Coronavirus Pandemic

[GP]

It's a good post.

[Niall_Quinn]

That's a whole list of reflections you have created there.

At least we agree he's not the philanthropist he claims to be. He's an investor. In many of the critical infrastructure and services industries, globally. And he's merging his interest in the food supply chain (patentable, not charitable) with GMO and artificial foods, health related products (patentable, not charitable) with his vaccines, drugs, technology based global ID and currency (patentable not charitable, with MicroSoft being at the heart, of course). And when you bring these together you get a control system that dictates (because he's for mandatory action on a global scope backed by indemnification for suppliers) how people globally will live their lives. That's the point of the video you accuse me of missing while it drives past you, the size of a bus.

Now you might be too trusting or lack the imagination to see why one man having such influence is very obviously a bad thing. That would be okay. But you accuse those who are concerned about such things of being conspiracy theorists (a pejorative dripped into the mainstream by the CIA as fodder for the masses, FYI). This shows you are aware of the concerns of others, which evidently concerns you too (but in a different way), which is why you can't simply say you disagree but instead seek to discredit those who have a different opinion that makes you feel uncomfortable. You are, in effect, your own jailer determined to defend your imprisonment, to the extent you'll kick out at people in the next cell who show you the bars. Maybe you need people glued to the manufactured consent because it's the endorsement of the masses that allows you to accept your condition as normal and bearable. If mostly everyone is doing it and the TV says it's okay to do it, then all is well. Dissent then becomes an outlandish trait that can be dismissed based on safety in numbers. Until such a time as contradiction arises through authorised sources, in which case, hey, everyone knew that all along. The new paradigm is absorbed as if the yesterday's reversed consensus never existed. Indeed if a critic refers back to the old doctrine they probably become a conspiracy theorist themselves.

So on this basis, of course, Bill Gates - a control freak from the earliest days, master monopolist, a man who has become a legend for pushing inferior junk that sets back whole industries decades and destroys collaboration in favour of restriction, patent law and rampant profiteering - can be transformed into a concerned philanthropist. The video advised you research how Rockefeller achieved the same magical feat, but completed jigsaws reveal the picture. So beware.

Let's suppose. The powerful and influential are constrained by transient politicians through a system controlled by the people for the benefit of the people. That could be construed as an easily disprovable conspiracy theory in itself, given the 360 vista of almost every aspect of life that demonstrates the exact opposite. We could say some conspiracy theories are acceptable, others are not.

Why then would Ferguson, funded by the Gates Foundation, be permitted to sow chaos over such a protracted period and with such devastating consequences? It's not his fault, you suggest. It's the fault of those who listen to him. Makes you wonder then, why people who disagree with him being censored? Maybe it's THEIR fault? Ferguson builds crappy model after crappy model - like so many of the technocrats who have (coincidentally?) found themselves in positions of authority. Successive governments lap up his data. The mainstream media regurgitates, as fact. The illusion becomes reality, the danger becomes real, the people demand action and the government obliges - because they have to do what the people say, right? And when it all goes to hell (except for those who profit), the transient politicians (who are off to comfortable seats in several boardrooms anyway) are to blame.

This is the safe view endorsed by the majority, right? Let's call it reality, simply because the majority agrees with it.

So we get new politicians and the whole cycle repeats. Unfortunate, but what can you do? Mistakes and incompetence are not crimes. Is all this sounding reasonable and comfortable for you? Is this a conspiracy theory you can get behind?

Even so, there COULD be another reason why people like Ferguson (and Fauci and Tedros and all the others) manage to end up in key positions and somehow retain those roles despite performance. What if they are not incompetent? What if they are actually very good at what they do? What if it turns out that money buys influence and position? Could it at least be a possibility, even if the mainstream media proves that's not the case by proclaiming it otherwise? That would mean the mainstream media might be influenced by money and position too? Could that ever happen? Could positions of influence be doled out based not on competence and achievement but, instead, in the interests of those who can afford to influence the influencers? Is that too big a step to consider? A conspiracy theory too far?

I say people are generally moral and ethical, with the obvious exceptions. Which leads you to ask, how can I believe that if I don't think Gates is similarly moral and ethical? It's a finely loaded question, to be sure. Well, what if he's an exception? Is that possible? In your case we've all seen you play a game of league tables with the death toll. A joke? Dark humour? I'm only commenting on what you yourself have provided here. There can be more than one exception to any rule.

As for Corbett. You'd benefit by treating him with a little less automated contempt. You don't have to agree with him. But the conditioned response of writing him off in all regards robs you of an alternative voice to the synchronised script from the mainstream. I don't see how it can hurt you to listen. While you can. Because, for some reason, these alleged crackpots are systematically being removed from public view. Why? Shouldn't we all be able to discount their "fake news" if we are genuinely armed with evidence based knowledge? Regardless, soon there will only be one opinion, the official, authorised opinion. An outcome aided and abetted by those who attack rather than consider dissent. You'll have no science, you'll have no history, you'll have no notion of independent thought and opinion if the trend continues. I suppose knowledge will be "safe" at that point. Even as it is arbitrarily reversed to suit prevailing circumstances. Everyone will be trained to accept, trained to rage against the (by then, fly posting) die hard conspiracy theorists, trained in almost every aspect of life. By philanthropists like Bill Gates, who knows what's best for you whether you like it or want it or not.

And maybe this is all cool for your because, what's the worst that could happen? You get an unwanted advert in your new global ID secured browser which will helpfully remind you when to attend clinic for your 150th mandatory vaccine that's free at the point of delivery (and costs £1K behind the scenes)? It's not as if this will stop you enjoying your lab grown, hormone drenched burger, or consuming your daily intake of approved TV (provided your digital credit score allows you to watch). These are all convenient things for a more ordered society. And perhaps it's right they should be controlled by just a few "smart" people. And the best part, voices like Corbert's won't be around to disturb the fun. Hell, even Michael Moore won't be around, distant memories of times when people were forced to think and choose for themselves because the state couldn't be bothered to do it for them.

Keep dismissing dissent out of hand. Keep on verifying your knowledge by running it against the authorised mainstream checklist. Keep on using that approved knowledge to provide you with ammunition against those who stray from the righteous path. Utopia is on the way.

[Niall_Quinn]

Letter's you have a girly fan base developing. Best kind too - nothing to say, just fawning adulation. Ironically for the very same reasons I gave in the main post.

[Letters]

The neighbours have people round again. My curtains have never been so twitched.
Will let you know if any of them drop dead.

[Mac76]

are they wearing these?

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/sta...523008/photo/1

[Letters]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52814815

Ah right. We should just all move on, nothing to see here

[Niall_Quinn]

"Coronavirus was already in Northern Italy in October 2019, but nobody wants to hear that." - says Pasquale Mario Bacco , an Apulian medical examiner, interviewed by the scientific journal MeteoWeb.

Bacco arrived at this conclusion together with his group after months of research, cross-data and willingness to understand what the true origins of Sars-Cov2 were and especially when the new Coronavirus really arrived in Italy.

"We found a very high concentration of positives between late February and early March in the Brescia area, with an 81% concentration of type G antibodies (so-called 'old'), that is, those that mature late in infections. This implies a jump of about three and a half months backwards, and therefore indicating a date between 15 and 20 October as the moment in which these subjects contracted the Coronavirus, we also rounded down ", explains Bacchus. So if the subjects examined have contracted the virus in that period, it is common ground that in Italy, in October, it was already circulating.

"In Tuscany, Emilia, Piedmont, Lombardy and Veneto, doctors have recorded interstitial pneumonia concentrations never seen before in Italy - continues dr. Bacchus -. In October in Brescia there were multiple pneumonia related to legionella, defined as atypical pneumonia . Never in recent decades has there been such a high concentration of pneumonia in Italy. The virus has been present for much longer than we think, but it is likely that in order to become more aggressive it will have to find the ideal climatic conditions ”.

It's a virus like any other in the family, although it's new to humans, it behave like the others. Viral infections generally have a higher incidence in winter."

Italian pathologists have estimated the true mortality rate of COVID19, in Italy, to be around 12.5% of the total death toll attributed to the disease.

Together, these findings suggest COVID19 is very similar to influenza, both in terms of mortality and its cyclical seasonal nature, being more pronounced during influenza season and dying out during the warmer periods of the year. Effectively we've had a double hit during this flu season.

It's also very possible that more people have died from national lockdowns than the disease, if the Italian data turns out to be even partially comparable in other nations. And with the resulting economic downturn and disruption to vital supply chains (particularly food), the global lockdown will eventually result in deaths many times greater than this second flu which caused the initial panic and the subsequent politically motivated extension to lockdown.

[Niall_Quinn]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52814815

Ah right. We should just all move on, nothing to see here

Explain what you see here? If you can't move on from this, what do you call it, a national crisis - then what in particular has you stuck? Is it the gravity of the matter? Is it some newfound set of principles? Is it something else that you'd prefer to keep to yourself?

What are your thoughts for resolving this crisis and allowing the nation to move on? What steps do you think should be implemented so a crisis like this can never happen again?

I would say if the country is being held in stasis by this issue (or, let's be generous and say the 1% of people who actually care about it at all), it rather downplays the actual crisis we are facing. Perhaps lockdown, emergency powers and an impending global recession to rival that of the '30s are not as important as initially feared? Regardless, let's pour all our efforts into this political theatre and get it out of the way because at some point, it's probably best to move on to to the other stuff, as suggested by Johnson.

[Niall_Quinn]

Because... Coronavirus!!!!

- NHS Test and Trace programme will launch tomorrow morning but it will go live without the crucial NHSX app
- The roll out of the app has been delayed after problems were experienced during a lengthy Isle of Wight pilot
- It means the new system will initially be entirely reliant on human testimony to slow the spread of the virus
- Anyone with coronavirus symptoms will be told to self-isolate at home for seven days and to order a test
- Anyone who then tests positive will be told to provide the NHS with contact details of people they have seen
- Contact tracers will then track people down using email addresses and phone numbers telling them to isolate
- Those people who are contacted will be told to isolate for 14 days even if they do not have any symptoms

Inform on yourself, inform on your friends, imprisonment without trial or jury on the say-so of a third party. It's the old witch hunts, back again. I'd love to think not a single person will comply, but we all know people who will be falling over themselves to fall at the feet of authority and lick the boot of the new medical tyranny.

[Niall_Quinn]

Also, to be as helpful as possible, Apple will be building their track and trace spyware into the iOS operating system in the coming weeks - so you won't even need to download an app. Now that's convenience - thank you Apple!

You'll need to opt-in to take full advantage of the "service", much in the same way as you opt-in to your data being stolen without your permission by every big tech Tom, Dick and Harry.

People used to laugh at the idea your phone tracks your every move - conspiracy theory! Then it became, well maybe, but how does it hurt me? Now it can not only track you, but lock you up for 14 days too! And this time, if you don't obey that lockdown, your phone can report you. Unless you are one of the few people left who can bear to be away from the stupid thing for more than 30 seconds.