Curious as to why there is no mention of having and taking Potassium Iodide?
"The FDA has approved two different forms of KI (potassium iodide), tablets and liquid, that people can take by mouth after a radiation emergency involving radioactive iodine." If there was a radiation emergency, people should take a drug that would help protect them from thyroid cancer.
Why should something like this never happen again? War is war. Japan in current day is an ally, so let's discuss the CCP.
Couldn't you say compared to the current modern day Communist Party of China and being as of today 21 Confusion institutes currently located in the United States? Do you think the current Communist Party of China does not have spies and people designed to infiltrate the United States government and the current Republic in various levels? Haven't they even been stealing secrets and intellectual property from governments?
Also, alerts last month from British Intelligence (MI5) regarding infiltration in their parliament?
And lastly, the CIA finally started a division to investigate China as of late last year.
So if you ask me, if there was a large security threat in the United States or Canada for example or any allied nation regarding spies from lets say the CCP, I believe they should absolutely be investigated and potentially put into secure camps regarding national security of a country.
It's not pretty(war isn't pretty), but how else would a military secure foreign threats in their country?
> So if you ask me, if there was a large security threat in the United States or Canada for example or any allied nation regarding spies from lets say the CCP, I believe they should absolutely be investigated and potentially put into secure camps regarding national security of a country.
Were the people imprisoned there actually a security threat? Were they investigated? Was it before or after they were interred?
There were thousands imprisoned and it is likely that a few were—amongst so many people, there are bound to be one or two.
However, the vast majority of them were not security threats. The vast majority were patriotic, good citizens, abruptly ordered from their homes and businesses without recourse or future justice. A travesty of American values.
Some young men interred left the camps to fight for the US and returned and were interred again.
Recommend reading about the Japanese American combat battalion. One of the most decorated units in the history of the US military (including 4,000 purple hearts), and earned while many of their families were unjustly detained in US internment camps.
I'm no historian expert, but at the time the world was in the middle of World War II and on Sunday, December 7, 1941 there was an event maybe you have heard of called "Pearl Harbor"?
Executive Order 9066 (This post and re: the camps) was signed February 19, 1942.
Every action has a reaction, especially in times of war, no?
Asian would be a race, "Japanese" in that case is a nationality - no?
"There was no internment of Russian Americans during the Cold War."
-- Last I recall, during the cold war there wasn't thousands of suicide Kamakazee pilots flying planes into a US Navy base and destroying US war ships(Pearl Harbor)?
I didn't miss the point, I was replying to the comment above of:
"Definitely worth preserving so that people are aware it happened and hopefully prevent it from happening again in the future."
I think it should be preserved as a reminder to all, and I am not necessarily against this happening again in the future and clearly gave a modern day example of The Chinese Communist Party as an enemy of nations and how something like this could potentially happen again.
You've posted a video of a Chinese restaurant whose management is at the very least xenophobic, or maybe racist. (Assuming the video is accurate.)
And I frown on that, for sure.
But that's light-years away from the US government incarcerating all Americans with Chinese heritage simply because of that heritage.
You're right that it could happen again.
But it would be unConstitutional and racist AF. And that's not the kind of America I want to see. Frankly, it's not the kind of America you should want to see, either. We're supposed to be better than that.
So all American citizens of Chinese descent are CCP spies and should be interned in case of war? What happened to innocent until proven guilty and all the freedom crap in your constitution?
Thanks! Yeah I wanted to really give the feeling of "exploring", while building it I had the concept of walking around a city and bumping into people in various locations in my head.
I don’t endorse illegal activities, ever, full stop. I speak only of the results.
Don’t speak or support what you’d be embarrassed to see successfully attributed to you on the front page of a newspaper. Everyone’s opsec streak runs out eventually, and anonymity should have bounds once you’re influencing the public sphere (politics, in this case).
(all of my political donations are public in FEC filings, even those I’m not required to disclose)
Only in the case where the subject in question is pushing public policy to hurt homosexuals while secretly being one themselves. Public figures are held to a higher standard of accountability, and a loss of some privacy is expected depending on how far your life dips into public policy and influence. The purpose in this case would be to expose the malicious hypocrisy.
You’re Average Joe or Jane? Of course not, not under any circumstances. Their bedroom is their business only. I can’t stress this enough.
> People have a right to privacy. Stealing private information is the opposite of freedom.
Higher level, to demand anonymity when pushing resourced ($$$) speech in a democracy is attempting to subvert the political system while avoiding recourse for bad faith intent and/or actions (my observations from a systems analyst perspective).
It sounds like you're saying the "ends justify the means".
Perhaps its not embarrassment that makes people want privacy, but fear of retribution. Consider someone living during the McCarthy era in the US. Speaking up could be career ending, and in the long run, if things had progressed to a more authoritarian regime, life threatening.
As one of the earlier posters said, I think many people see a slide into authoritarianism on both sides of the political spectrum. And it strikes me, that not being able to have secrets or privacy supports authoritarianism more than furthering democracy.
So how do you think this gets solved? What do you think some of the root causes are?
Semi-related, I was reading about the history of some of the "US greatest universities"; Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. were actually Christian Universities? Wasn't even Cambridge founded in the 1200's have similar history?
I'm not sure of the complete validity, but it's an interesting perspective for sure.
I even remember reading Einstein working alongside Father Lemaitre, a Belgian Catholic priest (Founder of Big Bang Theory) on some groundbreaking work?
I've always joked that maybe G-d gave us the computer as he felt pity on us for it took 4000 years for man to calculate several hundred digits of Pi, and who knows how many great minds dedicated to hand calculating only a more "perfect circle". Didn't even Archimedes die calculating Pi?
"Nōlī turbāre circulōs meōs!" a Latin phrase, "Do not disturb my circles!". It is said to have been uttered by Archimedes—in reference to a geometric figure he had outlined on the sand—when he was confronted by a Roman soldier during the Siege of Syracuse prior to being killed.
The root causes are scientists are experts in operating tools, just like many programmers can write code, it doesnt mean they understand the process.
The medical profession is largely still the snake oil industry it was hundreds of years ago, and Govt legislation enables their monopoly.
I have as little to do with the NHS as possible because these so called experts are experts in minutiae and not the big picture. They prescribe what they have been taught. The Govt/NHS also limits a GP's prescribing ability so private healthcare should be the gold standard not a communist era make work scheme like the NHS.
You try getting a doctor to explain their thinking, most will not, and when you challenge them they go all jihad on you, in a western country of all places!
This just demonstrates cognitive dissonance in what they have been taught, but any country or institution or individual who believes in sky faeries just shows humans can hold some diametrically opposed beliefs which are irrational and should be cause to be struck off any so called professional register!
He also said "We use the POWER that we have to limit the spread of that misinformation." These are extremely hostile and dangerous words from a US Official, no?
Who are you to determine what are/are not lies and what is/isn't truth? You are obviously following one narrative, but is there not another or other narratives? Is everyone that goes against the "mainstream narrative" automatically wrong, even if there have been world renowned medical experts and other science stating other facts that have been completely de-platformed by these "mainstream media outlets".
Do you think it's healthy that the "mainstream media" is owned by a few powerful funds and small groups of people comprised of board members of the very same medical and pharmaceutical companies? And those very same Super-PACS fund the politicians that get there? There is much cross-over, and lots of potential for conflicts of interests, no? To put your complete trust in one opinion, group, party or sources doesn't seem so healthy or sane to me - but to each their own.
You will not tell me what is misinformation or not. I prefer to hear from all experts of all sides myself. Personally, I'm a free thinker - but if you prefer to be spoon-fed what to and what not to think, this is your choice.
I have read history, I'm aware of the former Communist, Nazi, Authoritarian and Dictatorship regimes - all which started with the control of the media, suppression of free thinkers, speech, intellectuals and controlling ONE NARRATIVE and this is exactly how things start - and how they end or ended...well, wars (Civil and globally) and millions of deaths. Power corrupts, just like water is wet.
"Who are you to determine what are/are not lies and what is/isn't truth?" is an important question to philosophers but it's irrelevant here.
From what I can tell, your fundamental point is that truth is subjective, and governments that censor trivial things slide down a slippery slope to totalitarianism, so we should avoid that by allowing unrestricted free speech, which will protect us if the government turns out to be technically wrong. There's another point about the media but it is fairly close to conspiracy theory (for example, top pharma company boards don't overlap with mainstream media).
Another issue is that some sides don't have experts. For example, the pro-ivermectin side doesn't have experts. It has a small number of confused doctors and a large number of ignorant people, and a teeny-tiny number of people who have the ability to run a large-scale controlled clinical trial, but aren't getting involved.
Let's bring it down to a simple situation. The nation faces an existential risk. scientists convince the government they understand the cause and have a solution that will eliminate the risk. the process will involve temporary suspension of civil liberties that can be suspended when the risk is gone. However, Joe Rogan has an expert on his show that says the scientists are wrong.
At that point, I literally just trust that I made the right decision electing a person who will make the right decision (in the case of an existential threat, it's OK to suspend civil liberties temporarily). What do you do? Listen to the expert as the world dies?
Frankly it's quite sad and scary, the fact that some "government officials" like this one seem to think the US Constitution is some "guideline" and not something that people have shed blood for, gone to war for and many millions have died over all in the sake of freedom and for us to be free. All to be thrown away and disregarded?
I wonder why he/his family immigrated to the US? Was it for the freedom of opportunity? It seemed it worked out well for him only to then trample on the constitution and demanding US citizens be censored? The founding fathers who risked their lives must be rolling in their graves I would imagine.
He should be ashamed of himself and seriously reflect on his stance and choices. Vivek Murthy should resign immediately.
Could you say specifically what in his quote makes you think he's acting as if the US Constitution is a guideline? I'm guessing he knows the first amendment and the law and it seems unlikely that he would actually verbally state that the government should actively violate the constitution.
Remember, the US has powers it doesn't exercise that allow it to limit the freedom of americans within a constitutional context. And it also has the ability to message to people in ways that cast doubt on things it does not want people to believe.
Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
You have a US Government official specifically saying "Joe Rogan Must be Censored" which took an oath to uphold the constitution. He is paid from US tax dollars and is supposed representative of the people. No government official should call to censor anyone, this is literally KGB/H1tl3R/China Dictator type stuff and should frighten and scare the living crap out of everyone.
Joe Rogan hosted free speech from medical and world renowned vaccine experts who have been de-platformed, censored, bullied, fired, threatened with medical licenses being revoked...etc. etc.
Do you not know anything about history? "Today it's me, tomorrow it's you."
I stand with Joe Rogan, free speech, free thinkers, the right to say and write what you think wither I disagree or agree with it. If you can't tolerate that, then you might as well live in a George Orwell 1984 world. Not me.
I clicked thru the video and listened to him. While I don't thikn what he said is intelligent at all, at best, what he said is "you have no right to spread misinformation".
That's different from calling for somebody to be censored. And even if he's technically incorrect to say that people don't have the right to spread misinformation, there certainly are limits on the first amendment that could cover this situation. For example, if Rogan said something super-duper irresponsible, like "Everybody should immediately inject pure bleach into their bloodstream. It will cure covid", that is in fairly strong grounds for the first amendment not applying/being restricted in this case.
He also said "We use the POWER that we have to limit the spread of that misinformation." These are extremely hostile and dangerous words from a US Official, no?
But the thing is, Rogan did not say something super irresponsible like you are inventing and instead has actually has hosted medical and world renowned vaccine experts that had very intelligent things to say, backed with data, fact and logic. So why are you saying things or inventing scenarios that are completely false?
Just a reminder for you...
"Censorship and Propaganda was another important factor to the success for Hitler's dictatorship. Everything that was going to get in touch with the public, including Radios, the Press, the lessons they teach at school, the art works people paint, the movies they play at cinemas all had to be censored first before audiences could watch it."
No, those aren't hostile and dangerous words. You're just getting overexcited.
The scenario I explained is one in which a government may legitimately censor somebody because it exceeds the normal restraints of First Amendment. It's pretty clear that Rogan didn't say that. You may note in everything I'm saying, I'm not supporting censoring Rogan. If the US government wants to oppose his message, clearly they should just spend time on talk shows saying the message they want the public to hear (like they do). I do think Rogan was irresponsible with ivermectin, but it does not reach the point where the government could legitimately censor him.
You don't need you to keep reminding of quotes about hitler. It doesn't somehow make your argument stronger to explain how the Nazis came to be.
Again the problem to me is he is clearly pointing and publicly asking "Big Tech" to censor more, "deplatform" more...take more control of "right" speech vs "wrong" speech. The fact that even a government official calls it "Big Tech"; he publicly calling this current "curation" of companies a M0n0poly? I thought monopolies are ill…3gal?
And your point even with Ivermectin, a treatment option that not only costs pennies a dose (no profit in that for "Big Pharma" eh?)...but what exactly was the preferred treatment guidelines for Covid aside from taking a "kind of effective", "doesn't stop the spread", "Costed global tax payers b1ll1i0nz", "can still go to the hospital" vaccines? Was it because B1G Ph4rma didn't make their $xxx...$xxxx "treatment pill" yet?
And what exactly was irresponsible with Ivermectin? Did you have a problem with Monoclonal anti-bodies as well? You do realize this had interesting data and science coming out of Japan, India and other countries who deployed and utilized these drug trials? Isn't that how global science and "Open Science" should work? Smart scientists putting out shared research papers, working together to collaborate on new treatments, try different things, new studies and truly show smart human effectiveness and collaboration? Instead this has been ANYTHING such that, rather a few companies that put out a never-ending number of vaccine doses x billions of people times x dollars…? Also there can be no other effective treatments or ideas otherwise...if not, you must be CENSORED by "BIG TECH" for calling out "BIG PHARMA".
Come on now. This doesn't seem like a government or government official of "We the people"; more like, "Do what we say or else you should be censored". Maybe it is I, disillusioned? I thought it was Thomas Jefferson who said "When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty" - but I believe some folks took his monument down about a year ago in some protests? Hmm, how ironic? I guess my idea of the United States of America was the people here were tired of some Kings sh1t and an Authoritarian government telling them what the darn to do, so they formed a Constitutional Republic which stated every man is a King in this land and no one can tell them what to do? Is that not the law, Common Law I believe? Regardless, I always viewed "America" as way more badass than letting some handful of "Big Tech" and "Big Pharma" corporate PAX backed politicians and government tell you what to say or do.
I think at the very core root, you have a different view and vision of the government than I do. I personally don’t want any person or any government telling me what to do, what I should think, how I should think, and what is “right” speak or “wrong speak. And I prefer to see all the data and all the science, but somehow this has been blocked for 75 years? What?! Oh. Am I not allowed to write that? Is that not true?
"The FDA has approved two different forms of KI (potassium iodide), tablets and liquid, that people can take by mouth after a radiation emergency involving radioactive iodine." If there was a radiation emergency, people should take a drug that would help protect them from thyroid cancer.