Conspiracy theory: coronavirus response will kill hundreds of millions of people

G

Gary K

New member
Banned
Anyone here ever hear a so-called "conspiracy theorist" say that the way governments are handling the coronavirus with lockdowns would kill more people than the coronavirus? Well, that "conspiracy theorist" is being proven correct. Funny how things happen that way isn't it? How is it that someone who knows nothing but conspiracy theories can be correct so many times? I mean this "conspiracy theorist" has been accused of reading nothing but InfoWars. So how could he predict with such precision what would happen? And how can even those whose ideological organizations he opposes full stop end up agreeing with him?

Oh, we just gotta have lockdowns to save lives. Yeah, right..... Lives are really being saved, and what follows is just the beginning of sorrows.

The world is facing widespread famine “of biblical proportions” because of the coronavirus pandemic, the chief of the UN’s food relief agency has warned, with a short time to act before hundreds of millions starve.

More than 30 countries in the developing world could experience widespread famine, and in 10 of those countries there are already more than 1 million people on the brink of starvation, said David Beasley, executive director of the World Food Programme.

“We are not talking about people going to bed hungry,” he told the Guardian in an interview. “We are talking about extreme conditions, emergency status – people literally marching to the brink of starvation. If we don’t get food to people, people will die.”
Click to expand...
The rest of this article can be read here.
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
ffreeloader said:
Anyone here ever hear a so-called "conspiracy theorist" say that the way governments are handling the coronavirus with lockdowns would kill more people than the coronavirus? Well, that "conspiracy theorist" is being proven correct. Funny how things happen that way isn't it? How is it that someone who knows nothing but conspiracy theories can be correct so many times? I mean this "conspiracy theorist" has been accused of reading nothing but InfoWars. So how could he predict with such precision what would happen? And how can even those whose ideological organizations he opposes full stop end up agreeing with him?

Oh, we just gotta have lockdowns to save lives. Yeah, right..... Lives are really being saved, and what follows is just the beginning of sorrows.


The rest of this article can be read here.
Click to expand...

You would think that an article from The Guardian would draw a response from our current resident brits. Of course they're probably trying desperately to figure out how to use this to bash Trump since that seems to be all they're interested in discussing
 
G

Gary K

New member
Banned
ok doser said:
You would think that an article from The Guardian would draw a response from our current resident brits. Of course they're probably trying desperately to figure out how to use this to bash Trump since that seems to be all they're interested in discussing
Click to expand...

The point I was making was who is it that truly loves his fellow man? Those who advocate fear or those who look at what is happening to the world at large? Those who oppose lockdowns and advocate returning to work are the people looking out for the world at large. For only returning economies to normal status can help those who are starving by producing what the world needs.

And what we are seeing now is just the tip of the iceberg as to what is coming if the insanity that the left is pushing keeps being policy. The misery, death, and suffering that is coming if governments maintain their present courses is going to kill hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people
 
G

Gary K

New member
Banned
Here is what the Democrat candidate for President says about lockdowns.

Democratic nominee for president Joe Biden said Friday he would shut down the country to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus if it was recommended by medical experts.

"I would shut it down," Biden said on ABC's "World News Tonight" alongside his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., as they sat for their first joint interview since becoming the Democratic Party's ticket.

"I will be prepared to do whatever it takes to save lives because we cannot get the country moving until we control the virus."




Biden did not specify what defined "under control."

The seven-day moving average of the number of new daily new cases in the United States has been on a steady decline since reaching a peak of 69,328 on July 25, according to Worldometers.info.
Democratic nominee for president Joe Biden said Friday he would shut down the country to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus if it was recommended by medical experts.

"I would shut it down," Biden said on ABC's "World News Tonight" alongside his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., as they sat for their first joint interview since becoming the Democratic Party's ticket.

"I will be prepared to do whatever it takes to save lives because we cannot get the country moving until we control the virus."




Biden did not specify what defined "under control."

The seven-day moving average of the number of new daily new cases in the United States has been on a steady decline since reaching a peak of 69,328 on July 25, according to Worldometers.info.
Click to expand...

Please note Biden is promising to do the worst possible thing for the greatest number of people. And he claims he'll do the best possible thing for the greatest number of people? And all those leftists here say he is the best possible choice as he's so moral, as the left is so highly moral. In other words killing hundreds of millions of people is highly moral in their eyes. I'd say that is about as immoral as immoral can get.
 
Arthur Brain

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
ffreeloader said:
Anyone here ever hear a so-called "conspiracy theorist" say that the way governments are handling the coronavirus with lockdowns would kill more people than the coronavirus? Well, that "conspiracy theorist" is being proven correct. Funny how things happen that way isn't it? How is it that someone who knows nothing but conspiracy theories can be correct so many times? I mean this "conspiracy theorist" has been accused of reading nothing but InfoWars. So how could he predict with such precision what would happen? And how can even those whose ideological organizations he opposes full stop end up agreeing with him?

Oh, we just gotta have lockdowns to save lives. Yeah, right..... Lives are really being saved, and what follows is just the beginning of sorrows.


The rest of this article can be read here.
Click to expand...

The article is certainly more worth reading than your actual post as it doesn't resort to overt sensationalism. The author himself doesn't downplay the effects of Covid for starters and makes pains to to point out that it couldn't have been forseen. Ironically, I actually disagree with him on that to some extent as the threat of a new strain of virus and a possible pandemic were hardly so remote as more preparations to deal with such a possibility couldn't have been implemented beforehand. There's a big learning curve that many countries will have to deal with, not the least of which being having sufficient PPE for key workers on the front line who are most at risk. Many developed countries including the US and UK failed on that score.

Covid isn't responsible for war, poverty, starvation or natural disaster either. These were problems long before the pandemic struck and if your solution would be to just have no lockdown measures in place at all then congrats, you've just upped the death rate in your own country and at odds with the president who declared a national emergency when the proliferation of cases couldn't be ignored anymore.

There's no easy answer on this. Allow a pandemic to run rampant unchecked and you allow all manner of chaos. They weren't measures undertaken lightly and of course there's a detriment to the economy and a toll on people in general when such are enforced. Nobody is arguing otherwise. However, without them in place, then hospitals and health services would be overburdened. Even when the measures were tighter in the UK, there was a need for extra health professionals support. Stop trying to make this an 'either or' situation as if a non lockdown would have been the solution.

Of course, I agree with measures that should be put in place to reach those most in need and avenues taken to ensure that happens.
 
G

Gary K

New member
Banned
User Name said:
Certainly not the one who argues in defense of driving home drunk.
Click to expand...

What about those who argue for something that is going to kill hundreds of millions of people? Seems to me that is a whole lot further to the immoral end of the scale than a single drunk driver. Not saying I agree with drunk driving, but it kills a whole lot less people than lockdowns are going to kill.
 
G

Gary K

New member
Banned
Arthur Brain said:
The article is certainly more worth reading than your actual post as it doesn't resort to overt sensationalism. The author himself doesn't downplay the effects of Covid for starters and makes pains to to point out that it couldn't have been forseen. Ironically, I actually disagree with him on that to some extent as the threat of a new strain of virus and a possible pandemic were hardly so remote as more preparations to deal with such a possibility couldn't have been implemented beforehand. There's a big learning curve that many countries will have to deal with, not the least of which being having sufficient PPE for key workers on the front line who are most at risk. Many developed countries including the US and UK failed on that score.

Covid isn't responsible for war, poverty, starvation or natural disaster either. These were problems long before the pandemic struck and if your solution would be to just have no lockdown measures in place at all then congrats, you've just upped the death rate in your own country and at odds with the president who declared a national emergency when the proliferation of cases couldn't be ignored anymore.

There's no easy answer on this. Allow a pandemic to run rampant unchecked and you allow all manner of chaos. They weren't measures undertaken lightly and of course there's a detriment to the economy and a toll on people in general when such are enforced. Nobody is arguing otherwise. However, without them in place, then hospitals and health services would be overburdened. Even when the measures were tighter in the UK, there was a need for extra health professionals support. Stop trying to make this an 'either or' situation as if a non lockdown would have been the solution.

Of course, I agree with measures that should be put in place to reach those most in need and avenues taken to ensure that happens.
Click to expand...

That what couldn't have been foreseen? Lockdowns killing far more people than the virus? I foresaw that. I foresaw massive homelessness and massive starvation from lockdowns. That's far more misery and death than not masking up and not locking down as the Swedes have proven.
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
ffreeloader said:
What about those who argue for something that is going to kill hundreds of millions of people?
Click to expand...

The difference is that you and I both know that the coronavirus response is not going to kill "hundreds of millions of people."

~10,000 Americans are killed every year because of drunk driving, and that's not a conspiracy theory. That's a tragic fact.
 
Arthur Brain

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
ffreeloader said:
That what couldn't have been foreseen? Lockdowns killing far more people than the virus? I foresaw that. I foresaw massive homelessness and massive starvation from lockdowns. That's far more misery and death than not masking up and not locking down as the Swedes have proven.
Click to expand...

Uh huh, so basically your solution is "no lockdown" full stop. In the UK, there was provision made for the more vulnerable during the tighter restrictions where tenants couldn't be evicted during the clampdown, small businesses were given grants during enforced closure etc. You're being too simplistic on this and making the whole thing an either/or and even El Trumpo couldn't do that, remember? Of course a lockdown is going to hit and it's a difficult time for all concerned and that's why they're that rare.
 
Arthur Brain

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
ok doser said:
:darwinsm:

Give that tard a kewpie doll!
Click to expand...

Trump or you?

Neither Trump or his administration could ignore the figures despite desperate attempts to do so until a national emergency had to be declared. You reckon Trump wanted to do that?

Keep the doll for yourself...
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Arthur Brain said:
Trump or you?

Neither Trump or his administration could ignore the figures despite desperate attempts to do so until a national emergency had to be declared. You reckon Trump wanted to do that?

Keep the doll for yourself...
Click to expand...

the gift that just keeps on giving :darwinsm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top