Youtube comments of Shaun Patrick (@shaunpatrick8345).
-
2800
-
1800
-
1200
-
954
-
924
-
787
-
776
-
657
-
649
-
618
-
500
-
People are not "opening up their countries". Their countries are being opened up against their will, and the people moving into them do not care about the people, history and culture that was there before they arrived. And it's only being done in white people's countries. This is the genocide; it's not people running around with machetes, it's the slow replacement of a people and their culture, it's the removal of portraits, it's changes to curricula to erase historical figures, events and authors, it's the removal of statues, it's race-based quotas, it's "hate speech" laws directed at dissidents, and eventually it is the seizure of land and the herding of people into camps where they are denied access to public resources, as reported by Lauren Southern. Will you condemn it before it becomes violent or will you sit on the fence?
390
-
387
-
379
-
306
-
286
-
283
-
270
-
266
-
260
-
257
-
252
-
245
-
240
-
224
-
213
-
207
-
207
-
201
-
199
-
195
-
193
-
169
-
168
-
168
-
163
-
161
-
161
-
161
-
160
-
158
-
157
-
154
-
151
-
151
-
149
-
146
-
146
-
144
-
134
-
129
-
126
-
124
-
123
-
120
-
118
-
118
-
116
-
114
-
112
-
111
-
111
-
103
-
102
-
102
-
99
-
99
-
98
-
98
-
97
-
96
-
95
-
95
-
94
-
92
-
92
-
91
-
90
-
89
-
89
-
86
-
85
-
85
-
85
-
85
-
84
-
83
-
83
-
83
-
82
-
82
-
82
-
80
-
80
-
80
-
79
-
78
-
77
-
77
-
76
-
75
-
74
-
73
-
72
-
71
-
69
-
69
-
69
-
68
-
67
-
66
-
65
-
65
-
65
-
63
-
63
-
63
-
62
-
61
-
61
-
60
-
60
-
60
-
59
-
59
-
58
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
57
-
56
-
54
-
53
-
53
-
53
-
52
-
52
-
51
-
51
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
@RainerMichelle you are repeating the lie about Russian troops in Ukraine. International observers never saw any Russian troops there.
There are not just "Russian speakers" in Ukraine's recent borders, they are Russian people. Regardless of where the border lies, and borders have never been sacred in that region, the people remain Russian because they literally are Russian. Their foreign citizenship does not stop them being Russian people.
There were clashes recently between muslims and Hindus in several cities in England. The UK authorities were reluctant to use the necessary force to deal with them so the governments of Pakistan and India each expressed their concern about the situation. The people involved are UK citizens, but they are Pakistani and Indian rather than English, and their home countries know and accept that. Many in the west do not understand it, to our great detriment.
The border of Russia was placed to the east of a Russian population when it should have been placed to their west. The fighting is rectifying that mistake, which was made intentionally by Lenin to bring a pro-Bolshevik industrial population into the same region as a more conservative agrarian population. Nobody should expend any cost to preserve that decision, but you support it at the cost of tens of thousands of lives, worldwide hunger and what will be the deepest depression Europe has ever experienced. All because of "sovereignty" which was violated without condemnation as recently as 2014 by the USA, and was rejected in a democratic vote by the people most affected by the false border.
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
Just because there are "claims to victimhood" that doesn't mean there is no victim. Just because there is a sense that someone's culture or group is under threat, that doesn't mean they are not under threat. Are we supposed to surrender our territory, our identity, our culture, so that the colonizers can have a peaceful life outside their own countries, enjoying the last gasps of the civilization our ancestors created for us while they undermine it?
Spiked claims to oppose identity politics, favour democracy and support the working class, but will never criticise mass migration, which was never voted for, creates identity politics, and harms the working class most of all. "White supremacy" is not a global threat, but white retrenchment and the black and brown supremacies are a threat to the west.
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
@quillo2747 a definition of Nation from 1828:
A body of people inhabiting the same country, or united under the same sovereign or government; as the English nation; the French nation. It often happens that many nations are subject to one government; in which case, the word nation usually denotes a body of people speaking the same language, or a body that has formerly been under a distinct government, but has been conquered, or incorporated with a larger nation. Thus the empire of Russia comprehends many nations, as did formerly the Roman and Persian empires. nation as its etymology imports, originally denoted a family or race of men descended from a common progenitor, like tribe, but by emigration, conquest and intermixture of men of different families, this distinction is in most countries lost.
There are many nations in Britain, not all of which are British. Black British is a combination of nation and citizenship, like American Jew.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
White people might hold positions of power, but they are not able to use their authority for the benefit of white people over other races. In fact, they have to do the opposite, with affirmative action laws, capitulating to racists on "diversity" quotas, etc. If you want to see what a racial majority with power looks like, you should read about South Africa and Zimbabwe.
Blacks and hispanics in the US are allowed to be blatant in their use of power to benefit people with their own skin color. That's why it's ok to have a black journalists' union, a black caucus in Washington and other racially-organised groups advocating for blacks only. Black power is why you don't see black people in burglar alarm commercials! It's why there is no push for diversity in the NFL or the VMAs. And it's why Buzzfeed had to apologise for doing a "questions for black people" video even though it was only a tiny fraction as offensive as the ones they do about white people.
White people do not actually have power as a racial group, because they cannot use their power for their racial group and would lose any power they have if they even identify with their racial group. So even by the SJW version of racism, racism against white people is still racism, and appropriation of white culture is the only cultural appropriation.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
Rhys F. the alt-right is not a racial collective. You are not forced to join. Stop listening to Sargon, he's as ignorant as you.
"just because you happen to share the same race"
See, this is why you don't get it. It's not about race. Race is just an extended family, and a nation is a shared culture and history, leading to a certain way of life. You demand none of that be preserved because of some messed-up concept of race. Stop making it about race! "White" is just a shorthand for the things that make your life what it is, and allow you to live it the way you do, but you've been conditioned to reject all that and favor other races. If you were living among people of another race you would not be free to live as you do, because that is not how they live, but it's not about skin color, it's about all the other things. Anti-white racists know this, and attack "whiteness" all the time, because they do not want to live as white people do, and that's not about skin color either. To live as they want, they have to prevent you living the way you want! The alt-right opposes them, and for this you hate them /facepalm
2 wolves and a sheep are voting on what's for dinner and you're protecting the wolves' freedom to choose. You don't care about freedom.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
There's far more to gain that just that - how does $1.7 trilion sound?
If only the top 10% went to university, like it used to be, instead of the top 50%, then the lower 40% would extend their careers by 4 years, which is about 8% or 9% of their working life. But they would gain that at the end of their career, when they are most highly skilled, so their additional productivity would be greater than 9%. The workforce participation rate is only about 65%, so assuming very few graduates are not working, that lower 40% is about 60% of the workforce. Because of Pareto's law they would not be 60% of GDP, but might be 40% of it, and could easily be 15% more productive if they extended their careers.
That's a 6% boost to GDP, which is worth $1.7 trillion every year. That's the opportunity cost of expanded education opportunities, but as Auron stated, it is the cost of employers not being allowed to use IQ tests.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
This conversation was muddled by the fact they are talking so much about citizenship when nation is what really matters, but they were using the word Nation to describe a Citizenry. We need to be able to make the distinction if we are to understand people's motives. For example, the west is indeed moving past the Nation State, but it is not moving past the State part, only the Nation, which is being replaced with a Citizenry, which is a group of people with nothing in common other than their government documentation. Why would a Briton fight for a country which calls everyone British and does nothing to privilege, or even to protect, Britons?
The fact of the multiple nations within Ukraine, one of which is Russian, has been a key component in the conflict since 2014, but always gets ignored. Brendan at 43:42 speaks of national self-determination, which is what the Donbas Militia is fighting for against Ukraine. He needs to reconsider that bit about foreign interference at 43:52 as well, given the events 9 years ago which led to the crisis!
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@Jau Jo compare Britain at its peak. All you have is the racist myth of "they stole our resources". Why did Africa not develop on its own, with all those resources in its favour and a 70,000 year head-start? What resources does Japan have, and why are they rich? Face it, resources has nothing to do with the state of Africa.
Did Rhodesia become poor because it lost its resources, or did it lose its Europeans? What about South Africa's current demise - resource depletion or oppression of the Europeans there? Haiti - they depleted their own resources in a land Europeans were able to create wealth in, on an island where hispanics still do make a good life for themselves. In Baltimore, Detroit and other US cities which declined after the whites found the environment too hostile, it's clear that the main resource was, and still is, the Europeans' tax base. Don't pretend Africa or its people has a history of success and claim I might have "misconceptions"!
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
They are not fining people.
"Violation of this Acceptable Use Policy constitutes a violation of the PayPal User Agreement and may subject you to damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation, which may be debited directly from your PayPal account(s) as outlined in the User Agreement (see “Restricted Activities and Holds” section of the PayPal User Agreement)."
They are not fining people, and they are not playing judge and jury. They are making a charge for damages, which you can contest in court, or more likely via an arbitration service as that's the way Silicon Valley likes to do things.
Within the aforementioned Restricted Activities sections it states "In connection with your use of our websites, your PayPal account, the PayPal services, or in the course of your interactions with PayPal, other PayPal customers, or third parties, you must not...[among other things] Provide false, inaccurate or misleading information"
That's the existing version, not the one that was withdrawn, but the aim here is to prevent people using Paypal to sell fake Rolexes. They claim not to want to police your activities which do not interact with Paypal. It all depends on what you think "third parties" means. Had they not trashed their reputation by banning people for opinions, we might be more relaxed about what they mean by it.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@lotharkarlingi3130 it was juxtaposed with another rocket footage to show the failure of a SpaceX rocket in a maneuver which was performed successfully 20 years earlier. TF's commentary makes it clear that the crowd is incidental and the performance of the rocket is the thing he used the clip for. It is not about the fans, it is a debunking of SpaceX, and that clip is the final punch before he winds up the video.
If he is relying on "I was criticising the crowd" he ought to lose, because it is not true. Do we not care about truth any more?
Why, in his first response video on this issue, did he claim his use of the clip was fair use on the grounds that it was advancing knowledge, and why does he not simply rely on that now? It's a much more solid claim, in terms of the truth at least. Why did he say back then that the video was about about Musk's lack of progress in using recyclable rockets? Why does he now say it was about Musk's fans?
Why would he change his position to something not based on facts, if he had a solid position to begin with? Why has he reframed the entire video as a criticism of fans, if he did not need to rely on a criticism of fans in order for that clip to be fair use?
If criticising the crowd in that clip is essential to him being allowed to use it, then he is in trouble, because he did not criticise the crowd in that clip. Would it be difficult to convince a judge that something other than criticism of the crowd was the intent when including that clip? I suspect not!
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
"if two people share, it increases the Capital/profit of the owner."
No. You don't increase the rent when someone brings their partner into the apartment, or has a baby. And you don't cut the rent when someone leaves. Anyway, your earlier point was that making people live separately was a capitalist plot to increase profit. Now you say it actually cuts profit?
Regulatory capture is not part of capitalism because regulations are not part of a free market. You're not critiquing capitalism.
Zoning laws keep the market in a state of inbalance. It is a form of regulatory capture. Think about what's profitable if you own a house, there is a market for houses, and there's a government which can regulate the market. If you can get the government to ban the building of properties which could compete with you, then you make more money! That's what zoning does. Zones, low interest rates and "help for buyers" all raise house prices artificially. Voters love it! But it can't last forever - it's a decay process. 2008 proved it ;-)
2 people sharing 1 house is cheaper than 2 people buying 2 houses. Capitalism can't change that so it can't make them live separately. To kill marriage/cohabitation you need to break the free market and introduce perverse incentives. Once you do that, capitalists will serve the new market you created, and will profit from it. But you should not mistake that as their goal or conclude that they created the conditions they profited from.
"These parasites rarely produce anything. Instead they operate as pirates did."
You're describing governments, not capitalists.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@AddamSolo since February 2020 I've been watching people like you, and trying to help. I've seen you defending your ignorance for more than a year, and I know you worked hard so that you could be at this current point of suffering. There were always ways out of this for you, and there still are, but you have been made to invest in the lies that were fed to you, so that the path back to reality is painful to take. You refused the truth because you thought the lies were part of a resistance to a tyranny that doesn't actually exist. It was a beautiful plan and I failed to defeat it, but I can still take pleasure in its brilliance.
They want you to get the infection rather than the vaccine, and they made you want the same. They want more time for their reset agenda, so they need you to keep spreading the virus and encouraging others to do so, and you willingly comply, condemning anyone who wants everyone to act to end the pandemic. If you survive then perhaps in a few years when you are less emotional and invested you can look back and see what I can see today.
Fully vaccinated in the UK: 77% of the population, 39% of cases, and the death rate has collapsed since the vaccine rollout began. Everything you were told, that convinced you to do the wrong thing, was a lie. But you love the lie and reject the truth. You think doing that means you're strong, courageous or rebellious - taking a stand against something. And it's exactly what you were told to do and how you were told to feel.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
+TreClaire there are a few good comments on here about why the film was made the way it was, and how it got better over time, so you should browse for those and learn something. It's not because anyone is racist, it's because of the limitations of technical expertise over physics and chemistry.
Look at the women at 3:36, who is recognised by the facial recognition software in the camera that follows her face. Think about the contrast between her skin tone, hair color, eye color, lips, and the background. Is the contrast high or low? How easy would it be to program a computer to see these contrasting shades and recognise it as a face? Now do the same for the black guy she is with. Do you think it would be much harder to build a computer that could recognise his face? If so, is that because you are racist, or is it just that it's a more difficult problem to solve?
The perception that this is a problem of racism is racist. Naming something that is not racist is easy, but naming something that is not perceived to be racist, by actual racists, is more difficult. This video is race-baiting.
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
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 calling me a sock account doesn't refute the facts. Soros does fund feminism, and he does it to destroy the west. Google "soros femen," notice that he funded them while they attacked the west, and notice why he cancelled their funding. Google "national organisation women soros" or "womens march soros" and see some of what he still funds. You're not wrong about his intentions, but you're in denial about the goal of feminism and why people like him fund it. The trans agenda is just feminism taken to the logical conclusion (equality, equalism, quotas for women, gender instead of sex, gender is a social construct, self-identification, total absence of categories and standards, quotas apply to men now), which makes it even more destructive so it gets more support from the globalists now.
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
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It's not just the truckers, it's everyone who believed the propaganda and complied with the WEF's requests to "resist" the restrictions and open what they saw as a "window of opportunity".
"The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future".
~ Klaus Schwab, dictator of Canada, 2020.
Everyone who did not see what they were being asked to comply with, who believed the lie that wearing a mask was the extent of, or anything to do with, the reset, has to take part of the blame. There is nothing Great about asking you to wear a mask, and it does not qualify as a Reset, but people were told they would wake up happy and owning nothing if they wore one, and this terrified them. They were told that by refusing to stop they virus they were fighting against "tyranny". Presenting cowards with an easy way to pretend to be heroes is how the window was opened.
You fought hard for their victory over you, I know this because I saw it play out. I was fighting to get you to stop, to look at what was happening in the world, and to do good. Nearly everyone I tried to help preferred to live in the comfort of the propaganda and the delusion that they were fighting tyranny. This is your victory. You fought for it, you deserve it.
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Snotnarok he made a wallet and put someone else's logo on it. He used their logo because it adds value which the LV brand created. A company called La Californienne did the same thing with Rolexes a few years ago, and lost their case to the Trade Mark owner. Their watches were modified Rolexes which they had first removed the logo from and then they replaced the logo after making their modifications. They could have left the logo off, but that would have made the product less attractive to customers. They could have modified generic watches, but that also would have been less attractive. They used the Rolex logo to make money from other people's work, and that's what the wallet maker has done. He could have used any material, but chose one featuring someone else's logo, and he put the logo front and center on his product. You can see in the video that he first puts his template on a piece of the LV fabric which he could not cut to have the logo in the center, and then moves his template to a part where the logo can be cut more favourably.
Just because one Trade Mark owner allows it, that does not make it legal.
You did say that, and you had not already said you didn't - you didn't even refer to the sentence in which you said it. It is the use of the Trade Mark that is the issue, not the use of the product. They initially thought that it was not even their product, because without the rubber backing which the wallet maker removed, they didn't recognise it.
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
@phonewithoutquestion80 Gnome releases videos with each of its new releases. They show it being used as a PC desktop with inputs via mouse, keyboard and touchpad. It is not a mobile UI, it is not designed as a mobile UI, it is not advertised as a mobile UI, it is not a mobile UI.
People who make your claim tend to be confused by the fact it has an applications grid and several mobile devices have applications grids. This is not what makes a mobile UI though, and the fact that it has floating windows and multiple workspaces, which mobile UIs tend not to have, ought to override the fact of the applications grid. The apps grid is just a better use of space. If it was squashed into a corner like in Elementary, that would not make Gnome a non-mobile desktop, it would just make it worse.
Have you seen the Sharp Zaurus UI? It's mobile, and it looks like Windows 95, so the logic that can claim Gnome is a mobile UI must also claim that Windows is a mobile UI. The Zaurus had floating windows, and so does Gnome, so maybe they are in the same category of mobile UI? No, that would just be ridiculous. Gnome is clearly a desktop UI.
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
-
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
-
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@highlandsprings5752 I don't have a problem with the facts, but your "facts" are wrong. The USA has only 15,000 flu deaths (confirmed 100%, as you put it) in a bad year, and the number is estimated to be about 60k based on statistical models (confirmed somewhat less than 100%). You're suggesting that the UK has multiples more flu deaths than the US even with a much smaller population, and your claim is not corroborated by the UK government. So I'll ignore your numbers and go with the official data.
But even with your dodgy data, covid-19 is still more deadly, and it has not passed yet. It is not the flu. We have known that for months. Please try to be faster in working things out! If it helps you to call it the flu, then do so. But know that you need to wear a mask, that it is far more deadly then the flu, and that it affects people in ways the flu does not. Your definition of it does not matter, it does not change reality, it does not diminish what covid-19 is. Calling it the flu does not mean we should not be wearing masks, just like calling it cancer does not mean we should cure it with chemotherapy.
Coronavirus and common cold are not synonyms, and colds do not kill thousands of people.
You don't know what a poe is. I am not one, not even in the same category. Just like calling covid-19 the flu does not make it the flu, calling me a poe does not make me a poe. People are selling non-mask masks, so they can spread the virus without being arrested. There is no reason to assume his advice was not literal.
Do you know when "flu season" is? Do you know what today is?
Please use paragraphs.
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I can't help but notice a contradiction in this discussion! If we all agree that it was wrong for the Nazis to want to overthrow an ethnic group whose intellectual prowess gave it an outsized cultural, economic and political influence over the Germans, how can we claim to hold any opinion other than "they're superior so they should rule over you"? Note that Noah said the following:
...some individuals are genetically smarter than other individuals. That hasn't caused the collapse of civilization, it hasn't caused the individuals with...a high genetic propensity for cognitive ability to say you know "all the others must genuflect before us and treat us as demigods on earth because we're slightly smarter on average"
And why are they still using the Nazis as an example of people discriminating against a "superior" group? They're in the UK, it's 2019. Have they not noticed the drive to replace, in business, academia, entertainment, media, politics and the population at large, people of a group which researchers have found to have a higher average IQ than their replacements? Surely a better example to illustrate the need for fact-based policies would be the one where, unlike the contemporary view of the 3rd reich, it is accepted that the more successful group should be removed!
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
-
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
-
@elianes5505 it's racist to ignore the people who made the country what it is, and to blame their failures on the usual suspects, which is what tends to happen. It is not biased to put the blame where it belongs.
A few places did OK after colonisation, by maintaining the systems they inherited. Most became s-holes, and that's why Haiti is like it is too. Is it racist to point out that South Africa is the way it is because it is ruled by Africans, and that Orania is one of the few places worth living in because it is European? That's the truth, and we need to accept it, because telling lies makes more places go the way of Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Haiti.
Africa was not pillaged, there was nothing there to pillage. It was improved, and made far more productive than it had ever been. The natives benefited with wealth, education and extended lifespans filled with more opportunity than their grandparents could ever have imagined, and we are hated for that.
Spain had a huge empire because its people are competent, which is the point here. They had millennia less time to develop than Africa did, so you're not supporting your argument by pointing out Spain's relative success. They are also successful in Dominican Republic.
2
-
@elianes5505 Argentina was made rich by European immigrants and poor by socialism and uncontrolled migration from neighbouring countries (despite the declining state of the country, it was still a better option for them). There's an article I can't link to which details and explains the state of the country. Here's a passage:
Argentina’s ranking in international PISA testing continues to decline. In 2012 we were in 60th place, behind Chile, Mexico, Uruguay and Brazil. In 2015, test-takers were limited to Buenos Aires, which is largely European. That year, our rank rose to 39th, closer to the countries of original immigration such as Italy, Spain, and France. Education has declined to the point that only 50 percent of children can finish secondary school.
It's not "way worse economically" than those countries. It has a GDP/capita higher than Mexico, and 76% higher than Peru, which itself is more than twice that of Bolivia.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Calling BLM marxist was not right-wing panic, it was based on their policies and the fact its leaders said they were trained marxists. The mansions are not a new revelation, they were in the right-wing media shortly after being bought, with commentary pointing out they were in mostly-white areas. Why would BLM buy mansions when they want community centres, and why buy them so far away from the population they claim to serve?
The reason they have not had much effect on policing is that there was no problem to fix, so it can't be fixed. There was no racism alleged in the prosecution of the officer who restrained Floyd, and a Harvard examination of more than 1000 incidents found white suspects are more likely to be shot than black ones. What BLM has achieved is a 44% representation for their people in US adverts (based on stats for Superbowl adverts), more race-based employment and university admissions, and sections reserved for "empowering black voices" when you scroll through TV and Music streaming services. They are and always were a supremacist organisation with a marxist tilt. British schools and universities are "decolonising" because of them, museum exhibits are being reclassified and redefined in their favour, statues they don't like are being removed, their supremacy is growing. They are now the most powerful racial group throughout the west; those who refuse to kneel will be demonised.
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
-
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
-
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Melian_Dialogue that has nothing to do with masks or other actions we should be taking. The only comment I need to make is that if you don't want people taking advantage of the pandemic, you should take action against the pandemic, encourage others to do so, and condemn those who advocate actions which will prolong it. As I wrote before, I have done all that since the start, and I do not have any need to justify testing processes. They were trying to make Trump look bad, for your failure to realise we have a pandemic and that we could end it within its incubation period if we all isolate at the same time. That's about 2 weeks. We could have ended this last February and it would not have been an issue during the election. But you didn't want that, and you still don't. We are still 2 weeks away from the end of this, if we choose that path, and you still resist.
You advocate for a longer pandemic, so please justify every agenda people have used the pandemic to advance! Whatever people might be using it for is not on my back, it's on yours. You want this, you protest things which will prevent it. So justify those testing rates yourself. The bad guys are on your side, not mine. I've been trying to stop them.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MarvinWestmaas Semanya has XY chromosomes, internal testes, and no womb or ovaries. If you listen to the interview I referenced above, you will find the boxers are the same, and that none of them would have been confused after puberty. The IOC looks at passports, not at the sex of athletes, which gives men an unfair advantage in the female category. For the category to have any meaning, it must exclude people for more than just what they were "assigned" or granted by government fiat, because some people are assigned wrongly.
You claim "we don't hear her being accused of this, never in her 8 years of boxing." Well that's a bold claim, but a quick search reveals the truth. I honestly don't know why people persist in this (actually, I do. We all do).
"Algeria’s Imane Khelif, who competes on Thursday, was disqualified by the International Boxing Association over high testosterone levels before a gold medal bout at the women’s world championships"
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
-
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
SJWs are into social justice, not victimhood. They perceive victimhood through a social justice lens, and promote victimhood as a weapon where it does not exist, but social justice is what they are all about, and it is their goal. The alt-right is the opposite of SJWs; they do not want social justice, but that does not mean that people wanting to demographically change the USA are not victimising white people. They are doing that, and the people pointing out this victimisation are correct. This does not make them SJWs or racists.
The factual claim that a victim exists has nothing to do with the ideology of social justice. Alerting people to a crime does not make the crime go away; victim and offender are not reversed by the act of reporting a crime.
"Yeah and that's why i'm against mass immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens."
The disastrous consequences of multiculturalism do not go away when you make mass migration legal. It is the fact of multiculturalism, not the illegality of it, that is the problem.
Skin color is irrelevant, but ethnic group preference is not. Demographic change would be just as destructive if everyone had the same skin color but different cultures, histories etc and advocated for the interests of people from their own background. It is the SJWism inherent in multiple ethnicities cohabiting that the alt-right opposes, not their skin. When a racist says they hate white people it is not because of their skin, it is because of the different way they live.
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@TalesOfWar 17% are in social housing, others get housing benefit in private rented housing, which is all a long way from claims that they are a benefit. We have to pay that, and it pushes up house prices for everyone else at the same time as pushing down wages, so we effectively pay three times. This is a policy which affects us all, it not an unfair blame allocation. To blame the rich, as you did, has no basis and is entirely unfair.
Do you know how much the Netherlands calculated the cost of their migration policy to have been over the last 25 years? Denmark has some similar data, so you can find those or just ignore them and keep blaming innocent people instead. The economic argument is entirely fake, and the social impact is always ignored because it is so clearly detrimental. All such policies need to be stopped and then reversed, to prevent ongoing harms.
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@lotharkarlingi3130 he did not use a mocking tone, and he used "I guess" to show that he didn't really care about them. The juxtaposition of the 2 pieces of rocket footage, and his commentary on the clip, show that he did not use the clip to criticise Musk fans.
His claim that the video was intended as a criticism of Musk fans is new - he originally claimed it was criticism of Musk, which on viewing the video you can see is correct. This reframing is public now. Would a judge be interested to know why the video was originally declared to something other than what it is now claimed to be, when the thing it is now claimed to be is integral to his defence yet not supported by the facts?
At best, his defence is that he found their excitement "interesting," and that this is the best criticism of Musk fans he can muster to round off a video in which he criticises Musk fans. But that is not what the facts show the video to be, and it is not an accurate description of the commentary on the clip. That's his best effort, and the plaintiff has a heck of a lot more!
Here's the commentary on the clip:
"It's interesting to have people excited about [the attempted landing] I guess, but honestly I find the rockets that successfully land more impressive."
If you played that to someone would they think he was making a point about Musk fans, or Musk rockets? Bear in mind, he initially claimed it was the latter, and did so publicly! He will risk (and probably lose) fans' money on this instead of paying the man for the use of the footage.
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
-
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Don Vito you don't get it. Stop trying to end racism, instead stop forcing us to live together. Each group wants their own statues, each group wants their own national heroes and national holidays, each group wants to be "represented" on TV by people from their group, each group wants political representation for their group, each group wants to be taught their own history, literature, art etc in their own schools. We could all have all those things, if we were not forced to live together.
But above all, it is diaspora Europeans who are denied those things, because we build countries people want to live in, and we're not racist. We are punished for doing good and being "good". The result is that our own civilisation must be torn down and replaced because it is the best. This is unfair to us, and no benefit to the rest of the world either. Anti-racism is the sin, not racism.
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
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Gareth D you provided no evidence for why you believe your own claims. That's enough for me to assume that the scientific and anecdotal evidence in favor of mask wearing should be accepted.
I don't care about any NWO plan, but the people claiming there is no virus or claiming measures to stop it will not stop it, often try to associate those measures with a global control system that wants us to be inside watching netflix instead of outside earning money for it. You make no sense, and I lump you in with the others who make no sense.
Masks do work, they have worked in a number of countries, and doing nothing would lead to a huge number of deaths and ongoing physical and mental conditions. Herd immunity would require at least 70% of people getting infected, and a recent low-end estimate for the IFR is 0.5%. That's a minimum of 1.16 million deaths in the USA alone. When you add the economic consequences of having so many people get sick, or trying not to get sick, and the costs of long-term care for people who were badly affected but survived, it's just not worth it. The alternative is to wear a mask. It has been proven, and it is very cheap. Other than to prolong the pandemic for the benefit of big pharma and the NWO, why would anyone advocate against masks?
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
-
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
-
It's not a command to federal workers, it's a sanction. It restricts "the exportation, reexportation, sale, or supply, directly or indirectly, from the United States, or by a United States person, wherever located, of any category of services as may be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to any person located in the Russian Federation" etc. In fact it specifically excludes federal workers: "Nothing in this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the Federal Government".
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
@nottodisushttoagen1309 we are not living in a Steven Seagal movie. Instead of this fantasy, you need to focus on the other part of the comment: who stops us, how and why? If you don't know how they will stop you forming a militia, they will stop you. You don't have the power to use force, you need to get that power first. And if you won't think about who opposes you, and what their methods are, you will never get that power.
Do you remember when a BLM-associated group protested in formation wearing paramilitary uniform during the mass disturbances? That's illegal, but they were allowed to do it, and have done it again since. We are not allowed, even Steven Seagal is not allowed. Your first job is to make it so we are allowed to do that. Nobody has been able to so far, though many have tried to take steps which would move us in that direction (not with that specific goal, but it's all part and parcel of the same movement).
Another example is from recent protests where a native citizen journalist was trying to ask questions of protesters. One of them assaulted him and the police took him away for insightment. They have the power to assault us, and we don't have the power to ask them journalistic questions. Instead of changing that, you think we can just use force and fix things. Even if you fixed what was going on within 6 feet of you for a few minutes, which is about all you might be able to achieve, it would be used against us because we have no narrative control.
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
-
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
-
2
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Trump has not banned muslims, and has not suppressed the media. Building a border wall to protect against invasion by illegal immigrants is not fascist - every country throughout history has protected it borders, or at least tried to, including communist ones! Google and Facebook have suppressed media by labelling accurate stories "fake news" and by removing organisations from their site and search index if they disagree with their politics, but does anyone on the left criticise them?
Zuckerberg is a globalist, and Facebook deleted 30,000 pro-France accounts shortly before the 1st round of their presidential election. But if he's anti-nationalist, that means he's anti-fascist, right? And the dichotomy presented in the video is that there is either fascism or democracy. But Zuckerberg supports elitism instead of democracy and won't allow opinions that counter his worldview. He's against freedom, sovereignty and the right of diverse groups to exist as distinct groups. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has devolved education to the states and wants to cut the amount of government regulation. He is not trying to control your lives, he's the opposite of an authoritarian and therefore not a fascist.
If you want to find fascism in the US, look at leftist groups on university campuses. Conservative speakers are being met with increasing violence in an attempt by the fascists to silence any dissenting opinions. Yesterday a fascist murdered someone at Austin, and stabbed 3 others. The victims were all frat boys. A week previously, a fascist "antifa" group posted propaganda calling for the murder of frat boys. This is where the danger is, not in a President who wants to have 2 regulations removed for each new one Congress creates!
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
-
@blabby102 "the first diagnosed patient was not the first patient"
Logic not your strong point? There were other cases found to have happened months before the presumed first patient, and they hadn't been to the wet market either. But it was local patients from whom the link was disproved, very early in the saga.
Yes, people were discussing it on social media. And some of them were knowledgeable people who did not send letters to the Lancet hiding their conflicts of interest. Telling me you sheltered yourself from these discussions doesn't convince me of anything, so I don't know why you would do that, but PMC7982270 contains some of the information you missed out on.
From that paper, it may be polybasic cleavage sites I was trying to recall above, not furin ones, or perhaps both were used to explain the same thing. It also further explains why the market theory didn't hold. Unfortunately, as the Lancet example and revelations from X/Twitter about the extent of state requests for removal of information, we cannot place certainty on what we are told regarding this issue.
I have not mentioned a mine.
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
-
@IcestormTundra I'm not conflating current and future trends, because I don't even know what the future trend will be. The current trend is that your culture will be eradicated, and you are a fool if you are prepared to let that happen in the hope that the trend we've seen throughout history, across the world, and in your own country, will change when there is no reason for it to change, and all political power is ensuring those who wish it to change are persecuted.
Women's world records will not surpass those of men because there are physiological differences which make women less competitive. The trend of islamic colonization of the west has nothing to stop it, and is motivated by the religion's own dogma of colonization and world dominance. There is no comparison to be made.
Nobody paints all muslims as violent when they point out the reality of the violence of Islam. Not all muslims are killing Christians in Nigeria, but some are and that's a fact of muslim population growth which we would be fools to ignore. Not all muslims are killing Christians in Sri Lanka, but some are and that's a fact of muslim population growth which we would be fools to ignore. Not all muslims are killing Christians in Indonesia, but some are and that's a fact of muslim population growth which we would be fools to ignore. Not all muslims are killing Christians in the Philippines, but some are and that's a fact of muslim population growth which we would be fools to ignore. Etc. It's a trend you should not ignore. It's the trend which turned so many other countries Muslim, and which Sweden is not willing to stop.
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
-
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
-
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
-
@moheebsaad1918 you have been misled. A lot of people are spreading misinformation about the pandemic, and you are one of them. You fell for a lie, and you are spreading the lie. It is a viral process, this misinformation, and like all viral processes, it cannot be caused by radiation, which does not spread in a viral manner.
I told you to consider how the virus spread around the world. The reason nobody in the scientific establishment is looking at radiation as the cause of this is that it is not possibly for radiation to cause it. Look at the spread, think about how the disease would spread if it was caused by radiation. Think about how it is not possible for radiation to spread virally. We know the source, we know how the virus spread, we know radiation does not cause this. It is a virus.
You have been lied to, and the lie is easy to disprove if you spend a few seconds actually thinking about it.
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
-
@davidbrear8642 they banned the largest political party, which was pro-Russian, they restricted use of the Russian language, and you can see pictures of their atrocities in Donbas if you care to look. It is NATO which poses the threat to Russia itself, not Ukraine.
The nazi battalions are real, they were even reported on as a problem for Ukraine by western media over the last few years, if you care to look.
The west installed a puppet regime in 2014. Nazis claim their support was essential in whipping up the crowds in Maidan square. Channel 4 news website, 2013-12-16: "Far-right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator". The president they overturned was democratically elected in an election overseen by OSCE, who said it was conducted fairly. He was not Putin's puppet, he was willing to accept both trade deals offered, it was the west which could not countenance Ukraine having an agreement with Russia.
There was no need for NATO to encroach further on Russia, they had promised not to, they were told it was a red line. They ignored the concept of indivisible security, and their desire to make Ukraine available as a platform for aggression against Russia cannot be ignored. Remember, these people have blamed Russia for every setback they have received in the last 6 years, as well as other matters. Claims of "Russian collusion" have been made and disproved in the US 2016 election, Brexit and a more recent French election.
Yesterday I saw a video where a Ukro-nazi spoke about their intentions towards Russia. He mentioned the goal of invading to break it into 5 countries, which is something I have heard from US politicians as well. I wonder which side fomented that idea, and how it was communicated! Russia is aware of their aims and has a right to protect itself. For the good of the world, NATO should have stopped where it was. We cannot expect Russia to suffer 999 cuts and take no action before the 1000th.
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
-
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
-
@peacefuljourney4994 science didn't have all the answers on day one, but nor did the propagandists. Remember when they wanted you to think it was just the flu, and do nothing to stop the pandemic? Now they want you not to take a vaccine, to prolong the pandemic.
They can always point to errors made by the honest side, and tell you they are your friend. But ultimately we have to do what the virus demands of us, and if someone tells us to do those things then we have to comply with the virus even when the propagandists tell us to "resist" "tyranny". We cannot give in to propaganda.
Pandemics happen to populations, not individuals. If someone is encouraging you to put your own interests first during a pandemic, it is because they oppose your interests. You are bound to the whole, you can't be separate from it, and you need to put the false comforting promises of the propagandists aside. You need to reject their corruption, crime, lies and propaganda. You need to understand the virus and respond to it.
And you can't be soft about "belittling" a literal propagandist. He is not doing it for you, he is doing it to you. Remember that.
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
-
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
-
MM thinks Social Distancing was a failure because it was not 100% effective. If the goal was to be 100% effective, and let's remember this was imposed by people who supposedly want to control every aspect of our lives, it would have been set at 100 feet. Instead, it was set at a level which would reduce the spread of the virus, hopefully being part of a series of measures which would bring the reproductive rate below 1, whilst not imposing too great a burden on people.
It never had to be 100% effective, nothing did. One of the worst aspects of the pandemic is that people were terrified by fearmongers like MM, believing they were being forced to do things which "did not work," as part of a new totalitarian regime. Whether effective or not, everything we were asked to do could be expected to reduce the spread of a virus. It was only ever about the virus, yet people were told it was only ever about control. How unimaginative are our governments supposed to be, that when they take absolute power they can think of nothing more to do with it than asking us to stay in and watch Netflix?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@amorfati4927 he fearmongered you right here in this video, I explained it, and I basically explained that the 6ft rule was arbitrary. Instead of engaging with what he and others have done to you, you are trying to justify your acceptance of the fearmongering for the last 2 years.
You do not need to be scared. You never did. It was only ever about the virus, but you have been subjected to a massive campaign to make you feel weak if you admit that. You made acceptance of the fear part of your identity, so you can never let go.
Of course they kept the restrictions within the limits of what most people were able to operate within. That 100ft 100% effective social distancing distance would never work! But because people were able to comply with 6ft, you let yourself be fearmongered into thinking that compliance was the goal. That was never the goal, it was always and only ever about the virus.
They would not be able to fearmonger you if you were not able to comply with being fearmongered. Did you think about that?
When the government evacuates people in the path of a forest fire, do they want compliance?
Of course they do, and it is nothing to be scared of. You do not need to be scared, and you never did. But you outsourced your thinking to people who wanted you scared and compliant. They saw the pandemic as a "window of opportunity" (their own words - look it up) and they asked you to resist doing anything that would close the window. You complied.
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
-
@jimreaper1337 yes, it will stop the virus, and there is plenty of research you can look at to debunk the lies you've been told. It doesn't have to stop every viral particle, it just has be part of a strategy to get the reproductive rate below 1. People whose agenda requires the pandemic to continue do not want you to know this, and you complied when they asked you to remain ignorant of it.
Why has this fart-based propaganda become so popular with the covidiots? Is it because you all smell your farts? Do you sniff your underwear too? Do you realise they trap some of the fart but not all of it? What do you think it means for mask-wearing during a pandemic that putting something over an orifice can stop some of the emissions but not all? Did you ever consider that, or did you simply comply when told what to think?
Did you know covid causes blood clotting? When they told you not to protect yourself against blood clotting, did you comply? Yes, of course you did. You comply, because that is who you are and it is what you do. Compliance with the agenda has become part of your identity and you would be mocked within your online community if you acted within reality instead of within the propaganda. You know I'm right, I know I'm right, I've seen this a thousand times during the last 2 years. You're just one sheep among many.
They lied to you about everything, and one of the lies is that all the truths stated by the good guys were lies. You fell for it, and you complied with what they wanted you to do, even when it risked your own health and your own life. You complied because they told you it made you a renegade. They knew you would respond the way you did, and they crafted their propaganda to suit. They own you, and they bought you for nothing because you have a slave mentality. You gave yourself to them for free just to stoke your own ego.
1
-
@jimreaper1337 no they did not. You've been lied to, you continue to be lied to, and you think complying with their agenda and their lies makes you a dissident. What they actually said, as you would know if you were in any way self-motivated and not an NPC, is that cloth masks are less effective than N95 masks. Is this a revelation? Nope.
The fact that people can breathe through a mask tells you nothing about how they prevent viral transmission. It does debunk one of the earlier propaganda efforts though: that you suffocate when you wear one. That nonsense gained ground early on among people like you. They were actually terrified of cotton, that is how committed they were to the agenda.
I see you still cling to the fart propaganda after I explained its creation, its lies and its purpose. You can't stop complying, because compliance is part of your identity.
The vaccines were "sold" as 95% effective against infection, based on the results of their tests during the alpha-variant phase. This would make them 100% effective against the pandemic, if people were not sheepishly complying with the pro-pandemic agenda. Effectiveness against infection wanes to about 60%, and effectiveness against severe disease remains high. This was never hidden, but it became fodder for the propagandists who want you to make a bad choice regarding your health, and you complied. You STILL believe lies about vaccines when we have overwhelming evidence to support them. They did a job on you, and you love them for it!
You're more likely to be in hospital if you were scared of needles or believed the pro-pandemic propaganda. Telling you that most hospitalised people are vaccinated is part of the propaganda, and the lie contained within it is easy to deconstruct: most people are not scared of needles and did not fall for the propaganda, so most people are vaccinated. For example: 90 people vaccinated, 10 people fell for the lies. 6 vaccinated people in hospital, 5 sheep in hospital. Most people in hospital are not sheep, so it's better to be a sheep? They told you it's better to be a sheep, and you ARE a sheep, so you complied. You think this makes you a dissident.
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
-
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
-
@frankcastleisdead7473 Ben Shapiro does not defend nationalism for nations other than his own. Furthermore, nation is another term for ethnicity -- its root is in the latin word for birth -- so a nation state is an ethnostate. If Shapiro supports nationalism for jews, he supports an ethnostate.
If Italy was a homeland for the Italians, that would be an ethnostate, and it would not be racist, it would be nationalist -- the French are not Italian, but they're the same race. Having a homeland is not stupid, it's the only way to protect the right to a nationality, which is enshrined in the UN declaration of human rights. What's stupid is denying your nation its homeland, or denying the exclusivity of your nation, as the Italian and other treasonous elites have done throughout the west.
Culture is not irrelevant here, it is essential to the identity of a nation. If you don't preserve your culture and history, you don't properly preserve your nation. That's why Israel protects the jewish culture.
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
-
@tobyglyn you've been told to fear vaccines, and have been lied to about their effectiveness. I don't see anyone who has paid attention being in the slightest bit fearful. We have got vaccinated, we know the severity of the disease will be far less for us than for you, and we are back to normal life, because we know the vaccines do work. You have been terrified by the lies you chose to believe, and you think those of us who reject those lies are being fearful. But there is zero evidence of that.
I follow some blogs of people who fell for the propaganda. They are expecting all the vaccinated people to drop dead any money and are modifying their conspiracy theory to include a "time switch" that will turn on in a few years, because the original conspiracy theory was debunked by reality. They will remain terrified for the next few years unless they reject the lies and look at the world. They are terrified of masks, terrified of their government, terrified of vaccines, and have been programmed to be complacent about the real threat, which is the virus. The evidence of this is all over the web, even in this comment section.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@0IIIIII if you didn't assume sexism you should not assume racism. Would a woman have aroused suspicions by snooping around a house whose owners were away?
For what reason do you assume the woman who came forward to vouch for the pastor, and who claimed to be the person who called the police, wants the pastor to be jailed because of his skin? We're told she must have recognised him before calling, which means she specifically wanted him arrested. And if it was because of racism, she wanted him arrested because of his skin. She just needed an opportunity, and noticing him watering the plants was it! But then she changed her mind and tried to assure the police he was innocent. Something doesn't add up!
If we are conditioned to assume racism in every scenario between people of different races, we should not be forced to live with and among each other. When you support baseless accusations of racism you lead more people, of all races and for different reasons, to want not to have this disastrous cohabitation forced on us. The effort and expense of making diversity work is just not worth it, and it is failing, so I would be fine with freedom for all races from all other races, but I know it will not be allowed. As this forced association persists, the people who are suffering most from your actions are people who look like me. You have to stop, you are conditioning people to resent and hate a whole section of society for no reason.
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
-
@DeepBlueAbyss acquired immunity is not better for anyone. To acquire immunity you need to become infected, which negates the benefit you gain from immunity. So by definition, acquired immunity is not better than something which protects you against infection. You have fallen for the anti-vax propaganda which trains you to want to get the disease rather than the vaccine.
How can you pretend the pro-health narrative is "incoherent" when you support the idea of getting infected to avoid getting infected? They did a job on you and you can't see it!
Covid does not effect only the "extremely old". The death rate is low in the young, but another aspect of the training you received from the anti-vax/pro-pandemic propaganda is to ignore any negative health outcomes that are less severe than death. Your complacency about long covid is an example of this.
Something else they don't want you to think about is that a pandemic affects a population rather than an individual. If you're young and less likely to get a severe reaction to the disease, you still benefit from the vaccination being taken on by yourself and the wider population, because it helps to defeat the pandemic. The economy is still depressed by the pandemic even when the restrictions are lifted. Unlike yourself, many people understand the need to take precautions and limit unnecessary contacts. We can end that need with vaccination.
The propagandists also want you to think you actually have a choice to avoid both the disease and the vaccine, which you do not. If the pandemic becomes endemic then your choice is to get the disease or get the vaccine. The former is vastly more of a risk, and the latter can be scheduled. Take a few days off work, get the vaccine, rest, and then you don't need to worry. You can even do it at a weekend! If you get the disease then you have to upend your life at what might be an inconvenient moment, and you're far more likely to have to take much longer to recover. You bought into the propaganda that wants to take away your power over your own health.
1
-
@DeepBlueAbyss why do you need to know their motive? It is happening, and has been happening for 18 months. Originally you were trained not to do anything that would help end the pandemic, and now you are being trained to want to be infected. It is real, it is happening, it is being done to YOU.
Do you remember being told it's just the flu and that masks filter out oxygen molecules? It all happened, and is still happening. If you can't see it it's because you don't want to see it. Do the people doing it have a motive? Of course they do. Does being told the motive mean it is happening? NO! The fact it is happening means it is happening.
Vaccination does stop community transmission. You've been trained not to think about the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing people becoming infected, just like you were trained to ignore the effectiveness of masks in preventing infected people transmitting the virus. I have followed the propaganda, I know this stuff, I saw the "studies" people used to "debunk" masks. Those studies showed low rates of protection against infection, whereas the research that tested effectiveness against transmission never made it into the propaganda echo chamber. This is ridiculous because you can prove their effectiveness against transmission by holding a t-shirt over your mouth, breathing, and seeing if it gets damp!
So with masks you were trained to think about infection rather than transmission, and with vaccines you are trained to think about transmission rather than infection. You can spread the virus if you're vaccinated, but you're far less likely to have been infected, so you're far less likely to spread it. That is what they do not want you to consider. Vaccination reduces the R-number, and so do masks.
The motive to promote safe and effective healthcare rather than being infected by a virus that has killed millions is obvious. Many of us want the pandemic to be over, and we know that vaccination is one way to achieve that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DeepBlueAbyss if the effectiveness declined, it's because there was effectiveness in the first place. You don't need to be scared of that, and you should not lie about it.
The disease is worse than the cure. That's why you were told to get the disease. Are you not intrigued by the fact this propaganda is aimed at a certain type of person, and a certain political alignment? They targeted you, and they got you.
I have told you repeatedly that being infected is not a way to avoid infection. It makes no sense at all, and all it does is tell me you absorbed the propaganda which trained you to want the disease rather than the vaccination.
I'm not scared of anything, but you are terrified of the vaccines, as per your training. I got mine, I'm protected, I looked at the propaganda and compared it with reality. I chose wisely, and you are still terrified to protect yourself. You will get the disease or you will get a vaccine. That's the contention among "experts" now; they expect it to become endemic because of that drop-off in vaccine effectiveness. Only a fool would let themselves be led by propaganda instead of facts.
One of the blogs I follow which spreads propaganda is Anonymous Conservative. One of today's lies is about the "surge" in deaths in Singapore. It sounds scary if you're the sort of person (and you obviously are) who does not bother to check things out. Look at the surge, work out the infection fatality rate, compare it to the situation there last year, and have a think about his contention that "it is most likely the vaccines" causing it. He is terrified just like you, and he wants to spread that fear. You choose not to reject this obvious propaganda, so you have allowed yourself to be conditioned by it. You refuse to admit that it exists.
1
-
@DeepBlueAbyss there is no dishonesty in stating facts. Vaccine effectiveness against infection starts high and declines over time. Effectiveness against severe disease remains high.
Getting infected so that you gain immunity against infection is not a strategy for avoiding infection. Getting vaccinated is. If you can't work out why getting infected is not a way not to get infected, you have no business making your own health decisions. If you tell lies about the effectiveness in different age groups, I don't care that your comments get deleted.
We do not have more deaths after the vaccination rollout. The cases and deaths both dropped off during it, and with the arrival of the delta variant cases picked up again but there was a discrepancy between vaccinated and unvaccinated people because of the effectiveness of the vaccines. Also, the link between cases and hospitalisations or deaths was broken because of the vaccines' effectiveness against severe disease.
The last 28 days in Brazil and the UK. Brazil: 865,793 cases and 23,907 deaths. UK: 814,449 cases and 2,583 deaths. Brazil is 26% fully vaccinated and the UK is 62% fully vaccinated. Can you see the vaccine effectiveness there? Do you think you can convince me of such an obvious lie about death rates when I am the type of person who thinks for himself and looks at data?
The last 28 days in Indonesia and France. Indonesia: 768,230 cases and 41,417 deaths. France: 645,147 cases and 2,143 deaths. Indonesia is 12% fully vaccinated and France is 56% fully vaccinated. The effectiveness is apparent once more, as it is in all the available data. You cannot lie to someone who values truth!
You have been trained, by the propaganda I have warned you about. You do not think logically, you think the way the propaganda trained you to think. You ignore facts the propaganda ignores, and you state the lies the propaganda told you. I have seen the propaganda, I know the lies it tells you, and I know what it trains you to do, because I am on the side of politics at which the propaganda has been aimed. But I think for myself and look at sources, so I have natural immunity.
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
-
Alex Hoo he had no power to force the states. He's not a dictator!
Do you have a problem with your K-Eyboard, or is it a problem of bad rhetoric?
The media lied about HCQ because Trump commented on some research which showed it was a potential therapy. Based on the differential in death rates between nursing homes which used it and those which did not, I calculated back in May that 80% of deaths were preventable, caused by the media's Trump Derangement Syndrome and their desire to make you think everything he does is self-serving, ignorant, hateful, etc. They lied, and people died. So it's certainly not all on him, and since the US has a comparable death rate to Europe and South America there's no reason other than propaganda to make you think he's done an especially bad job. But they had to propagandise because "he would also have breezed through the election" if you had a better understanding of the world.
If he lined his pockets, why did his wealth fall during his presidency? There's just too much ignorance among the anti-Trump crowd!
He did win the election, by the way. Illegal votes don't count.
There is nothing to investigate him for. If the media didn't lie about him every day you would consider him to be just a normal president, like every informed person does.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fuckgoogle4712 the key word is "protection". I told you repeatey what the masks are for, and you still ignore me. They are not for the protection of the wearer. Those studies are worthless and irrelevant.
Do you remember when Trump hailed findings of the apparent effectiveness of HCQ, and the Fake News claimed it was ineffective and dangerous? Multiple research teams then showed that it was indeed ineffective in the late stages of covid when you don't include zinc or azithromycin. But the claims for its effectiveness were as a prophylactic or in the early stages of the disease, in combination with those other things. So the claims were rejected without actually being tested!
Yesterday there was news that in combination with AZM it boost survival rates by 200% even in the late stage of the disease, but lots of people who could have benefited have already been denied the treatment.
Similarly to that, you have found some studies which reject mask wearing without even testing the claims that masks are effective.
But even within those studies they do show the effectiveness of masks. Look at what they say about pathogens on the masks! Where do those come from, why are they on the mask, and where would they be if not for the mask? Without the mask, those pathogens would have been in the lungs of the wearer, but the researchers urge caution lest the pathogens get on the wearer's fingers. It doesn't take a genius to see what's going on here. We know that people are being propagandised into resisting efforts to stem the pandemic, and we know people are using the pandemic to further their agendas. Please stop helping the bad guys.
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
-
@lightning9279 you're focusing on the people who die. That's not all you should be considering, especially if you already know they're mostly not in the workforce. Q: How many get sick, and for how long are they off work?
A: Many and for a long time.
"Not to mention most of the recorded deaths were NOT due to the virus"
Are you sure about that? I've seen UK data, where there were more than double the normal number of deaths yet the number of covid-attributed deaths was _lower _than the excess. They are not falsely labelling every death as covid, they are under-reporting them. This virus is real, do not ignore it and do not pretend it won't have any impact.
From the Scientific American blogs:
The 25,000 to 69,000 numbers that Trump cited do not represent counted flu deaths per year; they are estimates that the CDC produces by multiplying the number of flu death counts reported by various coefficients produced through complicated algorithms. These coefficients are based on assumptions of how many cases, hospitalizations, and deaths they believe went unreported. In the last six flu seasons, the CDC’s reported number of actual confirmed flu deaths—that is, counting flu deaths the way we are currently counting deaths from the coronavirus—has ranged from 3,448 to 15,620, which far lower than the numbers commonly repeated by public officials and even public health experts.
As we have known since January, and I've stated many times since then to many people, this is not the flu.
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
-
@rabj5641 they do work. You asked for some science, I showed it to you, and you responded with some of the propaganda you'd heard. Then you responded again with some more propaganda. Yo have absolutely no idea what is going on, and it's entirely your own choice.
Why would you wear one? Well, if you don't like the fact loads of people are getting sick then you would want the pandemic to end. If you thought there was an agenda attached to it, you would want it to end. Wearing a mask, and encouraging others to do the same, is something you do if you understand what is going on instead of falling for the propaganda.
You fell for the propaganda. You were asked to prolong the pandemic, and you complied. Why are you not enjoying your reward?
Why would you not wear a mask? To protect yourself. They're not very good at that. So the fact you asked why you would wear a mask to protect yourself tells me you have absolutely no idea what is going on. You ignored the science, you followed the propaganda, and you are now lost and scared. But at least you helped push the agenda of the propagandists. That's what really matters, huh?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@beckwithtl the tagline on their website is "vintage timepieces reimagined". It's not Rolex doing the reimagining; you won't find these timepieces in a Rolex catalogue. They also state that their customisation includes "reinstalling all Rolex and Cartier marks and original indicia," which means they put Rolex branding on their own designs. If they were restoring the watches they might be allowed to use this process, but they're not doing that. They are creating their own brand by marketing a range of watches which have a strong identity, and the Rolex and Cartier marks are a part of that identity. They are piggy-backing on someone else's marketing, and would make less money if they chose to avoid using those trademarks.
They don't just put a new strap on the watch, they take the Rolex clasp, with Rolex branding, and put that on their own strap to make it look as if Rolex made the strap. If you were to remodel a Rolex you own, that might be acceptable, and even selling it as chattel might be. It might also be acceptable to remodel watches other people own, and return the watch to them. But the company in question is modifying Rolexes they own and reselling them with Rolex branding they applied. That's different, and it does qualify as counterfeiting. It's not appropriate to compare what they do with different things different people do.
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
-
@joe-bloggs. there was no political control. That's why they waited several weeks too long to call for lockdowns, and lifted restrictions when the number of infections fell. It was never about control, they never wanted this, but you don't understand it because you have failed to notice what was actually happening. You ignored reality and listened only to the propagandists, because you have a compliant personality type. That's the only way to remain ignorant of what has happened for so long. You were told to fear the response to the pandemic, so that's exactly what you did.
You ignored the covid injuries, didn't you! You did what you were told, because they needed you to be fearful of resisting the pandemic. They asked you for a "window of opportunity" to implement their reset, and you complied. They put it on their damn website, telling you what they were doing, and still you complied! They told you it was brave to comply, and you sill believe. You still think you were courageous to be terrified by them.
If you knew what a pandemic was you would understand the analogy. Pandemics do not happen to individuals, this was never about you and what you want to do. A pandemic infects a population, not an individual, but individuals can help create the conditions whereby it thrives within the population. It requires a population-wide response, which is why the people who wanted to use it for their own agenda asked the most compliant, docile, ignorant dupes to "resist" the resistance to the pandemic. They asked, and you complied. They knew what you are, they knew you would comply. They were right.
1
-
@Estoc_Bestoc_ clearing underbrush does not guarantee there won't be a fire. I know you were lied to about the vaccines, so you won't know that they do stop infection and do stop transmission. Not 100%, but they do work. That's why the analogy works too. To extend the analogy, lunatics would say the farmer should be an international hero for refusing to protect the people around him, because the protection was not guaranteed to work and he had fallen victim to an international conspiracy to burn forests down for a reset.
Had they not lied to you, you would have known what we all should have done in response to the pandemic. That's why they lied to you. They needed people to keep the lockdowns going, for a reset. They put it on their website so we would all now what they got you to do for them. Search "the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world," and ask yourself why they told you to resist anything that would close the window. And then apologise.
Measles vaccines are 90% effective and require boosters, which means they "don't work," but they practically eradicated measles from the West. I expect you'll want to look that up after you do some research into what I explained above. No, I'm joking. You'll ignore everything because you are too bought into the lies.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ryans3199 passages from 2 press releases from Hong Kong covering the end of their winter flu seasons:
2019:
Hong Kong entered the winter influenza season in early January this year. The influenza activity peaked around mid to late January and started to decrease continuously and returned to the baseline level in early April. This season lasted for about 14 weeks from the week of December 30, 2018, to the week ending April 6.
2020:
Hong Kong entered the winter influenza season in early January this year. The influenza activity peaked around late January, started to decrease continuously and returned to the baseline level in early February. This season lasted for about five weeks from the week of January 5, to the week ending February 8.
Your feelings about the statistics do not convince me. Masks work, social distancing works, and if we had used them any other year, we could have got rid of flu. There is no mystery about how to prevent the transmission of respiratory viruses.
I know the data, and I'm not scared by it. It's the people who deny it that scare me, because they will take actions that prolong the pandemic, and encourage others to do the same. You're not only killing grandma, you're putting everyone out of work too.
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
-
@isodoubIet that behaviour can be checked by an in-built ad-blocker, which can be turned off on a site-specific basis if necessary. Having the blocking in the browser does not in any way limit the functionality of an ad-blocking browser relative to that of a browser with an external ad-blocker installed. All people want from an ad-blocker is ad-blocking, and that does not require an extension. Install Brave and see what its ad-blocker can do, I think you'll be surprised.
If browsers want not to implement their own blocking, they will have to maintain an API and a distribution system. They can choose that, but probably won't. If they want to use Opera's extension store they will have to permit extensions from 2 sources, as well as maintaining the old API. That is more work than just reverting a commit. The easiest solution by far is to put an ad-blocker into the browser. Opera has ad-blocking built-in and has not yet stated whether they will support V2. If they choose not to, they will have no reason to keep V2 extensions in their store.
Vivaldi also has built-in ad-blocking. According to someone on Reddit, they say they want to retain webRequest blocking, but think it won't be possible long-term. Maxthon also has a built-in ad-blocker. I've been checking the most popular alternatives, and the future for external blockers doesn't look good.
Nobody expects to have to install an extension to block 3rd-party cookies, and they will soon expect to have ads blocked in-house too.
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
-
The Culture Transplant: How Migrants Make the Economies They Move To a Lot Like the Ones They Left
Over the last two decades, as economists began using big datasets and modern computing power to reveal the sources of national prosperity, their statistical results kept pointing toward the power of culture to drive the wealth of nations. In The Culture Transplant, Garett Jones documents the cultural foundations of cross-country income differences, showing that immigrants import cultural attitudes from their homelands―toward saving, toward trust, and toward the role of government―that persist for decades, and likely for centuries, in their new national homes. Full assimilation in a generation or two, Jones reports, is a myth. And the cultural traits migrants bring to their new homes have enduring effects upon a nation’s economic potential.
Built upon mainstream, well-reviewed academic research that hasn’t pierced the public consciousness, this book offers a compelling refutation of an unspoken consensus that a nation’s economic and political institutions won’t be changed by immigration. Jones refutes the common view that we can discuss migration policy without considering whether migration can, over a few generations, substantially transform the economic and political institutions of a nation. And since most of the world’s technological innovations come from just a handful of nations, Jones concludes, the entire world has a stake in whether migration policy will help or hurt the quality of government and thus the quality of scientific breakthroughs in those rare innovation powerhouses.
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
-
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
-
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
-
@mitchellhedges711 that's 6 years, not 4, and it goes back further than that - twitter was banning people in 2014 for using accurate titles, and this was just an achievement by the folx after years of pressure, it was not the start of it all. It was taken seriously enough to get into every school, government department and corporation, for there to be training sessions devoted to it, for people to be reprimanded for not submitting, for sports categories to be overturned, and for prisons to be similarly corrupted, awards ceremonies to drop gendered categories and much more. It was taken very seriously because people feared the consequences of not doing so.
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
-
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
-
@dantuber4738 they have not deleted the videos showing that masks do not make you oxygen deficient. If you cared about truth you would watch them.
"Whether masks work or not is pretty irrelevant in the big scheme of things"
They do work, and the evidence is easy to find. That is not irrelevant, it is something you can use to identify the liars. If they claims masks don't work, or that they block oxygen, do not trust anything they say on any topic - those people are lying to you.
I don't watch mainstream media, I watch people who don't lie to me. You should try it. You are misinformed by liars and you have repeated their lies to me.
Yes, people have died from Covid. The fact there have been deaths form other things does not negate the fact that covid kills people. Look at the excess deaths, and you will see that a lot of people have died who would not have died during a normal year.
Lockdowns do work, because the virus cannot transmit between people when they do not come into contact with each other. Masks do work, because they stop people emitting the water droplets which the virus moves around on. The proof of these is easy to find. You have been lied to, you believe things even after I have shown you how to discover the truth.
Why are you so afraid?
1
-
@dantuber4738 masks do work - the theory is sound and the results have been proven. You can see that if you read the research I mentioned, and then you can ignore the people who lied to you. Do not repeat their lies, you do not need to do that.
Most deaths do not get listed as covid. You lied.
The excess deaths far exceed 5-10k. You lied.
Excess deaths during the summer were NEGATIVE, when lockdown restrictions were still in place and the pandemic was in a lull. There was no mass die-off of cancer sufferers, and lockdowns were shown to reduce the baseline number of deaths even before their effect on covid is taken into account. You lied.
Flu has not disappeared, but because so many people are wearing masks and washing their hands, it has a much reduced likelihood of being transmitted. Covid and flu are not the same, and are not counted as the same thing by the government. You lied.
2018 was a bad flu year because the vaccine didn't work. Nobody wore masks, nobody socially distanced, nobody took extra care to wash their hands, and it killed fewer people than covid has. They are not the same thing. You lied.
PCR testing can identify Sars-Cov-2. The people telling you it can't are lying.
You don't need to live in fear. You don't need to lie. Yet you do.
The truth will not harm you, it will set you free. Live in the truth. Accept reality and bear it like a man.
1
-
1
-
@dantuber4738 you fear the truth. There is no scam, you've just been lied to. When you stop being terrified by the propaganda you've subjected yourself to, and take a calm look at the evidence, you will feel much better.
65k deaths is not "nonsense" when you look at the number of excess deaths as I told you to earlier. You refuse to look at the facts, because you like the lies. But I can tell from your comments that the lies are hurting you. Break free from the propaganda, it is controlling you.
"As for the flu- If you check ONS stats they openly admitted adding it to Covid deaths"
That is a lie. I've looked at their data, because I wanted to see the excess deaths and evaluate the propaganda I had been told. You don't want to see the excess deaths stats so you have not looked at their data, hence you're unaware that covid is in a separate row. In the current excess deaths spreadsheet row 18 is "Deaths where the underlying cause was respiratory disease (ICD-10 J00-J99)" and row 19 is "Deaths where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate (ICD-10 U07.1 and U07.2)". They do not add flu and covid deaths, and they do not "openly admit" to doing so. You are lying, and we both know it. For your own benefit, stop lying and stop living in fear of the truth.
But if you do want to keep lying, tell better lies. Don't spread such easily disprovable ones, it serves only to highlight your fear.
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LK-ho1dg language is a part of ethnicity, so Bantus are not the same ethnic group as the
KhoiSan. You even admit it yourself: "Language is one of several elements of ethnicity". That's right, but you don't understand what it means and does not mean.
Europeans did not go there to steal, kill or destroy, they went there to create a trading post.
What did the Bantu colonisers do when they came across the European settlers though? They stole, killed and destroyed! You're a racist full of hate, and unable to make a coherent case against the people you hate because your anger gets in the way of logic. That ALL CAPS sentence demonstrates your impotent and paranoid rage perfectly. EVERYONE wants to live near Europeans, that's the truth. EVERYONE wants to move to our countries, and they mostly bring what the Bantus did.
There was nothing there for the Europeans to colonise. There was empty land to settle, and they did not meet any natives in their first decade of settlement.
Race is not a social construct. You can test for race in any social context, for example by looking at the skull.
You're still liking your own comments. Sad.
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
-
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
-
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
-
They don't claim ownership. What they actually have is a license to broadcast the content you upload to their site (which you only upload in the first place because they say they will broadcast it). Without the right to broadcast it, you can sue them for performing their advertised service. Without the other permissions, they could not store your streams or make backups, nor convert them to a new storage or broadcast format, nor sell their company, nor restructure the company so that the service becomes a child company within a larger group (like how Alphabet owns Google), nor publish an API to developers.
"By uploading, distributing, transmitting or otherwise using Your Content with the Service, you grant to us a perpetual, nonexclusive, transferable, royalty-free, sublicensable, and worldwide license to use, host, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display Your Content in connection with operating and providing the Service."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GreatSageSunWukong yzrip did not argue that point, and LV did not need to consider the quality of the leather to know there was a trade mark issue. Nothing here suggests they "admitted" that they could not tell from the quality alone that it was their leather, and it does not follow that if they could not tell their own leather, that it is low quality.
If all the wallet maker did was peel off the rubber backing, as yzrip claimed, that would not tell us anything about the quality of the leather, or what LV's complaint was. yzrip did not bring up leather quality, and it is not in any way significant. The only thing that matters is that someone other than LV made and sold products with an LV Trade Mark. It would have been the use of the trade mark that led LV to investigate this case, because they do not check the leather quality of everyone who sells wallets.
You're reading a lot into an uninformed comment containing not much more than the words "they could say it’s fake". Yes, they could, because it was not made by them but had their logo on it. The claim "all he did was peal rubber off the back" is false, as you can tell by watching the video Louis mentioned, and seeing for yourself that the wallet maker made a wallet from the handbag leather.
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
-
@Pantifaximile the ideology promotes what it calls "affirmative care". When good people criticise this, they get no support from any organisations affiliated with the ideology. None of those organisations advocate for proper care, none of them support having obscene materials removed from schools, none of them give any support whatsoever to people who protect children. Wickes' position is that they oppose people who oppose the ideology.
I wrote more before my previous comment, but the overlords removed it again. Here it is backwards:
.daetsni elpoep doog eht nmednoc uoY .gnorw gnihtyna did eh kniht t'nod uoy dna ygoloedi ruoy fo troppus ni gniht emas eht did eh tuB .ydobon ylbaborP ?tehporp a si demmahoM taht ro detcerruser saw suseJ eveileb t'nod yeht fi serots eht ot emoc ot ton elpoep dlot eh fi sekciW
ta tog :ib eht troppus dluow ohW
.seno tnarelotni eht gnieb fo siht esoppo ohw esoht esucca uoY .ti fo troppus ni shturtnu llet uoY .ti troppus uoy dna ,eta_h dna ecnarelotni yb denifed si ytivitca riehT .desitenomed lennahc sih tog syug dab eht ,duarf ecnarusni aiv noitalitum yrassecennu teg nac eh os noitidnoc tnetsixe-non sih tuoba gniyl rettel a teg ylisae nac recudorp sih taht dewohs lennahc ebutuoy rojam a nehW .gnineppah ton si ti yas dna eil syug dab eht ,nerdlihc ot gniod era srotcod lacigoloedi tahw esopxe elpoep doog nehW .srotcetorp s'nerdlihc eht tsniaga eta_h gniticni ,era swal esoht tahw tuoba eil elpoep ruoy ,nerdlihc ot ssecca s'elpoep ytsan kcolb ot swal etirw elpoep doog nehW .nwod meht tuhs ot tnes steg IBF eht dna ,stsirorret dednarb ,troppus uoy elpoep eht yb tuoba deil teg yeht skoob loohcs ni seitinecsbo tsniaga dnats stnerap nehW
?ssecorp eht fo tuo stnerap gnipeek ,terces ni nerdlihc ot siht od srehcaet od yhW ?elpoep desimitciv ot liam eht hguorht senomroh gnidnes stsivitca era yhW ?PALAG si tahW .yregrus ot htap rieht esae ot secivres edivorp neht dna ,meht htiw gnorw gnihtemos si ereht kniht ot nerdlihc egaruocne yehT !eurt ton s'taht wonk lla ew
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
-
@andrewjoyner4133 there is no benefit for any group to do it unless all groups do. They won't immigrate, nobody will force them to, and some of their most influential members think they shouldn't even have to. Talk of ending tribalism will only encourage those least inclined to (and coincidentally the most discourage from) tribalism not to become tribal, whereas that very tribalism could be the best way to avoid the crash you predict, and also the best way to encourage others that tribalism is a bad strategy.
I'm not even sure what not being tribal would look like. Are employment quotas an anti-tribal device, or are they a tool of the tribalists to gain advantage for their tribe? They don't even effect each tribe equally -- jews could fill their quota of whites by employing their own tribe (they are half of "whites" in Harvard!), and Nigerians could do likewise for their black quota, or they could both ignore the white quota altogether, because there is no racial advocacy group for whites. If we removed quotas could we expect someone from a country with an average IQ of 70 not to complain that his nation is doing badly economically, compared with other nations in the UK economic zone? I doubt there is any education that could make someone think that way, and a law to prevent it would just be absurd.
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
-
@NateROCKS112 they were not racist, and they were not asked not to be not racist, they were asked to be pro-black. They did this, they actually did it. They are now racist (and misandrist) in accordance with the dominant ideology. Ideological discrimination does not serve capital, it does not become capitalism just because corporations do it.
Being pressured to do something by ideologues, especially those who have the support of the government, is not within the free market. It is coercion, which is leftist. Woke is leftist, and is only on the left. Racism is the new class consciousness, using the same language of oppression and privilege in order to gain power. The alleged goal is still equality, it is still leftism. The neo-colonialist attack on "whiteness" is disguised as being against hierarchy, which is leftism (but actually is just more racism).
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
-
@Startraxxion mRNA is not invasive, and it works. Like seatbelts, it is not 100% effective, and for some people it makes their situation worse. The OP thinks we should sacrifice freedom for seatbelts.
When you repeat the lie that they don't work, you are prolonging the pandemic and causing more people to die. All for a little "freedom"? You prolong the current situation when you lie about how it can be ended.
The vaccine effectiveness against infection declines, but even after 6 months it is more than 50% effective. And effectiveness against disease remains much higher. They work, so whatever a "pollie" is should be ignored. Look at the data, not to the propagandists.
Paper masks are not useless, and most people I see are wearing cotton ones anyway. If you had read any of the research you would know they work, but obviously that's not something you're into. If you read the propagandists they will link to research which shows they are ineffective at preventing infection, but what those people don't want you to know is that masks are effective at preventing transmission! They lie to you about everything that can end the pandemic and our current situation. They want you in this situation, and you repeat their lies for them. They own you.
Taiwan used masks and lockdowns to stop their outbreak earlier in the summer. If you think it's not possible, you should have a look into how they did it. And then stop repeating the lies and propaganda. Science is confirmed by observation, not lies and propaganda. Do some observing, and stop lying.
There are no experimental vaccines being issued. Stop lying, stop the propaganda, stop being a drama queen. Your lies help to keep you in the situation you find yourself in. Tell the truth, encourage people to reduce the transmission rate, and soon you will not have to fear any more. There is no tyranny, but you are keeping yourself in this state of fear by encouraging people not to do the things that can end it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wrongthinker843 the claim was that the survival rate is 99.97%, A decimal point does not make a compound number, and 99.97 is not the same as 99.7.
Hospitals were over capacity. There are news stories confirming this, and probably hospital press released too, so you have no excuse. I've seen a lot of people quoting the CDC wrongly. In your case, it is probably the capacity across the country, not the highest usage within any given hospital. Spare capacity in Maine is not useful when there are people in California needing ICU beds.
Staff reductions are not relevant. Keeping people from becoming infected reduces hospital usage, full stop.
If you have not yet worked out that there is actually a pandemic, there is no helping you. Scare quotes just betray your ignorance.
No, other illnesses do not account for the spikes in deaths last year and this, and they do not explain why those spikes correspond with spikes in infections. You have been conned if you think there was anything else leading to the excess deaths over the last 18 months.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wrongthinker843 you previously claimed "99,7% is the official recovery rate from CDC across all ages, before accounting for comorbidities"
In other words, it is the survival rate of people without comorbidities, and the rate for the whole population is therefore lower. That fits with other sources I've seen, but it also tells me you don't actually understand what you are looking at.
You don't know what a compound number is either. Look it up.
Whether 99.97 was a mistake, a lie or merely an intent to confuse between TFR and IFR, it is wrong. I was right to call it out. The IFR is much higher, and that's the one people are interested in.
Why are you using 10% as a chance of being infected? Herd immunity for delta requires upwards of 85% of people to be infected, and if it becomes endemic, which every commenter on here is determined to make a reality, then your chance of getting it is 100%.
Yes, there were hospitals without spare capacity. Ignore this all you want, it will not change the facts.
If you look at weekly deaths you can see where the spikes in infections occurred. There is no relevance whatsoever in the number of deaths in other years. Propagandists want you to look at irrelevant data because they want you to keep spreading the virus and to get the disease rather than a vaccine.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnhazaras3160 you also can't compare them to any other country. If you look at their transmission rate in the early stages of the pandemic, it is remarkably low, so what should we assume about their policy of misguided ignorance? I did the calculations long ago, and as I recall the 28 days after the 100th recorded case saw a 40-fold increase in cases in Sweden and about a 1,600-fold increase in the USA. Not every place is the same, and one key difference is that the Nordic countries fortify their food with vitamin D. So if Sweden can be compared to any country, it should be a Nordic one. That comparison shows they failed. Had the USA adopted Sweden's disastrous policy, it would have failed even harder.
If you want to rate their approach in another country, you can use the Netherlands. They started with the same policy and abandoned it when the inevitable happened. Sweden persisted, and what we can say for sure is that they failed, because they didn't try not to.
Taiwan's early transmission rate was a fraction of Sweden's, because they followed sensible policies against a respiratory virus. They had an outbreak at about the same time as Australia, and whereas Australia has people "resisting" those sensible measures, Taiwan ended its outbreak fairly swiftly. However it is achieved, having a population adopt sensible precautions is the best way the get through a pandemic. Sweden did not even try, and its record shows its failure. Australia's government tried but its people did not, and their failure is causing panic among "anti-authoritarians" around the world. The lesson to learn is that Sweden is a bad example and Taiwan is a good one. I hope people do learn it, but all I can see is that people are determined not to.
1
-
1
-
@johnhazaras3160 Israel still hasn't got to 80% vaccination. They levelled out in the low 60s.
You don't need to understand the virus completely to get the response right - it's a respiratory virus and we know how to deal with them. The problem is that too many people wanted to spread it, and "Sweden" was one of the propaganda terms they used. I have been encouraging people to take the pandemic seriously, and sometimes I got such one-word replies from ignoramuses who had no idea that Sweden was actually facing a disaster and was not a model for the world to follow.
Herd immunity is not magic, it's just the maximum-fatality approach. If that was tried on a large scale it would fail for the same reason a minimum-fatality approach failed: not everyone will comply. Before lockdowns were ordered some of us had already started social distancing, working from home, and avoiding unnecessary trips to shops and crowded places, in an attempt to stop the virus when governments were implicitly taking the maximum-fatality approach. Herd immunity would take a long time to reach, and the economy would be crushed in the mean time as informed people refused to comply with a psychotic government. A coordinated approach is essential, but it's a lot easier for governments to enforce a lockdown than it is to force people to get infected and die.
Do you remember when people thought Sweden had reached herd immunity over a year ago? They've had a lot of vaccine doses since then, another 2 waves of the pandemic, and they are still getting cases. Sweden is a failure, not a model. Taiwan is a model, not a failure. But the Taiwan approach requires you to do something, and to accept facts. People hate that, they want an easy way out and they are willing to triple the death rate if it gives them an easy life. We should not base policy on the desires of such people. We should harass them until they behave like decent human beings.
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
-
Don Vito the Melting Pot was written by an immigrant to the UK. "Bring us your tired..." was written by an immigrant to the USA. They are not founding principles, or even Americans ones. They are the principles of foreigners who want you to believe you are not allowed to live as Americans unencumbered by the civilisations, cultures, biases, conflicts, politics and instincts of non-Americans.
There is no need to be isolated just because you are not forced to live with people who it has been proved cannot live with you. Japan is not isolated. Hungary is not resisting non-isolation.
America is not America anymore, but that is not because of you being isolated from non-Americans, it is because you are forced to live with non-Americans, who do not want to be American, do not want you to be American, do not uphold American values, and do not want America to exist. If you want to live as an American, you need to be allowed to live among only Americans. Let the non-Americans live together in non-America and build their own statues.
1
-
Don Vito "by law" in no way implies "by birth".
"the country has always maintained an open immigration policy for the most part"
No it has not. And most importantly, it was not open at the beginning. Furthermore, people had to assimilate because there was no welfare and many returned home because of that. The system today is in no way what was intended, and in no way is it functionally the same.
"If we are really discussing US citizens"
Citizenship is the problem. Understand the importance of the nationality of people who are given citizenship, and you understand all the ethnic conflicts. They do not lose their nationality when they gain citizenship, hence the hyphens. Nobody has a right to citizenship of your country; the granting of citizenship is a modern colonisation movement.
"why try to deprive other people of the opportunity to live here"
Why give them the opportunity in the first place? There is no need to do it, and the result is only negative for the people who built the country. Foreigners can live as foreigners in foreign countries, there is no deprivation in letting them do that. They do not need to live as paper Americans in the USA, and if they do you are deprived. If everyone is allowed citizenship of the country your ancestors built, that citizenship is worth nothing and the work of your ancestors is for nought. Can you not see that you are losing everything?
"So why try to deprive other people of the opportunity to live here but maintain their cultures. Are you just mad?"
I wrote above about what it means to maintain a domestic national culture in a foreign land. To do it they will live together, work together, worship together, celebrate their national heroes and holidays, demand that they are taught their own history, literature, art etc, vote for their own political representation, demand they be "represented" in white culture etc. We know this is true, because it already happens. If they teach their history in a mixed school they impose their culture on others. That is called "white supremacy" when we do it. If they have a separate school, that goes against your goal of everyone getting along. And if they maintain their own culture they are not American in any real sense, they are a foreign colony. So no, it is not me who is mad. Let me say one more time...do not force people to live together. We know it doesn't work, so stop wanting to impose it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nathanjgtaylor1985 you joined the conversation to criticise people who you think are weak and compliant. I knew you were weak and compliant, just from the fact you wanted to boast about not being so. You complied when they told you not to wear a mask, you complied when they told you not to take the cure. You still think you are a free thinking dissident, you hate to think you are controlled, but you have been controlled for years. I knew instantly that you spent 2 years being terrified by all the lies they told you, and doing exactly what the tellers wanted you to do. I knew you are weak and compliant, and you admitted it in your last comment. You did what you were told to do, and you think of yourself the way you were told to think of yourself. You gave them the "window of opportunity" (yes, that's what they called it) which they told you to give them, and you think you were against them because that's what they told you to think. You complied with their agenda, you still do. But you're so completely controlled and compliant that you have no idea what they or their agenda even is.
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
-
Fae Selja they do not know who you are, so they cannot track you, it's as simple as that. From what I've heard, I think the tracking app(s) will be doing something like this: give each phone a unique id, and make them transmit their id to other phones close to them via bluetooth. Each phone stores the ids it comes into contact with. When someone tests positive, the tracking system administrator can get their id from the phone and have it transmitted to every other phone over the internet (not bluetooth this time). Any phone which finds that id in its collection should alert the user so they can be tested. Nobody is tracked, because they do not care about where you go and who you meet.
If you're concerned about being tracked then you can just get infected and never be given an early warning. Your choice. Remember that the disease kills more than 1% of people and survivors may have permanent organ damage. It's up to you. Oh, and you might be too ill to work for a month. Still, it's up to you. And the other thing to be cognisant of is that you can infect your friends and family even before you have any symptoms. Still, it is your choice whether all that happens, or you might be some really important person who the government wants to track and for some reason doesn't already do that via cell towers or other means.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeanbuchanan1660 no,it's a virus. You should have worked this out buy now. Do you want to know something that made me smile recently?
This news story:
A 37-year-old Ohio man named Richard Rose originally thought that all of the fuss about COVID-19 was just “hype”, and he angrily insisted that he would never buy a mask. The following is what he posted on Facebook on April 28th…
‘Let make this clear,’ he wrote, in a post that was shared 10,000 times. ‘I’m not buying a ***** mask. I’ve made it this far by not buying into that damn hype.’ Sadly, he eventually got infected, and COVID-19 killed him on July 3rd…
He worked it out in the end, but he was too late. Nevermind, it's just one less person spreading this pandemic and encouraging others to do so. You might be like him eventually, because immunity doesn't last long enough for herd immunity to come about, so unless we wear masks or socially distance the pandemic will never end, and those who haven't worked out that it's even real will be the most likely to get it. You might not die, but half of people who "recover" have heart damage, according to a report in the European Heart Journal. There are also reports of permanent lung damage, which you nay have to come to accept as the price of your ignorance. And all because you're unable to work out that there's a pandemic, 6 months into it and with constant news coverage.
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
-
@JohnSmith-ev1sm I know what you didn't tell me to buy. I still don't need a car, it is independent of what you didn't tell me to buy, it is just an example of things you mentioned which you don't need.
You're telling me Gnome is bad because it doesn't include things you don't need. That is the arrogance here, I'm just telling you to try it.
Android doesn't adjust to people's workflow, and I don't see anyone screeching about that. Gnome did not adjust to my workflow, I used it and realised why it is better than Windows 95 (which also didn't adjust to my workflow).
You adjusted your workflow to Windows 95 and then screeched when there was a desktop that worked in ways Microsoft did not intend. You're not alone, but you make no sense. Gnome is different to Windows 95 because the desktop environment has been considered with reference to how existing desktops, many of which are clones of Windows, work and don't work. There are bad metaphors and workflows within the Windows environment, and you have adjusted to them. Gnome removed them, which can be jarring if you don't consider why they were removed.
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@richardarriaga6271 they were controlling their own security, not Ukraine's destiny. It's a nonsense question, so why should he answer it? The regime is far-right, as was reported even by the western media before the SMO, so that one is NOT a loaded question.
The EU and US sought to control Ukraine's destiny by [redacted] in 2014. And they did so with the intent of moving their sphere of influence closer to Russia. Russia knew this and was not going to settle for it. They did not keep quiet about it, and they tried to negotiate a settlement before and after the SMO began. But Russia, like China, has found the West to be "agreement incapable" (China's phrase) so their only way of keeping NATO at bay is an unconditional surrender. This is what Gonzalo did not want. He warned against it, and wanted them to agree to Russia's initial demands instead, and not be lead by a small cabal in Washington that truly does not care about the destiny of the Ukrainian people. He was no propagandist, not pro-Russian, actually pro-Ukrainian in ways most commenters here will never understand. You got him wrong because he was more intelligent than you, and better informed.
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
-
You seem surprised that they don't reject their culture, history and grievances when they cross a border. It would benefit the natives and the Project if they did, but it would not benefit their group, so it does not benefit the individuals within the group, so it does not happen.
Councillors should not be talking about bin collections, they should be fighting to advantage their group against other groups in the wider community. Did you hear that a city in Germany, run by the Green party, with a Turk as its leader on that particular council, has banned natives from applying for 30% of government jobs? That is what every group should be doing in a multicultural society, before other groups have the power to impose such a thing in their own favour.
It used to be the case that by benefiting Britain every Briton would advantage himself or his posterity, though some chose to advantage their class or a narrower group. Today we have a lot of narrower groups and they should be expected to behave no differently.
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
-
@MagikMan643 it was declared a freak accident very early on, despite the video evidence showing the intent which you yourself have admitted. Not everyone went with the party line, but many did.
Nobody with "decades of experience" would let someone off a decision they made on the ice, field or pitch just because it happened quickly. Your "reasoning" excludes the video evidence and makes a mockery of the fact we penalise players for their actions.
Petgrave's intent was to hit Johnson with his skate lifted high. The league's most penalised player achieved what he attempted, and it resulted in Johnson's death, so it is manslaughter at the very least. It was an intentional action, not necessarily an intentional outcome. You have agreed that it was intentional, but you have gaslighted people that the lack of intent in the outcome renders the whole thing an accident. This is not the case, neither morally nor legally.
It's an analogy, to help you learn; the scenarios do not have to be the same! In both scenarios, there is an intentional action and an unintentional outcome. I hope you can understand this, and accept that convictions do happen.
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
-
1
-
1
-
Fae Selja you do not have a right to kill people. Nothing is being taken from you, you would just be required to act the way you ought to during a pandemic. In Japan they don't need to be told. In America people are stubborn, selfish and stupid so DO need to be told. Not all people, but you certainly are.
Do you know how many will die before herd immunity is reached? Do you know how many will get ill, how many will have permanent organ damage and how many will lose their jobs in the economic crash that results from the pandemic spreading through the population again? You are prepared to sacrifice those people instead of doing something very simple to prevent the pandemic continuing. This is not a case of "give me liberty or give me death," it's a case of "give me liberty and give them death". You are not a crusader against tyranny, you are a selfish idiot.
In Spain their recent serology testing showed the number of deaths before herd immunity would be about 240k in total, which would translate to 1.7 million in the USA, which is about 1.6 million more than have already died. After the USA recorded its 100th case of coronavirus, the number of confirmed cases doubled every 3 days for the next month, because people don't wear masks or do other things which would stop the spread of the virus. That's why the medical services couldn't cope and a lot of people died, and it would happen again if people behaved the same way after lockdowns are ended. If people wore masks the infection rate would be less than 1 and the virus would die out. That's a good thing, we should definitely do that! But people won't, which is why there is no voluntary solution. Rugged individualism does not work during a pandemic. Self-interest is the wrong strategy at the moment.
Research from Hong Kong released today showed wearing masks cuts the transmission rate by 75%. Have you seen the masks they wear there? They do not prevent you getting oxygen, they prevent you breathing virus particles onto other people.
You do not have the right to participate in a mass action which will lead to the deaths of more than a million people, permanent health complications for many more, and an economic collapse. I would have no sympathy if all people who refused to wear masks were tried for genocide, just as we would punish people who set forest fires or poison reservoirs. Your actions are deliberate and the consequences are known to you, so we have the right to treat you all like any other tyrant, mass murderer etc. All you are required to do is what any good human being would do. Or you could continue to cower from the non-existent tyranny you see all around you.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hopethisworks1212 we will need a civil war if the traitors in parliament succeed in overturning the will of the people and ignoring the promises they made. We cannot continue with a government so resentful and dismissive of its people, especially when they are too cowardly to admit what they are doing. They know that maintaining a no-deal option is the only way to negotiate, so they want to remove that option to keep the country subject to Brussels.
It's a typical Alinskyite practice to accuse your opponent of what you yourself are doing, and no surprise that it is those who favour centralised bureaucracy over local democracy who are employing it.
It wasn't just a manifesto promise that the people's will would be respected, it was also a promise made by the government when they held the referendum. Lying about something like that, and ignoring 17 million people, is the sort of thing which starts wars. You don't seem to care about that though, as long as democracy is thwarted and whoever the latest unelected EU president is can rule your life for you.
I know you're not simply concerned with following the proper protocols - no Remoaners are, or they would not have celebrated the other tricks used against a proper process of leaving the EU. If Johnson demanded the EU negotiators include an exit payment of £100 trillion in the "deal" then that would be completely within the process, and completely unacceptable to parliament, so the time for a deal would run out and we'd leave on the due date as per the law. But you wouldn't accept that democratic process, because you don't actually care about democracy, you just want to be governed by unelected bureaucrats in a foreign country.
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
-
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
-
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
-
@pdcrew2 it's on the ZOE site, in their July 29th update.
36,102 new daily symptomatic cases
10,268 new daily cases in partly vaccinated (1 dose) people
14,110 new daily cases in fully vaccinated people (2 doses)
The current stats for vaccinations in adults on the NHS site are 77% with 2 doses and 12.5% with 1 dose. That would have been slightly lower at the time of those case stats, and the unvaccinated number (11.5%) would have been higher. But using those recent figures, the rates work out as follows:
2 doses: 77% of adult population, 39% of all symptomatic cases
1 dose: 12.5% pop, 28.5% cases
0 doses: 11.5% pop, 32.5% cases
Confounding factors will be
1. number of children testing positive (vaccination rate is only for adults, which I think John overlooked when he reported on this)
2. time elapsed since the dose
3. age profile of vaccinated people (likely to be older and ordinarily more prone to symptomatic infection)
4. behaviour of vaccinated people (likely to be less complacent about the pandemic and less likely to risk exposure).
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
-
@monetprod1 we don't know what he was doing, we only know it made that woman think he was up to no good. You might think she's the sort of person who thinks watering flowers is a crime, but we have no evidence of that, and we have no evidence that he was watering flowers when she called the police. You are wrong when you claim we have a recording of what he was doing when she called the police. 100% wrong.
I give her the benefit of the doubt and assume he appeared to be looking to break into the house. I also give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he was looking for a hosepipe or doing something else innocent that appeared otherwise.
Something else we know of the woman is that she did not want him arrested once she knew who he was and what he was doing. You need to assess all these things before calling her a racist, which she clearly is not.
I have had the police called on me for acting suspiciously on another person's property. I was looking for a way to make a delivery, and I told the police that instead of getting angry and defensive. I have also called the police on a neighbor acting suspiciously on his own property. I did not know who lived in that house, but I saw someone breaking the glass in the door so I called the police. When they arrived he was sweeping up the glass. Actually they kept me on the phone and he started sweeping up before the car arrived but they came anyway, just to check it out. He was not the same race as me, so did I call because of his race, or because of what he was doing when the police arrived, or because of him breaking the glass? This is not rocket science!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@colby25 Russia was still trying to negotiate within the MInsk details until Zelensky larped about getting nukes at last year's Munich conference. Now we've had Merkel saying they never planned to keep within it, that it was just an excuse to rearm, and Hollande has confirmed this. It was always and only Ukraine which abandoned Minsk.
Ukraine's atrocities did not end after a year, and when asked to stop, Zelensky refused. No genocide had happened yet, but the atrocities continued and would never stop until the land was cleared. Troops had been positioned for a final push and the OSCE reported increased shelling in the days before Russia intervened.
Yes, the coup would not have happened without US/EU support and the energy of the far-right. Yanukovych was not a puppet and did not scrap the EU deal, he just considered a Russian one alongside it. That was too much for the west to bear.
Putin is not a dictator. He is not recreating the USSR and has said it would not be a good idea to do so. When he had the opportunities I described before, he did not take them, which should have been a lesson to you. You fell for western propaganda and you will lose your country because of it. A handful of neocons are willing to fight Putin to the last Ukrainian, and they're still going to lose.
Ukraine was not a peaceful neighbour. It rejected the concept of indivisible security, sought to be a base for Russia's enemies, incorporated ultra-nationalists into government and military, and enshrined a commitment to invade sovereign Russian territory. It never stopped shelling civilians, even when war was threatened, it rejected peace in the talks after Russia had parked its tanks outside Kiev, and it rejected peace in the talks in Istanbul. After those rejections and the rejection of Minsk by Ukraine and its backers, Russia has realised the only way to achieve peace is by the complete surrender of Ukraine. That will happen, and it could so easily have been avoided. It's people like you that brought this about.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tallard666 it was novel, meaning we had no previous immunity, and it is not seasonal. Lying and redefining terms does not make a case.
If you think confusion about the fact of mortality influenced the response to the pandemic, that makes total sense in accordance with your confusion about other basic facts. Get over it.
Politicians initially said no to lockdowns, then a huge number of people died or had to be admitted to ICUs, and lots of other people took the appropriate response given the seriousness of the situation, and locked themselves down. Then the government acted, mandating the necessary action for those who could not work it out for themselves. This was several weeks too late. The "preparedness" plan failed and we did something else that would actually work. You never needed to be scared, you don't need to be angry, you just need to get over it.
Pandemics affect populations, not individuals.
1
-
1
-
@tallard666 how could every person on the planet have immunity to something which nobody had come into contact with, and why does the fact it infected so many people not discourage you from holding such an obviously absurd opinion?
What would the fatality rate be if nobody received treatment? What would it be if we allowed everyone to be infected at the same time? You look at the success of the measures we took, and condemn them because they worked!
Imperial College London, October 2020; Report 34 - COVID-19 Infection Fatality Ratio Estimates from Seroprevalence
"we estimate the overall IFR in a typical low-income country, with a population structure skewed towards younger individuals, to be 0.23%.... In contrast, in a typical high income country, with a greater concentration of elderly individuals, we estimate the overall IFR to be 1.15%"
So that's 1.15% IFR for the UK, and with an R0 of about 4 we get a 75% infection rate before herd immunity. That's a fatality rate of 0.8625% (580,000 people in the UK, and that doesn't include serious or long-term illness) and you want me to believe it was 0.04%. I cannot believe you, because I know the facts.
Vaccination was something like 95% effective against infection, but dropped off over time, whereas effectiveness against serious illness remained high. 95% is not marginal.
We did not disobey the preparedness plan, it failed.
Science survived, people just chose to believe conspiracy theories and the sort of nonsense you're insisting on instead.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1