Bill Gates Conspiracy

Penfailed · 10-09-2020 11:36pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

I did think that perhaps it was a nervous laugh, but if you look at his wife's reaction she definitely isn't nervous. For some reason she has a gigantic smile on her face. For some reason the idea of a terrible pandemic causes her to smile.

So what's your take on it? You've referred to it many many times in this thread but you haven't actually said what you think that they are smirking/beaming about. Why does it set off alarm bells for you?

Dionaibh · 10-09-2020 11:39pm

Penfailed wrote: »

So what's your take on it? You've referred to it many many times in this thread but you haven't actually said what you think that they are smirking/beaming about. Why does it set off alarm bells for you?

I don't really know what to make of it, but I don't understand why they both smiled after he said what he said.

Penfailed · 10-09-2020 11:41pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

I don't really know what to make of it, but I don't understand why they both smiled after he said what he said.

In joke? There really could be any number of innocent reasons for it.

Dionaibh · 10-09-2020 11:49pm

Penfailed wrote: »

In joke? There really could be any number of innocent reasons for it.

You could be right, but then look at his reaction when the interviewer mentions the economy being destroyed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zShkBl5phUs

Who reacts like that? A possible explanation is that he doesn't like Trump and so he's happy that the economy is banjaxed.

Igotadose · 11-09-2020 8:45am

Dionaibh wrote: »

But what are your thoughts on what he said about Event 201?

They're worth ignoring as he's not a reliable source, and is looking to make a buck on his wild conspiracy theories. Post a reliable link that confirms your statement - major news media would be a great start - and then there might be something worth discussing.

The fact that the WHO sponsored an event to 'game' a pandemic outbreak is a brilliant idea. Maybe it helped save some lives. Too bad the US, especially, ignored it except some private citizens.

Igotadose · 11-09-2020 9:15am

Dionaibh wrote: »

I never said it proved anything. I mentioned his laughing at the economy being banjaxed to show that he laughs and smirks at, and about, things that aren't funny. Watch any interview with him an you'll see that he smirks or laughs for no reason. Why did he find it funny that the economy was destroyed? Why did he smirk / smile after saying the next one would get people's attention? Would you call that normal behaviour?

He's laughing at the reference to his blog a few seconds before, by Fareed Zakaria, before he seriously answers the economy question. The questions and answers always have a few second delay.

You might want to watch the entire video and see if you think the same afterwards, not just a small excerpt around 5 minutes in.

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2020/04/26/exp-gps-0426-gates-on-re-opening-the-u-s-economy.cnn

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 9:36am

Igotadose wrote: »

He's laughing at the reference to his blog a few seconds before, by Fareed Zakaria, before he seriously answers the economy question. The questions and answers always have a few second delay.

You might want to watch the entire video and see if you think the same afterwards, not just a small excerpt around 5 minutes in.

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2020/04/26/exp-gps-0426-gates-on-re-opening-the-u-s-economy.cnn

Thank you. I didn't realise. The dangers of watching just a clip without the context.

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 9:38am

Igotadose wrote: »

They're worth ignoring as he's not a reliable source, and is looking to make a buck on his wild conspiracy theories. Post a reliable link that confirms your statement - major news media would be a great start - and then there might be something worth discussing.

The fact that the WHO sponsored an event to 'game' a pandemic outbreak is a brilliant idea. Maybe it helped save some lives. Too bad the US, especially, ignored it except some private citizens.

Major news media reliable? Considering Gates funds most of the media trying to find any reference to Event 201 in MSM is impossible.

Igotadose · 11-09-2020 9:39am

Dionaibh wrote: »

Major news media reliable? Considering Gates funds most of the media trying to find any reference to Event 201 in MSM is impossible.

So, no confirmation then. As typical, CT is all make-believe.

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 9:42am

Dionaibh wrote: »

Major news media reliable? Considering Gates funds most of the media trying to find any reference to Event 201 in MSM is impossible.

so this article isn't true then?

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/03/26/fact-check-bill-gates-backed-pandemic-exercise-didnt-predict-covid-19/5081854002/

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:01am

Igotadose wrote: »

So, no confirmation then. As typical, CT is all make-believe.

If you search for 'Event 201' on Google, the only results, save for a few articles on fringe websites, are attacks on 'Plandemic', and so-called debunkings on fact-checker sites, sites that are also funded by Gates. Very often their debunkings consist of "we asked the person / organisation and they said it isn't true". I'm not saying Event 201 predicted COVID-19, but that a debunking that consists of 'they said it isn't true' isn't a debunking. Sure enough, in that USA Today article the debunking is 'they said it isn't true'.

Rather long article, but it examines the relationship between Gates and the media: https://www.cjr.org/criticism/gates-foundation-journalism-funding.php

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:02am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so this article isn't true then?

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/03/26/fact-check-bill-gates-backed-pandemic-exercise-didnt-predict-covid-19/5081854002/

The debunking consists of 'they said it isn't true'. Would you call 'they said it isn't true' a debunking?

Penfailed · 11-09-2020 10:07am

Dionaibh wrote: »

Thank you. I didn't realise. The dangers of watching just a clip without the context.

That's what a lot of YouTube videos do though. Selective editing to make things appear different to the actual reality to push an agenda (...and that goes for both sides of any argument).

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 10:08am

Dionaibh wrote: »

The debunking consists of 'they said it isn't true'. Would you call 'they said it isn't true' a debunking?

well no, that is not the only thing they said. try actually reading it.

King Mob · 11-09-2020 10:08am

Dionaibh wrote: »

fact-checker sites, sites that are also funded by Gates.

Which fact checker websites are funded by Gates and influenced to falsely debunk things surrounding him?

Is it specific ones or is it all of them?

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:21am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well no, that is not the only thing they said. try actually reading it.

I read the article and the only debunking I see is 'they said it wasn't true'. In 'Plandemic II', it shows Event 201 and real life side by side. Everything that's happening now was simulated in Event 201. Even Ryan of WHO practised saying 'new normal'.

But it could be a coincidence.

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 10:23am

Dionaibh wrote: »

I read the article and the only debunking I see is 'they said it wasn't true'. In 'Plandemic II', it shows Event 201 and real life side by side. Everything that's happening now was simulated in Event 201. Even Ryan of WHO practised saying 'new normal'.

But it could be a coincidence.

event 201 predicted 65 million deaths. have we had 65 million deaths?

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:33am

King Mob wrote: »

Which fact checker websites are funded by Gates and influenced to falsely debunk things surrounding him?

Is it specific ones or is it all of them?

Politifact, for example, is owned by the Poynter Institute, which has received substantial funding from Google and the Gates' Foundation.

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:33am

Penfailed wrote: »

That's what a lot of YouTube videos do though. Selective editing to make things appear different to the actual reality to push an agenda (...and that goes for both sides of any argument).

Thanks. It's very dishonest and misleading.

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 10:34am

Dionaibh wrote: »

Thanks. It's very dishonest and misleading.

none more so than the one you posted with the Max Headroom editing.

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:34am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

event 201 predicted 65 million deaths. have we had 65 million deaths?

That's one of the few differences between the actual pandemic and the simulated one.

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:35am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

none more so than the one you posted with the Max Headroom editing.

Fair enough. You're right. I didn't realise that the clip was taken out of context.

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 10:37am

Dionaibh wrote: »

That's one of the few differences between the actual pandemic and the simulated one.

s o not identical then. how many points of difference are required before you can no longer say that event 201 predicted Covd19?

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 10:45am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

s o not identical then. how many points of difference are required before you can no longer say that event 201 predicted Covd19?

I'm not saying Event 201 predicted it. But Mike Ryan practising saying 'this is the new normal' during Event 201 is worrying.

King Mob · 11-09-2020 10:45am

Dionaibh wrote: »

Politifact, for example, is owned by the Poynter Institute, which has received substantial funding from Google and the Gates' Foundation.

Ok. So that's one, according to you and if we accept that as true.

Is that the only one?
If not, which others?

Dionaibh wrote: »

I'm not saying Event 201 predicted it. But Mike Ryan practising saying 'this is the new normal' during Event 201 is worrying.

So then what are you saying that this Event 201 did?
How does it show a conspiracy?

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 11:03am

King Mob wrote: »

Ok. So that's one, according to you and if we accept that as true.

Is that the only one?
If not, which others?

So then what are you saying that this Event 201 did?
How does it show a conspiracy?

they used the phrase "new normal" is what it seems to boil down to.

runawaybishop · 11-09-2020 11:42am

Dionaibh wrote: »

I'm not saying Event 201 predicted it. But Mike Ryan practising saying 'this is the new normal' during Event 201 is worrying.

He's not practising anything. Use your head. He's just continuing to use information gained during a simulation.

runawaybishop · 11-09-2020 11:45am

Dionaibh wrote: »

Major news media reliable? Considering Gates funds most of the media trying to find any reference to Event 201 in MSM is impossible.

This is blatant nonsense. There is plenty of reference to this and the many other simulations.

Dohnjoe · 11-09-2020 1:16pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

Major news media reliable? Considering Gates funds most of the media trying to find any reference to Event 201 in MSM is impossible.

The Gates Foundation raises awareness of issues by funding journalism and studies on certain issues e.g. poverty in Africa, or helping train journalists to cover those matter or funding specials on those particular issues.

So if you open up the e.g. Guardian newspaper, you may find an editorial on page 15 on vaccines developments in some poor country that was funded by the Gates foundation.

So no, he's not "controlling the media". It's even more absurd to suggest that news and current affairs from countless credible outlets around the world are "unreliable" due to him.

4068ac1elhodqr · 11-09-2020 2:24pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

...So if you open up the e.g. Guardian newspaper, you may find an editorial on page 15 on vaccines developments in some poor country that was funded by the Gates foundation.

So no, he's not "controlling the media". It's even more absurd to suggest that news and current affairs from countless credible outlets around the world are "unreliable" due to him.

Agree, the Guardian for a change did/does have a wide range of topical stories on the various Gates-funded projects, e.g. here is one of theirs from a couple of years ago.

Remote-controlled contraceptive microchip could launch by 2018
Developed by researchers at MIT {gates funded}, the 'digital pill' 'implant' could revolutionise birth control, allowing women to switch hormones on and off at the touch of a button

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2014/jul/11/design-futures-remote-controlled-contraceptive-microchip-launch-by-2018
It's an interesting story on the topic of population/fertility control, wouldn't however fancy placing 16yrs worth of a remote control hormone drug reservoir under anyone's skin however.

The chip is implanted under the skin and releases small doses of the contraceptive hormone levonorgestrel on a daily basis, with enough capacity to last 16 years

To be fair the population of Africa is set to double by 2050, so may well need some direct intervention of family planning, don't think this particular project took off for the 500million females there as intended.

r439z5ifwt8soq · 11-09-2020 2:33pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

That's one of the few differences between the actual pandemic and the simulated one.

There are many similarities and many differences between that event and what actually happened. It would help to read these things with a mind to form an objective view, instead of reading it in order to make it fit the narrative you're subscribed to.

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 2:34pm

Heidi Defeated Barber wrote: »

Agree, the Guardian for a change did/does have a wide range of topical stories on the various Gates-funded projects, e.g. here is one of theirs from a couple of years ago.

Remote-controlled contraceptive microchip could launch by 2018
Developed by researchers at MIT {gates funded}, the 'digital pill' 'implant' could revolutionise birth control, allowing women to switch hormones on and off at the touch of a button

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2014/jul/11/design-futures-remote-controlled-contraceptive-microchip-launch-by-2018
It's an interesting story on the topic of population/fertility control, wouldn't however fancy placing 16yrs worth of a remote control hormone drug reservoir under anyone's skin however.

To be fair the population of Africa is set to double by 2050, so may well need some direct intervention of family planning, don't think this particular project took off for the 500million females there as intended.

what is the conspiracy?

Dohnjoe · 11-09-2020 2:35pm

Heidi Defeated Barber wrote: »

Agree, the Guardian for a change did/does have a wide range of topical stories on the various Gates-funded projects, e.g. here is one of theirs from a couple of years ago.

Remote-controlled contraceptive microchip could launch by 2018
Developed by researchers at MIT {gates funded}, the 'digital pill' 'implant' could revolutionise birth control, allowing women to switch hormones on and off at the touch of a button

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2014/jul/11/design-futures-remote-controlled-contraceptive-microchip-launch-by-2018
It's an interesting story on the topic of population/fertility control, wouldn't however fancy placing 16yrs worth of a remote control hormone drug reservoir under anyone's skin however.

And what's your point? what's the conspiracy?

The purpose of that thing is to reduce unwanted pregnancies, nothing nefarious. It just does so in a technological way. If it became available, maybe people would use it, maybe they wouldn't.

ohnonotgmail · 11-09-2020 2:41pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

And what's your point? what's the conspiracy?

The purpose of that thing is to reduce unwanted pregnancies, nothing nefarious. It just does so in a technological way. If it became available, maybe people would use it, maybe they wouldn't.

135 posts in and the closest we have come to a conspiracy is that he smiled in an interview

4068ac1elhodqr · 11-09-2020 2:42pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

And what's your point? what's the conspiracy?

The purpose of that thing is to reduce unwanted pregnancies, nothing nefarious. It just does so in a technological way. If it became available, maybe people would use it, maybe they wouldn't.

And what is your point?
I was simply agreeing with your point, that the Guardian isn't bad all the times, and sometimes gives an interesting perspective.

Somewhat agree with you, the concept of a remote-controlled contraceptive implanted microchip storing an embodiment of 16yrs worth of hormones sounds fine if a localised population is deemed to be spiraling out of control, sure what could go wrong?

Dohnjoe · 11-09-2020 2:54pm

Heidi Defeated Barber wrote: »

Somewhat agree with you, the concept of a remote-controlled contraceptive implanted microchip storing an embodiment of 16yrs worth of hormones sounds fine if a localised population is deemed to be spiraling out of control, sure what could go wrong?

What could go wrong?

Let's say the tech exists, has passed all the trials, etc and women can go to a GP and get the procedure

What nefarious thing is going to happen according to you?

4068ac1elhodqr · 11-09-2020 3:10pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

What could go wrong?

Can't see anything going wrong* with this Gates funded remote-controlled contraceptive implanted microchip, storing (in this embodiment), 16yrs worth of hormones to prevent fertility.

(*IF), very large scale, long duration (e.g. 16yr product lifespan) trials take place, and these prove there is zero risk to long term health or sterility.

What according to you, are any potential nefarious things with such a project?
If none, you clearly reckon there is zero risk.

Bear in mind this implant was planned for 500million, and for 2018 (without any 16yr duration trials), but was pulled for some strange reason.

Of course various female operations such as silicone breast implants or vaginal mesh surgery were all trialled and certified safe, but yet strangely seem to be making headlines of late.

Dohnjoe · 11-09-2020 3:20pm

Heidi Defeated Barber wrote: »

Somewhat agree with you, the concept of a remote-controlled contraceptive implanted microchip storing an embodiment of 16yrs worth of hormones sounds fine if a localised population is deemed to be spiraling out of control, sure what could go wrong?

Anything we use or eat or take has risk, whether it's water, aspirin, a burger, whatever. When it comes to medical stuff, risk can be relatively higher, which is why we have medical trials, tests, etc.

You however are on a conspiracy forum, and you often suggest at some nefarious conspiracy behind these things, without saying what it is, a bizarre "on the fence" stance.

In this case, with this tech, and what you have written above, explain what you think the conspiracy or nefarious thing you keep hinting at is? and how is that linked to Bill Gates?

If you can't detail what you keep alluding to, it's just mindless paranoia.

Timberrrrrrrr · 11-09-2020 3:33pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Anything we use or eat or take has risk, whether it's water, aspirin, a burger, whatever. When it comes to medical stuff, risk can be relatively higher, which is why we have medical trials, tests, etc.

You however are on a conspiracy forum, and you often suggest at some nefarious conspiracy behind these things, without saying what it is, a bizarre "on the fence" stance.

In this case, with this tech, and what you have written above, explain what you think the conspiracy or nefarious thing you keep hinting at is? and how is that linked to Bill Gates?

If you can't detail what you keep alluding to, it's just mindless paranoia.

Its the CT equivalent of saying the name "Bill Gates" followed up with a wink and a nudge.

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 3:43pm

runawaybishop wrote: »

He's not practising anything. Use your head. He's just continuing to use information gained during a simulation.

He practised saying it during Event 201 and has carried on saying it.

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 3:46pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

135 posts in and the closest we have come to a conspiracy is that he smiled in an interview

But you left out the bit about him smiling and smirking after saying 'the next one will get people's attention".

If I said "there's going to be a gigantic earthquake next week" and then smiled and smirked after saying it, would you find it a bit perturbing?

r439z5ifwt8soq · 11-09-2020 3:49pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

He practised saying it during Event 201 and has carried on saying it.

So he used something he learned through a training exercise in real life?

Timberrrrrrrr · 11-09-2020 3:52pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

But you left out the bit about him smiling and smirking after saying 'the next one will get people's attention".

If I said "there's going to be a gigantic earthquake next week" and then smiled and smirked after saying it, would you find it a bit perturbing?

Thats all you have, body language:pac:

This has to be the most stupid evidence for a conspiracy that I have ever seen and believe me, I never thought the massive magic mirror that survived the twin towers falling would ever be beaten but you sir have taken that baton and gone into a very clear lead

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 3:53pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Thats all you have, body language:pac:

This has to be the most stupid evidence for a conspiracy that I have ever seen and believe me, I never thought the massive magic mirror that survived the twin towers falling would ever be beaten but you sir have taken that baton and gone into a very clear lead

But I never said it was evidence of anything. I just said that it perturbed me.

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 3:55pm

Douglas Gifted Flashlight wrote: »

So he used something he learned through a training exercise in real life?

Could be. But all the world leaders started saying it in March.

Timberrrrrrrr · 11-09-2020 3:55pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

But I never said it was evidence of anything. I just said that it perturbed me.

People smiling perturb you?

Dionaibh · 11-09-2020 4:06pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

People smiling perturb you?

Two very powerful people smiling after saying that the next pandemic would get people's attention perturbed me.

runawaybishop · 11-09-2020 4:07pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

But I never said it was evidence of anything. I just said that it perturbed me.

Stop being facetious. You deliberately brought it up here as part of your conspiracy theory.

runawaybishop · 11-09-2020 4:07pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

He practised saying it during Event 201 and has carried on saying it.

Isn't that the point of a simulation? To learn and apply that learning to real events

Timberrrrrrrr · 11-09-2020 4:11pm

Dionaibh wrote: »

Two very powerful people smiling after saying that the next pandemic would get people's attention perturbed me.

You're easily "perturbed" so.

Bill Gates Conspiracy

Comments