+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
"But I daresay you know him better" and "I rather think your faith in him is chronically misplaced"... Jesus Christ, Organ. You're no longer sounding a bit like Gluey, you are Gluey. You cannot answer the question so you're trying to start another argument/narrative about my views on Bill Gates, even though I haven't given them to you. Nice try though.
All I've done throughout this exchange is ask for you to tell me why you were concerned about Gates calling Covid-19 'Pandemic 1'. I first asked what you were implying and you said "you should be more concerned about what Bill Gates is implying". I asked what he was implying and you haven't given a straight answer. I asked why you're concerned about his terminology and so far you've far responded...
because it's not the first pandemic
nobody else calls it that
he's a globalist
he said final solution in an interview
And now it's becsuse he was friends with Epstein.
None of which give an answer as to why you're concerned about him using the term "Pandemic 1".
Just admit that you don't know why it concerns you... Probably because it doesn't concern you in the slightest and you just hope there's something there for which you can show to people and say "the bad man is a globalist".
I'm not sure you even believe half of the shit you post... but you've gone too far down the rabbit hole to give up now. Bit of a sunken cost fallacy about it, all eh?
I won't respond if you reply to this as you are welcome to the final word.
I don't believe you can possibly be as naive as you present and I'm not falling for your convoluted spiel again because it's Mission Impossible for you to question the character and judgement of your hero Bill Gates whatever I or the New York Times says.
"Your hero"! That's another one!
Is there an online course you all take, or something?
One of the finer uses of "your hero" was gluey saying that TBG's hero was Michael Avenatti, despite TBG never having had any sort of conversation about him.
THAT'S how to do it, Organ. You have a lot to learn, grasshopper, but you've made fantastic progress in the last month. Keep it up!
That was just one ice crystal on the tip of a very large iceberg of course and I gave up on trying to have a rational debate with you-know-who a long time ago as it's impossible to counter sheer fantasy and misreprentations of what we have stated on here - and all attempts to come up with evidence to back up his nonsensical accusations were totally fruitless and for obvious reasons.
As for people stating that a person can be judged by the company they are photographed with: I think we have to be a bit more canny than that whoever we are talking about. Famous people will be photographed possibly thousands of times in the course of a year and with people across the human spectrum - and a snap at a function, party or gathering isn't necessarily great evidence of the nature of the relationship with someone else per se.
I'd agree with your second paragraph ordinarily but as you're often dim where context requires a modicum of thought then I'll spell it out for you. Gates chose to become a pal of Epstein after Epstein became a convicted sex offender.
Prince Andrew was a chum of Epstein before he was convicted of a sex crime. He remained so following his conviction. It's why his character and judgement have also been questioned.
Imagine starting the thread plandemic and still expecting to get taken seriously
I don't know why I'm surprised that he'd say that, even after I called him out for doing it in the previous post.
Tied himself up in knots about being "concerned" about Gates calling Covid-19 'Pandemic 1' and then couldn't give a simple answer as to why he felt that way... so descended into deflection and pretending I was defending Gates instead.
Definitely Gluey tactics of debate. Bizarre.
Yesterday I was listening to newscast, a BBC podcast (yep, organ you're going to love this one) and they were talking with people who had taken the first trials of a covid vaccine at (I think) Oxford.
One of the subjects (normal guy, not at the university) said he wasn't scared as they'd been researching it for years. Obviously he meant vaccines in general, maybe other coronaviruses. But the way he said it could be interpreted that covid 19 had been known of for years.
So go get it organ! Put it in your binder of evidence! Have that one for free.
What I don’t get about the him calling it pandemic 1, is if it really was this big “plandemic” why would he be saying the in a public interview?
It’s like the bedroom dwellers either think he’s clever enough to enact this plan but then dense enough to let slip in a televised interview or do they think he’s giving them a little clue on purpose?
I think the scientists should move aside its all be sorted on yer
State on these chumps.....
https://twitter.com/tom___scott/stat...642315777?s=21
France limits what Amazon may deliver to citizens locked down in their homes.
https://www.jurist.org/news/2020/04/...on-deliveries/
28 international studies are consistently confirming that SMOKERS are protected from the Chinese flu
UCL reviewed 28 studies from China, US, France, South Korea and the UK
It found smokers were less common than expected among COVID-19 patients.
One expert said 'something weird is going on with smoking and coronavirus'.
More: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...its-weird.html
Yeah it's odd to still see that being used. I didn't think the Mail (even them) would still use it, although Organ has made it look like it's from the Mail in the way he wrote that. It's very journalistic. So I put the opening sentence in google.
There were only two hits. One was Organ's post, and the other was to a forum called godlikeproductions. That name rang a bell. Just over a week ago Organ himself described the forum like this:
"I had followed the saga at another forum - godlikeproductions - which I've visited most days for donkey's years. It's a self-styled conspiracy/nutters/crazies board which is excellent for breaking news stories and is always very busy. I knew from the outset it was the opposite of what it portrayed itself as. It's real purpose is to spread fear and fake propaganda at every turn. It's also a honeytrap which is why I have never created an account there to post a message.
The coronavirus thread there which caught my attention is still active and stretches to almost 9,000 pages, believe it or not, and there's been, at a guess, 10,000 other threads on the same subject. It went all in on coronavirus hysteria before corporate media did later. "
So why would someone copy and paste from a forum that they describe as a "conspiracy/nutters/crazies board" whose "real purpose is to spread fear and fake propaganda at every turn"? Your guess is as good as mine.
Also, 14,000 posts in four years, can't be many more active posters on here than that; a good proportion of those are baiting.
Lifeonmars, you said I was being hypocritical in the trump thread. You got that wrong because you misinterpreted the post quite badly, but this is far closer to hypocrisy.