The danger of vaccines that is being covered up

[globetrotter]

I don't "believe 'official lies outright'" I look at the most likely explanation, think it out for myself, and conclude (in one example you listed above) that WTC happened as it appears.

this is precisely your problem. your foundation is unsound. you confuse most likely with most popular. the most likely explanation for any terrorist attack let alone one as large as 9/11 is that it was the job of one of the major govt intelligence services known for terrorist activities, like the cia, kgb, mi6, or israeli mossad.

False Dilemma.

You cannot write one sentence without logically erring. Unbelievable. And for the FOURTH TIME, you do not refute a single point I make and just ignore them. Clearly you DO NOT know a thing about logic or logical fallacies.

I don't mistake most popular for most likely.

You assume that because someone agrees with the pov of those you disagree with, that it is because I "listened to what they told me" and believed it without introspection. You are, again, engaging in a logical fallacy. In the first sentence. A stunning continuation of this CT'er flaw that is without letup. If I am not with you, I am against you. If I believe as 'The Official Version' says, then I must be doing so due to popularity.

False Dilemma.

This time the fallacy is that you assume because something is popular, that it therefore must be false or not the most likely reason. You disregard how the conclusion was reached.

I came to the conclusion myself. Watched all of your 'proof', read the websites, watched multiple impact videos 200+ times. Learned about the design of WTC 1, calculated the amount of energy required to melt one pound of steel. It is, btw, considerably LESS than the KE of one of the jets and it's fuel load. It is, therefore, entirely within the realm of easily explainable Physics that the melted steel was due to the energy of the jets upon impact and the burning jet fuel.

And for the 5th time, I do not watch TV. Therefore your continuing assumption that because I conclude different than you that I:

1) I am doing so because the theory is popular

and

2) I am doing so because I watch TV and I am brainwashed.

You continual assume that you are posting information I have not read, or that you are englightening me with facts, ideas and information that I do not know.

This is, to repeat, not true.

I read your support, facts, posts and info as you or Mr. S. post, and within seconds I always find something that sets off an internal mental alarm that says:

"Excuse me, but that is in error and here is why..."

What is more likely? An international conspiracy requiring the silence of millions of people and the coordination of thousands, or 19 Islamic men decide to kill some infidels? It is a simple test and whether one idea is popular or not is an illogical and invalid reason to dismiss it for consideration.

Remember that Islam has been at war with The West since before the USA existed. Before Western Europe existed. Before the Renaissance. Before any justifiable reason due to geo-political concerns.

Since 610.

So what is more likely?

That they continued a war that is 1401 years long, or that there was an international conspiracy of massive scope?

[odbo]

I did not and cannot stress this enough, your problem is that your foundation is unsound. It's by far the most common problem when believing a lie. The rest doesn't matter, if you start off with a skewed perspective you'll always be misled no matter how sophisticated you are and exhaustive your research.

You have to view the official story (of anything) with as much scepticism as any contradicting "conspiracy theories". Because the official story is usually a fairy tale. Thats what I meant by tv disinfo, they often call them "the facts on the ground."

What is more likely? An international conspiracy requiring the silence of millions of people and the coordination of thousands, or 19 Islamic men decide to kill some infidels? It is a simple test and whether one idea is popular or not is an illogical and invalid reason to dismiss it for consideration.

complete nonsense on so many levels.

and by the way i wouldn't be surprised if a million people did know what was going to happen. the system primarily relies on self-censorship, aka the everyday joe being scared shitless of the truth.



i've already stated my opinion that the "truth" movement was engineered as part of 9/11, probably why building 7 was taken down, to make it obvious to a pot head. and the matrix was a huge part of this. some still think a big budget film out of hollywood is out to help them!

Remember that Islam has been at war with The West since before the USA existed. Before Western Europe existed. Before the Renaissance. Before any justifiable reason due to geo-political concerns.

Since 610.

So what is more likely?

That they continued a war that is 1401 years long, or that there was an international conspiracy of massive scope?

what the f**k are you talking about? the us invented islam extremism. and key people admit this. they are free to say things out in the open because the population is so demoralized and dumbed down there will be no consequences.



if anything christianity has been at war with the jews. eastern europe was holding up but was dealt a final blow in 1917

[globetrotter]

Yet another typical response method of CT'ers.

You refuse to address prior points, but simply state:

@Well, what about this????"

Winston has done the same in a PM. Did he refute ANYTHING I posted?

No, of course not.

He did what all of you guys do.

He brought up another point, another theory, another incident.

"Well, what about THIS ONE, then..."

=========================

You guys want to prove to me that you have a clue then answer this:

Why did 911 occur on that day in particular?

My confidence that any of you know, is 0.000%

[gsjackson]

Y
=========================

You guys want to prove to me that you have a clue then answer this:

Why did 911 occur on that day in particular?

My confidence that any of you know, is 0.000%

To reference the American-orchestrated coup overthrowing a leftist government in Chile on 9/11/1973 and installing a right-wing autocrat.

Without taking a position on what went down 9/11/01, I'd think Mossad would be clever enough to throw in that little wrinkle of authenticity, though god knows no one in the Bush administration would have known enough history to have thought of it. Mossad being competent enough to orchestrate the demolition of some big buildings -- conceivably I could buy it. The Bush administration and attendant neocons? No way.

[odbo]

=========================

You guys want to prove to me that you have a clue then answer this:

Why did 911 occur on that day in particular?

george bush sr's new world order speech. 11 years to the day.
the creepiest speech of all time


there may be many reasons why but in my opinion this was the biggest.
i don't care much about 9/11.

my stand on vaccines:
they might work, but they are not and never were the best way to fight disease. natural remedies, vitamins, cannot be patented, which means medical industry's profits are limited. more over they don't want people to have the secrets to health (partially because it would mean less money for them but mostly due to eugenics considerations), so they sold us this crap. in a perfect world they'd give you some liquid which would simply kill all parasites and pathogens. i believe this already exists, well i have some experience but i'm not one of the people who cured himself of aids self medicating nor would i want to test my theory out on myself during a polio epidemic. i'd still be fine with vaccines if they didn't contain mercury and other poisons purposely placed there to dumb down and lobotomize us. if you don't want to see reality and acknowledge this is happening that's your problem. i've personally noticed how people's intelligence has dropped like stone the last 10 years. although to be fair i'm sure the biggest reason for that is regular use of cell phones. but it all works in unison. since you're not a "conspiracy theorist" you don't believe in the new world order. okay good luck with that.

obama really runs the country. hitler didn't invade switzerland to steal its gold because it has narrow passes. 6 million jews were gassed. lee harvey oswald or the cubans shot kennedy. vietnam caused gulf of tonkin. etc..

[globetrotter]

=========================

You guys want to prove to me that you have a clue then answer this:

Why did 911 occur on that day in particular?

george bush sr's new world order speech. 11 years to the day.
the creepiest speech of all time.

Wrong.

This is why it happened on that day:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna

The Battle of Vienna (German: Schlacht am Kahlenberg, Polish: Bitwa pod Wiedniem or Odsiecz Wiedeńska, Turkish: İkinci Viyana Kuşatması, Ukrainian: Віденська відсіч / Viděns'ka Vidsič) took place on the 11 and 12 of September[2] 1683 after Vienna had been besieged by the Ottoman Empire for two months. It was a battle of The Holy League versus the Ottoman Empire and fiefdoms of the Ottoman Empire near the Kahlenberg mountain in Vienna. The battle marked the beginning of the political hegemony of the Habsburg dynasty in Central Europe.

The Viennese army was led by Ernst Rüdiger Graf von Starhemberg subordinate of Leopold I Habsburg, Holy Roman Emperor.
The large-scale battle was won by Lithuanian, Polish, Austrian and German forces commanded by King of Lithuania and Poland John III Sobieski versus the Ottoman Empire army and the Ottoman fiefdoms armies commanded by Grand Vizier Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa Pasha.

Sept 11th is a date that is well known in Islamic circles as the date that Islam was turned back as it attempted to conquer Western Europe. The Ottoman Empire (and Islamic Empire) laid siege to Vienna, Austria from July 14th (this date later became Bastille Day in France) to Sept 12th. The tide of battle turned on September 11th, 1683.

I want to point out to you that September 11th, 1683 is 93 years BEFORE the formation of the United States as a political entity.

As you can see from this example, lacking the education to know about this bit of historical military history has a rather large impact upon one's understanding. Islam has been at war with The West since before the USA existed, since before North America was colonized by Europeans, since before Western Europe existed post-Renaissance, and many hundreds of years before Bush's speech. Islam did not exist in 609, and as it spread it always spread in the presence of an army as it conquered Christian territory. That's not religion, that's geo-political conquest.

The USA did not create Islamic Radicalism or Islamic Fundamentalism - it existed long before Europeans ever saw North America.

[odbo]

i don't doubt it, it very well might be the reason that date was chosen to bomb the hell out of some innocent arabs followed by such a speech.

[globetrotter]

i don't doubt it, it very well might be the reason that date was chosen to bomb the hell out of some innocent arabs followed by such a speech.

...and here we have the problem with CT'ers.

"I don't doubt it..." when I posted centuries old historical facts and it is know that OBL cited this date and this event as the reason.

When faced with overwhelming evidence you still are skeptical and resort to CT as the explanation.

That's not being open minded, that is called being ignorant.

"...the date was chosen to bomb the hell out of some innocent Arabs..."

Clearly you know nothing about the history of Islam and what those 'innocent Arabs' have been doing for the past 1,401 years.

Your ideology is based upon a profound and deep ignorance of the facts of history, compounded by a lack of logical thinking, and a limited intellect.

I have found these traits to be uniformly present in most CT'ers, and you have proven this to be the case in yet another example.

I am done arguing with you.

You are too stupid to realize that you are stupid.

[gsjackson]

The Battle of Vienna (German: Schlacht am Kahlenberg, Polish: Bitwa pod Wiedniem or Odsiecz Wiedeńska, Turkish: İkinci Viyana Kuşatması, Ukrainian: Віденська відсіч / Viděns'ka Vidsič) took place on the 11 and 12 of September[2] 1683 after Vienna had been besieged by the Ottoman Empire for two months. It was a battle of The Holy League versus the Ottoman Empire and fiefdoms of the Ottoman Empire near the Kahlenberg mountain in Vienna. The battle marked the beginning of the political hegemony of the Habsburg dynasty in Central Europe.

The Viennese army was led by Ernst Rüdiger Graf von Starhemberg subordinate of Leopold I Habsburg, Holy Roman Emperor.
The large-scale battle was won by Lithuanian, Polish, Austrian and German forces commanded by King of Lithuania and Poland John III Sobieski versus the Ottoman Empire army and the Ottoman fiefdoms armies commanded by Grand Vizier Merzifonlu Kara Mustafa Pasha.

Sept 11th is a date that is well known in Islamic circles as the date that Islam was turned back as it attempted to conquer Western Europe. The Ottoman Empire (and Islamic Empire) laid siege to Vienna, Austria from July 14th (this date later became Bastille Day in France) to Sept 12th. The tide of battle turned on September 11th, 1683.

I want to point out to you that September 11th, 1683 is 93 years BEFORE the formation of the United States as a political entity.

As you can see from this example, lacking the education to know about this bit of historical military history has a rather large impact upon one's understanding. Islam has been at war with The West since before the USA existed, since before North America was colonized by Europeans, since before Western Europe existed post-Renaissance, and many hundreds of years before Bush's speech. Islam did not exist in 609, and as it spread it always spread in the presence of an army as it conquered Christian territory. That's not religion, that's geo-political conquest.

The USA did not create Islamic Radicalism or Islamic Fundamentalism - it existed long before Europeans ever saw North America.

So which of the perpetrators was interviewed to confirm this was the reason the date was chosen? If there weren't any, then this is just speculation, just like the other antecedent September 11s are. And speculation that doesn't seem to fit the crime. The WTC and Pentagon quite clearly were chosen because they are symbols of western economic imperialism, enforced by the American military. This is very much a dispute of the last 60 years, one that hinges around specific policy issues and has nothing to do with some sort of long-standing blood feud between Islam and the West. It hardly makes sense that Arabs would lash out against American imperialism on the anniversary of a day when their own attacks were rebuffed.

If you want to know what motivates suicide bomber types read scholar Robert Pape's book Dying to Win. It makes clear that this is all about specific policies of the United States, a dispute carried out almost entirely in a secular context. It is all about recent history.

[odbo]

I am done arguing with you.
You are too stupid to realize that you are stupid.

i not only realize it, i have admitted it to myself and others many times. i see it as a strength.
you're too full of yourself to realize much of anything.

the world needs good people with intellect to counter-balance evil. if you're even half as smart as you think you are, you're wasting your gifts. what will it take for you to finally wake up!

When faced with overwhelming evidence you still are skeptical and resort to CT as the explanation.

no amount of evidence is ever enough if a slave wants to continue being a slave.

what happened before 9/11.. the films and tv shows seemingly predicting it.

during 9/11.. building 7 falling, 2 crashes, 1 in Pennsylvania, 1 into the pentagon, with absolutely no wreckage. the one into the pentagon killing accountants which on 9/10/2001 had rumsfield on tv announcing over 2 trillion dollars was unaccounted for.

after 9/11.. the wars against enemies that don't exist in countries which had nothing to do with it. david silverstein cashing in on his wtc insurance policy. bush, rumsfield, powell, and others lying through their teeth, about how they found out about 9/11, about WMD in iraq, about everything.

and many more. none of that makes you curious?




^this guy made a fortune on 9/11

[Winston]

Question to those who are pro-vaccine here: (e.g. Globetrotter and Momopi)

- How do you know whether vaccines are really about protection, or about making Big Pharma rich?

- How do you know whether what doctors tell you about vaccines is pure and objective, or corrupted by commercial interests of Big Pharma?

And what is the basis of your beliefs? Is it based on faith? Or on the "authority=truth" mantra that you've been programmed with?

Finally, why would the government give a shit about protecting children?

Is it your belief that secret agendas do not exist? Do government cover ups never happen, other than the ones like Watergate that became public?

[odbo]

the polio epidemic was on its way down when the vaccine "made" its name. if they injected chocolate into children back then, there would be a wives tale still around 50 years later that chocolate prevents disease.

bush senior was president and gave a speech on the new world order. 10 years later it was his son's turn to be president. but the idea of some hidden agenda is outrageous to a slave. no, it would make much more sense that 9/11 was the result of a 300+ year international islamic conspiracy.

tell a lie and repeat it enough on tv, people will start to believe it.

[globetrotter]

Question to those who are pro-vaccine here: (e.g. Globetrotter and Momopi)

- How do you know whether vaccines are really about protection, or about making Big Pharma rich?

- How do you know whether what doctors tell you about vaccines is pure and objective, or corrupted by commercial interests of Big Pharma?

And what is the basis of your beliefs? Is it based on faith? Or on the "authority=truth" mantra that you've been programmed with?

It is based upon the Scientific Method, something that you are so ignorant of you do not even know that you do not know.

Let me explain basic science to you.

1) You lay in a baseline. This would be kids get Polio and die or are on crutches or live in an iron lung.
2) You alter the conditions of the sample. This would be you administer the vaccine to the kids.
3) You then observe the results in the population of kids that did get the vaccine (they don't get sick) and those who did not (they get sick).
4) Based upon (3) you then decide to proceed with larger clinical trials, or in the case of the Polio vaccine, you cut those short and release it in to the general populace.

Why would you do so (cut the trials short)? Mostly because people won't die if you accelerate the process. Mom's don't have to fear summer outbreaks, trivial things like that.

Both of you, Winston and LinuxOnly, need to read this:

Dunning–Kruger effect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2 ... ger_effect

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to appreciate their mistakes.[1] The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their ability as above average, much higher than it actually is, while the highly skilled underrate their own abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority. This leads to the situation in which less competent people rate their own ability higher than more competent people. It also explains why actual competence may weaken self-confidence. Competent individuals falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. As Kruger and Dunning (1999) conclude, "Thus, the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others" (p. 1127). [2]

[momopi]

Question to those who are pro-vaccine here: (e.g. Globetrotter and Momopi)
- How do you know whether vaccines are really about protection, or about making Big Pharma rich?
- How do you know whether what doctors tell you about vaccines is pure and objective, or corrupted by commercial interests of Big Pharma?
And what is the basis of your beliefs? Is it based on faith? Or on the "authority=truth" mantra that you've been programmed with?
Finally, why would the government give a shit about protecting children?
Is it your belief that secret agendas do not exist? Do government cover ups never happen, other than the ones like Watergate that became public?

That's 8 questions with presupposition. Are you paying for my time to answer them?

[odbo]

Dunning–Kruger effect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2 ... ger_effect

someone making a personal decision not to get vaccinated and not to believe blatant zionist lies regarding 9/11, means they're trying to correct a problem. it doesn't mean they've overestimated their competence. if someone used to do stupid things like get flu shots or believe in the US military as some benevolent force, it's because they had misplaced confidence in doctors/the medical establishment, and the US empire as a whole. By becoming competent, they have lost that confidence in corrupt institutions, and no longer assume everyone is as good natured or "competent" as themselves, regardless of other people's position of power.


let's pretend for a minute bin laden wasn't an asset of the cia.
can you consider US intelligence competent after watching this?



and the bush administration?


another gem:


read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias