The democrats and tech giants took 1984 as an implementation manual, not a cautionary tale:
crimethink – To even consider any thought not in line with the principles of Ingsoc. Doubting any of the principles of Ingsoc. All crimes begin with a thought. So, if you control thought, you can control crime.
Newspeak – The official language of Oceania. Newspeak is “politically correct” speech taken to its maximum extent. Newspeak is based on standard English, but all words describing “unorthodox” political ideas have been removed. In addition, there was an attempt to remove the overall number of words in general, to limit the range of ideas that could be expressed.
ownlife – Individualism and eccentricity. A desire to do something for your own benefit. (i.e. hobbies, ownership of property, love, or any other thoughtcrime)
The NORC OCTOBER ELECTION RESEARCH PROJECT is also unaware of some facts, biased or both about Chinese whistleblowers that are contradicting the official Chinese and WHO line about the origins of the Chinese/Wuhan Coronavirus.
During their survey they ask if the coronavirus was created in a lab. Right now the jury is out. Selecting anything except it being “false” results in a warning by NORC that it is false.
Who exactly did they consult? Are these the same experts at the WHO, CDC, Fauci et al who lied about the efficacy of masks for months? The ones who lied about the efficacy of travel bans until it was too late?
Most likely, but the NORC is doing a disservice to anyone who cares about the truth and facts by ignoring whistleblowers from China. Particularly ones like Li Wenliang who were severely punished in China for letting the world know about the virus in December. The “rumor mongers” as the Chinese called him.
Ones like Li-Meng Yan, a well respected Chinese virologist who attempted to spread the word back in December but was shut down by the Chinese government. Is the left in the US really going to shut down a whistleblower like the Chinese government does? Facebook and Twitter mark it as “false” regardless of the fact that it is still a subject of research.
Does anyone know if it was created in a lab? Yes, some scientists in China would know or not, but this is still an open question and NORC is again showing their partisan stripes and, charitably, their ignorance.
If I can decide I am going to count “2+2=4” as wrong, I can report all kinds of incorrect results.
The totalitarian left, whether socialists, communists, or fascists pretending to be anti-fascist, is coming closer to power in the United States today. If Joe Biden wins in November and the democrat party takes the Senate and keeps the House, a laundry list of items will be immediately on the agenda:
Eliminating the filibuster. Sen. Schumer has already stated eliminating it is on the table. This will turn the Senate into the House without any need for consensus. and provide the opportunity for all kinds of mischief, including the following.
Giving citizenship to around 20 million people who have entered the country illegally, after blocking all President Trump’s attempts to fix the issue over his first term.
Packing the Supreme Court by adding additional seats.
Fauci brazenly lies again. He has no drink in his hand, is sitting there laughing and watching. Look at the pictures, and then see how he excused it.
“I had my mask around my chin I had taken it down. I was totally dehydrated and I was drinking water trying to re-rehydrate myself and by the way I was negative Covid literally the day before so I guess people want to make a big event. I wear a mask all the time when I’m outside. To pull it down to take some sips Of water and put it back up again I guess if people wanna make something about that they can. “
Don’t believe your lying eyes is what he’s saying, one rule for thee, another for me.
“Hate speech” is a term used by fascists, socialists, communists and other authoritarians to shut people up – when they can’t win an argument that involves liberty vs control, they want people to be shutdown and shut up. It is a slippery, subjective concept that allows those defining it to silence those with whom they disagree.
Always look to see who the arbiter of what is “hate speech” and you’ll see who will benefit from it in terms of wealth and power.
Interesting, now Fauci is admitting that that public health officials lied about the effectiveness of masks to preserve supplies for first responders. Of course anyone with any common sense knew they were lying about it earlier this year. Of course, anyone with any common sense knew they were lying about it earlier this year.
TheHill: “[Fauci] also acknowledged that masks were initially not recommended to the general public so that first responders wouldn’t feel the strain of a shortage of PPE. [Fauci] explained that public health experts “were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply.”
The CDC, WHO, and “officials” have been lying from the start. It is just nice (well, maybe not nice, but validating) to hear Fauci say what everyone with above a room temp IQ knew when the surgeon general and all the health officials were saying (among other things), “masks aren’t effective” and then 6-8 weeks later say they are. It wasn’t a question of new data, it was a question of self-serving lying by public officials which undoubtedly cost people their lives.
So, in short, “Fauci lied, people died.”
One wonders how much they were they also lying about in the Coronavirus Task Force meetings to the VP, President etc?
Who orchestrated this lie? Will there be hearings?
Why did the CDC and others lie about it? Why politicize it by lying?
How about all these people trying to “raise awareness” actually DO something instead of “advocating” for someone else to do something? Does anyone really think that there are more than 50 people in the USA who are not “aware” and need to have their “awareness raised”? Stop “advocating” and do something positive yourself. Go build a house for people with Habit for Humanity. Go get a job and work and then donate the proceeds to the people who need it. Go plant a garden (Mike Bloomberg says it is easy) and donate the food you grow to people who need it. Go buy a gun and protect people. Go help clean up stores and property damaged by riots. Go back to school, get an MD and help people in need with their medical needs. Get a JD and represent these people in court. Go to the police academy and become an officer so you can do it right. Get an accounting degree, engineering or something like that and use it to help. People need to get off their behinds and out from behind the keyboard, off instagram, Facebook, twitter etc, and actually do something instead of sitting around demanding someone else do something.
Stop accepting that more horrendous incidents like “George Floyd” will happen, get out from behind the keyboard and do something. Stop senseless death like that by taking action, accepting the challenge and fixing things instead of expecting “someone else” to do so.
Dear President Bravman, I am completely disgusted to read that “A professor at Bucknell University tweeted out last week that he wished death on Rush Limbaugh,”(https://www.thecollegefix.com/professor-wishes-death-on-rush-limbaugh-attacks-republicans-on-social-media/ ) particularly after insinuating that a US House of Representatives member should be hanged last year. First as an alumni, seeing Bucknell’s name in the context of Michael Drexler wishing death on someone in a news article that is circulated worldwide is deeply disturbing. Does anyone, let alone a professional, want to have their alma mater brought up in such a manner? Does Bucknell have plans to prevent such events in the future? Do professors have any standards that they must follow, like morality clauses in professional athlete contracts, so as to avoid painting the University in a bad light? When you see patterns of public behavior of a person wishing death on people, there should be a concern on how it reflects upon the institution and professors should, frankly, have better judgement than to do so without the need of contract terms. A second concern is, of course, about current students and faculty at Bucknell. If someone is publicly wishing death to at least several people, I would be concerned about their stability as it relates to on-campus violence against people with whom Drexler disagrees whether they are students, faculty, administrators, or even alumni. What is Bucknell doing in order to promote a safe campus environment that is open to viewpoints, particularly those that are anti-fascist, anti-communist, anti-socialist, – in short anti-authoritarian – and pro-liberty? I am concerned that someone wishing death on people and publicly calling Professor Riley (no relation) a “white supremacist skinhead” (from the article) might be temperamentally unfit to be educating students safely. I have to say that during my four years at Bucknell, not only did none of my professors ever wish death upon anyone or call students or other professors names, neither did the swim coaches, administrators, staff or anyone else with whom I interacted. The head swim coach (Dick Russell) insisted that when we went to swim meets, both home and away, we “look neat and clean” (nice shirt, (often) ties, no scruffiness) because we were “representing Bucknell”. Professors today should have as much sense as he did. Which leads to my next question.
How lax are the current hiring standards that Bucknell is hiring and promoting to tenured professor people who are immature and immorally evil that they would wish death on someone in a public forum where they are associated with Bucknell? Does Bucknell do anything to promote tolerance among faculty members and promote mental health of faculty members who are advocating violence among sitting members of Congress, calling other faculty members vile names and wishing death on public figures? Seeing some of the anti-free speech protests on campus recently makes me concerned about the direction the University has taken, but I do commend the school for standing up for free speech such as allowing Heather Mac Donald to speak last year. A University should be about civil discourse, not vile names, threats and the like whether or not you disagree with someone or not. Thanks,