5 Filters

Chomsky, Orlov, Saker - all have sunk into moral degeneracy

All these ‘intellectuals’ have been exposed by the covid crime (it is clear by now, if not many months ago, that it is extremely far beyond merely ‘covid scam’) as immoral vacuous idiots.

I think Darren Allen might argue that a large part of the reason why is that they have all made big names for themselves. When that happens, then you are embraced by a certain crowd, and you get comfortable within that bosom.

That is persuasive, except that the same mental breakdown has also happened to all the nobodies on the Left, e.g. the Sh!tboat crew.

1 Like

Dmitry Orlov doesn’t buy the covid scam, R. Does he? Do you see signs of that? I get all his mailouts, and I don’t think I see that. Saker and Chomsky, yes sure. As to the Bovril Boat: I don’t follow that site now, so I wouldn’t know.

The stance that seems to me to be soberly thought through goes like this:

Yes, there’s a nasty flu-alike about. As flus usually do, it kills some, gives some a really nasty illness, and has some longer-term nasty after effects for some; but most won’t be much bothered by it, and will get long-term broadscale natural immunity from it afterwards.

Yes, a ghastly global crime-against-humanity has been set going on the back of this flu, which looks as if it was engineered, and probably is still being engineered, for the job.

Yes, there has been a lamentable stampede of multitudes of people who really should know better to swallow the scammers’ narrative, though that’s losing headway now.

And yes, the poison-stabs are a disaster, a mass-killing, mass-crippling crime, which clearly have some unadmitted sinister purpose behind them, and longer term bad effects that are yet to come clear.

By now, I personally feel fairly confident about these statements. But open-minded scepticism still rools, OK! I think that many observer/commentators, confronting the same global confusion as me, will have made variously different sets of tentative conclusions. All we can do is observe, mull, hold our horses, and wait for more solid, certain clarity to emerge.

But internecine hyper-slagging of each other over points of difference in our - unavoidably-tentative - judgements isn’t useful. Waggaman is not a reliable source in this respect. He has a history…

I posted this earlier:

My recollection is that that guy showed that Orlov was basically onboard. Orlov’s ‘dissidence’ only goes as far as, for example, pronouncing the Sputnik jab as superior to the Pfizer one.

1 Like

Yes, I saw your earlier post, R, and opened the link. As I said, I don’t trust Waggaman/Slavsquat. In a trust competition between Waggaman and Orlov, it’s Dmitry every time for me. I’ve been following all his output for around fifteen years now. Never seen the slightest sign of the sort of duplicitous snake that Waggaman alleges. Waggaman, otoh, has smelt wrong since the first time I ran across him, some time ago.

Much of the critique of Andrei Raevsky’s pig-headedness is justified. But again, the sort of toxic caricature that Waggaman presents about these figures is the sort of stuff that gives genuine conspiracies a bad name.