All_Pro_Bills

Sure it is but I'm still waiting to hear what specifically is incorrect as nobody's proven anybody on Rogan's podcasts is spreading misinformation. Or debunked a single point made. I'd like to hear from scientist and researchers from the CDC, or the NIH, or Pfizer scientists before I'm ready to label any conclusions stated by his podcast guests as incorrect science. To date they haven't entered the conversation to dispute anything stated. What it comes down to is that an open and honest debate and discussion of the science, data, and expert views presented in a judgment free environment by a diversity of voices benefits us all. That's how progress is made and innovations are developed. By objectively looking at alternatives, debating and evaluating the merits of each alternative and choosing a course of action that's most effective. And it seems illogical to oppose those conversations assuming you have a genuine interest in the public good.

Perspective has nothing to do with it. What its about is facts and science presented in a court of law. Opponents of the cigarette industry assembled a fact-based and scientific case through the use of experts and discovery of the industry's records to prove in state and federal courts that smoking directly caused lung and other types of cancer and the industry knew of these effects. All through the use of due process through the legal and court system. To this point nobody has provided a single shred of evidence or refuted a single point presented by Rogan's guests concerning their expert conclusions concerning undisclosed dangers of mRNA vaccines and COVID in general. And what those dangers present to the public and the failure of government and the pharma industry to provide adequate disclosure of risks and acquire patient consent of those risks. What's missing from the argument here is that officials and others charging "misinformation" have proved nothing other than they're afraid to debate details. I've asked several times how anybody could know that guests like Dr. Malone are lying? I sure don't. What exactly they're lying about and what knowledge or expertise anyone might have in order to "know" they're lying? So I'm calling on any expert virologists, immunologists, vaccine experts, or nRNA technology, or Gene Therapy experts on the board to provide some insights. Or is the entire misinformation case depending on Harry and Meghan to provide expert medical advice?

Rogan's "crime" is that he provided a huge audience to experts the State has made great efforts to silence regarding COVID. They've been very successful marginalizing and punishing descent. While they bombard the public with get your shots public service announcements through the media 24/7. Some of Rogan's guests lately have challenged sacred narratives by providing their views on the safety and efficacy of vaccines that cite specific dangers they suggest the government and pharma companies have failed to disclose and may be hiding from the public. Nothing is more dangerous to authority than some expert challenging their edicts and their "right" to push everybody around. And as a result Joe's podcast, which authorities have to this point tolerated has crossed the line and is now viewed as dangerous to the establishment. So now he's spreading the dreaded "misinformation". And in the name of public safety these dangerous ideas must be suppressed. Because they're killing people. So he has to be forced through whatever means are necessary to stop. But here's the thing. The government and pharma are afraid. They're acting out of fear rather than any genuine concern for public safety. It's their safety that's the concern. Are Rogan's experts telling the truth and do they have all their facts straight? I don't know but I'd like to see some intelligent debate out in the open and I'd expect anyone else interested in knowing all the facts would too. A couple of Rogan's guests gave very detailed 3 hour long presentations filled with lots of facts, science, and statistics. But the officials shouting misinformation won't cite you one specific thing that is misinformation or incorrect. Just a blanket condemnation of their ideas. If they know the facts and the fact support the official narrative why don't they just say so? And go into all the details point by point and refute what these speakers have stated? Well, they're not going to engage in any public debate or counter any specific point of contention. Because they're afraid. Because once you get into the details their entire story could potentially fall apart and they can't risk that happening. So play the misinformation card, and if that fails see if they can brand him a racist. Wait and see.

Going into last year's draft the Bills didn't have a lot of perceived holes in their roster. They got two rotational players on the defensive line (when Basham was in the line up), a RT starter in Brown precipitated by injuries, and Doyle who came on later in the season as a swing tackle and 6th lineman in certain formations and play calls. But I think there's a different approach to the draft when you're looking to build a roster, or draft to stock certain position groups where you expect to lose veterans in free agency in a year or two, or in situations where the Bills are now. Where you need to add a couple players to add marginal improvement in performance in a couple places to get you over the top. My take is Beane needs to alter his approach and go into the draft with the goal of finding 2 or 3, maybe 4 players that will plug in as starters or big contributors week one. Not high potential projects or college players that need a year or two of pro experience. It needs to be "all in" for 2022. That means finding a day one starter at corner opposite Tre White, an upgrade/addition at LB, DT, and some size and speed at the RB spot. Sure if a player drops in your lap that takes you in another direction that needs to be considered or there might be spots other posters think are more in need than what I think but its win now and the team can't go into the 2002 draft and free agency period with any other goal in mind.

When you ignore intelligence agency reports of experts that predict outcomes different than what you want you tend to get surprised when things don't turn out the way you expected. It's a failure to perform the necessary risk analysis and mitigation especially critical in matters of life and death such as this one. And the decision process most like clouded by confirmation bias. Accepting facts that support your premise and expectations while rejecting facts and expectations that don't support your premise.

Maybe you're the person to talk to? I've been experimenting with homemade pizza recipes with less than desired results. Purchasing pre-made frozen pizza dough from the local supermarket. With my latest attempt I used a round cooking stone in my gas oven. Using standard toppings like pepperoni, mushrooms, red onion, and provolone and mozzarella cheeses. Although I used an ample amount of flour on the stone surface, I encountered some sticking of the crust. The end result was a somewhat crispy outer crust but without the desired browning and color. And some sticking damage to the crust underneath. In the oven for about 18 minutes at 425 degrees. Do you suggest a longer cooking time or a higher temperature? And a better method of creating a non-stick surface for the pie?

I must have hit the target for you to get so agitated. And I'm not on the side looking to impose their views on others and seeking to punish them if they fail to comply. While you pose as a liberal thinker you're consistently supporting authoritarian governments, which makes you what? I'm not waking back anything. Why should I?

Your being a bit dramatic as I stated nothing that resembles "terror". Unless you're a coward that is frightened by an open and honest debate. All I speak is the truth. If that scares you that's your problem not mine.

This morning GoFundMe had a change of heart and decided to refund funds directly to donors. But the damage is done. And they made the mistake of revealing their true beliefs and intentions over something that I expect wasn't critical to the big picture. The message is intellectual commie leftists running this organization align with authoritarian government edicts and, something I already know, they have nothing but contempt and scorn for real life working people. But more importantly they have no issue with changing or bending the "rules" to achieve any objective. In their minds any action necessary is justified by the objective. They don't play by the rules unless the rules guarantee they win. But everyone else, including the blue collar working Canadian trucker must be forced by any means necessary to comply with and follow the rules their compatriots decide to impose. In this case that weasel Trudeau. It's obvious they have no concern for laws or ethics or any other standards of behavior that might get in the way of them imposing their will on everyone else. And in this case, I expect it will come down to the use of force and violence against the truckers. Which will be supported and applauded with glee by the left and their media. Given all of this, I've concluded there's no living creature on the planet that is dumber than a conservative or libertarian or anyone to the right of these fringe lunatics that still believe playing by the rules is the proper and polite way to fight these ideological zealots.

Yes, I missed them and apologize for my oversight. HCQ and Ivermectin are both safe and prescribed by doctors for many indications. Many doctors have endured the pressure from the medical establishment and the government, threats of revoking grants and project monies, threats of cancellation of AMA memberships, etc., to prescribe these medications to COVID patients. And provided records and patient testimonials that document great success. In places like India Ivermectin is hailed as being the primary driver of the country's successful effort to bring down Delta cases last year. But you'd never know any of this by listening to western government officials or the media. I've come to the conclusion that when all this comes to an end there is going to be a day of reckoning for a lot of officials and members of the medical community. A lot of anger and hostility will be direct towards them when the public finally comprehends these people have consciously, and in many cases maliciously, withheld and dismissed early treatment protocols using re-purposed cheap and readily available medications and other actions like we've discussed here with vitamin's C & D, and Zinc. The science will clearly show that early treatment could have prevented most hospitalizations and most deaths. What it boils down to is government officials and administrator and quite a few doctors are either directly responsible or complicit in murdering 100's of thousands of patents sent to hospitals and left to die as potential treatments are unused and, in many cases, consciously withheld. All, for whatever motivations, to push vaccines from big pharma racking in billions in sales and contract for vaccines that for all practical purposes do not work. And they will pay dearly for their actions.

Carrot sticks are tasty and for me the texture and water content of the celery sticks cuts the heat from the hot sauce. Which is another key factor, mild, medium, hot, or something approaching thermo-nuclear. I prefer medium but as I've gotten a little older have dialed back on the heat.

Celery sticks or carrot sticks on the side? Or both.

Blue cheese on wings and leaning toward the creamy vs. the chunky formula.

Vitamin C and D along with zinc help support the proper functioning of the immune system. I also suggest 1000mg daily of amino acid L-Lysine.

What he does is provide a well subscribed platform for experts and others to present their views in great detail in a long-form format conversation. Those views many times conflict with those of the authorities or their allies. And that makes him a threat that must be confronted and if possible neutralized. One tactic is that authorities and lackeys push censorship under the false pretense of looking out for the public interest rather than revealing their real motive of protecting their interests. Suggesting that conflicting facts and expert opinions are somehow dangerous misinformation when in truth their own ignorance and arrogance is the real danger. Frankly, I don't believe any person capable of critical and logical thinking with the ability to form their own conclusions and opinions based on the presentation of many diverse opinions and verifiable facts could fall for such a ploy. Excluding those simply going along with the program because they are well-compensated or just afraid to challenge power through being intimidated by threats of negative consequences. And others either lacking the intelligence or the attention span to figure it all out. If we lived in a place such as North Korea for example it would be much easier for the authorities. Anyone questioning the wisdom and edicts of the glorious eternal leader would be quickly put to death. Unfortunately for authorities and power centers in the U.S. and most of the western world we're not quite their yet and they still have to rely and deception and threats of censorship and consequences for anyone that might challenge their authority and self-provided monopoly over "truth".

If these folks that think Rogan's guests are spreading COVID misinformation then just get everyone together in a no hold barred debate of the specific topic where they and their experts come to the table and debate Rogan's expert guests and we get down to it all on the up and up and get all the facts straight on the topic without any interference from any censors or uninformed know-it-alls. How simple is that? Because right now it just looks to me like they're trying to protect the official narratives from scrutiny. Thunderdome time. Two narratives enter, one narrative leaves. Like Dr,. Malone suggests that vaccine induced creation of spike proteins have the potential to cause irreparable harm to functions and organs of the human body. Don't tell me that's misinformation. Prove to me he's wrong. If they're right as the claim to be by urging censorship then it should be easy to prove. My view: The bottom line is censorship advocates that claim to be looking out for the interests of the listen or viewer or the public by demanding conflicting views be silenced and stopped from spreading misinformation their real motive is to protect the messenger and the official narrative from criticism and scrutiny of the misinformation they're spreading.

What's the odds Mika and Joe would perform an act of solidarity and utter those words in defense of their friend? I suspect an ice cubes chance in Hell.

I know the answer but it might offend some people.

No. Invoking Trump is the benchmark they use for the purpose of responding with a binary comparison to refute all arguments and avoid having to directly address anything you might post. The thinking goes something like Biden's administration sucks but Trump's sucked more or Hillary is corrupt but Trump is more corrupt. What we might call the cleanest pig in the mud hole approach. You might say Biden's attack killed 10 innocent women and children and the response is well Trump killed thousands (unverified of course) of innocent people. They also like to post lots of subjective opinions from like-minded individuals making unverifiable and fact-less claims which automatically transforms those opinions into facts. The strategy is to 1) Avoid having to discuss things you might bring up like Biden's numerous failures to date. In other words forcing them to defend the indefensible. 2) Deflect, associate in any way possible your views to Trump which by definition makes your views dangerous and more importantly automatically incorrect. 3) "Tag" you as a Trump "cult" member, and quite possibly a Putin sympathizer, which by definition invalidates your opinion and gets the conversation off the original topic. So you end up defending yourself not debating some position or view. 4) Positioning their view on all topics as the "victim" and the defender of justice and truth while yours is synonymous to the "Nazi oppressor" disregarding the fact that liberals control every major public and private institution which in reality makes them the establishment oppressor they claim victim status against. 5) After they read my post they will come back and say I do what I say they do! Or try to pull of a 1, 2, 3, or a 4 on me. See how they work?

The prize for the best insight in the fewest words. Lately, Joe Roagan's podcast has been the source of a lot of anxiety over the spread of COVID misinformation. But Rogan isn't spreading misinformation. He's just providing a forum for guests to provide their opinions and conclusions on his podcast utiizing a lengthy 3 hour format. Example, being Dr. Robert Malone. The creator/discoverer of mRNA technology. I'd say an unquestioned credentialed and experienced expert in the field. He basically said that mRNA vaccines produce spike proteins that can cause damage and harm to functions of the human body like proper functioning of the heart and the immune system. And these risks have not been properly disclosed to the public. And from a medical ethics perspective saying that all medical procedures and treatments have some level of risk, risk requires disclosure to the patient, and risk requires patient consent. And that none of that is happening. Is he right or wrong? I don't know. But I'm listening. But other people are not listening. They're calling for Rogan to be censored or labeled as a spreader of misinformation. But look at the people making these claims. Jen Psaki, Harry and Meghan, entertainers like Neil Young, and on and on. But they have absolutely no qualifications to make that judgment. Not a one of them are experts or experienced virologists, or mRNA and Gene Therapy researchers, or medical doctors, or proficient at molecular biology or some other discipline. If they're getting input from "experts" then identify your experts by name. They have no qualifications to make determinations about what is true or false. "Nothing is more dangerous than ignorance in action." They idiots. But idiots that make a lot of noise. In fact the truth is Rogan has expressed a willingness to anyone that disputes what Dr. Malone might say to counter his views point by point on his podcast. Maybe Harry and Meghan can share their insights about COVID misinformation by accepting an invite to the show and debate Malone on the merits and risks of mRNA vaccines since they seem to know everything. I'd love to hear that show! What I have not seen is uncensored and candid input from actual COVID experts disputing views like Malone's. People that might disagree with what some of Rogan's guests are saying and have the intellectual capacity and the expertise to make a coherent counter argument based on facts and science. We need to hear from them directly. Not through some institutional wall of secrecy. I doubt platforms that censor posters and users like Facebook, Google, Twitter, or Spotify have any such experts in their employ assessing conflicting views and making legitimate assessments. They just protect the official sources of bullsheet and as those narratives change adjust to it (just like Buffalo Timmy pointed out). I'm optimistic that ultimately the truth will win out. If it didn't we'd all still be forced to believe the Earth is flat like Neil Young does.

That's too logical. You need to stop. If that would happen then the potential for peace to break out everywhere might usher in a new era of human cooperation. And how would all those defense contractors supported by 800+ billion in annual US government spending along with 100's of billions more from elsewhere survive? Where would former officials in the State and Defense departments and the Pentagon find work in the private sector. What's next? Diverting all those funds to solving problems of poverty, hunger, and research and development into sources of unlimited energy? No, it's way more productive to live though an era of constant warfare and conflict. Suggesting peace and prosperity rather than death and war might lead others to accuse us of being Putin sympathizers. It's much better for our country to pursue a policy of acting like a 50 ton truck with no road manners.

Where can I apply? If required I can certainly ignore holding and pass interference calls as well as anyone.

Should we assume as leader of one NATO member he has authority to dictate policy to all other NATO members. Or has already consulted them with this brilliant idea? Along with unilaterally granting territorial access to a Russian leader these other nations consider an adversary and threat? And the Poles and Romanians have agree too? If this is factual I can hear Peppermint Patty walking this back at the next WH PR. Something like "We believe, and the President believes, blah, blah, blah".

If we're really lucky it might escalate to an all-out nuclear exchange. And all the war enthusiasts can say well we won that one!

This morning those guys from the Lincoln Project that showed up for a fake right wing photo op in Washington DC in early January with torches, matching hats, jackets, and khakis were spotting marching in formation over the Peace Bridge and headed to Ft. Erie. This time they made sure it was just all white guys for the sake of appearing authentic.