MeanMrMustard

Joined

• started 66 topics
• posted 3,828 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by MeanMrMustard

• 
  125

  Mandated Shunning is a Crime

  by Lee Marsh in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  mandated shunning is on the rise around the world with devastating effects on millions of people.

  shunning that is mandated by organized groups to its members is a form of both physical and psychological violence against those people being shunned and cut off from their family and life-long relationships.

  mandated shunning means that the shunning is ordered from the top down.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @Vidiot: That, of course, is true.
• 
  125

  Mandated Shunning is a Crime

  by Lee Marsh in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  mandated shunning is on the rise around the world with devastating effects on millions of people.

  shunning that is mandated by organized groups to its members is a form of both physical and psychological violence against those people being shunned and cut off from their family and life-long relationships.

  mandated shunning means that the shunning is ordered from the top down.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  That's it in a nutshell. They only reached out because the WT said they could, not because their own conscience said so. That they suddenly want to talk to estranged family and former friends after many years because someone else said so from the pulpit or in writing is reprehensible.

  True. But the responsibility for that lies with those family members. Don't let them hide behind the organization.
• 
  24

  Voting, why make it easier to vote??

  by moomanchu in

  1. social
  2. current

  democrats are always harping on and on about voting rights and how the ability to vote should be easier and access unrestricted.

  the most progressive ones want to allow prisoners, and illegals with no voter id the ability to vote along with the criminals, drug addicts, and uneducated low lives who already can vote.. .

  after they push for everyone and anyone to be able to vote they then tell us it is a sacred privilege, a duty and honor, and a big responsibility blah, blah ect..... if it is all those grandiose things are true i think it should be harder to vote not easier.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Just do this:

  1) No more withholding tax.

  2) Move tax day from April 15 to approx. 10 days before election day.
• 
  95

  Are you glad you got the Covid Vaccine? Did it help?

  by liam in

  1. social
  2. current

  i didn’t get the covid vaccine, but i admit, i was scared as shit i made the wrong decision because there was so much confusion out there.

  practically all my family and most of my friends took the vaccine because everyone was depending on those in charge to speak the truth.

  now a lot of them are sick, and they can't figure out why.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  The ‘anti-vaxxer’ crowd (including that portion who ‘aren’t against all vaccines, just the covid ones’), with their misinformation, wilful ignorance, and no better solutions for managing a pandemic, are supremely ungrateful ...

  Up front, sorry for the length...

  There absolutely was a better way to handle it, and it was no secret during the pandemic: inform the public of the risks, and let them naturally do what's best based on their risk profile.

  The problem was that from the start of the pandemic the relevant risk information was suppressed and hidden as much as possible. Everyone was asking "what's the death rate?" But there were no clear answers. There was, however, a lot of stoked-up fear. There were articles, polls, and interviews, even recently, that showed (especially among people on the left, undoubtedly because of where they got their news) the perceived chance of death after contracting c19 was 50%. Nevertheless, near the beginning people were attempting to compare the death rate to the flu - not in an attempt to claim it was the flu (even though some said that), but people were looking for a baseline for risk. The flu has a risk to it. People die from it. I know a young boy that died from it. Very tragic. But every year there is a risk. And people wanted to figure out their risk profile and decide accordingly. What they wanted to know is how does the average, healthy human fair against COVID vs the flu. To this day we still don't know the real death rate. But what we DID KNOW at the time is that for kids and young people, the risk was extremely low. It went up when you got over 60, or if you had complicating factors. So, the elderly and sick should be isolated - not the entire economic system. Don't shut down schools. Don't shut down businesses.

  Two weeks to stop the spread turned into a complete shut down. And the risk ... the risk that people were experiencing didn't match the extreme shut down measures. We got news about over-capcity hospitals - but there again, the details were hidden. Hospitals defined "full capacity" as having all the patients the current staff could handle. That could be 10% of actual beds. What followed from that? Well, in NY they brought in ships for more room. But they never saw any patients. Or the "overflow" from hosptials was moved to nursing homes - into direct contact with the highest risk demographic. Meanwhile the healthiest thing - getting sunshine - was prohibited. Some states like FL did fight back, with good results.
  

  I think we are just starting to feel the real consequences of the shut down, combined with the money printing. Two years ago the average house price was $215K. Now it's $400K. I have four kids, and you can't convince me food prices haven't at least doubled.
  

  And here is where it started to cross into politics. The high level of fear mongering played right into justification for the lockdowns. And the people pushing it have always had an anti-captalist bent. It became clearer that if these "emergencies" were actually exceptions to constitutional rights, then we really don't have rights. Just claim a crisis, hype it up, and start doing what you want... you know, for the good of everyone. And you didn't have to wait long to find validation of that. It seems C19 was an exception to every aspect of the 1st ammendment.
  

  So, IMHO there wasn't some grand conspiracy to release C19 in order to exert more governmental control. But once it was out there, it was sure used to that end. And for the conspiracy minded, it can be really hard not to infer intent - especially when you don't trust the good intentions of the leftists (which you should never do anyway). Keep in mind, this is the exact time that the WEF collectively got the most massive authoritarian erection they've ever had, while publishing their plans for "The Great Reset".
  

  The vaccines are a completely different story. They started out as project Warp Speed - and that was a Trump sponsored program.
  

  The objection to the mRNA vaccines in general goes something like this: The mechanism for the vaccine, from the people who developed the technology, is to inject messenger RNA into healthy cells. The mRNA encodes what it needs to mass produce some molecule that you wish to inform the immune system about - in this case the spiked protein used as a receptor for C19. Healthy cells then produce the spiked protein, the immune system reacts, targeting this protein for the future. This is all well and good. However, the immune system still has to go after the formerly healthy cells that have been hijacked. These healthy cells, presumably, are the arm muscle tissue where the injection takes place. And, presumably, we dont hijack too many cells (whatever that means). And, presumably, all the vaccine stays in the arm. But what if it doesn't? What if it sticks around longer than expected? What if the vaccine circulates, what happens when it hijacks a healthy heart cell or brain cell?
  

  The answer is that you would expect to see cases of heart inflamation - if heart tissue is involved. If it's circulating, causing damage to blood vessels, you might expect to see blood clots and strokes. And not necessarily immediately after taking the vaccine. And, that seems to be the type of signal we see in adverse vaccine reporting systems - whether foreign or VAERS.
  

  None of the above is conspiratorial. All that's required is to believe the obvious facts: the government through a ton of money at pharma, including emergency use immunity, and pharma was happy to pull out whatever tech they had at the time. The mRNA tech was not new. Why didn't they use it prior to this is an interesting question to consider, however.
  

  It turned political when Trump lost, and the vaccine was handed over to the left. When it was Trump's vaccine, it was to be viewed with disdain. But after the election, it was the best thing ever. And if it had stopped there (with the shift in positions), we could just chalk it up to normal two-faced politics. But nope - the lockdowns continued. And, in fact, those who were vaccine skeptical (even under Trump) were now the REASON why the lockdowns couldn't stop. Businesses were pressured to "encourage" vaccination, sometimes with employment on the line (look at the Tyson foods lawsuits). Vaccine passports and other insane leftist programs were pushed.
  

  Suddenly, for the conspiracy minded, it's easy to see intent where there was none.
  

  Same thing with the election. There wasn't some worldwide "they" behind the release of the virus. But once it was out there, it was used to push mail in voting, despite it violating state constitutions. Everyone could see the ballot train wreck coming. SCOTUS should have taken that case. That's a whole different topic, though.
  

  But to the conspiracy minded, the pattern matches.
  

  In the end, what's obvious to me : the left is nuts, the government is too big, we shouldn't be funding gain-of-function research. The government needs to be put back in its box. No more power to lock down, not for a virus, not for climate change. No WHO control, no vaccine passports. Emergencies can't bypass rights. I think if that were codified somehow, you would have a lot less shenanigans from the left.
  

  Unfortunately , that would reinforce conspiracy theories.
  
• 
  115

  Vice President Kamala Harris…your thoughts??

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  good pick?

  bad pick?

  helpful to president biden?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Lol. Watched some of the DNC Biden speech. He even brought back the "very fine people on both sides" lie again. Lol
• 
  115

  Vice President Kamala Harris…your thoughts??

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  good pick?

  bad pick?

  helpful to president biden?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Nothing like price controls to fix the economy.
• 
  299

  Who told the first lie?

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?

  god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.

  in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  I edited this part out as I think he will be upset that I shared even this.

  Are you sure you edited that part out?
• 
  299

  Who told the first lie?

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?

  god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.

  in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  You have not moved far past your Kingdom Hall.

  I haven't been in KH in about 15 years.

  I'm not talking in circles.

  You kinda went off the wagon a few pages back. You claimed I was still in a cult mentality, that I sound just like the WT. Now when someone says that to me, I have a few options ... you know, having agency and all. I could flip out. I could start throwing insults. I could hurl a chair through my window. It's up to me. Instead I decided to troll you a tad. I'm actually still on topic, but you are so worked up, it's going over your head. And, hence, it's adding to the entertainment value.
• 
  299

  Who told the first lie?

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?

  god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.

  in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  You do know I'm a registered Secular Humanist, right?

  Did you know I can speak French in German?
• 
  299

  Who told the first lie?

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?

  god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.

  in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  KOW: Yes. Join the mean mustard cult. If you don't, then you'll die. But not really... just someday. So, in a sense, it's not an empty threat.