|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Trust the CDC /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1645444967 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 02/21/22 at 04:02:47 |
|
Title: Trust the CDC Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/21/22 at 04:02:47 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/02/cdc-officials-admit-agency-withheld-critical-covid-information-public-including-data-breakthrough-infections-fears-vaccine-hesitancy/ I PRAY for Justice for these fukkin lying assholes |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Eegore on 02/21/22 at 04:31:40 But its cool that Thegatewaypundit lies, no issue there. Should the CDC release any information it has compiled and passes verification? Yes. Did they say they would do this? No. They said they would not. Did other sources omit this declaration? Yes. So if someone tells me they will not do something, should I be surprised when somebody else tells me that thing was not done? Its not right, but why would anyone expect all of the data to be released when we were told it wouldn't be? This is Fauci potential N95 mask shortage BS all over again. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by WebsterMark on 02/21/22 at 05:35:36 On another thread Eegore, you correctly argued passing along information which was later shown to be false was not lying since at the time, the evidence indicated the statement was true. Even though the gateway pundit is in my city, I very very rarely ever read what’s on his website. The only reason is because I’ve got other places I go to. I have no idea how reliable he is versus say CNN or MSNBC. My guess is probably pretty similar. My point is your first retort to Jog was TheGatewayPundint lies so they should be dismissed. But previous, as I mentioned on another thread, you more or less said that if you pass along information which is later proven to be false, that’s not a lie. So what did the gateway pundit lie about? Was it an opinion? Was it a statement of what they believe to be fact at the time that was later so not to be? Again, most of the mass media repeated the Russian lie for a period of years so should we label them as liars and dismiss everything they say forever? My work occasionally involves me with CDC members and I can tell you with absolute certainty they had members fully aware that the primary infection vector of Covid was respiratory droplets AND aerosols. Aerosols being the critical vector, but they (along with WHO) hesitated joining other organizations who said the focus on droplets was causing infections to spread. The WHO and CDC were hesitant and delayed this announcement by demanding more research because they were really terrified to use the word “airborne”. Point is The Gateway Pundit’s reporting might be completely accurate and if we’re gonna dismiss outright a partisan news organization, then we’re not left with anything. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by oldNslow on 02/21/22 at 07:08:57 Quote:
And let's not forget that even the so called "data" that we get from any government agency has very likely been massaged so that it is really no more than a press release from from a "partisan news organization" How many times does something that some Government agency swears is the absolute truth have to turn out to be utter bullsh*t, or something that they claim is bullsh*t turns out to be true, before it begins to dawn on some folks that the government can't be trusted? |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by MnSpring on 02/21/22 at 07:32:27 "...something that some Government agency swears is the absolute truth..." Kinna like the Chicken Noodle News parroting; "...President Joe Biden weighed in with a statement later on Monday and thanked the final US forces serving in Afghanistan for executing the "dangerous retrograde from Afghanistan as scheduled," with no further loss of American lives...." |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by buster6315 on 02/21/22 at 17:00:07 Yep boys and girls, we are loosing our country. These unelected bureaucrats holding back certain info. because we couldn't deal with it? They ought to be shot, or put behind bars, as was suggested above. Of course they will skate; powerful politicians will protect them. Corporations run the country, they've got the money. For the little man its more bondage. 250 years and we've come full circle. Tyranny. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Eegore on 02/21/22 at 20:13:56 "My point is your first retort to Jog was TheGatewayPundint lies so they should be dismissed. But previous, as I mentioned on another thread, you more or less said that if you pass along information which is later proven to be false, that’s not a lie." I didn't say they should be dismissed, I was attempting to convey that zero scrutiny of their incorrect publishing has happened, however on the flip side JoG will "PRAY for Justice for these fukkin lying assholes" if it is the CDC. However it is also ok to reference CDC publication as fact if it says something he agrees with. JoG also argues that if the CDC publishes information that somebody else intentionally alters, then the CDC are liars. Not the actual liar that altered the information or lied about what it said. If Thegatewatpundit publishes incorrect information there seems to be no reason to PRAY for Justice for those fukkin lying assholes. Why not? "Point is The Gateway Pundit’s reporting might be completely accurate" Given my research I would say Thegatewatpundit, by their own self-admission, has not been completely accurate. I would say they have intentionally lied, or to be specific they have on multiple occasions published information that is very false and proven so with minimal research. This is why they have a record of withdrawing their information, but by the time they do the damage has been done by means of thousands of people spreading information they won't bother to read. We compile spreadsheets on source accuracy and TGP scores very low, I think mostly because they will just post anything, and then see if it is true. So are they liars? They are liars in the same way I would be if I just posted anything I read on Facebook as fact, then "corrected" it only if somebody challenged it. "Again, most of the mass media repeated the Russian lie for a period of years so should we label them as liars and dismiss everything they say forever?" Again I don't use mass media as a reliable source of accurate information. This is one of the many reasons. I would have zero issue with anyone dismissing everything they say forever, I did that 20 years ago and have had very good results economically and socially in my life since. As for the CDC, I have never said we should trust them. I am familiar with scenarios as you describe. I have said if somebody else alters a CDC publication, calling the CDC liars makes no sense. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by WebsterMark on 02/22/22 at 05:35:44 You dismiss any findings of Project Veritas because of some event which I don’t recall which seems to have caused you to dismiss everything they put out. But I’m not getting into that discussion again so please don’t bother stating your case against them them. Point is, a small right wing independent pundit can come up with valuable nuggets. You know the name Monica Lewinsky right? You know why? |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by MnSpring on 02/22/22 at 07:34:09 7151535B4651340 wrote:
You have Pissed and moaned, time after time about JOG, and his saying CDC Lied, because new information has come out. I ask, "WHY", it is perfectly OK to parade around with a facsimile of a bloody head of a sitting POTUS. And it is not OK to say a DFI, FDS, junior elected person, has a mouth that is good for only one thing. (which has NOTHING to do with Bot, hand cream, and AOC appearances) |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Serowbot on 02/22/22 at 07:51:10 Here's one for you to worry about. ;D Hamsters’ Testicles Shrink After Being Infected With COVID, Study Finds https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgmb97/covid-19-testicles-damage?utm_source=anysubj.com |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by buster6315 on 02/22/22 at 08:42:55 7D6B7C61796C617A0E0 wrote:
Now there's a worthwhile study! |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by MnSpring on 02/22/22 at 08:57:29 7B6C6A6D7C6B2F2A282C190 wrote:
Now there's a worthwhile study![/quote] If you believe that c-19 was developed to be the start to controlling world population. It may be. Or it could be like a 'study', (funded by Taxpayers), that could discover a 2 p ecker billy goat, in the remote area of the Indies. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Serowbot on 02/22/22 at 10:43:30 283F393E2F387C797B7F4A0 wrote:
Now there's a worthwhile study![/quote] I know, right? And now I'm very worried for my hamster. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Eegore on 02/22/22 at 11:03:15 "You dismiss any findings of Project Veritas because of some event which I don’t recall which seems to have caused you to dismiss everything they put out. But I’m not getting into that discussion again so please don’t bother stating your case against them them." I don't dismiss them, I verify instead of pretending they didn't admit to editing multiple videos to portray answers to questions out of order - after they were challenged. Why I should be expected to ignore that very-provable fact I have no idea. This expectation that one source is always lying, (unless they say something you like then that one time only its the truth), and then to ignore the manipulation of others makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't we verify the information of every single source equally? |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Eegore on 02/22/22 at 11:07:22 "You have Pissed and moaned, time after time about JOG, and his saying CDC Lied, because new information has come out." Incorrect. I have said that if the CDC posts publicly information as well as making recorded statements, and Another Source alters that information JoG says the CDC lied. Not the liar that changed what the CDC posted. If I make a video and write a manual showing I clean a carb with carb cleaner, and then MnSpring posts on Facebook that I use dish soap to clean a carb, JoG will say I am a liar. "I ask, "WHY", it is perfectly OK to parade around with a facsimile of a bloody head of a sitting POTUS. And it is not OK to say a DFI, FDS, junior elected person, has a mouth that is good for only one thing." I never said it was ok to parade around with anything, I have never commented on that topic. Keep asking and I will keep saying I have no comment. I already answered many many times about AOC. This is a privately moderated forum. One Moderator does not want statements that the Moderator perceives as offensive to women posted on this privately moderated forum. This answer is the same no matter how many times you ask. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by MnSpring on 02/22/22 at 12:23:35 6646444C5146230 wrote:
WOW And you keep saying, the Red Car/Bank Robbery, is a, 'bad', analogy ! LOLOLOLOL "... I don't dismiss them, I verify instead..." So of all the rest, (where Veritas did not, portray answers to questions out of order) You have verified all of their exposing; Corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, lying, misconduct, etc.etc.etc. ? |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Eegore on 02/22/22 at 12:55:50 "So of all the rest, (where Veritas did not, portray answers to questions out of order) You have verified all of their exposing; Corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, lying, misconduct, etc.etc.etc. ?" I have verified the information I have used as reference. I just don't pretend they haven't altered content and therefore share it as fact without personal verification. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by WebsterMark on 02/23/22 at 04:17:44 Back to the original point…. The CDC purposely mislead, not unintentionally mislead. They did so because they felt lying was a means to an end. Every individual does that at one time or another, politicians do it as a matter of course and governments do it as a matter of policy. The CDC is a political organization so it misleads as a matter of policy. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by Eegore on 02/23/22 at 13:42:14 "The CDC purposely mislead, not unintentionally mislead. They did so because they felt lying was a means to an end." Right. You can't have everyone panicking. Remember the old duct-tape your doors and windows guidance? Why didn't they just pull that one out? |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/24/22 at 16:44:00 I did Not Know that figuring out you are being lied to about the benefits of the jab and being treated like a criminal for not wanting to relinquish your life while you Watch the Experts be wrong, time after time, is something akin to Panic. If the goal is to Not panic, they, the Experts, did it wrong again. Everything they DID was to Panic people into taking the jab. And we,those of us who have watched the Experts be wrong over the years, who have seen them lie,,, We who will not take the jab,being called conspiracy theorist and treated like we want to watch people die, are slowly being vindicated. RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA Hillary paid for that bogus nuts. And will never pay FOR it. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by MnSpring on 02/25/22 at 07:16:30 504F494E53546555655D4F43083A0 wrote:
And when the FEAR did not work fast enough, It was, 'FORCED TO', that took it's place. |
|
Title: Re: Trust the CDC Post by MnSpring on 03/01/22 at 07:44:40 Why ? Nov 2021 “… Mayo Clinic and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunizations Practices strongly recommend that children 5[ch8210]11 be vaccinated for COVID-19…” https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/tips-to-help-make-getting-a-covid-19-vaccine-less-scary-for-kids/ 4 months later. Feb 2022 “…Pfizer Covid vaccine was just 12% effective against omicron in kids 5 to 11, study finds…” https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/28/pfizer-covid-vaccine-was-just-12percent-effective-against-omicron-in-kids-5-to-11-study-finds.html And from the CDC: No date on article/information. Yet it is up as of March 2022. “…Currently, children ages 5 through 11 years are eligible to receive the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Children ages 6 months through 4 years may soon become eligible for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccinepdf icon….” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/planning/children.html This: “…Expanding the COVID-19 vaccination recommendation to children ages 5 through 11 years paves the way for 28 million more children to receive the vaccine….” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/planning/children.html#covid19-vax-recommendations https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/planning/children/equity-barriers.html Begs the answer. Is the recommendation for, health, of the children, or some, other, reason. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |