Jump to content

Doha

Members
  • Content Count

    1,990
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Everything posted by Doha

  1. LaNd Of ThE fReE scream the yanks as they get mowed down and journalists get forcibly arrested by a heavily militarised, unaccountable police state.
  2. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Nothing. What a surprise.
  3. I have previously stated that the period November-January will be unlike anything ever seen before in terms of new levels of lunacy. It's started earlier. I've seen a lot of commentary laughing at Trump, saying his unhinged response to having his lies finally called out is entertainment. It isn't. It really isn't. This is the start of the next slipperly slope. This one is very steep. This week he retweeted a video where some lunatic said "the only good democrat is a dead democrat." A Trump loss in November will see him refusing to accept it. After the tantrum over Twitter and last nights dogwhistle over those darn pesky blacks (“When the looting starts, the shooting starts,” is a threat coined by Miami Police Chief Walter Headley, who promised violent reprisals on black protesters in 1967. He also said: “We don’t mind being accused of police brutality. They haven’t seen anything yet.” [source]) the insanity is going to begin a lot earlier. I hope I'm wrong but I don't think I am. Over the next 12 months I predict and am concerned America is going to see a lot more Cesar Sayocs and James Fields'. If he is still on Twitter by that point, then I predict after an election loss he will directly call for violence and reprisal attacks.
  4. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Stop with the pompous pseudointellectual faux superiority and acknowledge the subject matter. The man who’s going to break down the walls of the establishment elite apparently is in fact married to an aristocrats daughter. The aristocrat named a horse after Obama because, by his own admission in some toff hunting publication, the horse is black and white. The point is simple. Do you acknowledge this as unacceptable and condemn the Wakefields?
  5. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Dear third party readers, No, this mouth breather is not being satirical. As you were. Doha
  6. Doha

    Coronavirus

    I very much look forward to the deflection on this one. We've had people posting whataboutism about Corbyn's brother and Abbotts son so clearly, close relatives are fair game. I can't wait to see the defence for Mary Wakefields castle owning father calling a horse after Obama because it's half back and half white.
  7. Doha

    Coronavirus

    https://www.fieldsportschannel.tv/sir-humphry-misses-pheasant-season-to-go-riding/ Barack. Lovely. Guess who his son in law is.
  8. Doha

    Coronavirus

    We have the worst rates. Another few hundred will go today. You are the health minister. Do you go on live tv A. With solemn dignity and appropriate gravitas B. smirking, laughing and sneering
  9. https://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2020/05/27/trump-press-secretary-kayleigh-mcenany-has-voted-by-mail-11-times-in-10-years/
  10. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Howzat. The title of that article is Dominic Cummings edited an old blog to add a reference to coronaviruses. It is explicitly about Dominic Cummings editing his blog. All 8 paragraphs in this body of work are solely dedicated to the explication of this title. I write a 2800 word essay on the production of all musical instruments. I use the word 'Gibson' once, within a small 46 word segment on guitars within a greater 2800 word body of work that aside from this 46 word segment on guitars is titled about, and is written to discuss, an entirely different topic, manufacturing of all kinds of instruments. Is the article explicitly about Gibson? This is utterly asinine. The minute detail you try to go into to deflect from the main topic at hand is extraordinary. The point you are trying to make is entirely without substance. It's mad. Another pathetic misrepresentation. Time, and time, and time, and time again, I have stated the article is not explicitly about Coronavirus. I have never denied it mentions it. I have repeatedly made a point of stating that it mentions it, because it mentions it only once. It is NOT the subject of the article. The article is not explicitly about coronavirus. Your attempted representation as such is a transparent attempt at trying to bog down in ludicrous detail to ignore and deflect from the main topic at hand.
  11. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Exactly. In all his minute pedantism and deflection, he skirts around the issue at hand. Why did Cummings alter an old blog post to include, for the first time, a mention of Coronavirus, only when several months into a Coronavirus pandemic. Why did he misrepresent this wording on his blog in a press conference as having been written last year? Why did he deceitfully not draw attention to the fact the post had been updated when he does that when he has updated other posts? How can the answers to these questions be anything other than deceitfulness, dishonesty and a pathetic attempt at trying to portray himself as a learned elder of prescience genius? I wrote explicitly about coronaviruses only last year. It's a fcking lie. Am I going mad here?
  12. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Do you see how circles work? Interesting words from the man coated in conservative Rain X. This is not in dispute. I made a point of asserting it. That isn't true. It isn't true. This is lunancy. The article was explicitly talking about lab biosecurity. In almost 2800 words it mentioned 'coronavirus' ONCE. ONCE. In the context of SARS. One kind of Coronavirus. Again, not plural, that's an attempt to frame and pad the article out as discussing multiple strains of CV viruses. It made mention to SARS once. In a paragraph he originally deliberately chose to copy and paste around. There's misrepresenting facts and then there's trying to rewrite reality. Fortunate for the sanity of OVF readers you are failing in your attempts at both. This is like watching Hannity. Up is down and left is right. I don't believe you have a head injury or are otherwise incapacitated so the only rational conclusion anyone can make from your claim here is that you are being dishonest to try and invent facts to suit your agenda. Not bend, invent, because what you are trying to claim is so easily disprovable as fiction. This isn't about interpretation, it's about fiction. No one else would read a 2800 odd word article explicitly about lab biosecurity that made one singular reference to SARS and then claim the article was explicity about Coronaviruses. If I presented that sort of argument all those years ago in source analysis/comparison in an A Level exam the markscheme would have to be adapted to include an extra grade just for me. M for mental. Clearly not, because he copied and pasted around it. Your attempt to alter reality is extraordinary. The only way I can read a 2800 word article titled Human error in high-biocontainment labs: a likely pandemic threat that mentions the word 'coronavirus' once and not conclude it is explicitly about coronaviruses (classic Doms words) means I can't read properly, I didn't check it all all, or I'm being dishonest. Right. The post-truth movement has reached these shores. Christ on a bike.
  13. Doha

    Coronavirus

    A senior member!? He wasn't elected. Perhaps we should have a referendum on these Brussels Barnard castle gravy train riders.
  14. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Indeed. I see your English teacher taught you irony. Yes it did. About inadvertent breaches of the containment of Ebola virus from biosecurity labs. "only last year I wrote explicitly about the danger of coronaviruses" is still untrue. Quite a large quote is one way to put it. It's 1036 words. His blog post is centred around it. How interesting though, that despite copying such a large excerpt....he actually chose to remove a section in the middle of it about coronaviruses/SARS....and then put in retroactively a few weeks ago. How peculiar. How interesting that he would copy so much of the article above this paragraph....and so much below it, and yet at the time of writing, deliberately choose not to quote this section. And then retroactively edit it in a few weeks ago, several months into a Coronavirus pandemic? And then on Monday be dishonest in saying he'd explicitly written about the dangers of coronaviruses last year? Ebola isn't in the coronavirus genus. H1N1 isn't in the coronavirus genus. The Marburg virus isn't in the coronavirus genus. SARS is. Which at the time of writing last year he made a deliberate choice not to mention in the blog post. He then made a deliberate choice to mention them by trying to quietly edit it in a few weeks ago. How curious motives are, eh. Spin. It isn't on the subject of coronaviruses. It's on the subject of human factors in relation to errors in biosecurity lapses. The term 'coronavirus' is used once in the article of 2767 words. 'SARS' is used twice. In the paragraph he made a deliberate choice not to quote at the time of original writing. Why would you edit this paragraph in that you previously made a choice to disregard when now several months into a pandemic in relation to coronavirus? To appear prescient. It's dishonest. Article and column writers make a point of acknowledging updates to bodies of work. He chose not to. Because he was being deceitful. Pitiful strawman. Media media media. Spin spin spin. Always someone else's fault. Mummy it wasn't me!!! It is a CLEAR edit to incorporate a section on CV that he deliberately chose not to include before the coronavirus pandemic. Edited a year later, quietly. This is irrefutable. The metadata is there for all to see. The comparisons are there for all to see. The article is there for all to see. I can only reason that your refusal to acknowledge this is you failing to argue in good faith because Jean's year 7 kids could compare & contrast and interpret sources more logically than your post. It's another example of you bending backwards so far in post -truth defence of an unelected bureaucrat simply because he delivered a political ideology you rabidly sought, that the Planck institute should like to study your bending of time and space. Transparent spin from the same D10 press office that claimed the police hadn't spoken to Cummings family. It's the same angle you are trying to frame. It is a misrepresentation and use of weasel words and is about as well constructed as Normans hit and run claim. an unnamed Number 10 source confirmed the post had been edited......correct. but that the original post did include a link to an article which discussed coronaviruses....It made one reference to the word Coronavirus. Not plural, in a paragraph on SARS infecting two biolab workers. A paragraph Cummings deliberately chose, for some reason, not to reference when constructing his blog post around the rest of that bulletin article. and from which the added quote was taken....That he copied and pasted around. And edited in retrospectively. Once a CV pandemic was in full swing. The older version of the blog post also contained quotes from this article......Of everything but. This does not assist your argument in the slightest. If anything it undermines you. Indeed. You are becoming as nonsensical as Paul in your hyperpartisan defence of night actually being day. It's very, very strange. Replace Cummings with Abbott, Starmer, Corbyn. What is your position now on trying to surreptitiously retroactively edit a body of work to include reference to a current event like you were the all seeing eye who forsaw it? And then make that claim in a live press conference when it is patently untrue? I know exactly what your position would be but you will never answer this truthfully because of the implication of admitting your teen idol is dishonest, lies, and thinks he's better than you. LBW? You've tried to sandpaper the ball and dropped it. Bit like classic Dom did. This is what happens when people who can't print to PDF try to be slick. Ask Paul Manafort.
  15. Doha

    Coronavirus

    The blog was retroactively edited only a few weeks ago to include a mention of Coronaviruses/SARS. "Last year" was untrue. "I wrote explicitly" was untrue. It wasn't there. It is now, having been copied and pasted from elsewhere. Good luck psued. Your dedication to an unelected bureaucrat is admirable. It's funny isn't it how everyone apart from you keeps misinterpreting all of these events, statements and actions. It's almost, almost, like your favourite word is manifesting. Sides.
  16. Doha

    Coronavirus

    Sarcastically pretending not to see the point. How atypical of your behaviour when it comes to, as you keep saying, your "side." He was dishonest in the press conference about this. Your inability to admit it is no surprise. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dominic-cummings-accused-of-adding-coronavirus-warning-to-year-old-blog-post-nw2jtr5nb https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/dominic-cummings-coronavirus-blog-boris-johnson-downing-street-a9532996.html https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/26/dominic-cummings-edited-blog-make-look-like-warned-coronavirus-12757843/
  17. Doha

    Coronavirus

    When filling up tomorrow I shall be nipping in to buy a daily star for the first time ever, simply because I'm going to have to fcking see this dystopian nightmare in the flesh for myself.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy