304 replies to this topic

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re: post 299

 

Flu? What flu?

[Advocatus Diaboli]

Re post #297

 

Paul is a medical doctor who expressed an opinion.  His opinoin ran counter to that of a social media site. And, on that basis, he was suspended. Fauci, from the beginning of the pandemic, was tergiversating on the use of masks, and his opinions were not suppressed because he had the correct political bent.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

C'mon, man (heh, heh). Are you kidding me? Look at the timeline. The legacy media smelled blood in the water early on, as well as having detected pressure and vibrations along their shared lateral line, and decided that Fauci was to be given a free pass. He could have declared, apodictlcally, that the Earth was flat, and the social media sites would have been bobbing their collective head up and down in uniform agreement, rather than suspending him as a purveyor of heretical dogma.

 

One man's eisegesis is another's incomprehensible gibberish. Or, in other words, life is like a 

"one-horse pony" (a confused melange of happenstance) heh, heh, right, Joe? (A palfrey can 

be your pal, or your palilogy, if you repeat it often enough--but not your your pony keg).

 

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." And, "gaslighting", come to mind, methinks.

 

"We are a litigious society, I am sure their lawyers (FWIW, I know a Twitter lawyer and guess 

what- Conservative)  are scared of being sued by someone who came down with COVID and 

blamed it on seeing the video." 

 

But, the lawyers aren't afraid of being sued by those who are monetarily and physically damaged 

by BLM protestors, whose supporters on YouTube, and Twitter (as well as, perhaps, Democratic 

congresspersons, depending upon whose spin you want to believe), that have vids and posts to 

egg-on the BLM, and that aren't taken down? Double standard?

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 15 August 2021 - 02:49 AM.

[geo12the]

 

C'mon, man (heh, heh). Are you kidding me? Look at the timeline. The legacy media smelled blood in the water early on, as well as having detected pressure and vibrations along their shared lateral line, and decided that Fauci was to be given a free pass. He could have declared, apodictlcally, that the Earth was flat, and the social media sites would have been bobbing their collective head up and down in uniform agreement, rather than suspending him as a purveyor of heretical dogma.

 

One man's eisegesis is another's incomprehensible gibberish. Or, in other words, life is like a 

"one-horse pony" (a confused melange of happenstance) heh, heh, right, Joe? (A palfrey can 

be your pal, or your palilogy, if you repeat it often enough--but not your your pony keg).

 

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks." And, "gaslighting", come to mind, methinks.

 

"We are a litigious society, I am sure their lawyers (FWIW, I know a Twitter lawyer and guess 

what- Conservative)  are scared of being sued by someone who came down with COVID and 

blamed it on seeing the video." 

 

But, the lawyers aren't afraid of being sued by those who are monetarily and physically damaged 

by BLM protestors, whose supporters on YouTube, and Twitter (as well as, perhaps, Democratic 

congresspersons, depending upon whose spin you want to believe), that have vids and posts to 

egg-on the BLM, and that aren't taken down? Double standard?

 

 

I don't think Faucii is a saint as he is made out to be by the left, nor is he the demon the right makes him out to be.

 

Look I am not Twitter. I am not on Twitter. Seems to me like a big waste of time. I don't know what to tell you. My lawyer friend who works for them is super adamant about not talking about Twitter at all. I don't know his salary but I can tell you it is Yuge, to quote a man who just was reinstated (oh wait, neverminded). Not that long ago we didn't have Twitter or social media AND people were not as polarized and divided and crazy as we are now. People discussed things face to face without the anonymity of the internet which tends to promote personal attacks on people who disagree. We were better off then. 

 

BLM arguments don't get anywhere. It's used to just rile people up and inflame tensions. I don't have the energy to go down that path.

 

Let's just agree to disagree! You seem like an interesting nice person even if we don't always agree on stuff.  

Edited by geo12the, 15 August 2021 - 05:20 PM.

[Qowpel]

What about the effect of these vaccines on telomere length? Has anyone in here checked for that as well?

I completely agree