(04-11-2024, 06:38 AM)TheRedneck Wrote: I don't doubt any of this.

Let's face it, governments all across the globe are in need of money. The reasons may be overspending, skimming by politicians, poor monetary policy, excessive public services... but the result, whatever the reason, is the same: they need money.

Governments have one and only one source of income: taxes. Governments do not make products; governments do not provide services for profit. They survive by taxation. This is not necessarily a bad thing in all cases, as government is indeed, as it has been characterized many times, a "necessary evil." There will always be those individuals in society who prefer to cheat, swindle, and even harm others for personal gain, and thus there must be some rule of law, enforced by an "ultimate authority," to prevent such for a thriving society to exist.

The problem is, all authority on the planet is through people, potentially the same people who would prefer to cheat, swindle, and harm others for personal gain. Democracy is intended to combat that potential, by spreading the ultimate power of choosing government officials via power spread amongst the population equally. However, recent years have shown a flaw in that check on power: people who are uneducated in human nature are likely to be swayed in large numbers to elect the wrong people to power.

The politicians and power brokers know all this. They didn't get to where they are by some stroke of luck or being born with a silver spoon. They understand human behavior and know how to manipulate it. That's how they attain and maintain their power base. That power base is then used to obtain large sums of money, which further solidifies their power, which further enhances their ability to obtain money. Wash, rinse, repeat a few times and we have a society where government now operates for the sole benefit of government, using the people being governed as a resource for personal gain.

We (should) all know this already.

So when a government needs money, they have only one source from which to draw it: taxes. There is a limit, however... too much taxation implemented too quickly or causing too much suffering among the population will result in an overthrow of said government. This can be violent as in a revolution, or it can me peaceful as in through the ballot box. So now we're looking at a limit on how much a government can tax and still remain in power. How to avoid that? Simple... the same way we as individuals avoid such issues: cut costs where they can be easily cut and put that savings toward things that are wanted.

The largest single expenditure for almost any government is elder care. Even the USA, with its astronomical military budget, spends more on services to the elderly that it does on defense. Other countries, most of which have more services and less military expenditures, have relatively even greater differentials. With health care costs rising quickly due to kickbacks from pharmaceuticals/administrators, and increased greed from insurers and providers, it has become a huge problem. Socialized retirement, such as Social Security in the USA, is no longer a hole in the financial bucket... it is a missing bottom.

Removing such services is out of the question; that would immediately result in the ousting of the present government and the politicians know this. They also know that the elderly are living longer than ever before and thus costing more than ever before. So the answer is: stop them from living longer.

Obviously, this cannot be a publicly known agenda. That would be worse than cutting services!

So we have policies to literally promote death among those who do not generate a taxable income and instead cost the government. COVID-19 vaccines were one method: ineffective, but at the same time damaging to the heart muscle and the immune system. This immediately kills off the present elderly and weakens the healthy so they cannot live as long. I have already mentioned that elsewhere. However, it does not address those who are not elderly and yet are unable to provide a taxable income for themselves... the infirm and mentally incapacitated. For them, more is needed. Even with the vaccine, they can live a "new normal" lifespan and cannot contribute to the tax base, Instead, they are a drain on the tax base. But, if we can make it easier for them to commit suicide, under the guise of alleviating pain or distress, we can also eliminate them while establishing a narrative of compassion and caring.

That's what is being done here. expect the call for assisted suicide to increase dramatically in the near future in the USA. Other countries are regularly used as a testing ground; the USA has more than its fair share of tough, independent thinkers even today, plus there's that pesky Constitution to get in the way. We may have the most powerful government in the world today, but we also are the hardest country to control. We are the last to be humbled.

That doesn't mean it can't happen, though. Watch your backs, everyone.

TheRedneck

(04-11-2024, 10:47 PM)TheRedneck Wrote: Assisted suicide is a precarious subject for me. On one hand, I can understand that a person can be in such pain with such little hope of relief that death can be a blessing. Far be it from me to deny someone that relief. However, I remain concerned about the extent that assistance can go. I cannot trust any profession or any government to always have the best interests of the individual at heart. Too often, people can be talked into things they would not have accepted had they known the full story. In the case of assisted suicide, that error is absolutely irreversible. There must IMO be such safeguards so no one is ever convinced by others to end their own life. Ever. So who do we trust to ensure those safeguards are met? The government? I think not. The medical profession? Possibly, but it too is operated by fallible humans. The next of kin? That sounds good, but the allure of inheritance has been used as an excuse by many already to wish death upon a loved one.

(04-11-2024, 10:47 PM)TheRedneck Wrote: ...

(03-16-2024, 02:13 AM)Kenzo Wrote: Some of you may have heard about this past years . Quite a horror story to me , and another big scandal is the silence ....i have not seen anyone got punishment , or even got to court in this matter . Is this behaviour allready normalized ? no big deal at all ?  Just kill off elderly in care homes by lethal injections/ drugs ?

Deeply troubling issue in society .


Tens of Thousands of Elderly Secretly Euthanized to Boost ‘Covid Deaths’

Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID-19 Pandemic


 

(03-16-2024, 02:13 AM)Kenzo Wrote: Some of you may have heard about this past years . Quite a horror story to me , and another big scandal is the silence ....i have not seen anyone got punishment , or even got to court in this matter . Is this behaviour allready normalized ? no big deal at all ?  Just kill off elderly in care homes by lethal injections/ drugs ?

Deeply troubling issue in society .


Tens of Thousands of Elderly Secretly Euthanized to Boost ‘Covid Deaths’

Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID-19 Pandemic

(04-12-2024, 11:48 PM)IdeomotorPrisoner Wrote: Isn't this drug a benzodiazepine?

Similar to Alprazolam (Xanax).

I thought it was part of the surgery prep cocktail? Or pallative care cocktail.

I hate these articles because they callously take things out of context. Midazolam, as an end of life drug, is combined with opiates for suffering experienced by that of terminal cancer patients,or someone in hospice.

It's adding insult to the effect covid had on the elderly, especially those in convalescent or pallative care, to suggest any civilized country euthanizes the elderly.

I believe there is some semblance of the hippocratic oath not only left in medicine but service of the greater good as well.

It's just too easy and boring to be paranoid of boogeymen these days.

As messed up as this is to say, I'm sure they were already dying from the Covid infection spike, and the increased scripts just reflect the number of Elderly given pleasure drugs to go as comfortable as possible.

(04-13-2024, 12:20 AM)Kenzo Wrote: The plan itself, using those drugs to elderly and with big doses does not make any sense at all, unless the plan is to end their life.

(04-13-2024, 07:12 AM)ArMaP Wrote: Big doses? The doses mentioned on the NHS PDF you linked to are normal, according to all the information I can find about Midazolam.

(04-13-2024, 09:12 AM)Kenzo Wrote: Would you want to start taking strong sedatives when you have respiratory insufficiency ,breathlessness ,pneumonia ?

(04-14-2024, 06:26 AM)ArMaP Wrote: Being an asthmatic for the last 56 years my answer is: it depends.

Breathing is a natural thing, you don't have to be awake to do it. Being sedated reduces (or stops, depending on the dosage) the stress related to being able to breath (and let me tell you that that stress is not nice, you feel you are going to die at any minute).

But if the person needs to be alert enough to, for example, call a nurse, then the dosage should be lower.

It all depends on the person deciding what to give the patient in each case.

(04-14-2024, 09:56 AM)Kenzo Wrote: it`s part of the  drug cocktail they use to execute people in some US states  for that same reason, it aid the process of killing .