Ivermectin vs. Covid and the vaccine

it just seems like an overreaction. i can see possibly that if you had actually gotten Covid, or if you had to work in a meat packing plant or a prison.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #252
Tree09 said:
Did it ever occur to you that only stuff that's actually reviewed for safety and efficacy should be sold to people? That's honestly a no brainer, we expect the same for the equipment we use for cutting trees. If the approval process is too strict that's a debate we could have, but despite those costs we still have mistakes, so which is it? Finally, i actually have a prescription for vitamin D, and they are using it to treat indolent lymphoma in between relapses (indolent lymphoma is slow but mostly terminal for now), in a modern medicine setting. Yup, vitamin D is currently being used to treat types of blood cancers, which are very very expensive to treat using other stuff. It obviously isn't the same as cancer drugs, but they have noted it's effectiveness so it's actually prescribed.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you came out whole from cancer. My GF had kidney cancer in 2013 and she would be dead by now without the surgeons. And my son and his mother would probably not have made it through his birth without the surgeons. And I take doxycycline every time I pull a tick off. SO it's not an all-or-nothing thing here. But I have learned how the system works. I want no parts of it. I AM about to spend 14.5K on unproven stem cell treatments, even though the stem cell doc is telling me I'll likely need a full hip replacement down the road and I now have pretty good health insurance, so the total hip replacement would only cost me the deductible. The hip is considered mid to late stage 4 and I still haven't taken an aspirin.

I disagree... it's not true that only stuff that's actually reviewed for safety and efficacy should be sold to people? If you would actually read some of the links I post up, its clear that the system in the US for testing and approving medicines has been completely corrupted by the greed of big pharma. The FDA process is lacking so much so that if you follow your oncologist's advice, you are almost certainly not getting the best available treatment. If you want to know why I suggest looking into the work of Bem Williams PhD, a 25+ year survivor of glioblastoma. His basic premise can be found here:
cancerpatientfreedom.com

Surviving Terminal Cancer

In my own case, I would likely be dead if I had followed the advice of my oncologist. ... I am convinced I would not have survived had I not pursued "unproven" treatments in addition to the standard treatments I received. Oncologists routinely oppose the use of "unproven" treatments, an...
cancerpatientfreedom.com cancerpatientfreedom.com
Here are a few excerpts from his book. If ever you hear the oncologist say there is nothing more they can do, I would suggest you take heed.
Promising treatments are unavailable because the U.S. government, via the FDA, has adopted a policy that rigidly divides treatments into "proven" and " unproven" categories based on a certification process of questionable validity. When the standard "proven" treatments fail, terminally ill patients are denied access to promising alternatives because these treatments have not yet received FDA approval. - "Surviving Terminal Cancer" - pg.4
Because conventional medicine has its limits, terminal cancer patients need to explore treatment options not yet incorporated into conventional medical practice. Patients must be willing to go beyond their physicians' advice, and sometimes follow options contrary to that advice. This is not an easy road to travel. Newly diagnosed patients are confronted with a disease about which they are largely ignorant. For better or for worse, they often are at the mercy of their physicians. Some physicians will actively resist any approach to treatment other than their own, even when they concede that their treatment offers little promise. Therefore, patients need to learn how to acquire medical information on their own while exploiting their physicians' knowledge and expertise. To do both simultaneously requires considerable patience, social skill, and effort. - "Surviving Terminal Cancer" - pg.2
Prevailing medical practice constrains access to treatments that have a good chance of providing significant clinical benefits. Some of these options come from alternative medicine, which is typically scorned by conventional physicians. Others come from cutting-edge treatments, which patients often do not learn about until several years into the treatments' development--years that many cancer patients do not have." - "Surviving Terminal Cancer", pg.3

If you want to learn about the cutting-edge science on cancer check out the moss reports. Ralph Moss gathers the latest science on over 30 types of cancers and updates regularly. Making this information available to the layperson. He started at Sloane Kettering,
www.mossreports.com

The Moss Report Website

Welcome to The Moss Report Welcome to The Moss Report Featuring articles, videos, podcasts and more from science writer Ralph W. Moss, PhD. Since 1974, The Moss Report has been the world's #1 source for
www.mossreports.com www.mossreports.com

Ralph Moss wrote a couple of books about the cancer industry... You can order the ebook for free. Checkout - https://www.mossreports.com/checkout/order-received/532960/?key=wc_order_sQT1yrzxfOdeO
Cancer, Incorporated is a blistering critique of the greed and lies of the cancer drug business, and shows how Big Pharma’s deceptions have caused suffering and cost lives!
This book reveals Big Pharma’s manipulation of every aspect of cancer drug development.
This has resulted in a host of minimally effective, unsafe and outrageously priced drugs.
This groundbreaking book focuses on how Big Pharma has corrupted the field of oncology by paying off the key opinion leaders in the field.

And then there is the work of James Lyons-Weiller, a true scientist that I have the deepest respect for. These men are my heroes.
here is the first part of his paper, which was recently published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 1(2), December 31, 2020

I could go on (and on and on)... It's not hard to dig up dirt on big pharma...

Introduction
Since the US CDC was founded, an unholy alliance has infiltrated public health in the US — euphemistically referred to as “industry/government partnerships” and “Not-for-Profit” government entities — the wicked marriage has infused profit motives into US government agencies charged with regulating medical and pharmaceutical industries. Those involved view themselves as agents working toward a “greater good” — notwithstanding, the trappings of perverse incentives and presumed moral dictates, agencies designed by past generations to protect the US population from harm from corporatist tendencies have been completely captured and subverted. Apologists for regulatory capture even laud the “benefits” of collusion between corporations and the agencies that have been designed — and are funded to — provide regulatory oversight (Reiss, 2011). It seems surreal to consider the brazen use and even celebration of the combination of pharmaceutical influences and matters of state. The “revolving door” between corporations and agencies has been widely recognized for some time – including the FDA (Piller, 2018; Kaplan, 2016), CDC (Reuters, 2009; National Public Radio, 2009). Thirty-nine percent of National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel had tied to Pharmaceutical or Biotechnology companies – this was the committee that recommended the expensive Remdesivir over the inexpensive hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19. Remdesivir is made by Gilead — and eight of the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel had ties to Gilead.

As well documented as these abuses are, nothing comes of them — even if public health suffers. The scope of its influence on the quality of science that is supposed to inform public health and medical policy is only just now becoming painfully apparent. The US media is likewise utterly captured due to revenue from direct-to-consumer marketing of pharmaceutical products; this quite literally means that the US does not have a free and independent press.

Corporatism Leads to a Regulatory Vacuum
Because corporatism is the prime target of US regulatory agencies, a regulatory vacuum has been created only to be immediately filled by profiteering government “watchdogs” expanding their own political, financial, and regulatory mandate against all challengers, especially the public population they are supposed to be protecting. The need for completely independent “untouchable” research institutions has never been higher, and yet some who have nominated themselves to protect the public interests, actually provide refuge for biased corporate science (e.g., Monsanto reaching into studies by allegedly independent researchers on the safety of glyphosate; McClellan-Roger Exhibit 5, 2019).

The lack of real regulatory backbone is absolute. Incredibly, for example, FDA only required an inert saline placebo in the Moderna’s mRNA m1273 vaccine clinical trial after a citizen’s group, The “I Can Decide Network” (ICAN.org), petitioned them with a thoroughly referenced piece of work that aimed to improved vaccine safety science by setting it back on its original track.

There is a bulwark system of defenses built up around vaccines (see Oller in this issue) that is patently unscientific to its core. Sadly, the US public have had to resort to litigation to seek justice and compensation for harm caused by corporate products, and such cases are adjudicated on legal merits informed by an increasingly biased body of scientific literature, and in the face of almost insurmountable legal obstacles that have only been increasingly strengthened in favor of vaccine manufacturers since the notorious National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that did nothing to protect children from injuries but did everything to guard vaccine producers from citizen-initiated lawsuits. This bias is enhanced by targeted retraction — the act of systematic targeting of research studies with results that draw the safety of corporate products into question (Shaw and Oller, 2020). I personally have been involved in the defense of a number of studies that are on par with or superior compared to previous published studies in their rigor of design, execution and analysis. It is readily apparent that ‘retraction’ of studies has replaced rational discourse in many journals — bringing the validity and reputation of those journals into question.

The bulwark of defenses around vaccines are not defending vaccines themselves — they are defending the power to control the public’s perception of vaccine safety, and are thus erected specifically to bias the scientific, medical and lay populations’ perception of the quality and rigor of vaccine “safety”, actually vaccine “risk and danger”, studies. The emergence of organizations such as ICAN — which has chronicled in detail their successes in holding CDC, HHS and the FDA accountable to best practices of clinical research — is the result of harms visited upon the US population caused by regulatory negligence. Without first-hand experience with vaccine injury, the messages of such organizations could not possibly resonate with the public, leading the recent surge in vaccine risk awareness, mass protests, and resistance to mandatory vaccinations without exemptions.

Career “Scientists” Favor Corporate Interests Over Public Health
Over the past three decades, as regulatory capture has increased, a massive public health crisis has emerged. In the US, over 54% of children have a chronic illness – for which they “require” life-long pharmaceutical interventions. Public health disasters such as rampant metabolic disease and diabetes, ADHD, autism, autoimmune disorders, and the rapid spread of COVID-19 due to CDC’s failed testing program in March, 2020 – all occurred on the watch of paraprofessional government careerist “Scientists” who have routinely made ill-founded calls for specific public health measures that defy all reason and logic. For example, Francis Collins of the NIH recently called for an early end to COVID-19 randomized trials by vaccination of the placebo group because, in his view “we owe them” the vaccine. This of course would obviate the entire reason for the clinical trials – which includes, to monitor for disease enhancement – ill health caused by pathogenic priming of individuals by prior exposure to a vaccine or an infection – as was seen in all past animal vaccine trials for SARS and MERS. A more rational and scientifically literate ad-hoc WHO committee published an article calling for continuance of the trials specifically because vaccinating the placebo group would make long-term safety signal detection impossible (WHO Ad-Hoc Expert Group, 2020).

In April, Dr. Birx of the Whitehouse COVID Response Team announced that all deaths of individuals with COVID-19 were to be counted as death from COVID-19, blunting the public health tool of reporting and tracking. The assumption that more testing is always better was matched with a corresponding drive to make the medical community and the public believe that RT-PCR tests cannot lead to false positive results, a claim falsified by numerous studies with empirical field false positive estimates that include 11% (Basile et al., 2020), 30% (Lee et al., 2020).

Public health in the US is one -hundred percent focused on the manipulation and control of public perception; they are obsessed with burying any evidence of vaccine risks, and thus our collection of vaccines themselves have become more and more blunted instruments loaded with more and more unforeseen and unstudied risks: we are left with unscientific, irrational responses to COVID-19 leading to staggering economic losses projected to be on the scale of US$16 Trillion dollars – a full ¾ of our GDP (Cutler and Summer, 2020; also see the CHD article in this issue of IJVTPR).

Regulatory Capture Means Loss of Liability for Flawed Products
As we now see with COVID-19 vaccines, corporations have learned that making their products appear to be essential to public health can place them closer to the goose that lays a continuous stream of golden eggs – ownership of monopolistic or near-monopolistic of government-contract mandated products free from liability. Right now, liability for vaccine injury in the United States falls to the Department of Health and Human Services— with specific cases adjudicated by Special Masters in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. My personal experiences in the NVICP as an expert have left me simply aghast at how patently unfair that hornswoggle program is: the HHS is at once the defendant and administers the HRSA Table of Vaccine Injuries; their experts and Special Masters remain ignorant of advances in science on aluminum toxicity and in matters of the use of aluminum hydroxide to induce autoimmunity even after being presented with the balance of the research literature. Indeed, one Special Master attempted to bribe me to change my testimony; when I submitted new testimony to the case that included mention that among the materials I examined, I was morally obliged to include the audio recording of the message tempting me with reimbursement if I took a different approach, the case was dismissed. The lawyer involved was subsequently disbarred due to another matter outside the NVICP.

The opposite model in which vaccine manufacturers, not the HHS, are held liable for vaccine injuries would provide them with critical quality control feedback on the suitability of their product and at the very least protect against product quality decay. It would herald the return of a free market. In the case of vaccines, products such as Merck’s MMR vaccines continued to be marketed full in the face of data that made loss of efficacy absolutely clear: entire schools with 100% of students up-to-date on MMR vaccination per the CDC’s recommended schedule still experienced mumps outbreak (Hogan et al., 2020).
If you have read this far Pm me.
 
Kyle, how can you state these mRNA shots are safe when there was no actual animal studies done on this version of them (big pharma/govt. have tried them before and almost all failed in stage 2 when the animals either died from the injections or later when catching the disease in the wild), the phase 2 for these only defined success as reducing symptoms in the 90-95% of the140 who actually caught it? There is plenty of documented evidence showing the world as being phase 3 guinea pigs (this stage is not supposed to end until 2023), and the pharma companies demanded even more blanket liability from any damages they may cause. And if they are so safe why are the thousands of doctors/medical scientists who object or even question them being deplatformed and memory-holed by media, govt. and big tech? A truly free scientific society would allow for vigorous debate on new techs, not what is currently happening. All this for a disease that has an over 99% survival rate for those under 50, and around 98.5% survival rate or those under 70 (without treatment). Funny, the treatments that 1000's of doctors use worldwide are dismissed,, allowing the EUA for these mRNA shots to exist. Just saying... (enjoy the 3 ellipsis, Mick!)
 
Last edited:
Pound sand @Mellow.

@BeerGeek
With that many studies, by 1000s of doctors, surely you can post 1, right? Not a youtube video, not something from who knows where, but an actual study published in an actual journal. That's not asking too much. I have no idea what you were trying to say with the animal trials, maybe referring to another study? If you could, please share that as well.

I'm aware that there is no way for them to have done long term studies on vaccines for a disease discovered a year and a half ago. I'm also aware you have nothing about long term effects of this disease, because we don't know crap about it yet. There is a free democratic discussion of all things in the medical field, even published studies that are later redacted remain on the record, complete with a disclaimer they are redacted. The problem is the accepted medical field (which most people accept btw) is behind not 1, but 3 different vaccines. They are different than anything that came before them, but they did the required studies and were accepted. Knowing that this disease is a political thing because of massive stupidity, they weren't going to just approve anything, it had to be both safe and effective or no one would ever trust the medical field again. It's cool to be against the system, but the burden of proof is on you.
 
Kyle, I will dig up study info and such, but how about you do the same? Also, what I stated is that 1000s of doctors have used alternative treatments successfully. Show me where the studies are that these are safe and effective...
 
Kyle, here's a study info on alternate treatments:

Dr. Zelenko was one of the first to proclaim this and claims to have treated over 1000 patients, if I remember correctly. COVID-19 outpatients: early risk-stratified treatment with zinc plus low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: a retrospective case series study - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920304258?fbclid=IwAR2ThVW8heoWpjCJNALqNZOklRcDarS9csetteKE_jpT8U0l3-SH6IeJDHg

Note, that the EUA would not have been granted if there wasn't a squashing of effective treatments like HCQ, Ivermcectin and vitamin/mineral treatments.

And if you find study data, it shouldn't come from the pharmas themselves.
 
Kyle, while your study info shows what the pharmas did and their claim of effectiveness in alleviating symptoms, there is no safety data attached, because they don't have it yet. I'd rather let my immune system deal with a virus that I have over 99% surviving i I catch it (which I did), than trust crooked big pharmas who've admitted that these have the potential to modify your DNA. YMMV.
 
And the moderna


They have to pay for their clinical trials, that's how they are approved. And why new meds are so expensive. But the good news is if you are part of a clinical trial, you don't have to pay for anything because it's not proven.


I was hoping you had one that backed your claims that they are unsafe. That's good that you found something on zinc and ivermectin, I'll see if i can find the whole article rather than the abstract, which would be nice to know for low risk people without insurance.

They don't have long term effects yet, but they have the short term, it's in the results along with the efficacy. Likewise you don't know the long term effects of having covid.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #262
They're not hard to find if you know what you are looking for:


www.the-scientist.com

Frontiers Removes Controversial Ivermectin Paper Pre-Publication

A review article containing contested claims about the tropical medicine drug as a COVID-19 treatment was listed as "provisionally accepted" on the journal's website before being removed this week.
www.the-scientist.com www.the-scientist.com



pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A systematic review of experimental evidence for antiviral effects of ivermectin and an in silico analysis of ivermectin's possible mode of action against SARS-CoV-2 - PubMed

Viral infections remain a major cause of economic loss with an unmet need for novel therapeutic agents. Ivermectin is a putative antiviral compound; the proposed mechanism is the inhibition of nuclear translocation of viral proteins, facilitated by mammalian host importins, a necessary process...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
Saved me the effort murph, thx. I'm fully vaccinated so i won't need it, but someone might, and I'm glad it at least was studied correctly.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #265
Vaxxine Dangers
childrenshealthdefense.org

What VAERS Data Reveal About Cardiac-Related Reactions to COVID Vaccines

As of Feb. 4, 1,171 cases of cardiac-related reactions were reported to VAERS, including 134 cases where the patient died — or 21% of the total COVID vaccine deaths reported to VAERS.
childrenshealthdefense.org childrenshealthdefense.org
  • Of the 1,739 deaths reported as of March 11, 30% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, 21% occurred within 24 hours, and 46% occurred in people who became ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated. By comparison, during the same period, there were only 85 deaths reported following flu vaccines.
childrenshealthdefense.org

CDC Ignores Inquiry Into Increasing Number of Deaths, Injuries Reported After COVID Vaccines

VAERS data released today showed 38,444 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 1,739 deaths and 6,286 serious injuries since Dec. 14, 2020.
childrenshealthdefense.org childrenshealthdefense.org

Thus, the net balance of risk is never experimentally tested or demonstrated but is merely presumed to fall in favor of population-wide vaccination. With any ACIP-approved vaccine, the possibility of generating any information to the contrary is stymied at every turn — including meaningful postmarket “surveillance”. These measures include the use of vaccines or adjuvants as “placebos” during clinical trials. Where the researchers involved in clinical trials of vaccines ought to be using inert saline as a comparison treatment, as shown by the team at ICAN.org (2020) in their report leading to what was called “Placebogate” — the vaccine promoters rely on misleading statements by physicians and the bullying of parents into accepting all the vaccines and “mandates”. They aim to prevent them from gaining access to data on vaccine adverse events. Instead they force reliance on retrospective observational studies which provide association and correlation but which will also eternally deny the discovery of adverse events caused by vaccines. They have placed limits on the Vaccine Safety Datalink, requiring intimidating over-the-shoulder supervision of anyone accessing the data (CDC, 2020). They have also engaged in post-hoc changing of study designs and analysis following result-peeking as in the Destefano et al. study, chronicled in the revelations of such heinous crimes of pseudoscience reported to Hooker by William Thompson (Hooker, 2016). My own in-depth analysis of all of the studies on the vaccine and autism question sent by AAP to President Trump revealed that all of the studies but one were underpowered to detect even a weak correlation, and that one of the studies was likely the product of outright fraud. I even calculated the number of patients that had to be moved from one group to another to achieve the association given the national prevalence of autism in the population under study.


childrenshealthdefense.org

During COVID Lockdown, Vaccine Rates Dropped — So Did the Number of SIDS Deaths

The CDC must open its Vaccine Safety Datalink to the public so we can better understand the link between fewer childhood vaccines during the pandemic and the drop in reports of adverse events, including infant mortality.
childrenshealthdefense.org childrenshealthdefense.org
Another CDC report indicates that the percentage of 5-month-olds who were up-to-date on their vaccinations in May 2020 was at 49.7% as compared with previous years when the rate was north of 66%. According to an article by Scientific American, New York City health officials cited that vaccination rates for children under 2 were down by 63% during the first two month of lockdown as compared to previous years.

Concomitant with this drop in infant vaccination is an overall drop in reports of infant vaccine adverse events on the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is a “passive surveillance” system used by the CDC to monitor any potential vaccine injury from shots administered in the U.S.

Where the number of reports of adverse events (AEs) for infants 2 and under was consistently above 4,000 for 2016 to 2019, in 2020, it dropped to just 2,303 — approximately half the number seen in previous years.

Interestingly, there has been a precipitous drop in Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) reports as well, as seen in the figure below. Where the rate of reporting of SIDS between 2014 and 2019 is approximately 20, in 2020, it drops by 75% to just 5 reports.

This is by far the lowest yearly number recorded in the history of VAERS, where the second-lowest was 13 incidents recorded in both 2008 and 2009.
 
And unfortunately, big pharma are the number 1 financiers of the big medical journals, so their views/pubs are suspect as well. There are numerous sites that list this doctor's views, here's one on the previous animal studies where they all died.:

truth11.com

Dr. Lee Merritt: In Animal Studies, After Being Injected With mRNA Technology, All Animals Died Upon Reinfection

Dr. Lee Merritt: In Animal Studies, After Being Injected With mRNA Technology, All Animals Died Upon Reinfection altnews.org / Alexander Light This post was shared from the humansarefree.com’…
truth11.com truth11.com
 
Not studies, not even close to a respectable source. This is where you guys keep losing people. I get that you are both completely against this vaccine, and all the other ones too, but you need something real to back it up. None of that is even in the ballpark. Most people want science based medicine. That means scientific method applied, ie studies, which are only published in journals. Sorry, that's the bar. If you want money out of medicine, you should fully be behind socialized medicine, which is the standard everywhere but the us. They often use the same medicines and treatments, and that's after going through approval there as well, so it's either the entire world is out to get you, or the study is what it is.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #269
Kyle
there are billions of dollars of profit at stake. Big pharma has a system for controlling the narrative down to a science (no pun intended). You seem to come from a place where the burden of proof is on the naysayers to prove that the vaxxines are dangerous. If you would take an honest look at the history of these companies and the practices they employ you might be more inclined to err on the side of caution and skepticism about industry-sponsored "Science". Big pharma has so much money and power to control the media and political process that anything you see in the news that runs contrary to big Pharma's propaganda, be it science-based or editorial, has managed to slip through the cracks. The regulatory agencies that are supposed to protect the people from big pharma's greed and deceit have become marketing tools for the industry they were founded to regulate.

I have not heard such an onslaught of major media propaganda as we are witnessing on this continual pro-vaxx drone in all major media from NPR to Fox News, since the run-up to the last Gulf War, when the constant news about weapons of mass destruction was used to deceive the people into supporting a PREEMPTIVE WAR. The war killed over 600,000 civilians, destroying families for generations, and cost the US over 2.4 trillion dollars, almost twice the total amount of US student debt. Bush, Cheyney, Powell, and George Tennant should have all been prosecuted for crimes against humanity. But congress never even held a hearing about where the intelligence went wrong. And the people never made a peep of protest in large part because the media that tricked them into supporting a war, was complicit after the fact at sweeping the story under the rug.

That same level of deceit is going on now with all this pro-vaxx propaganda. You fell for it bro. A buddy of mine asked me the other day if I lose respect for anyone that takes the vaxxine. He says he does, He thinks the fact that they took the vaxx shows how stupid they are. I don't really think like that, but couldn't come up with much of a counterargument.
 
It’s when you start banging on about the gulf war again as if that somehow proves your point that the eyes start rolling in the head.
There’s no equivalency. One thing does not equal another.
 
The studies on safety and efficacy are being conducted right now and if you've received the vaccine, then you are part of said studies. Results to be announced at a later date...
 
I didn't "fall for it bro," i have a medical condition that makes this easy. Posting bullshit opinions from debunked clowns doesn't prove your point. I have posted studies that show not only that they work, but exactly what side effects happened. You guys actually have something with the ivermectin, but of course likely aren't understanding the difference between animal and human grades of chemicals, so good luck with that. I thought, in my own stupidity, that i could somehow get you all to calm down and stop continuously posting dumber and dumber stuff in multiple threads, but i accept the futility of teaching you that without actual studies you are vomiting on a keyboard. I didn't pay for anything out of pocket, and it charged less than a case of beer and a pack of smokes to my insurance, so there goes that argument.

Since most here are young and healthy enough it won't really matter if you get it, good luck. But calling anyone else dumb for getting it just starts to show that you can't tell the difference between real and make believe. The whole propaganda thing is because half of the right wing in this country actually thinks that kamala harris is a criminal mastermind who stole the election from the American Jesus, who of course somehow turned a disease that he let snowball into a cluster fuk become a political issue. Carry on, but know i will teabag you with this moment when you are bitching about socalized medicine at a later date.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #274
Mick! said:
It’s when you start banging on about the gulf war again as if that somehow proves your point that the eyes start rolling in the head.
There’s no equivalency. One thing does not equal another.
Click to expand...
I drove from Philly to DC twice to protest the last Gulf War. I'd guess there were close to half a million people marching in the streets on the second day. I got home and my wife told me she had been listening to the news and there wasn't a peep about the protests. if you weren't in the US at the time, you wouldn't be aware of story after story, a constant blitz on weapons of mass destruction on every major media platform. I read the British intelligence report on Iraq which said Iraq had the capability to launch chemical warheads in 45 minutes and called it BS in 15 minutes. Complete propaganda designed to sell a premeditated war to the people.

how did a tree cutter driving around with a pickup truck and a chainsaw get that right when everyone in the state department and congress and the media, including the left radio, NPR get it so wrong.

this is the best example of media manipulation to act as a tool of thought control that anyone who lived through must remember.

it's clear that the people who planned this war had enough pull to gain full compliance from the media. It was universal.

And that's what we are seeing today with pro vaxx propaganda being pushed by all major media. the difference today is that the little guy has a platform on social media. And what do we see there? hundreds of doctors and nurses, and scientists calling the mainstream narrative BS. Thus is a new phenomenon. there's never been anything like it.

I bet if we were all honest here there would be very few of the members that didn't fall for the pro war mainstream media lies in an all out blitz running up to the war. you know who you are and you know you got fooled. why did you get fooled?

Because you're easily manipulated. you are the masses and you're stupid. you've been trained to believe what you were taught and do what you were told since you learned how to talk. And you went along because that was easier than learning to think for yourself and deal with the social fallout of bucking the system. You're stupid twice. Once for getting fooled, and secondly for not learning a lesson from it.

In the words of the most famous vaxxine damaged character in the world, "stupid is as stupid does". So go get your vaxxines.
 
Last edited:
I fault no one for getting the vaccine. I intended from day 1 to get Covid and get over it the natural way. I have not feared it in the least since it first became a media sensation. How many times have we gone to look at dead trees for customers and thought, "No way would I sleep in that house with THAT looming over it!"....yet they thought nothing of it? People have different fears/perceptions/convictions all the time, across all walks of life. Some are afraid of heights....some of this, some of that. I had a brother-in-law (deceased now), who wasn't afraid of snakes, but was terrified of spiders. I have a nephew who's around 30....about 6'...and will nearly faint and/or wet himself when it comes to getting a shot. In my opinion, what Covid has done, is cause division, derision and name-calling instead of civil debate/discussion. I read theater day of a grandmother who said she wouldn't get to see her grandchildren any more because they hadn't been vaccinated. I cannot imagine that. But that's her prerogative...and her loss. Some folks value political opinion higher than family and friends.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
For conspiracy theorist only
14 15 16
Replies
387
Views
23K
Nutball
Nutball
TreeMuggs
The Illusion of Safety: Safe vs. Safer vs. Safer-er
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
Burnham
Burnham
tntree
You are now a logger
2 3
Replies
70
Views
10K
sotc
sotc
F
American Insurance
2 3
Replies
55
Views
8K
sotc
sotc
Back
Top