Horizon Burning posted:

i wasn't particularly clear, i think, but i had the jab lmao

but i only really feel like i took it because of a failure on the part of my government to actually control the outbreak. all things being equal, i would've preferred to not have the vaccine, especially when you've got johnson and johnson execs saying poo poo like they won't vaccinate their kids because who knows what the side effects will be in thirty years or whatever.

gradenko_2000 posted:

Yoooooo who is this

quote:

The Filipina poet and scholar Conchitina Cruz spoke up, transmuting the lead of theory into the gold of an astonishing historical example. In 1946, Edilberto Tiempo enrolled at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop, overlapping with Flannery O’Connor. They were the two students in class (the legend goes) with accents too thick to be understood by their classmates — both had to have their stories read aloud by others. A year later, Edilberto’s wife, Edith, matriculated too.

In 1951, having returned to the Philippines, the Tiempos founded a creative-writing program at Silliman University in Dumaguete. In 1962, they added the National Summer Writers Workshop. Both programs thrived and even today remain arbiters of literary prestige in the Philippines. What’s more, their early literary outlook, adopted straight from the workshops at Iowa, has shaped literary production in the Philippines for over half a century, and hardly for the better.

gradenko_2000 posted:

I know (by now) that this "sweetheart" / "Romeo and Juliet" part of the law is not unusual given its existence in jurisdictions in other countries, but what's unclear to me is whether those provisions, as they exist in other countries, are themselves considered problematic

I don't want to say that "it's fine, look, the US does it too", so I want to know if, for example, there are groups there, or if there's a general consensus, that this isn't acceptable, either

Bip Roberts posted:

without the vaccines 100% of us we're going to get it soonest or later

gradenko_2000 posted:

- and so you do catch COVID, but if you're vaccinated then your chances of survival / avoiding debilitating long-term consequences is singificantly reduced

- but the COVID vaccine does not guarantee against avoiding infection, nor does it guarantee against developing symptoms once infected

Horizon Burning posted:

this is where i keep thinking the issue is. for example, i don't leave my house, i have my groceries brought to me, and i work entirely from home. if i happen to need to go out somewhere i wear a mask, wash my hands, etc. okay, without the vaccine, i'm rolling the dice and the odds of getting hospitalized are higher. but i can't put it from my mind that once everyone is vaccinated and everyone thinks they're safe, what's going to happen is everyone is basically going to be rolling a lot more dice. i just think about my parents and friends with lung conditions and so on. like, are they really safe? or am i just going to need to live with the fact that maybe i'll carry covid to them if i meet up with them again?

crepeface posted:

everything i know about romero and juliet laws is from transformers: age of extinction

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUq0HlMvQw0

i say swears online posted:

what the absolute gently caress

i say swears online posted:

what the absolute gently caress

crepeface posted:

everything i know about romero and juliet laws is from transformers: age of extinction

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUq0HlMvQw0

Doctor Jeep posted:

i absolutely love that he's got a loving laminated card in his wallet with the law printed out on it, it's like a sovereign citizen but for age of consent

crepeface posted:

everything i know about romero and juliet laws is from transformers: age of extinction

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUq0HlMvQw0

crepeface posted:

romero and juliet

crepeface posted:

everything i know about romero and juliet laws is from transformers: age of extinction

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUq0HlMvQw0

i say swears online posted:

what the absolute gently caress

Pryor on Fire posted:

I know this is the conspiracy thread but my god, get the loving jab you idiot

quote:

Canadian military leaders saw the pandemic as a unique opportunity to test out propaganda techniques on an unsuspecting public, a newly released Canadian Forces report concludes.

The federal government never asked for the so-called information operations campaign, nor did cabinet authorize the initiative developed during the COVID-19 pandemic by the Canadian Joint Operations Command, then headed by Lt.-Gen. Mike Rouleau.

But military commanders believed they didn’t need to get approval from higher authorities to develop and proceed with their plan, retired Maj.-Gen. Daniel Gosselin, who was brought in to investigate the scheme, concluded in his report.

The propaganda plan was developed and put in place in April 2020 even though the Canadian Forces had already acknowledged that “information operations and targeting policies and doctrines are aimed at adversaries and have a limited application in a domestic concept.”

A copy of the Dec. 2, 2020, Gosselin investigation, as well as other related documents, was obtained by this newspaper using the Access to Information law.

The plan devised by the Canadian Joint Operations Command, also known as CJOC, relied on propaganda techniques similar to those employed during the Afghanistan war. The campaign called for “shaping” and “exploiting” information. CJOC claimed the information operations scheme was needed to head off civil disobedience by Canadians during the coronavirus pandemic and to bolster government messages about the pandemic.

A separate initiative, not linked to the CJOC plan, but overseen by Canadian Forces intelligence officers, culled information from public social media accounts in Ontario. Data was also compiled on peaceful Black Lives Matter gatherings and BLM leaders. Senior military officers claimed that information was needed to ensure the success of Operation Laser, the Canadian Forces mission to help out in long-term care homes hit by COVID-19 and to aid in the distribution of vaccines in some northern communities.

BLM organizers have questioned why military officials gathered information on their initiative, pointing out they followed pandemic rules and did not hold any gatherings outside LTC homes.

Then chief of the defence Staff Gen. Jon Vance shut down the CJOC propaganda initiative after a number of his advisers questioned the legality and ethics behind the plan. Vance then brought in Gosselin to examine how CJOC was able to develop and launch the propaganda operation without approval.

Gosselin’s investigation discovered the plan wasn’t simply the idea of “passionate” military propaganda specialists, but support for the use of such information operations was “clearly a mindset that permeated the thinking at many levels of CJOC.” Those in the command saw the pandemic as a “unique opportunity” to test out such techniques on Canadians.

The views put forth by Rear Adm. Brian Santarpia, then CJOC’s chief of staff, summed up the command’s attitude, Gosselin noted in his report. “This is really a learning opportunity for all of us and a chance to start getting information operations into our (CAF-DND) routine,” the rear admiral stated.

The command saw the military’s pandemic response “as an opportunity to monitor and collect public information in order to enhance awareness for better command decision making,” Gosselin determined.

Gosselin also pointed out CJOC staff had a “palpable dismissive attitude” toward the advice and concerns raised by other military leaders.

The directive for the propaganda plan was issued by CJOC on April 8, 2020, but it took until May 2 of that year before Vance’s order to shut it down took effect.

Gosselin recommended a comprehensive review of Canadian Forces information operations policies and directives, particularly those that may impact any activities for domestic missions.

There is an ongoing debate inside national defence headquarters in Ottawa about the use of information operations techniques. Some public affairs officers, intelligence specialists and senior planners want to expand the scope of such methods in Canada to allow them to better control and shape government information that the public receives. Others inside headquarters worry that such operations could lead to abuses, including having military staff intentionally mislead the Canadian public or taking measures to target opposition MPs or those who criticize government or military policy.

Military propaganda training and initiatives within Canada over the last year have proved to be controversial.

The Canadian Forces had to launch an investigation after a September 2020 incident when military information operations staff forged a letter from the Nova Scotia government warning about wolves on the loose in a particular region of the province. The letter was inadvertently distributed to residents, prompting panicked calls to Nova Scotia officials who were unaware the military was behind the deception. The investigation determined the reservists conducting the operation lacked formal training and policies governing the use of propaganda techniques were not well understood by the soldiers.

Yet another review centred on the Canadian Forces public affairs branch and its activities. Last year, the branch launched a controversial plan that would have allowed military public affairs officers to use propaganda to change attitudes and behaviours of Canadians as well as to collect and analyze information from public social media accounts.

The plan would have seen staff move from traditional government methods of communicating with the public to a more aggressive strategy of using information warfare and influence tactics on Canadians. Included among those tactics was the use of friendly defence analysts and retired generals to push military PR messages and to criticize on social media those who raised questions about military spending and accountability.

The Canadian Forces also spent more than $1 million to train public affairs officers on behaviour modification techniques of the same sort used by the parent firm of Cambridge Analytica, the company implicated in a 2016 data-mining scandal to help Donald Trump’s U.S. presidential election campaign.

The initiative to change military public affairs strategy was abruptly shut down in November after this newspaper revealed details about the plan. A military investigation determined what the Canadian Forces public affairs leadership was doing was “incompatible with Government of Canada Communications Policy (and the) mission and principles of Public Affairs.” None of the public affairs leadership was disciplined for their actions.

Several months ago, Acting Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre and DND deputy minister Jody Thomas acknowledged in an internal document that the various propaganda initiatives had gotten out of control. “Errors conducted during domestic operations and training, and sometimes insular mindsets at various echelons, have eroded public confidence in the institution,” noted a June 9, 2021, message signed by Eyre and Thomas. “This included the conduct of IO (Information Operations) on a domestic operation without explicit CDS/DM direction or authority to do so, as well as the unsanctioned production of reports that appeared to be aimed at monitoring the activities of Canadians.”

Serf posted:

Assad never used chemical weapons
The Soviet Union didn't starve Ukrainians, the Holodomor was made up by the Nazis
Nazis run NATO
The Hungarian uprising was a CIA plot and the tanks were necessary

Laterite posted:

I hope it's worth pointing out that "anti vaxxers" have been a thing going back a decade+ since that debunked study linking them with autism. Uptake rates for commonly understood vaccines are lowering to the point where we're seeing stuff like goddamn measles making their way back into school populations in certain areas.

Also thanks CIA for using a fake vaccine effort in Pakistan to help kill bin laden.

nut posted:

wow this mfer comes in posts the article i posted yesterday just when u think u know someone

Zmej posted:

https://twitter.com/coherentstates/status/1442673085254094850?s=20

this pic is sending me

The_Rob posted:

I loving hate posts like this. let people talk and be honest. you haven’t added poo poo to this thread.

gradenko_2000 posted:

all of this is unequivocally true though

also lol at "Nazis run NATO" as supposedly being proven by a building shaped like runes and not because, say, Adolf Heusinger literally did run NATO

quote:

Ishii was arrested by United States authorities during the Occupation of Japan at the end of World War II and, along with other leaders, was supposed to be thoroughly interrogated by Soviet authorities.[7] Instead, Ishii and his team managed to negotiate and receive immunity in 1946 from Japanese war-crimes prosecution before the Tokyo tribunal in exchange for their full disclosure.[8][9] Although the Soviet authorities wished the prosecutions to take place, the United States objected after the reports of the investigating US microbiologists. Among these was Dr. Edwin Hill, the Chief of Fort Detrick, whose report stated that the information was "absolutely invaluable;" it "could never have been obtained in the United States because of scruples attached to experiments on humans" and "the information was obtained fairly cheaply."[7] On 6 May 1947, Douglas MacArthur wrote to Washington D.C. that "additional data, possibly some statements from Ishii probably can be obtained by informing Japanese involved that information will be retained in intelligence channels and will not be employed as 'War Crimes' evidence."

Serf posted:

yeah it rules when people try to frame it in a different way to score points on the internet. yeah there was a famine in the ukraine, but that was not historically unusual lol. and the nato building thing is an obvious deflection for the reason you stated

also i was doing some research into fort detrick because that's where covid came from and i thought the name sounded familiar and boy howdy did i find one spooky connection.

”WSJ” posted:

A Wall Street Journal investigation found that judges have improperly failed to disqualify themselves from 685 court cases around the nation since 2010. The jurists were appointed by nearly every president from Lyndon Johnson to Donald Trump.

About two-thirds of federal district judges disclosed holdings of individual stocks, and nearly one of every five who did heard at least one case involving those stocks.

Alerted to the violations by the Journal, 56 of the judges have directed court clerks to notify parties in 329 lawsuits that they should have recused themselves. That means new judges might be assigned, potentially upending rulings.
…

Judge Ramos, who oversaw the Exxon case, was unaware of his violation, said an official of the New York federal court, because his “recusal list”—a tally judges keep of parties they shouldn’t have in their courtrooms—listed only parent Exxon Mobil Corp. and not the unit, whose name includes the additional word “oil.” The official said the court conflict-screening software relied on exact matches.
…
The Journal found 61 judges or their families not only holding stocks in companies that were plaintiffs or defendants in the judges’ courts but also trading the stocks during cases.
…

Judge Janis Sammartino of California traded in stocks of Bank of America Corp. , CVS Health Corp. , Deutsche Bank AG , Hartford Financial Services Group Inc., HSBC Holdings PLC, JPMorgan, Pfizer Inc., Public Storage, Wells Fargo & Co. and Microsoft Corp. while hearing 18 lawsuits involving one or more of those companies, the Journal found. In all, she heard 54 cases involving companies held in her family’s trusts

mawarannahr posted:

why were there judges appointed by Long Balls Johnson working in 2010?

Perry Mason Jar posted:

gradenko_2000 posted:

is anyone here familiar with "Romeo and Juliet" laws as it pertains to age-of-consent?

as I understand it, these are provisions that are supposed to make an exception on what would constitute statutory rape, in cases where there's a small age-gap between the two people involved, given that there was consent. It varies from state-to-state, but for example in Connecticut, the age of consent is 16, but there is an exception for an age gap of up to two years, while California has no such provision - the age of consent there is 18, which means having sex with anyone below 18 years of age, regardless of any other circumstances, is illegal

gradenko_2000 posted: