[OT, but curious] bye bye, 5G...

Mirimir mirimir at riseup.net
Sat Jun 27 23:31:32 PDT 2020

On 06/27/2020 11:08 PM, Punk-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 22:27:55 -0700
> Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net> wrote:
>>> 	I guess you didn't even bother looking at the age of the people allegedly killed by the 'virus'?  So, do your homework, read wikimierda. 
>> Sure, COVID-19 is mainly killing older people. Looking at various online
>> sources, almost half of fatalities were over 75.
> 	roughly half of the fatalities are people over the 'average life expectancy'. They are already dead, statistically speaking. 
>> About 25% were 65-74,
>> and about 22% were 45-64. Only about 5% were under 45. And yes, for all
>> age groups, most of the fatalities had underlying health conditions.
> 	so the current PSYOP is just the flu rebranded. And not even the flu as the direct cause but just a factor. 

Well, it's a different type of virus. And it may well be one where
immunity after infection and recovery doesn't last very long, and where
vaccines won't work. If that's the case, it could be a fuckload worse
than another kind of flu. But ask me again next year this time.

> 	"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza
> Influenza spreads around the world in yearly outbreaks, resulting in about three to five million cases of severe illness and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths" 

It's too early to compare.

>> But most of those people arguably died sooner that they would have, but
>> for COVID-19. Maybe not a lot sooner, I admit. But in the most heavily
>> affected areas, total death rates _did_ increase.
> 	compared to what?

Compared to historical averages.

> And even if that were the case, it's just how the natural world works. There are ups and downs. 

I do agree with that. And one aspect of "how the natural world works" is
that monocultures are vulnerable to decimation by pathogens. So COVID-19
is just a natural response to human overpopulation. And there's no
reason to think that there won't be more. The rate of zoonotic disease
outbreaks has increased about five fold in recent decades.

>> Anyway, I do get the argument that it would have made more sense,
>> overall, to just let everyone get infected, 
> 	that's not my point. My point is that this is a ridiculous charade. 

I do tend to agree with that.

>> and let all the old and
>> infirm just die. 
> 	exactly like the always since there living things appeared on earth. Old and sick people die. Of anything. See how fucking insane - and ridiculous the charade is?

Well, being so old, I'd rather not be surrounded by people infected with
COVID-19. And fortunately, I live in an area with very few of them.

> 	the 'humanitarian' retards supposedly want to stop death - though of course only death caused by their imaginary threat. Nobody is talking about, say, banning cars, which certainly would save a lot of lifes and limbs. Or banning war? War is peace!


>> That would arguably have avoided the huge economic
>> shitstorm that we'll be facing for the rest of the decade.
>> And damn, if you welcome the shitstorm, why complain so loudly about the
>> proximate cause? Isn't it all for the lulz?
> 	well, one of the good consequences is that children weren't mind raped in schools for a few months. As to the a possible economic shitstorm, I don't think it will happen. 

Time will tell.

> 	The obvious objective of the charade is to thighten controls over...everything. 

It does seem that way, doesn't it? Opportunism seems more likely than
conspiracy, but you could be right.

> 	Hey, didn't you see the Emperor of the Cyphperpunks, Sir Jim Bell advocating for more fascist surveillance? 

No comment.

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list