WAR! What is it good for?

I wonder where the term conspiracy theories came from

Of course you can laugh as long as you fight for the right for someone to say something you don’t wanna hear

free speech without terms and conditions init…….something you don’t seem comfortable with if it makes you look a **** init

 

didn’t you just except Boris and Hancock’s advice on Covid vaccine which you received yet neither are still in a job because of fraud and lies and misinformation that should really put them in jail…….so let’s talk about who can judge a good egg over the rotten eggs is it

if dai got it wrong one thing I’m confident of is I’m free from spike protein causing heart disease and death

 

Yes, I believe in free speech, even for disgusting conmen like Icke. I think technically it's hate speech he's being kept out of Netherlands for, but hate speech IS free speech even if it's disgusting in nature. Icke should have the right to spew his nasty vile conspiracies. but I also believe those in his crosshairs should have the right to sue him for libel. I'd much rather see some Jewish organization take every penny Icke owns rather than take away his right to spew hate speech.

He has the right to be a twat, and his victims have the right to sue him for libel in my opinion.

 

wasn’t talking to you you fat fk

anyway your rambling is very much talking about stuff you haven’t got a clue about as per usual

you do know a Jewish man was the organiser of a peace rally who asked Icke to speak…..now that’s the only truth you need the rest is Nazi propaganda from your end

 

How many logical fallacies can you fit into one post?

 

Bite size for thick fks…….now does this remind you of anything…..it should do because you fully support it from what ive been reading over the years

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z2p3k2p/revision/4

 

anyways without the yank child talk what is your opinion on that footage of rocket hitting pentagon…….for a novice pilot that’s some flying skills

 

I don't agree with the libel aspect. It's something the Americans seem to do often that has also spread it's wings via lawyers in the UK, and generally it protects the wealthy and even the guilty. This word conspiracy seems to get banded about alot these days, and the word will be thrown at someone just for having a differing opinion.

Aside from libel, how do you define what is disgusting in nature and what is not. Take Mason Greenwood of Man Utd as an example, photos appeared of his partner being abused, along with a video recording, as far as I'm aware he's still at the club. Everyone is frightened to say a peep about his future at the club, why is that I wonder, because people don't want to get sued...

Lawyers only have one interest at heart, and that's their bank balances.

 

I haven't seen a video of a rocket hitting the pentagon. I've seen videos of blurred objects hitting the pentagon that are impossible to identify as a plane. As for "flying skills". Never tried flying a jumbo jet so couldn't give a comment on how difficult that would be, nor could anyone here. I've seen the conspiracy comments about how hard it is and there is a cut and paste that has gone round where everyone has an uncle who is a pilot who said it would be impossible to fly that low without the plane breaking apart and they all say it in exactly the same word order. All the people saying it would be difficult seem to have the same uncle.

I've also seen other pilots that say, it's hard to fly low because of a wobble effect at that altitude, but that's more because the speed they're usually flying at (bit like how it's hard to ride a bike at a slow speed) obviously since the impact was at 500mph, there was no slow speed wobble factor.

Could the pentagon video be a missile not a plane? Maybe, but as with all conspiracies you have to go through what it would take to cover it up, and what would be the motive. All the eye witness accounts, of which there are many, would have to all be in on the conspiracy. The family of the victims, who have heard the audio recordings on the plane, would all have to have been fooled, or be in on the conspiracy. Air Traffic control would have to be in on the conspiracy, unless the real plane just vanished in mid air.

If the whole point was to justify a war there was no point, the twin towers did that already. So there was not really a motive. So, like most conspiracy theories, they fail when it comes to basic logic. It would have been a huge expensive thing to recreate, with little benefit, and a lot of potential people who could have leaked the truth.

How do you get to have every single person visiting DC (many of whom are tourists, some potentially from non friendly nations) to say "it was a plane" if it wasn't.

 

truth like you say in America is that the dollar wins each and every time ……fk they don’t even have to have a fully functioning mentally fit president to guide them…..the future is guided by the shadow men never voted for in the first place


But dai Icke made money writing a book about the cu,nt hang him

 

I'm fully of the belief that speech should be free and "hate speech" is just a case where free speech is being used badly. I do believe that the consequences of your speech should be your responsibility though.

If someone (such as Icke) makes his lies about how the Jews are controlling the world and how they're an evil race, etc... if someone who is a follower of Icke and believes his words and commits a crime on them inspired by Icke's rants, such as by an attack on a synagogue, then Icke should be held accountable for instigating the crime. If not pursued criminally, then he should be pursued through civilian courts in the form of libel.

 

A long winded way to say I haven’t got a fking clue that fella

 

Well, that, and if you use basic logic, it's not a missile.

 

One example of this please

 

Its not a plane either….. was it a bird or superman

ps you’re logic said it was blurry but yet not blurry enough that you made the decision it was not a missile

looked like what some witness reports said that were recorded by the way but not used in the official report because it wasn’t worth mentioning

 

Where do we draw the line though?

I see a future where internet forums like this will not be allowed to exist, we will get to the stage that Russia is at now, where all media will be controlled. I see football chairman try and sue football fans for things they say on social media, the only difference here is they have money and we don't, they can criticise you but you can't criticise them without getting threats.

I get the points you make, but as I said in my previous comment, libel also protects the guilty to a certain extent, via anyone frightened to make a move against someone for fear of being sued - with the only difference being, it don't protect the average person, like you and me, espcially when it comes to the legal justice system or employment law, why is that, because we don't have money.

So all things are not equal, it's only a level playing field to those that can afford it.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe the 9/11 conspiracies, not one jot, but I believe in the right for people to persuade me otherwise. I can make my own decisions on fake videos posted by sucky that look as dodgy as his alien landings, but I still support his right to post them.

 

A simulation of flight 77 according to data provided to us by the official report and the black box data

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x36d2s9

 

there is no lines to be drawn you cannot have free speech if it’s on someone else’s terms….

 

I mean, he blames the Jews for COVID without any evidence. If someone acted upon that and killed some Jewish bloke because Icke told him the Jews started COVID, I think Icke should be held partially responsible for incitement. (If a direct link could be proven)

He's free to spout his nonsense, but he's not free from.the consequences.