Coronavirus

[Murmur]

Ironic though, as DWill says, that people blabbing about fake news are frequently the ones peddling it.

I wholeheartedly agree with you and DWill on that.

EDIT: Fixed a stupid mistake.

[geo]

I also believe there are doctors that have attempted to share their positive experience with the drug as a treatment but were censured for it.

I checked out Dr. Lisa Koche from one of KS' links. If she was censured, it was for making false claims about vaccines. A medical doctor of all people should know that any potential treatment has to be shown to be effective in drug trials and medical literature. She's basically a quack who can only offer anecdotal evidence that hydroxychloriquine is effective with her patients. She may ultimately be proved right, but in evidence-based medicine, we rely on clinical trials. Her statements here are obviously politically motivated.

[ant]

Not familiar with that one.

Certainly would personally be cautious dismissing all because of this one in particular.

I'd be honest about it.

[Robert Tulip]

I am reading The Plague by Albert Camus. About a bubonic outbreak in the city of Oran in Algeria in the 1940s, The Plague presents many of the psychological and existential problems now seen with the Covid pandemic.

Text is free at http://www.24grammata.com/wp-content/up ... a.com_.pdf and commentary is at http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/the_plague

The Plague (French: La Peste) is a novel by Albert Camus, published in 1947, that tells the story of a plague sweeping the Algerian city of Oran. It asks a number of questions relating to the nature of destiny and the human condition. The characters in the book, ranging from doctors to vacationers to fugitives, all help to show the effects the plague has on a populace.

The novel is believed to be based on the cholera epidemic that killed a large percentage of Oran's population in 1849 following French colonization, but the novel is placed in the 1940s.[1] Oran and its environs were struck by disease multiple times before Camus published this novel. According to a research report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Oran was decimated by the plague in 1556 and 1678, but outbreaks after European colonization, in 1921 (185 cases), 1931 (76 cases), and 1944 (95 cases), were very far from the scale of the epidemic described in the novel.

The Plague is considered an existentialist classic despite Camus' objection to the label.[2][3] The narrative tone is similar to Kafka's, especially in The Trial, wherein individual sentences potentially have multiple meanings, the material often pointedly resonating as stark allegory of phenomenal consciousness and the human condition. Camus included a dim-witted character misreading The Trial as a mystery novel as an oblique homage. The novel has been read as a metaphorical treatment of the French resistance to Nazi occupation during World War II.

Although Camus's approach in the book is severe, his narrator emphasizes the ideas that we ultimately have no control, and irrationality of life is inevitable. Additionally, he further illustrates the human reaction towards the "absurd"; The Plague represents how the world deals with the philosophical notion of the Absurd, a theory which Camus himself helped to define.

[ant]

I've read The Plague 3x.

The late Robert Solomon suggests The Plague is a philosophical consideration of the evils perpetrated by Nazi Germany in 1943-1945

[ant]

Geo wrote:

I would guess that KS doesn't know what truth is. The very concept of it is beyond his comprehension

As always, the truth always lies somewhere in the middle. We, more often than not, cannot comprehend the totality of any given truth.


But speaking of truth versus, say, conspiracy, how may of you are old enough to remember the fringe conspiracy theory that numerous politicians and celebrities were involved in some mysterious underground pedophilia ring?


And now we have Mr. Epstein (RIP) and Ghislaine Maxwell, who has pedo-related dirt on people like Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton?

And what of Bill Clinton? We have first hand testimony, flight records, and even photographs of good ol Democratic Bill hanging all over under-aged girls.
Why isn't this blockbuster bit of news getting more journalistic coverage?

Journalism is nothing more than political activism.

[Harry Marks]

And now we have Mr. Epstein (RIP) and Ghislaine Maxwell, who has pedo-related dirt on people like Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton?

And what of Bill Clinton? We have first hand testimony, flight records, and even photographs of good ol Democratic Bill hanging all over under-aged girls.
Why isn't this blockbuster bit of news getting more journalistic coverage?

Journalism is nothing more than political activism.

And why are you leaving out Donald Trump? I suspect the journalists have been holding back because libel laws are not kind to innuendo. If you are going to tar someone, better make it stick.

[ant]

Hahaha!

Since when did journalism start being sensitive to libel and or slander?

You a lawyer now?

That's truly hilarious

[Harry Marks]

Since when did journalism start being sensitive to libel and or slander?

You a lawyer now?

I studied journalism law in college. I have continued to follow the developments in the law, which have not been a lot. The definitive ruling is still "New York Times v Sullivan" from the 60s, in which the SCOTUS ruled that the usual burden, in which the publication is not required to pay damages if they can prove what they printed is true, does not apply to stories about public figures. Instead they have to be shown by a plaintiff to have exhibited a "reckless disregard for truth". On a private-ish matter like participation in a sex ring, the publication would have to have pretty solid evidence, or the cover provided by an actual grand jury indictment, before that Sullivan immunity kicked in. Some publications are willing to go with such a story if they have public accusations or two independent corroborating witnesses, but they are playing with fire if they do.

You can get the general idea from reviewing the Eliot Spitzer case. The media have no compunctions about printing such things, except if the facts are unclear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Spi ... on_scandal

Accusations that Trump raped an underage girl in an Epstein party, and in general was in compromising situations with Epstein, were around at least as early as 2016. They remain only accusations, with no indictments leveled.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 54111.html
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08 ... trump.html

[ant]

Regarding Clinton - there is significant evidence in the form of testimony on documentation. So there is that.

Regarding "window smashing man" - to my knowledge, no significant evidence exists to implicate him or establish motive. A "tipster" is not anything significant until material evidence can be discovered.


What's important to note here within the context of the current civil unrest is that even if Window Man's motive was to create public racial discord that in itself certainly is not a "catch all" for the totality of the unrest.

i don't know why you insist on softly promoting the possibility that white supremacists should in some way be held accountable for, um, what exactly?
Everything? That one incident in question?

Just say it instead of providing support to it.