Iranian woman protest against lslamization of Europa:
“We escaped from lslamists in Iran, we mustn’t tolerate persecution of women in Germany.
It’s Terrible for us who escaped from persecution by lslamists!”
Elon Musk is the gold standard for what a super-rich person should actually do to solve humanity’s biggest problems:
/ identify critical bottlenecks, pour in massive capital and talent, execute at lightspeed, and deliver real technological leaps instead of just writing checks to feel-good foundations /
- SpaceX for making life multi-planetary and advancing civilization
- Tesla for sustainable energy and autonomy
- xAI for understanding the universe and truth-seeking AI
- X for restoring the public square and free speech
- The Boring Company for solving traffic via underground infrastructure
- Neuralink for merging brains with AI
- Starlink for global connectivity
His purchase of X alone, securing free expression and the public square, was a priceless gift to humankind, and disproportionately for the poor.
The year is 1949.
The Nobel Prize in Medicine has just gone to the man who invented the lobotomy. Your doctor suggests one for your sister, who has not been herself since the baby came. It is the most celebrated advance in psychiatry of the age, and he is simply current. By the time the prize curdles into an embarrassment, close to twenty thousand Americans have had the operation, and proportionally more here in Britain.
The year is 1956.
Lay the baby down on his front, the doctor says. So does the most trusted childcare book ever written, the one on every new mother's shelf. On his back he might choke, the reasoning goes. Millions obey. The advice holds for nearly thirty years, long after the evidence has quietly turned, and a generation of cot deaths is counted before anyone thinks to roll the babies over.
The year is 1966.
A bestselling book informs your wife that menopause is a disease, that she is, in the author's word, a castrate, and that a small daily pill will keep her youthful and tolerable to live with. Her doctor agrees. The drug becomes one of the most prescribed in the country. Nobody mentions that the author sat on the payroll of the company that made it. That detail surfaces decades later, in the same year the landmark trial is halted early for raising rates of breast cancer, stroke and clots.
The year is 1979.
Your ulcer is caused by stress and sharp food, the doctor explains. Calm down, drink milk, take the antacid that happens to be the best-selling medicine on earth. Two Australians are about to prove that most ulcers are caused by a bacterium and cured by a fortnight of antibiotics. The profession laughs. One of them eventually drinks a beaker of the stuff to settle the matter. The establishment takes the better part of twenty years to stop laughing. The Nobel lands in 2005.
The year is 1985.
Butter is dangerous, the doctor says. Switch to margarine, it is modern, it is heart-healthy, the experts are united. The spread he nudges you toward is loaded with trans fats, which the next decade will identify as the genuinely dangerous one, and which will eventually be banned outright. The butter goes quietly back in the fridge. No correction is ever printed at the volume of the original warning.
The year is 1992.
There is a pyramid on the surgery wall, and the very same one in your grandchild's classroom. Bread, cereal, rice and pasta form the broad virtuous base, up to eleven servings a day. Fat is exiled to the tiny tip. The chart was reportedly held back a year while the relevant industries had their say. It is wrong at the bottom and wrong at the top.
Now it is today.
Your doctor has new guidelines, new studies, a fresh consensus, delivered with precisely the steady confidence of every guideline above. He believes it, and he has good reason to. So did every doctor in this thread. None of them were villains. Each was sincere, most were kind, and all were certain, reading from a map that somebody else had drawn and handed them. That is the part worth sitting with.
So when the man in the white coat tells you what to eat, what to fear, and what to swallow every morning for the rest of your life, you are allowed to ask. Who paid for the study. What the evidence says beneath the headline. What he was just as certain about thirty years ago, and where that advice sits now.
Then make up your own mind. Call it scepticism, or call it whatever your grandmother called it when she ignored the advert, kept the butter where it was, and lived to ninety-one.
It has outlasted every consensus on this list. It will outlast this one too.
@FinalTelegraph I agree with N.I. people's frustration with unfettered immigration. I think they are doing a disservice to their cause by being destructive AND wearing black with face masks. That's the same thing as ANTIFA and other commie groups do, and it doesn't draw supporters; it alienates
@GOP_is_Gutless Another stupid post with an intentionally misleading statement about how the interaction took place. This amicable exchange has no gotcha moment. Block on its way.
Americans "are all immigrants who were fleeing from…dictatorship, tyranny, socialism," says @DanielDiMartino.
That history makes their descendants "not only willing to take more risks, but also willing to defend their liberties."
Here’s what else makes America successful:
The Muslim Brotherhood states they'll impose Sharia Law in America
"through the ballot box 🗳️ or bullet;
there is no between."
Do you hear them saying they'll take over our country through elections or murder?
It’s time to declare Islam is a
National Security threat; agreed?
@PeterSweden7 Again, I find it necessary to remind people how despicable the head of the Supreme Governor of the Anglican Church is; he is leading the Church and its people into the new Caliphate.
@RedWavePress I want to see the UK people throw out their corrupt king and politicians for the harm they have caused the commoners. Rallying and voting against them, yes, but burning homes or businesses will work against that cause.
The Justice Department has released new guidelines that find the EEOC’s use of “disparate impact” is unconstitutional.
Good.
Disparate impact is a woke legal doctrine that’s rewritten American standards: