| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I can only think of three other people still kicking who can match his impeccable globalist credentials: George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Henry Kissinger.
If you wish to carry on underplaying who Gates is and who he knocks about with and the significance of what he states publicly then that's your prerogative. But assuming you're not pulling my leg then I must say you're taking normalcy bias to an absurd level.
I'm not positive but believe he gave the interview embedded in the video below within the past week. In it he repeats that he thinks a COVID-19 (AKA Pandemic 1 in his and your world) vaccine is a year or two away. I'm positive that what he says at 2:28 will be spun by you as an innocent error rather than as a Freudian slip.
This time next year, rodders.Originally Posted by Heisenberg
We're always just on the verge of something terrible, aren't we? It's just round the corner, it's gonna happen, it's gonna happen.
And when something terrible actually does happen, like a global pandemic, there was never a sniff of it. Even though it was all apparently deliberate. They are the ones that are kept quiet enough to evade the sofa detectives. Isn't it funny?
That's a lot of words to say you don't really know why you're concerned about Gates calling it Pandemic 1, but you're going to say that you're concerned (without giving a reason) just in case it somehow becomes a bigger deal in the future (spoiler alert: it won't).
Lardy is right, you're definitely echoing Gluey now by saying things like "AKA Pandemic 1 in his and your world" - why do you feel the need to lie about what I've said about it, only Gates has used that term and I have already said that I couldn't give a shit what he calls it.
All you had to say was the word 'Globalist' in your original response to get to the real nitty gritty of why you want this 'Pandemic 1' nonsense to be 'something'. Give it a rest, mate. It's not healthy to want something to be real when it's patently not. Genuinely, how much time, effort, and your mental health goes in to trying to uncover something that doesn't exist - just for the possibility (no matter how slim) that you can go "ha! I told you that conspiracies are real and globalists are real" etc etc etc.
Instead of answering the question for a third time you've now gone full tinfoil too. The "final solution" quote you've pointed to... That's incredibly dangerous and distasteful of you to imply something related to the Holocaust (which you have said didn't really happen) is equated to Gates funding a vaccine.
You're wrong about me saying that it was an error or Freudian slip by him. I think he's talking literally about a way to conquer the virus, as I'm not the type of person to perpetuate conspiracies and be wrong about them... Which you are, literally all of the time when you talk about this type of nonsense.
Don't think there's anything more to say, to be honest. Even when you're proven to be wrong you can't admit it and you come back with another conspiracy more incredible than the last.
Very funny... but also very depressing, in my opinion.
It seems we will have to agree to disagree.
I mentioned Gates' affiliations. You are judged by the company you keep is an old phrase.
Another of his was Jeffrey Epstein. As The New York Times noted with surprise: 'And unlike many others, Mr. Gates started the relationship after Mr. Epstein was convicted of sex crimes.'
Here's the article complete with a photo of Gates stood next to Epstein, his nonce friend. I rather think your faith in him is chronically misplaced, but I daresay you will know better.
Bill Gates Met With Jeffrey Epstein Many Times, Despite His Past: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/b...ill-gates.html
"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.
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?
And if the media are in on it too, which they definitely are because that's how the mouth breathing masses are brainwashed, why didn't they do him the courtesy of editing out his slip?
I think the scientists should move aside its all be sorted on yer
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.
Anybody who fell for the Kavanagh hoax needs to take a good look at themselves.
I made a general comment about just photographs not being sufficient evidence in themselves. If there is other corroborative evidence that is a different thing altogether. By the way, I will refrain from personally insulting you if you didn't understand that.
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
What's 'the Chinese flu'?
Careful Organ the watchers will pour over your every comma and comment, and swoop in as some super hero of political correctness, oh to have all that time on ones hands .
Quick tip: this type of fishing works better when you quote a relevant post to what you're baiting.
Very poor effort.
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.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote