Comments by "Hobbs" (@hobbso8508) on "NBC News"
channel.
-
22
-
18
-
15
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@SnotRocket79 Since you all seem very confused on the definitions of constitutional, republic and democracy, I suppose I will need to spell it out for you:
Constitutional government is by definition a limited government. The government must conduct itself within set rules and principles.
A republic is a state by which the people hold the power, and therefore the government is elected by the people. This is the opposite of a monarchy.
Finally a democracy is a system of government whereby the whole population or eligible members of the state run the country, usually through elected representatives.
None of these have to happen at the same time, and none are conflicting.
For example, the UK has no constitution, and is a monarchy, however the government is run by elected representatives. They are neither a republic nor a constitutional government, however they do have certain restrictions, and they are a democracy.
France however, much like the US, is all 3 of these types of government at the same time.
Since you vote for your representatives, you are engaging in democracy, and are therefore a democratic country. Now the US isn't perfect, which is what Bobby Ward up above was saying about it being a flawed democracy. That is true, as the way the republic functions means that some people get far more say in the voting process than others. There is also the issue Chris Bishop brought up about "majority vote" however, as mentioned earlier, the UK does not use majority vote, yet they are a democracy, and do use representation in a representative democracy, much like the US.
So the real issue here is that people just don't know what a democracy actually is, and their ignorance makes it sound like they think voting should be outlawed for all the nonsense they spout.
But sure, tell me more about how the US government functions and is definitely not a system where all eligible members of the state vote for representatives.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Ritt Jack It does work, just not perfectly. People are less likely to get infected, and people who get infected are less likely to die. Any idea how many breakthrough covid deaths their have been? Even with this new variant the number is less than 1,300. In fact, covid hospitalisations for the vaccinated are under 7,000, at a time when the US currently has 7,000 covid hospitalisations per day, and at the peak in January had over 16,000. Total covid hospital admissions have broken through 2.4 million, but among the vaccinated that number is 0.25% of the total hospitalisations.
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@robotron17
"The renaming of deaths was not limited to the flu"
Then why are the top causes of death in the US the same or increasing. Heart disease deaths increased, yet you think they are somehow hiding heart disease deaths in covid.
"deadly treatments (like ventilators)"
People are ventilated all the time and don't die.
"The coroner, Brenda Bock, says two of their five deaths related to COVID-19 were people who died of GUNSHOT WOUNDS!"
Notice how she said related to?
In response to Brenda Bock the state of Colorado stated they classify COVID deaths in two ways: A death due to COVID, where it was the underlying cause, and a death with COVID, where there was a positive test but it wasn’t listed as the cause of death.
"All deaths with a positive specimen (including at post-mortem) are counted REGARDLESS OF THE CAUSE OF DEATH!"
This quote is pulled from a study about mortality burdens and is an NHS review of how much does covid factor into the deaths. They took examples from everyone who had a positive result, then reviewed them to see how much covid was a factor. It's literally the opposite of what you think it is.
"And all of the "excess deaths" from drug overdoses, medical treatment, missed treatments due to shutdowns, deaths from population growth trends, etc"
Source. I already mentioned heart disease, which increased by 30K from 2019 to 2020. Diabetes deaths increased 14K, and other diseases increases by similar ratios. These are also only non-covid excess deaths, meaning these are on top of all the extra deaths just from covid.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Do you actually want an explanation, or do you just want to whine about your idiotic fake percentage. For example, stimulus checks alone make up 20% of the bill, so this 9% number being parroted is utter bollocks. There are also funds for unemployment benefits, SNAP benefits, expanded child tax credits, covid vaccine delivery, rental assistance, mortgage assistance, eviction ban extension, state and local government funding, school reopening funding and small business loans. If you're against any of that then let me know.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@westonripps84 Sure, lets do a deep dive.
If Dr. Fauci was lying he would be openly criticised by the scientific community for openly misrepresenting the paper he was holding. Fauci's position relies on the scientific and medical communities trusting him, and such an obvious and open lie would be easy to spot for anyone in the know, making debunking him easy. Instead what we see is said community openly supporting him, his ideas and the general opinion of the CDC and the US government at every turn.
Now lets look at what happens if Paul lies.
His supporters, who have no understanding of the laboratory science or the paper Paul and Fauci were referring to, believe him anyway and he gets reelected.
Who has the most to lose from lying? Who has the support of medical and scientific professionals? Fauci has the support of the Association of American Medical Colleges, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Association of American Cancer Institutes, and over 50 other science and public health organizations. Why would I take all of those thousands of experts and ignore them for a politician.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@davidicke4451
"Neither the pfizer nor moderna trials tested for transmission."
Then why are you using a study done in December, especially one only cited 5 times? The study I posted wasn't from the original trials and was posted in May. It used real world studies done in Israel about vaccinated populations, and uses a massive sample size.
"A vaccine is supposed to stop transmission in addition to providing immunity, whereas these “vaccines” don’t prevent transmission and therefore don’t contribute to preventing future mutations."
That's just a lie, the link I posted shows that.
"These drugs are experimental therapies, not “vaccines” in the traditional sense."
No, they are vaccines.
"The antibodies that you produce from the antigen of these inoculations are “non-neutralizing” as opposed to being neutralizing antibodies from an ordinary live attenuated vaccine."
Actually the opposite is true. While an ordinary vaccine relies on your body to figure out what antibody to produce, the RNA vaccines tell your body the exact antibody they need to directly hit the virus.
"The efficacy rate you provided is based on immunity to subsequent re-exposure, not transmission"
If you're immune you can't catch covid and pass it on. Unless of course you mean contact transmission, but that will also be reduced as the number of people capable of exposing the contact area to covid in the first place will drop as the ability to get infected drops. Contact transmission also doesn't allow for mutations.
"the testing of positives and negatives in the trials and in the real world in and of itself is flawed. CDC says to use PCR CT of 28 to confirm vaccine “breakthrough cases” guaranteeing an undercount."
Oh well, if you think it's an undercount then please provide your reasoning.
"The maker of the polyamerase chain reaction test suggested that the CT utilized shouldn’t be anywhere that high, nowhere near 40 due to the prevalence of false positives."
We already have ratios for both false positives and false negatives and they are both around the 1% range. Trying to claim we have too many false positives when there are far more people with covid just not getting tested at all is a joke.
"Several physicians, researchers and molecular biologists have made this criticism."
Like who?
"It’s a very real virus with extremely high R0 (transmissibility), but the lethality is likely lower than we’ve been led to believe."
If that were true more people would be getting infected, which makes the need for a vaccine greater due to potential variants. I did in fact agree that more people have this than are being tested for.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tonysoprano946
"8 million people per year die from the air."
Weird way to say pollution, but okay.
"There's absolutely no proof that masks, lockdowns and these [vaccines] have worked."
There are literally dozens of studies on all 3 of these.
"This amounts to more deaths than diarrheal disease, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS combined."
So? Literally irrelevant to how many people are dying from covid, which increased the age adjusted deaths in the US by 15.9% from 2019 to 2020.
"Where's your Biden proof? I work in construction and there's a much bigger difference in wood prices under Biden."
Which I'm sure never increased under Trump and has absolutely nothing to do with the global pandemic. I mean seriously how pathetic are you?
"Inflation is through the roof."
Not really. It's on the high end, but definitely not crazy.
"The market is gonna see the biggest free fall soon"
According to who?
"Name one thing Biden has done that wasn't already in place."
Rejoin the WHO.
Rejoin the Paris Climate Accord.
Rejoin talks with Iran.
End the war in Afghanistan.
Arrange for a stimulus bill, which included children's school meals, child tax credits, testing dosing and more.
Arrange a second spending bill for infrastructure.
Lower the unemployment rate after the last administration's dramatic explosions.
Mask mandates.
Vaccine/testing mandates.
Getting 220 million vaccine doses administered in 100 days.
Sanctioned Chinese officials.
Rescinded the Muslim ban.
Supported small businesses and restaurants.
Cancelled student loans for victims of fraud and people with disabilities.
Stopped arctic drilling.
Ended family separation.
Extended ACA enrollment window.
Promoted a "Buy American" adjenda.
Increased federal contractor minimum wage to $15 and hour.
Added an offshore wind energy initiative.
Revoked previous orders on sanctioning International Criminal Court officials.
Saved the pensions of more than 1 million retirees.
I could keep going but you haven't even read half of these.
"A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people."
No, the Democrats are not trying to do anything like this. Where is their plan to take over private businesses? How about anything even remotely authoritarian? Are they planning to storm congress and overturn votes? Because, I got to tell you, if a group of people did that it would be pretty authoritarian.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@maclivingston9268 Nothing you said makes any sense, other than the obvious projection of liking to argue. If you want to play semantics rather than actually addressing the original point, which is that people are constantly "persuaded, reminded, pressured, lied to, incentivized, coerced, bullied, socially shamed, guilt-tripped, threatened, punished and criminalized" through literal laws, then I, and the rest of the world, have no time for you.
Enjoy your mic drop, but pushing over the board and declaring victory won't actually get you anywhere.
1
-
@maclivingston9268 I'm sure you think you're being logical, but you really aren't.
You pivot from being able to see to looking at people specifically, which is a very narrow scope of seeing in general, and has nothing to do with your original point about being blind. I mean talk about a goalposts shift.
You call pharma a drug ring, while ignoring the regulations, research and development that go into it. It's like comparing a NASA engineer to a crackhead offering to paint your house. Society encourages showing that the drugs you are selling have a positive benefit to people, while discouraging the selling of illegal and dangerous drugs to anyone who'll buy them.
You talk about people driving drunk, but that doesn't change the original point, which is that people who do that are actively pushed not to through various avenues like "persuaded, reminded, pressured, lied to, incentivized, coerced, bullied, socially shamed, guilt-tripped, threatened, punished and criminalized". Yes, people do these things, but they are told not to. That's the point. Exceptions to the rule in this case actually prove the rule, because we can see how those exceptions are treated as a result.
So your delusions will continue to defy reality, and the goalposts shall never be in the same place twice while you're arguing disingenuously.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robotron17
"I made no comment on how rare it was, just correcting your time frame."
Right, which is why I'm making a comment on it, and your time frame to stretch out to 3 months is rare. That's not to say that a positive test after a negative antigen test is not possible or rare, but that your time frame is off.
"Antigen tests are less accurate than PCR, which is why PCR is the gold-standard"
Depends what you're looking for and the type of antigen test. If you're looking for a specific molecule, then absolutely PCR all the way. If you want a rapid at home test then some antigen tests can be perfect for a rapid response, which, if positive, can be confirmed with PCR. There are also NAATs which also test for live infection. They are often used as a confirmatory test in a hospital setting.
"It is the only lab test listed as "confirmatory" by CDC:"
The quote you posted doesn't exist in the CDC website, which makes sense as it's nonsense. They openly support several different tests, including antigen and NAATs. They even have a whole separate page called: Test for Current Infection. Want to hazard a guess which tests they recommend. Oh right, NAATs and antigen tests. Not PCR. In fact, PCR isn't even on the page.
"Wrong. It's literally the official position that PCR detects active infection."
I've just proven that wrong, but okay.
"FDA:"
From the exact page you are quoting on:
"Molecular and antigen tests are types of diagnostic tests than can detect if you have an active COVID-19 infection."
Again, PCR is not mentioned on the page.
Even better is at the phrase molecular test it actually says this:
"Molecular Test: a diagnostic test that detects genetic material from the virus"
So nothing about active infections.... again.
"But of course, in reality, there is no evidence that a positive PCR is reliably indicating anything that is impacting your health or indicating that you are endangering anyone around you."
Good job the FDA and CDC agree then isn't it.
1
-
@robertmarmaduke9721
"They also paid doctor $10,000 for every 'CoVid'(sic) death certificate and hospitals $30,000"
False. These numbers are pulled from the average amount that Medicare pays out to hospitals for the insurance of covid patients. They would have to pay this money anyway as with or without covid the treatment was the same for the patient. There is no evidence of extra payments.
"anyone dying for any reason with PCR machine turned up to 40 tested 'positive'"
What does that even mean. Do you know how PCR works?
"You have not responded at all to the statistical impossibility that 'cases'(sic) peaked at the same time as Biden was selected, and statistical impossibility 'cases'(sic) fell 6.7x faster after the inauguration, than the rate of inoculation."
What makes it statistically impossible? People travelled for the holidays and cases peaked soon after. When they stopped travelling so much the cases died down. How is this a "statistical impossibility?"
"It's DOCUMENTED that CDC told test centers to turn the PCR test cycles down right after the inauguration."
It's not, but okay. If you have evidence of this then go right ahead and show it.
"And now the number of 'cases'(sic) is going back up, still without clinical diagnosis"
PCR is not the only diagnosis, and in fact live infections are tested for using NAATs and antigen tests.
"still without autopsies, despite the continued inoculations"
Right, because we have a group of people who are not vaccinated, and a new variant that makes the vaccine less effective. The new variant is also a lot more contagious.
"Vaxx that has PROVEN to have low-efficacy, and gives no immunity"
Efficacy is immunity, so it can't be low in 1 and zero in the other. Efficacy is around 42% for this variant. The reason we aren't seeing any alpha variant these days is mainly because of the inoculations.
Go learn what PCR is. Even robonuts here knows more than you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"This is one part of U.S. policy where I side with republicans even though I'm a Democrat"
Understandable, and these sorts of issues really drive single issue independents.
"The way I see it, we have become the x on the map for a lot of foreigners"
That's literally always been the case.
"and most of them, like the Haitians are fleeing disastrously ran countries"
Also always been true. The Irish ran from the potato famine, the Jews ran from the holocaust and many many more examples.
"my fear is that they will bring that mess here"
Sure, I get that. The Italians brought mobs to New York. Things like this are an inevitability when allowing a lot of migrants in. The thing to take into account is that the vast majority of the people being let in have nothing to do with any of that. Why assume the worst and ban potential sources of labour? Immigrants are a net gain for the economy after all.
"Covid disrupted so much in this country and most of it has yet to get back to normal... so what do we do when enough of them show up that things get strained or crowded here?"
I would argue that the real issues with covid are from the locals not vaccinating and wearing masks. Green card applicants are required to vaccinate starting today. That's a good step in the right direction.
"We already live in a country that seems like it's in short supply of mercy"
So your plan is to provide even less mercy?
"so do we really have the resources to be the world's food bank?"
We aren't. Again, immigrants are a net gain. Asylum seekers as well pay in more than out.
"I'm a no on this one. Go back to your own countries, go fight your own wars, go fix your nation's mess and stop crawling to our doorstep begging for a hand out."
It's really not their fault though. In fact, a lot of the time the US is the reason they're coming here in the first place. How many governments has the US manipulated and sanctioned based on them being too socialist? In fact the top 3 countries that send immigrant caravans to the US are El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.
El Salvador's - In the 70s the US funded the local Salvadoran military government to end a civil war the way they wanted. Their involvement of arming a literal military dictatorship against locals caused over 70K deaths, and displaced over 1 million people, 500K of which because refugees.
Guatemala - The CIA in 1954 backed a coup and ousted the leader, leading to a 36 year civil war, lasting from 1962 to 1996. The war killed at least 140K people and 1.2 million people were displaces, with 200K of them over to other countries.
Honduras - For around 2 decades in the 80s and 90s the CIA supplied the Honduras government and their "death squad" with information of rising communist rebel movements. They also used this as a base of operations to train Salvadorans in the previously mentioned civil war.
Saying these people need to "Go back to your own countries, go fight your own wars, go fix your nation's mess and stop crawling to our doorstep begging for a hand out", when that exact issue is caused by the US actively funding the "mess", is a fundamentally broken ideal to hold. There is simply no good ethical, financial or political reason not to let in immigrants.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Garapetsa No, you said worst because you're pushing a bias narrative. The fallout from Katrina took years to get over, and FEMA failed the area dramatically as a result. For example:
After levees failed across New Orleans and water poured into the streets, disarray marked the response. With faint understanding of the city's topography, Brown and FEMA's top brass weren't aware of the magnitude of the flood. They dismissed reports from Marty Bahamonde, FEMA's only staffer on the ground, that the 17th Street Canal wall had broken and later that 80 percent of New Orleans was underwater. Brown told CNN that FEMA didn't know for three days that hundreds of people were trapped at the Convention Center with no food or water.
After rescues were well underway, FEMA turned away offers of personnel and supplies from the Department of Interior and denied a request from the state Wildlife & Fisheries agency for 300 rubber boats. It was slow to provide food, shelter, and supplies to first responders and stranded residents alike. Its leaders bickered with Gov. Kathleen Blanco and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin over who was in charge.
And when the response switched to recovery, there were the infamous FEMA trailers, those glorified recreation vans, hastily built and steeped in toxic resins, that populated yards and vacant lots for years after the storm.
They were only supposed to be in place for up to 18 months. The last one purportedly left New Orleans in February 2012, more than six years into the recovery. By then it was the wrong kind of icon: a symbol of FEMA's grinding, inept bureaucracy.
Comparing the current series of flash floods to KATRINA is just a joke. Doing so because the price of flood insurance has increased, which is obviously should have given the frequency and intensity of flooding in the region, is unbelievably idiotic at best, horrendously insensitive at worst.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hikikomori_trader
"Recent experimental research shows that many mammals, including cats, dogs, bank voles, ferrets, fruit bats, hamsters, mink, pigs, rabbits, racoon dogs, tree shrews, and white-tailed deer can be infected with the virus.
Cats, ferrets, fruit bats, hamsters, racoon dogs, and white-tailed deer can also spread the infection to other animals of the same species in laboratory settings."
Like candy from a baby.
"The chimpanzee version of the virus (called simian immunodeficiency virus, or SIV) was probably passed to humans when humans hunted these chimpanzees for meat and came in contact with their infected blood.
Studies show that HIV may have jumped from chimpanzees to humans as far back as the late 1800s.
Over decades, HIV slowly spread across Africa and later into other parts of the world. We know that the virus has existed in the United States since at least the mid to late 1970s."
Just too easy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brandona.deimel5155 They saw it coming and hedged their bets. People had seen an even like this coming for years, and preparing a vaccine early is the only way to get to market.
The co-founder of BioNTech designed the Pfizer vaccine in an afternoon on the 25th of January 2020. They made an agreement with Pfizer, and created the physical vaccine in a few weeks. Due to the simplicity of the vaccine the turnaround time was easy to keep short.
From there they were allowed by the FDA to do simultaneous pre-clinical trials, meaning they were doing cellular and animal testing at the same time. They were also putting billions behind the endeavour, allowing them to put hundreds of people on the task. Usually drug trials are done by a couple of scientists slowing working through the steps over years, but with the urgency they used massive funding to accelerate the testing, running hundreds and hundreds of plates a day knowing they would be at the front of the FDA queue.
By late April they already had clinical trial approval, with the phase 1/2 trials (combining them for speed) getting their first dose on the 23th of April and running until the 22nd of May.
Recipients were reviewed over the course of 6 months for side effects, but with no immediate problems they started their phase 2/3 clinicals (also combined) in 4 different countries, recruiting thousands as early as July and running to November.
EUA came through in December, and by them the earliest injection had been over 8 months ago, far past the 6 month threshold set on long-term side effects by the FDA given the urgency.
In February they started phase 3 trials on adolescents aged 12-15 and pregnant women at 24-32 weeks.
Now that it is fully approved the earliest injection was around 16 months ago. Earliest largescale trial was 14 months ago. They were testing it on cells and animals around 18 months ago.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robotron17
"approximately 100 million people have been fully V'd for an average of 5 months (far more if you include people receiving a single dose) Almost 3 million people die in an average year, so statistically, over 1 million of those V'd people have died"
Well yes, but actually no. The severely immunocompromised don't get vaccinated, such as late stage cancer and kidney failure type people. Their bodies don't have the immune response to actually process the vaccine, so they just don't get it.
"“If you look at the history of vaccines, you know that virtually all long-term adverse effects of a vaccine occur between 15 and 30 days after you get the dose – 45 days at the most", there should be 200k-300k reported deaths"
Well actually no. If you use that specific quote as your basis then the deaths would have to happen within that 45 day window, meaning instead of using a years worth of data to come out with you numbers you should actually be looking at the proportion of people who died within 45 days. that means your number is off, assuming we're looking at 3 million, by around 8-fold. They also only report suspected cases, which doesn't include a whole host of potential causes. They aren't going to submit the guy crushed by a vending machine to VAERS.
"Also, they dismiss every V death because the V likely kills you by exacerbating pre-existing conditions, so when you have that stroke, they just say "it was your time"."
Actually they review the coroner report, figure out based on how many people annually have strokes if there is an uptick in frequency and look at if there is any actual reason this could happen through the mechanisms of the vaccines. The idea they just say "it was your time" is utter lunacy.
"Of course, an all-cause mortality study of V vs. UnV would tell the true story, which is why THAT is not reported"
It's not reported because the FDA and CDC already do this, they just aren't prone to giving out personal medical records.
1
-
@robotron17
There is a big difference between health immunocompromised and dying in a hospital bed from cancer. You know, the people really close to death. Also, quoting something that advocated for boosters while push an anti-vax angle is more than funny.
"I already adjusted for this."
No, you didn't. you just took 10% of 3 million and called it a day, ignore multiple other factors. For example when you say:
"Roughly 2m people in the over 65 group die every year. So 1M is a good ballpark for V'd deaths at this point. And of those 1M, roughly 300k should die in 45 days"
Wrong and wrong. Not only are your vaccination numbers for over 65s too low, amusingly, your 30% proportion isn't even close to accurate. The real number is more like 12% at best, which also ignores people dying before than can be vaxed, meaning they wouldn't count in the vaccination stats, and people at deaths door not being vaxed.
"The coroner, Brenda Bock, says two of their five deaths related to COVID-19 were people who died of GUNSHOT WOUNDS!"
Colorado clarified that they draw a distinction between something being related and something being the cause. the related deaths don't go into the state stats.
State stats are also not VAERS making this even more irrelevant than it already was.
"They don't do this"
Yes, they do. I even quoted where they said they do exactly this. Your ignorance of government institutions is your own folly, not mine.
"They very clearly don't want accurate reporting of this. You're ULTRA naïve and just plain wrong to boot."
Projecting again I see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@zs3101
"just one person can not be poisoned with a military grade chemical weapon and survive, but 5000 people WILL with immediate irrevocable death"
You would know, ey comrade?
"The Lancet research showed no traces of chemical agent that would go against OPCW convention in Analny tests"
Oh look, the actual Lancet article about the Novichok nerve agent poisoning:
"Severe poisoning with a cholinesterase inhibitor was subsequently diagnosed. 2 weeks later, the German Government announced that a laboratory of the German armed forces designated by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had identified an organophosphorus nerve agent from the novichok group in blood samples collected immediately after the patient's admission to Charité, a finding that was subsequently confirmed by the OPCW."
The Associated Press reported on the 31st of January this year that 5,100 people were arrested at pro-Navalny protest across Russia:
"Over 5,100 arrested at pro-Navalny protests across Russia
The massive protests came despite efforts by Russian authorities to stem the tide of demonstrations after tens of thousands rallied across the country last weekend in the largest, most widespread show of discontent that Russia had seen in years. Despite threats of jail terms, warnings to social media groups and tight police cordons, the protests again engulfed cities across Russia’s 11 time zones on Sunday. Navalny’s team quickly called another protest in Moscow for Tuesday, when he is set to face a court hearing that could send him to prison for years. The 44-year-old Navalny, an anti-corruption investigator who is Putin’s best-known critic, was arrested on Jan. 17 upon returning from Germany, where he spent five months recovering from nerve-agent poisoning that he blames on the Kremlin. Russian authorities have rejected the accusations. He was arrested for allegedly violating his parole conditions by not reporting for meetings with law enforcement when he was recuperating in Germany."
My favourite part is the last bit where he was arrested for not reporting to law enforcement while recovering from almost dying. You can't make it up.
As for London, those 190 people were all fined. None of them are still in jail. So sure, sanction away comrade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fegelfly7877 Well that can't be the exact title as searching the exact phrase yields no results, but no issue, I'll dig it out myself.
Alright, found it. So according to the actual article, 80% of the UK population is vaccinated, and of those there were there were 22,318 cases in the last week of August. This compares to the 20,744 who were unvaxed.
He then clarifies the stats for the whole month. According to the quote from the article:
"The data actually shows that between 7th August 2021 and the 3rd September 2021 there were 47,580 cases among the unvaccinated population, 21,020 cases among the partly vaccinated population, and 41,748 cases among the fully vaccinated population. Meaning there were 15,188 more cases among the vaccinated population."
Counting partial vaccinations is dodgy at best but I digress.
Then he says this:
"So now that we’ve cleared up that the experimental Covid-19 injections clearly do not prevent infection or spread of Covid-19"
Well that's just not true. According to the very stats just presented case rates among the vaccinated are lower. This is because there are 4 times more of them. To get an accurate rate you first need to even out the population sizes when looking at cases. This means the number of cases per population of the unvaxed is 4 times higher than the vaxed.
"According to table 16 of the report between the 28th August 2021 and the 3rd September 2021 there were 36 admissions to hospital related to Covid-19 among the unvaccinated over 60 population, whilst there were 7 admissions on the partly vaccinated population.
However, there were a huge 299 admissions among the fully vaccinated over 60 population, and the same pattern can be seen for the weeks previous all the way back to the 7th August 2021."
This shift to the over 60s is a bait and switch. Over 60s in the UK are 92% vaccinated (just checked, it's actually 93.3%), so any stat relevant would be related to rate, which is 12 times (the higher percentage actually pushes this to 15 times) higher in than the numbers given for the unvaxed population. This actually pushes the hospitalisation rate to higher in the unvaxed group.
The author even shows a complete lack of understanding of this when he says:
"Therefore, this shows that the Covid-19 injections are increasing the risk of hospitalisation when exposed to Covid-19 by 70% rather than reducing the risk by the 95% claimed by the vaccine manufacturers and authorities."
"Therefore, the true number of deaths by vaccination status between the 5th August 2021 and the 26th August 2021"
This is just playing with the stats. He took out the last week intentionally as the trend didn't meet his needs. He then goes on to say:
"Therefore, this shows that the Covid-19 injections are increasing the risk of death when exposed to Covid-19 by a huge 566% rather than reducing the risk by the 95% claimed by the vaccine manufacturers and authorities."
Completely ignoring the rates and population differences again. Even if you take his cherrypicked timeline at face value, you're still looking at the same number of deaths in vaxed and unvaxed overall. What's worse is the majority of those deaths are in the over 60s population, which means you are against focusing on a group with a 92% vaccination rate. So his numbers show the exact opposite of what he claims, with death rates dropping in the vaccinated over 60s.
Maybe pick someone who understands what a rate is next time, or maybe someone who presents all relevant data.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sababaratashvili8629 I was merely refuting the idea that deaths are down in Florida, but if you really want to get into it then we can.
First of all, I was referring to all DeSantis policies, including his anti-mask mandate. Banning schools from masking, which is a valuable and tested method of reducing transmission, is simply an attempt to gain favour. Masks are designed to be worn by everyone in a particular area to protect those around you from yourself. Stopping mandating will just increase transmission and make schools hotbeds of viral infection.
As for the vaccine, while it doesn't stop all infections, it does stop a large proportion of people from getting covid, even delta. Israel numbers put efficacy in around 42% without a booster after several months of waning. With a fresher second dose or a booster efficacy can rise much higher. This means zero transmissibility or mutation potential in a large proportion of vaccinated people. The vaccines also reduce deaths, which was the whole point of this comment. If you want to stop people from dying then vaccinate them. Finally are the long term damage issues of covid. 75 of covid-longhaulers experience organ damage, with 2.5% getting multiple organ damage. Don't you think that's something we should be trying to prevent?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jfangm
"The original script is irrelevant"
So the script sent to casting agencies that shows the original concept from the writers, both of whom are trans, is irrelevant? Honestly, get a grip.
"that character clearly never appeared in that form"
Except in the original script. The studio changing their vision, or even themselves looking to tone it down due to their own insecurities, does not change what the original script was, or the general allegory that is apparent in multiple ways throughout the film. You should probably take the time to read an actual critical review of how The Matrix handles these concepts, as obviously it went over your head.
"Voting is not a universal right, nor should it be."
Ever think that you're the fascist? To counter your obvious bollocks:
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948):
The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1992):
Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity without unreasonable restrictions to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors;
There are like 6 more, but you get the point. Voting is a right.
And I'm sure at this point you want to argue that nationality isn't a right, therefore citizens being the only ones who can vote is perfectly in line with at least 1 of the quotes I posted, except:
Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
Right to nationality - Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
"Every nation puts some kind of limit on the right to vote."
Yes, and usually the line stops at "over 18". When it goes further you usually get some for of voter suppression, leading you further and further away from democracy.
"Even our own Founders did not believe the general population to be responsible enough to make informed decisions"
Oh, the rich slave owners? No way, tell me more.
"Heinlein believed that only those who understood the responsibility of voting, of exerting force, should be allowed to vote."
That's not true. He did write about solving a quadratic equation to vote though. Kinda the opposite of only allowing meatheads to vote. It does however prove my point about Starship Troopers and desperately erode whatever dignity you thought you had left.
"He had a friend summarize it and conflated a libertarian stratocracy with fascism simply because that society put an emphasis on military service as a means of achieving citizenship - it was not the ONLY way."
Right, the other way is serving a full service in a government job, and you only get the right to vote after that service has ended. So you either work for the government or die for the government to get to vote. Wow, so progressive, totally not fascism.
"The government in no way oppresses non-citizens, and non-citizens are treated just as well as citizens."
Except they have absolutely no say in anything, must pay higher tuition fees and aren't allowed to have more than 2 kids. The book literally refers to military personnel as "citizens" and everyone else as "civilians" drawing a very specific distinction. Again, you are sucked up into the glorification of the military again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fegelfly7877
"When thousands of people claim they catch COVID after getting jabbed, it's not a 'personal anecdote' anymore."
Well sure. The vaccines were created to fight the alpha variant. Delta is different and therefore efficacy goes down. We're still seeing some levels of efficacy and while you may still get infected, deaths are practically non-existent for the vaccinated.
"Nice try, but Israel has become the world capital on COVID cases, despite leading the charge on vaccines."
Florida is way worse than Israel.
"80% of deaths in August were from vaccinated individuals."
Also not true. "Per capita, for every death of an Israeli over 60 that had received the booster shot, there are 15 deaths of unvaccinated Israelis in same age group"
"1) 90% of people who are hospitalized with COVID are vaccinated individuals"
Unvaccinated. Check the CDC. I sent you the name of the article on this in a previous comment.
"
2) I don't want to risk my health by taking an experimental jab known for dangerous side effects"
Like respiratory failure, organ damage, blood clots and death? Oh wait, no, that's covid.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HiddenRoar
"Officers quitting due to lack of respect/belligerence from Defund the Police/BLM/Democrats BEFORE 2020."
Not really. Federal data on police leaving their jobs doesn't match your stats.
"bout 700 in all of the U.S., while you're looking at more than double of that from cops who are going home in just Chicago alone"
But not fired. They are required to report vaccination status, but are free to get regular testing without being vaxed. They'll come around eventually, they always do. Travelling nurse companies saw the same issue, right up until they didn't.
"Seattle, California as a whole, NYC, Honolulu, etc (notice it's all Democrat cities)"
Well basically every large city in the US is a Democrat city, so that doesn't exactly narrow it down. Expose to other people will do that. Even the cities in Texas vote left.
"Good luck with telling yourself the lie that people are lining up to replace cops that walk."
Considering around 1% of officer left between 2019 and 2020, the actual number of cops only changed by 0.08%. They were replaced in the same year. Now we are seeing a few extra quitting in 2021, but considering the number was only 1%, and the total is only increasing by 18%, that's only 1.18%. Even then the mitigation is massive as shown from 2020 numbers.
At the end of the say US cops tend to be more conservative, and are therefore more vaccine hesitant. Cops will threaten to quit, most won't, life will go on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1