or how the same high-powered CEOs who lied to the world and escaped accountability totally wouldn't lie to them about this.
forum needs a 'sexy' reaction
Name and occupation of Merkel's husband without googling, or get of @Lars backCalifornia has an economy >50% larger than Canada.
I know Trudeau, you should know the name of Newsome's cat.
Jocko.Name and occupation of Merkel's husband without googling, or get of @Lars back
The article mostly talked about the 80% claim being baseless.if masks are 80% effective all the time, and vaccines are only 50% effective at 6 months...
why are vaccines being mandated but masks not mandated?
Reminds me of how cancel culture works.Oh shit.
![]()
Video Resurfaces of Fauci Warning ‘Household Contact’ with AIDS Patients Could Put Kids at Risk
His stubborn focus on producing a vaccine rather than therapeutics was of particular frustration to activists and other scientists.www.yahoo.com
An old video circulating on social media shows Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, warning that even just “close contact” with those already afflicted with AIDS could result in infection.
Interesting.Reminds me of how cancel culture works.
It's variable depending on material and fit, but the point is that the CDC can't figure out if something that's been in use for over a century and doesn't cost anything makes the disease worse or performs better than the most modern treatment.The article mostly talked about the 80% claim being baseless.
Reminds.Interesting.
And what is your take on cancel culture? Good or bad?
What is your view on Cancel culture in relation to holding people accountable? Is it different, for example, when you have a call out for an unpopular opinion vs a call out for a professional statement which may lead to actions that could be harmful to others?
Reminds.
Specifically, the digging through the past in the hopes of finding juicy dirt.
Not a direct comparison, and you're better off looking for this battle with someone else.
Fite meI found it interesting that you related it to cancel culture which made me curious about your view on cancel culture.
And you took that as looking for a battle?
Wtf is wrong with you? Lol
Btw, I don't think cancel culture can be definitively defined as good or bad in every circumstance or situation. That's why I was wondering if you have a preconceived notion of whether it's considered good or bad. I didn't ask to try to prove you wrong. If I wasn't interested or open to your opinion then I wouldn't have asked.
Interesting.Fite me
Bad morning, apologies. Lately I'm taking some posts as dangles.I found it interesting that you related it to cancel culture which made me curious about your view on cancel culture.
And you took that as looking for a battle?
Wtf is wrong with you? Lol
Btw, I don't think cancel culture can be definitively defined as good or bad in every circumstance or situation. That's why I was wondering if you have a preconceived notion of whether it's considered good or bad. I didn't ask to try to prove you wrong. If I wasn't interested or open to your opinion then I wouldn't have asked.
I understand, but the article you posted undermines the sentiment you're putting forward.It's variable depending on material and fit, but the point is that the CDC can't figure out if something that's been in use for over a century and doesn't cost anything makes the disease worse or performs better than the most modern treatment.
But they're the authority and speak only benevolent truths, and anyone who questions them is a mouth-breathing MAGAtard.
the article affirms "follow the CDC"?I understand, but the article you posted undermines the sentiment you're putting forward.