rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunichthan 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous vaccine
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
Lou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important to himHere that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excess deaths around the world.
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns being taken in by that conman Fauci.
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you
keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something
he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by >competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive
deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific
or competent.
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:35:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>him than 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous vaccine
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:59:14 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich >>><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
Lou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important toHere that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excess deaths around the world.
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns being taken in by that conman Fauci.
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you
keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something >>>he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by >>>competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination.
Mortality statistics tend to be a running tabulation of deaths, which
is usually a few months behind on publication and likely to require >>continuous corrections. Lacking anything better, the WHO (world
health organization) is the best I can offer.
"Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)" >><https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid>
The problem is that excess death calculations rely on a dubious
assumption, that deaths from all causes other than Covid-19 remain >>constant. That's hardly the case when the statistics gathering >>organizations either shut down between 2020 and the end of 2022,
became heavily politicized, or faked their numbers to avoid a local
panic. There were other factors, like the shutdown of many hospital >>services, which delayed many procedures. The lack of international >>standards on collecting Covid-19 related data doesn't help much. If
you look at the graphs in the above URL, the lines between the upper
and lower uncertainty bounds are huge. In other words, the "data" is >>really an estimate (or best guess).
Here's the WHO graphs for just the USA: >><https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-deaths-daily-economist-single-entity>
95% uncertainty upper and 0% lower bounds are still widely separated.
For the USA, that's current +/- 1,000 deaths per week.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive >>>deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific
or competent.
Well, since Tom's reply is likely to be politicized, perhaps a
pre-emptive strike might be amusing:
"Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in >>Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic" (July 24, 2023) >><https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617> >>"In this cohort study evaluating 538,159 deaths in individuals aged 25 >>years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December
2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters
than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all >>adults, but not before."
Translation: Vaccines don't kill Republicans. It's the lack of
vaccines that kill Republicans.
But you are comparing Covid Deaths. Tom is talking about deaths due
solely to having received a vaccination
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:19:54 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>him than 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous vaccine
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:35:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:59:14 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich >>>><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: >>>>>> >
Here that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excess deaths around the world.Lou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important to
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns being taken in by that conman Fauci.
based-on-age-and-sex-the-possible-role-of-Covid-19-delayed-care-and-vaccines.pdf>
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you >>>>keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something >>>>he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by >>>>competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination.
Mortality statistics tend to be a running tabulation of deaths, which
is usually a few months behind on publication and likely to require >>>continuous corrections. Lacking anything better, the WHO (world
health organization) is the best I can offer.
"Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)" >>><https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid>
The problem is that excess death calculations rely on a dubious >>>assumption, that deaths from all causes other than Covid-19 remain >>>constant. That's hardly the case when the statistics gathering >>>organizations either shut down between 2020 and the end of 2022,
became heavily politicized, or faked their numbers to avoid a local >>>panic. There were other factors, like the shutdown of many hospital >>>services, which delayed many procedures. The lack of international >>>standards on collecting Covid-19 related data doesn't help much. If
you look at the graphs in the above URL, the lines between the upper
and lower uncertainty bounds are huge. In other words, the "data" is >>>really an estimate (or best guess).
Here's the WHO graphs for just the USA: >>><https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-deaths-daily-economist-single-entity>
95% uncertainty upper and 0% lower bounds are still widely separated.
For the USA, that's current +/- 1,000 deaths per week.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive >>>>deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific
or competent.
Well, since Tom's reply is likely to be politicized, perhaps a >>>pre-emptive strike might be amusing:
"Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in >>>Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic" (July 24, 2023) >>><https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617> >>>"In this cohort study evaluating 538,159 deaths in individuals aged 25 >>>years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December
2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters >>>than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all >>>adults, but not before."
Translation: Vaccines don't kill Republicans. It's the lack of
vaccines that kill Republicans.
But you are comparing Covid Deaths. Tom is talking about deaths due
solely to having received a vaccination
Sorry, I missed that. As I understand it, the author is disappointed
that the Covid death rate failed to drop to the comparatively low
levels of pre-pandemic (before Jan 2023) incidence. Note the title,
which suggest uncertainty:
"An analysis of excess mortality based on age and sex; the possible
role of Covid-19, delayed care and vaccines" ><https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Herman-Steigstra/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines/links/655c7aecce88b87031fbc73a/An-analysis-of-excess-mortality-
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines>
(12 pages). Note that CBS is "Statistics Netherlands": ><https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb>
I think the author answered his own question on Pg 4.
"In this graph, as an example, we see the baseline calculated for 2020
for both men and women. What is immediately striking is the sharp peak
among 75-year-olds. This is a consequence of the baby boom, the birth
wave in 1946 immediately after the Second World War."
In other words, he discovered that more men had died during WWII than
women, and that the baseline death rates are finally catching up with
the baby boomers. In other words, if he can't win at football, just
move the goal posts. Redefining the baseline death rates to fit his >conclusions is the equivalent to moving the goal posts.
Most his contentions are summarized in one sentence on Pg 9:
"We see here clearly and unmistakably that there was more excess
mortality in all the years in which vaccination was carried out than
in the year without vaccination."
This is the basis of the authors uncertain conclusion that Covid was
gone by the end of 2022 which should have reduced the excess deaths,
but didn't. Never mind various Covid variants, long Covid, creative
fatality tracking, delayed medical care, and such, all of which
persist to this day in some degree.
Pg 9 again: "The risk of mortality is increasing every year, while
there is hardly any corona anymore. There are obviously no complete
annual figures for 2023 yet, but the figures so far paint a picture
identical to 2022."
In other words, he admits to guessing based on incomplete statistics
and continues to adjust the baseline death rates to meet his
expectations. I would have been happier if he had used the baseline
numbers in the same manner as the WHO and other agencies, and then
applied his assumptions. Instead, he first adjusts his baseline
numbers to meet his expectations and then wonders why they still
didn't produce his expected results. Also, this is for only one
country and does not represent the situation in other countries.
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 03:30:28 -0500, Catrike Riderhim than 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous vaccine
<soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 19:14:50 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:19:54 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:35:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>>wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:59:14 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich >>>>>><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: >>>>>>>> >
Here that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excess deaths around the world.Lou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important to
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns being taken in by that conman Fauci.
based-on-age-and-sex-the-possible-role-of-Covid-19-delayed-care-and-vaccines.pdf>
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you >>>>>>keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something >>>>>>he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by >>>>>>competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination.
Mortality statistics tend to be a running tabulation of deaths, which >>>>>is usually a few months behind on publication and likely to require >>>>>continuous corrections. Lacking anything better, the WHO (world >>>>>health organization) is the best I can offer.
"Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)" >>>>><https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid>
The problem is that excess death calculations rely on a dubious >>>>>assumption, that deaths from all causes other than Covid-19 remain >>>>>constant. That's hardly the case when the statistics gathering >>>>>organizations either shut down between 2020 and the end of 2022, >>>>>became heavily politicized, or faked their numbers to avoid a local >>>>>panic. There were other factors, like the shutdown of many hospital >>>>>services, which delayed many procedures. The lack of international >>>>>standards on collecting Covid-19 related data doesn't help much. If >>>>>you look at the graphs in the above URL, the lines between the upper >>>>>and lower uncertainty bounds are huge. In other words, the "data" is >>>>>really an estimate (or best guess).
Here's the WHO graphs for just the USA: >>>>><https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-deaths-daily-economist-single-entity>
95% uncertainty upper and 0% lower bounds are still widely separated. >>>>>For the USA, that's current +/- 1,000 deaths per week.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive >>>>>>deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific >>>>>>or competent.
Well, since Tom's reply is likely to be politicized, perhaps a >>>>>pre-emptive strike might be amusing:
"Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in >>>>>Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic" (July 24, 2023) >>>>><https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617>
"In this cohort study evaluating 538,159 deaths in individuals aged 25 >>>>>years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December >>>>>2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters >>>>>than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all >>>>>adults, but not before."
Translation: Vaccines don't kill Republicans. It's the lack of >>>>>vaccines that kill Republicans.
But you are comparing Covid Deaths. Tom is talking about deaths due >>>>solely to having received a vaccination
Sorry, I missed that. As I understand it, the author is disappointed >>>that the Covid death rate failed to drop to the comparatively low
levels of pre-pandemic (before Jan 2023) incidence. Note the title, >>>which suggest uncertainty:
"An analysis of excess mortality based on age and sex; the possible
role of Covid-19, delayed care and vaccines" >>><https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Herman-Steigstra/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines/links/655c7aecce88b87031fbc73a/An-analysis-of-excess-mortality-
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines>
(12 pages). Note that CBS is "Statistics Netherlands": >>><https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb>
I think the author answered his own question on Pg 4.
"In this graph, as an example, we see the baseline calculated for 2020 >>>for both men and women. What is immediately striking is the sharp peak >>>among 75-year-olds. This is a consequence of the baby boom, the birth >>>wave in 1946 immediately after the Second World War."
In other words, he discovered that more men had died during WWII than >>>women, and that the baseline death rates are finally catching up with
the baby boomers. In other words, if he can't win at football, just
move the goal posts. Redefining the baseline death rates to fit his >>>conclusions is the equivalent to moving the goal posts.
Most his contentions are summarized in one sentence on Pg 9:
"We see here clearly and unmistakably that there was more excess >>>mortality in all the years in which vaccination was carried out than
in the year without vaccination."
This is the basis of the authors uncertain conclusion that Covid was
gone by the end of 2022 which should have reduced the excess deaths,
but didn't. Never mind various Covid variants, long Covid, creative >>>fatality tracking, delayed medical care, and such, all of which
persist to this day in some degree.
Pg 9 again: "The risk of mortality is increasing every year, while
there is hardly any corona anymore. There are obviously no complete >>>annual figures for 2023 yet, but the figures so far paint a picture >>>identical to 2022."
In other words, he admits to guessing based on incomplete statistics
and continues to adjust the baseline death rates to meet his >>>expectations. I would have been happier if he had used the baseline >>>numbers in the same manner as the WHO and other agencies, and then >>>applied his assumptions. Instead, he first adjusts his baseline
numbers to meet his expectations and then wonders why they still
didn't produce his expected results. Also, this is for only one
country and does not represent the situation in other countries.
Given the data came from the AMA, which is known to have a political >>agenda, I am reminded of the fact that studies can be munipulated to
show what the people who fund the study want it to show.
But what organization isn't interested in hiding their "short
comings".
Even the Boy Scouts.
On Sunday, December 10, 2023 at 9:20:11?AM UTC, Catrike Rider wrote:to him than 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous vaccine
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 15:40:36 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 03:30:28 -0500, Catrike Rider
<sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 19:14:50 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:19:54 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:35:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> >> >>>>wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:59:14 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >
Here that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excess deaths around the world.Lou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns being taken in by that conman Fauci.
based-on-age-and-sex-the-possible-role-of-Covid-19-delayed-care-and-vaccines.pdf>
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you >> >>>>>>keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something
he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by >> >>>>>>competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination.
Mortality statistics tend to be a running tabulation of deaths, which >> >>>>>is usually a few months behind on publication and likely to require
continuous corrections. Lacking anything better, the WHO (world
health organization) is the best I can offer.
"Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)"
<https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid>
The problem is that excess death calculations rely on a dubious
assumption, that deaths from all causes other than Covid-19 remain
constant. That's hardly the case when the statistics gathering
organizations either shut down between 2020 and the end of 2022,
became heavily politicized, or faked their numbers to avoid a local
panic. There were other factors, like the shutdown of many hospital
services, which delayed many procedures. The lack of international
standards on collecting Covid-19 related data doesn't help much. If
you look at the graphs in the above URL, the lines between the upper
and lower uncertainty bounds are huge. In other words, the "data" is
really an estimate (or best guess).
Here's the WHO graphs for just the USA:
<https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-deaths-daily-economist-single-entity>
95% uncertainty upper and 0% lower bounds are still widely separated. >> >>>>>For the USA, that's current +/- 1,000 deaths per week.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive
deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific >> >>>>>>or competent.
Well, since Tom's reply is likely to be politicized, perhaps a
pre-emptive strike might be amusing:
"Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in >> >>>>>Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic" (July 24, 2023)
<https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617>
"In this cohort study evaluating 538,159 deaths in individuals aged 25 >> >>>>>years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December
2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters >> >>>>>than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all
adults, but not before."
Translation: Vaccines don't kill Republicans. It's the lack of
vaccines that kill Republicans.
But you are comparing Covid Deaths. Tom is talking about deaths due
solely to having received a vaccination
Sorry, I missed that. As I understand it, the author is disappointed
that the Covid death rate failed to drop to the comparatively low
levels of pre-pandemic (before Jan 2023) incidence. Note the title,
which suggest uncertainty:
"An analysis of excess mortality based on age and sex; the possible
role of Covid-19, delayed care and vaccines"
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Herman-Steigstra/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines/links/655c7aecce88b87031fbc73a/An-analysis-of-excess-mortality-
It's politically incorrect to be a skeptic in 2023. You're supposed to lie back and enjoy diversity stuffing you with misinformation. -- Andre JuteWhen someone says, "here is what I want you to believe," my response<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines>
(12 pages). Note that CBS is "Statistics Netherlands":
<https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb>
I think the author answered his own question on Pg 4.
"In this graph, as an example, we see the baseline calculated for 2020
for both men and women. What is immediately striking is the sharp peak
among 75-year-olds. This is a consequence of the baby boom, the birth
wave in 1946 immediately after the Second World War."
In other words, he discovered that more men had died during WWII than
women, and that the baseline death rates are finally catching up with
the baby boomers. In other words, if he can't win at football, just
move the goal posts. Redefining the baseline death rates to fit his
conclusions is the equivalent to moving the goal posts.
Most his contentions are summarized in one sentence on Pg 9:
"We see here clearly and unmistakably that there was more excess
mortality in all the years in which vaccination was carried out than
in the year without vaccination."
This is the basis of the authors uncertain conclusion that Covid was
gone by the end of 2022 which should have reduced the excess deaths,
but didn't. Never mind various Covid variants, long Covid, creative
fatality tracking, delayed medical care, and such, all of which
persist to this day in some degree.
Pg 9 again: "The risk of mortality is increasing every year, while
there is hardly any corona anymore. There are obviously no complete
annual figures for 2023 yet, but the figures so far paint a picture
identical to 2022."
In other words, he admits to guessing based on incomplete statistics
and continues to adjust the baseline death rates to meet his
expectations. I would have been happier if he had used the baseline
numbers in the same manner as the WHO and other agencies, and then
applied his assumptions. Instead, he first adjusts his baseline
numbers to meet his expectations and then wonders why they still
didn't produce his expected results. Also, this is for only one
country and does not represent the situation in other countries.
Given the data came from the AMA, which is known to have a political
agenda, I am reminded of the fact that studies can be munipulated to
show what the people who fund the study want it to show.
But what organization isn't interested in hiding their "short
comings".
Even the Boy Scouts.
is, "what's in it for you?"
One is either a skeptic or a moron.
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 19:14:50 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>him than 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous vaccine
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:19:54 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:35:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:59:14 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: >>>>>>>>
Here that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excess deaths around the world.Lou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important to
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns being taken in by that conman Fauci.
based-on-age-and-sex-the-possible-role-of-Covid-19-delayed-care-and-vaccines.pdf>
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you >>>>> keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something
he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by >>>>> competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination.
Mortality statistics tend to be a running tabulation of deaths, which
is usually a few months behind on publication and likely to require
continuous corrections. Lacking anything better, the WHO (world
health organization) is the best I can offer.
"Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)"
<https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid>
The problem is that excess death calculations rely on a dubious
assumption, that deaths from all causes other than Covid-19 remain
constant. That's hardly the case when the statistics gathering
organizations either shut down between 2020 and the end of 2022,
became heavily politicized, or faked their numbers to avoid a local
panic. There were other factors, like the shutdown of many hospital
services, which delayed many procedures. The lack of international
standards on collecting Covid-19 related data doesn't help much. If
you look at the graphs in the above URL, the lines between the upper
and lower uncertainty bounds are huge. In other words, the "data" is
really an estimate (or best guess).
Here's the WHO graphs for just the USA:
<https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-deaths-daily-economist-single-entity>
95% uncertainty upper and 0% lower bounds are still widely separated.
For the USA, that's current +/- 1,000 deaths per week.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive
deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific >>>>> or competent.
Well, since Tom's reply is likely to be politicized, perhaps a
pre-emptive strike might be amusing:
"Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in >>>> Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic" (July 24, 2023)
<https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617>
"In this cohort study evaluating 538,159 deaths in individuals aged 25 >>>> years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December
2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters
than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all
adults, but not before."
Translation: Vaccines don't kill Republicans. It's the lack of
vaccines that kill Republicans.
But you are comparing Covid Deaths. Tom is talking about deaths due
solely to having received a vaccination
Sorry, I missed that. As I understand it, the author is disappointed
that the Covid death rate failed to drop to the comparatively low
levels of pre-pandemic (before Jan 2023) incidence. Note the title,
which suggest uncertainty:
"An analysis of excess mortality based on age and sex; the possible
role of Covid-19, delayed care and vaccines"
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Herman-Steigstra/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines/links/655c7aecce88b87031fbc73a/An-analysis-of-excess-mortality-
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines>
(12 pages). Note that CBS is "Statistics Netherlands":
<https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb>
I think the author answered his own question on Pg 4.
"In this graph, as an example, we see the baseline calculated for 2020
for both men and women. What is immediately striking is the sharp peak
among 75-year-olds. This is a consequence of the baby boom, the birth
wave in 1946 immediately after the Second World War."
In other words, he discovered that more men had died during WWII than
women, and that the baseline death rates are finally catching up with
the baby boomers. In other words, if he can't win at football, just
move the goal posts. Redefining the baseline death rates to fit his
conclusions is the equivalent to moving the goal posts.
Most his contentions are summarized in one sentence on Pg 9:
"We see here clearly and unmistakably that there was more excess
mortality in all the years in which vaccination was carried out than
in the year without vaccination."
This is the basis of the authors uncertain conclusion that Covid was
gone by the end of 2022 which should have reduced the excess deaths,
but didn't. Never mind various Covid variants, long Covid, creative
fatality tracking, delayed medical care, and such, all of which
persist to this day in some degree.
Pg 9 again: "The risk of mortality is increasing every year, while
there is hardly any corona anymore. There are obviously no complete
annual figures for 2023 yet, but the figures so far paint a picture
identical to 2022."
In other words, he admits to guessing based on incomplete statistics
and continues to adjust the baseline death rates to meet his
expectations. I would have been happier if he had used the baseline
numbers in the same manner as the WHO and other agencies, and then
applied his assumptions. Instead, he first adjusts his baseline
numbers to meet his expectations and then wonders why they still
didn't produce his expected results. Also, this is for only one
country and does not represent the situation in other countries.
For Tom it doesn't matter whether it's the fox or the rabbit, Tommy is
faster then either.
In another post he has Bidden bombing the Nord Stream gas pipeline,
which from all I read is totally without any proof at all, although
there are rumors that it was a Ukraine plot... carried out by a group
from, Poland :-)
What strikes me in this is that Slow Johnny, Liebermann, and Kreepy Krygowski aren't arguing with Mark Steyn's survey of studies around the world of excess mortality before, during and after COVID, as against the background of expected mortality in theaftermath of the Chinese virus, but simply take my post, and every other post, as another opportunity to try and bully Tom Kunich.
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive
deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific
or competent.
Hard medical studies showing that the government was either erasing or urging doctors not to file VAERS entries (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System)
that showed that instead of the CDC oft quoted 2% adverse events
that the ACTUAL number was 65%
...they are entirely unaware that for a vaccine to be considered"safe" it must have a VAERS rating of 0.01% and a preferred rating of
So by the CDC's OWN RULES a VAERS rating of 2% would have been
unreleasable and the vaccine companies REGARDLESS of emergency
authorization held accountable for what would be considered a
public health threat.
Even though it is a FACT
that all of the mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis (which in adults
may or may not resolve - that is it may or may not cause permanent
heart damage)
the CDC is STILL recommending that the mRNA vaccines which are
now forbidden in most of the world, should be used on all people
including children down to 6 months which will cause permanent
heart damage to children almost certainly.
But wait a minute,
the Stupid 3 only believe the CDC and not large studies by the most
important medical universities in the world.
An emergency authorization for a shortened testing period MAY NOT be
issued unless there are not safe alternative methods available.
So Fauci claimed that there were no alternative means of treatment
when in fact there were several drugs that were VERY effective using >off-label (that means using a drug for any other reason than it was
initially developed to treat) drugs. Fauci lied and people died.
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:35:07 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
Hard medical studies showing that the government was either erasing or urging doctors not to file VAERS entries (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System)
Got a link to some of these hard medical studies? I couldn't find
any.
Reminder. VAERS data is not intended to be used for demonstrating
cause and effect:
<https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html>
"The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a
vaccine caused the event."
"A report to VAERS generally does not prove that the identified
vaccine(s) caused the adverse event described."
that showed that instead of the CDC oft quoted 2% adverse events
that the ACTUAL number was 65%
I couldn't find anything with Google search that claimed 65% adverse
effects. If that were true, people who had been vaccinated would be
dropping like flied.
...they are entirely unaware that for a vaccine to be considered"safe" it must have a VAERS rating of 0.01% and a preferred rating of
0.001%.
Amazing. I wasn't aware that a VAERS rating was required BEFORE a
vaccine could be considered safe. That's really amazing because a
virus is not suppose to be generically available until AFTER it has
been tested and declared safe. It would be difficult to file a VAERS
report for a vaccine prior to it being declared safe for general
consumption. Got a source for those amazing numbers. "preferred
rating" for being safe seems rather odd.
So by the CDC's OWN RULES a VAERS rating of 2% would have been
unreleasable and the vaccine companies REGARDLESS of emergency
authorization held accountable for what would be considered a
public health threat.
As before, I can't seem to find anything under "VAERS approval" or
"VAERS rating". VAERS is a crowd sourced database of complaints
resulting from various vaccines. It's not a testing lab. <https://vaers.hhs.gov/about.html>
Please show me where it has become a drug safety rating system.
Even though it is a FACT
I usually use a line like that to warn me that what follows is
unlikely to be a fact.
that all of the mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis (which in adults
may or may not resolve - that is it may or may not cause permanent
heart damage)
There has been some conjecture that there is a connection. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10216497/>
"Myocarditis rates in people aged 12 to 39 years are around 12.6 cases
per million doses following the second dose of mRNA vaccination."
Doesn't seem like much of a risk.
the CDC is STILL recommending that the mRNA vaccines which are
now forbidden in most of the world, should be used on all people
including children down to 6 months which will cause permanent
heart damage to children almost certainly.
Not really. Here's what really is happening:
"FDA Takes Action on Updated mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines to Better Protect
Against Currently Circulating Variants" <https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-takes-action-updated-mrna-covid-19-vaccines-better-protect-against-currently-circulating>
Basically, the mRNA vaccines were updated for the latest variants and
the older mRNA vaccines were designated as obsolete or something like
that.
But wait a minute,
I waited a minute, but nothing happened.
the Stupid 3 only believe the CDC and not large studies by the most
important medical universities in the world.
Got an example of these large studies?
An emergency authorization for a shortened testing period MAY NOT be
issued unless there are not safe alternative methods available.
So Fauci claimed that there were no alternative means of treatment
when in fact there were several drugs that were VERY effective using
off-label (that means using a drug for any other reason than it was
initially developed to treat) drugs. Fauci lied and people died.
Are you referring to drinking bleach or injecting disinfectant?
"Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment" <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177>
You wrote "...no alternative means of treatment". Please note that
there's a difference between treatment, which occurs after an
infection, and vaccination which is intended to prevent an infection.
Please try not to get these two terms confused. Paxlovid and Lagevrio
are currently the best post infection treatments, while the mRNA based vaccines are currently the best method of prevention.
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:56:28 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:based-on-age-and-sex-the-possible-role-of-Covid-19-delayed-care-and-vaccines.pdf>
On 12/9/2023 10:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 19:14:50 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:19:54 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:35:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:59:14 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom KunichMortality statistics tend to be a running tabulation of deaths, which >>>>>> is usually a few months behind on publication and likely to require >>>>>> continuous corrections. Lacking anything better, the WHO (world
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
Here that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for >>>>>>>>> free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excessLou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN >>>>>>>> thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies >>>>>>>> given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only
deaths around the world.
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the
beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns
being taken in by that conman Fauci.
good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important to
him than 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous
vaccine
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you >>>>>>> keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something >>>>>>> he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by >>>>>>> competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination. >>>>>>
health organization) is the best I can offer.
"Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)"
<https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid>
The problem is that excess death calculations rely on a dubious
assumption, that deaths from all causes other than Covid-19 remain >>>>>> constant. That's hardly the case when the statistics gathering
organizations either shut down between 2020 and the end of 2022,
became heavily politicized, or faked their numbers to avoid a local >>>>>> panic. There were other factors, like the shutdown of many hospital >>>>>> services, which delayed many procedures. The lack of international >>>>>> standards on collecting Covid-19 related data doesn't help much. If >>>>>> you look at the graphs in the above URL, the lines between the upper >>>>>> and lower uncertainty bounds are huge. In other words, the "data" is >>>>>> really an estimate (or best guess).
Here's the WHO graphs for just the USA:
<https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-deaths-daily-economist-single-entity>
95% uncertainty upper and 0% lower bounds are still widely separated. >>>>>> For the USA, that's current +/- 1,000 deaths per week.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive >>>>>>> deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific >>>>>>> or competent.
Well, since Tom's reply is likely to be politicized, perhaps a
pre-emptive strike might be amusing:
"Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in >>>>>> Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic" (July 24, 2023)
<https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617>
"In this cohort study evaluating 538,159 deaths in individuals aged 25 >>>>>> years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December >>>>>> 2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters >>>>>> than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all >>>>>> adults, but not before."
Translation: Vaccines don't kill Republicans. It's the lack of
vaccines that kill Republicans.
But you are comparing Covid Deaths. Tom is talking about deaths due
solely to having received a vaccination
Sorry, I missed that. As I understand it, the author is disappointed
that the Covid death rate failed to drop to the comparatively low
levels of pre-pandemic (before Jan 2023) incidence. Note the title,
which suggest uncertainty:
"An analysis of excess mortality based on age and sex; the possible
role of Covid-19, delayed care and vaccines"
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Herman-Steigstra/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines/links/655c7aecce88b87031fbc73a/An-analysis-of-excess-mortality-
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines>
(12 pages). Note that CBS is "Statistics Netherlands":
<https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb>
I think the author answered his own question on Pg 4.
"In this graph, as an example, we see the baseline calculated for 2020 >>>> for both men and women. What is immediately striking is the sharp peak >>>> among 75-year-olds. This is a consequence of the baby boom, the birth
wave in 1946 immediately after the Second World War."
In other words, he discovered that more men had died during WWII than
women, and that the baseline death rates are finally catching up with
the baby boomers. In other words, if he can't win at football, just
move the goal posts. Redefining the baseline death rates to fit his
conclusions is the equivalent to moving the goal posts.
Most his contentions are summarized in one sentence on Pg 9:
"We see here clearly and unmistakably that there was more excess
mortality in all the years in which vaccination was carried out than
in the year without vaccination."
This is the basis of the authors uncertain conclusion that Covid was
gone by the end of 2022 which should have reduced the excess deaths,
but didn't. Never mind various Covid variants, long Covid, creative
fatality tracking, delayed medical care, and such, all of which
persist to this day in some degree.
Pg 9 again: "The risk of mortality is increasing every year, while
there is hardly any corona anymore. There are obviously no complete
annual figures for 2023 yet, but the figures so far paint a picture
identical to 2022."
In other words, he admits to guessing based on incomplete statistics
and continues to adjust the baseline death rates to meet his
expectations. I would have been happier if he had used the baseline
numbers in the same manner as the WHO and other agencies, and then
applied his assumptions. Instead, he first adjusts his baseline
numbers to meet his expectations and then wonders why they still
didn't produce his expected results. Also, this is for only one
country and does not represent the situation in other countries.
For Tom it doesn't matter whether it's the fox or the rabbit, Tommy is
faster then either.
In another post he has Bidden bombing the Nord Stream gas pipeline,
which from all I read is totally without any proof at all, although
there are rumors that it was a Ukraine plot... carried out by a group
from, Poland :-)
You don't know that. Nor do I.
A successful CIA or special services operation leaves hints
to a different conclusion such as 'Polish agents'.
I don't know what? That there is, apparently, no proof who did it? Or
that there is rumors that the Ukrainian did it?
As for CIA operations leaving hints, I don't think so, at least not in
many cases. The bombing of Indonesia, for example, the pilot that they
caught was deliberately carrying identification in spite of orders NOT
to do so. The U2 flights over Russia and Cuba? The Air America flights
over Vietnam and Laos?
Certainly the aircraft were Sterilized" so that the U.S. could
officially deny they the were the culprits but nothing was done to
imply that somebody else did the deed.
On 12/10/2023 6:30 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you referring to drinking bleach or injecting disinfectant?
"Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment"
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177>
You wrote "...no alternative means of treatment". Please note that
there's a difference between treatment, which occurs after an
infection, and vaccination which is intended to prevent an infection.
Please try not to get these two terms confused. Paxlovid and Lagevrio
are currently the best post infection treatments, while the mRNA based
vaccines are currently the best method of prevention.
I heard that press conference live. Mr Trump said no such
thing.
The 'bleach' quip was by a TeeVee comedian later that day
and just as Gerald Ford, a graceful accomplished athlete,
skier, dancer was pegged as 'clumsy' by a comedian, the
label outlived the truth.
But like everything from Liebermann he gains all of his political
information from CNN. Do you suppose he got his 12 foot thick
pavement there as well?
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 19:03:57 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/10/2023 6:30 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you referring to drinking bleach or injecting disinfectant?
"Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment"
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177>
You wrote "...no alternative means of treatment". Please note that
there's a difference between treatment, which occurs after an
infection, and vaccination which is intended to prevent an infection.
Please try not to get these two terms confused. Paxlovid and Lagevrio
are currently the best post infection treatments, while the mRNA based
vaccines are currently the best method of prevention.
I heard that press conference live. Mr Trump said no such
thing.
From the BBC article I cited, Pres Trump was very careful to suggest
that such Covid-19 cures should be studied.
"While noting the research should be treated with caution, Mr Trump
suggested further research in that area."
He then "suggested" to his advisors to look into other such remedies.
I'm probably reading between the lines hear, but it sounds like a
thinly veiled order to look all these marginal "treatments" or they
will be looking for a new job fairly soon.
For the (broken) record, I asked (not accused) Tom if he meant bleach
or disinfectant when he proclaimed that there were:
"several drugs that were VERY effective using off-label"
At the time, the wonder drug was allegedly Remdesivir. Initially, it
was proclaimed to be everything from a miracle drug to poison.
Eventually, the data was collected and tabulated:
"Association of Remdesivir Treatment With Mortality Among Hospitalized
Adults With COVID-19 in the United States" (Dec 1, 2022) <https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2799114>
"There were 3557 mortality events (14.3%) in the remdesivir group and
3775 mortality events (15.2%) in the control group."
That's a fabulous 0.9% difference in mortality between taking
remdesivir and taking a placebo (or taking nothing). Somehow, the
article expanded the difference to be:
"...associated with a statistically significant 17% reduction in
inpatient mortality (...) compared with propensity score-matched
control patients"
whatever that means.
The 'bleach' quip was by a TeeVee comedian later that day
and just as Gerald Ford, a graceful accomplished athlete,
skier, dancer was pegged as 'clumsy' by a comedian, the
label outlived the truth.
Such are the hazards of being "quoted" by the press. My favorite was
when Al Gore was quoted as claiming he invented the internet. What he actually said was:
"I took the initiative in creating the Internet". <https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/799/708>
Somehow, the illusion usually triumphs over reality.
On 12/10/2023 9:19 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 19:03:57 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/10/2023 6:30 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you referring to drinking bleach or injecting disinfectant?
"Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment"
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177>
You wrote "...no alternative means of treatment". Please note that
there's a difference between treatment, which occurs after an
infection, and vaccination which is intended to prevent an infection.
Please try not to get these two terms confused. Paxlovid and Lagevrio >>>> are currently the best post infection treatments, while the mRNA based >>>> vaccines are currently the best method of prevention.
I heard that press conference live. Mr Trump said no such
thing.
From the BBC article I cited, Pres Trump was very careful to suggest
that such Covid-19 cures should be studied.
"While noting the research should be treated with caution, Mr Trump
suggested further research in that area."
He then "suggested" to his advisors to look into other such remedies.
I'm probably reading between the lines hear, but it sounds like a
thinly veiled order to look all these marginal "treatments" or they
will be looking for a new job fairly soon.
For the (broken) record, I asked (not accused) Tom if he meant bleach
or disinfectant when he proclaimed that there were:
"several drugs that were VERY effective using off-label"
At the time, the wonder drug was allegedly Remdesivir. Initially, it
was proclaimed to be everything from a miracle drug to poison.
Eventually, the data was collected and tabulated:
"Association of Remdesivir Treatment With Mortality Among Hospitalized
Adults With COVID-19 in the United States" (Dec 1, 2022)
<https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2799114>
"There were 3557 mortality events (14.3%) in the remdesivir group and
3775 mortality events (15.2%) in the control group."
That's a fabulous 0.9% difference in mortality between taking
remdesivir and taking a placebo (or taking nothing). Somehow, the
article expanded the difference to be:
"...associated with a statistically significant 17% reduction in
inpatient mortality (...) compared with propensity score-matched
control patients"
whatever that means.
The 'bleach' quip was by a TeeVee comedian later that day
and just as Gerald Ford, a graceful accomplished athlete,
skier, dancer was pegged as 'clumsy' by a comedian, the
label outlived the truth.
Such are the hazards of being "quoted" by the press. My favorite was
when Al Gore was quoted as claiming he invented the internet. What he
actually said was:
"I took the initiative in creating the Internet".
<https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/799/708>
Somehow, the illusion usually triumphs over reality.
Yes, that's another fine example of purposeful misdirection
by misquote or paraphrasing to reverse the meaning.
On Monday, December 11, 2023 at 6:09:08 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/10/2023 9:19 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 19:03:57 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>Yes, that's another fine example of purposeful misdirection
On 12/10/2023 6:30 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you referring to drinking bleach or injecting disinfectant?
"Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment"
<https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177>
You wrote "...no alternative means of treatment". Please note that
there's a difference between treatment, which occurs after an
infection, and vaccination which is intended to prevent an infection. >>>>> Please try not to get these two terms confused. Paxlovid and Lagevrio >>>>> are currently the best post infection treatments, while the mRNA based >>>>> vaccines are currently the best method of prevention.
I heard that press conference live. Mr Trump said no such
thing.
From the BBC article I cited, Pres Trump was very careful to suggest
that such Covid-19 cures should be studied.
"While noting the research should be treated with caution, Mr Trump
suggested further research in that area."
He then "suggested" to his advisors to look into other such remedies.
I'm probably reading between the lines hear, but it sounds like a
thinly veiled order to look all these marginal "treatments" or they
will be looking for a new job fairly soon.
For the (broken) record, I asked (not accused) Tom if he meant bleach
or disinfectant when he proclaimed that there were:
"several drugs that were VERY effective using off-label"
At the time, the wonder drug was allegedly Remdesivir. Initially, it
was proclaimed to be everything from a miracle drug to poison.
Eventually, the data was collected and tabulated:
"Association of Remdesivir Treatment With Mortality Among Hospitalized
Adults With COVID-19 in the United States" (Dec 1, 2022)
<https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2799114>
"There were 3557 mortality events (14.3%) in the remdesivir group and
3775 mortality events (15.2%) in the control group."
That's a fabulous 0.9% difference in mortality between taking
remdesivir and taking a placebo (or taking nothing). Somehow, the
article expanded the difference to be:
"...associated with a statistically significant 17% reduction in
inpatient mortality (...) compared with propensity score-matched
control patients"
whatever that means.
The 'bleach' quip was by a TeeVee comedian later that day
and just as Gerald Ford, a graceful accomplished athlete,
skier, dancer was pegged as 'clumsy' by a comedian, the
label outlived the truth.
Such are the hazards of being "quoted" by the press. My favorite was
when Al Gore was quoted as claiming he invented the internet. What he
actually said was:
"I took the initiative in creating the Internet".
<https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/799/708>
Somehow, the illusion usually triumphs over reality.
by misquote or paraphrasing to reverse the meaning.
Liebermann never fails to show us his IQ.
Don't you find it curious that moron Liebermann doesn't know that the vaccine at BEST appeared to protect against Covid-19 for 30 days. It most certainly did NOT prevent your from spreading it and after 30 days you caught Covid anyway. What's more, ifyou took the series, the Yale Study showed that 65% of people had serious side effects. I suppose when you're like Liebermann you absolutely must be an apologist for Fauci and Big Pharma,. He has to show that he is intelligent by agreeing with Fauci.
I'm still remembering that guy yesterday telling me that Liebermann claims that I am trying to destroy his reputation. That is the funniest thing yet. If I destroyed his reputation he would actually look better.
Do you suppose he is still telling people that he had radiation treatments and they don't effect his immune system?
On 12/11/2023 10:12 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
Liebermann never fails to show us his IQ.
??
He remembered an apt example and contributed promptly.
I can't believe you missed :
"Nixon was actually a marvelous President that was willing to take the blame for the acts of his campaign staff (Colonel Oliver North)"
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 21:35:05 -0500, Radey Shoumanmortality-based-on-age-and-sex-the-possible-role-of-Covid-19-delayed-care-and-vaccines.pdf>
<shouman@comcast.net> wrote:
John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> writes:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:56:28 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/9/2023 10:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 19:14:50 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:19:54 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:35:16 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 07:59:14 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
rOn Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:09:38 -0800 (PST), Tom KunichMortality statistics tend to be a running tabulation of deaths, which >>>>>>>> is usually a few months behind on publication and likely to require >>>>>>>> continuous corrections. Lacking anything better, the WHO (world >>>>>>>> health organization) is the best I can offer.
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 9, 2023 at 2:56:24?PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
Here that doughty, efficient and often successful fighter for >>>>>>>>>>> free speech, Mark Steyn, explains the Post-COVID excessLou was just telling us that he doesn't like Trump because CNN >>>>>>>>>> thinks he's a meany for cutting off their government subsidies >>>>>>>>>> given to them by the Democrats so that they would report only >>>>>>>>>> good things about Democrats. That's a lot more important to >>>>>>>>>> him than 13% of his relatives dead because of a poisonous
deaths around the world.
https://www.steynonline.com/13963/the-known-unknowns
Once more we grasp that Tom was right from the
beginning. Will you monkeys now apologise to Tom?
Andre Jute
Rolling on the floor laughing out loud at the RBT clowns >>>>>>>>>>> being taken in by that conman Fauci.
vaccine
Tommy, can you provide any proof of the excess Covid deaths that you >>>>>>>>> keep going on about?
I don't mean some idiot on you tube blathering on about something >>>>>>>>> he/she/it really knows nothing about, but a proper scientific study by
competent people of actual confirmed deaths due to the vaccination. >>>>>>>>
"Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)"
<https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid>
The problem is that excess death calculations rely on a dubious >>>>>>>> assumption, that deaths from all causes other than Covid-19 remain >>>>>>>> constant. That's hardly the case when the statistics gathering >>>>>>>> organizations either shut down between 2020 and the end of 2022, >>>>>>>> became heavily politicized, or faked their numbers to avoid a local >>>>>>>> panic. There were other factors, like the shutdown of many hospital >>>>>>>> services, which delayed many procedures. The lack of international >>>>>>>> standards on collecting Covid-19 related data doesn't help much. If >>>>>>>> you look at the graphs in the above URL, the lines between the upper >>>>>>>> and lower uncertainty bounds are huge. In other words, the "data" is >>>>>>>> really an estimate (or best guess).
Here's the WHO graphs for just the USA:
<https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-deaths-daily-economist-single-entity>
95% uncertainty upper and 0% lower bounds are still widely separated. >>>>>>>> For the USA, that's current +/- 1,000 deaths per week.
My guess is that you won't reply as there is no proof of excessive >>>>>>>>> deaths, well except for your imagination which is neither scientific >>>>>>>>> or competent.
Well, since Tom's reply is likely to be politicized, perhaps a >>>>>>>> pre-emptive strike might be amusing:
"Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in >>>>>>>> Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic" (July 24, 2023) >>>>>>>> <https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2807617>
"In this cohort study evaluating 538,159 deaths in individuals aged 25 >>>>>>>> years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December >>>>>>>> 2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters >>>>>>>> than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all >>>>>>>> adults, but not before."
Translation: Vaccines don't kill Republicans. It's the lack of >>>>>>>> vaccines that kill Republicans.
But you are comparing Covid Deaths. Tom is talking about deaths due >>>>>>> solely to having received a vaccination
Sorry, I missed that. As I understand it, the author is disappointed >>>>>> that the Covid death rate failed to drop to the comparatively low
levels of pre-pandemic (before Jan 2023) incidence. Note the title, >>>>>> which suggest uncertainty:
"An analysis of excess mortality based on age and sex; the possible >>>>>> role of Covid-19, delayed care and vaccines"
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Herman-Steigstra/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines/links/655c7aecce88b87031fbc73a/An-analysis-of-excess-
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375774174_An_analysis_of_excess_mortality_based_on_age_and_sex_the_possible_role_of_Covid-19_delayed_care_and_vaccines>
(12 pages). Note that CBS is "Statistics Netherlands":
<https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb>
I think the author answered his own question on Pg 4.
"In this graph, as an example, we see the baseline calculated for 2020 >>>>>> for both men and women. What is immediately striking is the sharp peak >>>>>> among 75-year-olds. This is a consequence of the baby boom, the birth >>>>>> wave in 1946 immediately after the Second World War."
In other words, he discovered that more men had died during WWII than >>>>>> women, and that the baseline death rates are finally catching up with >>>>>> the baby boomers. In other words, if he can't win at football, just >>>>>> move the goal posts. Redefining the baseline death rates to fit his >>>>>> conclusions is the equivalent to moving the goal posts.
Most his contentions are summarized in one sentence on Pg 9:
"We see here clearly and unmistakably that there was more excess
mortality in all the years in which vaccination was carried out than >>>>>> in the year without vaccination."
This is the basis of the authors uncertain conclusion that Covid was >>>>>> gone by the end of 2022 which should have reduced the excess deaths, >>>>>> but didn't. Never mind various Covid variants, long Covid, creative >>>>>> fatality tracking, delayed medical care, and such, all of which
persist to this day in some degree.
Pg 9 again: "The risk of mortality is increasing every year, while >>>>>> there is hardly any corona anymore. There are obviously no complete >>>>>> annual figures for 2023 yet, but the figures so far paint a picture >>>>>> identical to 2022."
In other words, he admits to guessing based on incomplete statistics >>>>>> and continues to adjust the baseline death rates to meet his
expectations. I would have been happier if he had used the baseline >>>>>> numbers in the same manner as the WHO and other agencies, and then >>>>>> applied his assumptions. Instead, he first adjusts his baseline
numbers to meet his expectations and then wonders why they still
didn't produce his expected results. Also, this is for only one
country and does not represent the situation in other countries.
For Tom it doesn't matter whether it's the fox or the rabbit, Tommy is >>>>> faster then either.
In another post he has Bidden bombing the Nord Stream gas pipeline,
which from all I read is totally without any proof at all, although
there are rumors that it was a Ukraine plot... carried out by a group >>>>> from, Poland :-)
You don't know that. Nor do I.
A successful CIA or special services operation leaves hints
to a different conclusion such as 'Polish agents'.
I don't know what? That there is, apparently, no proof who did it? Or
that there is rumors that the Ukrainian did it?
As for CIA operations leaving hints, I don't think so, at least not in
many cases. The bombing of Indonesia, for example, the pilot that they
caught was deliberately carrying identification in spite of orders NOT
to do so. The U2 flights over Russia and Cuba? The Air America flights
over Vietnam and Laos?
Certainly the aircraft were Sterilized" so that the U.S. could
officially deny they the were the culprits but nothing was done to
imply that somebody else did the deed.
Pulling crazy shit and then arranging the blame to fall on someone else
is absolutely SOP for intelligence services. See for instance
"Operation Gladio".
If I'm not mistaken "Operation Gladio" was intended to form secret
"stay behind" units in Soviet dominated areas, not to cause blame to
fall on someone else. Rather like the support G.B. gave to many "Under Ground" (often Communist) groups in German occupied Europe.
Awww, now ya went and ruined it. I was so looking forward to tommy regaling us with stories about how he met with ollie in the lobby of the watergate hotel where he described to tommy how the demoncrats burgled their own offices. Or maybe that wouldhave been irish-troll spinning such yarns....like it matters.....
The CIA has turned into one of the most evil organizations on this Earth. There was just another article published the other day claiming that 85% of Russian troops have died in the Ukraine war. That is unmitigated lies propagated by the CIA.
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 10:09:32 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
The CIA has turned into one of the most evil organizations on this Earth. There was just another article published the other day claiming that 85% of Russian troops have died in the Ukraine war. That is unmitigated lies propagated by the CIA.
87%. Some articles, which you could have easily cited, but didn't:
"315,000 Russian Troops Have Been Killed Or Injured In Ukraine, U.S.
Says - Far More Than Russia Claims" <https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/12/12/315000-russian-troops-have-been-killed-or-injured-in-ukraine-us-says-far-more-than-russia-claims/?sh=6e41dc1feea5>
"The figure represents 87% of Russia’s roughly 360,000 pre-war troops
it had in February 2022, according to the report provided to
lawmakers."
"U.S. intelligence assesses Ukraine war has cost Russia 315,000
casualties" <https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/>
"A declassified U.S. intelligence report assessed that the Ukraine war
has cost Russia 315,000 dead and injured troops, or nearly 90% of the personnel it had when the conflict began, a source familiar with the intelligence said on Tuesday."
"Since then, the report found, 315,000 Russian troops, or about 87% of
the total with which it started the war, have been killed or injured,
the source said."
"The real figure was likely higher, they said."
More of the same: <https://www.google.com/search?q=315%2C000+Russian+Troops&tbm=nws>
On 12/13/2023 12:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 10:09:32 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
The CIA has turned into one of the most evil organizations on this Earth. There was just another article published the other day claiming that 85% of Russian troops have died in the Ukraine war. That is unmitigated lies propagated by the CIA.
87%. Some articles, which you could have easily cited, but didn't:
"315,000 Russian Troops Have Been Killed Or Injured In Ukraine, U.S.
Says - Far More Than Russia Claims"
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/12/12/315000-russian-troops-have-been-killed-or-injured-in-ukraine-us-says-far-more-than-russia-claims/?sh=6e41dc1feea5>
"The figure represents 87% of Russia’s roughly 360,000 pre-war troops
it had in February 2022, according to the report provided to
lawmakers."
"U.S. intelligence assesses Ukraine war has cost Russia 315,000
casualties"
<https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/>
"A declassified U.S. intelligence report assessed that the Ukraine war
has cost Russia 315,000 dead and injured troops, or nearly 90% of the
personnel it had when the conflict began, a source familiar with the
intelligence said on Tuesday."
"Since then, the report found, 315,000 Russian troops, or about 87% of
the total with which it started the war, have been killed or injured,
the source said."
"The real figure was likely higher, they said."
More of the same:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=315%2C000+Russian+Troops&tbm=nws>
That's on the front page of my dead tree media WSJ this morning.
More of the low IQ thinking from Liebermann.
As we all know,
Russia now controls 85% of the Ukraine because all of the Russians are dead, >killed by Ukrainians that have to hire mercenaries to fight for them.
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 13:12:14 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/13/2023 12:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 10:09:32 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
The CIA has turned into one of the most evil organizations on this Earth. There was just another article published the other day claiming that 85% of Russian troops have died in the Ukraine war. That is unmitigated lies propagated by the CIA.
87%. Some articles, which you could have easily cited, but didn't:
"315,000 Russian Troops Have Been Killed Or Injured In Ukraine, U.S.
Says - Far More Than Russia Claims"
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/12/12/315000-russian-troops-have-been-killed-or-injured-in-ukraine-us-says-far-more-than-russia-claims/?sh=6e41dc1feea5>
"The figure represents 87% of Russia’s roughly 360,000 pre-war troops
it had in February 2022, according to the report provided to
lawmakers."
"U.S. intelligence assesses Ukraine war has cost Russia 315,000
casualties"
<https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/>
"A declassified U.S. intelligence report assessed that the Ukraine war
has cost Russia 315,000 dead and injured troops, or nearly 90% of the
personnel it had when the conflict began, a source familiar with the
intelligence said on Tuesday."
"Since then, the report found, 315,000 Russian troops, or about 87% of
the total with which it started the war, have been killed or injured,
the source said."
"The real figure was likely higher, they said."
More of the same:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=315%2C000+Russian+Troops&tbm=nws>
That's on the front page of my dead tree media WSJ this morning.
Thanks and that's good to know. Unfortunately, most of the major
printed news media has disappeared from the vending boxes in front of markets, stores and offices in my area. What's left are the locals.
That doesn't matter as I prefer to read my news online. Let's see if
there's any mention in the competition:
Nothing here (yet) as of noon PST, Dec 13, 2023.
<https://www.rt.com/russia/>
<https://english.pravda.ru/russia/>
<https://www.aljazeera.com/europe/>
This mention the 315,000 killed or wounded: <https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/12/12/us-intel-says-315k-russian-casualties-in-ukraine-congress-source-a83402>
(You'll need to turn off any ad-blockers to read it.)
We will need to wait a while for comments from Russia. My guess(tm)
is that 90% casualty rate is much too high to be realistic and that
Russia has far more than 360,000 personnel available from a total
Russian military of 2.2 million. Russia is also continuing to provide replacements giving some credibility to the 315,000 loss figure:
"Russia boosts size of armed forces by 170,000 troops" <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/2/russia-to-boost-size-of-armed-forces-by-170000-troops>
Notice that the article claims that Russia now has 1.3 million troops involved in the war. Someone is lying about the numbers but I don't
know who (yet).
On Wednesday, December 13, 2023 at 11:12:19 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/13/2023 12:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 10:09:32 -0800 (PST), Tom KunichThat's on the front page of my dead tree media WSJ this morning.
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
The CIA has turned into one of the most evil organizations on this Earth. There was just another article published the other day claiming that 85% of Russian troops have died in the Ukraine war. That is unmitigated lies propagated by the CIA.
87%. Some articles, which you could have easily cited, but didn't:
"315,000 Russian Troops Have Been Killed Or Injured In Ukraine, U.S.
Says - Far More Than Russia Claims"
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/12/12/315000-russian-troops-have-been-killed-or-injured-in-ukraine-us-says-far-more-than-russia-claims/?sh=6e41dc1feea5>
"The figure represents 87% of Russia’s roughly 360,000 pre-war troops
it had in February 2022, according to the report provided to
lawmakers."
"U.S. intelligence assesses Ukraine war has cost Russia 315,000
casualties"
<https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/>
"A declassified U.S. intelligence report assessed that the Ukraine war
has cost Russia 315,000 dead and injured troops, or nearly 90% of the
personnel it had when the conflict began, a source familiar with the
intelligence said on Tuesday."
"Since then, the report found, 315,000 Russian troops, or about 87% of
the total with which it started the war, have been killed or injured,
the source said."
"The real figure was likely higher, they said."
More of the same:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=315%2C000+Russian+Troops&tbm=nws>
More of the low IQ thinking from Liebermann. As we all know, Russia now controls 85% of the Ukraine because all of the Russians are dead, killed by Ukrainians that have to hire mercenaries to fight for them.
On Wednesday, December 13, 2023 at 3:00:03?PM UTC-5, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Nothing here (yet) as of noon PST, Dec 13, 2023.
<https://www.rt.com/russia/>
<https://english.pravda.ru/russia/>
<https://www.aljazeera.com/europe/>
Aljazeera has it: >https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/13/russia-ukraine-war-list-of-key-events-day-658
6th bullet point under "Fighting"
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:59:50 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 13:12:14 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/13/2023 12:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 10:09:32 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
The CIA has turned into one of the most evil organizations on this Earth. There was just another article published the other day claiming that 85% of Russian troops have died in the Ukraine war. That is unmitigated lies propagated by the CIA.
87%. Some articles, which you could have easily cited, but didn't:
"315,000 Russian Troops Have Been Killed Or Injured In Ukraine, U.S.
Says - Far More Than Russia Claims"
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/12/12/315000-russian-troops-have-been-killed-or-injured-in-ukraine-us-says-far-more-than-russia-claims/?sh=6e41dc1feea5>
"The figure represents 87% of Russia’s roughly 360,000 pre-war troops >>>> it had in February 2022, according to the report provided to
lawmakers."
"U.S. intelligence assesses Ukraine war has cost Russia 315,000
casualties"
<https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/>
"A declassified U.S. intelligence report assessed that the Ukraine war >>>> has cost Russia 315,000 dead and injured troops, or nearly 90% of the
personnel it had when the conflict began, a source familiar with the
intelligence said on Tuesday."
"Since then, the report found, 315,000 Russian troops, or about 87% of >>>> the total with which it started the war, have been killed or injured,
the source said."
"The real figure was likely higher, they said."
More of the same:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=315%2C000+Russian+Troops&tbm=nws>
The numbers don't make any sense.
87% of prewar army lost?
Looking at U.S. figures and depending on how you do your calculations
about 35% of the U.S. Army are actual "Combat Forces".
If the Russians have an air forces then the numbers get even more
mysterious, It is difficult to compute the number of support troops
for every combat airplane but one indication might be that there are
2,580 USAF names inscribed on the Vietnam Wall. Out of something like
57,000 names
On Thu Dec 14 08:11:51 2023 John B. wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 11:59:50 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 13:12:14 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 12/13/2023 12:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 10:09:32 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
The CIA has turned into one of the most evil organizations on this Earth. There was just another article published the other day claiming that 85% of Russian troops have died in the Ukraine war. That is unmitigated lies propagated by the CIA.
87%. Some articles, which you could have easily cited, but didn't:
"315,000 Russian Troops Have Been Killed Or Injured In Ukraine, U.S. >>>>> Says - Far More Than Russia Claims"
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/12/12/315000-russian-troops-have-been-killed-or-injured-in-ukraine-us-says-far-more-than-russia-claims/?sh=6e41dc1feea5>
"The figure represents 87% of Russia?s roughly 360,000 pre-war troops >>>>> it had in February 2022, according to the report provided to
lawmakers."
"U.S. intelligence assesses Ukraine war has cost Russia 315,000
casualties"
<https://www.reuters.com/world/us-intelligence-assesses-ukraine-war-has-cost-russia-315000-casualties-source-2023-12-12/>
"A declassified U.S. intelligence report assessed that the Ukraine war >>>>> has cost Russia 315,000 dead and injured troops, or nearly 90% of the >>>>> personnel it had when the conflict began, a source familiar with the >>>>> intelligence said on Tuesday."
"Since then, the report found, 315,000 Russian troops, or about 87% of >>>>> the total with which it started the war, have been killed or injured, >>>>> the source said."
"The real figure was likely higher, they said."
More of the same:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=315%2C000+Russian+Troops&tbm=nws>
The numbers don't make any sense.
87% of prewar army lost?
Looking at U.S. figures and depending on how you do your calculations
about 35% of the U.S. Army are actual "Combat Forces".
If the Russians have an air forces then the numbers get even more
mysterious, It is difficult to compute the number of support troops
for every combat airplane but one indication might be that there are
2,580 USAF names inscribed on the Vietnam Wall. Out of something like
57,000 names
--
Cheers,
John B.
John, the Ukrainians are drafting 16 and 50 year olds just like the NAZI's were doing in 1944. WHY did the NAZI's do that and don't you think that the Ukrainians arw doing it for the msame reasons?
On Fri Dec 15 04:57:48 2023 "funkma...@hotmail.com" wrote:
On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 11:29:11AM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
This administration has been making open acts that could start a nuclear war,
Yeah, because something the US did justifies the russian invasion of Ukraine. Care to enlighten us?
Flunky,the UKRANIANS starte4d this war and Putin warned them for 6 months to stop murdering Russian Nationals who hsd legally bought farms in the Ukraine! Are you so fuckintg stupid that your remory doesn't go back just SEVEN years?
Therefore they have to lie about the capabilities of the the Russian Army. The pure unadulterated lying about the Russian army is rife throughout the Slime Stream Media.
Yet you can offer no support for your claims to the contrary.
Russia controls 80% of the Ukraine
No, they don't, you fucking moron. Here's a good primer on the timeline of the occupation.
Are you so slow that you couldn't read Andrew's Ukrainian map?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60506682
Since we know you have an aversion to looking at anything that uses actual words (despite the ludicrous claim of reading out three libraries), here a graphic that appears about 3/4 down the article:
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/1FDA/production/_131745180_ukraine_control_quad_15_11_23-nc.png.webp
, The Ukrainians of military age have LEFT the Ukraine for the US open borders.
Most reports say the US has accepted a bit over a 250K refugees since the start of the war. This is out of a bit over 8 million in total.
So the only people that oppose the Russians are mercenaries who are very expensive and YOU are paying them to so nothing more than hold the final 20% of the Ukraine.
Oh, you mean like these guys?
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/dismayed-moscows-war-russian-volunteers-joining-ukrainian-ranks-105648729
Flunky believes ABC - the same people that claim that we're zall going to die from climate change. The same people that told us that the Covid-19 vaccines are "safe and effective". The same people who have quoted many times "fact checkers" who donothing but mimic the Administration. On a good day you have problems spelling. No wonder you have problems thinking that someone else can read.
On Fri Dec 15 04:57:48 2023 "funkma...@hotmail.com" wrote:
On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 11:29:11AM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
This administration has been making open acts that could start a nuclear war,
Yeah, because something the US did justifies the russian invasion of Ukraine. Care to enlighten us?
Flunky,the UKRANIANS starte4d this war and Putin warned them for 6 months to stop murdering Russian Nationals who hsd legally bought farms in the Ukraine! Are you so fuckintg stupid that your remory doesn't go back just SEVEN years?
Therefore they have to lie about the capabilities of the the Russian Army. The pure unadulterated lying about the Russian army is rife throughout the Slime Stream Media.
Yet you can offer no support for your claims to the contrary.
Russia controls 80% of the Ukraine
No, they don't, you fucking moron. Here's a good primer on the timeline of the occupation.
Are you so slow that you couldn't read Andrew's Ukrainian map?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60506682
Since we know you have an aversion to looking at anything that uses actual words (despite the ludicrous claim of reading out three libraries), here a graphic that appears about 3/4 down the article:
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/1FDA/production/_131745180_ukraine_control_quad_15_11_23-nc.png.webp
, The Ukrainians of military age have LEFT the Ukraine for the US open borders.
Most reports say the US has accepted a bit over a 250K refugees since the start of the war. This is out of a bit over 8 million in total.
So the only people that oppose the Russians are mercenaries who are very expensive and YOU are paying them to so nothing more than hold the final 20% of the Ukraine.
Oh, you mean like these guys?
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/dismayed-moscows-war-russian-volunteers-joining-ukrainian-ranks-105648729
Flunky believes ABC
the same people that claim that we're zall going to die from climate change.
The same people that told us that the Covid-19 vaccines are "safe and effective".
The same people who have quoted many times "fact checkers" who do nothing but mimic the Administration.
On a good day you have problems spelling. No wonder you have problems thinking that someone else can read.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 299 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 79:19:43 |
| Calls: | 6,695 |
| Files: | 12,229 |
| Messages: | 5,347,593 |
