Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | 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 |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What was the reason sky got rid ? Perhaps he’s just paranoid " Stupid tweet calling into question media reports of the damage in Ukraine | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? " This. | |||
| 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 |
"What did he say" I don't want to say till i have leagal representation  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? " Free speech. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized " And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper ...." People seem to get freedom of speech and freedom of consequences confused. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What did he say" He expresssed support for a tweet which suggested the media were fabricating reports of the damage to Ukrainian towns. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. " Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... People seem to get freedom of speech and freedom of consequences confused." They do indeed. In the immortal words of Prof. Brian Cox: "everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper ...." It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion." Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. " You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion." Fine as an individual. Not fine if you are employed as an ambassador for an organisation. Go off script by all means. Just don't expect the script writers to be happy about it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... People seem to get freedom of speech and freedom of consequences confused. They do indeed. In the immortal words of Prof. Brian Cox: "everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!" " Not sure about that guy..  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... People seem to get freedom of speech and freedom of consequences confused. They do indeed. In the immortal words of Prof. Brian Cox: "everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!" Not sure about that guy.. "Very erudite quote though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? " Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On the bright side, Jeff Stelling is gonna still be doing soccer Saturday next season "There’s a football opinion we can agree on | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion." In my opinion, MLTs opinion is head-bangingly crackers. *bellybutton Winston | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Should he have gone..?" Gone where? There I was thinking this was going to be another thread about swinging parties in Guernsey! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In years to come they might find a link between heading the ball and mental health ... If he has gone barking then he should be supported. If he does not believe everything that he is spoonfed by the press then he should be applauded. " He never headed the ball.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are?" Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines " So you’re one of them. No point carrying on the debate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job "Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation." Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines " We are talking about Mstt Le Tissier, not moody big pharma conspiracy theories. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job
Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation."
Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos
"Social media is public. If you don’t want what you say getting out there don’t post it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job
Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation."
Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos
Social media is public. If you don’t want what you say getting out there don’t post it."True story | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m more concerned about those who saw his tweet and believed it or gave it some credence. If you’re getting your news, views or information from an ex footballer then wise up. "don’t forget a lot of people get their facts from Facebook and Twitter it makes sense now when they’d give you a warning when watching the wrestling about trying this at home unfortunately people are stupid and do the moves and probably the same people believe what some celebrities say | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job
Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation."
Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos
Social media is public. If you don’t want what you say getting out there don’t post it."You need to work for somewhere else if your worried about what you say constantly. I personally use social media very little, but if my work was influencing my personal life i'd go else where. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job
Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation."
Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos
"They aren't. This is about someone acting in a way that is counter to the values of their employer in such a way as to have an adverse reputational impact on the organisation. I sat employer, but big Matt was in all probability a contractor. But the effect is much the same | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job
Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation."
Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos
Social media is public. If you don’t want what you say getting out there don’t post it.
You need to work for somewhere else if your worried about what you say constantly. I personally use social media very little, but if my work was influencing my personal life i'd go else where. "I really don’t. I don’t post on social media much. When you work for a large company you represent them. How many people lose their jobs for getting arrested? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines So you’re one of them. No point carrying on the debate." Haha one of what? A free thinker? You do realise you change minds through debate. You’re still believing you’re everything you’ve been told initially despite the evidence showing the complete opposite. Despite this I wish you all the best | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job
Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation."
Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos
Social media is public. If you don’t want what you say getting out there don’t post it.
You need to work for somewhere else if your worried about what you say constantly. I personally use social media very little, but if my work was influencing my personal life i'd go else where.
I really don’t. I don’t post on social media much. When you work for a large company you represent them.
How many people lose their jobs for getting arrested?
"This is why I would like to see famous people not getting sacked for having an opinion. It might show a better example. I understand that companies can employ who they want but it would be nice to see them just allowing people to be more open. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines We are talking about Mstt Le Tissier, not moody big pharma conspiracy theories." It’s literally why MLT is a topic of debate | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He used his right to free speech, personally i didn't agree with him, but when you're high profile, you are always going to be scrutinized And thats the issue. Whether or not what he said is right or wrong, he is paid (lots) to represent organisations with very public profiles. You can't expect to still be paid lots if you go off script over controversial topics. He wo pays the piper .... It's refreshing to see people not following the script though. I think it's bad for society if everyone only shares one opinion. Most jobs you’ve got to follow the script. I would be sacked if I posted misinformation on my social media and I’ve got a shit job
Misinformation quickly turns into information as we've seen from the past few years. Companies are going to have fun in court if their sacking people for "misinformation."
Also tell your company to stop spying on people... weirdos
Social media is public. If you don’t want what you say getting out there don’t post it.
You need to work for somewhere else if your worried about what you say constantly. I personally use social media very little, but if my work was influencing my personal life i'd go else where.
I really don’t. I don’t post on social media much. When you work for a large company you represent them.
How many people lose their jobs for getting arrested?
This is why I would like to see famous people not getting sacked for having an opinion. It might show a better example. I understand that companies can employ who they want but it would be nice to see them just allowing people to be more open."They can be open. Just not when they are accepting money to represent an organisation that has expectations. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines So you’re one of them. No point carrying on the debate. Haha one of what? A free thinker? You do realise you change minds through debate. You’re still believing you’re everything you’ve been told initially despite the evidence showing the complete opposite. Despite this I wish you all the best " I have a relative who is a “free thinker”. She spends her time on alternative search engines and thinks the North Pole is a conspiracy. She said covid was 5G, now the vaccine is killing people. Hillary eats babies, Donald Trump was the saviour. She says we shouldn’t drink sugar free drinks because they’re harmful whilst smoking 20 a day. She also can’t produce a single piece of evidence from a reputable source that backs any of her claims. “Do your research” I have. I read stuff from reputable sources and world leading experts not Tammy on Facebook with her F in GCSE science. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines So you’re one of them. No point carrying on the debate. Haha one of what? A free thinker? You do realise you change minds through debate. You’re still believing you’re everything you’ve been told initially despite the evidence showing the complete opposite. Despite this I wish you all the best I have a relative who is a “free thinker”. She spends her time on alternative search engines and thinks the North Pole is a conspiracy. She said covid was 5G, now the vaccine is killing people. Hillary eats babies, Donald Trump was the saviour. She says we shouldn’t drink sugar free drinks because they’re harmful whilst smoking 20 a day. She also can’t produce a single piece of evidence from a reputable source that backs any of her claims. “Do your research” I have. I read stuff from reputable sources and world leading experts not Tammy on Facebook with her F in GCSE science." So who are your reputable sources? Snopes the fact checker gets correctly fact checked when a big enough platform shows they’re wrong with an agenda. All you have to do is look at Pfizer’s own data to show these jabs are harmful. As for sugar free drinks...yeah, aspartame is the devil. She sounds intelligent. As for Facebook. They have openly said they censor certain viewpoints. But if you want to have more pricks than a second hand dart board be my guest. Big pharma breaks the law on a regular basis and it costs lives. Just look up the drug bextra and how Pfizer got around that one... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines So you’re one of them. No point carrying on the debate. Haha one of what? A free thinker? You do realise you change minds through debate. You’re still believing you’re everything you’ve been told initially despite the evidence showing the complete opposite. Despite this I wish you all the best I have a relative who is a “free thinker”. She spends her time on alternative search engines and thinks the North Pole is a conspiracy. She said covid was 5G, now the vaccine is killing people. Hillary eats babies, Donald Trump was the saviour. She says we shouldn’t drink sugar free drinks because they’re harmful whilst smoking 20 a day. She also can’t produce a single piece of evidence from a reputable source that backs any of her claims. “Do your research” I have. I read stuff from reputable sources and world leading experts not Tammy on Facebook with her F in GCSE science. So who are your reputable sources? Snopes the fact checker gets correctly fact checked when a big enough platform shows they’re wrong with an agenda. All you have to do is look at Pfizer’s own data to show these jabs are harmful. As for sugar free drinks...yeah, aspartame is the devil. She sounds intelligent. As for Facebook. They have openly said they censor certain viewpoints. But if you want to have more pricks than a second hand dart board be my guest. Big pharma breaks the law on a regular basis and it costs lives. Just look up the drug bextra and how Pfizer got around that one..." This. Thread. Is. About. Le Tissier. No conspiracies. Nothing to do with paranoid left field immunisation theories. #JustSaying | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines So you’re one of them. No point carrying on the debate. Haha one of what? A free thinker? You do realise you change minds through debate. You’re still believing you’re everything you’ve been told initially despite the evidence showing the complete opposite. Despite this I wish you all the best I have a relative who is a “free thinker”. She spends her time on alternative search engines and thinks the North Pole is a conspiracy. She said covid was 5G, now the vaccine is killing people. Hillary eats babies, Donald Trump was the saviour. She says we shouldn’t drink sugar free drinks because they’re harmful whilst smoking 20 a day. She also can’t produce a single piece of evidence from a reputable source that backs any of her claims. “Do your research” I have. I read stuff from reputable sources and world leading experts not Tammy on Facebook with her F in GCSE science. So who are your reputable sources? Snopes the fact checker gets correctly fact checked when a big enough platform shows they’re wrong with an agenda. All you have to do is look at Pfizer’s own data to show these jabs are harmful. As for sugar free drinks...yeah, aspartame is the devil. She sounds intelligent. As for Facebook. They have openly said they censor certain viewpoints. But if you want to have more pricks than a second hand dart board be my guest. Big pharma breaks the law on a regular basis and it costs lives. Just look up the drug bextra and how Pfizer got around that one..." She sounds intelligent? She couldn’t pass her GCSE’s and now I’m meant to get medical advice from her. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why can’t folk just think these things privately rather than airing them? Free speech. Yeah but someone in the public eye like that doesn’t get to have free speech freely. They have free speech with consequences. I would have though common sense would have stepped in and he’d have realised he’d get flamed and the potential consequences to that. You’ve literally just said the opposite of free speech. Professions don’t decided who canoe can’t think and say what (unless directly inciting violence). You need to read 1984, you’ve just described a thought crime. As for consequences. What about those over the past 2 years who have coerced people into doing things that have turned out to be detrimental? Where are their consequences? Could you enlighten us as to what these things are? Go and read the 55k every 30 days Pfizer have to now legally release of 329k documents they have on their initial trials that got them emergency use authoritarian that they initially were granted to drip feed until 2076, then went to court asking until 2096 which backed fired to 55k every 30 days. It shows your governments and public health bodies knew they were coercing the worlds population with poisonous chemicals. You will struggle to find using google. Try multiple search engines So you’re one of them. No point carrying on the debate. Haha one of what? A free thinker? You do realise you change minds through debate. You’re still believing you’re everything you’ve been told initially despite the evidence showing the complete opposite. Despite this I wish you all the best " Says the man who believes the absolute twaddle he posted. The Virus Forum, where irony came to die. 
Winston | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Agree with it or not is your choice but we can't go around just censoring people because we don't agree. That's not very "free society" is it?" MLT hasn't been censored. Winston | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
