Jump to content

Coronavirus Mega-Thread.


numnuts
 Share

Message added by Grumpy Owl,

This topic is for all general discussion regarding the current COVID-19 pandemic. There are of course numerous other related topics for discussing specific aspects of this pandemic in more detail. And there are other parts of this forum for more 'off-topic' discussions.

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, DarianF said:

Having considered the results of the Dundee gold standard for testing blokes, I can 100% confirm...... It's a bloke! State of the 5 o'clock shadow on the lip for starters. 🤣

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Ergo Storm said:

 

Unfortunately, I think she is wrong about the law.  First, people aged 16 and 17 can normally give consent in a similar way to adults.  As for under 16s, in the video she refers to the judgment in Bell v Tavistock, but that did not overturn Gillick competency.  That was a case specifically about puberty blockers.  Lord Scarman's test in Gillick remains good law (albeit with some arguable points of adjustment from decisions in lower courts).

 

Is all this staged?  She comes across as a bit nutty - frankly.  Please don't think me unkind, but a 'normal' person would view her that way.

Well she is a lawyer,is ex military,has connections to the guardians 300 and stood up and spoke in parliament square quite convincingly a couple of months ago

So nutty yes,but i would happily crawl naked over broken glass to paddle in her pish and she could read the shipping forecast to me and i'd find it erotic

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Ergo Storm said:

 

Unfortunately, I think she is wrong about the law.  First, people aged 16 and 17 can normally give consent in a similar way to adults.  As for under 16s, in the video she refers to the judgment in Bell v Tavistock, but that did not overturn Gillick competency.  That was a case specifically about puberty blockers.  Lord Scarman's test in Gillick remains good law (albeit with some arguable points of adjustment from decisions in lower courts).

 

Is all this staged?  She comes across as a bit nutty - frankly.  Please don't think me unkind, but a 'normal' person would view her that way.

So if she's got it wrong, what's the correct position on the law? And what's a normal person? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, zArk said:

Property is my body and kids

 

Communism claims ownership of my body and kids.

 

Magna carts and common law is incompatible with communism

images.jpeg.2b345db90fe1350054aa228361161fcc.jpeg

 

My point wasn't the specifics of the two sets, merely the elites control both and as much as you have distinctions between the two they both serve the ruling hands. We have common law yes but if you have gone against the grain then corrupt judges will do what they do and you would end up potless in legal fees fighting it, as well as corrupt police bringing false charges which again will lead you into poverty fighting to clear your name, or you would just be eliminated by state. Yes you may own your own body and kids in law, but that law is so perverse that it doesent matter. If you don't own your body and kids but do as your told your fine, if you own your body and kids and do as told your fine, but on both scenarios if you rub the ruling class the wrong way it's the same outcome. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys. I was just thinking, going by 'official statistics', I reckon we should be able to prove already that the jabs are a higher risk to young people than 'Covid'.

 

And no I think think Covid exists, but let's just assume we believe the Government, can it be proven that the risk from the jabs already exceeds the risk from Covid for the younger age group?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No point debating the law really is there? its going to stop nothing right or wrong they ARE going to start jabbing children under 16 no matter how many legal parasites fight it and the judges WILL do as they are told

 

Unfortunately people are still clinging to the belief that they have legal recourse in matters

 

You don't ,won't and never will have

 

They WILL jab kids

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Xelador said:

Security guard who shot man 3 times acted in self defense because the victim wasn’t wearing a COVID mask, lawyer says

https://cwbchicago.com/2021/08/security-guard-who-shot-man-3-times-acted-in-self-defense-because-the-victim-wasnt-wearing-a-covid-mask-lawyer-says.html

Holmes, who is barred from possessing a weapon because he is a four-time convicted felon and registered child sex offender, was working as an armed security guard at the store on the 6000 block of South Racine

 

o_0

pretty new/old normal

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, whatthefoxhat said:

No point debating the law really is there? its going to stop nothing right or wrong they ARE going to start jabbing children under 16 no matter how many legal parasites fight it and the judges WILL do as they are told

 

gonna be interesting as the court system fills up with 'breach of contract' claims as those non-jabbed are sacked

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, whatthefoxhat said:

No point debating the law really is there? its going to stop nothing right or wrong they ARE going to start jabbing children under 16 no matter how many legal parasites fight it and the judges WILL do as they are told

 

Unfortunately people are still clinging to the belief that they have legal recourse in matters

 

You don't ,won't and never will have

 

They WILL jab kids

 

5lerfl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DaleP said:

 

First we need to establish whether he's a part of the circus act paid by the taxpayers.....

If he is not then, he should sue the police for attacking him for not doing anything.

 

Mate. Come on. Letting a dog maul you like that just for show? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DaleP said:

 

First we need to establish whether he's a part of the circus act paid by the taxpayers.....

If he is not then, he should sue the police for attacking him for not doing anything.

 

Head slammed into road. That alone could have killed him. Not to mention the dog that could have easily ripped his neck enough for him to bleed out.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

 

Some questions...

What the fuck is that all about?

How many of them does it take to catch the thing?

How did they know it has covid?

And is that really a good use of public money?

What a shit show. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dazzer said:

Some questions...

What the fuck is that all about?

How many of them does it take to catch the thing?

How did they know it has covid?

And is that really a good use of public money?

What a shit show. 

 

It didn't have covid. It had TB. Still, pretty cruel though.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Morpheus said:

People in England take over 1st public building using common law

url: bitchute.com/video/BDaq2jgLfoik/

 

This is a perfect example showing the police to be absolutely clueless as to their job, their role and who they serve. (Common Purpose reframing in full effect) Credit to these people for stating their case in a calm and respectful way by stating these officers merely have "obligations and roles "under that uniform and that they won't be able to hide behind it.

 

Would love to have seen their expressions under those bloody masks when they were told the would be held personally liable in a Common Law Court if they didn't bring the Inspector down.

 

Fantastic stuff.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...