Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
by stickdog99 » Tue Nov 01, 2022 6:29 pm
by Grizzly » Tue Nov 01, 2022 10:02 pm
water under the bridge, bro.
by stickdog99 » Wed Nov 02, 2022 2:41 am
by Belligerent Savant » Wed Nov 02, 2022 11:05 am
Belligerent Savant » Mon Oct 31, 2022 3:50 pm wrote:.
A resounding Yes to all of this.
We have the 'receipts' in this very thread, Re: what we knew and when. And we also have, here, documentation of those that continued -- and still continue -- to defend what was always indefensible.Emily Oster proposes “a pandemic amnesty,” suggests that “we need to forgive one another for what we did and said when we were in the dark about COVID”
eugyppius
2 hr ago
I don’t know much about the American pandemic pundits, but I gather that Brown University economist and “parenting guru” Emily Oster is far from the worst of them. Her Twitter timeline suggests she spent the early months of the pandemic terrified about the virus until school closures took their toll on her kids, at which point she repositioned herself as a kind of lockdown moderate, opposing the worst of the hystericist excesses while validating their central premises whenever possible to save face with friends and colleagues.
“Employer mandates” mean firing people who don’t share your medical and political opinions.
Emily Oster’s latest act of moderation is the suggestion that we forgive and forget all the disastrous policies inflicted on us by terrified wealthy urbanites, clueless technocrats and mad scientist vaccinators since 2020, because, hey, these were just honest mistakes, anybody could’ve messed up like that, it’s all good.April 2020, with nothing else to do, my family took an enormous number of hikes. We all wore cloth masks that I had made myself. We had a family hand signal, which the person in the front would use if someone was approaching on the trail and we needed to put on our masks. Once, when another child got too close to my then-4-year-old son on a bridge, he yelled at her “SOCIAL DISTANCING!”
These precautions were totally misguided. In April 2020, no one got the coronavirus from passing someone else hiking. Outdoor transmission was vanishingly rare. Our cloth masks made out of old bandanas wouldn’t have done anything, anyway. But the thing is: We didn’t know.
The thing is, Emily Oster, that we did know. We’ve studied respiratory virus transmission for years. All the virologists and epidemiologists who aren’t total morons knew your 2020 mask routine was crazy and they just didn’t care. They wanted you to do it anyway, because they thought that if they got you to act paranoid and antisocial enough, your insane behaviour might have some limited effect on case curves. Joke’s on you, and it’s sad you still haven’t realised.[T]here is an emerging (if not universal) consensus that schools in the U.S. were closed for too long: The health risks of in-school spread were relatively low, whereas the costs to students’ well-being and educational progress were high. The latest figures on learning loss are alarming. But in spring and summer 2020, we had only glimmers of information. Reasonable people—people who cared about children and teachers—advocated on both sides of the reopening debate. …
No, reasonable people could see already in March 2020 that SARS-2 posed no measurable threat to children. There was never any honest debate to be had about this.The people who got it right, for whatever reason, may want to gloat. Those who got it wrong, for whatever reason, may feel defensive and retrench into a position that doesn’t accord with the facts. …
We have to put these fights aside and declare a pandemic amnesty. … [W]e need to learn from our mistakes and then let them go. We need to forgive the attacks, too. Because I thought schools should reopen and argued that kids as a group were not at high risk, I was called a “teacher killer” and a “génocidaire.” It wasn’t pleasant, but feelings were high. And I certainly don’t need to dissect and rehash that time for the rest of my days.
Moving on is crucial now, because the pandemic created many problems that we still need to solve.
I’m sorry somebody called you genocidal, Emily Oster. That must’ve been tough for you. You know what’s also tough? Getting your head kicked in by riot police because you had the temerity to protest against indefinite population-wide house arrest.
Or being fired from your university job and banned in perpetuity from the premises because you uploaded a video to social media complaining about the onerous and expensive testing requirements imposed upon unvaccinated staff. Or being confined to your house and threatened with fines because of personal medical decisions that had no chance of impacting the broader course of the pandemic in the first place. But somebody called this woman genocidal in French and she’s ready to move on, so it’s all good.
Emily Oster may have said a few reasonable things in the depths of her pandemic moderation, but she can take her proposal for pandemic amnesty and shove it all the way up her ass. I’m never going to forget what these villains did to me and my friends. It is just hard to put into words how infuriating it is, to read this breezy triviliasation of the absolute hell we’ve been through, penned by some comfortable and clueless Ivy League mommyconomist who is ready to mouth support for basically any pandemic policy that doesn’t directly affect her or her family and then plead that the horrible behaviour and policies supported by her entire social milieu are just down to ignorance about the virus. We knew everything we needed to know about SARS-2 already in February 2020.
The pandemicists and their supporters crossed many bright red lines in their eradicationist zeal and ruined untold millions of lives. That doesn’t all just go away now.
https://www.eugyppius.com/p/emily-oster ... tter&sd=pf
The comments section within the above link are worth perusing as well.
E.Woodhouse
Writes Wood House
Oct 31
·
Thank you for writing this and saving me time today.
People like myself battled Emily Oster on Twitter from the get-go. She was, indeed, comfortable and clueless.
What she and other pandemicists are missing is that they must
1. Confess to what they did, specifically and without excuse-making;
2. Acknowledge it was wrong, misguided, and hurt people;
3. Apologize;
4. Humbly ask for forgiveness;
5. (However possible), make restitution, and
6. Be forgiven.
_________
JJ
Writes Freedom over Fear
Oct 31
2a. Also acknowledge that the correct information WAS available from the start but was wrongly labelled misinformation and then censored. I don’t want all these apologisers saying they just didn’t know any better. Or worse, that no one knew any better. Because a bloody lot of us did and I’m not an “expert”.
___________
KHP
Oct 31
Not *quite* perfect... where do the gallows fit in to that sequence?
by Belligerent Savant » Thu Nov 03, 2022 1:15 pm
Igor Chudov
Writes Igor’s Newsletter
Nov 2
·
Liked by eugyppius
I disagree with Prof. Oster and want Covid criminals punished for poisoning millions of people and taking away our civil liberties.
That said, Emily is not the thought leader here -- she was selected to launch this amnesty "trial balloon" as a pleasantly appearing individual who was not implicated in the nastiest of behaviors.
There was a reason why "they" selected Emily and not Dr Leana Wen or Monica Gandhi.
Emily here is not the mastermind of the amnesty idea -- she is a figurehead. She is not exactly dumb, but being "data driven" without realizing that data is supplied by crooks shows lack of thinking, possibly intentional.
One of the reasons things like lockdowns and mass vaccination frenzies have become possible in the first place, is the uniformity of outlook and opinion among the governing elite. When everybody, from university professors to the minister president of Bavaria to municipal police administrators, believes that with enough social distancing we can eradicate SARS-2, and that the unvaccinated are responsible for prolonging the pandemic, the result is a powerful if erratic and ever-shifting social tyranny. Social media technologies have been particularly noxious for the consensus formation of the Head Girls[/Boys, et al.], widening the range of issues on which they have functionally identical opinions and enforcing conformity more thoroughly than was ever before possible. And should one of their runaway preference cascades go off the rails and destroy society, they’ll rapidly reunite around the new consensus position, that nobody could’ve known any better and all the worst offenders—especially their friends and colleagues—acted in good faith with the knowledge that was available at the time.
by Belligerent Savant » Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:12 pm
Dissecting the Deceptive Plea for COVID-19 Amnesty
A Midwestern Doctor
Nov 1
One of the challenges I find with most forms of media is that the creators of it are continually seeking to manipulate you into adopting their position. For this reason, I greatly prefer written content as opposed to audio or visual content as it is much easier for me to rapidly filter out the manipulative rhetoric built into what I am reading. Similarly, this is why, to the best of my ability, I try to avoid inserting manipulative language into my writing (as best as I can I try to follow the Golden Rule and not to do things to other people I don't like having done to me).
Recently an article began circulating stating that the pandemic pushers deserved amnesty for their actions over the last two years. This article was repeatedly shared in our community as a way of politely saying "How About No” to the author, and to illustrate that enough consequences from the vaccine are starting to emerge that the government has realized they may need to pivot to a new approach (which suggests additional issues from the vaccines will emerge in the future). From having thought this article over, my best guess is that this article was primarily targeted at assuaging the guilt of the left leaning voters who trusted their leaders on these vaccines and are not the most motivated to vote for them in the midterms (as the polling data presently indicates a landslide for the Republican party).
When I read through this article, I realize the author highlighted a very common problem I observe in human interactions (which I will admit I have also been guilty of). The author is demanding to receive forgiveness for their conduct, but in their apology, is refusing to admit they did anything wrong. In order to accomplish this, they utilized a variety of manipulative rhetorical constructs that are relatively simple and frequently utilized.
Because it is so common to encounter propaganda pieces like this, I thought there might be some value in illustrating my thought process as I read this article. I tried to not make this be too sophisticated so that it accurately portrayed what jumped out at me when I first read the article. Additionally, there are a few pieces of information I consider to be quite important to know in my commentary and many more in the comments.
In reading this analysis, it is important to remember that many people make their decisions based on what their peers or the media tells them to do (which is likely the audience this article was written for) rather than being self directed and using critical thinking to discern which decision makes the most sense to them. As a result, we almost certainly interpreted this article dramatically differently from its intended audience which is receptive to this style of persuasion.
Thinking about this article more, I believe the fundamental logical error in this article is that leaders should be absolved of their responsibility for making incorrect decisions if there was a degree of uncertainty with the information at hand. This is not the standard we have held our leaders to, as their job is always to make the best decision they can with the information that is available, and in most eras, if the decision was correct they were praised for their leadership, whereas if the decision was incorrect they were blamed for their mistakes. The “but I couldn’t have known!” excuse has never been deemed an acceptable way for leaders to justify their mistakes.
In the past, leaders have successfully navigated much greater degrees of uncertainty. In the case of COVID-19, Ron DeSantis, who had no previous training in public health or medicine, was able to look at the data himself and correctly discern what policy needed to be followed. Although DeSantis deserves praise for his leadership, the fact that he was able to successfully figure this out without a scientific background demonstrates that the degree of “uncertainty” here was clearly manageable.
As this post shows, it can credibly be argued much of this article was intentionally deceptive. What I am more surprised by is the degree of a lack of insight the author shows into the mistakes that were made. I should note that this is very common behavior you will observe from those who have been influenced by cults or cult like groups. As one reader remarked, it is astounding how much the quality of journalism has declined over the last few years and that an article of that quality made it to publication:
I personally bear no ill will towards the author as I am used to dealing with people who drank the Kool-Aid , but I also believe she will need to offer something much more sincere if she wants us to move on and forget how she and her fellow Covidians behaved.
Fortunately, I think the degree to which the vaccines were a scam is going to red-pill a lot of people who had previously been subservient to media propaganda, and if we patiently wait, much more genuine apologies will be forthcoming.
Additionally, one of the most well known examples of an insincere apology was the BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill. At the time the event happened, BP claimed it was a completely unexpected catastrophe, but in reality, they had recently had the exact same blowout happen in a Middle East country shortly beforehand, so they clearly knew the practice was unsafe but they didn’t care because profit was their only priority. Once the spill started, BP engaged in a variety of PR tactics to make the public stop being mad at them (rather than fix the oil spill or compensate those affected by the spill), one of which was having the CEO give a highly misleading apology that included “we’re sorry,” and was later parodied by South Park. Similarly, as one reader remarked:
Let me know if you like this format and your thoughts on this article! I am very hopeful it was at least partly motivated by the pharmaceutical industry beginning to realize they sacrificed one of their largest markets (the childhood vaccination program) for their greed to get the COVID-19 injections into every American. Lastly, I am continuing to work on the piece detailing my thoughts on the causes of Alzheimer’s disease (I apologize for the delay on it).
Sources for this article include:
[embedded links at source]
Healthcare officials intentionally lied about the vaccines.
NY Judge revoked vaccine mandate.
Canadian Premier endorses COVID-19 amnesty.
The CDC guidelines were nonsensical and unscientific.
Fauci and Birx continually fought Scott Atlas on the COVID-19 task force to push for unwarranted and harmful school closures.
This is what Trump actually said regarding disinfectants.
Reducing childhood vaccines prevented SIDS.
UV light device for the lungs.
by stickdog99 » Sat Nov 05, 2022 8:19 pm
by Grizzly » Sun Nov 06, 2022 11:07 pm
by stickdog99 » Tue Nov 08, 2022 4:43 pm
by Belligerent Savant » Tue Nov 08, 2022 5:00 pm
WELCOME TO THE CONTROL GROUP
An independent, worldwide, long-term study of the health outcomes of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-free.
A citizen led initiative, open to anyone who has chosen not to be jabbed.
WHY DO WE NEED A CONTROL GROUP?
The SARS-CoV-2 jabs were rushed out under emergency use authorization, using novel technology without any long-term testing. The original control group for this experimental treatment was unblinded only a couple of months into the trial and its participants offered the jab, which the vast majority took. Therefore, there is no longer an official control group. Science demands that every experimental treatment must have a control group in order to properly evaluate its long-term success and efficacy.
Mainstream and social media are ignoring, attacking and de-platforming the many hundreds of international doctors and scientists who have raised serious concerns about this.
Many beloved friends and family members of our participants have received these SARS-CoV-2 jabs, and as concerned citizens who, for many different reasons, have decided not to participate in this experiment, have come together to positively contribute their data to the Control Group Cooperative study in order to become the missing control group.
Our belief is that without a vaccine-free control group to compare against, there is no true measure of the levels of safety and effectiveness proclaimed by governments and health organisations across the world. Our intention is to collect large scale health data from both the SARS-CoV-2 jabbed and the vaccine-free in order to facilitate truly independent, comparative analysis, to show whether the vaccine-free do, or do not have better long and short-term health outcomes.
WHO ARE THE PEOPLE BEHIND THIS INITIATIVE?
This project has been setup by mums and dads, uncles and aunts and grandparents who have come together to make a positive contribution to society, just as many individuals believe they are doing when accepting the SARS-CoV-2 jabs.
We are voluntarily supported by scientists, doctors and other professionals from all over the world who have helped this project to achieve the growth and success it has to date.
A Cooperative organisation (Control Group Coop) was created to own this project and to ensure it is managed and funded by its participants, and to protect its independence. A cooperative has only stakeholders, not shareholders which ensures we cannot simply be acquired without the permission and/or agreement of our members.
Watch the video to meet Diny and Rachael, two mums who helped found this organisation and are working tirelessly alongside a dedicated local team and online volunteers to ensure its long-term success and sustainability.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 168 guests
