by Patrick ➕follow (61) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 86 - 125 of 219 Next » Last » Search these comments
It's more like the 1950's US all right. Except for mandatory military draft, having to carry ID papers when you go outside, vaccination QR codes to get into a restaurant (Moscow), and resurgence in religion in which all the leading figures of the religion are close buddies with "team Putler". Oh, and all that poverty outside of major cities. But that's of course minor.
It's as if you have close ties to Russia, wink, wink.
Russia is INFINITELY improved over what it used to be. Vastly improved.You know that how? Time to disclose your connections and drop the pretense of impartial reasoning (wink, wink) I do agree with you that roaming the streets of Moscow (or St. Peterburg, or Yekaterinburg, or Vladivostok) was fun when you had dollars in your pockets. Except for those damn papers which you had to carry with you just in case.
You are right! That must've been what "mostly writer" meant when he compared today's Russia to 1950's US (LOL).
I'm sorry my examples, particularly with the military draft and several of the largest cities and states in America imposing vaccine IDs to eat in restaurants, ruined your narrative.That wasn't much of a narrative. But I think that they really, REALLY, ruined the "mostly writer"'s comparison between todays Russia and US back then. See, he meant it in the most Russia-friendly way. And then there you come with your clarifications. I didn't think that I'd have to explain it, but they made his comparison not quite as flattering.
richwicks saysRussia is INFINITELY improved over what it used to be. Vastly improved.You know that how?
I have Russian coworkers today. Those didn't exist in 1950 unless they were defectors.So, your knowledge of Russia today comes from your coworkers (plural). Is that your primary source? Had to confirm this because, you see, with all this confidence one could think that you are involved more directly. You also have Ukrainian coworkers I recall. Also plural. I hope that all these coworkers get along.
richwicks saysI have Russian coworkers today. Those didn't exist in 1950 unless they were defectors.So, your knowledge of Russia today comes from your coworkers (plural). Is that your primary source? Had to confirm this because, you see, with all this confidence one could think that you are involved more directly.
You also have Ukrainian coworkers I recall.
Do you trust them with everything that they say? What's their take on the current invasion?
I have Russian coworkers today.
I've had a couple.
I don't want to draw attention to the fact they are Russian and I'm in Silicon Valley, people are supposed to be smart here, but they aren't.
For those who say that rt.com or any Russian govt pnwed press agency is "far worse" than what the US has, you are wrong.Are you too comparing two variables while knowing only one of them?
mell saysFor those who say that rt.com or any Russian govt pnwed press agency is "far worse" than what the US has, you are wrong.Are you too comparing two variables while knowing only one of them?
Example: there's this arguably most popular Russian band, "Leningrad". The leader of the band Shnurov is connected and has dipped into politics. He just created a new clip. The point of the clip is that Russians are now treated in Europe the same way as Jews in Germany in 1940. I.e. that there are "No Dogs and Russians" signs (that's literally what the song says), and that Russians must wear id-patches https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeIjDxbAZeM&source=patrick.net
I.e. that there are "No Dogs and Russians" signs (that's literally what the song says), and that Russians must wear id-patches https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeIjDxbAZeM&source=patrick.netI just clicked on my own link to verify something and noticed that the clip has English subtitles. Watch it! It's worth it. Just so you get vague idea about propaganda Russian style.
When you enter a restaurant, wearing any random piece of cloth over your mouth and nose will protect you from disease. But that protection isn't necessary when you sit down at a table in the restaurant. The germs will completely avoid your table area until you have finished eating, drinking, and talking. And of course paid your check. Then the disease will again attack, so put your mask back on before leaving.
So the germs only live in our mouths and nose, and the random piece of cloth guarantees they stay there? The propaganda angles here are endless.It appears that you need to be enlightened on very basic stuff.
So the germs only live in our mouths and nose, and the random piece of cloth guarantees they stay there? The propaganda angles here are endless.
Virus is indeed smaller than openings in a mask. Which is why we have that cute meme with one person wearing a mask and another person building a wire fence against mosquitos, with implication that they are equally likely to succeed. The meme authors apparently didn't realize that virus doesn't get transmitted in isolation. It gets spread within droplets of bodily fluids. And those droplets are for the most part greater in size than openings in the mask, and may be stopped. Then of course there's matter of statistics and other parameters, but there's no doubt that in a lab-controlled environment exposure of a person wearing a mask is lesser than the one who isn't, and significantly so.
Unless you have a reasonable resource to show that exposure in same controlled environment is the same. Do you? I doubt it.
We have real life, real world data that trumps controlled studies.Show them.
My view is the correct viewWhat exactly is your view? That mask or no mask, exposure to self and to those around is the same? Are we clear on that?
AmericanKulak saysWe have real life, real world data that trumps controlled studies.Show them.
Keep in mind that I'll drill into other variables of a hypothetical study, just to be sure that there's no bias (*)
AmericanKulak saysMy view is the correct viewWhat exactly is your view? That mask or no mask, exposure to self and to those around is the same? Are we clear on that?
* Note: I at this time am an anti-mask person
There’s just one big problem with that narrative.
All of the available evidence we have points to the Ukrainians, not the Russians, being responsible for the tragic shooting of Renaud.
This morning, Renaud and his crew, which had been contracted with Time Magazine, were traveling through the outskirts of Kiev, Ukraine’s capital city, and on their way to document the plight of the refugee situation. ...
But since the initial Ukrainian PR campaign, compelling evidence, in addition to multiple eyewitness testimony, has emerged to tell a very different story of the day’s events.
The Real Story
Shortly after the incident occurred, a video was posted to social media, with Renaud’s body on display in the background. In the video (CONTENT WARNING), a Ukrainian soldier says the shooting occurred in the settlement of Romanovka. ...
The location of the incident is very significant, because it established that the shooting took place well within a swath of territory that remains within the lines controlled by Ukrainian forces. Now, it’s certainly possible that troop movements shifted in those early hours, but there is no documented evidence of Russian troops being anywhere near the crime scene, before during, or after the incident. The Russians have in recent days repeatedly shelled the entire area, but Renaud was killed by nearby gunfire. ...
Another major piece of information came out earlier this evening, when The New York Times confirmed that the incident occurred at a Ukrainian checkpoint. ...
Arrendondo, who is by far our most reliable source for this incident, makes it clear that the shooting came from the direction of the checkpoint. And The New York Times, backed by other sources, have established the area as a Ukrainian checkpoint. And in addition to that, the most recent maps of troop positions show the scene of the crime as an area that remains controlled by Ukrainian forces.
In all likelihood, Brent Renaud was killed by Ukrainian forces. And instead of taking responsibility for the tragic shooting, the Ukrainians used Renaud’s death as an instrument to advance a propaganda campaign against their enemy.
Nope: the burden of proof is on you.
Cloth Masks, don't work - though we knew this in Early 2020. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/wellness/experts-warn-that-cloth-masks-don-t-work-again-recommend-tests/ar-AAS3Wmn
The latest maternity hospital “Russian Bombing” in Mariupol has a lot of the same staged appearances of the Syrian war propaganda. A bomb crater in the middle of the square. Crisis actors looking at the cameras and playing their roles. There was video of buckets of fake blood inside the hospital and later Russian soldiers who overtook that position showed Ukrainian forces had used the hospital to stash armaments.
but there's no doubt that in a lab-controlled environment exposure of a person wearing a mask is lesser than the one who isn't, and significantly so.
and possibly health issues related to respiratory conditions or environments with high performance demands.
Another major piece of information came out earlier this evening, when The New York Times confirmed that the incident occurred at a Ukrainian checkpoint. ...@Patrick
So you've been to lab controlled restaurants?I made it abundantly, ABUNDANTLY clear that I understand the difference between lab and real life and that my reasoning factors it in.
You'll see that the article says that the Russians were 2km away from that Ukrainian checkpoint.The map shows 2km from the main forces. "The map" and "main forces" are important bits. In dynamic situation, it doesn't mean much.
but if n95 and up and worn correctly and with tables enough apart and proper ventilation it may make a difference.
« First « Previous Comments 86 - 125 of 219 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,257,247 comments by 15,003 users - AmericanKulak online now