Topic: British Airways confirms four vaccinated pilots have recently died... (Read 528 times)

What on earth are you even talking about at this point.

News writing in journalism is different from EDITORIAL WRITING, and other more

News writing is a very sensitive part of journalism as you need to have SUFFICIENT PROOFS that will support your claim. In news writing, the TITLE is the very significant part as it will give the READERS the very core of the news you present, its like the BRIEF ABSTRACT of the article you write. In other words, THE TITLE is the very SUMMARY of the ARTICLE WRITTEN.

Ergo, the article you cite is not even well writen or even proofread by a JOURNALIST. Its just written by some student or something in the basement of her mothers house.

Didn't you say journalism? Don't you even realize that journalists write articles? From the journalist's standpoint, there definitely is a need for the article. In this case the article gives the reader directions to go to, showing that pilots deffintely ARE dying from the vaxx... right along with thousands of other people.

What in the world of journalism is this. KEKW

If that's the case then there is no need for the article. He just need the title for you to believe everything.

1 sentence is enough for you to believe something. AND THAT IS EVEN WITHOUT ANY PROOF OR SUPPORTS

Except for one major thing. The title is what is happening, even if the particular article doesn't show it clearly.

Inside the mind of BADecker:

Mastur of being click baited.

Except for one major thing. The title is what is happening, even if the particular article doesn't show it clearly.

AND???,

the news you cite yourself have misleading titles as the title says "vaccinated pilots fall ill or DIE", where the deaths was not even related to being vaccinated. Can you even get that?, even a toddler can see whats wrong with that.

Anyway, your logic in the post above, shows that you THINK outside of the box that is out of bounds. You don't have proofs to defend your claims, and this has been the situation since 2020. You make a conspiracy, thinking about something, but up to this date, those theories of yours have not yet been proven.

We all understand that you have a bit of a problem adding 1 + 1 together to get 2. But of course, what is reported on is what is reported on. If it says nobody died, then it says nobody died. Thanks.

The thing to do is a little bit of multiplication rather than only simple addition.
1. Airlines are in business to make money.
2. Not considering bailouts, they have to fly to make money.
3. So, why are they cancelling flights?
4. Note that the word "multiplication" 4 lines above, is not manipulation. Read it closely and clearly.

In other words, airlines have reasons for cancelling what will become thousands of flights. What are those reasons? They are big and serious reasons, because nobody wants to lose money through loss of business.

Some of the reports show what the reasons are. The reasons? Pilots and other airline personnel are sick from the vaccine. Many are so sick, that they can't fly any longer.

But the present question is, do you have vaccine or Covid sickness, Natsuu? I mean, anyone who wants to take the people's focus off the truth like you do, and then does such a lousy job of it, has to be sick.

Did you even read it? THERE IS NO ONE died in that news, instead of the 4 pilots who was said to be NOT DIED FROM COVID.

haayyyyyyy

You can fact check the fact checkers yourself.  They cite their sources.   (try clicking on the words that look a little different or have a little squiggly line underneath)

Pilots are encouraged to be aware of the signs of deep venous thrombosis and clotting issues and take preventative measures such as compression stockings and stretching of their legs during long flights.

Medical News Today published a study on June 15th, 2021 that showed an increased risk of blood clotting and low platelets in AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Some scientists hypothesize that since the ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) in the shot causes a full body reaction, once the vaccine comes into contact with platelets inside the human body, the vaccine activates those platelets, causing them to change shape and transmit chemical signals to the immune system. Those platelets send out platelet factor 4 (PF4), which regulates blood clotting.

However, in some people, after some undetermined amount of time, at random, PF4 latches onto the vaccine, and large "complexes" form. Since those complexes are "unknown," the human body interprets those clusters as threats. Thus, immune cells in the body mistakenly attack PF4's, prohibiting them from preventing the problematic clots seen in some COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

...

Nope:  Just the opposite.  Two of the people I pay the most attention to (and sometime fund) implore people NOT to just trust what they say and do their own research.  To back it up, both are also VERY fastidious about providing links to source material for everything they talk about.

Check out how it should be done:

  https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-381-who-will-fact-check-the-fact-checkers/

  https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/who-says-children-should-not-be-vaccinated-nanobots-az-vax-has-protein-breakdown-blood-clots/

Note the organized sequential links to the source material, then at the bottom of the page a comments section so people can add to or challenge the information provided.

So you rarely look at fact checking sites because Corbett told you to just believe him instead.  Gotcha.

As Corbett said, these (usually B&M Gates Foundation funded) 'fact checkers' tend to rely heavily on straw-man arguments.  That is to say, take something ridiculous that someone (often one of their own operatives most likely) said and 'debunk' that.  They know damn well that 99% of people are just going to look at the color code thingy at the top.

I don't remember ever seeing an open comments section on any of the 'fact checks'.   Any source of information without an open comments section is very suspect to me, and I don't use them very much for actual information about critical or sensitive subjects.

One of the few times I actually looked to find information on a 'fact check' site was when someone who claimed to be the family doctor of Bill Gates' family said that the kids were sharp, healthy, and unvaccinated.  Did the 'fact checkers' even bother to get a statement from Gates?  Of course not.  They 'debunked' the story by pointing out that the doctor was not acting ethically by exposing private medical information.  Lol!  What a joke.

As Corbett said, these (usually B&M Gates Foundation funded) 'fact checkers' tend to rely heavily on straw-man arguments.  That is to say, take something ridiculous that someone (often one of their own operatives most likely) said and 'debunk' that.  They know damn well that 99% of people are just going to look at the color code thingy at the top.

I don't remember ever seeing an open comments section on any of the 'fact checks'.   Any source of information without an open comments section is very suspect to me, and I don't use them very much for actual information about critical or sensitive subjects.

One of the few times I actually looked to find information on a 'fact check' site was when someone who claimed to be the family doctor of Bill Gates' family said that the kids were sharp, healthy, and unvaccinated.  Did the 'fact checkers' even bother to get a statement from Gates?  Of course not.  They 'debunked' the story by pointing out that the doctor was not acting ethically by exposing private medical information.  Lol!  What a joke.

Someones done a very good job of keeping you from realizing that all the quotes and information these fact checkers publish include detailed sources.  (try clicking on the words that look a little different or have a little squiggly line underneath)

Yup.  It's a fall-out from 'classic' old-school pre-scientism concepts such as observation, research, and critical thinking.

Your average 'global citizen' would never think to ask about how the 'fact checkers' came into existence and who funds their pay-checks, much less what that means for their work product.  To most people, that they calling themselves 'fact checkers' makes it obvious that they are credible in checking facts.  As further proof, Google and Facebook use them!

https://www.corbettreport.com/who-will-fact-check-the-fact-checkers/

classic...

A lot of persons have been complaining about the side effects of the vaccine which the government have been  keeping quiet and debunking the reports of the media.

If the government has nothing to say on this without taken drastic measures to question the mode, ingredients and the constituents of the vaccine in order to get to the bottom of this. Then I think something is fishy here.

With almost 3 billion vaccinated and counting I have a feeling we're in for a lot of these "Vaccinated person died!!!11!111" threads, all chock full of nonsense.

---

classic...

One of the tools I use to ascertain the weight of a story is how fast the 'fact checkers' respond.  When they are on a story within a day, it indicates that there is a 'there there', and it is an important thing.

Tim Truth did a piece on this:

  https://www.bitchute.com/video/4CVmg3vR6Xr5/

Edit:  Here's an interesting one from the comments in Tim Truth's vid:  https://onemileatatime.com/news/american-airlines-canceling-hundreds-of-flights/

If the formal report says it wasn't the vaxx that killed them, then the report should state what it was that killed them. Did their planes crash? Car accidents getting to the airport? Gunned down by hijackers? You know... something.

Yeah, that was my point. But really there's not even an attempt to supply information in this instance, it's just a copy/pasted meme image with zero consideration of facts or evidence. Show me the data that demonstrates that the vaccine has the same mortality rate as the virus. If the evidence can't be supplied, then the graphic — which you might be tempted, erroneously, to believe is based on evidence — is actually baseless nonsense.

A scammer has a significant leg-up if the only allowable information about the scam must be authorized/authenticated by the scammers themselves.  Just say'n.

If that were true, then yes. One death per 10k Covid cases and one death per 10k vaccinations would mean that the vaccine is as deadly as the virus, and so is pointless.

The only thing is... your numbers aren't correct. Look at the data. How many people have died from Covid? How many have died from vaccination?
Take the UK as an example of a highly vaccinated country. ~130k Covid deaths. Vaccinations are currently at 108 per 100 people (because 2 shots are needed), so slightly more than one vaccination per person. Are you really suggesting (with zero evidence) that there have been 130k deaths in the UK due to the vaccine? That's absurd.

~

If the formal report says it wasn't the vaxx that killed them, then the report should state what it was that killed them. Did their planes crash? Car accidents getting to the airport? Gunned down by hijackers? You know... something.

FTFY
its only misleading when the actual report makes it clear that the deaths are not linked. but then some people make a mistake and say something slightly different. and then the whole special bus brigade jump on it without doing their own research

british airlines never said any of the 4 dies due to vaccines
yet the special bus brigade started rumours of misunderstanding and the idiots just went for it

Did the vaccinated pilots catch the COVID-19 virus again and die or ended up dead after vaccination?  

"they said, adding that none of the deaths was linked to vaccines."

Therefore, they confirmed that they're dead, but not from covid vaccine...

Title is misleading as always

Yeah, I did read it. I assumed it was a joke.

1. Someone makes an outrageous claim.
2. The claim is debunked by looking at the facts.

If someone makes a statement without being willing to supply evidence, then the statement is questionable.

If the response to any attempt to debunk the claim is that those debunking it are questionable, then there is no point in arguing anything; if you decide on a conclusion, and refuse to consider facts or evidence, and indeed consider facts to be merely an inconvenience that gets in the way of your pre-determined conclusion, when what's the point in attempting to have a discussion?


---

Edit: Also, feel free to ignore my post here.

Did you not read the post above yours? This is like the question which came first the chicken or the egg? I guess in this thread the chicken shit! tvbcof just said most "Fact Checkers" cover real stories up because that narrative hurts the usual suspects that profit and plunder at the expense of others....

One of the tools I use to ascertain the weight of a story is how fast the 'fact checkers' respond.  When they are on a story within a day, it indicates that there is a 'there there', and it is an important thing.

Basically, a fake story debunks itself in due course.  Not very threatening...but often very useful.  Many, if not most, fake stories are injected deliberately because they are useful in achieving certain goals.  'Going Viral' is a very useful marker for such a thing.

A real story is the real threat, and it's what the 'fact checkers' are funded to deal with.  It's not so much about 'debunking' something as it is 'setting the conversation'.  This is complex because there is not one unified 'conversation'.  There are many going on within many groups.  The complexity and value lays with influencing how and when these various 'conversations' will merge.

People should study Edward Bernays to see how deep this stuff goes, and it's surely become vastly more sophisticated since he exited the industry.  He was the nephew of Sigmund Freud, and is an uncle of the guy who runs Netflix with all of it's bizarre degeneracy, links to the Kushners, etc.  Talk about a family with a gift for mind-fucking 'the nations'!

I must say, it's much more efficient for you to debunk your owns posts like this. It saves us all the hassle of presenting the facts and evidence. Maybe you can just add "FACT CHECK: THIS IS FALSE" to each of these all-bold P&S threads? And presumably this particular thread can be closed now, as there's nothing more to say on the subject?

~

Online rumors have been circulating over the past few days that four British Airways pilots have died, and that British Airways is in “crisis talks” with the British government about these deaths. In attempting to dismiss this rumor, Reuters ran a fact check article that actually confirms the deaths of the four pilots.

Via Reuters:

The spokesperson, however, confirmed the authenticity of the four condolence books, as four company pilots had recently passed away. “Our thoughts are with their family and friends,” they said, adding that none of the deaths was linked to vaccines.

British Airways, like nearly all airlines, is aggressively pushing vaccines for both its employees (including pilots) and passengers. Earlier this year, for example, British Airways launched its own vaccine passport.

According to Reuters, there is no truth to the claim that British Airways is in “crisis talks” with the British government. However, if such crisis talks were taking place, they would no doubt be classified as a national security issue, so Reuters wouldn’t be told about this anyway. That doesn’t mean they are taking place, but if we’ve learned anything over the last 18 months, it’s that when the controlled corporate media “debunks” things related to covid, that usually means the claims are true.

Various videos, including the following video posted on Brighteon.com, covers the rumor that numerous vaccinated British Airways pilots have died and that British Airways is in “crisis talks.” Note that this video does not claim this is all confirmed, but classifies the claim as a “rumor.”

...