 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We were warned about GPS trackers in Covid vaccines too "Is that why many have reported a ringing in their ears since getting one. Radio signals/transmissions? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want . "Ooh, can I? Cool. Ya mad bastard!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remember to never look up because, Google Earth. " That's a new one on me 
OK I lead a sheltered life  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want .
Ooh, can I? Cool.
Ya mad bastard! "Still no regrets how you acted like a facist nutter during covid then ? Hey ho | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want .
Ooh, can I? Cool.
Ya mad bastard!
Still no regrets how you acted like a facist nutter during covid then ? Hey ho
"What does my face have to do with it?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want . "I love this post most of all. A real treasure. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want .
I love this post most of all. A real treasure."And 100 %! Accurate No wonder you love it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nearly every night a big white orb rises out the ground and goes across the sky, it changes shape regularly and every month it is taken offline, presumably to download all the biometric data it has scanned us all for as it is clearly Kier Starmer who has made it to spy on us all and steal our biometric details. The local police told me it is called the moon. I refuse to live in such a police state and every night I go out to my local park and I declare repeatedly and loudly that I refuse to give permission for the moon to scan my details and let the government spy on me. I have even written a disclaimer on my front door declaring this. My wife left me last month, she is clearly part of the police state. " What you didn't realise is that she was a security android, planted by the state to monitor you! Don't look up at the sky!   | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I´ve done my research AKA watched some bloke on you tube and found out the birds arent real! There was a genocide of birds by the deep state and they were all replaced with bird drones. When you see them on lampposts - theyre recharging. IF IT FLIES IT SPIES! "This is true, in the first Lord of the Rings film there were crows that were spies! There were no lampposts there though, I wonder how they recharged? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I´ve done my research AKA watched some bloke on you tube and found out the birds arent real! There was a genocide of birds by the deep state and they were all replaced with bird drones. When you see them on lampposts - theyre recharging. IF IT FLIES IT SPIES! "That was thirty years ago... you're out of date! They use insect size flying drones with cameras now! Be afraid, be very afraid! Big Brother is alive and well and is living in your house and place of work!!!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want .
I love this post most of all. A real treasure.
And 100 %! Accurate
No wonder you love it. "Aww that’s very cute. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? " Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! " I blame the food additives myself  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! I blame the food additives myself "I blame free thinkers and Common sense | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! I blame the food additives myself
I blame free thinkers and Common sense "Met a lot of ´free thinkers´thru and ex and they were the most gullible take any random persons word as gospel.No scepticism in any of them just very black n white thinking and research´ is a lot harder than watching a yt vid or reading the light paper. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! I blame the food additives myself
I blame free thinkers and Common sense "I really like the suggestion that the conspiracy theorists who have all downloaded their ideas from websites and other people are “free thinkers”. The suggestion that being overly credulous and lacking critical thinking faculties is “free” is truly excellent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! I blame the food additives myself
I blame free thinkers and Common sense
I really like the suggestion that the conspiracy theorists who have all downloaded their ideas from websites and other people are “free thinkers”.
The suggestion that being overly credulous and lacking critical thinking faculties is “free” is truly excellent. "Free thinking is an asset but.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! I blame the food additives myself
I blame free thinkers and Common sense
I really like the suggestion that the conspiracy theorists who have all downloaded their ideas from websites and other people are “free thinkers”.
The suggestion that being overly credulous and lacking critical thinking faculties is “free” is truly excellent.
Free thinking is an asset but...."…but those who tend to describe themselves as free thinkers seem to do so because they spend their time thinking things that everyone else has already thought about, but dismissed as obviously nonsense and moved onto more nuanced and less fantastical things long before the free thinkers had even moved on from their last conspiracy theory. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not actually a scanner it's Keir's arse mooning us all every night ready to take a dump all over us" It can't be Keir's arse as it would be attached to Raynor's tongue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? Excitingly some people do. It makes me very happy to see the diversity in human thought. We are a rich and varied bunch! I blame the food additives myself
I blame free thinkers and Common sense
I really like the suggestion that the conspiracy theorists who have all downloaded their ideas from websites and other people are “free thinkers”.
The suggestion that being overly credulous and lacking critical thinking faculties is “free” is truly excellent.
Free thinking is an asset but....
…but those who tend to describe themselves as free thinkers seem to do so because they spend their time thinking things that everyone else has already thought about, but dismissed as obviously nonsense and moved onto more nuanced and less fantastical things long before the free thinkers had even moved on from their last conspiracy theory."THANKYOU!
The ´free thinkers´i´ve met thru an ex of mine were closed minded as f...
It was always THEIR truth or nothing at all.
Very black and white thinking,no room for nuance and grey area and in my experience also a huuuuge dollop of i´m specialor the very smart arse term - awake,i know thing´s you sheep dont.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Nearly every night a big white orb rises out the ground and goes across the sky, it changes shape regularly and every month it is taken offline, presumably to download all the biometric data it has scanned us all for as it is clearly Kier Starmer who has made it to spy on us all and steal our biometric details. The local police told me it is called the moon. I refuse to live in such a police state and every night I go out to my local park and I declare repeatedly and loudly that I refuse to give permission for the moon to scan my details and let the government spy on me. I have even written a disclaimer on my front door declaring this. My wife left me last month, she is clearly part of the police state. " Think Starmer is bad? On recent visit to Svalbard, Norway, the orb was visible for a full 24 hours. So that’s around the clock surveillance & information harvesting. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. " It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want . "I wouldn’t take the piss. The Covid vaccine turned me into a 5G mast and now everyone wants to use me as a hotspot. When I went to my friend’s wedding, the reception was brilliant. No, I wouldn’t take the piss at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You think the moon is bad, you should see Uranus. " Has anyone penetrated the mysteries of Uranus? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" This is true, in the first Lord of the Rings film there were crows that were spies! There were no lampposts there though, I wonder how they recharged?" There was no electricity. The birds were clockwork. Note the jerky way they flew. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. " In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want . "I agree with you, but Australia was one of the worst places to impose the covid jabs without consent! One of the most dictatorial governments. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? " The New England medical journal (about as lefty and pro-censorship as it's possible to be) just published a study showing the covid jabs reduced human immunity, and coincided with a massive worldwide upsurge in TB, rickets and other nasties. So keep bleating like a sheep if you wish, but we were fucking right all along (and better read/educated, clearly). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? The New England medical journal (about as lefty and pro-censorship as it's possible to be) just published a study showing the covid jabs reduced human immunity, and coincided with a massive worldwide upsurge in TB, rickets and other nasties. So keep bleating like a sheep if you wish, but we were fucking right all along (and better read/educated, clearly). " Nothing to do with the fact that most of the world isolated itself for the best part of 2 years and immunity decreased naturally? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. " I don’t think you understand what paranoia is. But that’s ok. It just sorta derails your entire point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do people actually believe this stuff? The New England medical journal (about as lefty and pro-censorship as it's possible to be) just published a study showing the covid jabs reduced human immunity, and coincided with a massive worldwide upsurge in TB, rickets and other nasties. So keep bleating like a sheep if you wish, but we were fucking right all along (and better read/educated, clearly). Nothing to do with the fact that most of the world isolated itself for the best part of 2 years and immunity decreased naturally? " But we no longer need to worry about using the Amazon App, just think about what you want to buy and thanks to the covid jab, Bezos gets a notification automatically and sends it out to you. My 5g phone is an amazing tool, I can use it to cook food, and it is hardwired straight to Bill Gates so every time I watch porn, a child in Africa gets a malaria vaccine, it’s wonderful. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Everything you have wrote is true. Britain is a police state. And reminds me of who my father fought against in the last war. He would be shocked that the British government has opened the doors to what millions fought against. " What exactly is it that he fought against which we are doing now? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Britain isn't a police state, it's become overly woke I'll grant you but what you have is a decline in standards of behaviour and when people are told to behave in a sensible and sociable way they throw a tantrum and cry it's a police state" Are you daring to suggest that those who are demanding to behave however they wish may be doing so because they want to behave like dicks with impunity? How could you say such a thing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting discussion! I met a man at the weekend who introduced himself as an unemployable “out-and-out nutter” and who proceeded to speak very convincingly about the thermosphere through which no metallic object can pass without damage so there cannot possibly have been space travel beyond that. That was before he listed his family’s academic achievements followed by all the science disciplines in which he had achieved masters degrees, or played me any of the music he had composed … all I experienced was a lengthy four-chord sequence over which there was a lot of random, though occasionally repetitive noodling - I’m really not very highly evolved. I was fascinated to hear about the extra-terrestrial beings who have blocked us from leaving earth because we only have “level 1” travel status and have not evolved sufficiently to meet other more advanced species without wanting to destroy them. By contrast they have evolved beyond violence. Fascinating when it’s a random stranger and not a member of one’s own family. He promised to summon some local (in galactic terms) e.t.s on Friday night to put on a firework display the likes of which I would never have seen. I’m sad that I obviously fell asleep before it happened "Which of the forum contributors was it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Britain isn't a police state, it's become overly woke I'll grant you but what you have is a decline in standards of behaviour and when people are told to behave in a sensible and sociable way they throw a tantrum and cry it's a police state Are you daring to suggest that those who are demanding to behave however they wish may be doing so because they want to behave like dicks with impunity? How could you say such a thing?" Jesting aside, that's a good question; I suppose some must want to behave like dicks but I don't think all, I suspect the majority just don't know the difference | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Interesting discussion! I met a man at the weekend who introduced himself as an unemployable “out-and-out nutter” and who proceeded to speak very convincingly about the thermosphere through which no metallic object can pass without damage so there cannot possibly have been space travel beyond that. That was before he listed his family’s academic achievements followed by all the science disciplines in which he had achieved masters degrees, or played me any of the music he had composed … all I experienced was a lengthy four-chord sequence over which there was a lot of random, though occasionally repetitive noodling - I’m really not very highly evolved. I was fascinated to hear about the extra-terrestrial beings who have blocked us from leaving earth because we only have “level 1” travel status and have not evolved sufficiently to meet other more advanced species without wanting to destroy them. By contrast they have evolved beyond violence. Fascinating when it’s a random stranger and not a member of one’s own family. He promised to summon some local (in galactic terms) e.t.s on Friday night to put on a firework display the likes of which I would never have seen. I’m sad that I obviously fell asleep before it happened
Which of the forum contributors was it?"Funny man,🤣. No, sorry to disappoint, but it was no one coonected with this site. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. I don’t think you understand what paranoia is. But that’s ok. It just sorta derails your entire point. " I don't think you understand what a truly democratic government is. Suggest that you read the actual wording of the new legislation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Let's put these concerns into perspective. Your car needs a new number plate so you go to Halfords to buy one . . and they need your BIOMETRIC DETAILS (Driving License + (possibly) the V5) to supply it.
So, how many are crapping themselves worried about their details becoming public if they get a cyber attack?
Get a grip on reality peeps! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So we blame the state or those trying to make life a little safer rather than the criminals who are the real threat" You mean the elected criminals, or the cartels who operate them or just the criminals who have a reasonably high chance of being arrested? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks for all the information, guys. I've decided on the basis of this post that it's a good time for me to go into my "end of the world" bunker. I have 5 year's supplies in the bunker, so I'll be out again in 2030. Good luck. I hope some of you survive. Over and out for now............" Don't forget you'll need fresh tinfoil to wrap around your head everyday, oh and a false moustache in case there's biometric cameras in your bunker
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks for all the information, guys. I've decided on the basis of this post that it's a good time for me to go into my "end of the world" bunker. I have 5 year's supplies in the bunker, so I'll be out again in 2030. Good luck. I hope some of you survive. Over and out for now............ Don't forget you'll need fresh tinfoil to wrap around your head everyday, oh and a false moustache in case there's biometric cameras in your bunker
"😂😂 I'm gonna spend the next 5 years saving my sperm in case it's needed to repopulate the earth. (Ok, there's a presumption there that there'll be no fit, intelligent, handsome males surviving, and they have to use mine instead 🙄😂) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. I don’t think you understand what paranoia is. But that’s ok. It just sorta derails your entire point. I don't think you understand what a truly democratic government is. Suggest that you read the actual wording of the new legislation. " Ok, please point out the words in the legislation you think back up your point because I cannot find any. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. I don’t think you understand what paranoia is. But that’s ok. It just sorta derails your entire point. I don't think you understand what a truly democratic government is. Suggest that you read the actual wording of the new legislation. Ok, please point out the words in the legislation you think back up your point because I cannot find any." "to protect children AND ADULTS." "where the Secretary of State believes this is necessary for certain public policy reasons": effectively removes all the limitations on what can be restricted. i.e. it's not just to protect kids from seeing porn. Poorly defined law is never good law. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. I don’t think you understand what paranoia is. But that’s ok. It just sorta derails your entire point. I don't think you understand what a truly democratic government is. Suggest that you read the actual wording of the new legislation. Ok, please point out the words in the legislation you think back up your point because I cannot find any. "to protect children AND ADULTS." "where the Secretary of State believes this is necessary for certain public policy reasons": effectively removes all the limitations on what can be restricted. i.e. it's not just to protect kids from seeing porn. Poorly defined law is never good law. " Thanks for the block capitals, really added to your point. Apart from you don’t seem to have one. Now there is a gateway you cannot just stumble across porn without choosing to see it, that helps adults who don’t want to see it as well. So what is poorly defined about that? Is the fact that you now have to do a tiny thing and you are furious? You are now just trying to make it out to be rubbish in any way you can without actually having a coherent point? The real point is you are annoyed and that’s all there is to it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it's just to keep track of everyone. And there are activities. new world order" You need to stop reading things, your brain does not appear ready. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it's just to keep track of everyone. And there are activities. new world order You need to stop reading things, your brain does not appear ready." You need an eye test. Too much wanking perhaps | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want .
I love this post most of all. A real treasure.
And 100 %! Accurate
No wonder you love it. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Exactly where we are headed We warned you We also warned you about covid passes, vaccine deaths, covid nonsense,geo engineering ... all true to date But take the piss all you want .
I love this post most of all. A real treasure.
And 100 %! Accurate
No wonder you love it. "No not 100%, a thousand %, 2 thousand %, numbers you have never heard of before. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. I don’t think you understand what paranoia is. But that’s ok. It just sorta derails your entire point. I don't think you understand what a truly democratic government is. Suggest that you read the actual wording of the new legislation. Ok, please point out the words in the legislation you think back up your point because I cannot find any. "to protect children AND ADULTS." "where the Secretary of State believes this is necessary for certain public policy reasons": effectively removes all the limitations on what can be restricted. i.e. it's not just to protect kids from seeing porn. Poorly defined law is never good law. Thanks for the block capitals, really added to your point. Apart from you don’t seem to have one. Now there is a gateway you cannot just stumble across porn without choosing to see it, that helps adults who don’t want to see it as well. So what is poorly defined about that? Is the fact that you now have to do a tiny thing and you are furious? You are now just trying to make it out to be rubbish in any way you can without actually having a coherent point? The real point is you are annoyed and that’s all there is to it?" As you didn't spot anything concerning, I though you might appreciate having some parts highlighted (the simplified forum text doesn't seem to allow underscoring, hence the capitalisation). As you claimed to have read it (which I doubt you did) and claim to understand it (which you proved you don't) and you are still think it's just about porn, then I can't help you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Complacency and an unfounded assumption that we will always have a benevolent government. It’s not the benevolence that makes me feel secure, more the fact they couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, these conspiracies are wildly over estimating the capability of the worlds civil services and governments. It’s all lovely boys own stuff, but so utterly far fetched. Paranoia is an illness. In your own post you demonstrate paranoia about government ineptitude. It's not paranoid to be sceptical that any creeping restriction on freedoms, including the right to privacy, can and will be misused. I don’t think you understand what paranoia is. But that’s ok. It just sorta derails your entire point. I don't think you understand what a truly democratic government is. Suggest that you read the actual wording of the new legislation. Ok, please point out the words in the legislation you think back up your point because I cannot find any. "to protect children AND ADULTS." "where the Secretary of State believes this is necessary for certain public policy reasons": effectively removes all the limitations on what can be restricted. i.e. it's not just to protect kids from seeing porn. Poorly defined law is never good law. Thanks for the block capitals, really added to your point. Apart from you don’t seem to have one. Now there is a gateway you cannot just stumble across porn without choosing to see it, that helps adults who don’t want to see it as well. So what is poorly defined about that? Is the fact that you now have to do a tiny thing and you are furious? You are now just trying to make it out to be rubbish in any way you can without actually having a coherent point? The real point is you are annoyed and that’s all there is to it? As you didn't spot anything concerning, I though you might appreciate having some parts highlighted (the simplified forum text doesn't seem to allow underscoring, hence the capitalisation). As you claimed to have read it (which I doubt you did) and claim to understand it (which you proved you don't) and you are still think it's just about porn, then I can't help you. " Your entire argument is now based on supposition and making up things I didn’t say. As you were… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your entire argument is now based on supposition and making up things I didn’t say. As you were…" From your assumption that the use of capitalisation, for emphasis, must always equate to anger, we can infer whence you receive the majority of your "knowledge". I understand it is bliss. Have another blissful day. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your entire argument is now based on supposition and making up things I didn’t say. As you were… From your assumption that the use of capitalisation, for emphasis, must always equate to anger, we can infer whence you receive the majority of your "knowledge". I understand it is bliss. Have another blissful day. "Apart from the fact I never said that. Another thing which needs to be made up to create a point which otherwise has nothing on which to base it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your entire argument is now based on supposition and making up things I didn’t say. As you were… From your assumption that the use of capitalisation, for emphasis, must always equate to anger, we can infer whence you receive the majority of your "knowledge". I understand it is bliss. Have another blissful day.
Apart from the fact I never said that.
Another thing which needs to be made up to create a point which otherwise has nothing on which to base it. ""and you are furious" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your entire argument is now based on supposition and making up things I didn’t say. As you were… From your assumption that the use of capitalisation, for emphasis, must always equate to anger, we can infer whence you receive the majority of your "knowledge". I understand it is bliss. Have another blissful day.
Apart from the fact I never said that.
Another thing which needs to be made up to create a point which otherwise has nothing on which to base it.
"and you are furious" "Yes, and nowhere was that linked to your capitalisation. That was taken from the content of your varied and widely available missives on this topic. I note you are rather focusing on semantic arguments, conveniently deflecting away from the material points made. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your entire argument is now based on supposition and making up things I didn’t say. As you were… From your assumption that the use of capitalisation, for emphasis, must always equate to anger, we can infer whence you receive the majority of your "knowledge". I understand it is bliss. Have another blissful day.
Apart from the fact I never said that.
Another thing which needs to be made up to create a point which otherwise has nothing on which to base it.
"and you are furious"
Yes, and nowhere was that linked to your capitalisation.
That was taken from the content of your varied and widely available missives on this topic.
I note you are rather focusing on semantic arguments, conveniently deflecting away from the material points made.
"You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your entire argument is now based on supposition and making up things I didn’t say. As you were… From your assumption that the use of capitalisation, for emphasis, must always equate to anger, we can infer whence you receive the majority of your "knowledge". I understand it is bliss. Have another blissful day.
Apart from the fact I never said that.
Another thing which needs to be made up to create a point which otherwise has nothing on which to base it.
"and you are furious"
Yes, and nowhere was that linked to your capitalisation.
That was taken from the content of your varied and widely available missives on this topic.
I note you are rather focusing on semantic arguments, conveniently deflecting away from the material points made.
You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury.
Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn."Why should it be limited thus? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus?" Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. " Where is the censorship? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? " In the legislation that you haven't read.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? In the legislation that you haven't read. "Nice try, there is no censorship in it. You haven’t demonstrated that there is, you have demonstrated that the scope is wider than just children. That is all you have demonstrated. The rest you are simply leaving to allusion and I go back to my previous point, this legislation is nothing like what you are claiming it is. You have claimed censorship but not demonstrated it in any way. You have tried ad-hominem attacks to distract away from that, but those are just noise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not actually a scanner it's Keir's arse mooning us all every night ready to take a dump all over us" 😅🤣😂 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? In the legislation that you haven't read.
Nice try, there is no censorship in it.
You haven’t demonstrated that there is, you have demonstrated that the scope is wider than just children. That is all you have demonstrated.
The rest you are simply leaving to allusion and I go back to my previous point, this legislation is nothing like what you are claiming it is.
You have claimed censorship but not demonstrated it in any way.
You have tried ad-hominem attacks to distract away from that, but those are just noise.
"An ad-hominem attack would be an accusation of paranoid illness or fury.
At this point I'd be as well trying to explain Bernoulli's Principle to my dog. At least, with him, he has a genuine curiosity about the lawn sprinkler, which we could use as a visual teaching aid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? In the legislation that you haven't read.
Nice try, there is no censorship in it.
You haven’t demonstrated that there is, you have demonstrated that the scope is wider than just children. That is all you have demonstrated.
The rest you are simply leaving to allusion and I go back to my previous point, this legislation is nothing like what you are claiming it is.
You have claimed censorship but not demonstrated it in any way.
You have tried ad-hominem attacks to distract away from that, but those are just noise.
An ad-hominem attack would be an accusation of paranoid illness or fury.
At this point I'd be as well trying to explain Bernoulli's Principle to my dog. At least, with him, he has a genuine curiosity about the lawn sprinkler, which we could use as a visual teaching aid. "Yes, they would indeed and you are providing good evidence to support my ad hominem attacks. What you are not doing so well is providing any evidence to back up your claims of censorship. What you are doing is confirming my accusations that you are just annoyed about the requirements to prove your age prior to accessing porn and saying whatever it takes to try to make the law sound bad, but with an ever diminishing standpoint. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? In the legislation that you haven't read.
Nice try, there is no censorship in it.
You haven’t demonstrated that there is, you have demonstrated that the scope is wider than just children. That is all you have demonstrated.
The rest you are simply leaving to allusion and I go back to my previous point, this legislation is nothing like what you are claiming it is.
You have claimed censorship but not demonstrated it in any way.
You have tried ad-hominem attacks to distract away from that, but those are just noise.
An ad-hominem attack would be an accusation of paranoid illness or fury.
At this point I'd be as well trying to explain Bernoulli's Principle to my dog. At least, with him, he has a genuine curiosity about the lawn sprinkler, which we could use as a visual teaching aid.
Yes, they would indeed and you are providing good evidence to support my ad hominem attacks.
What you are not doing so well is providing any evidence to back up your claims of censorship.
What you are doing is confirming my accusations that you are just annoyed about the requirements to prove your age prior to accessing porn and saying whatever it takes to try to make the law sound bad, but with an ever diminishing standpoint."Yes, that last one was ad-hominem. I'm still waiting for your actual rebuttal based on the content of the legislation. I won't hold my breath. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry the words are too big for you, did you think this thread wasn’t paying enough attention to your unique level of pointless attention seeking? " ... ... 🏴 le petit kLaXoN .... Participation is not attention -seeking. The bit about not understanding words was ironic 🤡🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? In the legislation that you haven't read.
Nice try, there is no censorship in it.
You haven’t demonstrated that there is, you have demonstrated that the scope is wider than just children. That is all you have demonstrated.
The rest you are simply leaving to allusion and I go back to my previous point, this legislation is nothing like what you are claiming it is.
You have claimed censorship but not demonstrated it in any way.
You have tried ad-hominem attacks to distract away from that, but those are just noise.
An ad-hominem attack would be an accusation of paranoid illness or fury.
At this point I'd be as well trying to explain Bernoulli's Principle to my dog. At least, with him, he has a genuine curiosity about the lawn sprinkler, which we could use as a visual teaching aid.
Yes, they would indeed and you are providing good evidence to support my ad hominem attacks.
What you are not doing so well is providing any evidence to back up your claims of censorship.
What you are doing is confirming my accusations that you are just annoyed about the requirements to prove your age prior to accessing porn and saying whatever it takes to try to make the law sound bad, but with an ever diminishing standpoint.
Yes, that last one was ad-hominem. I'm still waiting for your actual rebuttal based on the content of the legislation. I won't hold my breath. "... ... 👊And the ball hits the net. A scrappy goal but they all count.Ref blows his whistle... Wowsers. We have a winner... 🤔😭 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? In the legislation that you haven't read.
Nice try, there is no censorship in it.
You haven’t demonstrated that there is, you have demonstrated that the scope is wider than just children. That is all you have demonstrated.
The rest you are simply leaving to allusion and I go back to my previous point, this legislation is nothing like what you are claiming it is.
You have claimed censorship but not demonstrated it in any way.
You have tried ad-hominem attacks to distract away from that, but those are just noise.
An ad-hominem attack would be an accusation of paranoid illness or fury.
At this point I'd be as well trying to explain Bernoulli's Principle to my dog. At least, with him, he has a genuine curiosity about the lawn sprinkler, which we could use as a visual teaching aid.
Yes, they would indeed and you are providing good evidence to support my ad hominem attacks.
What you are not doing so well is providing any evidence to back up your claims of censorship.
What you are doing is confirming my accusations that you are just annoyed about the requirements to prove your age prior to accessing porn and saying whatever it takes to try to make the law sound bad, but with an ever diminishing standpoint.
Yes, that last one was ad-hominem. I'm still waiting for your actual rebuttal based on the content of the legislation. I won't hold my breath. "There is nothing to argue against. You havent demonstrated any attempt at censorship so there is nothing to disprove. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You ignored the material points made. You have made none. Only focusing on your misinterpretation of capitalisation and your incorrect inference of fury. Show me the part of the legislation that you believe would limit its scope to protecting children from porn. Why should it be limited thus? Your point was that some were being paranoid and angry about government censorship. Now you are condoning government censorship. K. Where is the censorship? In the legislation that you haven't read.
Nice try, there is no censorship in it.
You haven’t demonstrated that there is, you have demonstrated that the scope is wider than just children. That is all you have demonstrated.
The rest you are simply leaving to allusion and I go back to my previous point, this legislation is nothing like what you are claiming it is.
You have claimed censorship but not demonstrated it in any way.
You have tried ad-hominem attacks to distract away from that, but those are just noise.
An ad-hominem attack would be an accusation of paranoid illness or fury.
At this point I'd be as well trying to explain Bernoulli's Principle to my dog. At least, with him, he has a genuine curiosity about the lawn sprinkler, which we could use as a visual teaching aid.
Yes, they would indeed and you are providing good evidence to support my ad hominem attacks.
What you are not doing so well is providing any evidence to back up your claims of censorship.
What you are doing is confirming my accusations that you are just annoyed about the requirements to prove your age prior to accessing porn and saying whatever it takes to try to make the law sound bad, but with an ever diminishing standpoint.
Yes, that last one was ad-hominem. I'm still waiting for your actual rebuttal based on the content of the legislation. I won't hold my breath.
...
...
👊And the ball hits the net. A scrappy goal but they all count.Ref blows his whistle... Wowsers. We have a winner...
🤔😭
"True, it always has to be about you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remember everything is true until disproved lol" So Donald Trump really is a peado? Bominic Cummings is going to dress as Batman and save the world in 2032 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
