|
|
Post by sabre on Dec 14, 2022 12:44:33 GMT 12
More satire? Or have you completely lost the plot? Hard to tell.. The murdering fuckwits were well known conspiracy theorists. Among other things they were Anti-vax, believed that the vax was to reduce the population. They believed that the Port Arthur masaca was faked by the government to get peoples guns off them. Meanwhile dumb fucks like you continue to spread mis-information which fuels these guys at the outer extreme. You have no respect or care in the world for the damage that your conspiracy spreading words do. Can you clarify what misinformation I have spread? |
|
|
|
Post by sabre on Dec 14, 2022 12:59:36 GMT 12
More satire? Or have you completely lost the plot? Hard to tell.. You have no respect or care in the world for the damage that your conspiracy spreading words do. And you ironically have no respect or care for the damage that forcing a harmfull and ineffective medical treatment on to a population can do. |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 14, 2022 13:10:09 GMT 12
I understand it is done. No pushing is required... I am not sure how the police/justice burden will increase? The police already have to enforce/prosecute sales to underaged people, so nothing changes in this regard, they just continue to do that. The number of stores that sell fags will be reduced from 6000 to 600, making it even easier to police. And those 600 stores will be able to use technology such as facial recognition and real-time ID checks to ensure people are who they say they are. More importantly the reduction of the estimated costs on the health system of $5bn can be redirected to all the upcoming vaccine induced medical conditions that you claim are on the horizon for those who took the mandated gene-therapy. :-) :-) you are correct on one point, the legislation was passed on Tuesday. As for the rest, there is a saying, "history proves we never learn from history", in this case the classic example was prohibition in the US in the 30's which was a spectacular failure. This government time and time again fails on understanding the law of unintended consequences. What will this legislation do 1. Provide increased opportunities for criminals, from the ASH web site New Zealand has a problem at its border - cigarettes. Customs' head of investigations says profits from selling smuggled cigarettes are estimated to be eight times more lucrative than the illegal cocaine trade. ASH Director, Deborah Hart talks to Newshub and says we need " ...a whole lot more resource put into countering the illicit trade."
2. There is always the attraction of "forbidden fruit" and by making smoking illegal it will likely promote the curiosity of the young to try it (just like alcohol and drugs). 3. If it is to be enforced then seeing as the police currently do nothing to enforce smoking laws, then yes there will be a cost along with the increased theft of smokes. Reality is the police are so under resourced so it is likely to be the last thing on their agenda to enforce. Interesting you comment about facial recognition, so now it is to be used to police people. In one of your previous guises (Grounded/Dr Wrong/something deleted) you claimed it was only for "convenience". Your last crack about jab injuries is very low blow considering the level of suffering in the community arising from the jabs... Bio-metric tracking is everywhere you go, many private organizations have deployed it, even supermarkets have it. These places use it to catch repeat offenders. So if you get caught in a shop once using fake ID to buy fags, then they will know when you come back and they will share that with the other shops that they network with - don't like it - tough shit - it's everywhere. If you want to use facial recognition to identify yourself then that's up to you. If a store says we are only selling fags to people who have gone through our identity system so that we do not have to check your paper IDs everytime you come in then you get to choose if you deal with that store or not. When something that is a human right requires you to use facial identity to obtain it and that's the only way you can obtain that human right then that would be a step too far. But if a private business wants to use facial recognition for there convivence and you agree/accept that convivence then I do not see a problem with that so long as they are keeping my data safe. The previous conversation was about online ID. To prevent online fraud. Because you can't tell if the person behind the computer is or is not authorized to use the credit card that they have in their possession. So yeah it's optional because you can choose to shop somewhere else. Banking will be interesting - because right now banking is not deemed to be a human right - and many people who have fallen a foul of their banks due to bankruptcy or other reasons have found that banks will not deal with them, so they struggle to even open a bank account. I see banks being the first to cross the line and require facial recognition to prove who you are. Once there is no bank that you can sign up to without bio id then we have a problem. But bio-id will be driven by private industry, simplifying and bringing costs down rather than by government driving a single bio-metric ID program as the conspiracists will have you believe. A company I work at has deployed "human recognition technology" as soon as a person walks into an area that is deemed unsafe, an alarm sounds. Maybe they just don't have their hi-vis jacket on, maybe they forgot to put there helmet on, maybe they are not authorized to be in that area? These are the kinds of things in private industry that are driving bio id. |
|
|
|
Post by GO30 on Dec 14, 2022 14:10:47 GMT 12
Such a tragedy, two families utterly destroyed, simply because of dumb fucks that peddle and spread conspiracy theories which unstable people like this latch onto. Some years back people were burnt at the stake or drowned as they questioned science, science done by 'specialists and experts on their fields' as you mention. Since those days the killings have tapered back but to question the science still made you a denier and a conspiracy theorist worth of throwing shit at.
Then one day some cheeky fucker showed the earth was not flat, showed the earth rotates around the sun, showed smoking may make you look cool but will fuck you over, showed the CIA wasn't plying people with LSD just to give them a good afternoon, showed the FBI were indeed tracking John Lennon due to his anti-war stance, showed the US Govt has been aware of UFO like activities for decades .................. and a goodie very relevant to this thread, they showed a significant amount of the vaccine being given for Polio was contaminated by the SV40 virus.
All of those were conspiracy theories until the day they became the truth. There are a SHIT LOAD more than just those.
As a topical FYI - that dodgy Polio vaccine was administered to 100,000,000 before it got out that it was contaminated. There are many Doctors and Scientists who are saying the current Covid vaccine is taking us down that same path.
So the real question is who are the dumb fucks? The ones you suggest are conspiracy theorists or is it a case you are the dumb fuck but you just don't know it yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by fish on Dec 14, 2022 14:14:25 GMT 12
Excuse me PuddleDuck, Why are you linking this event in Q'land with anti-vax? That is right up there with linking the Chch Mosque shootings with Anti-vax. Your arguement is getting increasingly un-hinged. There are always going to be bad people in our communities. They will do bad things. That is why we have security services. There were massacres and mass shootings a long time before covid and jabs. I've had to deal with people in London who thought the govt was going to spy on them via the water meters my project was installing. That was waaaayyyy before covid. Trying to link mass murderers who have gone tropo in outback Queensland with any logical debate is just a nonsense. It would have been the heat, the flies, the floods (or the drought) and the isolation. Effectively you are talking mental health issues. That all has nothing to do with the safety of vaccines and peoples views of it. |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Dec 14, 2022 14:18:14 GMT 12
More satire? Or have you completely lost the plot? Hard to tell.. The murdering fuckwits were well known conspiracy theorists. Among other things they were Anti-vax, believed that the vax was to reduce the population. What happens when something that was a conspiracy becomes a fact. Or at least has clear data supporting it? Is it still a conspiracy, or does it become a technical point of note? At what point does something with lots of supporting data become accepted as a fact? Anyone got the latest all cause mortality figures handy? Death rates do seem a bit high. While there is no causal link, there certainly appears to be a relationship between mandatory vaccine role out and increased sudden death... |
|
|
|
Post by Cantab on Dec 14, 2022 14:27:33 GMT 12
More addictive than Meth, amongst other things, making them illegal worked out real good didn't it?
Just feeding the gangs another income stream.
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 14, 2022 14:54:48 GMT 12
The murdering fuckwits were well known conspiracy theorists. Among other things they were Anti-vax, believed that the vax was to reduce the population. What happens when something that was a conspiracy becomes a fact. Or at least has clear data supporting it? Is it still a conspiracy, or does it become a technical point of note? At what point does something with lots of supporting data become accepted as a fact? Anyone got the latest all cause mortality figures handy? Death rates do seem a bit high. While there is no causal link, there certainly appears to be a relationship between mandatory vaccine role out and increased sudden death... But you don't actually believe that the purpose of the vaccine was to poison people and reduce the population. You actually understand that the purpose of this vaccine and every vaccine in history is to save lives. Further, you are also are not stupid enough to think that either the government, or big-pharma are involved in some conspiracy to reduce the population of the planet. That's a fundamental difference here. It's one thing to look at some data, acknowledge that your not a statistician, have an opinion of your own while you hunt out some more accurate information from the scientific community. But these people believed, via misinformation, that that was the purpose of this vaccine and all for that matter all previous vaccines. They unfortunately did not make this up on there own. Give a nutcase a ounce and they will make it into a metric-fuck-tonne. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2022 15:06:57 GMT 12
What happens when something that was a conspiracy becomes a fact. Or at least has clear data supporting it? Is it still a conspiracy, or does it become a technical point of note? At what point does something with lots of supporting data become accepted as a fact? Anyone got the latest all cause mortality figures handy? Death rates do seem a bit high. While there is no causal link, there certainly appears to be a relationship between mandatory vaccine role out and increased sudden death... But you don't actually believe that the purpose of the vaccine was to poison people and reduce the population. You actually understand that the purpose of this vaccine and every vaccine in history is to save lives. Further, you are also are not stupid enough to think that either the government, or big-pharma are involved in some conspiracy to reduce the population of the planet. That's a fundamental difference here. It's one thing to look at some data acknowledge that your not a statistician but have an opinion of your own while you hunt out some more accurate information from the scientific community. But these people believed, via misinformation, that that was the purpose of this vaccine and all for that matter all previous vaccines. Give a nutcase a ounce and they will make it into a metric-fuck-tonne. Please explain why the ceo of pfizer resigned?? I go with he knew there would consequences DEATHS unexplained |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 14, 2022 15:12:00 GMT 12
But you don't actually believe that the purpose of the vaccine was to poison people and reduce the population. You actually understand that the purpose of this vaccine and every vaccine in history is to save lives. Further, you are also are not stupid enough to think that either the government, or big-pharma are involved in some conspiracy to reduce the population of the planet. That's a fundamental difference here. It's one thing to look at some data acknowledge that your not a statistician but have an opinion of your own while you hunt out some more accurate information from the scientific community. But these people believed, via misinformation, that that was the purpose of this vaccine and all for that matter all previous vaccines. Give a nutcase a ounce and they will make it into a metric-fuck-tonne. Please explain why the ceo of pfizer resigned?? I go with he knew there would consequences DEATHS unexplained LOL. He has not resigned. But it was a great mis-information campaign wasn't it... ?! Obviously got you hook line and sinker... and you're one of the last people on here I would of expected to be gotten by that... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2022 15:26:32 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 14, 2022 15:30:06 GMT 12
Wow... Are you really talking about the 2010 CEO? 12 years ago? |
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Dec 14, 2022 15:51:03 GMT 12
So there's currently a mis-information campaign hitting social media that the CEO of Pfizer has resigned because mRNA was not ready.
He has neither resigned or stated that mRNA was not ready.
If you're talking about the CEO who resigned in 2010, per those links, then I have no idea why he resigned or any information about his term at Pfizer or what inconsequential deaths he was part of.
I invite you to enlighten me.
|
|
|
|
Post by fish on Dec 14, 2022 16:28:06 GMT 12
What happens when something that was a conspiracy becomes a fact. Or at least has clear data supporting it? Is it still a conspiracy, or does it become a technical point of note? At what point does something with lots of supporting data become accepted as a fact? Anyone got the latest all cause mortality figures handy? Death rates do seem a bit high. While there is no causal link, there certainly appears to be a relationship between mandatory vaccine role out and increased sudden death... But you don't actually believe that the purpose of the vaccine was to poison people and reduce the population. You actually understand that the purpose of this vaccine and every vaccine in history is to save lives. Further, you are also are not stupid enough to think that either the government, or big-pharma are involved in some conspiracy to reduce the population of the planet. That's a fundamental difference here. It's one thing to look at some data, acknowledge that your not a statistician, have an opinion of your own while you hunt out some more accurate information from the scientific community. But these people believed, via misinformation, that that was the purpose of this vaccine and all for that matter all previous vaccines. They unfortunately did not make this up on there own. Give a nutcase a ounce and they will make it into a metric-fuck-tonne. Trust, but verify. I don't really hold any strong beliefs (I like to think I'm fairly pragmatic), but if deaths go up after a mass vaccine roll-out, it does pose some question marks. The corollary is that if vaccines are designed to reduce death, and deaths are up, did the vaccine work? These questions are with the backdrop of the specter of human rights infringements, where people have been as near as practical forced to take the jab. We aren't talking minor sanctions here, we are talking exclusion from society, exclusion from careers and professions, and in many cases the loss of the persons home. One of the main fears (not beliefs) was that the development and testing of the jabs were too rushed. Nekminnit, everyone is dying. Now there is fairly clear evidence the vaccine isn't as safe as what we were told, that there is evidence that the development and testing was rushed, people are being branded as nut-jobs and conspiracy theorists. I would have thought a better term to describe those people is that they are right. Taking this back to the start, risk verse benefit of the jab. I have a vaccine injury - to the point that my income protection company has verified it - so I'm not talking a sore arm and redness for two days. My father had a vaccine injury. Medically verified but not formally linked to the vaccine (other than that it is heart related). I know of a handful of other people that had various vaccine injuries. Via my sister in-law, I know of one sudden death of a 14yr old male from heart issues that only developed post jab. So not counting media reported sudden deaths. But across that, I don't know of anyone that was hospitalised with covid. I haven't met or spoken to anyone that thought covid was any worse than the flu. I don't know of anyone, and aren't aware of anyone that died with or due to covid. Not even under the 28 day criteria. Given my above observations and personal experinces, I really wonder who to trust. So I listened lots to Jacinda Adern and Ashly Bloomfield. Given what I see happening with my own eyes (not internet or social media) I feel they lack credibility. So when someone on the internet / social media (Lets say Dr Guy Hatchard for example) says there are issues with the jab, and I see the FDA go to the Supreme Court (USA) and try to take 70 yrs to release the safety data, then I do start putting more trust in so-called conspiracy theorists than our govt. Noting I have a degree in vaccine manufacture and am perfectly comfortable reading technical and academic papers. I can usually (but not always) spot a load of twaddlebollocks. The vaccine clearly wasn't as safe as was said, and the people that were reluctant to get it were correct in their reluctance. They are not conspiracy theorist nut-jobs. They are right. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2022 16:56:19 GMT 12
Wow... Are you really talking about the 2010 CEO? 12 years ago? my badjust found a current article and informed my mate to checks dates  |
|
