What is really behind the virus crisis?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Write4U said:
Yes, that was an article from the "conspiracy zone" website. Give me a break !
Click to expand...
These are the articles I was referring to.

Scientists at the Rand Corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/b04151999_bt170-99.htm

There are other scientists who say the opposite.
http://www.google.es/search?q=depleted uranium&tbs=vid:1

Look at this too.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?...0B53A6410E96278A3&first=1&tsc=ImageBasicHover

Do you believe what the article from Rand says?
 
FatFreddy said:
Scientists at the Rand Corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.
Click to expand...
FatFreddy said:
Do you believe what the article from Rand says
Click to expand...
Thanks for proving my point.

This is what the article from Rand says.
The Department of Defense announced today the release of a RAND scientific literature review that indicates no evidence of harmful health effects directly linked to depleted uranium exposures at levels experienced by Gulf War veterans.
Click to expand...
And that was translated as ; Scientists at the Rand Corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.

Now do you see the duplicity in the "quoted passage"?
 
Look at the whole article. It's obviously damage-control. The effects of depleted uranium on the Iraqi people and US soldiers were devastating.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=doug rokke depleted uranium&FORM=HDRSC1

Beyond Treason Full HD 2005


Do you think the US government is being honest about the effects of depleted uranium?


edit
----------------------------------------

Talk - Dr. Doug Rokke - Depleted Uranium (DU)
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy said:
You seem to have unshakable faith in mainstream info. I'm going to show you an example the US government lying about science to see how you react.
Click to expand...

No, you are going to post your idiotic spam about the Moon landings, off topic! This business about depleted uranium is a pathetic generalisation made from a hyped study. You have spammed THIS everywhere too and ignored responses.

Debunking The Apollo Moon Hoax: Whistleblowers, governments and lies. (debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com)
"Summary:-
This section of the "wall of spam" highlights two points that massively contradict each other. We have the premise that scientists and governments lie, "demonstrated" with whistleblowers and articles written and spoken by numerous individuals very much alive. We then have the premise that nobody would speak out about Apollo because they would fear for their lives! BUNKUM!"

And from previous spamming of this crap:
"To put this into context, you are suggesting that a whole barrage of scientists lie, based on your pathetic attempt to poison the well, with some half-assed "assessment" concerning RAND - a ridiculous generalisation from a completely unscientific claim! Is the weapon dangerous? Yes. Is the depleted uranium? No. Would the depleted uranium be maybe dangerous if you chucked a few tons of it at your enemy. Probably. BUT, the waste from the lead and mercury would be orders of magnitude worse! So your other pathetic attempt, without ANY scientific analysis, or rigor, to pin the deformities on the RAND report on DU is also bullshit."
 
FatFreddy said:
Look at the whole article. It's obviously damage-control. The effects of depleted uranium on the Iraqi people and US soldiers were devastating.
Click to expand...

basic science "were devastating"
versus
"is devastating"
which one serves the ends and means ?
in which case it would be the surviving radiated patients whom ARE suffering
not "were suffering"
[what is the point of the grammar change, to emotionally distance yourself from real people and suffering?]
surely the patient should come first
are you referring to those whom are now dead, because otherwise they have recovered
i doubt they have recovered if they are still alive


depleted uranium poisoning in iraq from usa depleted uranium munitions is behind the covid19 pandemic ?

where is the connection ?

subject narrative
science note
we are discussing medical science
what-is-really-behind-the-virus-crisis

so it only seems logical to include

"Gulf War Syndrome"
as it was named
was a combination effect of terrible PTSD & poisoning and fatigue of military personal in the Gulf war invasion

history has been re-written to service usa private interests to prevent suing people i expect

when talking depleted uranium radiation poisoning
there is 2 different subject headings
1 gulf war syndrome,
which includes PTSD and various other things combined as toxic shock damage and injury to soldiers
AND
specific site documented exposure to depleted uranium

soo... in the event you choose to follow some spin doctor off into their scamy rabbit hole to spend on your credit card

be sure to know before hand what specifically the fuck they are talking about
because you want science not bullshit.
unless your a farmer looking for bullshit
in which case you will never see the product
only the bill on your credit card

and
because the thread subject is about science
what-is-really-behind-the-virus-crisis

keep in mind
PTSD was actively denied as a diagnosis to avoid suing the USA government for many years
... which is a whole different subject
and another subject you should not be getting your credit card out to spend on some
junky-fix-psycho-ministers-new-age-self-help-cure-all-bullshit

"just harden up with god to cure your radiation poisoning while acting effeminate" is not a way to apply modern medical science
 
Last edited:
David C said:
"To put this into context, you are suggesting that a whole barrage of scientists lie, based on your pathetic attempt to poison the well, with some half-assed "assessment" concerning RAND - a ridiculous generalisation from a completely unscientific claim! Is the weapon dangerous? Yes. Is the depleted uranium? No. Would the depleted uranium be maybe dangerous if you chucked a few tons of it at your enemy. Probably. BUT, the waste from the lead and mercury would be orders of magnitude worse! So your other pathetic attempt, without ANY scientific analysis, or rigor, to pin the deformities on the RAND report on DU is also bullshit."
Click to expand...
So do you people think the Rand article was objective? Do you think it was misleading. Do you think it was playing down the dangers of DU? Be clear.

This is an objectivity test.
 
FatFreddy said:
So do you people think the Rand article was objective? Do you think it was misleading. Do you think it was playing down the dangers of DU? Be clear.

This is an objectivity test.
Click to expand...

It isn't a bloody objectivity test at all! Your opinion is biased and ignorant on this subject, how the hell do you set the criteria for objectivity when you have no credentials to assess such a thing!

This crap is just you dragging yet another thread off topic and avoiding responses. You quoted that text and then completely ignored it. Try again.

"To put this into context, you are suggesting that a whole barrage of scientists lie, based on your pathetic attempt to poison the well, with some half-assed "assessment" concerning RAND - a ridiculous generalisation from a completely unscientific claim! Is the weapon dangerous? Yes. Is the depleted uranium? No. Would the depleted uranium be maybe dangerous if you chucked a few tons of it at your enemy. Probably. BUT, the waste from the lead and mercury would be orders of magnitude worse! So your other pathetic attempt, without ANY scientific analysis, or rigor, to pin the deformities on the RAND report on DU is also bullshit."
 
David C said:
Would the depleted uranium be maybe dangerous if you chucked a few tons of it at your enemy. Probably. BUT, the waste from the lead and mercury would be orders of magnitude worse! So your other pathetic attempt, without ANY scientific analysis, or rigor, to pin the deformities on the RAND report on DU is also bullshit."
Click to expand...
Yep. Indeed, one of the reason the report concludes that DU is not unreasonably dangerous is that soldiers have been living with DU shrapnel in them for decades. If that had been lead or mercury they would have been dead by now.
 
FatFreddy said:
Rand article
Click to expand...
this self anointing wanna be neo evangelical hyper liberal elitist playing the working mans man ?
only thing i would trust him to do is create and run his own cult
1200px-Rand_Paul%2C_official_portrait%2C_112th_Congress_alternate.jpg
 
I thought you people would just tap dance around this instead of answering it directly.
FatFreddy said:
So do you people think the Rand article was objective? Do you think it was misleading. Do you think it was playing down the dangers of DU? Be clear.
Click to expand...

That is a very misleading report that plays down the dangers of depleted uranium and you people are defending it. Rant all you want; the viewers have seen your reactions.


RainbowSingularity said:
this self anointing wanna be neo evangelical hyper liberal elitist playing the working mans man ?
only thing i would trust him to do is create and run his own cult
Click to expand...
I'm just a layman so I can't really opine on this. All I can do is listen to all the experts and try to see who makes the most sense and see if any of them get caught in lies.

There's the theory that the virus jumped from an animal to people. There's a theory that the virus was made in a Chinese laboratory. There's a theory that the virus was made in an American laboratory and smuggled into China.

Start watching this at the 2:30 time mark.

Anthony Fauci is a liar, a traitor, and a murderer
https://www.newstarget.com/2021-05-16-del-bigtree-covid-is-biological-weapon.html


Is Wuhan virus a hit job? A whodunit not to miss. Uriah Heep, our Sherlock Holmes solves the case!


I don't have a firm opinion on this.
 
FatFreddy said:
Anthony Fauci is a liar, a traitor, and a murderer
Click to expand...
I can't believe you even cited that insidious LIE.

Anthony Fauci, Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., is director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the National Institutes of Health. Since his appointment as NIAID director in 1984, Dr. Fauci has overseen an extensive research portfolio devoted to preventing, diagnosing, and treating infectious and immune-mediated diseases. Dr. Fauci also is chief of the NIAID Laboratory of Immunoregulation, where he has made numerous important discoveries related to HIV/AIDS and is one of the most-cited scientists in the field.
Click to expand...
Dr. Fauci serves as one of the key advisors to the White House and Department of Health and Human Services on global AIDS issues, and on initiatives to bolster medical and public health preparedness against emerging infectious disease threats such as pandemic influenza.
Click to expand...
He was one of the principal architects of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which has already been responsible for saving millions of lives throughout the developing world. Dr. Fauci is a member of the US National Academy of Sciences and has received numerous awards, including the National Medal of Science, the Mary Woodard Lasker Award for Public Service, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He has been awarded 38 honorary doctoral degrees and is the author, coauthor, or editor of more than 1,200 scientific publications, including several major textbooks.
Click to expand...
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/voices/events/fauci/#

And you dare question the integrity of this eminent physician who has dedicated his entire life in an effort to save millions of people from horrible diseases, based on a rumor without any evidential substance?

(whispers) "Hey, I have bridge I can sell you".

George C. Parker (March 16, 1860[1] – 1936)
was an American con man and prophet best known for his surprisingly successful attempts to "sell" the Brooklyn Bridge. He made his living conducting illegal sales of property he did not own, often New York's public landmarks, to unwary immigrants. The Brooklyn Bridge was the subject of several of his transactions, predicated on the notion of the buyer controlling access to the bridge. Police removed several of his victims from the bridge as they tried to erect toll booths.
Click to expand...
I bet you like Trump, do you?
 
FatFreddy said:
I thought you people would just tap dance around this instead of answering it directly.
Click to expand...

It's been answered you joke! It is NOT misleading at all. It covers the issues surrounding USA soldier exposure to it. The lead and mercury is vastly, VASTLY more toxic!

I'm just a layman so I can't really opine on this.

That is a very misleading report that plays down the dangers of depleted uranium and you people are defending it.

I'm just a layman so I can't really opine on this.
Click to expand...

I've taken your quotes and put it in the correct context. To make it really accurate, you are a very ignorant layman who makes no effort to educate yourself. You stick ONLY to woo-woo sites.

Rant all you want; the viewers have seen your reactions.
Click to expand...

The viewers? These would be the people who hold you in as much esteem as something on their shoe?

I'm just a layman so I can't really opine on this. All I can do is listen to all the experts and try to see who makes the most sense and see if any of them get caught in lies.
Click to expand...

That is the opposite of what you do and you are not qualified to determine whether an expert is lying! You ignore every majority expert and listen to idiots,

I don't have a firm opinion on this.
Click to expand...

Bullshit - you defend it as though your life depended on it. Now, once again!

You quoted that text and then completely ignored it. Try again.

"To put this into context, you are suggesting that a whole barrage of scientists lie, based on your pathetic attempt to poison the well, with some half-assed "assessment" concerning RAND - a ridiculous generalisation from a completely unscientific claim! Is the weapon dangerous? Yes. Is the depleted uranium? No. Would the depleted uranium be maybe dangerous if you chucked a few tons of it at your enemy. Probably. BUT, the waste from the lead and mercury would be orders of magnitude worse! So your other pathetic attempt, without ANY scientific analysis, or rigor, to pin the deformities on the RAND report on DU is also bullshit."
 
FatFreddy said:
Dr.Sherri Tenpenny, Correct terminology not shedding, 70% of the vaccinated people will Die/Dead
Click to expand...
That is incorrect. 100% of all people will Die/Dead. But only a very small percent of vaccinated people will die from Covid.

A small percentage of people fully vaccinated against COVID-19 will still develop COVID-19 illness
COVID-19 vaccines are effective. However, a small percentage of people who are fully vaccinated will still get COVID-19 if they are exposed to the virus that causes it. These are called “vaccine breakthrough cases.” This means that while people who have been vaccinated are much less likely to get sick, it may still happen. Experts continue to study how common these cases are.
Click to expand...
Large-scale clinical studies found that COVID-19 vaccination prevented most people from getting COVID-19.
Click to expand...
Research also provides growing evidence that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines offer similar protection in real world conditions. While these vaccines are effective, no vaccine prevents illness 100 percent of the time. For any vaccines, there are breakthrough cases. With effectiveness of 90 percent or higher, a small percentage of people who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 will still get sick and some may be hospitalized or die from COVID-19. It’s also possible that some fully vaccinated people might have infections, but not have symptoms (asymptomatic infections).
Click to expand...
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/201...measure-effectiveness/breakthrough-cases.html
 
Fauci is KILLING Americans by refusing them safe and effective covid remedies
https://www.newstarget.com/2021-05-13-fauci-killing-americans-refusing-safe-covid-remedies.html

The Treatment of Viral Diseases: Has the Truth Been Suppressed for Decades?
https://www.jpands.org/vol25no3/merritt.pdf

Calif. doctor successfully cures 1,700 COVID-19 patients


DR SIMONE GOLD PLEDGES TO MAKE HYDROXYCLOROQUINE AN OTC0 DRUG, LIKE IT IS IN MANY MALARIA COUNTRIES.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/hhzDMXY3nmRL/

TEN MEDICAL FACTS REGARDING THE COVID-19 EXPERIMENTAL VACCINES
https://www.americasfrontlinedoctor...0-Facts-Experimental-Vaccine-Cole-4-12-21.pdf

PROFESSOR DOLORES CAHILL: WHY PEOPLE WILL START DYING A FEW MONTHS AFTER THE FIRST MRNA VACCINATION (incl PDF)
https://philosophers-stone.info/202...-few-months-after-the-first-mrna-vaccination/
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy said:
I might as well just post stuf for the viewers to see.
Click to expand...

Just in case you were wondering, I reported your blatant off topic thread derailing. I guess you want to see how far you can push things and have something to report to your "viewers" at the basketball forum. You have basically started derailing with your Rand bullshit as a means to disregard all scientists, something you have posted on about 50+ forums as part of your wall of spam. You massively contradict yourself and are too ignorant to understand why.

You quoted that text and then completely ignored it. Try again.

"To put this into context, you are suggesting that a whole barrage of scientists lie, based on your pathetic attempt to poison the well, with some half-assed "assessment" concerning RAND - a ridiculous generalisation from a completely unscientific claim! Is the weapon dangerous? Yes. Is the depleted uranium? No. Would the depleted uranium be maybe dangerous if you chucked a few tons of it at your enemy. Probably. BUT, the waste from the lead and mercury would be orders of magnitude worse! So your other pathetic attempt, without ANY scientific analysis, or rigor, to pin the deformities on the RAND report on DU is also bullshit."
 
David C said:
"To put this into context, you are suggesting that a whole barrage of scientists lie, based on your pathetic attempt to poison the well, with some half-assed "assessment" concerning RAND - a ridiculous generalisation from a completely unscientific claim! Is the weapon dangerous? Yes. Is the depleted uranium? No. Would the depleted uranium be maybe dangerous if you chucked a few tons of it at your enemy. Probably. BUT, the waste from the lead and mercury would be orders of magnitude worse! So your other pathetic attempt, without ANY scientific analysis, or rigor, to pin the deformities on the RAND report on DU is also bullshit."
Click to expand...
You're ignoring the info I posted. I'd bet most of the viewers aren't though. Anyone who looks at the info I posted can see that you're tap dancing around because you're checkmated.

I wouldn't call this off-topic. You people seemed to have a naive willingness to believe when you looked at the official version of things. That made me want to show you an obvious official lie to see how you reacted to it. Anyone who checks out the info I posted can see that the Rand memo is an obvious lie. You people defended it. That pretty much shows everybody what you people are.

https://www.clubconspiracy.com/counter-intellegience-tricks-and-techniques-t4702.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top