Half Truthes and why they are seriously dangerous

[Michael]

So on the main page the Sun Magazine brought out an article which i want to discuss.

It reads:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Why do our doom merchant and increasingly desperate scientists believe plunging us into lockdown again is the solution to this ongoing coronavirus pandemic?

And when will Boris Johnson – once a great libertarian – stand up to the discredited boffins Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance by refusing to curb our basic freedoms any further for measures that simply will not work?

The World Health Organisation’s special envoy on Covid-19 last week warned there is only one result that comes from locking down entire populations – and it’s certainly not eradicating the disease.

 

David Nabarro said: “Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer.”

That poverty is coming to the UK – and fast. The Centre for Economics and Business Research today predicts almost three million folk will be unemployed by Christmas.

That’s just the beginning and the reason why we can no longer live in a Covid bubble.

Yet, in October, seven months after the peak of this new disease exported by China, the government is today pushing ahead with plans to lock down some of our biggest cities.

And the worst is yet to come, with waves of the always-deadly flu set to collide with Covid over winter.

 

No one is denying the virus is a serious problem that requires genuine changes to some of the ways we live, like the wearing of masks and some sensible social distancing measures.

But, with no guarantee of a vaccine, it is implausible to think that lockdowns that were first used for three weeks to protect the NHS are a sensible way forward.

We must remember that even in March and April, when Covid was an unknown threat, our health service was not overwhelmed. We have learnt so much since then, both in terms of how to treat the illness and how to manage the NHS.

 

My fear is that, rather than being an effective tool, the increasingly draconian and nonsensical regulations announced by the Prime Minister today that divide England into three tiers will encourage us to become a nation of liars.

 

Is anyone seriously going to believe four blokes in their 50s having dinner at the pub are really part of the same household, for example?

Will people really stop inviting their friends over for a drink when they’re allowed to catch a packed tube home at 10pm when the ridiculous nationwide curfew kicks in?

Why is it OK to work in an office surrounded by people all day but it’s not OK to visit relatives from another household?

None of this makes sense anymore.

 

The cure has now become far worse than the disease."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First the obvious trojan horse.

The article basically talks about the non-sensical meassurments. We here in germany have the same topic thrown arround on our official media, that the meassurments are in-consequent, because they vary from region to region.

 

I want to phrase an important sentence from David Icke:

Problem - Solution

 

They peddle back, admit the non-sensical regulations, only to sell you the idea that there need to be stricter on a nationwide scale.

 

This is how backwards the psychology works:

"Is anyone seriously going to believe four blokes in their 50s having dinner at the pub are really part of the same household, for example?"

 

Translation: The 4 blokes should not meet at a pub, because they obviously are not part of the same household.

 

"Will people really stop inviting their friends over for a drink when they’re allowed to catch a packed tube home at 10pm when the ridiculous nationwide curfew kicks in?"

 

Translation: People should stop inviting their friends

 

"No one is denying the virus is a serious problem that requires genuine changes to some of the ways we live, like the wearing of masks and some sensible social distancing measures."

 

Of course we are denying it, because there is strong evidence that the virus doesent even exist or as seen isnt dangerous at all. Pick one of the two.

This means: Masks and social distancing are not required and not mandatory and should be removed instantly.

But they want you to get used to this idea of wearing them.

 

But, with no guarantee of a vaccine, it is implausible to think that lockdowns that were first used for three weeks to protect the NHS are a sensible way forward.

 

Again some big nonsense. They want to sell you the idea that the vaccine is the saving grace. It is not. They didnt even isolate the virus, they dont even know what they are testing, they therfor not even can offer a vaccine.

 

As seen they are now mixing some truths with lies and this is a typical psychological attack, well known. Two steps forward, one step back. Creating an artificial problem, admitting that problem, wait for the puplic to ask for a solution, offer a solution.

 

Dont fall for this nonsense

 

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2020 by Michael

[Mitochondrial Eve]

1 hour ago, Michael said:

As seen they are now mixing some truths with lies and this is a typical psychological attack, well known. Two steps forward, one step back. Creating an artificial problem, admitting that problem, wait for the puplic to ask for a solution, offer a solution.

 

Dont fall for this nonsense

 

I would agree that there is backwards psychology at play when it comes to the confusing and contradictory "rules" being forced on us.

 

Perhaps it is playing into the controllers' hands querying the inconsistencies. This then gives the excuse needed to enforce even more draconian measures. Taking the example of being "allowed" to travel on the tube but not to invite friends over - if people challenge why crowded tube journeys are "allowed" but seeing friends is not, the solution given won't be to grant more liberty back again and allow the latter, but rather to come down even harder on the former. On public transport, face coverings were made mandatory.

 

Perhaps just ignoring the silly rules is the best strategy.

[Michael]

2 hours ago, Mitochondrial Eve said:

 

Perhaps just ignoring the silly rules is the best strategy.

 

I actually believe its the only way forward. To absolutly stop with whatever they come up with and to not give in.

We had some big and small protests over the last months and one current theme that occured was that people, despite protesting against these restrictions, wearing masks and kept social distance, to avoid that the police cleared the field. (in my country)

Thats not how it works. It wont change anything in the long run.

Of course, the positive is that it makes people aware that there is a growing resistance, but you have to deny all regulations they come up with to be taken seriously.

 

They simply wont care if one accepts even the slightest thing.

Edited October 13, 2020 by Michael