Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "UnHerd" channel.

  1. That is an outstanding summation. Here's something that's happening in Australia One of our billionaire funded think tanks the Lowy Institute has decided that they are more important than our elected government in respect to foreign affairs including Ukraine. We have an journalist organisation called the National Press Club and they host televised public talks with Q&As almost every week. A couple of months ago the Director of the Lowy Institute was the talker. He described how they had hosted foreign diplomats. That drew attention because he wasn't talking about retired diplomats but actual serving diplomats and that begged a very important question: Who's acting as a diplomatic service representing Australian interests? AFTER THAT TALK: the Lowy Institute hosted Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a televised talk. Again the question needed to be raised: Who's acting as a diplomatic service representing Australian interests? You are absolutely right, we have a number of unelected millionaires and billionaires who have taken it upon themselves to act (at times) as if they are the voice of reason or as representatives at very high diplomatic levels. I actually don't mind them voicing opinions, everybody is entitled to it, but when they are using their money to leverage political power on the world stage that's unacceptable.
    2
  2.  @SandraLakshmi  I don't know if you can call Russia a terrorist state, but you are right in that they can't be negotiated with at this moment. AND to be clear I mean right now, not a week from now or a month from now. The Ukrainians now believe they can win or a version of win which wasn't a possibility at the start just because of the numbers (soldiers, jets, tanks,...) the Russians could deploy. The Russians are now in a place they never planned for. Very similar to what America got to in Afghanistan and Iraq. So right now at this moment in time the Ukrainians think they can win and the Russians can't believe they can lose AND in that scenario neither will negotiate even if they wanted too.
    1
  3.  @irenepolikoff5526  Good points. The problem is basically the fact that humanity is all the colors of the rainbow and politics and public discord have become a field of black and white squares where the aim is to knock pieces of the board until there's nothing left but the royalty, their guard and what's left of us pawns after they sacrificed all the others.
    1
  4. @_____ That is some of the most ignorant garbage I have ever heard anyone say. You are totally ignoring the historical reality of the last 50 years. The supe rich are super rich because they DID STEAL our money. They are the ones who paid to have governments that are useless. They were the ones who pressured governments into giving them tax breaks, concessions and subsidies that allowed them to get the wealth they have. They PAID politicians and political parties staggering sums of money so that once in power they would get regulations watered down while other regulations were just eliminated. The got governments to simply get rid of and disband regulators or weaken them so much they couldn't be effective. This nonsense you're preaching about that its not their fault is so far from reality I have to ask, which one of them do you work for?
    1
  5. @_____ Don't call anyone childish when your ignorance of basic history is so pathetic. In the American system THEY DID SET IT UP TO AVOID CORRUPTION. It was the money people who came along afterwards who screwed up the whole system. Go back to school and learn some basic history before you start trying to lecture others and FURTHER to that go back to school in a place that actually has a functioning education system.
    1
  6. @_____ lol at what? Your ignorance or your stupidity???
    1
  7. Its amazing that here's Freddy pointing fingers about disinformation when plenty of his guests are specialists in spreading lies and disinformation. I basically unsubscribed and stopped watching Freddy's videos when he kept having on people like Michael Schellenberger and Konstantin Kisin who have BOTH become major spreaders of disinformation in recent years. What ever morals and ethics those guys had they threw away and its NOT that Freddy has them. We should always have an open mind to alternative views. My issue is when disinformation GOES UNCHALLENGED. And here's an example. In Schellenberger's famous TED talk titled "Why renewables can’t save the planet | Michael Shellenberger | TEDxDanubia" about 9 minutes in he points out the deaths in Holland of workers on a wind turbine. As an engineer who's worked in safety systems this is taken incredibly out of context and there is no need for it. That TEDx talk is full of great and informative information and I have used it a lot in pointing out things. The most important of which is that BY THEMSELVES renewables will not save the planet. What I hate is the implication by Schellenberger that the pursuit of renewables is NOT helping and that's a lie. The truth on that is that renewables like wind and solar will be a major part of saving the planet because they do less harm but they can't do it alone because you need other things to keep the energy grids stable. To use that example of workers dying on a wind turbine NOT only has NOTHING to do with the functionality of a wind turbine but avoids the actual issue with workplace safety, accidents and deaths. Its just a distraction to evoke an emotional response instead of sticking to the important aspects of the topic. But this is the sort of thing people do when pushing a narrative they'll present fact after fact and then switch to a fact out of context or just outright lies hoping nobody notices the switch. So when Freddy bemoans how the government is handling misinformation, lets put it in context and that context is Freddy spreads or helps spread misinformation.
    1
  8. I strongly 3/4 agree. I think on the lab leak he was 100% right and way earlier than anyone else, but unfortunately he came up against an industry determined to protect its interests combined with a raft of truly idiotic claims about bio-weapons. Bret pointed out one fact that's never been refuted and made me change my mind on the whole subject. COVID suddenly appeared in Wuhan ALREADY ADAPTED to humans. I'm yet to see anyone refute that or explain it. He didn't get into silly arguments he just presented a fact. Is he dead right about big pharma and their insidious business practices. Yes and that was well known long before COVID. Over 25 years ago I saw a documentary about a Whistle blower who blew the lid on vitamin pills and how big pharma used trading between their own divisions to make insane profits. We've all seen what Purdue have did with Oxy and that should have put people in jail. On the "alternative treatments" he handled it poorly. He pushed too hard on things like Ivermectin in ways that did not help anyone. WAS HE RIGHT to push for considering alternatives and raise questions on strategy? YES, ABSOLUTLEY YES. In fast moving situations you need a dissenting voice or its too easy for the decision process to fall into a blind spot (tunnel vision) and make bad decisions. BUT (and this is my but with Bret) once an alternative has been proven ineffective MOVE ON. The Ivermectin question was answered and Bret help drag it on and on and on. By not letting go, Bret blew his own credibility right when we needed someone with his knowledge to question the vaccine strategy. Instead of doing right by everyone he was just blabbing about Ivermectin. Overall did he do good? YES, but he also made mistakes.
    1
  9.  @Dragonslairminis  Yeah but I think he was right more than twice a day but on a couple of points he really messed up.
    1
  10.  @Dragonslairminis  Actually hard to say on that because nobody knows for certain how many people took his alternative advice and then died. Certainly he messed up, and sadly he'll never admit it. But compared to other people's failures are his even close. A quick glance at Worldometers shows America is now past the million COVID deaths. I remember a certain President saying it would be 15 or something and then 50,000 and then 60,000. Now its over 1,000,000. I doubt we can put many of those on Bret Weinstein compared to some others. For instance the entire Fox team of deniers. Or Alex Jones and some of the Televangelists.
    1