This is a ((((New York Crimes))), I mean (((New York Times))), article bashing RFK, Jr. This guy is dangerous and he’s likely to throw the election to Drumpf, who is 50X the crook than Biden ever might have been. Biden polls very poorly for no particular reason. I think it’s just because he’s too old. No one wants him to run again, including 70
The first three beefs are just fine and are on target. Nevertheless, he does bring up important issues such as the biocide being committed by agricultural chemicals and their possible effects on humans and preposterous addition of completely unnecessary neurotoxins like mercury and aluminum to the vaccines we give to small children.
But the last two, where the (((Slimes))) attacks the obvious fact of the CIA’s hand in JFK’s assassination and the clearly stolen election of 2004 shows just how awful these corporate Democrats at the (((Crimes))) are. They’re gatekeepers, guardians preventing us from knowing just how deeply diseased the American system truly is. As such, they’re as much a part of the problem as the psychopaths running roughshod over all of us.
This article, titled:
5 Noteworthy Falsehoods Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Has Promoted,
has the subhead:
A Longtime Vaccine Skeptic, Mr. Kennedy Is Leaning Heavily on Misinformation as He Mounts a Long-shot 2024 Campaign
The first three charges make some sense.
The first subhead is:
He has falsely linked vaccines to various medical conditions.
Well, putting that neurotoxic mercury or thimerisol into those vaccines was outrageous. That chemical is especially toxic to the brains of immature organisms. They’ve removed it from most vaccines, but the flu vaccines still have it, and kids supposedly get as big of a mercury dose as ever. The theory makes sense but the proof is not so great.
They’ve also been putting aluminum in vaccines, and that’s a brain toxin too.
Hey pharmaceutical industry crooks: How about if you take all these toxins like aluminum and mercury out of your vaccines?
The second is:
He Has Made Baseless Claims about a Connection between Gender Dysphoria and Chemical Exposure
This is true. However, some of these estrogenic chemicals are feminizing men and sperm levels in Western men have been plunging for decades now.
I suppose you would have to look at a society before and after exposure to these chemicals. Or you could test the bodies of these tranny men and see if they have higher levels of estrogenic chemicals in their bodies than we normal folks. It seems to me that these estrogenic chemicals have been piling up in our bodies for much longer than this recent wave of tranny insanity, so I doubt this theory.
And saying that most Americans don’t get much atrazine exposure sounds like nonsense. We Americans get far too much exposure from all of these pesticides and herbicides but the US government and the chemical industry won’t outlaw any of these toxic chemicals! They won’t even outlaw the bee- and bird-killing neonicanoid or neonic chemicals.
This is one way that the European social democracies are far ahead of the US. They’re still Nazis and fascists on foreign policy on account of being part of the Western and EU imperialist system, but they are pretty good on domestic policy.
These countries are run by socialists who have no personal interest in maximizing the profits of the capitalists. So they’re perfectly willing to do things that the capitalists hate like banning these horrific biocidal pesticides.
The US government, Democratic and Republican, is captured by the big agriculture and the chemical industries, and as a result, we hardly ban any pesticides or herbicides anymore.
We are talking about the crooked, corporate-controlled EPA itself here when I say they won’t touch any of these agricultural toxins. I’m pretty sure we don’t need to spray our crops with these biocidal life-exterminating toxins to the extent that we do.
What we have here in the US is something called regulatory capture whereby corporations “capture” regulatory government agencies and render them useless through lobbying and campaign contributions.
Further, there is an endless revolving door between regulatory agencies and the industries they are supposed to be regulating. I think we need to ban this revolving door process. There are bills that would ban it for at least five years, but they never make it through the corporate-controlled Congress. I’d like to ban them for life!
The fact that regulatory bureaucrats regularly rotate back and forth between business and the regulatory agencies that are supposed to regulate those businesses is outrageous, but hey, that’s the American way, as American as Mom and apple pie. And the American people won’t do a damned thing about it because they simply don’t care!
The third is:
He has falsely linked antidepressants to school shootings.
This one is interesting but it is unproven. Really you have to look at a society that has not been exposed to this drug much and then look at them again after they take up the drug, preferably in large numbers, and you would have to see if there’s a link. I’m not sure if there’s a link myself, but one definitely hasn’t been proven yet, I suppose. Nor has it been disproven! I’m not aware that anyone has looked into it at all.
The era of mass shootings has coincided with the era of mass consumption of SSRI’s, so there is a correlation, but of course correlation does not equal causation. It’s an interesting theory and I think we should look into it more.
He Has Bolstered a Conspiracy Theory That the C.I.A. Assassinated His UncleMr. Kennedy has long promoted a conspiracy theory that the C.I.A. killed his uncle, President John F. Kennedy.He claimed without evidence during a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity in May that Allen W. Dulles, the director of the C.I.A. at the time President Kennedy was killed, helped cover up evidence of the organization’s involvement.Referencing a House committee inquiry in 1976, he said:Most of the people in that investigation believed it was the C.I.A. that was behind it because the evidence was so overwhelming to them.
But even that investigation, which found that President Kennedy was “probably” the victim of a conspiracy of some kind, And He Has Said That Republicans Stole the 2004 Presidential ElectionMr. Kennedy told The Washington Post in June that he still believed that John Kerry, the Democratic candidate, had won the 2004 presidential election.Mr. Kennedy first promoted that idea in a 2006 article in Rolling Stone, asserting that Republicans had “mounted a massive, coordinated campaign to subvert the will of the people” and assure the re-election of President George W. Bush. He claimed that their efforts “prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted.”But it is one thing to complain of vote suppression; it is another thing to demonstrate that Mr. Kerry won more of the votes cast.
Mr. Bush defeated Mr. Kerry by a margin of 35 electoral college votes nationally; he carried Ohio and its 20 electoral votes by more than 118,000 ballots.The Times reported in 2004 that a glitch in an electronic Ohio voting machine added 3,893 votes to Mr. Bush’s tally. That error was caught in preliminary vote counts, officials said. But the event, alongside other voting controversies nationwide, spurred widespread questions about election integrity that caught traction with people like Mr. Kennedy.Mr. Kerry, however, conceded the race a day after the election.