3
The_Watcher 3 points ago +3 / -0

I believe the traditional process is:

  • Regulator finds new rule to grab more power and reduce freedoms.
  • Regulator gives money to activist NGO to prosecute the Regulator.
  • NGO then sues the Regulator because it has not enforced that rule.
  • Regulator goes to government and says: "Look, we are being sued, we need to apply that rule."
  • Government says: "OK, we have no choice if you are getting sued."
  • Regulator enacts rule and grabs yet more power.
3
The_Watcher 3 points ago +3 / -0

There is probably a difference between hurty words and really hurty words.

3
The_Watcher 3 points ago +3 / -0

I heard that the rules of diplomacy are:

  • If a diplomat says "Yes" he means "Maybe".
  • If he says "Maybe" he means "No".
  • If he says "No" then he ain't no diplomat!
3
The_Watcher 3 points ago +3 / -0

So he has paid the $1.1 billion, then?

Alex Jones must pay $1.1 billion of Sandy Hook damages despite bankruptcy, judge rules

2
The_Watcher 2 points ago +2 / -0
6
The_Watcher 6 points ago +6 / -0

... what is the purpose of attacking him with lawfare?

Warning: Pure speculation on my part.

First you build someone up and get them to release some interesting information. When a story comes along that the conventional media cannot suppress then you start to use people like Jones. You find him a witness to, say, pizzagate. You make sure that 95% of his story is correct but that last 5% is wrong and can be shown to be wrong. You get Jones to publish the story then you go after him through the courts exposing the 5% lie.

Now the other outlets decide to suppress any pizzagate stories they might have because they do not want to get sued like Jones.

Of course you don't want to really put him out of business because he is still useful. For instance, the Sandy Hook story refuses to lie down. Why not do the same again?

4
The_Watcher 4 points ago +4 / -0

That was my take as well.

He always seemed to be playing to the gallery but I don't remember anything ever coming of his inquiries. He did say "exculpatory" a lot, though!

2
The_Watcher 2 points ago +2 / -0

They are, it is just a way to make the victory more inclusive!

The plan is to lure the Russians right over to somewhere west of Lviv then Ukraine will pounce. The plan is going quite well so far. The movement west is becoming increasingly rapid. Those silly Russians!

2
The_Watcher 2 points ago +2 / -0

"grabbing women by the pussy"

You can usually bet anyone as much as you like that they cannot repeat the exact quote. That is partially because Trump was not speaking in whole sentences and partly because there was a preceding conditional clause.

Rather like the famous (mis)quote of Mr Bumble in Oliver Twist where he says that: "The law in an ass." The full exchange was:

“That is no excuse,” replied Mr. Brownlow. “You were present on the occasion of the destruction of these trinkets, and indeed are the more guilty of the two, in the eye of the law; for the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction.”

“If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is a ass—a idiot.

Trump was right; if you are rich and famous they do let you. Just hang around the stage door when the boy band is leaving for confirmation!

1
The_Watcher 1 point ago +1 / -0

Real climate scientists have long known that CO2 doesn't LEAD temperature, it FOLLOWS temperature.

Well the found the data in 1988 so that figures.

When the water heats up from the sun, it releases CO2.

Is that why the high levels are over land?

3
The_Watcher 3 points ago +3 / -0

In fairness, they did want to change the title of the journal to "Psychology Seven Years Ago" but it made the writing too small.

2
The_Watcher 2 points ago +2 / -0

Someone once produced a diagram that showed that most of the warming comes from the areas with the fewest thermometers.

In other words, where we have reliable thermometers there is very little warming but where we have to interpolate and extrapolate then we create a lot of warming.

This one is fun as well. It shows that most of the CO2 in the atmosphere is in the poorer parts of the world. So it would appear that it is not the rich countries with their industrialisation and consumerism that is causing most of the problem.

6
The_Watcher 6 points ago +6 / -0

"among the most well-known and influential musical works of all time."

I'm surprised that I have never heard of it!

1
The_Watcher 1 point ago +1 / -0

According to the Vostok ice core data, earth has gone through four cycles of heating and cooling lasting about 100,000 years each time. We are still in an ice age because we still have ice at the poles. When we are not in an ice age things get a lot warmer and that happened quite naturally in the past.

CO2 levels have been at least 17 times as high in the past quite naturally.

The main issue thrown up by the Vostok data (that was the graph Al Gore showed in his Inconvenient Truth film) is that it is actually the warming the precedes the CO2 increase by a few centuries. So it is more likely that warming causes CO2 rather than CO2 causes warming.

You are right about the money aspect. First you get a wealthy country on board so you have cash available to bribe the poorer countries. You can then rely on "democracy" to get your way. The bribed countries will vote with you. Then you increase the scare until the whole world agrees to a global tax which will eventually be used to finance your new globalist government.

2
The_Watcher 2 points ago +2 / -0

I spent most of my life, well right up to 2016 actually, totally ignoring politics. However, I did get involved with forums discussing Global Warming and Climate Change. I had decided it was all a hoax but when I talked to actual scientists I realised that I did not know as much as I thought i did.

That was when I learnt how to check facts and use the scientific method to my advantage. I regard that now as my training ground. I still think it is a hoax, by the way!

9
The_Watcher 9 points ago +9 / -0

Please cut them some slack. It takes time. First, you have to do a count to see how many extra votes you need to get completed. Then they need to be filled out and delivered. Then you need to count them all again, including the new ones, and pretend you are counting them for the first time.

It all takes time!

1
The_Watcher 1 point ago +1 / -0

A problem with weapons like hat pins is that they can be taken from you and used by your attacker.

4
The_Watcher 4 points ago +4 / -0

Or maybe the Roseanon Q-Hat?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›