Coding behind the 'models'

[Trauiner]

I asked first...

Classic.

As with all your conspiracy theories, you post stuff because you believe it aligns with your conspiracy but can never dig into the source of it. Maybe if you started doing so, you would realise a few things.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Feel free, you stupid fucking cunt.

Now now.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Classic.

As with all your conspiracy theories, you post stuff because you believe it aligns with your conspiracy but can never dig into the source of it. Maybe if you started doing so, you would realise a few things.

Maybe I already have.

 

[bonusmedia]

Toby Young wants low IQ parents to select intelligent embryos for the sake of social mobility.
You're shilling for a man who thinks your own non-neurotypical child is a worthless aberration.

Look in the mirror, realise what you've become. You're a good bloke at heart, you're completely right to be skeptical and question authority, but you've somehow gone from that to trusting people who treat working people like shit on their shoes. You went down the rabbit hole and got lost. It's not too late to turn around.

 

[Trauiner]

Maybe I already have.

Well clearly you haven't because if you had, you wouldn't be able to say what you have.

 

[BREWSTERS]

In a word, communism. That's where this is leading.

The Cambridge Dictionary definition of a police state is; "a country in which the government uses the police to severely limit people's freedom".

Can you deny that's what is happening in this country?

Whole industries won't recover from this - tourism has had it for one. Over 50% of the UK population now rely on the government for money.

Whether CV is real or not, the numbers are artificially inflated. They don't even deny it in the US...some MPs and scientists in Italy are working to get 'actual' figures published.
So why would some countries inflate the figures, and it is only some countries. It makes them look bad not being able to control it like many others. Many countries it's barely a blip on a chart. If it was genuinely as bad as they say, I'd expect them to be looking at ways to make the figures look better. But they want them to look as bad as possible...to keep people in fear. A frightened population is easily controlled...look at China a billion people controlled by a few. Controlled because they largely rely on the state for everything.

That's where this is heading. More than half of the UK already do.

You're right about money losing it's value. There is no inherent value in it anyway. Once the state or whoever already controls everything, what use is money?

 

[BREWSTERS]

Well clearly you haven't because if you had, you wouldn't be able to say what you have.

And you think you can say that because what...you know everything...is that it? Dear me.

 

[bonusmedia]

Jebus. The most far-right government we've ever had is leading us to communism? Man, they did a number on you.

I have a good mate in Lancaster who's high functioning autistic. He does research on psychiatry and the history of autism for the Wellcome Trust. I love him dearly and the thing I appreciate most is that he has no filter - I can always trust that what he says is what he means. I know it's a wide spectrum, lots of people have very challenging behaviours, it's bloody hard work, but you do it because you love them.

Anyway, I like Lancaster. If you can possibly stand it, when it's possible, I'd like to buy you a pint, Brewsters. I honestly think that if we were sat across from each other, we could find common ground. The bastards win by making us fight each other. We can do better.

 

[bonusmedia]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[BREWSTERS]

Jebus. The most far-right government we've ever had is leading us to communism? Man, they did a number on you.

I have a good mate in Lancaster who's high functioning autistic. He does research on psychiatry and the history of autism for the Wellcome Trust. I love him dearly and the thing I appreciate most is that he has no filter - I can always trust that what he says is what he means. I know it's a wide spectrum, lots of people have very challenging behaviours, it's bloody hard work, but you do it because you love them.

Anyway, I like Lancaster. If you can possibly stand it, when it's possible, I'd like to buy you a pint, Brewsters. I honestly think that if we were sat across from each other, we could find common ground. The bastards win by making us fight each other. We can do better.

I'm sure we all share some common ground. It makes me laugh when people discount something because it's from a certain source...I'm often guilty of it myself. I see the BBC as the main propaganda arm for government...it doesn't mean that everything they put out is wrong. It's the same with most sources. I know people switch off when David Icke gets mentioned, mostly because of the lizard thing and I can understand that. But when it comes to geopolitics and what he calls the 'totalitarian tip-toe' he's on the money and has been making predictions for years that prove to be correct.

Toby Young...I couldn't care less about him, but the common ground I do share with him is being a lockdown sceptic.

So yeah, I'm sure we could have a pint - if the pubs open, and can get 'ze correct trawel papers yah' Your statment "The bastards win by making us fight each other" is absolutely correct...see, some common ground already. Get us arguing over the details to stop us looking at the bigger picture.

 

[BREWSTERS]

I mean, if you define "police severely limiting freedom" as attempting to prevent people from doing something that is fatal to a considerable portion of the population, then yes. I can see what you are saying.

0.06% is not a considerable portion of anything...and that's going off the biggest figure I've seen touted for possible deaths (40k). Take out the 'died with' to leave the 'died of' and you're looking at a fraction of that already tiny amount (see the Hamburg Doctor below).

It is not proportional to lock-up 100% of a population for such a small risk. Especially when the overwhelming number of 'at risk' people can easily be identified.

But even people that are flouting the guidelines aren't being fined for the most part. So with that in mind, I deny that the Police are severely limiting people's freedom. As part of guidelines they are already giving us back much of our "freedoms".

Obviously there isn't the manpower to fine most flouting the guidelines - I don't doubt they would though if they did.

As for them giving us back that which should never have been taken away - some people are acting like they're grateful; it's like having your car stolen and being thankful they leave the contents of the glovebox.

I think it will take a number of years to get back to anywhere near how things were regarding tourism.
I think the hospitality industry will prove to be the largest hindrance. It's happened in places like China, where restaurants have been opened but public confidence OR their mentality towards eating out has changed.

Tourism is gone - I can't see how it can ever recover. Lenders aren't going to be keen when there's an ever present threat of a new pandemic. Hospitality? That'll have a hard time until more people realise the scale of the 'threat'.

There are recent arguments suggesting that UK released numbers are actually well below "real" numbers. How do you argue that one?

I'm not going to try and argue against 'suggestions', especially when it is widely known and not denied that the numbers presented in certain countries, the UK being one, are of people who die 'with' CV and not necessarily 'of' CV. Here is a German doctor who has performed autopsies on the deaths relating to CV in Hamburg.

Sure, there are some inconsistencies and things that could be done better by the Government, but I don't think becoming a Communist state is something that would happen. The Government haven't decimated our education system that much just yet.

One thing that isn't inconsistant, is our governments pushing of fear, and refusal to question and examine any evidence that shows that the lock-up hasn't worked at all. Pushing fear on the people is nothing short of terrorism.

Terrorism:

• n.
  Resort to terrorizing methods as a means of coercion, or the state of fear and submission produced by the prevalence of such methods.
• n.
  The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized; a mode of government by terror or intimidation.

 

[BREWSTERS]

But that's solely down to being a numbers game.
If you throw out enough predictions, statistically you are going to be right a certain % of the time.

If genuine research, documents and sources were provided behind these "predictions" then they would hold value, but the sources are always someone like "anon", or "Sue Denim". Immediately it loses credibility, and rightly so.

With the benefit of time, when many predictions come true...from books written 10 or 20 years ago, it doesn't matter if sources are named. Many sources for some information would have literally been risking their lives. That guy was naming people like Saville, Heath and many other prominent politicians and celebrities in his books many years ago - while they were alive! When they could've been brought to justice. But the press...who must've known he was right, roled out the lizard mullarkey to stop people in their tracks.

He's been saying for years that Bill Gates has sinister motives - since before most people knew who he was.

But anyway, Icke's just one element, and obviously I don't believe everything he says, but sometimes he's worth listening to instead of discounting off hand. There are literally hundreds of good investigators who unearth information that the MSM would never be allowed to present. In the US for example, the biggest source of advertising dollars is the pharmaceutical industry. How many media outlets do you think are going to bite the hand that feeds them?

The sources you share never provide any details, though. They never document their sources, and points of reference are always thin on the ground for individuals to investigate for themselves.

That works both ways...one of MSMs favourite phrases seems to be 'sources say...'.

Ease up a bit. Chill out. You stress yourself out about all this stuff.

Yes maybe, but if I hear someone breaking in my window at night I'm going to tool up, not ease up. If you can't hear the glass break, it's easy to chill.

 

[Trauiner]

Tourism is gone - I can't see how it can ever recover. Lenders aren't going to be keen when there's an ever present threat of a new pandemic.

As you may or may not know, I'm heavy in the 'geo' domain/website industry. Most of my geo websites essentially rely on 90% of the revenue coming from tourism. That being hotel bookings, local 'day out' locations etc paying for advertising. At present, there has been no sign in tourism being 'gone' or dying in the slightest.

Hotels are being inundated with bookings for upcoming months across the board from what I can see and pre-bookings for other things like 'adventure days/days out' etc haven't slowed down. In fact, some locations are seeing their highest bookings in years. (People want to escape where they've been locked-down, maybe?)

I can see tourism having a massive boost in some areas, because people will want to enjoy themselves after being held down.

I think once the the lockdown is even more relaxed, people will go back to doing things like they always did. It will be like nothing happened.

We're in a bit of a odd situation at the moment because a lot of people go along with the motto of 'stay at home and be safe' but they're only happy to go along with that because the government is paying their wages. It's easy to say "Yes, I'm staying at home!" while you're getting your bills paid for not working.

I believe that if the government didn't offer the 80% furlough pay etc and people had the thing of 'If I don't go to work today, I'm not going to get paid and I'm not going to be able to pay my bills', I bet you would have a vastly different outcome of people agreeing and sticking to the 'Stay at home' motto they happily promote. (Part of me does believe the 80% pay isn't really to protect businesses per say but rather to keep people at home. The government would fail to have people listen without that pay protection for employees.)

The whole lenders thing I can somewhat see your point. I don't see that being a problem though. What I foresee is insurance companies having to change what protection they actually offer. Lenders will adjust.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Good info thanks - I hope you're right...I'll be happy to be wrong.

Are the bookings coming from the UK for UK hotels? Me and my mates have cancelled three motorbike trips this year - two abroad and one UK. When we get the chance we're going to rebook for a UK tour rather than go abroad so as to help UK businesses. I imagine quite a few may be doing likewise, not just here but in other countries.

Longer term with higher unemployment, that's got to take a toll though I'd imagine.

As will venues ability to provide the services - taking bookings is one thing, being allowed to trade when that time comes may not be their call.