Uvalde, that footage and YouTube, what gives?
Since the, hour and a half long, footage of the Uvalde school shooting, was released on every social media platform with a video function, known to man a couple of nights ago, it's been bothering me?
You see there's a very glaringly apparent, nonsensical element with this whole thing and that's what occurred with YouTube.
Most, if not all of you, have experienced the censorship measures that YouTube employs and against seemingly the most arbitrary and inconsequential of infringements, on a regular basis. So, naturally, when that footage not only appeared on YouTube, but managed to gather millions of views without being taken down, something really did not add up for me and I was immediately suspicious.
Now I've heard any number of opinions on this, the most prevalent being, that they want to cause chaos between left and right, anti-gun and pro-gun, Democrat and Republican, etc etc. All in an effort to engineer a firearms ban in the US.
Now, admittedly that is a fairly valid and plausible line of reasoning... Which is the line that, thankfully, the majority of people are taking. (you should hear some of the takes I've heard... This:
🤦♂️
Doesn't come close to describing those explanations?)
However, doesn't this footage, kind of works against that narrative too?
Showing the ease at which the gunman was able to gain access to the school and the length of time he was left unchallenged?
I get what they're saying, but most people, who have children themselves (and this is true of most who would consider themselves democrat voters and anti-gun too!) are likely to reassess their opinions on guns and indeed are doing just that.
Like i said, it just has positive and negative aspects, each of an equally high degree of preference and this is true for all sides too.
The release of this footage and YouTube's inaction, can be viewed as being of huge benefit and also, paradoxically, a massive detriment, to either side of the argument. Because of this it can only be seen as, not really helping, or hindering either of them and in any real, or significant way, with both sides probably preferring no one saw it and it remain unreleased?
The fact that YouTube let it accrue as many views as it possibly could and in an incredibly short period of time, the channel I saw it on was easily past 400,000 views at least, when I saw it, I haven't checked recently but I believe it's still up on the platform too, only increases my suspicion.
So, again it makes absolutely no sense, because they'll know it doesn't help their agenda and is especially noticeable because of the strict and rapid deployment of those censorship methods, prior to this video.
Soooooo... Why're they doing that then, if it benefits no one?
Well...
The only thing that enters my mind, is that they know YouTube is still a massive hindrance to any narrative they attempt to portray and this will only continue, irrespective of how ever much censorship they employ?
People can be very creative, when it comes to finding ways that they can bypass the censorship algorithms?
This pandemic has proven to them, that YT's become, essentially, a liability and in an enormous way and this outweighs any kind of benefits they got for bolstering their narrative on the platform (which was it's intended goal, to help propagate propaganda!) then there's the other video platforms, YT's competition, to consider too. They're supposedly not under their control and allow their users to post what they like? When in reality, they're used to ghettoise those that they ban from YT, in order to keep an eye on them and what they're saying?
Non of their attempts to control the narrative with social media, have appeared to be working. This is a huge problem.
For a good while they've considered some social media platforms, including those that they created themselves, now as more of a threat, than as a useful or beneficial tool.
Since the, hour and a half long, footage of the Uvalde school shooting, was released on every social media platform with a video function, known to man a couple of nights ago, it's been bothering me?
You see there's a very glaringly apparent, nonsensical element with this whole thing and that's what occurred with YouTube.
Most, if not all of you, have experienced the censorship measures that YouTube employs and against seemingly the most arbitrary and inconsequential of infringements, on a regular basis. So, naturally, when that footage not only appeared on YouTube, but managed to gather millions of views without being taken down, something really did not add up for me and I was immediately suspicious.
Now I've heard any number of opinions on this, the most prevalent being, that they want to cause chaos between left and right, anti-gun and pro-gun, Democrat and Republican, etc etc. All in an effort to engineer a firearms ban in the US.
Now, admittedly that is a fairly valid and plausible line of reasoning... Which is the line that, thankfully, the majority of people are taking. (you should hear some of the takes I've heard... This:
🤦♂️
Doesn't come close to describing those explanations?)
However, doesn't this footage, kind of works against that narrative too?
Showing the ease at which the gunman was able to gain access to the school and the length of time he was left unchallenged?
I get what they're saying, but most people, who have children themselves (and this is true of most who would consider themselves democrat voters and anti-gun too!) are likely to reassess their opinions on guns and indeed are doing just that.
Like i said, it just has positive and negative aspects, each of an equally high degree of preference and this is true for all sides too.
The release of this footage and YouTube's inaction, can be viewed as being of huge benefit and also, paradoxically, a massive detriment, to either side of the argument. Because of this it can only be seen as, not really helping, or hindering either of them and in any real, or significant way, with both sides probably preferring no one saw it and it remain unreleased?
The fact that YouTube let it accrue as many views as it possibly could and in an incredibly short period of time, the channel I saw it on was easily past 400,000 views at least, when I saw it, I haven't checked recently but I believe it's still up on the platform too, only increases my suspicion.
So, again it makes absolutely no sense, because they'll know it doesn't help their agenda and is especially noticeable because of the strict and rapid deployment of those censorship methods, prior to this video.
Soooooo... Why're they doing that then, if it benefits no one?
Well...
The only thing that enters my mind, is that they know YouTube is still a massive hindrance to any narrative they attempt to portray and this will only continue, irrespective of how ever much censorship they employ?
People can be very creative, when it comes to finding ways that they can bypass the censorship algorithms?
This pandemic has proven to them, that YT's become, essentially, a liability and in an enormous way and this outweighs any kind of benefits they got for bolstering their narrative on the platform (which was it's intended goal, to help propagate propaganda!) then there's the other video platforms, YT's competition, to consider too. They're supposedly not under their control and allow their users to post what they like? When in reality, they're used to ghettoise those that they ban from YT, in order to keep an eye on them and what they're saying?
Non of their attempts to control the narrative with social media, have appeared to be working. This is a huge problem.
For a good while they've considered some social media platforms, including those that they created themselves, now as more of a threat, than as a useful or beneficial tool.
🤔2👍1
So what can they do to solve this problem?
They can't just outright pull the plug on it and for what will only look like to everyone, seemingly no good reason can they?
Why not?
Because that risks further exposing them and also turning more of the gerbils against them.
As always, in order to do it without drawing any kind of unwanted suspicion, they would need us to pull the plug for them, like a good little helper monkey and for that they would need the outrage mob to be sufficiently... Well... Outraged and demanding the head of YouTube on a plate!
Now, admittedly, this video alone probably isn't enough to warrant the levels of outrage needed for those standard, empassioned celebrity demands we also seem to see first and then that be rapidly followed by the resulting virtue signalling gerbilista's to cry out for a possible ban / some sort of takedown, of the platform, to be justified just yet?
I have a sneaking suspicion though, that this could perhaps be the beginning of their attempt at a planned demolition of social media video platforms. After all children and the easily offended may witness this kind of material and of course we must do everything to prevent that ever occurring... It's them that we must think about?
They can't just outright pull the plug on it and for what will only look like to everyone, seemingly no good reason can they?
Why not?
Because that risks further exposing them and also turning more of the gerbils against them.
As always, in order to do it without drawing any kind of unwanted suspicion, they would need us to pull the plug for them, like a good little helper monkey and for that they would need the outrage mob to be sufficiently... Well... Outraged and demanding the head of YouTube on a plate!
Now, admittedly, this video alone probably isn't enough to warrant the levels of outrage needed for those standard, empassioned celebrity demands we also seem to see first and then that be rapidly followed by the resulting virtue signalling gerbilista's to cry out for a possible ban / some sort of takedown, of the platform, to be justified just yet?
I have a sneaking suspicion though, that this could perhaps be the beginning of their attempt at a planned demolition of social media video platforms. After all children and the easily offended may witness this kind of material and of course we must do everything to prevent that ever occurring... It's them that we must think about?
👍2
Sam Fisher (Data Drops) pinned «Uvalde, that footage and YouTube, what gives? Since the, hour and a half long, footage of the Uvalde school shooting, was released on every social media platform with a video function, known to man a couple of nights ago, it's been bothering me? You see…»
Sam Fisher (Data Drops) pinned «Why this Native American language was never to be written? https://youtu.be/NOWmLKtR32Q»
fmats-09-944755.pdf
551.1 KB
Fun and Frolics courtesy of the WEF
Some interesting stuff I found, when perusing the WEF strategic intelligence webpage. Papers on Covid (obviously... I mean, come on... It is the WEF!) but also some surprising papers on magnetism and biodegradable polymers too.
Some interesting stuff I found, when perusing the WEF strategic intelligence webpage. Papers on Covid (obviously... I mean, come on... It is the WEF!) but also some surprising papers on magnetism and biodegradable polymers too.
s13063-021-05686-8.pdf
865.3 KB
Miettinen & Nurminen Method in Statistics
I forgot to add these papers on the Miettinen and Nurminen Method, used by Pfizer when calculating the data for their trials and also post Emergency Use Authorisation of their vaccines.
These are quite technical and academic, in the way they're written (which may put some people off?) but I feel that, if we're to understand what it is exactly these companies are doing, then it's best to familiarise ourselves with the methods they use to do it?
I have also linked the other method they use, the Bayesian Inference Technique, that i posted a few months ago too
(I highly recommend Ben Goldacre's books, included in that drop, as they make it easier to understand?)
https://news.1rj.ru/str/SamFisherDatadrops/3359
I forgot to add these papers on the Miettinen and Nurminen Method, used by Pfizer when calculating the data for their trials and also post Emergency Use Authorisation of their vaccines.
These are quite technical and academic, in the way they're written (which may put some people off?) but I feel that, if we're to understand what it is exactly these companies are doing, then it's best to familiarise ourselves with the methods they use to do it?
I have also linked the other method they use, the Bayesian Inference Technique, that i posted a few months ago too
(I highly recommend Ben Goldacre's books, included in that drop, as they make it easier to understand?)
https://news.1rj.ru/str/SamFisherDatadrops/3359
When Pfizer's fudging the numbers, required far too much fudge? (video removed by YouTube)
Well, it's not like I didn't see it coming did I?
Took them longer than I thought to take it down though, I think my censor is slacking?
Sooo....
Strike number 9 and my channel still hasn't been deleted, starting to think that YouTube secretly love me and know they'd miss me if they I wasn't there?
🤣🤣🤣
Well, it's not like I didn't see it coming did I?
Took them longer than I thought to take it down though, I think my censor is slacking?
Sooo....
Strike number 9 and my channel still hasn't been deleted, starting to think that YouTube secretly love me and know they'd miss me if they I wasn't there?
🤣🤣🤣
1657652963968.mp4
398.3 MB
When Pfizer's fudging the numbers, required far too much fudge?
(Now deleted by YouTube)
For those who missed it when it was on my YouTube, but still want to see it?
Fret not...
I hath saved it on yonder Telegram saved messages thingy... So it will not be consigned to video hell?
For those who missed it for... Reasons?
I have this to say to thee...
😝
(Now deleted by YouTube)
For those who missed it when it was on my YouTube, but still want to see it?
Fret not...
I hath saved it on yonder Telegram saved messages thingy... So it will not be consigned to video hell?
For those who missed it for... Reasons?
I have this to say to thee...
😝
👍1