to be utterly shocked and heartbroken at how many intelligent, lovely friends and acquaintances have totally bought in to the radical global conspiracy theories...

[fuschia2000]

Seeing so much conspiracy stuff on Facebook threads, its totally alarming.... the folks can really make a good argument, with pseudo science, lots of data etc but we are looking at radical q'anon right wing conspiracy theories breaking through into the normal discussion groups and online groups.....

My sil says that although covid is without a doubt real, it is being used to gradually bring in a cashless society and businesses to go bust, therefore people relying totally on the government for support,

The Gov runs on our money - ie the tax we pay - if everyone was on basic benefits they would pay no tax as below the threshold. So the gov would have no money.
So the above is utter drivel. When I was a teen about 50 years ago I thought the Gov gave me money towards my college fees - I had no idea they were recycling someone else's tax payment. I might have been more appreciative if I had realised that.

The pandemic has been great for Amazon, not so good for small local businesses. Because you, the people are doing all your shopping on it. If you stopped doing all your shopping on it it would be less rich, it's not some conspiracy from on high it is YOU giving amazon, google, netflix your hard earned cash for their products. Unfortunately, unlike the past, the rest of the world is too so they are sooooooooooo rich. Tooooo rich imv.

I will probably be shouted down, but isn't the Great Reset just a think tank plan around globally coordinating effort to try and and rebuild the economy/society more sustainably and equitably after the pandemic? The line about owning nothing and being happy seems to come from a speculative think piece written by one person in 2016, with the stated aim of generating discussion around the pros and cons of a situation we could be heading towards already, rather than being a stated aim of the WEF. The video that includes/quotes that line is pretty obviously based on that piece of writing. Both predate the 'Great Reset' stuff by a few years
www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/how-life-could-change-2030/

There are definitely arguments to be made about whether the Great Reset is really much different from what the WEF have talked about before, and whether it's just rich people trying to assuage their guilt/look good, but I don't know that it's particularly sinister. Rich people and corporations already control and shape the world, if they can see the need/be persuaded to try to do this in a way that's fairer and more sustainable that's surely not a bad thing? Calling it 'The Great Reset' may not have been the wisest choice though!

Trying to write anything coherent on a phone is so frustrating! Further to my previous post, I am not for a moment saying I the the Great Reset is wonderful, has no downsides and we should all support it, just that I don't think it's a sinister plot to enforce socialism. I think the article by Naomi Klein puts it very well
theintercept.com/2020/12/08/great-reset-conspiracy/

@cinnabarmoth

I totally agree with you - the great reset was never positioned as this huge mind control agenda, literally just a think tank/futurologists.

Sadly the conspiracy theorists have weaved it into their anti- government, anti-vax, anti-bill gates anti- everything rhetoric.

@cinnabarmoth

I will probably be shouted down, but isn't the Great Reset just a think tank plan around globally coordinating effort to try and and rebuild the economy/society more sustainably and equitably after the pandemic? The line about owning nothing and being happy seems to come from a speculative think piece written by one person in 2016, with the stated aim of generating discussion around the pros and cons of a situation we could be heading towards already, rather than being a stated aim of the WEF. The video that includes/quotes that line is pretty obviously based on that piece of writing. Both predate the 'Great Reset' stuff by a few years www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/how-life-could-change-2030/

There are definitely arguments to be made about whether the Great Reset is really much different from what the WEF have talked about before, and whether it's just rich people trying to assuage their guilt/look good, but I don't know that it's particularly sinister. Rich people and corporations already control and shape the world, if they can see the need/be persuaded to try to do this in a way that's fairer and more sustainable that's surely not a bad thing? Calling it 'The Great Reset' may not have been the wisest choice though!

Yes! That's exactly what I think it is. I imagine that there are loads of such speculative thought experiments going on all over the world, but they don't have sexy titles like The Great Reset. Unfortunate naming indeed.

And by "speculative thought experiment" I don't mean anything was ever going to be done about it. They aren't experimenting on anyone.

It's unfortunate that conspiracy theorists can point to something real (although not what they say it is) and give their ludicrous ideas some spurious credibility, when it really is a massive twisting of facts.

[quote cinnabarmoth]Trying to write anything coherent on a phone is so frustrating! Further to my previous post, I am not for a moment saying I the the Great Reset is wonderful, has no downsides and we should all support it, just that I don't think it's a sinister plot to enforce socialism. I think the article by Naomi Klein puts it very well
theintercept.com/2020/12/08/great-reset-conspiracy/[/quote]
Thank you for sharing, this is a good quality article from a well regarded author, who sets out how the genuine concerns people have about elites exploiting the pandemic are being drowned out by batshit conspiracy theories. I am so upset that a friend of mine has fallen for 'the virus is not real' as it is plainly nonsense, but I entirely understand people who sense that the pandemic is being exploited to drive specific agendas.

Look at all those dodgy contracts worth millions of pounds of our taxes that were given to the mates of tory politicians under the cloak of a global emergency. Then those same politicians didn't want to support families who had fallen on hard times due to the pandemic over the school holidays.

Look at all those dodgy contracts worth millions of pounds of our taxes that were given to the mates of tory politicians under the cloak of a global emergency. Then those same politicians didn't want to support families who had fallen on hard times due to the pandemic over the school holidays.
Surely you are part of the problem - very valuable contracts were going to go to someone, no one's come up with a list of the good honest companies that should have got the contracts. I think 14 million was given to one of the vaccine companies for research - was that a bung? Or did it ensure we were/are ahead of the game when it came to vaccines. The gov made an increase in universal benefits at the start.
The big winners are American tech companies. They're going to try to rule the world. Cos in the U.K. are small fry.

[quote cinnabarmoth]Trying to write anything coherent on a phone is so frustrating! Further to my previous post, I am not for a moment saying I the the Great Reset is wonderful, has no downsides and we should all support it, just that I don't think it's a sinister plot to enforce socialism. I think the article by Naomi Klein puts it very well
theintercept.com/2020/12/08/great-reset-conspiracy/[/quote]
Thank you for sharing this article @cinnabarmoth

@RichardMarxisinnocent

Did that actually happen though? Everyone who tested positive had that on their death certificate even if they got run over by a bus? As the actual cause of death? I've yet to see any evidence that it happened like that other than people claiming such on forums.

No they didn't have covid as cause of death on their death certificate if they got run over by a bus. They may however have been included in the COVID stats of deaths reported each day, because those stats look at everyone who tested positive for COVID in the previous 28 days, and at whether the person is alive or deceased. If deceased they are one of the people who died within 28 days of a positive COVID test. COVID may or may not have been their actual cause of death. There are other stats which show number of deaths where covid is mentioned on the death certificate. These people may or may not have had a positive covid test - the doctor certifying death may have put it as covid due to symptoms if they didn't have a test. Numbers for both sets of stats are similar.

This is what I meant. PHE stats include everyone who died within 28 days of testing positive. They don’t double check. Until recently, it wasn’t even 28 days, you could’ve been tested 3 months before your death and still be included in the stats. Lots of terminally ill or very frail people died after testing positive and were counted as a Covid19 stat. No one seems to die of flu or pneumonia anymore.

But many people die of covid after 28 days too and I assume that they aren't included in the figures. A work colleague of my husband was on a ventilator and in hospital for at least 3 months and he almost died. He probably wouldn't have been included in current figures for covid deaths if he had died. If anything the deaths from covid may be an underestimate.

There have been over 80,000 excess deaths since the start of the pandemic. How do you square that with your thoughts that too many people are being classed as death from covid?

This is what I meant. PHE stats include everyone who died within 28 days of testing positive. They don’t double check. Until recently, it wasn’t even 28 days, you could’ve been tested 3 months before your death and still be included in the stats. Lots of terminally ill or very frail people died after testing positive and were counted as a Covid19 stat. No one seems to die of flu or pneumonia anymore.

Which is why the excess death stats are potentially more useful. And people not dying of flu is most likely the direct result of lockdown, social distancing etc. It is not as contagious so the various measures taken to control Covid have been extremely effective in controlling other infectious diseases.

Doctors and scientists with anti lockdown views are discredited, as are those wishing to try older, cheaper medical treatments. I try to avoid MSM since I realised but AFAIK even the Great Barrington Declaration was smeared and removed from search engines. It may be back now, .i don't know. I think some search engines and big sites played silly buggers with articles about Ivermectin too. TalkRadio was removed from YouTube for a while, I can't recall what excuse was given but it was flagged up because of freely exploring anti lockdown sentiment.

This is classic conspiracy theory bollocks. It's all so vague. It doesn't say what the bloody problem you're so worried about is. If I hadn't actually engaged on some of these issues with other people, not a word of this would make a bit of sense to me. It's all "oh well, of course they'd say that" or "you see these [nebulous] things or these [unknown] people were told to shut up".

Ivermectin is a classic example. Oooh, big pharma are trying to stop it being used as a way to help people because they'll make more money off vaccines/new drugs etc. But it's a ridiculous argument because

1. Other cheap and cheerful existing drugs HAVE been announced as having some positive impact and ARE being used
2. Reputable medical journals have discussed Ivermectic and worried that the quantity needed to treat Covid is dangerous for humans (bear in mind this is a drug designed to, if I recall, kill lice or similar?)
3. The practicalities of pharmaceutical companies creating a big conspiracy to hide the efficacy of cheap drugs is laughable. In my experience, getting people all on the same page in a group of more than 2 is impossible but sure, there's not a single whistleblower from across the (massive) pharmaceutical industry who has seen documentation that says this drug must be hidden?

FFS.

Triffid if you don't know what I mean re Talk Radio etc I don't know how to explain it better.

Re pharma, stop using the word "conspiracy" and ask yourself if pharma like to promote more expensive drugs.

I read medical journals - not so much the Lancet now as it has lost the plot. Yes, those discussions have happened in journals. I'm not disputing that.

Hands up though - haven't read a medical journal since xmas.

Apart from getting drawn in on here, I do try not to get drawn in.

Re pharma, stop using the word "conspiracy" and ask yourself if pharma like to promote more expensive drugs.

Of course they do. But there's a big difference between actively looking for bulletproof solutions they can charge a fortune for and an industry-wide plan to prevent investigation into other options.

TO people who don't follow media, Talkradio is meaningless. And quite frankly, it's got Julia Hartley Brewer on there so no, I can't get too worked up if Youtube decided it was basically hate speech because based on what I know of her, that seems quite possible. But as always, things like this are dropped in to conversation/posts by people like you with the implication that they're so so awful and a sign of a big cover up or whatever.

I saw one where someone was suggesting it was some kind of big conspiracy theory that cabinet ministers in the UK don't have expertise in the areas they cover. I nearly pissed myself laughing at the cluelessness re how the UK political system works and may have linked to pictures of the Bullington Club in the comment section...

Triffid "And quite frankly, it's got Julia Hartley Brewer on there so no, I can't get too worked up if Youtube decided it was basically hate speech because based on what I know of her, that seems quite possible. But as always, things like this are dropped in to conversation/posts by people like you with the implication that they're so so awful and a sign of a big cover up or whatever. "

People like me? Like what?

And you assume something in particular because of one person on a radio channel?

This is how we got here. Is there ever a point at which people listen to a different point of view? Why so much polarisation? Where did nuanced discussion go?

@CutePixie

"Until recently, it wasn’t even 28 days, you could’ve been tested 3 months before your death and still be included in the stats"

What constitutes recently? It was changed to 28 days back in August - they have only been reporting on UK Covid deaths since March I think, for obvious reasons - so the 'new' methodology has been around for longer than the 'old'.

publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2020/08/12/behind-the-headlines-counting-covid-19-deaths/

Have deleted one friend and his wife as fed up of their long detailed daily political rants about how x party and x leaders would have done a better job/how terrible all torys are and how vile and stupid Tory voters are/bitching about brexit and are wanton anti Vaxers and one of them a few weeks ago was ranting on about how they don't know if they can anything to do with friends/family who have a vaccine and have been bleating on about Covid conspiracies and how the government is using it to control the masses.

The husband won't let me make a couple of tin foil hats to post to them.

ffs ive said this about 800 times on here now about The Great Reset thing and its just morons who dont understand basic politics. Basically at the beginning of Covid all these world orgs got together and said how are we going to boost the economy after covid, they called it all The Great Reset. Idiots have then gone and attached their usual jew hating nazi theory recycled madness onto that and claimed things will happen which wont, just like the New World Order in 1996 didnt happen and 'the Storm' didnt happen last week.

Re. 'The Great Reset (spooky music)'Fact check: World leaders are not encouraging a second wave of coronavirus to push a global vaccination strategy, nor an IMF-backed programme to steal everything you own'

The idea that somebody must be a nazi because they were born in germany in 1938 is so fucking uneducated and offensive that it makes me scream.
Especially whilst people who spout this shite are actually spitting out regurgitated nazi propaganda about 'world jewry' ('globalism'/'cultural marxism'/'judeo-bolshevism')

www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-imf-idUSKBN2761YQ

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/29/how-to-deal-with-a-conspiracy-theorist-5g-covid-plandemic-qanon

@user1471565182

ffs ive said this about 800 times on here now about The Great Reset thing and its just morons who dont understand basic politics. Basically at the beginning of Covid all these world orgs got together and said how are we going to boost the economy after covid, they called it all The Great Reset. Idiots have then gone and attached their usual jew hating nazi theory recycled madness onto that and claimed things will happen which wont, just like the New World Order in 1996 didnt happen and 'the Storm' didnt happen last week.

Quite the lies you're telling here.

Troll farm activated.

This is how we got here. Is there ever a point at which people listen to a different point of view? Why so much polarisation? Where did nuanced discussion go?

But this is my point. There's no alternative point of view because it's never actually stated. It's innuendo and suggestion and random facts taken out of context to prove other random facts. Your original post implied there was some conspiracy theory that made Youtube remove Talkradio. I simply pointed out that the content may have been seen as offensive.

This is where we're at now. Someone can say, "Person x has been removed from all newspapers" and the assumption and implication is that it's a conspiracy. Instead of, perhaps, that person x was spouting offensive and hateful drivel that the relevant newspaper decided wasn't appropriate.

Of course it's possible that there are cover ups etc (I seem to recall there were a lot of very reasonable questions re the way India Knight and her husband were treated after his conviction for child porn for example), but so often a comment is dropped in like it's a silver bullet and really, it's just not.

Triffid "Your original post implied there was some conspiracy theory that made Youtube remove Talkradio. I simply pointed out that the content may have been seen as offensive. "

No. I asked why it was removed. I did not imply any "conspiracy theory". That term is meaningless. I do think it might have been removed because they were avoiding hosting anti lockdown content, but I don't think that makes me a CT.

I don't know I've said that might be a silver bullet phrase, but I'll go back to doing something constructive as clearly there is an entire culture and language on this that I don't know about. And it's probably good if I go to my grave not knowing.

@LunaHeather

Triffid "Your original post implied there was some conspiracy theory that made Youtube remove Talkradio. I simply pointed out that the content may have been seen as offensive. "

No. I asked why it was removed. I did not imply any "conspiracy theory". That term is meaningless. I do think it might have been removed because they were avoiding hosting anti lockdown content, but I don't think that makes me a CT.

I don't know I've said that might be a silver bullet phrase, but I'll go back to doing something constructive as clearly there is an entire culture and language on this that I don't know about. And it's probably good if I go to my grave not knowing.

That's just disingenuous. "I asked why it was removed". But it was clear that you think there's some dodgy reason. I love the fake wide eyed innocence, "I didn't suggest any conspiracy theory, I'm just asking questions".

Asking questions with implied answers isn't good enough. If the question should be asked, then go find an answer and state what you believe the answer to be. With proof to back it up.