Even this statement is misleading. Every controlled study EVER conducted on the effectiveness of masks for preventing respiratory viral infections has shown that masks are ineffective. Apart from this masks promote bacterial infections and cause psychological harm. https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/expert-slams-gold-standard-cochrane-review-mask-verdict/news-story/af7f698fefb0d4ea3e742a2fba3e06b3
How is this flat-earther a ‘professor’? How does he know that masks are ‘spectacularly successful’ if every randomised controlled study (the Gold Standard of scientific evidence), says otherwise? Note how they use the term “gold standard” to mean something else in this article, referring to the prestige of a journal, not to the research protocol. https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/expert-slams-gold-standard-cochrane-review-mask-verdict/news-story/af7f698fefb0d4ea3e742a2fba3e06b3
If “15 minute cities” were just about providing local services so that people would not need to travel further to obtain those services, there would be no need for “traffic filters”. People would naturally drive less and walk more, voluntarily, because it would make sense. Convenience sells itself and needs no coercion. The fact that traffic filters are introduced and fines imposed for using certain roads at certain times proves that “15 minute cities” are not based on convenience but on coercion. Traffic filters make driving more difficult, stressful and expensive, in effect coercing people to stay within their zone. No matter how this coercive measure is presented, “low-traffic neighbourhood” is a soft form of imprisonment.
Clarification: I am not implying that “traffic filters” are an integral part of the “15 minute city” concept, but that the implementation of movement-restricting measures at the same time as promoting the idea of “15 minute cities” proves that there is no intention to generate convenience in order to incentivise a voluntary transition to a more spatially constrained lifestyle. If road-blocks come first, convenience comes never.
Clarification: I am not implying that “traffic filters” are an integral part of the “15 minute city” concept, but that the implementation of movement-restricting measures at the same time as promoting the idea of “15 minute cities” proves that there is no intention to generate convenience in order to incentivise a voluntary transition to a more spatially constrained lifestyle. If road-blocks come first, convenience comes never.
Those who declare their values without also declaring that they must remain subordinate to the fundamental laws of logic, are bound to contradicting their values in practice. Moreover, multiple values are of no value, always already contradictory, because moral consistency can be accomplished only if there is only one measure of value. For all rational consciousness, the highest value can be proven: https://philpapers.org/rec/KOWODO
A “counter-protest” is by definition Not a Protest, but the regime itself.
It is encouraging that both sides of the debate emphatically agree on this crucial point. Consequently, the only question subject to dispute is which side is lying. Considering that only one faction in this debate are professional liars and career parasites with a trial of destruction, theft and murder behind them, the answer should be rather obvious.
There is an easy and fair solution to the “15 minute city” problem: make smart suburbs a subscription based service (not taxpayer funded), which would allow those who support the idea to live there with all their gadgets, conveniences and restrictions, but with no cost to anyone who would not wish to live in these hives of dependency and ideological indoctrination. Nevertheless, some taxpayer funding could be secured if the “smart cities” became accredited as mental institutions.
The “15 minute city” hypocrisy
Residents of cultural centres and inner suburbs have the lowest car ownership per capita and are already the least mobile, commuting mostly on foot, by tram, or bicycle. They already live-out their lives within a 5km radius cafe/bar/gym zone, voluntarily. If “15 minute cities” were primarily intended to reduce the time and energy spent on commuting, this initiative would not be focussing on the high density, cocaine fuelled inner suburbs and cultural centres, but on the outer suburbs, where people commute the most to satisfy their basic existential needs. It seems the focus of the 15 minute city concept is rather on installing surveillance systems to monitor human movement in city centres rather than on putting schools, food markets, libraries and offices in places where they are needed the most: the new estates on city limits, full of young families.
Residents of cultural centres and inner suburbs have the lowest car ownership per capita and are already the least mobile, commuting mostly on foot, by tram, or bicycle. They already live-out their lives within a 5km radius cafe/bar/gym zone, voluntarily. If “15 minute cities” were primarily intended to reduce the time and energy spent on commuting, this initiative would not be focussing on the high density, cocaine fuelled inner suburbs and cultural centres, but on the outer suburbs, where people commute the most to satisfy their basic existential needs. It seems the focus of the 15 minute city concept is rather on installing surveillance systems to monitor human movement in city centres rather than on putting schools, food markets, libraries and offices in places where they are needed the most: the new estates on city limits, full of young families.
Young children are not detained for criminal offences on the premise that parents are liable for the crimes of the child and have a reasonable level of control over their child’s behaviour. When children are in effect abandoned by their parents, this premise no longer applies and something has to be done by the community, both for the safety of the children involved and to protect the community from crime. Aboriginal children in and around Alive Springs are an abandoned generation.
Forwarded from Normal (Michael Kowalik)
Mass media love when people make claims about medical facts. They can just call in the ‘experts’ to ‘debunk’ your claims, or just call it ‘fake news’. The general public only needs reassurance to continue believing the experts, they don't care about evidence. On the other hand, a simple, intuitively appealing ethical argument is terrifying to the experts because they cannot dismiss it as ‘fake news’. Ethics is not a question of empirical facts but something we all already know, it is part of the collective unconscious, which cannot be deceived.
When Tucker Carlson presents a particular point of view, for example about vaccines, it must be understood as expressing the point of view of the owner of Fox News, Rupert Murdoch. The question that then arises is what else is Rupert Murdoch saying about vaccines and vaccine mandates, via other channels. It very much appears that Rupert is playing both sides, or more precisely, invests in ‘moral outrage’ on both sides of the moral argument.
Emotional saturation engenders a unique form of hectic docility and mental plasticity with respect to influences other than the emotive issues. The power of creative tension rests on emotional annealing of the human material.
BREAKING NEWS. In order to prevent racial biases, Australia will import 20,000 mercenaries police contractors per year for the next 5 years to replace the remaining Australian-citizens in the state police forces, except those of Commissioner and Deputy-Commissioner rank. The mercenaries contractors will be guaranteed immunity from any criminal or civil liability arising from the performance of their contract;)
WHISTLEBLOWER is a corporate euphemism for CONTROLLED RELEASE with plausible deniability.