LAPD Still Won't Get Vaccinated (Ontario, Corona: 2015, wedding, airplane)

[mcp86]

70% of long Covid sufferers develop damage to at least one vital organ like the heart or liver, a new U.K. study found. Reason why seriousness of covid should not be measured by death metric alone.

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Yeah, by definition, that is not denial. It is irresponsible, but not denial.

de·ni·al
/dəˈnīəl/
noun: denial
the action of declaring something to be untrue.

During the same war period, the NY Times published over 1200 stories covering the Nazi treatment of the Jews. Placing them in later pages rather than front page was a deeply grievous error. But it was not “denial.”

As I posted earlier, a link for those interested in the Times’ failure:
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/10903

And, once again, tagging contemporary Times with errors made 80 years ago under different ownership, management and editorial direction is as disingenuous as conflating the Republican and Democratic parties of the Civil War era when their ideological underpinnings were reversed relative to today

I entirely disagree with your post. The New York Times knowingly and wittingly censored the Holocaust. 1200 stories? You kidding me? Are you that obtuse? That is denial of the Holocaust when you are the “paper of record” not reporting on amongst the most atrocious events in human history. Sorry, you’re 100% wrong. 1200 stories out of how many stories they have reported during that period of time? Through that period of time there were 23,000 front page stories where only 26 times was there a mention of the Holocaust in this paper of record.

In the article you posted, it states:

“the newspaper’s Jewish publisher believed that Jews were neither a racial nor ethnic group, and therefore should not be identified as Jews for any other than religious reasons.“

Well “to the self hating Jewish publisher,” HITLER certainly saw the Jews as a race and ethnic group didn’t he?!!!!!!

Let’s not forget these NYT’s publishers were also Stalin lovers. They covered that up then as well just as they continue to cover up and make up stories today like the Trump Russia collusion hoax. The NYT’s is not the paper of record, they are a tabloid. They are a paper to only line your birdcage with.

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

No, it can’t be argued honestly or intelligently when the definition of the word itself denies the accusation … nor when the same paper reported 1200 articles on the events as they were happening, on other pages of the paper.

Shall we also argue that Republicans are liberals because they promoted liberal policies in the 1800s?

The 1200 stories of the Holocaust were buried in the paper among the hundreds of thousands of stories that were reported. Geez.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Nyfinestbxtf

The 1200 stories of the Holocaust were buried in the paper among the hundreds of thousands of stories that were reported. Geez.

de·ni·al
/dəˈnīəl/
noun: denial
the action of declaring something to be untrue.

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/10903

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

Do you actually believe Alex Jones? I mean if everyone you could cite, he is the most easy to debunk.

Myorkas never said 20% had Covid. Rather that 1 in 5 we’re “sick”. Whatever that means.

Originally Posted by goodheathen

Enough of sidebars.

Los Angeles media in recent years has reported on police gangs, retaliation, officers storming the capital in January, etc. A few claims today I hadn't heard before, but they're consistent with a very troubled local police culture (which descends from beatings and corruption scandals decades ago). That's why the loud, anti-vaccine, possibly-willing-to-lie-about-religiosity attitude from LAPD employees now isn't a surprise to me. Maybe there's a reason threads like this are mainly for locals.

Police from decades ago resemble nothing of police today and up to at least the past 20-30 years. Maybe the NYPD was ahead of the curve compared to other police departments, but there are no police departments that operate in the way your above post suggests today.

Storming the Capitol? Which police stormed the Capitol building? Yeah, there were a bunch of morons and droobs who trespassed, but no active police officers that I’m aware of is charged with anything other than trespass. I don’t know of any of these active police officers which is less than 10 who are still employed with their respective police departments.

Your post smells of anti-police (trademark of the radical left Marxist) which you have a particular axe to grind with the LAPD. It makes you feel good for them to be obedient to your will. Tells a lot about your character.

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

de·ni·al
/dəˈnīəl/
noun: denial
the action of declaring something to be untrue.

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/10903

Denial: knowingly covering up, censoring, omitting the truth is denial of the truth.

Even if what you say is true, that the NYT’s didn’t deny the Holocaust, you think their censoring, burying, and omitting of the Holocaust paints them in a better light? Sounds more agenda driven.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Nyfinestbxtf

Denial: knowingly covering up, censoring, omitting the truth is denial of the truth.

Even if what you say is true, that the NYT’s didn’t deny the Holocaust, you think their censoring, burying, and omitting of the Holocaust paints them in a better light? Sounds more agenda driven.

I made it clear that how the NYT handled the Holocaust reporting 80 years ago was a grievous failure of journalism in the view of nearly every historian since.

That said, the Times didn’t “cover up, censor, or omit the truth” … they failed to feature it as it deserved to be covered. The reasons for their failure are covered in the historical analysis I linked. The reasons are not excuses … they are an honest explanation of the failure.

You accused the NYT of ‘denial’ not bad editorial judgment.

But your entire attack is also totally incompetent and disingenuous in trying to conflate the NYT of today with the NYT of 80 years past when it was under entirely 100% different ownership, management and editorial direction.

You just posted this about attacking police departments of “decades ago”:
” Police from decades ago resemble nothing of police today and up to at least the past 20-30 years.”

But you feel justified attacking the NYT of 80 years past?
Listen, you have a beef with today’s NYT. Sure. All conservatives do. Go ahead and express your POV about today’s editorial direction.

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

Why always the pious tone? There is no meaningful sacrifice. Rights aren't being sacrificed, and the inoculation is not a sacrifice, just a nuisance. There do not have to be hordes of unvaccinated people, especially within the LAPD, an organization that's supposed to help society function better. The sheer number of them (regular citizens included) makes life less good for everyone, economically and socially (odds too high of them being present and slightly dangerous). The only, imperfect solution on the horizon is to increase the vaccination rate, and at this point it looks like only mandates will be effective at that.

I’m not being pious, I’m being realistic.

Life has to go on. Human contact is mandatory for us as a species. Covid isn’t going anywhere regardless. We’re all going to get it at some point because the vaccine doesn’t prevent infection. I agree the best course of action is to get vaccinated to reduce severity of symptoms. That’s why I did even after getting Covid.

That said, we’re always going to have a segment of society that refuses it and we should not hold back society on their behalf.

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

I made it clear that how the NYT handled the Holocaust reporting 80 years ago was a grievous failure of journalism in the view of nearly every historian since.

That said, the Times didn’t “cover up, censor, or omit the truth” … they failed to feature it as it deserved to be covered. The reasons for their failure are covered in the historical analysis I linked. The reasons are not excuses … they are an honest explanation of the failure.

You accused the NYT of ‘denial’ not bad editorial judgment.

But your entire attack is also totally incompetent and disingenuous in trying to conflate the NYT of today with the NYT of 80 years past when it was under entirely 100% different ownership, management and editorial direction.

You just posted this about attacking police departments of “decades ago”:
” Police from decades ago resemble nothing of police today and up to at least the past 20-30 years.”

But you feel justified attacking the NYT of 80 years past?
Listen, you have a beef with today’s NYT. Sure. All conservatives do. Go ahead and express your POV about today’s editorial direction.

Bad editorial judgment is an understatement of understatements when we are talking about the worst human event in recent history. Yeah, I’ll stick with the the NYT’s being deniers of the Holocaust and you can continue to sugar coat it. The NYT’s was a garbage rag then and they continue to this very day. A paper not even good enough to wrap fish in.

Comparing the NYT’s of then to today and the police departments over 30 years ago to today is a false equivalency.

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

I’m not being pious, I’m being realistic.

Life has to go on. Human contact is mandatory for us as a species. Covid isn’t going anywhere regardless. We’re all going to get it at some point because the vaccine doesn’t prevent infection. I agree the best course of action is to get vaccinated to reduce severity of symptoms. That’s why I did even after getting Covid.

That said, we’re always going to have a segment of society that refuses it and we should not hold back society on their behalf.

That's a mix of fatalism and half-truth. I suspect a hidden agenda. Masking is the only limitation being widely imposed on vaccinated people. (And as much as I dislike it, temporarily there probably should be some other restrictions.) It's unvaccinated people who are de facto holding back society, by making some activities not worth the risk. If another 10% were vaccinated, which is doable, that very likely would change.