FACT vs OPINION

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

...The old ways of controlling the world no longer work. Now we have cell phones. The entire world has them, even starving people (they get a better rate). Someone has to guard the henhouse. Looks like it will be the fox.

I wonder, does the opening chorus of Carmina Burana roll through your mind as you're typing this stuff?

Once again, if you're going to make extraordinary claims they you are require to provide extraordinary evidence. But the real problem with buying into mass Illuminati-driven conspiracy theories is that you then miss all the horror that is really happening.

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

Mike,



Just for the record I work for a smalll local business (a restaurant group of about 6 restaurants/bars) that has taken a stand against local ordinances such as mask mandates and lock downs/business closures. And I've seen the trend of small businesses taking this stand increase in Florida over the last few weeks. It's not that the businesses are against masks per se, but rather that they are mandated. They specifically have company policies that we not bring up the subject of masks to customers (they feel confronting customers can be a risk and that it isn't their place to do so). They have a policy of wellness checks at the beginning of shifts, a supportive policy of helping employees that maybe infected on getting tested and to isolate at home if needed, and onsite sanitation policies. If it was not for the local policy of the city government of fining individual employees (which I've seen them do, so it's not just a threat but a reality) they would have a policy of masks optional (both at the option of the employee and the client, with the client's desire outweighing ours).



In Naples, FL which has a mask mandate but allows for medication exceptions a local business posted a sign stating that due to HIPPA rules they will not ask about a person not wearing a mask.



Large corporations have chosen to follow a strict mask policy. I'd wager this is because it is easier for them to make a single overriding policy that covers all their locations vs allowing for individual locations to provide guidance on measures that are appropriate for their location. Plus the added benefit of virtual signaling as a PR/marketing point (boomers still have a lot of money to spend before they die).



For our business clientele the Covid19 virus just isn't the threat (in my opinion) to warrant the loss of business / loss of dining experience to warrant the lockdown/masking measures. And in our industry masks do affect the business, causing a loss in tips (money for employees) and fewer sales for the business owner. My personal opinion is that the loss is not worth the wearing of a mask.



Also, as our owner has taken legal action and publicly commented against the local city's handling of the issue I've seen support both online and in person by citizens for his actions. So there is a market for those with similar opinion. As the owner group won't force a vaccination on their employees I guess I'll still be able to be part of a community and live a normal life lol.



For the record, I'm not an anti-vaxxer but I'll wait until they do a first few rounds before making a decision on whether to take it or not (Microsoft / Apple has taught me never to be the first to get the update). I think masks are marginally useful but go along to get along. I don't think the threat of the virus is worth the crushing response to it (and I was watching China in January and thought that numbers were going to be horrendous, and had made a list of 6 or so family members I thought would be dead by now, of which none have been affected). I don't deny there is a virus, I just think that when you look at overall deaths on a 5 - 10 year graph, 2020 will be a minor blip.

This is refreshing to hear, also one of the reasons I now call this state home.

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

Mike, I'm an extreme libertarian so my redline was way before the seat belt laws lol.



I was just giving input on your comment that some people would be locked out of a society without a vaccine. While large corporations have very similar policies and rules, as long as independent businesses are allowed to operate there will be ways around.

I wouldn’t say that’s extreme at all.

That’s how all Americans who claim to support the bill of rights and individual liberty should think.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I wonder, does the opening chorus of Carmina Burana roll through your mind as you're typing this stuff? ........

Are you a psychic?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJC-_j3SnXk

I am adding an excerpt (published today) from a blog that you guys won't click on. (for you to read while you enjoy the music):
2009, La Gloria, Mexico. Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the world, operates a giant pig farm. 950,000 pigs.

The urine and feces from these 950,000 pigs run out into the open air and forms what are called lagoons. They’re so large, you can see them from outer space.

Workers spray the toxic lagoons with a toxic foam. It’s routine.

Workers, and people in the surrounding neighborhood, are getting sick and dying. So new contractors are brought in to spray the lagoons with yet another toxic chemical.

Out of nowhere, guess who shows up? The CDC.

Guess what they conclude? It’s not the urine and feces lagoons or the toxic chemicals causing illness and death. No. Of course not.

It’s a new mysterious virus. H1N1.

And voila, we have a new cover story and a new epidemic, called Swine Flu.

The cover story serves a number of purposes, as time passes. But the most obvious one is: Smithfield Foods is protected. They get away with murder.

And to cap it all off, four years later, in 2013, Smithfield, still protected, sells itself to a Chinese company, Shuanghui International Holdings, for $4.72 billion.

Makes you wonder. I can imagine a few Chinese intelligence professionals sitting in a room in Beijing, in 2013, expressing astonishment. “Can you believe the CDC? They sold a cover story about a virus that was so ridiculous…but it worked. Suppose we followed suit, but on a grand scale? We claim an outbreak is occurring in one of our cities. We invite the CDC and the World Health Organization to come in and help. There is no virus, but we know they’ll ‘find a new one.’ They always do. Then, boom. We do something no one has ever done before. We lock down 50 million people overnight and provide a model to the rest of the world. Other countries line up and lock down their populations, wrecking their economies. Meanwhile, we announce China has ‘recovered,’ we cancel our lockdowns and put everybody back to work. It’s a war with no shots fired, and we win. Do you think we could pull it off? Do you think we could sell it? Maybe we should talk to Bill Gates. He’s a smart guy. He always has interesting ideas…”

[dwedeking2]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

A good example: If a restaurant gets a reputation for being dirty, and serving tainted food that makes their customers sick, how long do you think that place will stay in business? Customers vote with their feet.

But Mike this example doesn't require any government input.

I totally agree that a business should research the threat to their clients and employees and devise a program that solves the problem and meets their business goals. Those that get it wrong go out of business, those that get it right survive.

My employer has a plan in place that is 100% wellness checks before work, encourages employees to not come in if not feeling well (don't even show up to report sick), assistance with testing, and financial assistance if employees need to be isolated. A increased program for cleaning above what they were doing before before Covid19.



This business has also been targeted by local code enforcement due to the owners outspoken public position.



When operating a small business having some stability in the marketplace is essential to staying open. You just don't have the resources to adjust to last minute rule changes or to survive complete lockdowns. I read in the paper how one Los Angeles restaurant was shut down, spent $40k to implement new safety devices and programs, were allowed to reopen. The following day the county shut down all restaurants. Instant bankruptcy and the end of a life project.


And I'm working on making my self sustainable 41' island

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

But Mike this example doesn't require any government input.

Guess we've crossed meanings somewhere. I wasn't talking about a government mandate. I was suggesting that institutions and businesses will respond as per their own needs, which hopefully overlaps with the needs of the customers and staff.

I think some institutions like schools and government offices that are government-run might also institute the same policies. But I expect it will come from the basic sense of community good, and if that doesn't work, good-old self interest.

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

This business has also been targeted by local code enforcement due to the owners outspoken public position.

I really feel for small business in these times of woe. They aren't being treated fairly, and they are at huge disadvantage to their big-box competitors. Our province of Manitoba has recognized this and banned these big boxes from selling non-essential items. This is in an effort to even a small part of the playing field.

It's not fair ... but sadly, life never is.

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

And I'm working on making my self sustainable 41' island

Now yer talkin' . Wish I could say the same. Government restrictions has meant I haven't even laid eyes on my boat in over a year now. And I'm not too hopefully this will change in 2021. At this rate I may have to resign from CF .

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Government restrictions has meant I haven't even laid eyes on my boat in over a year now.

Would you talk about this some more. I want to learn why exactly. A boat needs maintenance and security. I don't understand how this rule mitigates any risk.

UFO posted this link on the other thread:https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/...OVfTLGwvhMHR_c
It blows the Wuhan narrative out of the water. The so-called COVID was in Italy before October 2019. I suspect it has been around longer than that. There was a vicious flu like illness in Guatemala in Nov/Dec 2018. Could that have been COVID?

[GordMay]

[QUOTE=Mike OReilly;3287229... Both provinces claim that this is based on their own data regarding spread. I don't have the bandwidth to confirm this. Maybe you do Gord? ...[/QUOTE]
I have NO idea, why governments do/decide the things they do/decide. Transparency of actual reasoning (motives) is, apparently, not a political strength.

[Thumbs Up]

I would like to know how many of the COVID assigned deaths were actually the result of experimental medical treatments.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

I would like to know how many of the COVID assigned deaths were actually the result of experimental medical treatments.

43, but that's just my opinion.
Wait - it may be a fact! ➥ https://www.realclearscience.com/blo...verything.html

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

Would you talk about this some more. I want to learn why exactly. A boat needs maintenance and security. I don't understand how this rule mitigates any risk.

This will take us off onto another tangent, and I think it's discussed elsewhere, so I'm not sure it's worth bringing up again, but since you asked...

My boat is in Newfoundland. They have taken one of the more extreme approaches to the pandemic. They have basically barred all non-residents from entry. I sailed there a few seasons ago, but my official residence is elsewhere, even though in reality my only real home is my boat.

So I've been rather deeply affected by all this stuff. But I still understand and appreciate why Newfoundland has taken these measures. And while I don't like it, I remember, it's not (only) about me .

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I have NO idea, why governments do/decide the things they do/decide. Transparency of actual reasoning (motives) is, apparently, not a political strength.

As they say, the lords move in mysterious ways .

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

......
Out of nowhere, guess who shows up? The CDC.

Guess what they conclude? It’s not the urine and feces lagoons or the toxic chemicals causing illness and death. No. Of course not.

It’s a new mysterious virus. H1N1.

And voila, we have a new cover story and a new epidemic, called Swine Flu.

Here's alternative way of seeing things.

Influenza A virus has been killing people for a long time, at least 100 years (even if we had different names back then for the same viruses).

Long ago it was recognized that influenza tends to hang out in birds and pigs and field research/monitoring of influenza has been ongoing for decades in pig/poultry farms, also monitoring # of people catching what/where/when.

They do this to track changes in the viruses, see what's more likely to kill who/when and come up with vaccines to try to provide protection against viruses deemed most likely to give problems. Think of them as bird watchers of sorts. They're always out there looking.

Flu shots have been manufactured for many decades, but you need to understand that every year it's a different flu shot. In fact each flu shot targets 3 different flu strains (each with names like H1N4, H3N5, etc; typically two A, one B strain). The strains are selected based on what the research suggests is most likely to kill the most people in the next year.

The link below describes research in Mexico. In the paper you see terms where they describe parts of the viruses that get shared among different sub-types of the virus.

It makes no sense for someone to say "They showed up to the pig farm, saw nastiness, then decided to make a flu shot" because that is (making a new vaccine subtype) is what happens every single year anyway.

The guys publishing this stuff are ordinary people. If they are cogs in a machine, their machine usually helps people a lot. I suggest to you that the people pushing the stuff in your link are much more the thought manipulators than these guys are. They are showing you their work, and with some online study, you can understand it all yourself. They're basically talking about Legos (genetics) and how Legos/genetics move around.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4957980/

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Singularity

Here's alternative way of seeing things.

Influenza A virus has been killing people for a long time, at least 100 years (even if we had different names back then for the same viruses).

Long ago it was recognized that influenza tends to hang out in birds and pigs and field research/monitoring of influenza has been ongoing for decades in pig/poultry farms, also monitoring # of people catching what/where/when.

They do this to track changes in the viruses, see what's more likely to kill who/when and come up with vaccines to try to provide protection against viruses deemed most likely to give problems. Think of them as bird watchers of sorts. They're always out there looking.

Flu shots have been manufactured for many decades, but you need to understand that every year it's a different flu shot. In fact each flu shot targets 3 different flu strains (each with names like H1N4, H3N5, etc; typically two A, one B strain). The strains are selected based on what the research suggests is most likely to kill the most people in the next year.

The link below describes research in Mexico. In the paper you see terms where they describe parts of the viruses that get shared among different sub-types of the virus.

It makes no sense for someone to say "They showed up to the pig farm, saw nastiness, then decided to make a flu shot" because that is (making a new vaccine subtype) is what happens every single year anyway.

The guys publishing this stuff are ordinary people. If they are cogs in a machine, their machine usually helps people a lot. I suggest to you that the people pushing the stuff in your link are much more the thought manipulators than these guys are. They are showing you their work, and with some online study, you can understand it all yourself. They're basically talking about Legos (genetics) and how Legos/genetics move around.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4957980/

They made a national emergency, wanted to declare a pandemic. The CDC was caught red handed and had to admit that they had stopped counting cases but were instead making up the numbers. This is proof that they lie to us and try to fabricate pandemics. It is an important article and was CBSnews! Sharyl Attkisson resigned from CBS and is an investigative reporter who hosts Fullmeasurenews.Home | Full Measure She is credible. The study you linked could well be a cover-up. I didn't read it too closely and even if I did am apparently not qualified to make any judgment on it. I am sure that the authors of the study were not in it, scientific research stays pretty compartmentalized. I think that you will find half a dozen more similar studies corroborating their narrative and paid for with our taxes.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/swine-f...overestimated/

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

They made a national emergency, wanted to declare a pandemic. The CDC was caught red handed and had to admit that they had stopped counting cases but were instead making up the numbers. This is proof that they lie to us ...
... She is credible. The study you linked could well be a cover-up. I didn't read it too closely ...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/swine-f...overestimated/

“Swine Flu Cases Overestimated?” ~ by Sharyl Attkisson (CBS, October 21, 2009)
➥ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/swine-f...overestimated/

Sharyl Attkisson is a right wing ideologue (somewhat irrelevant to this discussion), and a rabid anti-vaxxer (relevant). Anything she writes, even remotely related to vaccination, should be rigorously fact checked, due to her opposition to vaccination. On this subject, she’s not reliable.

It is true that the CDC official surveillance stopped requiring lab confirmation for flu-related deaths on August 30 (2009). During the initial months of the pandemic, the CDC was requiring lab confirmation for all flu deaths in order to assess the prevalence of the disease, Llelwyn Grant of the CDC explained to FactCheck.org. After August 30, it returned to the usual method of reporting, which counts all deaths from influenza- or pneumonia-related symptoms, not just those that have been lab-confirmed as flu. (Limiting the count to lab-confirmed flu deaths would probably result in underreporting of flu mortality — flu tests often aren’t performed, according to the CDC, and influenza only shows up in tests for a limited time.) There were about 593 deaths related to H1N1 in the four months before the CDC stopped requiring lab confirmation.
But the CDC still kept track of reported lab test results, and even did some testing. For the week of October 11-17, for instance, there were 12,943 tests reported, of which 4,855, or 37.5 percent, were positive for influenza. Of those, 3,378 were confirmed to be influenza A subtype H1N1, or swine flu. Most of the rest weren’t tested for subtype, but these were also likely to be subtype H1N1.
About 60.8 million cases of H1N1 (“Swine Flu”) affected the USA, from April 12, 2009, to April 10, 2010, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
A vaccine, for the swine flu, became available about five months after the first confirmed U.S. case, and access opened to the general public, in late December 2009. The WHO announced the end of the pandemic Aug. 11, 2010, 14 months after the first U.S. case.

“... On May 4, 2009, CDC shifted from reporting confirmed cases of 2009 H1N1 to reporting both confirmed and probable cases of 2009 H1N1. At that point, more than 98% of “probable” flu virus samples were testing positive for 2009 H1N1, indicating the ever-growing scale of the outbreak. Probable cases were reported to CDC by state health departments and occurred in people who tested positive for influenza A and negative for seasonal influenza A(H1N1) and A(H3N2) subtypes at their state health department laboratory, but whose samples had not had confirmatory testing for the 2009 H1N1 influenza viru ...
... CDC continued to work with the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) to enhance surveillance for 2009 H1N1 influenza. As 2009 H1N1 cases continued to occur through the spring and summer, the task of counting cases became increasingly difficult. On May 12, 2009, CDC transitioned from reporting individual confirmed and probable cases of 2009 H1N1 influenza to reporting aggregate counts of 2009 H1N1 lab confirmed and probable cases, hospitalizations and deaths with the launch of an aggregate reporting web site. Once the numbers of cases increased beyond the point where counting of individual cases was practical, on July 23, 2009, CDC reported the number of 2009 cases for the last time. Reporting of 2009 H1N1 hospitalizations and deaths continued. In addition, CDC continued using its traditional surveillance systems to track the progress of the 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak. Traditional surveillance systems do not count individual cases, but instead monitor activity levels and virus characteristics through a nationwide surveillance system ...
... CDC closed out reports of 2009 H1N1 hospitalizations and deaths for the 2008-09 season in late August. On August 30, 2009, reporting modifications were implemented to allow states to report hospitalizations and deaths associated with any influenza or to report hospitalizations and deaths using a pneumonia and influenza syndromic case definition through the Aggregate Hospitalizations and Deaths Reporting Activity (AHDRA). This change in reporting was implemented in order to provide a fuller picture of the burden of serious flu illness and deaths during the pandemic. The new reporting season for the 2009-2010 flu season began on August 30, 2009, and the first new numbers for the 2009-2010 season were reported in the September 11, 2009 issue of FluView ...

“The 2009 H1N1 Pandemic: Summary Highlights, April 2009-April 2010" ~ CDC
➥ https://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/cdcresponse.htm

“... Routine seasonal surveillance does not count individual flu cases, hospitalizations or deaths (except for pediatric influenza deaths) but instead monitors activity levels and trends and virus characteristics through a nationwide surveillance system. The reporting of hospitalizations and deaths by state health departments was a new surveillance system that was initiated at the beginning of the 2009 H1N1 outbreak.
Beginning August 30, 2009, CDC modified this surveillance and asked states to report either laboratory confirmed hospitalizations and deaths or syndromic cases, i.e. cases of presumed influenza and/or pneumonia based on ICD-9 coded hospitalizations or death reports each week. This is a new system will be used to monitor trends in hospitalizations and deaths. CDC believes this system will provide a fuller picture of the burden of serious flu illness and deaths during this pandemic. This number will be cross-checked periodically against modeling studies to assess its validity. CDC has provided guidance for states on how to count and report these cases. ...”
“Monitoring Influenza Activity, Including 2009 H1N1" ~ CDC
➥ https://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/reportingqa.htm
“Interim Guidance for State and Local Health Departments for Reporting Influenza-Associated Hospitalizations and Deaths for the 2009-2010 Season”
➥ https://www.cdc.gov/H1N1flu/hospitalreporting.htm

“2009-2010 Influenza Season Week 41 ending October 17, 2009" ~ CDC
➥ https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weekl...0/weekly41.htm

“How CDC Estimates the Burden of Seasonal Influenza in the U.S.” ~ CDC
➥ https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden...-estimates.htm

“2009 H1N1 Pandemic (H1N1pdm09 virus)” ~ CDC
➥ https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-res...-pandemic.html