FDA Asks Court To Delay First 55K Batch Of COVID Docs

a reply to: v1rtu0s0
I think the same court should require docs on the event 201 exercise (hypothesis) to be compared with fda measures.

Suspicion the two follow the same off the rails approach is strong.
🙏❤

Is ivm mentioned in either?

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Does anybody here have even the remotest idea of how long it takes to prepare 55,000 documents for release, or how chronically under funded and under staffed the departments that process these documents are.

There's no conspiracy here, there's just a bunch of over stretched people who can't make a deadline, and whose neck will be on the block if they accidentally release the names of a bunch of kids or something.

This is drug trial info
NOTHING has to be "prepared "
IT IS NOT A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE

originally posted by: Lemon1234
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Does anybody here have even the remotest idea of how long it takes to prepare 55,000 documents for release, or how chronically under funded and under staffed the departments that process these documents are.


It just took a couple of seconds to do 1 page.

So just to be clear, are you on board with the decades they requested for releasing the data?

The Pfizer and FDA.

What a strange team.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Can always count on the zombie to rush to the defense of our government/corporate overlords. You are a bottomless pit of BS. No matter how much you shovel, you've got plenty more for another day.

Oh, and I guarantee none of "citations in your signature line" back up anything you wrote.

Should this all be electronic?

I dont believe for a second, they dont have it on a computer and all their claims about time needed are absurd.

a reply to: Lemon1234

If they us a.i to redact names, even faster.. considering those documents are already on a Computer.. it's not like they are hand written..

a reply to: Justoneman

It should have been released when the shots were first given out.The answer is no ,it shouldn't remain hidden.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Well to be fair to the reviewers, lots of papers are intentionally convoluted and use 50 cent words that don't really mean sh@@, to mislead and confuse people to what is really going on.

Or is it so they can find ways to convolute and 50 cent words so they can mislead and confuse people to what is really going on.

What do they need to "review"? This isn't a stealth hypersonic program. Literally just release it. The point is for the public to see the tomfackery in full glory.

The lack of shill and troll responses besides you know who (that I already shutdown) shows you there's no defending this one.

Soooo.... they only have 28 censors...er... reviewers to remove potentially damning admissions from the documents?

originally posted by: jwal5150
Soooo.... they only have 28 censors...er... reviewers to remove potentially damning admissions from the documents?

Yes, uncountable sums of money aren't enough to hire more than 28 people. Who if they did a page per minute would only have to work 1 hour a day to do 55,000 pages in a month.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

It will reveal just how deadly the vaxx was. How much harm they'll do to people in the years to come. They just don't want that out yet until Biden is rambling around in Happy Acres rest home and sanitarium.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Does anybody here have even the remotest idea of how long it takes to prepare 55,000 documents for release, or how chronically under funded and under staffed the departments that process these documents are.

Let me guess you're going with 75 years because there is no conspiracy anywhere they simply do not exist?

Am I right?

You should be fired for this one.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Every time someone on the trial had some kind of reaction that might have been due to the vax it would have generated a whole load of documents, which would need to be searched through to ensure that no identifiable personal information was in them.

a reply to: underpass61

OK, then tell me, how long will it take 28 people to release all of those documents. Do the math.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Lemon1234
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Does anybody here have even the remotest idea of how long it takes to prepare 55,000 documents for release, or how chronically under funded and under staffed the departments that process these documents are.


It just took a couple of seconds to do 1 page.

So just to be clear, are you on board with the decades they requested for releasing the data?

They didn't ask for decades, they asked for protection from malicious requests. The figure was an estimate of how long it would take that team of people to process all of those documents in batches of 50,000.

Add to this the fact that they're not simply releasing batches of documents, they're processing specific FOIA requests. Each request might require them to process and then compile thousands of documents form a dozen different sources. That's not a simple task, and if they miss out a single relevant document by accident people like you will scream that it was a conspiracy.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: underpass61

OK, then tell me, how long will it take 28 people to release all of those documents. Do the math.

I just did the math and you disappeared after getting owned.

If I was your boss at whatever agency you work for I'd fire you because you do such a bad job that what you're doing has the opposite effect of what you're trying to achieve.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: underpass61

OK, then tell me, how long will it take 28 people to release all of those documents. Do the math.

I just did the math and you disappeared after getting owned.

I notice that you said that you did the math, but haven't actually included the math.

Feel free to post it here.