Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

What lies did the FBI tell about the laptop and its contents?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Have you not followed the story?

---

Not much.

---

Well no wonder you are so wrong, and you keep spouting data that is over 12 months old.

Over the past 90 days, multiple reports have been released showing that investigations into the laptop and the data on the harddrive are authentic and there is NO information to support the claim that Russia was involved with the laptop.

The Twitter files also back up the "conspiracy theory" that the FBI was giving direction to Twitter to suppress the Hunter Biden story, and to spread the false claim that it was just "Russian disinformation".

Do you really think that the FBI didn't have the resources or intellect to determine that the laptop wasn't linked to Russia? %A0The FBI had that laptop in their possession for months before the NY Post story broke. %A0Do you think that the FBI never investigated it? %A0How is it that CBS and other bastions of conservatism have finally admitted the truth that that laptop was real, and that censoring it was "probably wrong"?

Pull you head out! %A0The FBI knew exactly what they were doing, and they did it anyway. %A0Twitter, Facebook, CBS, CNN and the rest of them all played along without doing ANY investigation of their own... because it fit the overall goal of removing Trump from office.

This is NOT a conspiracy theory.

All of the "conspiracy theories" about Covid have been proven to be true, and now the same has happened with the collusion between Big Tech and government to alter the election... and yet you continue to think that these proven liars are telling you the truth? %A0What is wrong with you?

---

Of course the FBI was investigating it. That's one of the reasons Twitter was suspicious. When they "finally" admitted they made a mistake banning the story, it was all of a day or two later.

I'm glad you brought up the Covid nonsense, and not only because it instantly discredits everything else you just said. It also happens to be the original subject of this hopelessly benighted thread that we've hijacked for the last few pages. I propose that we move on from the tempest in the teapot that is the Biden laptop controversy and get back on topic.

---

For what you are saying to be true... the FBI didn't investigate the laptop until just a few weeks ago??

The FBI had the laptop for months BEFORE they told Twitter to suppress the story. %A0So either they are totally incompetent (didn't investigate for well over 2 years) or they knowingly suppressed and lied about the laptop. %A0So which is it?

---

I don't know, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me when they supposedly lied.

---

You said the following:

"Of course the FBI was investigating it. That's one of the reasons Twitter was suspicious. When they "finally" admitted they made a mistake banning the story, it was all of a day or two later."

When exactly did this happen in your mind? %A0When was this "day or two later"... when did this happen?

---

I may have been unclear. It was Twitter who changed their mind a day or two after the ban. That doesn't mean the story was true; in fact it was full of inaccuracies apart from the authentication issue. They just decided banning it was the wrong thing to do.

---

"a day or two after..."

what an astoundingly self-serving misremembering of history

---

In Reversal, Twitter Is No Longer Blocking New York Post Article
By Kate Conger and Mike Isaac
Published Oct. 16, 2020

With just a few weeks to go before the Nov. 3 vote, the social media companies are continuing to shift their policies and, in some cases, are entirely reversing what they will and won't allow on their sites. On Friday, Twitter underlined just how fluid its policies were when it began letting users share links to an unsubstantiated New York Post article about Hunter Biden that it had previously blocked from its service.

The change was a 180-degree turn from Wednesday, when Twitter had banned the links to the article because the emails on which it was based may have been hacked and contained private information, both of which violated its policies. (Many questions remain about how the New York Post obtained the emails.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/16/technology/twitter-new-york-post.html

---

"a day or two after...."

What an astoundingly self-serving misremembering of history, fortified with NYT spin.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/27/twitters-continued-ban-on-the-post-has-no-rhyme-or-reason-only-bias/
https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-lifts-new-york-posts-suspension-after-lengthy-standoff-over-hunter-biden-report

---

We're talking about a dispute between Twitter and the New York Post, and your reliable, objective, not at all self-serving source is…the New York Post? That's a good one.

---

Watch this and have your mind blown. Whoever wrote the script for this episode of X-Files has to be a time traveler or a senior deep state operative who revealed the entire plan just for giggles 🤯🤣 pic.twitter.com/oPmC8A4SyL

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) December 15, 2022

ShooterTX said:

---

Had anyone seen this recently?
Pretty amazing how fiction becomes reality.

Watch this and have your mind blown. Whoever wrote the script for this episode of X-Files has to be a time traveler or a senior deep state operative who revealed the entire plan just for giggles 🤯🤣 pic.twitter.com/oPmC8A4SyL

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) December 15, 2022

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Had anyone seen this recently?
Pretty amazing how fiction becomes reality.

Watch this and have your mind blown. Whoever wrote the script for this episode of X-Files has to be a time traveler or a senior deep state operative who revealed the entire plan just for giggles 🤯🤣 pic.twitter.com/oPmC8A4SyL

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) December 15, 2022

---

Solid evidence.

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Had anyone seen this recently?
Pretty amazing how fiction becomes reality.

Watch this and have your mind blown. Whoever wrote the script for this episode of X-Files has to be a time traveler or a senior deep state operative who revealed the entire plan just for giggles 🤯🤣 pic.twitter.com/oPmC8A4SyL

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) December 15, 2022

---

Solid evidence.

---

Yeah... but it's way better evidence than anything you have posted supporting masks or the jab.

The fact that you continue to support the jab is just pure insanity.

When has the government and their lemmings pushed so hard for something that was so ineffective? I guess maybe climate change policies... but even that might potentially lead to cleaner air quality... but the jab is just worthless at best and potentially very harmful.

BTW, it's not a vaccine... it's a jab. Let's just be honest and quit pretending that it is something else. Maybe you could call it a "trans-vaccine"... a harmful concoction that identified as a vaccine. It's just as real and beneficial as drag queen story time is for kids.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

What lies did the FBI tell about the laptop and its contents?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Have you not followed the story?

---

Not much.

---

Well no wonder you are so wrong, and you keep spouting data that is over 12 months old.

Over the past 90 days, multiple reports have been released showing that investigations into the laptop and the data on the harddrive are authentic and there is NO information to support the claim that Russia was involved with the laptop.

The Twitter files also back up the "conspiracy theory" that the FBI was giving direction to Twitter to suppress the Hunter Biden story, and to spread the false claim that it was just "Russian disinformation".

Do you really think that the FBI didn't have the resources or intellect to determine that the laptop wasn't linked to Russia? %A0The FBI had that laptop in their possession for months before the NY Post story broke. %A0Do you think that the FBI never investigated it? %A0How is it that CBS and other bastions of conservatism have finally admitted the truth that that laptop was real, and that censoring it was "probably wrong"?

Pull you head out! %A0The FBI knew exactly what they were doing, and they did it anyway. %A0Twitter, Facebook, CBS, CNN and the rest of them all played along without doing ANY investigation of their own... because it fit the overall goal of removing Trump from office.

This is NOT a conspiracy theory.

All of the "conspiracy theories" about Covid have been proven to be true, and now the same has happened with the collusion between Big Tech and government to alter the election... and yet you continue to think that these proven liars are telling you the truth? %A0What is wrong with you?

---

Of course the FBI was investigating it. That's one of the reasons Twitter was suspicious. When they "finally" admitted they made a mistake banning the story, it was all of a day or two later.

I'm glad you brought up the Covid nonsense, and not only because it instantly discredits everything else you just said. It also happens to be the original subject of this hopelessly benighted thread that we've hijacked for the last few pages. I propose that we move on from the tempest in the teapot that is the Biden laptop controversy and get back on topic.

---

For what you are saying to be true... the FBI didn't investigate the laptop until just a few weeks ago??

The FBI had the laptop for months BEFORE they told Twitter to suppress the story. %A0So either they are totally incompetent (didn't investigate for well over 2 years) or they knowingly suppressed and lied about the laptop. %A0So which is it?

---

I don't know, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me when they supposedly lied.

---

You said the following:

"Of course the FBI was investigating it. That's one of the reasons Twitter was suspicious. When they "finally" admitted they made a mistake banning the story, it was all of a day or two later."

When exactly did this happen in your mind? %A0When was this "day or two later"... when did this happen?

---

I may have been unclear. It was Twitter who changed their mind a day or two after the ban. That doesn't mean the story was true; in fact it was full of inaccuracies apart from the authentication issue. They just decided banning it was the wrong thing to do.

---

"a day or two after..."

what an astoundingly self-serving misremembering of history

---

In Reversal, Twitter Is No Longer Blocking New York Post Article
By Kate Conger and Mike Isaac
Published Oct. 16, 2020

With just a few weeks to go before the Nov. 3 vote, the social media companies are continuing to shift their policies and, in some cases, are entirely reversing what they will and won't allow on their sites. On Friday, Twitter underlined just how fluid its policies were when it began letting users share links to an unsubstantiated New York Post article about Hunter Biden that it had previously blocked from its service.

The change was a 180-degree turn from Wednesday, when Twitter had banned the links to the article because the emails on which it was based may have been hacked and contained private information, both of which violated its policies. (Many questions remain about how the New York Post obtained the emails.)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/16/technology/twitter-new-york-post.html

---

"a day or two after...."

What an astoundingly self-serving misremembering of history, fortified with NYT spin.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/27/twitters-continued-ban-on-the-post-has-no-rhyme-or-reason-only-bias/
https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-lifts-new-york-posts-suspension-after-lengthy-standoff-over-hunter-biden-report

---

We're talking about a dispute between Twitter and the New York Post, and your reliable, objective, not at all self-serving source is…the New York Post? That's a good one.

---

1. THREAD:

THE TWITTER FILES: HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE

– By censoring info that was true but inconvenient to U.S. govt. policy
– By discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed
– By suppressing ordinary users, including some sharing the CDC’s *own data*

— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022

Cobretti said:

---

1. THREAD:

THE TWITTER FILES: HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE

– By censoring info that was true but inconvenient to U.S. govt. policy
– By discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed
– By suppressing ordinary users, including some sharing the CDC’s *own data*

— David Zweig (@davidzweig) December 26, 2022

---

.@emmaogreen explores the People’s C.D.C.: a ragtag collective of academics, doctors, activists, and artists who believe that the government has left them to fend for themselves against COVID-19.https://t.co/cSfPYXUa6O

— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) December 28, 2022

Cobretti said:

---

.@emmaogreen explores the People’s C.D.C.: a ragtag collective of academics, doctors, activists, and artists who believe that the government has left them to fend for themselves against COVID-19.https://t.co/cSfPYXUa6O

— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) December 28, 2022

And then there are masks. The People's C.D.C. strongly supports mask mandates, and they have called on federal, state, and local governments to put them back in place, arguing that "the vaccine-only strategy promoted by the CDC is insufficient." The group has noted that resistance to masks is most common among white people: Lucky Tran, who organizes the coalition's media team, recently tweeted a YouGov survey supporting this, and wrote that "a lot of anti-mask sentiment is deeply embedded in white supremacy."

***

It's tough to definitively adjudicate these disputes. In the progressive imagination, science is sometimes treated like a static text that's easy to interpret, with clear takeaways for behavior. "One of the big mistakes in our field is this mantra 'Follow the science,' as though science is not contested, as though there are not evidentiary gaps, as though there are not conflicting reports and data points you have to navigate your way through," Fairchild, the O.S.U. professor, said. The People's C.D.C. talks about "science" as proof that the members' position is correct, when in reality they're making a case for how they wish the world to be, and selecting scientific evidence to build their narrative. It's a kind of moralistic scientisma belief that science infallibly validates lefty moral sensibilities.

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

.@emmaogreen explores the People’s C.D.C.: a ragtag collective of academics, doctors, activists, and artists who believe that the government has left them to fend for themselves against COVID-19.https://t.co/cSfPYXUa6O

— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) December 28, 2022

And then there are masks. The People's C.D.C. strongly supports mask mandates, and they have called on federal, state, and local governments to put them back in place, arguing that "the vaccine-only strategy promoted by the CDC is insufficient." The group has noted that resistance to masks is most common among white people: Lucky Tran, who organizes the coalition's media team, recently tweeted a YouGov survey supporting this, and wrote that "a lot of anti-mask sentiment is deeply embedded in white supremacy."

***

It's tough to definitively adjudicate these disputes. In the progressive imagination, science is sometimes treated like a static text that's easy to interpret, with clear takeaways for behavior. "One of the big mistakes in our field is this mantra 'Follow the science,' as though science is not contested, as though there are not evidentiary gaps, as though there are not conflicting reports and data points you have to navigate your way through," Fairchild, the O.S.U. professor, said. The People's C.D.C. talks about "science" as proof that the members' position is correct, when in reality they're making a case for how they wish the world to be, and selecting scientific evidence to build their narrative. It's a kind of moralistic scientisma belief that science infallibly validates lefty moral sensibilities.

---

That answers where Sam gets his propaganda question.

It's a special kind of intentional stupid to believe "masks" in general reduce the spread of covid in any sort of meaningful way. The same people that have plexiglass hanging in their homes.

---

Should you attend that New Year’s Eve party? Our medical analyst weighs in https://t.co/cJy5xMgNrm

— CNN International (@cnni) December 29, 2022

Cobretti said:

---

Should you attend that New Year’s Eve party? Our medical analyst weighs in https://t.co/cJy5xMgNrm

— CNN International (@cnni) December 29, 2022

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Worth the listen.

A lot of people are finally waking up to the truth.

https://rumble.com/v20xews-the-covid-redemption-with-tim-robbins-048-stay-free-with-russell-brand.html

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Worth the listen.

A lot of people are finally waking up to the truth.

https://rumble.com/v20xews-the-covid-redemption-with-tim-robbins-048-stay-free-with-russell-brand.html

---

Watched about 15 minutes and got to hear them talk about the CDC supposedly redefining vaccines and whether there was a foul motive behind it. I wondered the same thing at the time, spent a few minutes looking, and ascertained the reason.

My question to them would be the same as my question to you: why not go and find out?

---

The final COVID boss. pic.twitter.com/VE8wy3RTWk

— RAMZPAUL (@ramzpaul) December 30, 2022

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

Regardless of how one feels about the particulars, generally the public health response to covid was an embarrassing mixture of disinformation, contradiction, and politics over people's overall health. Not that an honest assessment every will be allowed, but it definitely was one of the darkest times in American history driven largely by incompetence, ego, and bigotry.

---

pic.twitter.com/3vBKjLUrPk

— Declaration of Memes (@libertycappy) December 30, 2022

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

It's neither a Disney movie nor a dystopian sci-fi. It's a complex world with complex issues, one of which is gain of function research. Indiscriminate banning is a bad idea if we want medical science to advance. Selective bans are preferable, depending on the costs and benefits in each case.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

It's neither a Disney movie nor a dystopian sci-fi. It's a complex world with complex issues, one of which is gain of function research. Indiscriminate banning is a bad idea if we want medical science to advance. Selective bans are preferable, depending on the costs and benefits in each case.

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

It's neither a Disney movie nor a dystopian sci-fi. It's a complex world with complex issues, one of which is gain of function research. Indiscriminate banning is a bad idea if we want medical science to advance. Selective bans are preferable, depending on the costs and benefits in each case.

---

100% chance another virus escapes a lab. One which could kill billions.

We're not responsible or knowledge enough for that kind of science.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

It's neither a Disney movie nor a dystopian sci-fi. It's a complex world with complex issues, one of which is gain of function research. Indiscriminate banning is a bad idea if we want medical science to advance. Selective bans are preferable, depending on the costs and benefits in each case.

---

100% chance another virus escapes a lab. One which could kill billions.

We're not responsible or knowledge enough for that kind of science.

---

100% chance more viruses evolve in nature. One of them could kill billions. We want to be ready.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

It's neither a Disney movie nor a dystopian sci-fi. It's a complex world with complex issues, one of which is gain of function research. Indiscriminate banning is a bad idea if we want medical science to advance. Selective bans are preferable, depending on the costs and benefits in each case.

---

100% chance another virus escapes a lab. One which could kill billions.

We're not responsible or knowledge enough for that kind of science.

---

100% chance more viruses evolve in nature. One of them could kill billions. We want to be ready.

---

Making bioweapons is not how you prepare to fight viruses.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

It's neither a Disney movie nor a dystopian sci-fi. It's a complex world with complex issues, one of which is gain of function research. Indiscriminate banning is a bad idea if we want medical science to advance. Selective bans are preferable, depending on the costs and benefits in each case.

---

100% chance another virus escapes a lab. One which could kill billions.

We're not responsible or knowledge enough for that kind of science.

---

100% chance more viruses evolve in nature. One of them could kill billions. We want to be ready.

---

Making bioweapons is not how you prepare to fight viruses.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

If our leaders, scientists, doctors and governments were responsible, gain of function research would be banned worldwide.

That it hasn't been banned screams to me that they're not serious about this. They're just looking to make more money.

Why do you have so much pfaith in the system or humanity? Do you think we're living in a Disney movie?

---

It's neither a Disney movie nor a dystopian sci-fi. It's a complex world with complex issues, one of which is gain of function research. Indiscriminate banning is a bad idea if we want medical science to advance. Selective bans are preferable, depending on the costs and benefits in each case.

---

100% chance another virus escapes a lab. One which could kill billions.

We're not responsible or knowledge enough for that kind of science.

---

100% chance more viruses evolve in nature. One of them could kill billions. We want to be ready.

---

Making bioweapons is not how you prepare to fight viruses.

---

Gain of function research is one of the ways we prepare to fight viruses.

---

Slow the spread? You’re still using that phrase? What you’re describing here is nearly useless. https://t.co/wEjgJku9KF

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) December 31, 2022

The Covid fatality risk by age in the Stanford doc’s new analysis:

Ages 0-19: 0.0003%
Ages 20-29: 0.003%
Ages 30-39: 0.011%
Ages 40-49: 0.035%

This was the grave risk which justified government coercion of experimental vaccines. My analysis of the paper: https://t.co/fgivoKb9dD https://t.co/80sQ7wcsn0

— Rav Arora (@Ravarora1) December 31, 2022

Redbrickbear said:

---

The Covid fatality risk by age in the Stanford doc’s new analysis:

Ages 0-19: 0.0003%
Ages 20-29: 0.003%
Ages 30-39: 0.011%
Ages 40-49: 0.035%

This was the grave risk which justified government coercion of experimental vaccines. My analysis of the paper: https://t.co/fgivoKb9dD https://t.co/80sQ7wcsn0

— Rav Arora (@Ravarora1) December 31, 2022

---