Posts: 647
Threads: 27
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation:
12
10-29-2021, 09:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-29-2021, 09:04 PM by Blue Bird.)
(10-29-2021, 08:22 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: Yes, I actually watched another video with him in it about a month ago.
Although this channel may seem a bit radical, it was interesting to hear Dr. Zelenko speak.
https://peachlandadvocate.ca/stew-peters...r-zelenko/
I think the bottom line is there are treatments out there if you do get a serious case of Covid but no one in the current government or mainstream media would lead you to believe it is so. They are too bent on just getting the jab and nothing else.
As far as the what the MRNA jab is and what it may turn out to be, I'm going to just sit back and see!
I heard that he has cancer and that he doesn't have much longer to live. He is a brave man.
This goes easily to the heart and it will encourage me:
I'm going to just sit back and see!
The truth will prevail!
Just not sure when, but don't give up or in!
Dana, I think we don't see what's behind all this, but many things point in the direction you mentioned.
Posts: 1,393
Threads: 80
Joined: Dec 2018
Reputation:
49
(10-29-2021, 09:01 PM)Blue Bird Wrote: (10-29-2021, 08:22 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: Yes, I actually watched another video with him in it about a month ago.
Although this channel may seem a bit radical, it was interesting to hear Dr. Zelenko speak.
https://peachlandadvocate.ca/stew-peters...r-zelenko/
I think the bottom line is there are treatments out there if you do get a serious case of Covid but no one in the current government or mainstream media would lead you to believe it is so. They are too bent on just getting the jab and nothing else.
As far as the what the MRNA jab is and what it may turn out to be, I'm going to just sit back and see!
I heard that he has cancer and that he doesn't have much longer to live. He is a brave man.
This goes easily to the heart and it will encourage me:
I'm going to just sit back and see!
The truth will prevail!
Just not sure when, but don't give up or in!
Dana, I think we don't see what's behind all this, but many things point in the direction you mentioned.
Wow, didn't know he had cancer, that's a shame. I actually upset to hear that!
Didn't know I was providing encouragement but glad you feel that way!
To me, it seems obvious something is going on "behind the scenes" as so much info is being suppressed (but slowly leaking out!).
There are too many people in this world for everyone to be "on board" with an agenda that may not be rational (I'm being nice here).
And there are too many ways now for us to find out, it's not like it was many years ago when we had to depend on just certain outlets for information.
I'm not saying all the info out there is tried and true, but there is a lot more than "meets the eye" and isn't being transparent. Why?
That's what concerns me.
Posts: 647
Threads: 27
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation:
12
10-29-2021, 11:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-30-2021, 12:05 AM by Blue Bird.)
Yes, it is sad that he is so sick. And we would need him and would like to have him here on earth, too. Maybe, his cancer will go so far back that he can go on living.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/vgQ1P31iYKEp/
At the end of this interview, he talks about his illness.
It's an oppressive atmosphere with all the suppressed information in the media. I felt this way when we visited the German Democratic Republic in 1986. Now it's here. A few weeks ago, youtube took a video down while I was watching it. Incredible!
Posts: 335
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation:
4
10-30-2021, 05:13 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-30-2021, 05:15 AM by Alan_Boskov.)
Robrecht Wrote:... what, if any, sourcing or documents are referenced in your video and links. What, if anything, is this reporting based on? Is it mere suspicion, dislike, or partisan muckraking of Dr. Fauci? Or do these reports reference any documents or well-placed anonymous or identified sources?... While the question is legitimate, it's directed at the messenger instead of at the sources of which you call to question. Whether all of these sources are diabolically organizing under a concerted agenda or not is always possible. However, unlikely.
Bending facts or even simply reporting without a substantial verifiable source isn't uncommon. Even before the internet became available to the general public, distortions in reporting, either based on ignorance or intent to deceive, existed. Such respected publications like the Economist magazine have also been proven wrong.
Posts: 137
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2020
Reputation:
9
(10-30-2021, 05:13 AM)Alan_Boskov Wrote: Robrecht Wrote:... what, if any, sourcing or documents are referenced in your video and links. What, if anything, is this reporting based on? Is it mere suspicion, dislike, or partisan muckraking of Dr. Fauci? Or do these reports reference any documents or well-placed anonymous or identified sources?... While the question is legitimate, it's directed at the messenger instead of at the sources of which you call to question. Whether all of these sources are diabolically organizing under a concerted agenda or not is always possible. However, unlikely.
Bending facts or even simply reporting without a substantial verifiable source isn't uncommon. Even before the internet became available to the general public, distortions in reporting, either based on ignorance or intent to deceive, existed. Such respected publications like the Economist magazine have also been proven wrong.
Recall, it was you who claimed that there were diabolical experiments being conducted. I have not accused your sources of being diabolical, merely questioned if they are being truthful or well informed, merely questioned if their claims are based on any actual evidence, either documents or well-placed sources, identified or anonymous. Surely, as the messenger, you too must also care if your message is true, right?
Posts: 249
Threads: 6
Joined: Dec 2018
Reputation:
14
(10-29-2021, 09:01 PM)Blue Bird Wrote: (10-29-2021, 08:22 PM)searchinmyroots Wrote: Yes, I actually watched another video with him in it about a month ago.
Although this channel may seem a bit radical, it was interesting to hear Dr. Zelenko speak.
https://peachlandadvocate.ca/stew-peters...r-zelenko/
I think the bottom line is there are treatments out there if you do get a serious case of Covid but no one in the current government or mainstream media would lead you to believe it is so. They are too bent on just getting the jab and nothing else.
As far as the what the MRNA jab is and what it may turn out to be, I'm going to just sit back and see!
I heard that he has cancer and that he doesn't have much longer to live. He is a brave man.
This goes easily to the heart and it will encourage me:
I'm going to just sit back and see!
The truth will prevail!
Just not sure when, but don't give up or in!
Dana, I think we don't see what's behind all this, but many things point in the direction you mentioned.
I'm saddened to learn Dr. Zelenko is so ill. He is a voice needed for these times and, I feel fortunate for having had the opportunity to listen to the links that were provided here which included access to his website.
Since the onset of Covid-19 there has been constant goal post movement. We've come a long way from "flattening the curve - just 2 more weeks" to vaccination mandates, one of, no jab-no job, and this is not just occuring in the medical field. I can listen to both right and left viewpoints that come together when reporting on the vaccination which is those who have refused the shot had simply not been better persuaded of the vaccination's safety. I find this narrative troubling.
Posts: 335
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation:
4
10-30-2021, 07:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-30-2021, 07:10 PM by Alan_Boskov.)
Of course. But if I needed to refrain from sending a message, because of doubting the source on one or more points, I need not send any messages whatsoever.
The claim has been around long enough for Mr. Fauci to sue the sources for laible, if these claims happen to be unsubstantiated. His refusal in judicially challenging these claims does nothing to prove these accusations to be a product of either a fictitious or a distorted origin.
Posts: 137
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2020
Reputation:
9
(10-30-2021, 07:08 PM)Alan_Boskov Wrote: Of course. But if I needed to refrain from sending a message, because of doubting the source on one or more points, I need not send any messages whatsoever.
The claim has been around long enough for Mr. Fauci to sue the sources for laible, if these claims happen to be unsubstantiated. His refusal in judicially challenging these claims does nothing to prove these accusations to be a product of either a fictitious or a distorted origin.
In my opinion, it is certainly better to not spread false information than to spread information that is of doubtful veracity with no substantiation whatsoever. Don't you want to be responsible for promoting reliable sources who substantiate their claims? Also, it doesn't seem like you understand the legal definition of libel. Neither nor your source committed libel against Dr Fauci. At worst it seems that you're simply spreading false and unsubstantiated claims about a study said to be approved by the NIH. That Fauci has not sued you or your source for something they did not do, does nothing whatsoever substantiate your claims.
Posts: 335
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation:
4
First of all, if Fauci tries to sue me for alleging, that would be bad business, as long as there are bigger fishes to fry.
If allegations against him were not true, his judicial inaction is preventing him from taking a lucrative opportunity in collecting damages from these sources. His inaction is also indicative of the allegation's plausibility.
Posts: 137
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2020
Reputation:
9
Alan, don't you see the illogic of your position?
On the one hand, you provide reasons why Dr. Fauci should not sue for libel:
Quote:First of all, if Fauci tries to sue me for alleging, that would be bad business, as long as there are bigger fishes to fry.
On the other hand, you want to use the fact that he has not sued anyone for libel as an argument for your allegations being true:
Quote:If allegations against him were not true, his judicial inaction is preventing him from taking a lucrative opportunity in collecting damages from these sources. His inaction is also indicative of the allegation's plausibility.
But the more fundamental illogic of your position is that, as I've already said, your allegations are not libel against him. Let that sink in for a moment. At worst it seems that you're simply spreading false and unsubstantiated claims about a study said to be approved by the NIH. That is not libel against Fauci. It's just false and unsubstantiated claims about a study said to be approved by the NIH.
|
