This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Coronavirus and the impact of Lockdown policy
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Mattconrov  12 Aug 23 10.35am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Legal cases that project Veritas have won.lol
" You're not laughing now are you". Nigel Farage 2016. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 12 Aug 23 12.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Endlessly repeating the same mantra doesn't change the fact that this is still trying to silence people. You endlessly claiming it is trying to silence people is what necessitates the repetitive denials. It isn't. I am trying to point out the value of doing so. If people want to do valueless things that's up to them. I will continue to point out their lack of worth and encourage a focus on things that can be changed, alongside the diversionary intention I see that motivates some.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 12 Aug 23 1.00pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mattconrov
I've put 59 second clip up for you. The great David Icke or project Veritas didn't make this criminal of a women do anything. Just 59 seconds long. Wiki responses again I see. Lol Try and stick to the patently obvious evidence and not to people you dislike. Your disingenuous behaviour is laughable. Your great fact check site wiki. The site that can be edited anonymously On their own page they admit this. So if someone wants to lie and bring someone down. Just go and edit something anonymously. Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 10.09am) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 10.16am) Hopeless again. That clip perfectly demonstrates the tactics employed by Project Veritas, pursuing and harassing someone who has sent perfectly innocent internal communications. Communications that those behind Project Veritas want to misrepresent and suggest they mean something that they obviously don't. It's what they do, and people like you swallow it by the bucket load. The question of the source material used to develop the vaccines has been discussed many times, including earlier in this thread. Whilst tissue from fetal cells may have been used at some point to develop cell lines used for testing, nothing from them is directly used for testing or in the vaccines themselves. Nevertheless, this is a subject which gives some people some pause for thought, so can be controversial. It is therefore perfectly understandable that any manufacturer will be cautious about how, and when to inform people so they can make genuinely informed decisions. To describe someone trying to ensure that as a criminal is, I am afraid, typical of the stance that those behind Project Veritas do. That you get sucked into it is quite sad. Yes anyone can edit Wiki. Rather that than have disinformation go unchallenged. Anyone who thinks the challenge is incorrect also has the ability to challenge the challenge. With evidence and logic, of course.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  12 Aug 23 1.00pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
You endlessly claiming it is trying to silence people is what necessitates the repetitive denials. It isn't. I am trying to point out the value of doing so. If people want to do valueless things that's up to them. I will continue to point out their lack of worth and encourage a focus on things that can be changed, alongside the diversionary intention I see that motivates some. Wanting people not to have opinions on everything that's happened in the expectation that it won't happen again is unrealistic and whatever the recommendations for the future they won't do anything to repair the damage done to the economy, children's education, society in general and, ironically, the NHS.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 12 Aug 23 1.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
That is a big bag of nothing at all. That anyone with enough effort could get such judgements in the USA is a given. Their Constitution is so far out of date and unfit for purpose it's almost inevitable. Only today I have read Andrew Torba Gab banging on about how Gab is the only place that truly free speech is permitted and how they will never adopt a "Lawful but awful" strategy on their site. The result is that things that many consider awful get posted there which in turn means that they won't read it so it ends up attracting an ever tighter band of people with extreme and unusual views. The same thing applies to Project Veritas. What they do may be supported legally but is seen by many as awful, and they won't watch. Others, you included, don't see it they way. So the divide gets wider.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 12 Aug 23 1.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Wanting people not to have opinions on everything that's happened in the expectation that it won't happen again is unrealistic and whatever the recommendations for the future they won't do anything to repair the damage done to the economy, children's education, society in general and, ironically, the NHS. Who said they ought not have opinions? I am encouraging the channelling of those opinions into the debate about the future. A debate which is better done objectively and unemotionally via the the enquiry. The objective now is to prepare for a similar occurrence. So if the evidence exists that an alternative strategy would produce better outcomes then let it be presented and reviewed. Just complaining that damage was done etc, etc is stating the obvious. That cannot be the question. The question is what would deliver something better? Not just theoretically better, but statistically proven to be better. In the meantime, people are still being affected by the spread of misinformation. Surely that's what ought to be the current focus?
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 12 Aug 23 1.49pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Who said they ought not have opinions? I am encouraging the channelling of those opinions into the debate about the future. A debate which is better done objectively and unemotionally via the the enquiry. The objective now is to prepare for a similar occurrence. So if the evidence exists that an alternative strategy would produce better outcomes then let it be presented and reviewed. Just complaining that damage was done etc, etc is stating the obvious. That cannot be the question. The question is what would deliver something better? Not just theoretically better, but statistically proven to be better. In the meantime, people are still being affected by the spread of misinformation. Surely that's what ought to be the current focus? So wait for the enquiry for however many years that might take. Too many people are still dealing with the effects of lockdown to worry about what to do in the event of another. Those who lost jobs or had their children's education affected or are on a hospital waiting list are angry and can express their anger now not in several years time.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mattconrov 12 Aug 23 2.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Hopeless again. That clip perfectly demonstrates the tactics employed by Project Veritas, pursuing and harassing someone who has sent perfectly innocent internal communications. Communications that those behind Project Veritas want to misrepresent and suggest they mean something that they obviously don't. It's what they do, and people like you swallow it by the bucket load. The question of the source material used to develop the vaccines has been discussed many times, including earlier in this thread. Whilst tissue from fetal cells may have been used at some point to develop cell lines used for testing, nothing from them is directly used for testing or in the vaccines themselves. Nevertheless, this is a subject which gives some people some pause for thought, so can be controversial. It is therefore perfectly understandable that any manufacturer will be cautious about how, and when to inform people so they can make genuinely informed decisions. To describe someone trying to ensure that as a criminal is, I am afraid, typical of the stance that those behind Project Veritas do. That you get sucked into it is quite sad. Yes anyone can edit Wiki. Rather that than have disinformation go unchallenged. Anyone who thinks the challenge is incorrect also has the ability to challenge the challenge. With evidence and logic, of course.
You say used in testing but not in direct testing. That makes no sense. Of course they were used in testing. Otherwise why was she mentioning that they were using them.Semantics. The Pfzier bosses words were not misrepresented. They were in black and white. You said they may have used them. No may about it. She's admitting they used them. Lol Innocent people don't run away. As James of project Veritas said. What else are you hiding? I'm not saying it's wrong to use fetus cells. I'm asking why are they hiding it. They shouldn't be doing that. With regard to wiki. You seem to like using it if it backs up your points. It sounds like an opinion website. My god didn't you even read what the owner of it says.
Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 3.08pm) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 3.59pm) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 4.02pm) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 4.04pm) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 5.45pm)
" You're not laughing now are you". Nigel Farage 2016. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 12 Aug 23 5.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
So wait for the enquiry for however many years that might take. Too many people are still dealing with the effects of lockdown to worry about what to do in the event of another. Those who lost jobs or had their children's education affected or are on a hospital waiting list are angry and can express their anger now not in several years time. Do you want a rushed enquiry making poor recommendations? These things take time if done properly. People’s anger at their personal experiences is understandable but it also doesn’t help prepare for another. Compassion and support is the response needed for that. Tackling the impact on the NHS doesn’t have a short term fix. Ensuring we avoid making it even worse is thought necessary.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 12 Aug 23 5.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mattconrov
You say used in testing but not in direct testing. That makes no sense. Of course they were used in testing. Otherwise why was she mentioning that they were using them.Semantics. The Pfzier bosses words were not misrepresented. They were in black and white. You said they may have used them. No may about it. She's admitting they used them. Lol Guilty people don't run away. As James of project Veritas said. What else are you hiding? I'm not saying it's wrong to use fetus cells. I'm asking why are they hiding it. They shouldn't be doing that. With regard to wiki. You seem to like using it if it backs up your points. It sounds like an opinion website. My god didn't you even read what the owner of it says.
Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 3.08pm) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 3.59pm) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 4.02pm) Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 4.04pm) It’s not semantics at all. It’s you not understanding the difference between material that was used to start a cell line and the material itself. The cells in the cell line are not from the fetal material. She wasn’t running away because she is guilty of anything. She was running away from aggressive behaviour. Doorstepping employees is disgraceful. If you want questions answered the Company will, I am sure, answer them. There is no dispute about how Wiki is produced. In my view it serves an extremely important role in ensuring that conspiracy theories and untrue claims get challenged. That the founder has distanced himself from it is beside the point. There’s plenty of places where the conspiracy theories can and do get spread. You are the walking embodiment of the proof of that. Edited by Wisbech Eagle (12 Aug 2023 5.50pm)
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 12 Aug 23 5.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Do you want a rushed enquiry making poor recommendations? These things take time if done properly. People’s anger at their personal experiences is understandable but it also doesn’t help prepare for another. Compassion and support is the response needed for that. Tackling the impact on the NHS doesn’t have a short term fix. Ensuring we avoid making it even worse is thought necessary. Rushed? It's expected to take 4 years and will probably be longer. The time will be spent undoing the damage to the NHS created by a situation supposedly designed to protect it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mattconrov 12 Aug 23 5.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
It’s not semantics at all. It’s you not understanding the difference between material that was used to start a cell line and the material itself. The cells in the cell line are not from the fetal material. She wasn’t running away because she is guilty of anything. She was running away from aggressive behaviour. Doorstepping employees is disgraceful. If you want questions answered the Company will, I am sure, answer them. There is no dispute about how Wiki is produced. In my view it serves an extremely important role in ensuring that conspiracy theories and untrue claims get challenged. That the founder has distanced himself from it is beside the point. There’s plenty of places where the conspiracy theories can and do get spread. You are the walking embodiment of the proof of that. Edited by Wisbech Eagle (12 Aug 2023 5.50pm) The point is and was. Are fetal cells being used in the testing / making of the covid vaccines in any shape or form. The answer is yes. You know that and she admitted it. Whether it's actually in the covid vaccine is not the point. Otherwise why would she instruct her staff not to mention it. Lol Edited by Mattconrov (12 Aug 2023 5.55pm)
" You're not laughing now are you". Nigel Farage 2016. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.