never even guessed that the US and China were working together on anything at all there. I was as shocked as you to find out that Fauci funded that research, on that virus, and even more surprised that the truth got out. I'm still shocked by that. That had a really low percentage of happening in the US in this day and age, especially hen you consider who it was that wanted to keep it a secret. 

The difference between me and you is that once I had that information about the GoF research, I kept it front-of-mind instead of suppressing it, and looked backwards at what Fauci knew and when he knew it, reconstructing everything that I 'knew' about covid, Fauci, the jabs, the mandates... everything.

It's a really big deal to find out that he had both of his hands in one of the two cookie jars in Wuhan, back when he alone was in charge of informing the world that the stolen cookies came from the other jar, the one from the wetmarket.  

 

Re: The Lancet and NEJoM, go back and find my posts here about them if you doubt me. I've been talking about their retracted survey, and my skepticism about how quickly everyone attacked the HCQ idea, since 2020. Leftards said so many stupid things about HCQ and Dr Didier Raoult that it was infuriating. The way that HCQ might work made sense to me, as did ivermectin, along with their cost-effectiveness. Off-patent drugs that might fight covid? Why didn't EVERYONE say "Let's see what happens"? HCQ and ivermectin "bind to the ACE2 receptors" or whatever, that covid binds to. They just get in the way of a complex reaction, much like a halon fire extinguisher.  I never bothered to find out exactly how a halon fire extinguisher works, we were just told what it does, how to use it, watched videos of it, and I never consulted a dude with a PhD in chemistry to make sure that it was happening. I saw it happen in videos. Moved on.  

Buddy, you live in an information bubble that no amount of facts or logic can penetrate. Goddess, me and so many others (even myata, your fellow leftist) have tried to talk to you about this for 4 years now and you just insist on keeping your head up your ass. 

edit: Do you guys consider myata a traitor, to some extent? [S]He's basically alt-left on every topic aside from covid. It's a surprisingly stark crossover. A cultist, but not really a cultist? Makes no sense. 

Edited by WestCanMan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, eyeball said:

I don't need to defend the simple fact that yes people indeed did look at past pandemics, i.e. Spanish Flu when COVID hit.

Moving those goal posts again i see :)  You went from "looked at spanish influenza specifically and were able to draw conclusions about the current pandemic" to "may have looked at pandemics in general" :)

And yes - you do have to defend it if you're going to make that claim.

If people were actually looking at the details of what happened in those pandemics there will be lots of evidence of that - articles, resaerch, commentary.  Got any? No?

 

Kid - you make shit up all the time when you think it supports whatever pea-brained idea that's popped into your head. And then you lie your ass off defending your imaginary 'facts'.

Nobody looked at the influenza out break and decided that meant people today would go nuts. Nobody really drew any useful info from previous outbreaks. 

Just stop lying and making crap up and you won't have to spend all that time and energy getting mad at me later when i point out you lie and make shit up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Nobody looked at the influenza out break

In March 2020 alone, the English-language Wikipedia page for “Spanish flu” garnered more than 8.2 million views, shattering the pre-2020 monthly record of 144,000 views during the pandemic’s 2018 centennial.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-1918-flu-faded-in-our-collective-memory-we-might-forget-the-coronavirus-too/#:~:text=In March 2020 alone%2C the English-language Wikipedia page for “Spanish flu” garnered more than 8.2 million views%2C shattering the pre-2020 monthly record of 144%2C000 views during the pandemic’s 2018 centennial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, eyeball said:

When people looked at the Spanish Flu at the beginning of the COVID pandemic it was apparent that millions of people would come unglued as issues became conspiracies and political entrepreneurs proliferated.

The entrepreneurs are still milking it for all it's worth.

 

The COVID-19 pandemic has taken the world by storm, but it is not unique. Past pandemics have likewise been accompanied by conspiracy theories and waves of mistrust in science. In this Curiosities of Medical History feature, we look at some of the wildest theories to emerge during the flu pandemic of 1918.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/the-flu-pandemic-of-1918-and-early-conspiracy-theories

It took all of 5 minutes to find these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Moving those goal posts again i see :)  You went from "looked at spanish influenza specifically and were able to draw conclusions about the current pandemic" to "may have looked at pandemics in general" :)

And yes - you do have to defend it if you're going to make that claim.

If people were actually looking at the details of what happened in those pandemics there will be lots of evidence of that - articles, resaerch, commentary.  Got any? No?

Eyeball likes to pretend to be an iconoclast and gov't skeptic, and then regurgitates all of the LPOC's drivel, much like MH claims to be a conservative, and then regurgitates all of the LPOC's drivel.

Leftists pretend to be champions of the powerless and the oppressed, and then when actual fascism comes along, they rush out and buy hobnailed jackboots

Quote

Kid - you make shit up all the time when you think it supports whatever pea-brained idea that's popped into your head.

Facts are for conservatives. You need to talk to him about his feelings. He's still upset about the Massacre at Glencoe ffs. He feels like he can identify with holocaust survivors because of what happened to 30 people in Glencoe in 1692 😐  

He also feels like the covid jab works, and you're just hectoring him with facts all the time.  "Liiiieeke, what's with your obsession with facts, bruh? They're so ugleee. Can't you just repeat whatever Trudeau says and then be smug like the rest of us?"

FYI, eyeball's "truth" can be whatever he wants it to be, AND he deserves a participation trophy for writing 'stuff' here. "It's 2015" all the time now!

Edited by WestCanMan
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Isn't that because they decided to change the name? And i don't see anyting about people drawing conclusions. Where does it show they all realized people would go crazy this time? The wikipedia page doesn't say that

Epic ail again :)  

54 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Eyeball likes to pretend to be an iconoclast and gov't skeptic, and then regurgitates all of the LPOC's drivel, much like MH claims to be a conservative, and then regurgitates all of the LPOC's drivel.

Leftists pretend to be champions of the powerless and the oppressed, and then when actual fascism comes along, they rush out and buy hobnailed jackboots

Facts are for conservatives. You need to talk to him about his feelings. He's still upset about the Massacre at Glencoe ffs. He feels like he can identify with holocaust survivors because of what happened to 30 people in Glencoe in 1692 😐  

He also feels like the covid jab works, and you're just hectoring him with facts all the time.  "Liiiieeke, what's with your obsession with facts, bruh? They're so ugleee. Can't you just repeat whatever Trudeau says and then be smug like the rest of us?"

FYI, eyeball's "truth" can be whatever he wants it to be, AND he deserves a participation trophy for writing 'stuff' here. "It's 2015" all the time now!

Yeah -  i noticed that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

He's still upset about the Massacre at Glencoe ffs. He feels like he can identify with holocaust survivors because of what happened to 30 people in Glencoe in 1692 

You don't get sarcasm either do you?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Where does it show they all realized people would go crazy this time? The wikipedia page doesn't say that

Ever the observant one aren't you? Lol!

Keep observing...you never know when something might sink in.

15 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Isn't that because they decided to change the name?

We still use the term influenza despite its silly roots.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Ever the observant one aren't you? Lol!

Yeah - i observe you still couldn't defend your statment that massive numbers of people looked at the spanish influenza and realized we were all going to go nuts now :)

 

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

 

Keep observing...you never know when something might sink in.

 

I doubt anything's going to sink into that brain of yours anytime soon. You are decidedly non porous.

 

Quote

We still use the term influenza despite its silly roots.

But we don't use the term 'spanish'. Or we're not supposed to. Because that's racist. 

When people called covid the china flu or wuhan flu the lefties screamed "WHAAAAAT? THAT"S RRRRRRAAAAACIST!!!!!! (reeeeeee!)

And people noted that we've been calling it the 'spanish influenza' for 100 years now. So why wasn't that racist?

 

But then - i've been explaining this to you for decades now.  I've got the receipt :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/4/2024 at 6:26 PM, Moonbox said:

Yes, but throwing one strike doesn't make you a good bowler if your first 999 tries were gutter-balls.  

 

On 4/4/2024 at 6:26 PM, Moonbox said:

Yes, but throwing one strike doesn't make you a good bowler if your first 999 tries were gutter-balls.  

Aw, why don't you just go stick a finger in your ear and go bowling. You had better bring a bottle of Tylenol with you. Let me know if you get any strikes, bowling head. 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,745
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...