Opinion AUSTRALIAN Politics: Adelaide Board Discussion Part 5

[Slippery Pete]

I’m no fan of the PM but it has to be said — this is a great call by him

Bondi attack 'bollard man' to be granted permanent residency in Australia, lawyer says

A petition was set up by a member of the public calling for him to be granted an Australian citizenship, describing his actions as a "true act of Australianism".

www.abc.net.au

 

[ADL9798]

Said before this case he may end up doing a Ben Roberts-Smith own goal.

He's a proven grub & liar.

Channel 7 are having a habit if backing the wrong horse...

Kerry Stokes might finally run out of money after bankrolling these two idiots and now this impending slam dunk defamation case.

The poor guy has been getting death threats. Getting enough money to live on his own private island or three might go some way to making up for it.

 

[ADL9798]

Surprised you haven’t shared this yet Slippery Pete

 

[Eagleboy2011]

​

​

South Australian taxpayers being ‘ripped off from dud Fleet SA repair deals with interstate-based firms’​

An SA MP has told parliament locals have been mysteriously “black-listed” from contracts as SA taxpayer money goes interstate to do a job that could be cheaper here.
A parliamentary committee heard claims that Fleet SA, which manages all state government vehicles, has told local repair shops to “use a more expensive preferred glass windscreen repairer that comes from interstate”.

Upper House independent MP, Frank Pangallo, said taxpayers were “actually getting ripped off” by decisions of the SA Financing Authority, a Treasury division that controls Fleet SA.


Rowey impacted.



Mr Rowe, a FIVEAA radio presenter, 58, bought the Main North Road, Prospect, business in December 2022. He said operations were thriving.

“I’d like to think the state government would look at its processes and how it spends taxpayers’ money by giving priority to SA businesses and not harming them,” he said.

“I don’t even want their business – I just want them not to tell our clients to not use us.”

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/south-australian-taxpayers-being-ripped-off-from-dud-fleet-sa-repair-deals-with-interstatebased-firms/news-story/9a029e2d145ddb4c439a8eefbcac70b8?utm_source=AdelaideNow&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Editorial&utm_content=ADV_BREAKING_NEWS-ALERT_01&net_sub_id=285893080&type=curated&position=1

 

[Slippery Pete]

Surprised you haven’t shared this yet Slippery Pete

Oh good you’re still there.

This was the question:

None of that answer addresses the most significant point, a point I made numerous times back when mandates were rolled out, and one which has finally been acknowledged in that paper.

“….COVID-19 vaccines were approved without long-term safety data and might cause immune dysfunction”

If you believe long-term data was not important, and that it was okay to ”guess” on people’s lives, health, and livelihoods, then just say that.

 

[Bearded Clam]

 

[ADL9798]

Oh good you’re still there.

This was the question:

And in today’s edition of ‘Slippery shared a tweet but didn’t bother to actually read the article’

99% of this is the author expressing concern around the long term impacts of COVID while (appropriately) acknowledging the need for further research into this and into vaccine side effects.

Here’s another quote from the same article:

“A possible association between COVID-19 vaccination and the incidence of
postural orthopaedic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) has been demonstrated in a cohort of 284,592 COVID-19-vaccinated individuals, though at a rate that was one-fifth of the incidence of POTS after SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

It’s a similar story for rates of other serious COVID vaccine side effects.

And this is the crux of it.

No-one has ever denied or concealed that there are side effects associated with COVID vaccination. However, these are outweighed by the immediate and long term risks of contracting COVID while unvaccinated, and the benefits of protection against these risks via vaccination.

It’s illogical and disingenuous to be promoting concern about only one side of this equation (vaccine side effects) while completely ignoring the other (COVID impacts + vaccine benefits in preventing these). Both short and long term. But that’s assuming you’re actually serious about improving outcomes for people, and not part of a cult lashing out at anything and everything to do with the establishment as it’s primary ideological goal.

 

[OneGreatClub]

And in today’s edition of ‘Slippery shared a tweet but didn’t bother to actually read the article’

99% of this is the author expressing concern around the long term impacts of COVID while (appropriately) acknowledging the need for further research into this and into vaccine side effects.

Here’s another quote from the same article:

“A possible association between COVID-19 vaccination and the incidence of
postural orthopaedic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) has been demonstrated in a cohort of 284,592 COVID-19-vaccinated individuals, though at a rate that was one-fifth of the incidence of POTS after SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

It’s a similar story for rates of other serious COVID vaccine side effects.

And this is the crux of it.

No-one has ever denied or concealed that there are side effects associated with COVID vaccination. However, these are outweighed by the immediate and long term risks of contracting COVID while unvaccinated, and the benefits of protection against these risks via vaccination.

It’s illogical and disingenuous to be promoting concern about only one side of this equation (vaccine side effects) while completely ignoring the other (COVID impacts + vaccine benefits in preventing these). Both short and long term. But that’s assuming you’re actually serious about improving outcomes for people, and not part of a cult lashing out at anything and everything to do with the establishment as it’s primary ideological goal.

Next Slippery will say there wasn’t even a pandemic where millions were dying.

 

[Slippery Pete]

99% of this is the author expressing concern around the long term impacts of COVID

Yes, I almost forgot about the epidemic of “Long Covid.”

Thank God for the vaccine.

I tell you what. When I think of successful vaccines, I think of all the ones that left people with “long” and “chronic” versions of the disease they were supposed to prevent. Lmao.

while (appropriately) acknowledging the need for further research into this and into vaccine side effects.

Some of which are:

• “spike protein expression in muscle tissue, the lymphatic system, cardiomyocytes and other cells after entry into the circulation.”. (Remember when “iT sTaYs iN yOuR aRm yOu cOnSpRiaCy tHeOrIsT!!”)

• Recipients of two or more injections of the mRNA vaccines display a class switch to IgG4 antibodies. Abnormally high levels of IgG4 might cause autoimmune diseases, promote cancer growth, autoimmune myocarditis and other IgG 4-related diseases. — (At this point, to still be defending this thing being mandated is beyond embarrassing, but if you want to continue prosecuting that laughable case, you really shouldn’t ignore this part of the article)

Back to the question. It’s really simple:

In your view….is it desirable, ethical and medically prudent, to issue a blanket mandate on ages 12 and above, regardless of medical history, immunity status or any other consideration — of a pharmaceutical product that has zero long term data?

It’s a yes or no question.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Yesterday and today are the 73rd anniversary of the Battle of Kapyong. Over 23-24 April 1951.
The Battle of Kapyong has come to be known as the most significant and important battle for Australian troops in the Korean War.
They held up the advance of the Chinese army and gave the Americans time to regroup.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

LEST WE FORGET.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Forget Covid, this could be a real emergency

 

[relapse]

Forget Covid, this could be a real emergency

Given that supermarkets like Drakes are selling the 180 gram blocks of Cadbury for $7, I wonder just how bad it could potentially get.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

This has to be a worry. Didn't they sent coppers to the NT recently.

COPS CUT CALLOUTSEXCLUSIVE

Police triage trial to reduce welfarechecks

ELIZABETH HENSON

Police are cutting back on the callouts they attend in a bid to free up resources for more serious jobs.A new triage system aims to weed out unnecessary welfare checks. Police are cutting back on the types of call-outs they attend in an attempt to free-up resources to allow officers to focus on more serious jobs. As the crime rate continues to rise, SA Police is trialling a new triage system that aims to weed out unnecessary welfare checks, meaning police will no longer undertake all types of checks.A welfare check is made after a member of the public or a government official request police to check on the physical wellbeing of someone.SA Police assistant commissioner Philip Newitt says police are taking a "cautious and steady” approach to rolling out the trial, and if successful, itwill likely consider the tightening of current triage policies for other types of call-outs.“We don’t want to discourage people from ringing the police when they really do need us but we don’t want them to ring for superfluous reasons either,” Mr Newitt said.“It’s important that we have our police available to attend to thosematters where our skills, equipment and knowledge can be best used for community safety.”In 2022/23, police received more than 53,000 welfare check requests, and of these, officers were deployed on 33,000 occasions, with each task taking an average of two hours and seven minutes. Just under 10 per cent of the requests were made by other government agencies, such as the SA Ambulance service, while the remainder were made by members of the public. Mr Newitt said some of the unnecessary welfare check requests police attended included a parent calling to say their child would not get into their car and they wanted officers to help.There were numerous instances where patients had been discharged from hospital with a cannula still in their arm and officers were asked to bring them back to hospital or ensure the person had removed it themselves.SA Ambulance Employees Association general secretary Leah Watkins said she hoped the new policy would not put ambulance officers at risk.“I can appreciate the rationale for needing to go through this review process and triage process and I would hope that any changes that flow don’t put any additional onus on our crews to enter potentially hazardous or dangerous situations without SAPOL attendance,” she said.“And that we can still continue doing what we’ve always done and making risk assessment and seek back-up as needed.”Mr Newitt said SA Police were expecting there would, on occasions, be disagreements between it and other agencies, such as SA Ambulance, on the necessity of police attendance.“There will be that individual example where you go. There’s a bit of astand-off between the agencies but there’s an escalation process to allowthat to occur in real time,” he said.“So the end result of that is someone’s going, and it’s working out who’sthe best to go.”Mr Newitt said as part of the new call-out parameters, police would askcallers a series of questions to ensure they fully understood thecircumstances and could make informed decisions.He said if police decided not to attend a welfare check, the caller would begiven advice or directed towards other agencies, and “they’re alwaysinvited if the circumstances change to ring back”.Police would continue to attend all incidents where a person’s life was atrisk, a person had likely died, a crime had occurred or child safety wasjeopardised.Police Association of South Australia President Mark Carroll said officerswere facing an “ever-increasing demand on services,” and redirectingunnecessary welfare checks to other agencies would “free up thousands ofhours for members to get back to their core duties — including respondingto urgent and critical events.” The trial will be reviewed in August