120 thoughts on “Sunday’s Papers”

          4. Poor oul divil

            Ditto here Papi. There’s an element of beating up someone in a wheelchair with this. Like SOQ whoever is behind this username just craves negative attention

          7. Papi

            No, girl, you have at it. I went for a walk and didn’t argue with anyone about Dangermouse.
            You won today. Go you.

          9. Papi

            Good grief. How terribly sad you’ve become. Yes, I’ll think twice. You win again. Everyone know Giiggs is the winner. Of all things.

            Happy now? Pathetic.

          10. GiggidyGoo

            The only pathetic one is yourself who rides in on his white horse, all guns blazing, only to disappear without being able to elaborate on his rant.
            Go you is right.

          11. Papi

            It’s true, you’re right yet again. How pathetic to have a had a day with my family when I should have dealt with the powerhouse that is you on the internet.

            The winner, ladies and gentlemen, gggoiigs.

          12. GiggidyGoo

            That’s some long skid mark all the same.
            So your idea of looking forward to a day with your family is to….. rant on the comment section of BS? I’m sure you can’t wait to spend a few weeks holiday ranting.

  2. Shayna

    Unfortunate capture of Boris , there in The Sunday Express, he looks like he’s doing a Third Reich salute?

  3. bisted

    …oh no…don’t tell me the ratlickers have finally got to St Luke O’Neill with their horse wormer and other quack remedy cocktails…

    3. Nigel

      The idea that we need anti-virals to help deal with a virus is not particularly weird, just the idea that you can pick a random medicine and declare it to be a miracle cure and anyone who says otherwise is trying to supress the truth.

      1. Cui Bono?

        Ivermectin wasn’t picked randomly. It was used on Sars-Cov-1.

        What’s incredible is that we have never made a successful vaccine for a coronavirus after decades of effort and then within the space of 1 year we have several produced and rolled out to the masses under emergency use authorisation and anyone who dares to question it is declared an antivax conspiracy theorist.

        1. Nigel

          Ivermectin becoming a fixation for conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers was entirely arbitrary, occurred way before significant studies could have been perormed on its effectiveness and persisted after such studies showed it to be not particularly effective.

          ‘What’s incredible is that we have never made a successful vaccine for a coronavirus’

          Oh man wait’ll you hear about malaria.

          1. Chris

            After such studies… Yes a few cherry picked ones, the majority of studies (and real life applications) found it to be safe and actually effective. As opposed to the reckless and dangerous vaccine campaign.

          2. Cui Bono?

            The fixation is only in your mind and from the propaganda from the mainstream media you swallow. There was plenty of evidence showing its effectiveness which was suppressed because otherwise the masses would not need the vaccines because they are only approved for emergency use and a condition for this is that there can be no other alternative treatments.

            The rational thinkers simply wanted honest debate, discussion and scientific thinking to return. Not much to ask for really. It should be expected.

            All we had and still have is propaganda, fear and mass hysteria. The truth will hopefully come out in the end.

          3. Nigel

            There isn’t enough propaganda in the world that could cover up the supposed effectiveness of a drug that got as much attention as Ivermectin did.

          4. Chris

            Deaths of boys aged 15-19 in the UK have increased by 58% yr on yr since the middle of June (the date the vaccine was first offered to 18-19 year olds). Deaths of boys aged 10-14 have increased by 69% in the first four weeks since the vaccine was offered to them (source: ONS) https://twitter.com/agentorange6969/status/1453445974236487684?s=20

            With the rollout now targeting the very young, you just have to accept that those that turn a blind eye to all of this, are malevolent.

            Exhibit B – https://twitter.com/Bradley93038424/status/1453669882684338182?s=20

            Normalising strokes in young children. Evil.

          5. johnny

            “Deaths of boys aged 15-19 in the UK have increased by 58% yr on yr since the middle of June (the date the vaccine was first offered to 18-19 year olds)”

            source…ONS?

            this is just LIES and MISINFORMATION

            link the original source “Chris”

            “This claim is based on a flawed analysis of health data. It wrongly implies the COVID-19 vaccines caused teenagers to die when there is no evidence to support that. Experts said no known deaths among teenagers in the U.K. have been linked to COVID-19 vaccines.”

            https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-818000433358

            the site has gone to shi

            FACTS MATTER…

            “THE FACTS: A website that has repeatedly spread COVID-19 misinformation in recent months is advancing a new misleading claim this week, this time about vaccines and teenagers.”

            https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-818000433358

          6. Nigel

            Your first link doesn’t provide a source. The second link is just projecting malevolent motives onto a minor public health campaign, with no aditional info to justfy it. You’re hysterical.

          7. Chris

            Hysterical? I think not, pointing out objective evil is anything but.

            The ONS data is readily available for all to see – linking to compromised ‘fact-checkers’ is embarrassingly naive and if you actually cared about disinformation, you wouldn’t persist

          9. Chris

            Making things up? Strokes in children aren’t normal. Heart attacks in healthy young adults aren’t either.

          10. Nigel

            How would you know how ‘normal’ they are? You’re going off a data-free tweet and another tweet with a picture of a bus.

          11. Johnny

            Chris – your link to back up your “heart attack” is to agent orange.
            Now while in your world that’s a irrefutable source…..you also doubled down and lied again by citing an official source, to flood the zone,as back up to your heart attack lies and misinformation…..
            Oh what a tangled web we weave…

            I would happily link something like that if I made such a wild claim
            Back it up
            Cmon
            Chris
            Link

            Time to stop this barrage of garbage “Chris”,link the ons…ah go on,gwan,gwan,gwang…

          1. Nigel

            You said deaths. The link with the actual science in it just talks about myocarditits, some serious enough for hospitalisation, no deaths.

            ‘Rates per million following dose 2 among males were 162.2 (ages 12-15) and 94.0 (ages 16-17); among females, rates were 13.0 and 13.4 per million, respectively.’

            If those were covid deaths per million you’d laugh at them, because you’re awful.

            In the Israel story, numbers of heart attacks in 16-19 year olds went from 12 to 23.

            So first of all, that’s how ‘normal’ heart attacks in the age group were, in Israel, apparently, if accurate. Even then it’s still only two years in isolation, and no actual direct link to vaccines established, and no deaths mentioned.

          2. Chris

            ‘If those were covid deaths per million you’d laugh at them, because you’re awful.’

            You have some nerve stating that. I have never written anything to indicate any glee at the suffering of the vaccine injured. It’s you that would rather they don’t exist, as you see them as mere statistics that contravene your ignorant and frankly pitiful world view.

            “25% increase in Cardiac arrests & Heart attacks (16-29).
            83.6% increase in Heart attacks (Women 20-29).
            According to the study, this increase was correlated with Mass vaccination.”

            ^ More selective cherry picking Nigel that I’m under no illusion, isn’t informed by malevolence.

          3. Nigel

            ‘I have never written anything to indicate any glee at the suffering of the vaccine injured.’

            I didn’t say you did. ‘The vaccine injured’ are some holy ineffeable host of martyrs that must be venerated, usually ttrough faith alone. But you and the rest of your pals dismiss covid death numbers and mock fears about the effects of covid and the possible long-term effects of covid all the time.

          4. Chris

            Nigel – ‘If those were covid deaths per million you’d laugh at them, because you’re awful.’

            Also Nigel – “I didn’t say you did.”

            You’re a pathetic case.

          5. Nigel

            Someone can’t read. I said ‘if these were covid deaths.’ You said you never expressed glee at ‘the vaccine injured.’ Two different things.

  5. Birdie

    Is Brendan O’Connor very popular? I’m sincerely curious. I’d love to see the stats on his articles.

  7. GiggidyGoo

    The excitement of it. 50 Quality Street Tins to be won. With the sweets, probably £3 each, but the tin itself no more than £0.50. Enter online for a chance to win a tin.
    ……..

    Any sign of Varadkar’s criminal investigation concluding – it should be easy seeing as he admitted it. Has he sued Village Magazine yet? No? It’s a full year on since the revelation.

    1. GiggidyGoo

      (as in…
      As per the Defamation Act 2009, the timeframe is 1 year following the date of the claimed defamatory act. Therefore, the time frame in which you have to make a claim is called the statute of limitations, which is 1 year in this case)

    1. Nigel

      ‘Vaccines are giving people AIDS.’ You’ve gone all the way through, haven’t you?
      That article
      – doesn’t provide sources for its figures
      – conflates reduced rates of vaccine efficacy with, I can’t believe I’m typing this, AIDS.
      You really need to have a good long look at yourself.

      1. SOQ

        We already know that these concoctions wane over a relatively short period of time but we also know that the immunity can be bumped up by another shot- except that also appears to be short lived.

        So the questions being asked are- is the immune system in a better, same or worse state afterwards? And if worse, is that only in relation to CoVid-19, or wider?

        Let’s be honest, at this point in time, nobody knows the answer to those questions.

        You can call it what you will but from a physical state of health, there is very little difference between Antibody Dependant Enhancement ( ADE) and Acquired Immune Deficiency (AIDS)- the immune system is seriously damaged if not completely gone either way.

        Now it may be the case that the opportunistic infections and cancers may be different, but it is still a terminal condition and, is what some scientists have been warning about all along.

        Time will tell.

        1. Nigel

          ‘Let’s be honest, at this point in time, nobody knows the answer to those questions.’

          There has been absolutely nothing whatsoever to suggest that the vaccines, even if they wane in effectiveness, actually damage the immune system. And yet you posted a story that definitively claims that the vaccines give you AIDS.

          ‘You can call it what you will’

          Oh I think they called it that for a reason.

          ‘but it is still a terminal condition’

          So you’re okay with them using AIDS to scaremonger about the vaccine.

        2. SOQ

          Actually there is stuff coming through about increases in certain cancers but all of that takes time to collate and verify. Even in the short term, if you look at the UK, EU and US reporting systems, there is definitely patterns of unusual or uncommon conditions emerging.

          The article uses the term ‘vaccine mediated acquired immunodeficiency syndrome’ and yes it may be triggering but, are they wrong? The key word is “immunodeficiency” and if these things do damage people immune systems, then that is exactly what it is.

          Remember that AIDS is a disease not a virus and there have been cases of people who have had AIDS who were never HIV+. Virology, especially in relation to the immune system, is not a black and white topic.

          1. Nigel

            ‘but, are they wrong’

            Since they make their case by treating suposed decreased vaccine effectiveness and AIDS as exactly the same thing, yes, they are most definitely wrong.

            And yes, it’s triggering, but it’s not people like me or people who are LGBTQ or HIV positive or who have AIDS that they’re trying to trigger.

          2. SOQ

            There is no long term safety data? NONE.

            Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome is a disease or if you prefer, a set of symptoms. Albeit rare, It has been known to develop without HIV. Likewise people have been known to cure themselves of HIV, so there is always exceptions to the rules.

            But just on that subject- why were people throwing false HIV positives after the Australian vaccine? Never seen a decent answer to than one myself.

          3. Nigel

            ‘There is no long term safety data? NONE.’

            You just stated definitively that vaccines give you AIDS GET OFF YOUR HORSE.

            ‘Never seen a decent answer to than one myself.’

            If this is anything to go by you wouldn’t know a direct answer if it came up and kicked you with both hooves.

          4. Chris

            The ‘false positives’ I’d assume are due to the mechanism of action of the vaccines. In order to deliver their payload (mRNA) they have to knock off T-cells (TLR). The absence of their activity is giving the ‘positive’ test results. HIV specifically targets TLR-4 – but these ‘vaccines’ target others.

            “The key TLRs affected are TLR 3, TLR 7 and TLR 8. They act as sentries, whose job is to recognise foreign invaders by way of their form or patterns; a bit like an aircraft spotter in World War II. If the wrong type of shape is recognised in the sky then alarm bells sound and anti-aircraft fire kicks in. In the case of TLRs, the immune system gets activated.

            What if you could by-pass those spotters? No alarms, no immune system response; and your payload, foreign mRNA in this example, gets through safely. Then your drug/vaccine has a much greater chance of working.

            At that point in the original experiments to discover how to turn off toll-like receptors (and subsequently in the design of the vaccines), the question should have been asked: but what would be the consequences of switching off that important early warning system?”

            https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/stabilising-the-code

          5. Nigel

            It doesnt even say it turned them off, it says it bypassed them. This is doing the same work that equating vaccine efficacy rates dropping with AIDS was doing. You’re falling for some sloppy nonsense.

          7. Chris

            ‘That very technology is being used in SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: It switches off TLR 7 & 8 signalling, that the immune system needs to fight infection and cancer.’
            https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16111635/

            ‘[The] BNT162b2 vaccine also modulated the production of inflammatory cytokines by innate immune cells upon stimulation with both specific (SARS-CoV-2) and non-specific (viral, fungal and bacterial) stimuli. The response of innate immune cells to TLR4 and TLR7/8 ligands was lower after BNT162b2 vaccination.’
            https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.03.21256520v1.full.pdf

          8. SOQ

            Thanks Chris- I haven’t seen other real explanation.

            Nigel- I admire you trust in big pharma funded science but there is a political reason why the term ‘Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome’ was referenced- namely- the nasty little vermin known as Fauci.

          9. Nigel

            The first one – no article of that name there.
            The second one – ‘heightened risk of contracting HIV in a country with a high incidence of HIV’ is a different thing entirely from ‘the vaccine gives you AIDS.’

          10. Nigel

            ‘I admire you trust in big pharma’

            You seem to have the same problem as the people in that article, equating my utter distrust of you and your opinions and your sources of information with a trust of Big Pharma.

            ‘there is a political reason why the term ‘Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome’ was referenced- namely- the nasty little vermin known as Fauci.’

            I’m sure that was part of it. I expect cultivating and exploiting homphobia amongst anti-vaxxers is part of it as well. Referencing Fauci and AIDS is just a way of bypassing what’s left of their intellectual faculties.

          12. Chris

            1st article – We show that RNA signals through human TLR3, TLR7, and TLR8……Dendritic cells (DCs) exposed to such modified RNA express significantly less cytokines and activation markers than those treated with unmodified RNA. DCs and TLR-expressing cells are potently activated by bacterial and mitochondrial RNA, but not by mammalian total RNA, which is abundant in modified nucleosides. We conclude that nucleoside modifications suppress the potential of RNA to activate DCs.

            ^ ‘express significantly less cytokines and activation markers’ ie the markers are not present.

            2nd article -‘ Weak T-cell responses have previously been reported in vaccinees that have received just a single dose.’

            ‘Inhibition of innate immune responses may diminish anti-viral responses.’

            ‘The mRNA 48 BNT162b2 vaccine induces complex functional reprogramming of innate immune responses,
            which should be considered in the development and use of this new class of vaccines’.

          14. Chris

            https://www.hiv.gov/hiv-basics/overview/about-hiv-and-aids/what-are-hiv-and-aids

            ^ “A person with HIV is considered to have progressed to AIDS when:
            the number of their CD4 cells falls below 200 cells per cubic millimeter of blood (200 cells/mm3). (In someone with a healthy immune system, CD4 counts are between 500 and 1,600 cells/mm3.)”

            CD4 = TLR4 (T-cells) different naming convention. So, HIV+ is when you’ve become infected & the disease attacks your TLR4 cells making you susceptible to acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).

            The mRNA vaccines effect TLR3, TLR7 & TLR8 ie the “weak T-count” mentioned in the second article. This is by design as the innate immune system is very sophisticated at stopping random viral loads from replicating in our cells.

            Do those affected T-cells increase in time? We don’t know – hence the importance of long term studies that were neglected in order to jab as many people as possible. Early uncorroborated studies don’t look particularly positive with a weekly drop of 5% or so in the double jabbed.

          16. Chris

            No, it’s a drop in vaccine effectiveness as to Covid-19 & a reduction in overall immune response (lower T-cell counts).

            In fact the whole issue of ‘boosters’ is a warning that something bad is afoot. If the ‘vaccines’ were to be effective in the conventional sense, they would train the innate immune response to recognise and respond to SARS-CoV-2.

            What appears to be happening instead, is more like a subscription service – where the innate immune system is weakened from the vaccines & then only responds when prompted to produce more spike proteins (booster).

            This response is a narrow bandwidth (only covid-19). Leaving the vaccinated open to other infections – which, with a reduced immune system they’ll be less likely to successfully fight, without more medical interventions.

            Will they fess up if this is the case? No, any research that contravenes their golden goose is getting pulled from publication: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_kW7_9azxI

            The above link is about a paper regarding myocarditis that was withdrawn post publication without sufficient explanation. It’s the tip of the iceberg really.

          17. Nigel

            ‘ a reduction in overall immune response’

            It says absolutely nothing about this. You are reading a whole load into something that you can’t even quanitify. A low t-cell count is not the same thing as suddenly having AIDS.

            Pre pub papers usually get withdrawn because there’s something wrong with them.

          18. Chris

            It was withdrawn POST publication with no explanation as to why for the authors, but no doubt you’ll magic up some reason.

            A reduction in T-cells (specifically TLR4) is when the diagnosis of HIV+ is given. This then DEVELOPS into AIDs.

            The vaccines REDUCE other T-cells, hence the false positive HIV+ tests. Which COULD lead to a form of AIDs

            I said there were other studies (not referenced above) that show blood tests months after vaccination with very low counts. But I’m not going to spend my night googling for a potato.

          19. Nigel

            Pre pub studies are withdrawn all the time. You;re supposed to take that possibility into account knowing that they’re pre pub.

            I’m guessing that there’s more to having AIDS than ‘a low t-cell count.’

          20. Chris

            ‘I’m guessing that there’s more to having AIDS than ‘a low t-cell count.’

            Not really, HIV kills the TLR4 cells. If left untreated the immune system collapses. AIDS is the result – a cascade failure of immunity. The body can’t fight any cancers/infections that present themselves.

            It isn’t a set of symptoms, though AIDS patients will present with similar one’s, sarcomas, skin cancers etc. Pneumonia tends to take a lot of them.

            Thankfully, HIV can be treated these days – so there’s no real excuse for not providing antivirals.

    2. John

      The idiotically stupid links that you constantly promote in a failed attempt at spreading misinformation and lies displays that you are either a totally brainwashed member of the anti-vaxxer cult or you really, really need to return to primary education which will hopefully allow you to achieve a very basic level of critical thinking.

      P.S. I am not saying that you are personally stupid maybe you just have bad luck when you’re thinking

    1. Nigel

      I’m as jaded about politics as anyone but if you go too far down that route you have to wonder why things like child labour laws, the five day working week, publc health care, social welfare, free education, consumer protections and safety belts in cars exist. Because while you can come up with self-serving reasons for many of them, they are still mostly there for the well being, and betterment, of regular people. When you consider what largely selfless and enormously beneficial acheivements all those things are, combating climate change doesn’t seem as completely impossible as people like to make out.

        1. Nigel

          Anyone whotells you politics can’t be used for positive change, only for negative, doesn’t want positive change. There was a lot of that about during the Repeal The 8th campaign.

      2. Ghost of Yep

        “I’m as jaded about politics”.

        You haven’t the slightest clue about the subject Nigel.

    2. Chris

      @ Verbatim It’s nice to see MEPs finally address this, though they waited until the wolf was at their own door.

      1. Verbatim

        Always good to hear a rousing speech, although I’m wary of all politicians.

        Funny how Nigel compares the “nice” reforms of society, which we pay for with direct and indirect taxes, but always fails to mention, or perhaps never even thinks about, the many others that restrict our movement, our freedoms, our liberties which we pay for with our enslavement to the system.

          1. Chris

            The perfect slave is one who isn’t aware of his own servitude. Hell, they’ve even managed to get people such as Nigel to champion it.

            Of course, this isn’t anything new – ‘woke’ is just 21st century Bolshevism. Where it will lead is quite apparent to anyone that isn’t an indoctrinated automaton.

          2. Nigel

            The perfect slave is one who looks around, declares themselves a slave and then tells everyone else they’re slaves until they believe it too.

          3. Chris

            No, what you’re describing is a dissident – hardly the perfect slave now are they? Stirring up the ranks and all that. Another glaring logical cul de sac.

          4. Nigel

            Dissenting from your own self-imposed metaphorical slavery isn’t particularly heroic, except in terms of overcoming personal problems. Telling other people they’re all really slaves is also what cults do. Actual slaves may have other ideas of what slavery really is.

          5. bisted

            …here Nigel…didn’t your boys and gal reintroduce open slave markets into Africa for the first time in hundreds of years?

          6. Chris

            I never said I was a slave. But slavery 2.0 is where humanity is heading, some are partially already there by consenting to the regime change. I didn’t – and though my rights have been curtailed (freedom of association in public/ freedom to travel) I won’t consent under any circumstances.

          7. Nigel

            ‘by consenting to the regime change’

            What regime change?

            ‘I won’t consent under any circumstances.’

            Ok.

          10. bisted

            …do you mean President Assad who has resisted the Yank/EU attempt at regime change…yep…I’m definitely on that side…

  13. Micko

    Interesting.

    Although one thing the Washington Post’s owner could do to help the old climate change, is to sort out the carbon footprint of his online mega superstore and his massive data centres … and maybe, just maybe not bring William Shatner to the edge of space for the laugh.

    1. Nigel

      That shouldn’t detract from the vital importance of that story. We live in a deeply corporatised world – there isn’t a media source out there that isn’t under the ownership of or financed by someone or something that would fit on that list of ‘cartoonisly evil’ but oh so very real characters or institutions we linked to.

      I know, let’s link it again!

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/27/climate-crisis-villains-americas-dirty-dozen?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco

      Also, tax the rich till they squeal.

        1. Nigel

          Wow, we have to wait for him to do something before the rest of us can? That’s, uh, bound to work.

          1. Micko

            What we could do is a drop in the ocean.

            If your “dirty dozen” and those like them don’t do anything, then anything we do is pointless.

            But you go ahead and make your own life a little bit more miserable. It’ll make you feel better, but it means nothing.

Comments are closed.

Broadsheet.ie