|
|
Post by patman post on Jan 11, 2023 22:45:29 GMT
Iām pointing out that supporting a moronic statement by Rees-Mogg that the victims who followed the LBFās flawed advice should have known better was at best mistaken and at worst, toadying of the most crass type. But I suspect you knew thatā¦ Are you really trying to tell me that you would stay in a burning highrise if someone told you to? Depends who that someone was. Now knowing that the LFB is as flawed than the Met, I might well be sceptical of its advice to stay put and wait for rescue. But at the time of Grenfell, the Fire Service were infallible heroesā¦ |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jan 11, 2023 22:48:29 GMT
So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today. Collateral damage as they were told they were doing it for the greater good, which they probably did. People have to make their own risk benefit assessment and act accordingly. All the information is out there, including the reduced risk as the latest variants are far less dangerous than the original Wuhan strain. You can't educate pork mate, All the lefties want are state controled zombies. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 11, 2023 22:54:13 GMT
Are you really trying to tell me that you would stay in a burning highrise if someone told you to? Depends who that someone was. Now knowing that the LFB is as flawed than the Met, I might well be sceptical of its advice to stay put and wait for rescue. But at the time of Grenfell, the Fire Service were infallible heroesā¦ When you are as old as I am you realise that nobody is infallible.. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jan 11, 2023 23:26:36 GMT
In the event of a fire, it's not unreasonable to follow the advice of the fire brigade. They are the ones trained and experienced in fire and rescue. Would you stay put in a burning highrise? I don't know until I'm in that situation. The point that I'm making though, is that whether you think that the fire service's advice is good or bad, it is not an unreasonable stance to accept it. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jan 12, 2023 5:44:06 GMT
I couldnāt care less what his views are. But I do worry about the lefties who try and make a meal of it. And as it has been pointed out to you those were NOT his actual words. Shouldnāt you be more worried about those in the dross you support who state that the holocaust never even happened and are under investigation for being anti semites? The dross I support? I'm a floating voter. I've voted for 3 different parties the last times I voted. I've told you that before, but you don't listen. All you wish to say is "lefties" and "woke" but you ignore what other people are actually saying. Floating voter my arse. When have you ever had a good word for a tory?
So who would bother to listen to anyone who cannot even get the facts right?
Hve you snswered the question about "HIS ACTUAL WORDS?" beause if you have you must have used invisible ink as per usual.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jan 12, 2023 7:13:20 GMT
Indeed I did.
So not only don't you listen, but you can't read either. š
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Jan 12, 2023 7:15:24 GMT
Bridgen was only repeating information given to him by a consultant cardiologist - basically that the new mRNA vaccines can cause heart inflammation. As usual the government has moved very quickly to shut him up. Also as usual the BBC is referring to the information as "false". We don't know if the information is false. It's certainly known that these vaccines DO cause heart inflammation as a low level side effect, but the cardiologist is saying that it's far more common than acknowledged. The fact that the govt wants to shut down debate about this will only raise suspicions that he's right. If anyone listened to "More or Less" on BBC R4 yesterday they had a report on claims that the rates of sudden cardiac arrest had risen alarmingly recently. Typically the BBC attitude was to trash the source of the information. They even accused the source of being a climate change denier (  ) implying that they were just propagating "conspiracy theories". Interestingly there was also an interview on Tice (last Sunday) with a doctor who was saying that people should avoid the mRNA "booster" vaccines as they are potentially dangerous. He was plainly a very knowledgeable bloke but the BBC would dismiss him as a loony and the medical council are probably already moving to strike him off. My own opinion is that this should be properly investigated. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2023 8:29:36 GMT
Bridgen was only repeating information given to him by a consultant cardiologist - basically that the new mRNA vaccines can cause heart inflammation. As usual the government has moved very quickly to shut him up. Also as usual the BBC is referring to the information as "false". We don't know if the information is false. It's certainly known that these vaccines DO cause heart inflammation as a low level side effect, but the cardiologist is saying that it's far more common than acknowledged. The fact that the govt wants to shut down debate about this will only raise suspicions that he's right. If anyone listened to "More or Less" on BBC R4 yesterday they had a report on claims that the rates of sudden cardiac arrest had risen alarmingly recently. Typically the BBC attitude was to trash the source of the information. They even accused the source of being a climate change denier ( ) implying that they were just propagating "conspiracy theories". Interestingly there was also an interview on Tice (last Sunday) with a doctor who was saying that people should avoid the mRNA "booster" vaccines as they are potentially dangerous. He was plainly a very knowledgeable bloke but the BBC would dismiss him as a loony and the medical council are probably already moving to strike him off. My own opinion is that this should be properly investigated. He was not "only repeating information given to him". He was endorsing the view that vaccines were akin to the holocaust, which is highly ridiculous and a grotesque and offensive exaggeration. Had anyone in Labour said such a thing the headlines would all have been about Labour antisemitism. Without an immediate apology and retraction, Labour would have expelled him. To liken the vaccines to the holocaust is so utterly ridiculous. I have managed to survive unscathed being vaccinated 4 times. I doubt whether I could have survived the gas chambers even once. Just about everyone I know has been vaccinated and not one has thus far dropped dead yet as a result. This is not to say that the vaccines are necessarily entirely harmless, but does surely demonstrate that comparing them to the holocaust is a grotesque exaggeration of utterly idiotic proportions and offensive too, an insult to all those millions of holocaust victims and an offensive antisemitic comparison for sure in the eyes of most Jews |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 12, 2023 9:44:11 GMT
... hot on the heels š of being suspended from parliament for lobbying, he's now been suspended from the Tory party for comparing vaccines to the holocaust. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Mr Andrew "Anyone from the UK can have an Irish passport" Bridgen. š What an idiot. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64236687There are plenty of people who quietly agree with Andrew Bridgen. I just listened to some 'expert' on Talk TV who said some of Bridgens concerns should be investigated not laughed at. He said information regarding the covid vaccine is being withheld from the public in this country. He said this was stupid because other countries are slowly releasing information that our government may find embarrassing. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jan 12, 2023 9:44:20 GMT
What were Bridgen's ACTUAL WORDS? I'll help you: On Tuesday, he tweeted: ā As one consultant cardiologist said to me, this is the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaustā. So he wasn't just quoting this unnamed cardiologist, he was asserting it as being true - it isn't, very much isn't. The unnamed cardiologist should have been sacked. Once for hyperbole. Once for telling a bonce like Brigen something like that And once for expressing a political view which is highly unprofessional. I guess there are those who prefer that a good proportion of the human race is wiped out in some macabre "hand of god" cleansing processs sort of like the medical Noah's Ark of history. This discussion has been floating around in American chat groups and has become part of identifying the left/right DNA of their highly destructive politics. Bridgen is trying to tag along by introducing US issues into the UK. The UK has enough issues, thanks. Mr. Bridgen should indeed be contained as much as possible. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Jan 12, 2023 9:55:13 GMT
Bridgen was only repeating information given to him by a consultant cardiologist - basically that the new mRNA vaccines can cause heart inflammation. As usual the government has moved very quickly to shut him up. Also as usual the BBC is referring to the information as "false". We don't know if the information is false. It's certainly known that these vaccines DO cause heart inflammation as a low level side effect, but the cardiologist is saying that it's far more common than acknowledged. The fact that the govt wants to shut down debate about this will only raise suspicions that he's right. If anyone listened to "More or Less" on BBC R4 yesterday they had a report on claims that the rates of sudden cardiac arrest had risen alarmingly recently. Typically the BBC attitude was to trash the source of the information. They even accused the source of being a climate change denier ( ) implying that they were just propagating "conspiracy theories". Interestingly there was also an interview on Tice (last Sunday) with a doctor who was saying that people should avoid the mRNA "booster" vaccines as they are potentially dangerous. He was plainly a very knowledgeable bloke but the BBC would dismiss him as a loony and the medical council are probably already moving to strike him off. My own opinion is that this should be properly investigated. He was not "only repeating information given to him". He was endorsing the view that vaccines were akin to the holocaust, which is highly ridiculous and a grotesque and offensive exaggeration. Had anyone in Labour said such a thing the headlines would all have been about Labour antisemitism. Without an immediate apology and retraction, Labour would have expelled him. To liken the vaccines to the holocaust is so utterly ridiculous. I have managed to survive unscathed being vaccinated 4 times. I doubt whether I could have survived the gas chambers even once. Just about everyone I know has been vaccinated and not one has thus far dropped dead yet as a result. This is not to say that the vaccines are necessarily entirely harmless, but does surely demonstrate that comparing them to the holocaust is a grotesque exaggeration of utterly idiotic proportions and offensive too, an insult to all those millions of holocaust victims and an offensive antisemitic comparison for sure in the eyes of most Jews BRAVO š š š |
|
|
|
Post by Tinculin on Jan 12, 2023 10:57:44 GMT
It was a stupid thing to say.
If someone ātold himā, he should have had the sense to dismiss it and not repeat it.
As a lay person, repeating something like that just makes you sound as stupid as the person saying it.
As a politician, not knowing how repeating that would sound, not only makes you sound as dumb as a lay person, it makes you look completely incompetent as a politician.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Jan 12, 2023 11:32:23 GMT
So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today. Collateral damage as they were told they were doing it for the greater good, which they probably did. . . . Except the BBC did not say that and had you followed the hyperlink under the words you've misrepresented you would know that. And as for your 'would be alive today' that's total bollocks too as that's to ignore the death rate of those that refused the vaccine, got infected and died. 1447 in just the first 5 months of 2022 I am trying to cut down my posting here but when you post the deceitful and dangerous anti vax shite you've tried elsewhere then some things have to be said. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2023 11:44:46 GMT
So 59 people killed by the vaccine according to the BBC "fact check". 59 people who would be alive today. Collateral damage as they were told they were doing it for the greater good, which they probably did. . . . Except the BBC did not say that and had you followed the hyperlink under the words you've misrepresented you would know that. And as for your 'would be alive today' that's total bollocks too as that's to ignore the death rate of those that refused the vaccine, got infected and died. 1447 in just the first 5 months of 2022 I am trying to cut down my posting here but when you post the deceitful and dangerous anti vax shite you've tried elsewhere then some things have to be said. I won't reply any further to your misrepresentation of my post because of the proboards policy. I don't know what I can say. I merely quoted the BBC "fact check". I think, as you would say, not just a river in Egypt, then. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jan 12, 2023 11:49:27 GMT
Is there going to be a proper investigation into the current high rate of excess deaths? Are parliament afraid of this debate? Is there a sudden uptick in sudden heart related deaths or not? What is the debate to be ā is there a sudden increase in heart related deaths and if so, had all the extra deaths been vaccinated against Covid? Seems to me thereās a double standard. When Covid deaths are listed, one argument is that the listed deaths were of people with Covid, who did not necessarily die from Covid. Could/should a similar question be posed over the reported sudden deaths from heart failure ā ie, has there been an increase in the number of these sudden deaths and, if so, were all the sudden deaths of people vaccinated against Covid. Depending on the outcome of such an inquiry, was any additional risk from Covid vaccination so small as to make it worth takingā¦? |
|
) implying that they were just propagating "conspiracy theories". 
