[as shown by Stanford Epidemiology Professor John Ioannidis et al. ] - Ioannidis showed VERY early on in the "pandemic" COVID was a nothingburger. Anyone who spread the fear and apocalypse nonsense was spreading disinformation. Glad you name checked Swan - one of the most egregious jab pushers.
I'll never forget him saying in 2021 (unfortunately I can't locate the video ad now) that 'we already know what the side effects are, so there are no nasty unknown side effects around the corner'. On black box provisionally approved therapeutics still in phase three trials. WTF.
I remember listening to him in early 2020. He said how we always think the infection fatality rate is high early in a pandemic as only the serious cases present to doctors/hospitals and this gives a false impression of how many people die from a disease. The world should have listened to him.
Yes, incompetence (a common culprit) doesn't seem sufficient to account for 2020/1.
The 'build back better' slogan (used by many leaders mid way thru 2020) did arouse suspicion in me at the time, as did Scomo's commitment to buy 25 million jabs at the same time.
Both seemed incongruous with the prevailing situation.
We forget that periodically ideas that most people thought to be true are disproved and the people questioning these beliefs are initially vilified and sometimes killed for questioning the orthodoxy. Think of Copernicus questioning that the sun revolves around the earth or Darwin's theory of evolution. There can be no progress unless people are allowed to question beliefs.
'misinformation' is publishing information that is wrong - publishing untruths, irrespective of intention? Mmm. Molto difficili!
Like all legislation ... or rules for life ... or moral principles ... or moral do's and don'ts, the issue is that WORDS are used - words that have definitional ambiguity.
In respect of the photo/footage of the young woman (actress?), supposedly in hospital with C19, its moral standing (to me) is hardly different whether she was an actress or whether she was a real cherry-picked patient. The issue for me was the intent of deception ... of some organisation/group or person deliberately fomenting dubious perceptions of reality. Msm is guilty of fomenting erroneous perceptions in this way (ie through cherry-picking particulars, but omitting hard data that would give a much clearer idea of the general) all the time. And this annoys me.
As I have written before, though, an act/utterance of deception can be noble, just as the conveyance of a truth can be morally dubious. LINS (Life Is Not Simple).
Censorship typically fails because it gets hijacked by activists.
And yes, I agree with the writer that the determination of just what is 'truth' is tricky. Today's conventional wisdom (scientific or other) tends to be tomorrow's embarrassment.
And medical and climate science is particularly unbankable, it seems.
Part of me is thinking that if it is not possible to draft satisfactory legislation then it should not be drafted at all. My father used to say that a job not well done is a job not worth doing ... or words to the same effect.
PS I should like to know how you got past US customs, Rebekah. It's declaration form is foreboding and you do have a history of anti-government behaviour.
Ha! I will add your customs question to the AMA. I don’t agree about noble lies but I appreciate that many people would side with you on that. I agree the misinformation bill is a job done poorly and it would be better to ditch it than put lipstick on the pig to push it through.
[as shown by Stanford Epidemiology Professor John Ioannidis et al. ] - Ioannidis showed VERY early on in the "pandemic" COVID was a nothingburger. Anyone who spread the fear and apocalypse nonsense was spreading disinformation. Glad you name checked Swan - one of the most egregious jab pushers.
I'll never forget him saying in 2021 (unfortunately I can't locate the video ad now) that 'we already know what the side effects are, so there are no nasty unknown side effects around the corner'. On black box provisionally approved therapeutics still in phase three trials. WTF.
I remember listening to him in early 2020. He said how we always think the infection fatality rate is high early in a pandemic as only the serious cases present to doctors/hospitals and this gives a false impression of how many people die from a disease. The world should have listened to him.
I just can't believe all this is happening.
I mean where the west is going.
Read something about EU as well.
It all seems surreal.
Is it "just stupidity and incompetence"?
It's hard not to be thinking about various conspiracy theories.
Are there any credible explanations?
I guess almost 0?
They can't be all touting "build back better" and "misinformation bills" type of rules in sync.
Well, we'll face it HEAD ON :)
Yes, incompetence (a common culprit) doesn't seem sufficient to account for 2020/1.
The 'build back better' slogan (used by many leaders mid way thru 2020) did arouse suspicion in me at the time, as did Scomo's commitment to buy 25 million jabs at the same time.
Both seemed incongruous with the prevailing situation.
We forget that periodically ideas that most people thought to be true are disproved and the people questioning these beliefs are initially vilified and sometimes killed for questioning the orthodoxy. Think of Copernicus questioning that the sun revolves around the earth or Darwin's theory of evolution. There can be no progress unless people are allowed to question beliefs.
Just some thoughts, in no particular order....
'misinformation' is publishing information that is wrong - publishing untruths, irrespective of intention? Mmm. Molto difficili!
Like all legislation ... or rules for life ... or moral principles ... or moral do's and don'ts, the issue is that WORDS are used - words that have definitional ambiguity.
In respect of the photo/footage of the young woman (actress?), supposedly in hospital with C19, its moral standing (to me) is hardly different whether she was an actress or whether she was a real cherry-picked patient. The issue for me was the intent of deception ... of some organisation/group or person deliberately fomenting dubious perceptions of reality. Msm is guilty of fomenting erroneous perceptions in this way (ie through cherry-picking particulars, but omitting hard data that would give a much clearer idea of the general) all the time. And this annoys me.
As I have written before, though, an act/utterance of deception can be noble, just as the conveyance of a truth can be morally dubious. LINS (Life Is Not Simple).
Censorship typically fails because it gets hijacked by activists.
And yes, I agree with the writer that the determination of just what is 'truth' is tricky. Today's conventional wisdom (scientific or other) tends to be tomorrow's embarrassment.
And medical and climate science is particularly unbankable, it seems.
Part of me is thinking that if it is not possible to draft satisfactory legislation then it should not be drafted at all. My father used to say that a job not well done is a job not worth doing ... or words to the same effect.
PS I should like to know how you got past US customs, Rebekah. It's declaration form is foreboding and you do have a history of anti-government behaviour.
Ha! I will add your customs question to the AMA. I don’t agree about noble lies but I appreciate that many people would side with you on that. I agree the misinformation bill is a job done poorly and it would be better to ditch it than put lipstick on the pig to push it through.
thanks Rebekah you are awesome