Located in The Break Room, started by lennco, Jul 20, 2012
MeWe.com is up and running in add’n to Gab;
In case u missed the awesome Gab interview;
"Seems like Covid vaccines have been released to relieve the pressure on overcrowded & underfunded nursing homes. To turn the elderly and the vulnerable into lab rats for an indisputably experimental gene rewiring vaccine"
Courts in Spain Order Forced COVID-19 Vaccination of Incapacitated Nursing Home Residents
Netherlands: 22 nursing home residents dead within two weeks of first mRNA shots
More out of context junk.
Wow, some frail old people in a nursing home died. An amount that was actually under the statistical average for that group. Must be the vaccine!!!!
This is simply trying to tie correlation to causation when the link does not actually exist. Classic misinformation.
No shit. Old people are getting the vaccine in most places, not young people. Old people die at higher rates in general.
It is an absolutely asinine argument to try to tie old people dying at a higher rate to a COVID vaccine. Old people die at a higher rate man, that is a fact of life.
Brad, weird feeling?
Readin neutral source, for once, Citation below
Not CNN, MSNBC, Vox, Kool Aid. Wake up, Brad! Snap out of it;
We all know if it was some bloated trillion dollar tax cut for the rich the GOP would support it. Who cares about debt then. I know "libertarian" Rand Paul had no problem adding to debt when it came to tax cuts for the rich.
The fact so many ordinary people are going to benefit really annoys them. There is a reason it is one of the most popular pieces of legislation in modern history.
Who cares if the GOP is "fuming". They didn't care about "unity" or "compromise" when they were in power pushing unpopular ideas. I am still waiting on their healthcare plan...
The people overwhelmingly support this. The GOP can object to this, raising minimum wage, and other popular ideas at their own peril.
You promote vaccines. Did you take it yourself?
You know who else promoted vaccines? Donald Trump.
I have not been offered it yet. I am not in a high risk group. I will when it is my turn.
As far as I know Trump didn't promote the vaccine, he just said it is coming.
All Trump supporters (in alternative media) are against corona vaccine.
If someone cries and says,
"there is a pandemic and you haven't done anything about it ,
and because you are against science and new tech
you prevent a vaccine from being created ,
and you don't care about my life and health",
how can Trump respond,:" it is coming, get it, and shut up."
or is he supposed to say something like:
" there is no pandemic, and don't take mrna vaccines because they are dangerous,
and deep state running the medical system,
and sorry, before eliminating the deep state I can't help you."
If he said this what would mainstream media say: He refers to baseless conspiracy theories
to defend his failure in fighting against the pandemic.
45 was too busy promoting himself, but did boast 'Operation Warp-Speed'.
Most of his (alternative media) supporters live in an alternate universe, so what would you expect?
This was never considered a factor when they were counted as Covid-19 deaths.
It's not a politicized issue here like it is there, but even here most people take all these figures with a grain of salt. The US was clearly doing all they could to ramp up the fear - maybe with good intentions. But people who stop living to avoid a tiny chance of death have their priorities backwards. We all die, but too many of us never live.
...and HATE speech is legally protected FREE speech in USA, in effect, it does not exist.
Hate speech in the United States cannot be directly regulated due to the basic human right to free speech recognized in the American Constitution. While “hate speech” is not a legal term in the United States, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that most of what would qualify as hate speech in other western countries is legally protected free speech under the First Amendment. In a Supreme Court case on the issue, Matal v. Tam (2017), the justices unanimously reaffirmed that there is effectively no "hate speech" exception to the free speech rights protected by the First Amendment and that the U.S. government may not discriminate against speech on the basis of the speaker’s viewpoint.
Do you even understand what you are addressing? There are incidents at particular centers that underwent Covid19 vaccination or at least the first dose and there are many examples in Europe. And not national stats for you to manipulate.
Spain nursing home The Nuestra Señora del Rosario stopped administering Pfizer BioNTech shots after 46 (capacity of 148) residents died within days of the of the first dose.
Do you celebrate coercive or forced vaccinations with no rights what goes into your own body?
Do you have a problem with Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data? You got a better way to track injuries and deaths caused by vaccines?
The data goes through February 4, 2021, with 12,697 recorded adverse events, including 653 deaths following injections of the experimental COVID mRNA shots by Pfizer and Moderna.
No curiosity or empathy just always looking to shut down any independent dialog with your talking points while complaining about the state of the thread. You are an abject shill.
No speech should ever be regulated. Not talking about incitement or call to action so don't go there to waste my time.
Hate Speech Isn't Real
As a Canadian, you too, are bound by the laws of the Land: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, whether you like it or not:
The meaning of "hatred" in the context of the Criminal Code of Canada:
Hatred is predicated on destruction, and hatred against identifiable groups therefore thrives on insensitivity, bigotry and destruction of both the target group and of the values of our society. Hatred in this sense is a most extreme emotion that belies reason; an emotion that, if exercised against members of an identifiable group, implies that those individuals are to be despised, scorned, denied respect and made subject to ill-treatment on the basis of group affiliation
Section 319(2) makes it an offence to wilfully promote hatred against any identifiable group, by making statements (other than in private conversation).
Section 319(1) makes it an offence to communicate statements in a public place which incite hatred against an identifiable group, where it is likely to lead to a breach of the peace.
The Supreme Court of Canada has rejected constitutional challenges to the hate propaganda offences in the Criminal Code, and has also rejected challenges to the hate publication provisions in human rights legislation. The Court has ruled that while the provisions restrict freedom of expression, the restrictions are justifiable under section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I rest my case
This land was made for you and me
People tell me this guy’s completely fine and is the most popular POTUS of all time
“It’s time Biden was put out to pasture “.... Corn Pop 2021
Biden is a must watch, one never knows when he will drop some truth bombs
That's an awful law. A whole lot of words that pretend to describe hate, but are actually so vague that almost anything you say could be called a hate crime. (Except in private conversation. But what if that conversation is made public? And exactly when does a conversation cease to be private?)
That's the reason these laws are basically evil. There are laws against incitement, laws against harassment and assault. And these cover most reasonable cases. The law against "hate speech" can and will be used as a tool to squash dissent. Look at Thailand's Lese Majeste laws for an example of how they can be used. Countless people are in prison because someone who didn't like them decided to say they insulted the king, the king's family, or even the king's dogs.
People may express their own opinion, but it is a double-edged sword. I'm entitled to my opinion or I have a right to my opinion is a logical fallacy in which a person discredits any opposition by claiming that they are entitled to their opinion due to mistakes in reasoning.
Some people show respect for others' Rights, while some do not. Laws help protect from racism and discrimination. Each province and territory has its own laws not federally regulated. For instance, anti-discrimination law may include protections for groups based on age, race, ethnicity, nationality, disability, mental illness, sex and sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, religion, creed, or individual political opinions. Hate speech prorogates these protections.
Separate names with a comma.