All Covid-19 measures are permanent, don't be a boiling frog!

Lol Another attempt to deflect to a new topic because you're getting cornered again.

Again you ask questions and expect answers yet refuse to answer any yourself.

You said you would get back to me and explain why masks would be permanent, you said you would explain the reasons behind the need for people to wear masks from now in, care to elaborate on it now while I have you here?

Ah so it was just another lie in a long list of lies that you have told?

This right here proves to everyone reading this thread that you are a liar and have no intention whatsoever of debating in good faith.

For clarity sake here is the exchange about masks on November 9th.

ME:

"you STILL haven't explained why they would be permanent, what's the nefarious reason (in your mind) that they would need them to be permanent?"

Gortanna:

"I'll come to that later. I read another hypothesis the other day."

Lol. So you'll come to it at some point before the thread hits 300 pages of you not answering it?

Before 400?

Before the end of time?

I don't think you'll ever come to it because you don't have an answer, and you are a very dishonest person. I think you saying that "you'll come to it" is another one of your lies you used to deflect from the fact you can't answer it.

Who's "Your man"? Are you again refering to me but for some reason you're afraid of stating my name?

Give us the context of where he said that, have you a link, what was he talking about? Everything I checked up on about Bill Gates turned out to be nonsense. I'd be surprised if this wasn't too!

So are you suggesting that world leaders a few months ago intended to lockdown everyone in the winter, and that the lockdown in the Netherlands is not in response to rising Covid numbers and strain on their hospitals?

So are you saying that in the West we shouldn't take action against a virus, and we should just let it run through the population. What if it was Ebola, would you still think we shouldn't do anything about it, and have no restrictions? What about foot and mouth disease, if there was an outbreak, do you think restrictions would be justified, like in the past?

What do you mean by this?

So are you still confined to 2 or 5 km from home, can you not go to crowded matches (40,000 + in the Aviva yesterday), can you not go to shops, restaurants, pubs. What do you mean?

What do you mean by that? Have I got to wear a mask if I walk down the street or go to the park?

So what's wrong with requiring the Covid cert to get into places where social distancing is not possible. Do you think the virus is gone, and there is no longer any risk? Do you think the Covid numbers are just made up?

Also, this is not context.

One is a link to some twitter crank talking about an entirely different topic, so is completely irrelevant.

The other is a clip from a conspiracy youtube channel that provides no details about where and when and in what context the quote is from. It is editted purposfully to remove it from it's context. The video does not show what Gates was talking about before the quote you're asking about, therefore it is not in context.

This is a very common and very dishoenst trick grifters use on gullible people to make them think their lies are true.

Ok, your youtube link is to someone who has cut 17 sec out of a 17 min interview with Gates recorded by the US Chamber of Commerce Foundation in June 2020, and is trying to put a spin on it (to gauge their credibility, the same person says the Covid outbreak in 2020 was predicted in 1956, also says the Antichrist is here, etc)

Here is the original video on youtube. In the bit in question, starting at about 4min 40sec, he is answering a question "what are you concerned about now?". He answers

"Well, this won't be the last pandemic that we face, you know pandemics can come from natural causes, which is largely coming across from other species, you know, a flu, for example, is still a very big risk, and so we'll have to invest in making sure that we catch the disease sooner, and that we have platforms to make diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines very quickly. Very little was invested even though there were calls from a lot of people, including from our foundation ... " leaving out a bit, but further on he says " ... and the cost would have been tiny compared to say what we spend on being ready for war, we didn't actually do the simulation to think about, ok what about nursing homes, what about getting factories ready, what about the testing regime, you know, in fact, the testing could have been ramped up very quickly, and, a few countries have almost avoided the epidemic entirely, like Taiwan, New Zealand, Australia, you know, they took their experience and actually prepared and so they moved a lot faster, so, we, you know, will have to prepare for the next one, that, you know, I'd say, is, ah, will get attention this time",

He's clearly talking about pandemics in general (google 'pandemics' and see how many there have been in the past), and he's referring to the inevitable next pandemic, and, given our experiences with this one, we will be more ready for the next one. Nothing at all suspicious in what he says, it make perfect sense to me. Why do you think what he says is not what he means?

Your Twitter link is to someone who is taking a recent interview with Bill Gates and taking things out of context. Here is the original interview on youtube. Most is about climate change, but at 32min 40sec he is asked about "pandemic preparedness", and in his response he says ...

"2015 that i gave the uh ted talk and wrote a number of papers uh titled 'We're not ready for the next pandemic' and sadly that was uh a better forecast of what would happen than uh anyone would have wished for, you know the economic damage, the, you know, the death's, it's been completely horrific, and i would expect that will lead the R&D budgets to be focused on things we didn't have today ..." -- Skipping forward -- "... so i'm hoping in five years i can write a book called you know 'We're ready for the next pandemic' but it will take tens of billions in R&D ..." -- Skipping fwd -- ".. it'll take probably about a billion a year for a pandemic task force at WHO level which is doing the surveillance, and actually doing what I call germ games, where you practice, you say, okay what if uh a bioterrorist brought smallpox to 10 airports, you know, how would the world respond to that, you know, that, there's naturally caused epidemics, and bioterrorism caused epidemics, that, could, even be way worse than what we experienced today ..." -- Skipping fwd -- "..a lot of the R&D we need to do to be ready for the next pandemic are things like making vaccines cheap having big factories, uh eradicating the flu, getting rid of the common cold, making vaccines just a little patch you put on your arm, things that will be incredibly beneficial even in the years when we don't have pandemics".

So, answering your original question, what Bill Gates meant when he referred to "the next one" is completely clear, and is that he was referring to a future pandemic, which seems inevitable given how many happened in the past, and that we should be prepared for it!

So do you think a reasonable person could take any malicious meaning out of what Gates said?

A simple google would answer that.

Time waster.

Watch now as even though me and Pintofview gave him a clear direct answer he will ignore and deflect and avoid and try to move on to another topic cause he can't address any of the points.

He only asked this pointless question to deflect from the fact he's refusing to address any of the questions put to him.

He knows it's dishonest. Doesn't care. As long as he can play pretends.

Listen carefully to what the government are saying. They use words like: Probably, Possibly, Maybe, Approximately, Roughly, In all likelihood, In all probability, Most likely, Very likely, Presumably, Reasonable assumption, Supposedly, At a glance

This is not science, it's propaganda.

But you haven't answered the question.

It's been recently pointed out to you that you lied about that. You've admitting that you're refusing to answer the question.

Why do you keep posting bullshit you know is bullshit from twitter cranks you know are liars and grifters? Why do you keep lying and being completely dishonest to defend bullshit?

No one here has a problem with the thread. You and your buddies however have shown that you are unable and unwilling to engage in discussion where people are allowed to question the conspiracy theory religion.

Since you keep forget things inconvienient to your beliefs, I remind you, you and your fellow conspiracy theorists were trying to get the forum closed down because you were pissy that people were allowed to not agree with you.

If you don't like the thread and the forum, why are you posting in it?

I think it's because no where else will tolerate you posting bullshit you know is bullshit so you can play pretend at being a rebel researcher. And you know no one would be arsed to follow you on a blog or twitter.