I agree with you on all of this. However, to be fair, Naomi Wolf is going through the Pfizer documents and not the military documents Sasha and Katherine are going through. I think she can only comment with the facts of Pfizer’s own data.
I agree with you on all of this. However, to be fair, Naomi Wolf is going through the Pfizer documents and not the military documents Sasha and Katherine are going through. I think she can only comment with the facts of Pfizer’s own data.
These questions are not going away. If investigators deny by omission that the Frankenshots are the work of the DoD, NSC and those who control them, then well, they are not really investigating.
I agree with you but they report on the findings they research so they can back it up. I don’t think Dr. wolf can go outside of her space and comment about the DoD even if she is guessing. She would need to watch for making accusations because they will sue you and you’ve got to be careful. She’s got the goods from Pfizer…watts and Latypova have the goods from the DoD docs. I don’t see anything wrong with all these experts working together and sharing their information and their findings. That’s all I’m saying. I’ve been in the legal field all my life and people will sue for anything and everything. All of them are great investigators and should all share with each other but it seems people are taking sides without realizing the legality of it.
"I don’t see anything wrong with all these experts working together and sharing their information and their findings"
Lets hope that happens.
Denial by omission is a real thing in the realm of news, media etc. and is powerful. The news is not a court of law, or no one would say anything at all.
Yes but you have to make sure you can back up your statements before going public…otherwise you can be held accountable if you have hearsay and not the actual proof of documentation. Again, with all due respect Dr. Naomi Wolf is being careful. She is not disputing any claims that Latypova and Watts are uncovering. They are all heros in my book.
"Yes but you have to make sure you can back up your statements before going public…otherwise you can be held accountable if you have hearsay and not the actual proof of documentation"
I don't think the 1st amendment mentions that you need proof of documentation before you say or print something.
I thought the standard for libel was higher than that, something like if you know something damaging is false and advertise it as if it were true then it could be defined as slander.
But I think what you're talking about is the threat of law-fare, just making someone pay for lawyers to defend themselves from spurious charges.
So it goes back to what I said before, if an investigator is afraid of lawfare then nobody would investigate. Which has pretty much been the case I guess in this monopolized world we live in.
But since this is World War 3, maybe people should not worry so much about lawfare.
I see your point here. I just think people have to be careful. I’m not trying to argue. I think all of them are doing what they set out to do. What I find striking is the back stabbing between these experts. It’s like one has to be on top of the other by downgrading the other. I can’t quite wrap my head around it. Yes…we have freedom of speech. They speak what they know from what they are observing from data. They have their own data. I’m out..I’m through…I said my peace. I’m sorry Naomi is not mimicking the two lady experts.
I agree with you on all of this. However, to be fair, Naomi Wolf is going through the Pfizer documents and not the military documents Sasha and Katherine are going through. I think she can only comment with the facts of Pfizer’s own data.
These questions are not going away. If investigators deny by omission that the Frankenshots are the work of the DoD, NSC and those who control them, then well, they are not really investigating.
I agree with you but they report on the findings they research so they can back it up. I don’t think Dr. wolf can go outside of her space and comment about the DoD even if she is guessing. She would need to watch for making accusations because they will sue you and you’ve got to be careful. She’s got the goods from Pfizer…watts and Latypova have the goods from the DoD docs. I don’t see anything wrong with all these experts working together and sharing their information and their findings. That’s all I’m saying. I’ve been in the legal field all my life and people will sue for anything and everything. All of them are great investigators and should all share with each other but it seems people are taking sides without realizing the legality of it.
"I don’t see anything wrong with all these experts working together and sharing their information and their findings"
Lets hope that happens.
Denial by omission is a real thing in the realm of news, media etc. and is powerful. The news is not a court of law, or no one would say anything at all.
Yes but you have to make sure you can back up your statements before going public…otherwise you can be held accountable if you have hearsay and not the actual proof of documentation. Again, with all due respect Dr. Naomi Wolf is being careful. She is not disputing any claims that Latypova and Watts are uncovering. They are all heros in my book.
"Yes but you have to make sure you can back up your statements before going public…otherwise you can be held accountable if you have hearsay and not the actual proof of documentation"
I don't think the 1st amendment mentions that you need proof of documentation before you say or print something.
I thought the standard for libel was higher than that, something like if you know something damaging is false and advertise it as if it were true then it could be defined as slander.
But I think what you're talking about is the threat of law-fare, just making someone pay for lawyers to defend themselves from spurious charges.
So it goes back to what I said before, if an investigator is afraid of lawfare then nobody would investigate. Which has pretty much been the case I guess in this monopolized world we live in.
But since this is World War 3, maybe people should not worry so much about lawfare.
I see your point here. I just think people have to be careful. I’m not trying to argue. I think all of them are doing what they set out to do. What I find striking is the back stabbing between these experts. It’s like one has to be on top of the other by downgrading the other. I can’t quite wrap my head around it. Yes…we have freedom of speech. They speak what they know from what they are observing from data. They have their own data. I’m out..I’m through…I said my peace. I’m sorry Naomi is not mimicking the two lady experts.
I don't want to make it sound like Latypova and Watt don't have proof for what they say, because I think they do.
I may be late to the party, but how is it that Naomi and Sasha and co are privy to these documents? Where do I get copies?