"Malte Runz" wrote in message
news:l8juajp9dha1d8b5all957av9di14atbu7@4ax.com...
>
>On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:05:29 +1000, "Andrew W" <space@defense.com>
>wrote:
>
>>"Malte Runz" wrote in message
>>news:pkopaj52j96ca8smvhb70ag1iviq2d30ev@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:47:36 +1000, "Andrew W" <space@defense.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Malte Runz" wrote in message
>>>>news:65qnaj9h7jtrc497e90qtb9f5a54dmallf@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:47:38 +1000, "Andrew W" <space@defense.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Malte Runz" wrote in message
>>>>>>news:9pphaj51bc9ak2q24n79p8rujfcktl3mn5@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 09:07:07 +1000, "Andrew W" <space@defense.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Malte Runz" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:t0pfaj5tvefcvlsq3femilk94lr7hn94md@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 14:49:18 +1000, "Andrew W" <space@defense.com>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"El Kabong" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>news:f0n98jdmt37p4u2vgqsn1vjhmgpi5e08uf@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>(snip)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Andrew hates democracy and loves Putin.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>You're wrong on both counts. ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>All you do is defend Putin and what he is doing, not only in
>>>>>>>>>Ukraine,
>>>>>>>>>but also how he deals with his political opposition in Russia.
>>>>>>>>>Remember when you said that the journalist Putin had killed in the
>>>>>>>>>elevator deserved it, because she was probably a 'dangerous
>>>>>>>>>troublemaker'?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Putin does the same as most political leaders do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And does that make it alright?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nope. It's politics.
>>>>>>Show me some hard facts about Putin instead of just hearsay.
>>>>>
>>>>>Putin ordered the attack on Ukraine. He's a war criminal on par with
>>>>>Adolf Hitler.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Funny how that's exactly what MSNBC and CNN etc. say which are run by
>>>>the
>>>>deep state.
>>>
>>>Ignoring the usual deep state crap, are you saying it wasn't Putin who
>>>ordered the attack on Ukraine?
>>>
>>
>>It's unknown who the order came from. ...
>
>No, it's not.
>
>https://tinyurl.com/33a25h5b
>"Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered Russian troops into two
>separatist-held regions in eastern Ukraine in a military escalation
>that Western leaders have warned could lead to massive consequences
>for Moscow.
>
>Putin signed the decrees ordering the troop deployment on February 21
>after announcing his decision to recognize the independence of the two
>regions, a move that was swiftly condemned by Western leaders fearful
>of major conflict on the European continent."
>
>https://tinyurl.com/25zc7whc
>Putin's speech right before the attack.
>"... We have been left no other option to protect Russia and our
>people, but for the one that we will be forced to use today. The
>situation requires us to take decisive and immediate action. The
>people’s republics of Donbas turned to Russia with a request for help.
>
>“In this regard, in accordance with Article 51 of Part 7 of the UN
>Charter, with the approval of the Federation Council of Russia and in
>pursuance of the treaties of friendship and mutual assistance ratified
>by the Duma on February 22 with the Donetsk People’s Republic and the
>Luhansk People’s Republic, I decided to launch a special military
>operation. ..."
>
>Do you understand the words "I decided to launch a special military
>operation."?
>
>See what a little google research can uncover!
>
>> ... It could have been a General.
>
>I know you don't believe that, and now I know that you know it was
>Putin who "decided to launch a special military operation".
>
>Another example of you not doing your own research but decided to spew
>blather instead.
>>

Putin ordered an attack on key locations where the enemy resides. He didn't
order an attack on the whole country of Ukraine and its people like the MSM
claims.

>>
>>>
>>>>The deep state is what Putin is trying to eradicate, not the people of
>>>>Ukraine, fool. ...
>>>
>>>Do you believe Putin when he explains how Ukraine is really a part of
>>>Russia and has no right to exist as a sovereign nation? Do you need me
>>>to link to his 'manifesto' again? Last time I did so, you claimed to
>>>already have read it. Okay... once more:
>>>http://www.en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
>>>
>>>"I am confident that true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in
>>>partnership with Russia.
>>>
>>
>>A partnership sounds alright.
>
>To someone like you, yes, I'm sure a partnership with Putin sounds
>alright. Together you can get rid of the troublemakers, right.
>>

You don't know as much about Putin as you think. You only hear about him
from the real enemy that the MSM never talks about, because the same enemy
controls them.
And you can't see purpose of all this - to create another world war.

>>
>>>
>>>Our spiritual, human and civilizational ties
>>>formed for centuries and have their origins in the same sources, they
>>>have been hardened by common trials, achievements and victories. Our
>>>kinship has been transmitted from generation to generation. It is in
>>>the hearts and the memory of people living in modern Russia and
>>>Ukraine, in the blood ties that unite millions of our families.
>>>Together we have always been and will be many times stronger and more
>>>successful. For we are one people."
>>>
>>
>>That sounds okay. Nothing aggressive there.
>
>Of course it sounds fine to you. The talk about 'blood and soil' and
>'one people'. You love that shit.
>>

You love the lying MSM, the mouthpiece of the real enemy.

>>
>>>
>>>>... Why do you believe the MSM lies?
>>>
>>>"For we are one people." Putin's words, motherfucker.
>>>
>>
>>That's unity. ...
>
>No, it isn't. It's assimilation. The Ukrainians do not want to be "one
>people" under Putin's Russia.
>

You've been completely brainwashed.

>
>> ... You prefer division and conflict? I think you have mental
>>problems.
>
>I prefer people being able to choose for themselves, and not having
>the big neighbor telling them they are "one people", and in order to
>prove it Big Brother is laying waste to their country..
>>

The crooked MSM tells you all this.

>>>
>>>>>>>>You unwittingly and indirectly defend systemic corruption out of
>>>>>>>>ignorance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Strawman.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Not really.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, really. I'm not ignorant about what you call systemic corruption.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes you are because you still believe the corrupt MSM, left political
>>>>party
>>>>etc. etc.
>>>
>>>Etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. Wake me up when your done blowing your
>>>strawman.
>>>
>>
>>Everything you say is the same as what the radical left MSM says.
>
>You keep forgetting to add 'extreme'.
>
>(snip)
>
>>>>No I don't follow the MSM and political left.
>>>
>>>Another keeper. Yes, I know you don't know what 'MSM and the political
>>>left' actually say. One thing you are getting completely wrong is that
>>>you think the political left is aligned with MSM. I'll let you in on a
>>>little secret. Leftist dislike MSM just as much as you do.
>>>
>>
>>Why do they say the same things then?
>
>They don't! Prove me wrong. Links, quotes, the whole spiel.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>Do you still believe the global warming scam that's for taxing people
>>>>with
>>>>carbon credits and limiting travel?
>>>
>>>Global warming is real and travel is not limited.
>>>>
>>
>>Global warming and cooling has been happening for billions of years. The
>>temp goes up and down.
>
>So, you accept the science that shows the temperature is rising?
>

In some countries its falling. Here in Australia we are having some of the
coldest and longest winters ever.

>
>>Years ago Al Gore and others claimed that we are doomed, but today we're
>>no
>>closer to that.
>
>Yes, we are. Every year is hotter than the previous year.
>

It's the media that's been claiming that. Australia is mostly a tropical
country and our summers are now intermittent with only a few hot days and
the hottest days are not hotter than decades ago. You've been gaslighted.

>
>Deserts are
>spreading rapidly.
>

Not true.

>
>Storms are more frequent and stronger.
>

The enemy are using weather manipulation technologies.

>
>Sea levels
>are rising.
>

Not true.

>
>Your Great Barrier Reef is dying.
>

'Global warming' as it's being put forward isn't necessarily the cause of
that. Storm damage and Crown-of-thorns starfish are the main causes.

>
>>The crooks in power want to bring out yet another tax.
>>Battery powered cars are another way to limit our travel ...
>
>Utter bullshit.
>

You've been fed bullshit.

>
>> ... and keep us in
>>cities. ...
>
>Nonsense.
>

Says an MSM believer.

>
>> ... You've heard of the 15 minute cities?
>
>Yes. A concept that is meant to reduce the need for unnecessary
>commuting.
>

Who's doing unnecessary commuting?
What about people who have to travel because of the nature of their
business? Or have relatives out of town?

>
>Or, do you think it's good that millions of people spend
>hours stuck in traffic every day? 'Rush hour is happy hour'?
>>

You think the WEF has the big solution? You believe them?

>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Freedom from dishonest politics and bureaucratic meddling in our
>>>>>>>>lives.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do you regard regulations WRT pollution and contamination of the
>>>>>>>environment "meddling in our lives"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You're twisting the issue.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm giving you an example of politicians and bureaucrats meddling in
>>>>>people's lives. Come up with a better one if you don't like mine.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Do you want to pay yet another tax?
>>>
>>>And what tax would that be. Remember, we're talking about reducing the
>>>amounts of bad and un-natural chemicals being released into the
>>>environment. How does that amount to "yet another tax".
>>>>
>>
>>So you haven't heard about the carbon tax? ...
>
>Of course I have. Remember when you tried to lecture me on what goes
>on in Denmark on that front? But that is only partly relevant here. We
>were talking about regulations of the amounts and kinds of material
>you can release into the environment. CO2 is only one of them.
>

The corporations are releasing high amounts of toxic chemicals into the
environment including water ways but they don't want to talk about that
because then they have to spend a lot of money. So they put the blame on us,
cows etc. And you just believe them.
CO2 is a red herring. CO2 is needed, especially by plants.

>
>> ... The MSM doesn't talk about that
>>either?
>
>Point proven. You don't know what 'MSM' is talking about.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Freedom from being poisoned by chemicals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Like not having pesticides in your drinking water?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And fruit etc.
>>>>>>Do you know about the glyphosate in our foods? What about PFAS and
>>>>>>other
>>>>>>toxic chemicals?
>>>>>
>>>>>Last year we had a huge awareness campaign and public debate about
>>>>>PFAS in Denmark. Where do you find it, what does it do, how to avoid
>>>>>it, what are the alternatives? That's the kind of bureaucratic
>>>>>meddling I approve of.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes some groups are doing something which is good but it's too late for
>>>>many
>>>>who have already lost their health or lives.
>>>
>>>And therefore the good things that are happening now don't count. We
>>>can't have anything ruining a good conspiracy theory.
>>>
>>
>>Conspiracy theory: Anything the MSM won't discuss.
>
>Conspiracy theory: MSM won't discuss it!
>
>https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/02/us/video/pfas-forever-chemicals-farmland-food-biosolids-digvid
>https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/new-way-destroy-pfas-forever-chemicals-rcna43528
>https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68671731
>https://apnews.com/article/forever-chemicals-pfas-pollution-epa-drinking-water-1c8804288413a73bb7b99fc866c8fa51
>https://www.foxnews.com/us/why-epa-regulating-pfas-what-forever-chemicals
>https://www.npr.org/2024/04/12/1198909666/epa-pfas-forever-chemicals-limits-drinking-water
>https://abcnews.go.com/US/pfas-entering-americas-water-supply/story?id=98479678
>
>QED
>

They put those stories on other pages that most people never see unless they
specifically search for them.
I just checked and there's no word of this major problem on the main pages
of any of those news sites.

>
>>>>Are bureaucrats the ones who've been taking this action for years?
>>>
>>>They enable the implementation.
>>>>
>>
>>...in a perfect world.
>
>Who else can do it?
>

A government for the people instead of for itself.

>
>>>>>>The corporations and gov know about it and have for a long time. ...
>>>>>
>>>>>The use of PFAS was never held secret from the public.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Did the MSM and gov talk about it to the public? If not then it's
>>>>basically
>>>>a secret like the others subjects I talk about.
>>>
>>>We are many who do not need the government to talk about things for us
>>>to know about them.
>>>
>>
>>If it wasn't for the internet you wouldn't know.
>
>So what. The important thing is that I know. How do you get your
>information, if not from the internet?
>>

You think you know stuff but you have to use your discernment and common
sense and wide research to piece together what is true and what is not.

>>
>>>
>>>>If you go to a politician about this they will stonewall you or tap
>>>>dance
>>>>around it.
>>>
>>>Have you tried?
>>>
>>
>>Do you not know anything about what politicians are like?
>
>Okay. You haven't tried. You go by what you hear... on the internet.
>

I use my brain.

>
>>>>>Like with many
>>>>>other products, we don't know about the, possibly detrimental, impact
>>>>>they can have when they are created and taken into use. It's what we
>>>>>do when we find out that counts.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The detrimental effects have been know by doctors and scientists for a
>>>>while.
>>>
>>>And there has been talk about the effects for a while.
>>>
>>
>>Talk is not action.
>
>Moving the goal posts again. You asked if "the MSM and gov talk about
>it to the public". The answer is yes. The links I provided above prove
>it.
>

They don't talk about it on TV and radio. Unless you specifically search for
it on the net you most likely will never see it.

>>
>>
>>>
>>>>Same was the case with glyphosate which was based on agent orange ages
>>>>ago.
>>>
>>>Have you asked yourself why no one uses Agent Orange anymore? Maybe
>>>it's because the bureaucrats and politicians did some meddling.
>>>But glyphosate has relatively low toxicity for people,
>>>
>>
>>Say the corporations and their yes men.
>
>Show the scientific studies that prove them wrong.
>

There's not so much need for new scientific studies when people have been
getting sick and dying for many years from poisoning.

>
>>>and if we
>>>observe the guidelines set up by the bureaucrats and politicians it
>>>poses very, very little risk. Dihydrogen monoxide, on the other hand,
>>>is like everywhere! They add it to most of the foods we consume, and
>>>the MSM and corrupt politicians have known about it for decades, but
>>>they never talk about it!
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> ... Is that not
>>>>>>high corruption?
>>>>>
>>>>>How is that corruption? Who is paying whom, and for doing what? The
>>>>>corporations pay the governments for not meddling in their dirty
>>>>>business?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Excuse me? The corruption is knowing that the population is being
>>>>poisoned
>>>>but continuing to sell the products to the public for profit. ...
>>>
>>>That's not corruption.
>>>
>>
>>You're ok with people being poisoned for profit??
>
>Strawman.
>

You have a strange idea of corruption then.

>>
>>
>>>
>>>> ... Are you dumb?
>>>
>>>Look up the definition of corruption.
>>>>
>>
>>Ok.
>>"dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving
>>bribery."
>
>I ask again. Who is bribing whom? Why do I need to guide you through
>your own arguments all the time..
>

You honestly don't know anything about the bribery and other kinds of
corruption going on and who's involved?
You're a bad research, or you don't care too much about the biggest problems
in the world.

>>
>>And so?
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>If you want to get rid of those chemicals, how do you suggest we do
>>>>>it?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You really don't know? ...
>>>
>>>No, I don't know what /you/ think.
>>>
>>
>>Never mind what others think. ...
>
>Yeah, a strawman is much easier.
>

You are so slimy.

>
>> Is what other think all that's important to
>>you?
>
>See what I mean? Of course I want to know what you think when I'm
>debating you.
>

Debate the corrupt governments and corporations instead. Get your priorities
right.

>>
>>
>>>
>>>> ... Use more natural alternatives. ...
>>>
>>>How do you enforce that?
>>>
>>
>>Ask the governments. I don't work for them.
>
>We're slowly getting somewhere. Yes, the government makes the rules
>and the bureaucrats can enforce them.
>>

And you think they're not corrupt and stacking cards in their own favour?
You don't know that they make one set of laws for us and another for
themselves?

>>
>>>
>>>> ... They exist but they
>>>>bring less profit for the corporations.
>>>
>>>And how do you make the corporations change their behavior?
>>>
>>
>>Clean out the corruption, how do you think? ...
>
>Make laws and enforce them. Cleaning out corruption is part of the
>enforcement.
>

Then how come there's more corruption happening as time goes by?

>
>> ... Why the dumb questions?
>
>Well, considering who I'm dealing with...
>>

Projection

>>
>>>
>>>>>We stopped using leaded gasoline, freon for cooling, and asbestos in
>>>>>insulation. How do you think that came about?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Public awareness, and threats of lawsuits.
>>>
>>>For a threat of lawsuits to be possible there needs to be laws that
>>>have been broken.
>>>
>>
>>Duh. Plenty have been broken.
>
>And the government made the laws, right? Not keyboard warriors like
>you.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Who made the laws that went against the economic
>>>interests of the big, bad, corrupt corporations?
>>>
>>
>>What a dumb question.
>
>You're getting the point! If the governments didn't make laws and
>enforced them the corporations would run amok.
>

They are running amok. So how did that happen then?

>
>Neither of us think
>that is a good idea. Is there still corruption and are people breaking
>the laws? Of course, but we have a system that enables us to go after
>the bad guys and it is happening. Sorry to burst your bubble.
>

The corporations have billions to keep the best lawyers to get themselves
out of trouble. Plus they bribe and threaten people. They are well
protected. And the governments do little unless they're made to do
something.

>>
>>
>>>
>>>>It wasn't people like you who took action, but the kinds of people I get
>>>>my
>>>>info from.
>>>
>>>Would you be so kind to name one or two of them, so I can thank them
>>>in person?
>>>
>>
>>Dumb response.
>
>You know me...
>

--
Definition of an idiot/ignoramus: Someone who gets their information from
the mainstream media and calls it facts and evidence.

http://www.rumormillnews.com - The best alternative news site