ecosophia | Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 29

Current Mood: cold

Entry tags:

Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 29

The semi-open posts I've hosted here on the Covid-19 narrative, the inadequately tested experimental drugs for it, and the whole cascading mess surrounding them have continued to field a very high number of comments -- to understate the matter considerably! -- so I'm opening yet another space for discussion. The rules are the same as before:

1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry et al. are causing injury and death. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.

2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its tame politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here.

3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue.

4. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules.

With that said, as Canadian officials launch a campaign of reprisals against citizens who supported a peaceful protest against government policy, and the words "died suddenly" become the favorite media euphemism of our time, the floor is open for discussion.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Regarding the General Bob McDonald scenario, right now in Canada democracy is hanging by a thread with bated breath as the Senate takes its sweet time to come to a decision regarding the Emergencies Act. For those who are not up-to-speed on Canadian civics, our Senate is a sleepy place where prime ministers' pets go to rubber-stamp legislation and collect insanely big paycheques until they die. Lots of folks figured that the 'debate' among the Senators would last a few hours. But the Senate as requested several DAYS to hum and haw it over and it seems like there are a fair number of critics among them who are asking some probing questions, especially since the House of Commons representative who speaks to them is telling them, 'there really IS an emergency even though it doesn't look like it, but you can't see the top secret documents that say that it is an emergency... so, just trust us and approve it like good government fauna.'

If the Senate votes it down, the Emergencies Act is immediately nixed. But... if the Senate approves the Emergencies Act, a Bob McDonald scenario may be triggered: given how hot-under-the-collar the vets have been about government over-reach and heavy-handedness to the point of inviting beatings and arrest, I dare say that there will be some patriotic (and possibly power-hungry) active members of the military who would happily clear house and run a small, tight government to the ecstasy of many Canadians.

Ron M

The developments in Israel are very interesting. Unfortunately we only have the all-cause mortality data till Jan 30th. There is something really odd though: the all-cause mortality is rising in tandem with the rise of the infections, but much less in tandem with C19 mortality. The last week of data shows this. On Jan 23 the all cause mortality stood at 29% and the C19 mortality at 8.07 per million. On Jan 30 the all-cause mortality was 28% but the C19 mortality was a hefty 35.72 per million, more than 4 times the previous week while all-cause mortality declined! Next week will show if this is an administrative blip, but I have reason to believe it isn't.

In the second part of last year we saw something similar in Europe: the all-cause mortality moved in tandem with the amount of infections, but C19 mortality did not expain the excess all-cause mortality as total C19 mortality was only about 25% of total all cause mortality.

My conclusion is that it seems like the majority of the excess mortality is caused or triggered by the Corona virus, but it is mostly not Covid19. I don't have the biomedical knowledge to understand how this can be.

Boccaccio

If you think most people here agree with the red side on culture issues you either don't read most of the comments or haven't been here very long. There are a good many who are usually on the blue side of things, but stuck with red here; many more of us, such as myself, are fed up with the entire thing and don't want to take a side. We want to be left alone, and right now are on the red side of things because right now the people running the blue side of things have gone totalitarian.

Either way, so as to respond to your points more substantively, I think the police were justified in shutting down the protests. I also think that declaring a national emergency over this sets a very dangerous precedent. I also think that the people in government ought to listen to the protests; they signal public opinion, and if the government loses the support of enough people, it falls. When that happens things get very messy.

I have read this article and others about Edward Dowd, a former Blackrock employee who is saying 1) The vaccines are killing lots people, 2) The group life insurance companies will refuse to pay out for deaths caused by the vaccine, 3) Big Pharma has no liability (that is what the EUAs are about) UNLESS they committed fraud, in which case, they are liable and will be sued into bankruptcy, 4) All of this is beginning to dawn on Wall Street and they are pretty sure there is plenty of fraud, so they are selling off Big Pharma, or at least hedging, and maybe shorting it.

My question for the commentariat is this: Do you know anyone who was killed by the vaccine, i.e., they died and there was a report put into VAERS (or other system if outside the US)? If so, do you know if the survivors got a payout from the life insurance? There was a story making the rounds that a life insurance company in France refused to pay out in such a case, but no one can verify it. Anyone out there know of any examples where a life insurance company paid?

Just a wee visual comment on technological hubris... (with frog)

RFK Jr's book, the real Anthony Fausti (or a title something like that...) has considerable material on HIV and the many ways it doesn't seem to fit as the sole cause of AIDS. Interestingly, several people independently discovered another microorganism that, when found in blood samples along with HIV, seemed *much* more predictive of developing AIDS. People can carry low HIV loads for decades, unlike my earlier impression.

The pattern was set by Dr Fausti 30 years ago-- determine the one Answer, and then viciously defame, defund, and ignore anyone brave enough to challenge that party line. Particularly effective when most federal research $ comes under your direct control.

I had never encountered any of these parts of the AIDS story before this book. Luc Montagnier, recently deceased, discovered HIV. He stated back in the 1990s that it could not be the sole cause of AIDS. The book is a well researched polemic, but worth the time to read.

Now Daily Mail is a rag but I find it curious to find that it covers vaccine side effects

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10539871/French-No-1-Gael-Monfils-blames-adverse-reaction-Covid-booster-recent-withdrawals.html

That's what happened in Fiji with Bainimarama. The situation got so messy that when a strong man finally stepped in many of the citizens were incredibly grateful. Outside the country a lot of jornos and ex-pats were calling him all sorts of nasty names but when I went there it was surprising to find out how popular he was.

Inn a related vein (ha), I don't usually watch TV, but I was over someone's house when they had the TV on.

Saw a public-service commercial about recognizing the signs of deep vein thrombosis and "not waiting" to get to the hospital as quickly as possible should one experience those signs.

First pubic-heath notice about recognizing deep vein thrombosis that I've ever seen in my lifetime.

I've heard that certain novel medical treatments are linked to deep vein thrombosis.

But I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

"If a few thousand people can get together and block half a billion in trade daily and then just get whatever they want, how is that fair for the majority?"

If "what they want" is the restoration of rights of bodily integrity, informed consent and respect for a person's decisions, which have been removed, are they not "wanting" what the majority also wants? And if these are not things the majority wants, why don't they? Or is it that they want these things for themselves, but not for you?

PS. This, by the way, is exactly the same thing that I have said many times to people getting upset about BLM protests, in particular the early one responding to the shooting of Michael Brown in Missouri. If "what you want" is the right to due process (ie the right to not be summarily executed for a presumptive crime before you have the opportunity to face your accusers in a court of law and present a defence on your own behalf), are you not "wanting" what the majority also wants? And if these are not the things the majority wants, why don't they? Or is it that they want these things for themselves, but not for you?

One detail that stood out to me during both the Michael Brown protests, and the Freedom Convoy, was the footage of people out on the streets with brooms and garbage bags, cleaning up.

I have no doubt that both protests have also attracted bad actors - in this world there is no shortage, ever, of infiltrators, provocateurs, and entryists with bad agendas.

Nevertheless, from where I stand, it looks to me like both protests attracted large numbers of people, who vastly outnumbered the bad actors, who simply breathed a great sigh of relief at seeing that something important about their own experience of the world, which had received no public airing at all, was finally being SAID.

Edited 2022-02-23 21:13 (UTC)

Oh well in that case I'm sure they weren't actually there to crash the party, they were just there to buy a book, and things got a little "out of hand".

(The jokes write themselves, I'm so, so sorry)

Those who aren't legally in charge of their own healthcare - children, the 'clinically insane' and some elderly (e.g. with dementia).

Hi adeimantus,

I'd like to address some of this points, as they are important matters to be clear about.

You might argue that I'm setting up a false equivalency between the red and blue tribes. You might argue persuasively that the Covid issue is clear-cut, that your position is obviously the correct one, that everyone else is clearly evil or foolish. But it's precisely in highly polarized times that we need to be wary of simple truths and question the narratives that seem to make us conceited and arrogant in our certainty.

Of course, it's always healthy to question the basis of one's beliefs--but still, one must eventually come to a conclusion about them. And it is also healthy to consider positions of those contrary to our own--but again, one must eventually come to a conclusion about those as well. As for "dealing with real problems", the very heart of the matter is that the two tribes cannot agree on what those actually are. For starters, the two tribes cannot agree on the basic rights and responsibilities of citizenship, or even what citizenship itself is, so it seems unlikely that some reasonable middle-ground exists between them.

If a few thousand people can get together and block half a billion in trade daily and then just get whatever they want, how is that fair for the majority? "If you waste enough money and annoy enough people, the government will do whatever you want" isn't an ideal form of decision making. In a Westminster-style parliamentary democracy like Canada, flawed and unsatisfying as it is, governance is based on the balancing of the rights of different constituencies, not in the whims of a mob. If this particular mob can get what it wants this time, are we sure that future mobs will align with our opinions on other issues, and would we want to be governed by them?

If a majority wants to violate the basic human rights of a minority, how fair is that to the minority? Here, details matter, and the conclusions drawn about them. The details of what that minority is demanding, and how they are exerting pressure meet their demands, have to be considered, or else no conclusion can be reached. The cost of the pressure they exert (blocking trade/travel across a bridge, in our example) needs to be weighed against the gravity of their grievances.

The convoy has not asked to "get whatever they want" or for the government to "do whatever they want," the single demand (as far as I know) is that absurd violations of their rights (forced injection with dangerous vaccines) be removed.

Are these demands mere "whims", or do they represent rare, critical opposition to a "Mass Formation Psychosis" (a popular term these days) in a nation that is sleep-walking into tyranny? Who, in fact, is the "mob"? Who has the "whims"? Remember, to one of these tribes, it is those who saw fit to embrace all manner of tyranny over irrational fear of a mild respitory virus that represents the "mob." To one of these tribes, it the idea that a nation's tradition of individual liberty is meaningless in the face of a mild respitory virus that is a "whim". Of course we may reach different conclusions on those questions and the definitions of these words, but to say that all political action must take place within the existing political framework (Canada's Westminster-style parliamentary democracy in our example), in a manner that is approved by those who control it, is to assume that this framework is at least well-functioning. But, here again, whether or not the existing political system is well-functioning is a question demanding a conclusion--if anything is to be done at all.

-balowulf

Mais bien-sûr, along with the ancestors you've spoken of before in the US, you are also the descendant of a real L'Huissier de justice gratuit en Canada?

I think in Anglo-Canada, it is pronounced sounding more like hoser, or south of the line, I suppose hooser. Which is a strange reversal of the original French.

Trudeau discontinues Emergencies Act
Canadian Prime Minister has revoked the controversial order that had given the government sweeping powers to crack down on mandate protesters
[…]

https://www.rt.com/news/550397-emergencies-act-end-protests/

Just saw this.

- Teri

Thank you to everyone who pushed back against Trudeau's invoking the Emergency Measures Act. Mr Dictator Wannabe has backed down!! YAY!!!

My only regret is that I was working up the event chart for the parliamentary ratification of the act. Seeing how things had shifted in the space of a week was fascinating and I was starting to get the hang of how to use aspects to see how things might change over the period the chart was in effect. Oh well.

Excuse me while I do a happy dance.

You raise good points adeimantus, and I appreciate that you prefaced your comments as 'the devil's advocate position'. Agree absolutely that we all need to lift our heads from time to time from our 'grudge bowls' and take a peek at another perspective.

But I would suggest that peaceful protest, even that which inconveniences some part of the population, should be protected at all cost. In Canada we have a history of native protests and blockades as well. Their issues are not my issues, but I have no problem supporting that as long as it remains peaceful. Contrast that with the out and out crimes committed by Burn Loot and Murder; I think that is a qualitative difference that justifies different treatment.

As for Canadian-style democracy, I think it's the failure of that democracy that is the cause to the Trucker Convoy effect. In the last two federal elections the Liberal Party was supported by less than 20% of the population; the NDP by about 10%. But this 'small minority' is running roughshod over human rights and persecuting their 'enemies' with a disturbing zeal.
I joke that in Canada we have 4 left-wing parties and 1 Separatist party, (our so-called Conservatives have not been successful in conserving a d**n thing) but it's not that funny in real life. So it's not hard to understand why the truckers chose to enact a little 'direct democracy'. If you believe you are not represented in our parliament, you may feel the need to take steps.

The parties in power are the real mob that has destroyed trade, and jobs, and lives with their absurd policies. And I have no problem characterizing them as evil.

An addition to my previous reply a few other observations that might be relevant and a specultion:
- the excess mortality in the Netherlands was highest in the highest age group, so the frailest people
- in Israel the ICU admissions are in tandem with the C19 mortality (with a few days between the two).
- So we have the strange situation that the infections and all-cause mortality peak well before the ICU admissions and C19 mortality peak.

It looks like people are dying from the virus before they fall ill with C19. If people die before they are admitted in the hospital, there might be not a test so the presence of the virus is not established.

One possibility is imo that this is an indication that Mark L's hypothesis of immuno tolerance is happening. That could explain people dying from the virus without C19 being diagnosed. A contra argument could be that the data do not show that vaccinated people were dying in greater numbers than the unvaccinated, but then again the data are so much scrubbed that it is difficult to say anything definitive about how the vaxx and no-vaxx group are doing.

As the peak of the infections and excess mortality fall on almost the same day, if immuno tolerance is really causing this, it means that people are most infectuous just before they die, so they will also be superspreaders. As nobody knows who is about to die and a superspreader this would lead to mass-panic. I sure hope this speculation is very wrong.

Boccaccio

I am with you on 90% of your argument and logic, but I have to ask…did not a few dozens of people block billions (trillions?) in trade for two years, perhaps longer, and get what they want at the expense of almost everyone on earth?

What a huge relief this must be! May this outbreak of sanity spread across the world! Thanks for this delightful news.

Ron M

On the subject of insurance companies being the unlikely truth revealers ... This could potentially blow a few things open courtesy of info. from Germany.

The Bad Cat cautiously tells more here: https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/german-vaccine-side-effects-data?utm_source=url

Friends have had dreams of huge tidal waves over the west coast of N.A. and Hawaii.

May I humbly submit b complex vitamins in addition to the excellent suggestions here.

Thank you, temporaryreality, for your musings. I, too, have been thinking about Tamanous lately and noticing how the current freedom movement in North America seems to be channelling or manifesting it in a very pure way (and how the ideologies of the WEF are the polar opposite of it). Many different ways of perceiving and explaining this extraordinary phenonomenon!

Ron M

You make some good points about considering points of view etc but sorry You are playing it too politically correct. A peaceful protest is not a mob. Don’t buy your reasoning because its too wishy washy. If standing up for your personal freedom and ultimately for religious freedom you annoy some people well then OH WELL. SORRY BOUT THAT Sorry i annoyed someone for the right to breathe fresh air and decide what substances go in my bloodstream. My bad.

Another insurance related story, this time from Germany - https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1496555793092685824

Funny, you can get away with lying outright until somebody has to actual pay for the lies and then it gets real.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 13 of 36

Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 29

Re: A gray champion, dictator or something else soon?

Re: Ruhh-Row…

no subject

Re: Interesting article -- will Life Insurance companies and Wall Street end it?

no subject

Re: Hyper lethal varient

no subject

Re: A gray champion, dictator or something else soon?

no subject

no subject

Re: A gray champion, dictator or something else soon?

Re: A request to be shown I am wrong

no subject

Re: Hunters Lodges

Trudeau

EMA is cancelled!!

i get where you are coming from

Re: Ruhh-Row…

no subject

Re: UK/England - restrictions removed

Re: Side effects

no subject

Re: (red and other) herrings murmurate too

Please don’t be too soft

no subject