Hacker News Reader

Comment by didjathinkmess | Hacker News Reader

>Does HN have a policy against straight-up actual false, scaremongering COVID public health statements like the "I know many people with long-term VACCINE complications. Get the Vaccine and you will suffer for it" one?

Unfortunately no. They also allow straight-up actual false, scaremongering COVID public health statements like the "I know many people with long-term COVID complications. Get the vaccine or you will suffer from them".

See the problem? They could both be false, or they could both be true. But if they're both true, what your suggesting is the censorship of not misinformation, but the actual account of a real life vaccine injury.

View on HN

> or they could both be true.

The could not. One of them, the first one, is at variance with reality. Read it again, they did not claim a real life vaccine injury, they claimed "many people", "long term" and also "it will happen to you". This is, I repeat, nonsense.

>they did not claim a real life vaccine injury, they claimed "many people

Ok here you go..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxqC9SiRh8

The community of people injured by the vaccine, mentioned in the video.

https://www.c19vaxreactions.com/

First is politician who is known for ... "scoring partisan political points" on this topic to put it mildly https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/ron-john...

Second, IIRC is a clearing house for self-reporting unverified claims. Not a group of people that OP personally knows.

Basically a big old nothingburger, thanks for wasting 5 minutes our time.

Wait. What is your point exactly? The people in the first video are paid actors...or something?

Also, a question to everyone who come across this.

Do you think the people in the first video, who took part in trials and suffered injuries, deserve medical/financial support from the government or the companies who did the trials?

Ron Johnsons' nonsense is dangerous and nonsense.

Do you doubt the legitimacy of people in the first video?

Yeah. The original claim by parent commenter is "I know many people with long-term VACCINE complications".

What that seems to translate to is "I regurgitate propaganda videos and claim that they're my first-hand knowledge"

Which is pretty sad, TBH.

> my first-hand knowledge

Why do it need to be first hand knowledge, if it is legitimate?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28022905

I did not say that it needs to be first hand knowledge, I said that they claimed first-hand knowledge.

Why did they claim first-hand knowledge? because immediacy feels more convincing. A story in first person is more visceral. Why did they feel the need to "make it more convincing" like that? it's a tell.

> I said that they claimed first-hand knowledge.

I don't think they did.

I think that is the clear implication of "I know many people", not "I know of", but "I know".

The phrasing is intended to give the feeling of immediacy.

Oh, you are right. They did seem to claim it. But I am not sure how they can prove it in an online forum..

Yes. 100% doubt.

I see.

Look, for me it does not add up. I mean, what is their end game? If the whole thing gains public support and popularity, which we have to assume their intention is, the people in the video can be easily followed up and their claims validated (I am pretty sure the opposition would love to do it, which would be also quite easy). Which will ultimately backfire on themselves, which make it unlikely to be their (at least the senator's) endgame..

So what is it?

Also, why is there no fact check that "debunks" the whole thing?

> Which will ultimately backfire on themselves, which make it unlikely to be their (at least the senator's) endgame..

Will it? Are you sure? US media is now so polarised that the various echo-chambers almost never intersect. The US right anti-covid train has been going for an appallingly long time, why would it stop now due to mere facts. There have been facts all long, that hasn't made a difference. To that topic or others that I could name.

> Also, why is there no fact check that "debunks" the whole thing?

Are you sure that there isn't? Have you looked? I linked to an article "debunking" the same character, upthread. I know their name and their position, but I do not follow all their antics: Circus clowns gonna circus clown. It's not on me to research a debunking of that specific performance.

>Will it? Are you sure?

Pretty sure. Why do you think the opposition won't take care of it?

>Are you sure that there isn't?

It would help if you ignore the politician in it. I am taking about the actual people in the first video, who claim to have suffered AEFIs.

> Why do you think the opposition won't take care of it?

As I said above, recent track record. This is not a thing that we see happening, so why would it start happening now? Do you not think that the media spheres are disjoint, as I said above?

> I am taking about the actual people in the first video, who claim to have suffered AEFIs.

So then, are you sure that there isn't a fact check that "debunks" that? Have you looked?

> This is not a thing that we see happening,

I asked a specific question about opposition not interested in "debunking" the "dubious" claims of those people organized by the senator. You seem to be talking about some "anti-covid train".

So may be it will help if you address my question.

> Have you looked?

https://www.wisn.com/article/sen-ron-johnson-holding-milwauk...

Does not mention or doubt the legitimacy of the victims of AEFI.

>is at variance with reality.

Also, what does this mean? Please explain.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com