Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FallingAwake

  1. For me, it's kind of ridiculous to think that any one human being knows the whole story. I mean, we live in a world run in part by intelligence agencies, who by their very nature do things in secret. If what they do slips out, it's by leaks and whistle-blowers, not by these agencies declaring "Yeah, we took out President X" on the six o'clock news. So @Staffsknotmay have a lot of "boots-on-the-ground" and/or "inside" knowledge, and I respect him for that (having to go places I would never dream of going), but at the same time it's also ridiculous to think he knows what the CIA, MI5, MI6, Mossad, MFI etc have planned. At the same time, the story of what they do or don't do can't be integrated into the "official narrative" until much, much later, if ever. This is why I know that neither the official narrative, nor the many conspiracy ones, can possibly be "the full picture" - unless you assume the CIA, MI5 etc never do anything (which is just as ridiculous as saying they're behind everything). Clearly they do "some stuff"... it's just we don't really know what
  2. I don't either, but combine it with a vaccine passport excluding you from basic economic activity unless you're regularly topped up with Pfizer, and it's a different form of addiction. We're not there yet, but we're seeing hints of this in places like Israel (where their vaccine passports will soon only be valid if they've had a 3rd shot) and Lithuania (where you're barred from health services except emergency treatment without one). There is a lot of potential for abuse in this system, which is why I'm keenly watching these vaccine passport developments. These things are always well-intentioned and temporary, until maybe they're not.
  3. Yeah, I think I was typing up my reply and so didn't see that you'd also answered. I accept that the unvaccinated are dying a lot more, relatively speaking, which is part of the "deal" (rightly or wrongly) with remaining unvaccinated. Coronavirus is still going to reap a certain fraction of those who don't have natural or vaccinated immunity, and especially those with other underlying health conditions. I suspect that part of the "sensationalist" message is really for the American audience, where vaccination rates are much lower. America has always been interesting, in that a lot of people are very independent minded, and have a "don't tread on me" attitude (Montana state motto?). I don't have hard figures, but I also suspect a much higher level of distrust in government. So when Joe Biden mandates the vaccine, it has a much stronger polarising effect. And not just in a Republican / Democrat sense, but in a deeper "don't trust the government" sense, which manifests partly but not entirely down R/D lines. Then again, I don't think a softer, more persuasive approach would particularly work for Americans either, because of the inherent distrust. If I'm honest, I actually think we're witnessing the gradual break-up of America, but that's a very different topic altogether 😼
  4. I think this is because (for some reason) they've only started reporting the "per 100,000" figures, which is a better way of seeing how effective vaccines are, relative to the population, rather than just raw numbers of people dying. It's their basis for claims like "you're x times more clearly to y", and I agree, the "per 100,000" are useful and important pieces of data to have. It should also indicate when vaccines become less effective. Based on the latest set of data, it seems like it's wearing off particularly for the older groups, who had jabs earlier.
  5. Question: How do they factor in vaccination rates? Case in point: according to the government dashboard, on February 1st only 17.7% of people 16 and over had had Jab 1, and just 0.9% were on Jab 2. By March 1st that had risen to 37.7% and 1.6%. By April 1st these figures were 57.6% and 9.1%. By May 1st, these were 63.5% and 28.2%. (Source: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations ) Almost by definition, then, the vast majority of people who would die in February were unvaccinated. Only 0.9% were even "fully vaccinated", if by this you mean x2 jabs. The same would be true of March and April, during which no more than 28.2% (by May 1st) were "fully vaccinated". In other words, unless you can explain otherwise, the deaths are naturally going to be heavily skewed, because the majority of people weren't "fully vaccinated" until 4th June, when the number of people (aged 16 or over) receiving a 2nd dose hit 50%. Conveniently, the report you cite goes up to July In short: dubious use of statistics, when the majority of people, by definition, weren't "fully vaccinated" anyway during the reporting period. I'll accept that, if the stats were properly weighted, it would show an advantage (in terms of death) to being fully vaccinated, but I don't think the figures are quite saying what you think they're saying. In fact, this should be a case study in how statistics can be used to make a misleading argument. Now we should look at the stats from July onwards, when the majority of people were actually "fully vaccinated", and see if they say the same thing.....
  6. They just prepared incredibly well for it. Event 201 being a good example. "The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY. The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences." https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/ We have to thank these people for their incredible foresight and timing. Of course it's the primary motivator. There are always good intentions. We'll see whether further good intentions are added on later, amounting in real terms to ever more restrictions and freedoms based on your level of compliance. Well, yes, it's arguably a "human right" if you simultaneously deny these humans access to services unless they have a legal identity. But it's a political choice to deny people a service in the first place unless they have a legal identity. This is also the case with vaccine passports. It's power is in its ability to deny you access to certain things unless you (a) have one, and (b) have it updated to the criteria you are told, i.e. two jabs, three jabs, four jabs etc. Will you be using this "human right" argument when people are denied access to basic services because they choose not to have, say, a third jab? (This is already the case in some countries. Read the account I posted earlier of the person living in Lithuania, denied access to basic healthcare because of strict vaccine passport requirements.) My guess is no. You're "zero covid", so you'll side with whoever can promise you the hardest boot stomping on the human face.
  7. It really depends who our "masters" are. If we lived purely in a world of political democracy, our masters would be the politicians we elected. However, we live in a world of competing "stakeholders" as the World Economic Forum term it, including corporate interests and the rich. These are the people and entities that actually have the money and power to shape your future. For example, they have determined that thou shalt have a digital ID, for your own benefit of course. The Need for Good Digital ID is Universal The ability to prove who you are is a fundamental and universal human right. Because we live in a digital era, we need a trusted and reliable way to do that both in the physical world and online. https://id2020.org/digital-identity Yes, it is your human right that you have this digital ID. Furthermore, a few more fun facts from the same page: - "A unique convergence of trends provides an unprecedented opportunity to make a coordinated, concerted push to provide digital ID to everyone." One of these "trends" was the worldwide coronavirus pandemic, which led to governments of the world introducing vaccine passports, a form of digital ID which has the opportunity to be extended to other areas of life. - "In September 2015, all United Nations member states adopted the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, including their commitment to “provide legal identity for all, including birth registration” by 2030." This is not a conspiracy theory. This is their plan out in the open, backed by some of the richest and most powerful entities in the world. In my opinion, there is no way these entitities will be able to resist tying this digital identity stuff into your ability to buy and sell. It's too much of an opportunity for further power, control and money. Vaccine passports have already set the direction of travel in this regard, and the pandemic probably has a few more tricks up its sleeve before it goes away.
  8. Yes, I just checked. "Based on antibody testing of blood donors, 97.7% of the adult population now have antibodies to COVID-19 from either infection or vaccination compared to 18.1% that have antibodies from infection alone. Over 95% of adults aged 17 or older have antibodies from either infection or vaccination." (p3) Still, that's pretty good.
  9. Well, the good news is, here in the UK, almost 98% of the population have antibodies for covid, either from natural immunity or from vaccination. - "250 samples from every geographic region in England are tested each week using 2 different laboratory tests, the Roche nucleoprotein (N) and Roche spike (S) antibody assays. This dual testing helps to distinguish between antibodies that are produced following natural COVID-19 infection and those that develop after vaccination. Nucleoprotein (Roche N) assays only detect post-infection antibodies, whereas spike (Roche S) assays will detect both post-infection antibodies and vaccine-induced antibodies." - "Overall, the proportion of the population with antibodies using the Roche N and Roche S assays respectively were 18.1% and 97.7% for the period 2 August to 27 August" https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016465/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_36.pdf (See page 20). So basically, we've achieved herd immunity, through infection and vaccination.
  10. Karl Denninger of Market Ticker pulling no punches: I Hate Being Right http://market-ticker.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=243546 "I told you a few weeks ago I was seeing very disturbing data that strongly suggested the jabs were, in some form or fashion, destroying existing immunity or otherwise potentiating more-severe disease. I didn't have the hard data to quantify it, but I've mentioned the drift in the data streams for some time now. It was clear and convincing, but not quantifiable. Until now." What's interesting is he's using UK data. "This data shows conclusively that for anyone between 40 and 79 being vaccinated makes it more-likely for you to get Covid-19. That means what you think it does: If you took the jabs you are the plague rat; you are more-likely to get (and thus transmit) the disease than an unvaccinated person."
  11. Some of the links may be tenuous, but some of the figures are directly connected to the lab leak idea, and they didn't even declare a conflict of interest. And remember, this was the paper that was then used to shut down talk of a lab leak. At a bare minimum, there are definitely conflicts of interest here.
  12. UK Health Secretary: Vaccine passports to be scrapped UK Health Secretary Savid Javid has confirmed that vaccine passports are going to be scrapped, speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr show. https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/sep/12/coronavirus-live-news-uk-covid-vaccine-passports-latest-updates?page=with:block-613dbe4f8f08f3a185fd938e#block-613dbe4f8f08f3a185fd938e However, I wouldn't hold my breath. It seems Europe are more keen on vaccine passports for domestic use. Here's an account of the awful (IMO) situation in Lithuania for those who choose not to be vaccinated, or can't be for health reasons: Covid Pass in Lithuania and throughout Europe: How recent vaccine mandate laws have upended my family's life https://txti.es/covid-pass/images This is quite shocking for a country that only recently escaped the clutches of the Soviet Union.
  13. I agree it's a rabbit hole and one that's not easy to go down. The "conspiracy industry" (as you imply) is dwarfed by the "military industrial complex" as Eisenhower called it. A day before 9/11, Donald Rumsfeld himself said there was a TWO TRILLION DOLLAR hole in the defence budget. This is a simple fact. So whatever money the conspiracy people are making is peanuts by comparison with the kind of numbers involved at state levels. Also, you say "If the Yanks wanted to invade Afghanistan they'd have just done it." They would certainly have the military strength to invade a number of countries in the world if they chose, but they wouldn't have the moral authority (or pretext) to do so. (They are, after all, nominally a democratic republic.) This is what 9/11 gave them. They got the American people on board, along with a "coalition of the willing". It also gave them a reason to wage a "war on terror" with no definable end.
  14. Who's saying "this" didn't happen? 9/11 happened. Afghanistan happened. Iraq happened. These events have an "official narrative" as it were. What you're basically implying is that people shouldn't question the official narrative. You're implying that governments never lie... or if they do, it's small lies (to cover cack-ups or incompetence), but never big ones (i.e. deliberate action or inaction). Without a doubt, some conspiracy claims are batpoo crazy, but some of them are quite plausible, arguably more plausible than the official version. Like the collapse of Building 7, which collapsed 7 hours after the others, which looked remarkably like a controlled demolition, and took NIST 7 years to come up with an "official" story. Anyway, this is getting a bit "off topic"... but the whole Afghanistan thing is premised on 9/11, so it is related. You can't fully understand Afghanistan without understanding 9/11. Clearly we don't have the full picture anyway, since Biden is going to release that report "in six months". So at minimum there has been something to hide for over 20 years.
  15. This was a classic post from 10 years ago. It's relevant in that Afghanistan was a direct result of 9/11: https://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/ The bottom line I think is, if you believe the official story, I have a bridge to sell you.
  16. True, we don't know the long term risks of covid. But we also know that miniscule numbers of children are hospitalised from it. They seem to have an advantage over it that adults don't have. This is why I'm interested to know how the children who were part of the child "long covid" studies reported on back in February or so are doing now. If they're back to health, it would show that "long covid" isn't really a big long-term issue for children who are still developing. Also, the article says... "COVID-19 can cause tiny clots to form in the bloodstream, which can clog the smallest blood vessels in the kidney and impair its function." This is interesting, because it's also what the doomsday doctor (I forget his name, Hoffe or something?) said was happening with vaccines, but this was poo poo-ed by "debunkers". How does COVID-19 cause tiny clots, but the vaccine spike protein doesn't? Is producing many trillions of spike proteins from a vaccine really harmless, while COVID-19 doing it isn't?
  17. By your application of 'antivax' here, the JCVI were antivax. In the end, they are just cautious, which is a good position to take for a new treatment where the benefits to children are, as the JCVI themselves argued, fairly marginal, and the longer term risks unknown as yet.
  18. Unless the parent wants her child vaccinated, but the child doesn't want to be. Then I guess the child is Gillick incompetent or something?
  19. Teenage Boys Six Times More Likely to Suffer Heart Problems from Vaccine Than to Be Hospitalised from Covid, According to New Study https://dailysceptic.org/2021/09/10/teenage-boys-six-times-more-likely-to-suffer-heart-problems-from-vaccine-than-to-be-hospitalised-from-covid-according-to-new-study/ Here's the link to the original Telegraph article, but since it's behind a paywall, the above link quotes extensively from it: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/09/09/teenage-boys-risk-vaccines-covid/ I guess Joe Biden didn't get the memo.
  20. Curious that in Greek, the root word for sorcery and pharmacy are the same word, i.e. in the book of Revelation, ch 18: "For your merchants were the great ones of the earth, and all nations were deceived by your sorcery [Greek pharmakeia; literally drugging, enchantment]"
  21. Die Stadt teilte auch mit, dass es insgesamt bei ca 10% der geimpften Personen zu auffÀlligen gesundheitlichen Störungen gekommen sei, "im Wesentlichen in Form von Herz-Kreislauf-, Atemwegs- und neurologische Störungen". The city also announced that about 10% of the vaccinated persons had experienced noticeable health disorders, "mainly in the form of cardiovascular, respiratory and neurological disorders". Yikes. Edit: OK, it's 10% of the 90 people, not 10% of the entire city. I misread this part.
  22. If anyone ever wondered why Trump called CNN "fake news", the above headline nails it. Of all the wonderful things Ivermectin has done for the human race, they sum it up as "horse dewormer". Would be a good description of CNN news reporting, though.
  23. Layperson's translation: "Take your third shot when we authorise it (and we WILL authorise it, even though we have "no plans" to do so right this nanosecond), or we'll commence the boot-stomping-on-your-face phase again until you comply." For further reference, see: Australia.
  24. "one of the most respected agencies in the world, the FDA" đŸ€Ł
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.