Comments by "Dale Crocker" (@dalecrocker3213) on "Double Down News" channel.

  1. 16
  2. 13
  3. 12
  4. 12
  5. 12
  6. 10
  7. 9
  8. 9
  9. 8
  10. 8
  11. 7
  12. 7
  13. 7
  14. 7
  15. 6
  16. 6
  17. 6
  18. 6
  19. 6
  20. 6
  21. 5
  22. 5
  23. 5
  24. 5
  25. 5
  26. 5
  27. 5
  28. 5
  29. 5
  30. 5
  31. 4
  32. 4
  33. 4
  34. 4
  35. 4
  36. 4
  37. 4
  38. 4
  39. 4
  40. 4
  41. 4
  42. 4
  43. 4
  44. 3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50. 3
  51. 3
  52. 3
  53. 3
  54. 3
  55. 3
  56. 3
  57. 3
  58. 3
  59. 3
  60. 3
  61. 3
  62. 3
  63. 3
  64. 3
  65. 3
  66. 3
  67. 3
  68. 3
  69. 3
  70. 3
  71. 3
  72. 3
  73. 3
  74. 3
  75. 3
  76. 3
  77. 3
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85. 2
  86. 2
  87. 2
  88. 2
  89. 2
  90. 2
  91. 2
  92. 2
  93.  @fredfredrickson5436  The deliberate starvation and working to death of millions cannot be compared to the occasional errors of capitalism. Marxism and its centrally planned economy could only be sustained through slavery, corruption and terror. American prisoners are in prison because they have committed crimes, not because they have been arbitrarily selected or denounced. They live in conditions which would make citizens of the mid 20th century Soviet Union salivate with envy. Marxism corrupts Socialism, which is why until comparatively recently the British Labour Party forbad all relations with it. The fact that it now welcomes its various unwholesome manifestations into its midst is the reason for its constant rejection by the electorate. I disagree with Marx's critique because it is wrong, It fails on many levels, but predominately it fails because it does not take into account the fact that there are a great many utter bastards in the world, and the bastards will win whatever system is operational. Capitalism recognises this fact but imposes restraints on the worst excesses of the entrepreneurial psychopath through a system of financial regulation. Marxism refuses to admit differences in personality and insists we are all the same and equal and that our behaviour is governed by purely economic forces. They soon find out they are wrong when the psychopaths rise up through the ranks of the various committees and local soviets necessary to run their clumsy system and impose a regime of terror. It always happens this way and always will. Only societies which evolve through time survive and prosper. Those which attempt to impose a system thought up by some bloke with a beard and a pencil are doomed to fail. The only question is how long will it take and how many people will die in agony in the process.
    2
  94.  @fredfredrickson5436  Show me your pile of bodies. We can compare its height with those left by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. Capitalist imperialism is exactly the strategy being followed by China right now. It has retained the repressive structure Communism needs to make a centralised state work and is busy colonising the world. It has its concentration camps too. There is no "late stage capitalism." There is just capitalism. Economic success certainly leads to imperialist expansion and it always has done. Once spears and chariots, guns and gunboats were needed. Now they are not, We have grown more sophisticated in our methods. This has led to the unlikely marriage we see today between Marxism and capitalism so typified by the Chinese phenomenon. Communism needs strict state control over individual behaviours in order to even begin to try to succeed. In China it has not succeeded but the control of the population has remained and is now being applied very successfully to the expansion of state capitalism. China's economic success is dependent upon the slavery of the proletariat. China's model is now actively being pursued by Western capitalism in the form of globalism, which requires centralised control and the subordination of the individual to a bureaucratic elite. Marx was quite correct in seeing labour as a form of capital, but he did not envisage how the administrators of his creed would be forced by economic realities to spend that capital. Marx was always wrong. Now he is both wrong and irredeemably old-fashioned. Your attachment to him is romantic and naive. This discussion began with George Soros. As I said, his gigantic intellect is beyond the comprehension of lesser mortals but it provides a rich territory for speculation. It seems to me that what he is doing is very similar to what China is doing, Based upon the principles of reflexivity he influences outcomes by acting in several roles, one of which is the infiltration of political structures and ideological movements and using them to pave the way for the expansion of his strategies. China builds roads. Soros builds BLM and puts puppets in charge of US and Canadian cities. China and Soros are both utilising Marxism, but neither is Marxist.
    2
  95. 2
  96. 2
  97. 2
  98. 2
  99. 2
  100. 2
  101. 2
  102. 2
  103. 2
  104. 2
  105. 2
  106. 2
  107. 2
  108. 2
  109. 2
  110. 2
  111. 2
  112. 2
  113. 2
  114. 2
  115. 2
  116. 2
  117. 2
  118. 2
  119. 2
  120. 2
  121. 2
  122. 2
  123. 2
  124. 2
  125. 2
  126.  @RussCR5187  A couple of things: There is considerable literature disputing the efficacy of any safety measures in preventing the spread of Covid 19 which is, as I said, is following the established pattern for viral infections as I described. I can provide you with such information if you wish. Mathematical models indicate that if the R number reaches and stays at 1.4 a 30% infection level will be arrived at quite rapidly in the UK at which point herd immunity will be achieved. Once again I can provide you with the necessary technical information. You are woefully behind with information about hydroxychloroquine. The article you cite was of course published in May at a time when the drug was under attack by pharmaceutical companies as it provides an incredibly cheap alternative to their profitable products. President Trump's endorsement also led to fierce political opposition. Tests were carried out using absurdly huge doses given to patients in the last stages of the disease which led to the widely publicised disinformation you are still sadly not yet disabused of. The tests were shown to be fake and articles about them were withdrawn. The Lancet was especially hard hit and its reputation may never recover from the scandal. Proper studies have clearly shown that small doses administered in the early stages of the disease can reduce death rates by at least one third. In this instance I will provide you with some information which may help you catch up with the present position. Dr Campbell does daily updates on the pandemic. He believed the vilification campaign too but here fully admits that hydroxychloroquine is effective, based on his detailed analysis of a recent study involving some 8,000 patients in Belgium. There are links to that and other studies in the description below the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBn4e69tGlg This is a rather excitable news video from Australia but it sums up the story neatly and accurately https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXmwt_8tdNY This is list of the100 or so recently published studies, most peer-reviewed, which indicate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine when properly administered. https://c19study.com/
    2
  127. 2
  128. 2
  129. 2
  130. 2
  131. 2
  132. 2
  133. 2
  134. 2
  135. 2
  136. 2
  137. 2
  138. 2
  139. 2
  140. 2
  141. 2
  142. 2
  143. 2
  144. 2
  145. 2
  146. 2
  147. 2
  148. 2
  149. 2
  150. 2
  151. 2
  152. 2
  153. 2
  154. 2
  155. 2
  156. 2
  157. 2
  158. 2
  159. 2
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. 1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. 1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. 1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190.  @TheMarsCydonia  Your logic (if such it can be called) is somewhat twisted I think. Trump was accused of colluding with Russia to help him win the election. No evidence was found for this. In law the fact that the investigation found no case to answer does, indeed, prove that Trump was innocent. That's how it works. As I explained, the cases brought by the Trump team and others in local courts were brought with no real hope of success, and indeed with the expectation of merely testing the water at best. The exchange you posted between the Trump lawyer and the Michigan judge clearly illustrates this. The lawyer gave the judge good excuses to decline to hear the case and so avoid a dangerous situation for all concerned. I'm sure His Honour was very grateful and the Trump lawyers could surely see no point in instigating a lengthy legal procedure which could in no way reach a conclusion by the time of the Electoral College vote and which would in any case be liable to appeal. It is not a question of the judge being crooked. He is just being pragmatic - as indeed is the lawyer. The situation remains that absolutely no-one - not the state legislatures nor SCOTUS - are prepared to do anything which might allow Trump to win. No-one wants to reap the whirlwind. Unless he really is a brilliant three-dimensional chess player with a series of masterly strokes in reserve Trump will have to give up the Presidency, and he know it. But that of course is just the beginning. Trump probably didn't cheat all that much - and look what happened to him! On the other hand it very much seems as though Biden cheated like hell and this, combined with the alliances he has made with the likes of Antifa, BLM the Chinese Communist Party and George Soros are going to lead to a very volatile and unpredictable situation for America. I think it unlikely that it will be possible to avoid bloodshed.
    1
  191.  @TheMarsCydonia  You still seem to be missing the point. The case against Trump was the result of a lengthy professional investigation which turned out to have been based in large part on manufactured evidence from a single source ( Steele). It failed. The case against Biden is based upon numerous allegations from various individuals and the authorities have thusfar failed to investigate them. The evidence is there but it has not been investigated. I have, for instance, just watched a video which appears to show Trump's vote actually DROPPING quite substantially at various junctures. Votes which had been recorded for him were quite suddenly taken away. How can this be so? Is it so? Are the analysts who have produced this evidence mistaken or lying? We need to know. And I never said the judge you quoted was crooked. He was just being sensible. Equally well the representatives of the various agencies you mention are also being sensible. It would be a bad career move for anyone to stand up to the Biden crew at this point. Barr is a glaring example of this. Your view of the situation seems overly simplistic. I repeat: the allegations have neither been proved or disproved because no court has had the courage - or folly - to consider them properly - or any investigative agency the instruction to investigate them. And thus they remain hanging in the air and are far more varied and substantial that vague stories about Trump people meeting with Putin people in hotel rooms. If someone can explain how more than 400,000 votes disappeared from Trump's totals in Pennsylvania, then that is just one anomaly to be ticked off. Others spring up to take its place. Even now in Georgia Republican observers are being denied the legal right to observe signature verifications. Why? As to your remark on the final part of my last comment I'm afraid you may be LOLLING on the other side of your face before long. America is a disaster waiting to happen at the moment.
    1
  192. 1
  193. 1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. 1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. 1
  252. 1
  253. 1
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. 1
  270. 1
  271. 1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275. 1
  276. 1
  277. 1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280. 1
  281. 1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285.  @sososoprano1  That is only part of the story. And what is a "Palestinian" anyway? This whole area was impoverished and vastly underpopulated under the aegis of the declining Ottoman Empire. Only between half a million to a million lived there and a high percentage of them were Jews. Then Zionism came along. The Zionists actually bought large tracts of land from their Ottoman owners and began a process of transforming a derelict semi-desert into thriving farmland. Arabs flooded in from neighbouring countries, either as labourers or in some cases as actual invaders. Today's "Palestinians" are largely the descendants of these people. If it wasn't for Jews they wouldn't be there. The wave of Jewish settlers which occurred after the horror of the Holocaust created enormous problems all round, and things were done on both sides which, in retrospect, were utterly shameful. But the over-riding factor in my view is that the Muslims hate the Jews for religious reasons. The more extreme among them -who have the whip hand, sadly - want them all dead. The Jews on the other hand are quite happy to live side by side with Arabs as long as they behave themselves, work hard and don't steal from them or threaten to kill them. I sincerely hope and pray that the Arabs will eventually be able to cast off their religious prejudices and take part properly in the great experiment which is the creation of the state of Israel. As things stand, however, they have to accept the consequences of their attitude and actions. They have given the Israelis no real alternative.
    1
  286. 1
  287. 1
  288. 1
  289. 1
  290. 1
  291. 1
  292. 1
  293. 1
  294. 1
  295. 1
  296. 1
  297. 1
  298. 1
  299. 1
  300. 1
  301. 1
  302. 1
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. 1
  306. 1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309. 1
  310. 1
  311. 1
  312. 1
  313. 1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328.  @accc9090  Newspapers tell lies; now more than ever before. I was a journalist myself for thirty years and saw standards drop. They are even lower now. Back in the day the joke was "never let the facts interfere with a good story." Bad enough, but now the deceptions are often politically motivated. I have gone to a few primary sources as you suggested and - as I expected - all the "might", "may be" and "scientists fear that" stories you have presumably read all have very shaky foundations. The simple and obvious fact is that we are at too early a stage to predict long term outcomes. That is not to say that there won't be any. There certainly will. Influenza, for instance often has severe long term effects. Reduced lung function persists in the majority of cases, Crippling depression and exhaustion can persist not just for months, but years. There is considerable evidence that schitzophrenia can result in later years in people whose mothers had the flu while pregnant. It has been cited as a cause of Parkinson's disease in later life. It is important to remember that all these things - and indeed the symptoms themselves - are not actually caused by the virus itself, but by our bodies' reactions to the invasion. This is why prophylactic precautions are just as important, if not more so than trying to keep the disease at bay by wearing a shred of cloth on your face. I have evidence for everything I say. When I speculate I make it clear. I am afraid that propagandists posing as journalists you have read in publications such as the Guardian do not adhere to these standards.
    1
  329.  @Paul-eb2cl  It's pointless arguing In fact doctors often have great difficulty in determining the cause of death when a number of factors is present, but they are told in a pandemic to include the pandemic disease on the certificate if they have any suspicion that it may have been present. In the case you mention the doctor, if he was doing his job, would have put the cause of death as myocardial infarction, but included on the certificate that Covid 19 was present. That death would have been entered as coronavirus related and would have appeared in the daily "death toll" figure. This injunction was made very shortly after the outbreak was discovered and it is false to suggest that deaths in care homes would not have had coronavirus entered as possibly present on their death certificate, and thus they too would have appeared in the official figures. No test would have been necessary. The fact the deceased was running a temperature and was coughing would have been enough. All this suggests that the actual number of deaths attributable to Covid 19 are probably LESS than the official figure, but it seems churlish to argue the point. What interests me more is why people find it necessary to exaggerate and amplify a situation which is bad enough as it is. This mindset seems to occur in people who have some deep inner need to take as many precautions as possible, to regulate as much as possible, to find someone to blame and to try to apply rules of juristiction to what is a manifestation of cruel nature, rather than any fault of man.
    1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. 1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. 1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354. 1
  355. 1
  356. 1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1
  380. 1
  381. 1
  382. 1
  383. 1
  384. 1
  385. 1
  386. 1
  387. 1
  388. 1
  389. 1
  390. 1
  391. 1
  392. 1
  393. 1
  394. 1
  395. 1
  396. 1
  397. 1
  398. 1
  399. 1
  400. 1
  401. 1
  402. 1
  403. 1
  404. 1
  405. 1
  406. 1
  407. 1
  408. 1
  409. 1
  410. 1
  411. 1
  412. 1
  413. 1
  414. 1
  415. 1
  416. 1
  417. 1
  418. 1
  419. 1
  420. 1
  421. 1
  422. 1
  423. 1
  424. 1
  425. 1
  426. 1
  427. 1
  428. 1
  429. 1
  430. 1
  431. 1
  432. 1
  433. 1
  434. 1
  435. 1
  436. 1
  437. 1
  438. 1
  439. 1
  440. 1
  441. 1
  442. 1
  443. 1
  444. 1
  445. 1
  446. 1
  447. 1
  448. 1
  449. 1
  450. 1
  451. 1
  452. 1
  453. 1
  454. 1
  455. 1
  456. 1
  457. 1
  458. 1
  459. 1
  460. 1
  461. 1
  462. 1
  463. 1
  464. 1
  465. 1
  466. 1
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. 1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. 1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1