Hi TERF simps!
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (49)
sorted by:
They do it for their sexual fetish.
OK, so there's myocarditis in 0.02%. How many of them died? Are we reaching the 90% you predicted any time now?
Say, didn't you promise to admit that you were wrong if your predictions about Kim Potter not being charged, her name not being released and her picture not being shown, and then immediately turn around and make several more laughable predictions when you were proven wrong the very same day?
Do you have any proof other than carefully curated garbage pushed by people with a vested interest in that being the case?
I was overly pessimistic, but the logic was correct. It's now beyond any doubt that myocarditis is deliberately being ignored because of who it harms.
Was I wrong though? What was it again, 14 months for murder? I bet if a male cop shot a woman to death "by accident", he'd get a lot more than that.
That is rich, now you want proof? How is it that you only want proof when it's a view that you do not like. When you do, there's no evidence because they destroyed it all, or because the womans blackmailed and bribed everyone to deny it.
90% vs. < 0.02%... "the logic was correct".
Well, you were only wrong 6 times. Or as it's known by your standards: the usual. And the best part is that every time your predictions came out false, you did not introspection, but instead make a new laughably stupid prediction that also turned out FALSE.
And now you deny you were wrong at all!
I bet that even if that were to happen, and he was acquitted or not even charged, you'd claim that Carrie Symonds and Melinda persuaded the prosecutors not to charge him to persuade US that THEEEY mean well, and that we should trust THEEEEM.
Leaving aside your usual crazy, you kept insisting that "they don't throw their own under the bus" (despite Rotherham), and that she would not be punished "because she is a woman". I pointed out to you the case of Mehrsele, but you obviously ignored that. By the way, he got about the same sentence, even though what he did was worse.
I asked if you had proof, not for a rant about my beliefs.
Actually, looking back at the comment you're referring to, the logic does line up. My theory was that the boosters would be given constantly and the rate would rise exponentially. We started with 7 in 100,000, and we're now at 1 in 5,000 after two booster regimes. I'd be looking at countries like Canada for proof when the third booster regime begins.
And I pointed out that your demand is laughable, as you never require any proof to believe anything.
And like I told you at the time, you're a retard of the highest order. If people start dropping dead, as you claimed, people wouldn't go take the next booster, drooling idiot.
LOL! Yes, any time now. 90%.
I noticed you failed to address your seventh lie about the Kim Potter case. But I'm sure you'll repeat it next time anyway, despite the refutation.