Opinion INTERNATIONAL Politics: Adelaide Board Discussion Part 5

[Eagleboy2011]

CNN's ratings are plummeting for a reason. Cartoon News Network.

 

[1970crow]

Its in the Constitution Amendment XIV. Perhaps read the actual wording. They want to change it, do so in terms of the Constitution.

I’m pretty sure if the people knew about semi-automatic weapons in 1791, the might not have agreed to Amendment 2 but here we are.

Geez you have some weird takes. If they'd known that the invading forces were arriving with automatic weapons you can be absolutely certain that the amendment would have passed.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Trump's executive orders reminded me of



Now, a few more details about this year's company picnic; it's at the plant, no food will be served, the only activity will be work, and the picnic is cancelled.

 

[1970crow]

Interesting. So the next question would be are the US population willing to have a 82 year old vice-president?

And another thing, why would Vance want to give up the Presidency given all the perks you get with it. If you asked most US citizens they would struggle to give you any vice-presidents name, only Presidents are remembered.

Selena Meyer

 

[rocket18]

Geez you have some weird takes. If they'd known that the invading forces were arriving with automatic weapons you can be absolutely certain that the amendment would have passed.

No, no.

In KirkyWorld where men can get pregnant he expects US citizens to get their muskets out if they need to go against opposing forces that have automatic weapons.

"Geez, hold on guys I need to get my powder, wad, ball and flint organised before you start"

 

[1970crow]

Yeh? Nah. What are we day 3.

Trump says he can end the Russia-Ukraine war in one day. Russia's UN ambassador says he can't

The comments by Vassily Nebenzia, Russia’s United Nations ambassador, come as Donald Trump has repeatedly said he can settle the war between Russia and Ukraine in one day if he’s elected president again.

apnews.com

Has he started on it yet? Did he say on day 1 or in 1 day, you know they're different things right?

 

[Crow till I die]

Yeh? Nah. What are we day 3.

Trump says he can end the Russia-Ukraine war in one day. Russia's UN ambassador says he can't

The comments by Vassily Nebenzia, Russia’s United Nations ambassador, come as Donald Trump has repeatedly said he can settle the war between Russia and Ukraine in one day if he’s elected president again.

apnews.com

Not sure if you have been in a coma or not, but he has already got about solving the immigration disaster inherited, he has gotten rid of DEI and he has got DOGE underway with savings already being made for the taxpayer. Not bad for 3 days in...i mean he has done more in 1 day than biden in 4 years so you should be cheering him on from the rooftops

 

[Crow till I die]

No, no.

In KirkyWorld where men can get pregnant he expects US citizens to get their muskets out if they need to go against opposing forces that have automatic weapons.

"Geez, hold on guys I need to get my powder, wad, ball and flint organised before you start"

Blunderbus

 

[OneGreatClub]

He said he knew nothing about Project 25…

 

[ringo200]

https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-hits-nih-devastating-freezes-meetings-travel-communications-and-hiring

A reminder that Trump's pick to head the NIH spent the entire pandemic being wrong about everything and whinging about being attacked and silenced when this was pointed out, and now does victory laps about how he was actually right all along because truth, science, evidence are only useful when they are on your side for these people.

Bhattacharya co-authored the Great Barrington declaration outlining a focused protection approach to COVID.

To argue for this he used a paper he co-authored which claimed that COVID had a much lower mortality rate than others were suggesting because many more people than we realised had actually already caught COVID. At the time many pointed out the errors in his paper which predicted a death toll of roughly 20-40 thousand in America if 100 million Americans caught COVID. You can look up yourself how many actually died and how accurate he was here.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464

His co-author would later describe this estimate as 'way off', Bhattacharya just claims he was providing a range of estimates that included a lower and a higher range. If you read his article it is very clear that he was trying to argue the high range estimates which turned out to be pretty correct were flawed, and that the lower figures he was presenting were what we should be basing our response on.

Based on this inaccurate prediction he suggested the best response would be to protect the vulnerable (how? not really clear. Who is defined as vulnerable? not really clear but could be up to 1/3 of the population depending on how it's defined) while in their words "maximizing" infections among the non-vulnerable.

Great Barrington Declaration FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions about the Great Barrington Declaration.

gbdeclaration.org

Notice that some of the same people that argue we shouldn't be giving "experimental" vaccines to children were also arguing that we should be "maximising" the amount of children getting infected with a virus that at the time we knew very little about. We did not put the virus through phase 3 clinical trials, we had no idea what long term effects there would be, we had no idea what future variants might do to children.

Focused protection was a disaster in theory and in practice. In reality the way to protect the vulnerable was to reduce transmission among everyone.

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/sweden-failed-to-protect-elderly-in-covid-pandemic-commission-finds-idUSKBN28P1QC/

Critical weaknesses in shielding strategies for COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has led to a wide range of non-pharmaceutical interventions being implemented around the world to curb transmission. However, the economic and social costs of some of these measures, especially lockdowns, has been high. An alternative...

journals.plos.org

even under the unrealistic assumption of perfect shielding, hospitals would have been rapidly overwhelmed with many avoidable deaths among lower risk individuals. Crucially, even a small (20%) reduction in the effectiveness of shielding would have likely led to a large increase (>150%) in the number of deaths compared to perfect shielding. Our findings demonstrate that shielding the vulnerable while allowing infections to spread among the wider population would not have been a viable public health strategy for COVID-19 and is unlikely to be effective for future pandemics

This isn't a hindsight thing, this was obvious at the time

Public health organizations condemn herd immunity scheme for controlling spread of SARS-CoV-2

apha.org

the recommendations in the Great Barrington Declaration would haphazardly and unnecessarily sacrifices lives. The declaration is not a strategy, it is a political statement. It ignores sound public health expertise. It preys on a frustrated populace. Instead of selling false hope that will predictably backfire, we must focus on how to manage this pandemic in a safe, responsible and equitable way.

The suggestions put forth by the Great Barrington Declaration are NOT based in science.

As far as I can tell the main evidence they have that they were right is that people did not like lockdowns or school closures, which I mean, of course.

The new administration is an attack on science and truth. Even the ones that actually have relevant credentials are willing to fall in line and use the respectability of their titles to sane wash people like RFK jnr, pretending that he just has some reasonable concerns despite spending his entire life spouting nothing but unreasonable concerns.

 

[OneGreatClub]

https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-hits-nih-devastating-freezes-meetings-travel-communications-and-hiring

A reminder that Trump's pick to head the NIH spent the entire pandemic being wrong about everything and whinging about being attacked and silenced when this was pointed out, and now does victory laps about how he was actually right all along because truth, science, evidence are only useful when they are on your side for these people.

Bhattacharya co-authored the Great Barrington declaration outlining a focused protection approach to COVID.

To argue for this he used a paper he co-authored which claimed that COVID had a much lower mortality rate than others were suggesting because many more people than we realised had actually already caught COVID. At the time many pointed out the errors in his paper which predicted a death toll of roughly 20-40 thousand in America if 100 million Americans caught COVID. You can look up yourself how many actually died and how accurate he was here.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464

His co-author would later describe this estimate as 'way off', Bhattacharya just claims he was providing a range of estimates that included a lower and a higher range. If you read his article it is very clear that he was trying to argue the high range estimates which turned out to be pretty correct were flawed, and that the lower figures he was presenting were what we should be basing our response on.

Based on this inaccurate prediction he suggested the best response would be to protect the vulnerable (how? not really clear. Who is defined as vulnerable? not really clear but could be up to 1/3 of the population depending on how it's defined) while in their words "maximizing" infections among the non-vulnerable.

Great Barrington Declaration FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions about the Great Barrington Declaration.

gbdeclaration.org

Notice that some of the same people that argue we shouldn't be giving "experimental" vaccines to children were also arguing that we should be "maximising" the amount of children getting infected with a virus that at the time we knew very little about. We did not put the virus through phase 3 clinical trials, we had no idea what long term effects there would be, we had no idea what future variants might do to children.

Focused protection was a disaster in theory and in practice. In reality the way to protect the vulnerable was to reduce transmission among everyone.

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/sweden-failed-to-protect-elderly-in-covid-pandemic-commission-finds-idUSKBN28P1QC/

View attachment 2209730

Critical weaknesses in shielding strategies for COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has led to a wide range of non-pharmaceutical interventions being implemented around the world to curb transmission. However, the economic and social costs of some of these measures, especially lockdowns, has been high. An alternative...

journals.plos.org

This isn't a hindsight thing, this was obvious at the time

Public health organizations condemn herd immunity scheme for controlling spread of SARS-CoV-2

apha.org

As far as I can tell the main evidence they have that they were right is that people did not like lockdowns or school closures, which I mean, of course.

The new administration is an attack on science and truth. Even the ones that actually have relevant credentials are willing to fall in line and use the respectability of their titles to sane wash people like RFK jnr, pretending that he just has some reasonable concerns despite spending his entire life spouting nothing but unreasonable concerns.

God help us when the next pandemic hits

 

[OneGreatClub]

lol just lol.
You’ve been conned.

 

[Slippery Pete]

In KirkyWorld where men can get pregnant

What’s interesting is, although they are all losing their minds over there, I haven’t heard ANY of them complain about Trump obliterating DEI and sicko gender ideology.

kirky and his boomer mate footy4ever , would be secretly agreeing with this move from Trump, but can’t say it out loud over there, as their rabid Commie mates will have them burnt at the stake.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

People posting images of their losses on TrumpCoin is my schadenfreude therapy. There are plenty of people to voted for Trump that will be screwed by his policies but it doesn't feel right to laugh at somebody being deported or losing their healthcare. With Cryptobros however, it's totally guilt free.

This one was a different meme coin but it never stops being funny.

 

[StonesThrow]

They are not the personality types who say whoops, sorry I made a mistake or i was wrong.

I don't mean say sorry, I mean just come out and say yeah it was and so what. They're are no consequences

 

[Slippery Pete]

As far as I can tell the main evidence they have that they were right is that people did not like lockdowns or school closures, which I mean, of course.

You make it sound like it’s a parking fine. “They did not like it”

Truly shocking that people “did not like” having their nation’s economy destroyed, their small business wiped out, their physical and mental wellbeing torched, and their kids’ education obliterated.

But hey. People will whinge about anything.

The people like you with nothing at stake — who sat in front of a laptop at home for two years — you’re the real heroes.

 

[Slippery Pete]

lol just lol.
You’ve been conned.

I thought you were gonna post the stuff about mRNA technology.

What do I have to do for you to take another few Covid vaccines? Just name it, I’ll do anything.

 

[GROTTO]

Not sure if you have been in a coma or not, but he has already got about solving the immigration disaster inherited, he has gotten rid of DEI and he has got DOGE underway with savings already being made for the taxpayer. Not bad for 3 days in...i mean he has done more in 1 day than biden in 4 years so you should be cheering him on from the rooftops

He had more important things to do first.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

How easy is this. What did Biden do apart from starting wars to sell weapons.

 

[ADL9798]

Keep in mind that for the true believers there has been a decade long campaign of constant and intense criticism of mainstream media, academia, science and scientists, researchers. All of which obviously has some truth to it, I’m not aware of a perfect source of information yet.

But this allows the true believers to live in a world where nothing could ever really challenge their world view, there never has to be a moment of cognitive discomfort where you wonder if you may have got something wrong.

News article I don’t like it’s just because they’re biased. Academics say x but that’s just because they’re all ideologically compromised. Scientists say y but that’s just because they’re getting paid.

For the true believers it really does feel as close to the Orwell you must not just say 2+2=5 you must truly believe it as we have seen from a political movement.

Ted Cruz came out and accused a news site of lying for saying Musk appeared to do a fascist salute, something which is pretty clearly true. To be in the good graces of the party you must reject what your eyes tell you and listen to us.

Of course you should be aware of bias, financial interests etc.. but I’m not sure getting your information from Mike Cernovich instead of mainstream news is a step towards reality.

The centre-right have been on a slippery slope, digging themselves into a deeper and deeper hole for a while now.

You have to ask why they get so viscerally upset when people merely point out what are to any sane person, more and more obvious examples of christofascist theocracy influencing what was once a moderate led political right?

Increasingly, people are not only favouring one side of politics or the other, they are welding their entire identity and investing 100% of their self esteem and happiness into the trials and tribulations of 'their' political party. In extreme cases, they weld themselves to a single politician.

It's not enough to say you support most of a politician's policies but disagree with others, you need to support every single word that comes out of their mouth and excuse or ignore any and all repugnant behaviour no matter what.

You only need to look at some of the posters in the US Politics thread to see how deranged this cult-like behaviour has become for Trump supporters.

When your core beliefs and values are no longer your own but those of your political party, accepting the fact that fascist ideology is increasingly becoming mainstream for right wing politics is now an attack on you personally. It's tantamount to that person calling you a fascist.

The cognitive dissonance is overwhelming.

Rather than accepting this and taking the opportunity to create some separation between their core beliefs and values and those of their political party, their brain melts. It's much easier for these people to lash out at the messenger or dismiss every and any source of information as 'fake news' than to confront this reality.

The selectiveness of this is also hilarious. While throwing a tantrum any time it's even vaguely insinuated that any of their political team have done or said something a bit fascist, they will happily call anyone outside this bubble a communist. This is called projection.

 

[jenny61_99]

It's laughable the whataboutism shit.

Taking a still from a vid at a perfect time without any context at all...AND IT'S WITH HIS LEFT ARM LOLOLOL The Hitler Nazi salute is always right arm.

" was used as a greeting in Nazi Germany. The salute is performed by extending the right arm from the shoulder into the air with a straightened hand."


LOLOL Eagleboy2011 you've been sucked in yet again. You make a perfect Trumpite!

Someone I know posted this on FB today. A quick run through the "is this photo legit? app" soon proved it be altered/manipulated.

 

[jenny61_99]

My take on Elon salute - although it clearly looks like it, I’m 90% sure he didn’t mean it with Nazi intentions (that’d be low for anyone)

But holy **** how could you not have the foresight to think about what you are actually doing on such a public platform

I don’t want someone with such lack of foresight, and plain silliness in actions, as one of the world’s highest-tier voices

How they hell you came to that conclusion is beyond me. 100% it was the intended movement.

 

[arrowman]

We all tend to judge the words and deeds of public figures based on our prejudices/ preconceptions. We cut more slack for people we agree with, we judge those we disagree with more harshly. It's natural, it's human nature, and it's something you have to work on if you want to judge objectively.

But if you really believe that Musk was intentionally performing a literal Nazi salute, I'm sorry, but your brain is broken.

 

[Cap]

We all tend to judge the words and deeds of public figures based on our prejudices/ preconceptions. We cut more slack for people we agree with, we judge those we disagree with more harshly. It's natural, it's human nature, and it's something you have to work on if you want to judge objectively.

But if you really believe that Musk was intentionally performing a literal Nazi salute, I'm sorry, but your brain is broken.

Have tolerance and understanding for the Nazi salute guy but not boys and girls that are born a little different

I think that sums you up perfectly

 

[OneGreatClub]

Someone I know posted this on FB today. A quick run through the "is this photo legit? app" soon proved it be altered/manipulated.View attachment 2209840

This is definitely real
Though