Jump to content

torqued

Supreme User
  • Posts

    865
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    29

torqued last won the day on September 15 2021

torqued had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

torqued's Achievements

Gray Beard

Gray Beard (4/4)

814

Reputation

  1. Someone recorded a highly detailed Taiwan Straits war planning meeting in Guangdong province. Fascinating stuff. Troop, ship, and aircraft numbers are discussed, along with fishing boat militias, domestic propaganda campaigns, and use of big data and health systems to aid in rapid recruitment. CCP publishes this across most major Chinese media outlets today: https://www.sohu.com/a/550108041_121094251
  2. That's so ridiculous. Bill Gates is on record as saying the faster we improve health, the faster the birth rate declines. He's wants us all to be healthier, not more sick.
  3. That was hilariously awkward.
  4. True. But it is also worth nothing that the CDC has already advised that although it is effective, people who haven't received the smallpox vaccine in the last 3 years, should get it again to protect against Monkeypox. Enter the pox "booster" programs, mandates, passes, contact tracing, etc, etc, etc... https://www.cdc.gov/poxvirus/monkeypox/clinicians/smallpox-vaccine.html#:~:text=pre-event setting.-,Vaccine Effectiveness,85% effective in preventing monkeypox.
  5. Only a handful of cases, and the POTUS is already pitching a new vaccine. "Well, they haven't told me the level of exposure yet, but it is something that everybody should be concerned about. We're working on it hard to figure out what we do and what vaccine, if any, may be available for it.“ - Joe Biden, earlier today at Osan Air Base. There have been 92 cases of monkeypox worldwide as of May 21, Latest World Health Organization (WHO) data. There were only at most five cases in the U.S. at that time.
  6. Pfizer's CEO yesterday: "Google, what is the largest criminal settlement?" https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=largest+criminal+settlement
  7. I would agree with you that overpopulation is likely not the problem some may think it is. However, energy and resource consumption per capita has been an exponential upward curve since at least the 1970s. It's a math problem. I have no idea when we reach the limits of growth, but I think it's distant. Nature tends to revert to the mean and I trust that process. However, you're wrong in thinking there are not groups and organizations who believe the problem is imminent, and must be corrected. Back in the 1970s when "Limits to Growth" was published, it was met with a lot of resistance. Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker famously said its predictions failed to account for human ingenuity and perseverance and the laws of economics are an inevitable balancing force. He was right, and the economic boom followed his policies. I digress... Subsequently, it was determined by these groups that democracies and competing nations cannot be relied upon to act in the best interest of the planet. It wouldn't be such a stretch to suggest that the best way to enable an agenda for sustainable growth would be to circumvent democracies and act outside national borders. The best way to accomplish this would not be appealing to the public, (that's a proven failure) but to recruit and form partnerships of wealth and power (decision makers) that can force policy. It doesn't sound like you subscribe to these ideas that the world is ending, and I don't either. But there are people who do, and they've put a lot of thought into how to bring human consumption under control. If you can control the economy, you can decide what and how much people can consume (CBDC). CBDCs need an infrastructure that the general public, at least in free democracies, won't willingly adopt. A global health pass system is effectively that infrastructure, while fear is the perfect motivator. Pandemics can incite enough fear to get people to accept a very different system in a short period of time, but are not nearly as deadly or destructive as the alternatives.
  8. Slow down. I have no idea what your beliefs are, but imagine yourself as someone who believes that humanity is on an unsustainable path (see tragedy of the commons). That you have gone to great lengths to study and predict worst-case scenario outcomes. Maybe you've come up with some crazy ideas on how to fix the future. Some of them make sense, and some are terrible. At the same time, you consider yourself a good person. After all, you think you're going to save humanity, not destroy it. Genocide would be evil. Aside from the moral and ethical downsides, policies of evil typically don't have long term success rates in human history. Again, I know nothing about you. But if you were in this dilemma, how would you reconcile the need to curb human consumption (/reproduction), yet avoid committing evil deeds? Perhaps it would be frustrating that people either can't see or don't care about the future you're convinced we're destined for. You might feel justified in placing someone in a position to make the choice for themselves. Choose life, albeit at the expense of prosperity and freedoms, or choose a great risk to your personal health. Should too many people choose the latter... up the stakes.
  9. The point being: just as before, these events are rehearsed before they are implemented. It's not that they're good guessers. Global non-governmental organizations know the ends they mean to achieve, but the outcomes haven't been nearly as predictable as was thought. Unlimited growth in a finite system has consequences. Those who have the means and ability to look into the future can see what's coming. World economies are now dependent upon the financialization of continued economic growth. When they can no longer grow, they don't decline, they tend to collapse. However, if you want to attempt a managed decline in worldwide prosperity, you need methods by which you can control and manipulate a global population as they become unhappier, and angrier. Happiness is not a position, it's a trajectory.
  10. Remember, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/scenario.html https://t.co/XFi48NoGPb https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1527574636631928832?s=20&t=AFDelmdbs8x_WLLJEypEGw
  11. The most ironic post I've ever seen on this forum. To be fair, I wholeheartedly agree with you. 1000%!
  12. Got it. And he does admit to doing everything. The "Snowden is a hero/traitor" is subject I can't argue well because I can't first win either side of the debate in my own head. On one hand, he lied, he stole, he gave up state secrets, he knowingly broke the law, and he fully expected to face the consequences. He made that choice. We can't let that go unpunished, lest we have any jerkoff with classified information and a bone to pick with the government going public. On the other, I remember the ideas that the government has the technology and desire to listen to and track any American citizen domestically being the regarded as crazy conspiracy theories prior to Snowden. The problem being, he couldn't reveal the ways in which the intelligence communities were violating the trust of the American public without also revealing our capabilities against foreign adversaries. These programs were apparently created and executed with no distinction between the two. Now that our government is suggesting large swaths of the American public are potential domestic terrorists, and therefore enemies, I think it's important to know how our intelligence communities intend to go after those people. I understand being a superpower is a messy business, but there is significant potential that power to be abused. In the end, I lean toward believing we should remain an accountable democracy and sunlight is the best disinfectant.
  13. There's no way you voted Libertarian. 😄
  14. No trial, no jury, just straight to the death penalty, eh? Hate to pick on you, brother, but I'm going to challenge ideas I don't agree with. Not for fun, not because I like stepping on toes and getting people worked up, but because I see things that are clearly wrong. I can think of three instances here in the last week or so of death being the consequence of a perceived crime. Just straight up advocating for execution. One person said he'd dole out the death penalty himself because the unvaccinated didn't deserve hospital treatment. But it's not just here and actually, I think overall the people who frequent this forum are far more reasonable than the public at large. In Snowden's case, anyone who really wanted to could start with the death of a soldier and create a cause/effect chain of events that would somehow link to Snowden. So offing that a-hole is justified, right? But what would that process look like, and could it be applied elsewhere? Snowden did a, a caused b, b->c, d, e, f, and then people died. =Traitor. =Death. Milley did a. a->z. =Traitor. =Death. Biden =Traitor. =Death. Racist =Nazi =Death. The Unvaccinated =Murderers =Death. Republicans, Democrats, the Rich, etc. More people are wishing death on other individuals and groups due to ideological differences, and the threshold seems to be getting lower. This doesn't end well. This is related to the earlier vid I posted. Great stuff. Today, you likely consider the idea of "Genocide" hyperbole. At some point in your lifetime, you won't. It happens with Tyranny and the seeds are being planted.
×
×
  • Create New...