AC

"57 per cent of Australians still want Covid vaccine mandate"

Yet less than 15% are up-to-date with their own booster shots. Those two things don't gel.

___________________________________________________________________-

mikk,

"Or are you going to tell us it was all albos fault?"

Well I didn't mention any politicians. In the main I don't blame the pollies this time. Its was the health professionals and the pharmaceutical industry that lead the politicians and therefore most of society down the garden path. The politicians were just mouthing what they'd been misinformed about.

_____________________________________________________________________-

"Drink Pine-O-Clean"

I've shown Paul several times that Trump said nothing of the sort. But the issue is either too complex for Paul to follow or he really doesn't care about the facts. Or all of the above.

__________________________________________________________________

John Daysh

It is now clear that the authorities knew from an early stage that the virus was a lab leak, not natural, but that those who had a part in funding said lab were desperate to hide that truth.

Masks - if masks worked then it was a lie to say otherwise just because you wanted to protect supply. But since we now know they were largely ineffective (or worse) it is clear that the authorities only wanted to enforce their use as a placebo measure.

Vaccines- it was claimed at the outset that vaccines would stop people getting the virus and stop the spread. Neither was true. The authorities now admit it. The vaccine manufacturers now confirm that that was never the point of the vaccines and that they didn't even bother to do studies on whether it stopped transmission because they knew it wouldn't. Yet the whole vaccine mandate mantra was based on protecting others by being vaccinated. It was a lie.

Finally, lying is one thing. But even worse was the way the authorities and media actively sought to cancel, discredit and censor those who, from the outset, saw and tired to get the truth out.

mhaze,

You’re throwing out a lot of claims here, but none of them hold up under scrutiny.

Lab leak? We still don’t know for sure where Covid came from. Some intelligence agencies say a lab leak is possible, others still lean toward natural origins. But the idea that “authorities knew” from the start and covered it up? That’s pure speculation, not fact. If there was a global conspiracy to hide it, you’d have to explain why multiple countries, including ones with no ties to Wuhan research, reached similar conclusions early on.

Masks? If they had said from day one that masks worked while knowing there weren’t enough to go around, you’d be calling that a scandal too. And no, masks weren’t useless. Proper masks like N95s did reduce transmission. Were cloth masks as effective? No. But saying masks were enforced just as a "placebo" is rewriting history.

Vaccines? Early on, the data showed they did reduce infection and transmission of the original strain. Then variants came along, and that changed. That’s not a “lie,” that’s just how science works. And no, manufacturers didn’t "know" it wouldn’t stop transmission - they just focused on preventing severe illness in trials because that’s what vaccines are designed for. Later studies showed they still helped reduce spread, just not perfectly.

As for people being "censored," let’s be real - most of them weren’t exposing hidden truths, they were just wrong. Saying vaccines didn’t work, that masks were dangerous, or that Covid was a hoax wasn’t some bold act of free speech - it was spreading misinformation that put lives at risk. Being fact-checked and held to account isn’t censorship.

You’re twisting everything to fit a predetermined narrative. You’re not here to talk facts, you just want to be outraged.

Mhaze

Instead of intrigue, what’s wrong with identifying good old fashioned panic as a solution to your misgivings about official responses, (Official overreaction), a theory neatly align with that source of “official” panic we were all subjected to: (Paralleled, for good example, with a panicked response to imagined climate change, as an motivation for the idiocy of official reaction)? Over educated and inexperienced children at play in a big persons world, which they stupidly tore to pieces, and likewise continue to do so wherever their authority meets the pavement!

Yuyutsu

It’s very ingenuine to suggest the possibility of discord in the Christian view of the God-Head.

Maybe the archangel Gabriel could be representative of the sevenths, leading into the chord changes arriving at worship of the Triad of the God-Head . A vertical hierarchical view.

Yuyutsu

Not a slavish following of the Jews, no: But sympathy is more fitting. The Christian view of the Saviours arrival as predicted in Jewish texts, a view not accepted by Jews and Islamists alike.
Christianity is far advanced on both.

Christians are waiting around for the penny to drop with both groups of non-believers.

Yuyutsu

Think on this then.

Since the ME is engaged in its usual religious waring mentality, let’s describe the three antagonists as an ”imperfect” triad. Discordant. Let’s describe its structure as containing a dominant second, in place of say a third. We now have a conflict or challenge for the ranking of the one note. The resolution is likened to splitting the atom.
What resolution outside of an atomic explosion, will replace the dominant second with the harmonious third again? Netanyahu maybe; or Donald Trump, or something outside the box?