Mrs Roops

I would save the eggs to help digest the 3000 bitter pills you're currently obliged to swallow. Still, according to you the Great Reset signing ceremony is due in four days time so by the close of business on the 23rd May we all expect you to provide a report on what was signed and by who. No pressure then...

You did indeed draw attention to an issue... Your complaint was sustained yet somehow this is my fault. Please explain how.

Very strange...and convenient. 'Its there, but its not there' is the sort of cop-out your favoured covid experts would use by saying, "I know stuff, but I cant tell you - trust me anyway". Its also strange why you resorted to the charade of uploading a screen-grab of vid titles which talk about 2000 Mules. Your convoluted excuses are too little too late. But most strange of all you avoid rebutting any opinions I have of the movie in question. Now colour me cynical but its as if you actually haven't seen the film. Haven't we been here before where you say you've read/seen/experienced stuff but then becomes clear you haven't? Let me help you. As you know I'm an even-handed girl and will fight for the underdog, you know, the little man who through his cluelessness always falls into a hole he's dug himself so I will say this. If (and that's a hypothetical "if") there is any semblance of truth in 2000 Mules' "exposé" then IMO there's enough material to overturn the last presidential election. Now you're the expert on all things American - what do you think will be Trump's next course of action, after all he has amassed a sizeable fighting fund to legally overturn the election?

One would have thought my position on the Common Market which transmogrified into the EEC was clear. Nevertheless in Europe and especially in the UK referendums were held and much legislative aggro took place before member states ceded power and authority to Brussels and Strasbourg. Now we are to believe that without any debate anywhere on earth all the world's nations are suddenly going to sign over emergency powers to Geneva? Powers that hitherto were granted to respective governments on a temporary basis by reluctant legislatures around the world? C'mon Billy, this goes beyond your normal cartoonish tin-hattery, this is twilight world stuff.

Absolutely. You fraudulently asserted that Roe v Wade sanctioned abortion right up to the point of birth and conflated an organ harvesting industry. The inference was clear.

Precisely. At 13 weeks gestation an embryo would be 5-7.5 cm long. No viable organ could possibly be harvested let alone by a multi billion dollar industry. To mention five cases of near full-term abortion in a state of 40 million people is not indicative of common practice either, in any case its illegal and certainly not sanctioned by Roe v Wade. Perhaps KB could provide a link to the story as well as the name of the Democrat who "openly stated their support for it"

That discourse may well have been said, but not by me.

Absolutely, I did want to bring the religious aspect into my post noting KB's proddy mindset but left it out for reasons of brevity.

You're just showing talking heads talking about 2000 Mules and not the movie itself. Why would one need to google when all one has to do is go straight to Rumble? In fact if you click on the Movie at Rumble you immediately get the film maker telling you that to view you have to pay just a few cents shy of $30 US to see the film. That's right, thirty dollars, so not free you fraudulent, utterly clueless piece of work. Alternatively, you could also view the film if you subscribe (for a fat fee) to the film-maker's rumble.locals channel. Have you not yet twigged that the film uses smoke & mirrors and admittedly excellent cinematography to beguile the rabid MAGA crowd into thinking that they were cheated at the presidential election? Of course not, because you're one of the gullible morons who lap up a compelling narrative but doesn't realise the film is bereft of evidence. Fair play to the film-maker though; he saw a market to pander to and made millions out of the MAGA crowd.

Roe v Wade codified the woman's right to choose during the first trimester of pregnancy (13 weeks) so the notion that foetuses could be aborted "right up to the second it emerges" is abject nonsense as is the inference that foetuses are grown to order to sate a multi-billion dollar organ harvesting industry. FTR, I personally would not agree to aborting a healthy baby, in fact I was offered and declined a "foetal reduction" when I was pregnant with triplets. That said, I am uneasy when a group of men get to decide what a woman may or not do with her own body. A woman with an unwanted pregnancy is going through enough angst as it is and doesn't need a bunch of suits pontificating on her behalf. The problem is that with the distinct probability that Roe v Wade will be overturned it appears that twelve states have put in place "trigger" laws banning any form of abortion care the moment the ruling is/if announced. There are a further two dozen states that have indicated that they will follow suit. Shameful.

What derailing? I disagreed with your slackjaw nonsense about a treaty being signed on the 22nd May where you say that, "This international treaty will give the WHO the authority to mandate lockdowns, face nappies, and all the other abuses of your liberties which have proved so successful in the fake Covid plandemic Great Reset rehearsal which has been more successful than thought possible" In fact the 22nd is the opening of the 75th Annual WHO five day conference where the world quango's employees formulate and coordinate priorities and allocate funding to world health projects. No "treaty" will be signed by any world leader, in any case do you really think any democratic or authoritarian regime is going to cede power and authority to a bunch of Geneva based bureaucrats? The tin-hatter brethren have played you for a mug. Again.

...or maybe I said something similar to this...

No it's not. So you haven't viewed it. Looking forward to the last in the trilogy - 3000 Bitter Pills.

No it won't.

So when and where did you view 2000 Mules?

Eh?

The sequel to 1000 depositions.

Quit yer whinging, its only the truth.

Oh. I actually enjoyed the vid. Bright, bubbly and a catchy ditty.

Hang on, the interview made it very clear that Dr Wright died aged 32 from taking the AZ jab. You obviously hadn't seen it when you wrote the previous posts so don't tell me to, "Do try and keep up luv" you patronising parasitic fraud. At no point did Mrs Wright suggest that the national vaccine roll out should not have happened. Her concerns were that more information should have been given at the point and prior to delivery and that more resources should be made available to those who were adversely affected by the jab. I would disagree with her on the first point as taking that to its logical conclusion then legislators in full-on nanny mode would withdraw all aspirins, paracetamols, Imodium, et al from supermarket shelves. The Mark Steyn "news" show was quite revealing, not least as I now have a better understanding where some of the tin-hatters' half-baked theories evolve from. In between asking guests front-loaded questions Mr Steyn interjects during the interviews with his own questionable opinions dressed as facts - all very Tucker Carlson. It was telling that Mrs Wright saw through this and made no comment after Steyn's rants and at one point there was an awkward silence when he was obviously expecting her to concur with him.

Clearly tone deafness and ego coupled with an inability to let go of an issue prompted your embarrassing attempt at satire... You actually don't give a toss about the personal tragedy. If you did you would have stated Dr Wright's correct reported age at death (32) and that he died after receiving the AZ jab. Most egregious of all is that Dr Wright's widow is on record in supporting the national roll-out of the vaccines and would no doubt be alarmed at an ill-informed nut-job making making conspiracy capital from her personal grief. You are a parasite, Billy - feeding on and misreporting stories to promulgate baseless theories on a virus that clearly you have no idea about so put away your onion peeler and cease with the faux virtue signalling.

I appreciate you're a little red-faced after unintentionally confirming just how safe the current covid vaccines are but the onion-peeling, ambulance chasing antics and subsequent fatuous opining is making you look desperate and unhinged.

Well done, given that 142 million doses of covid vaccine have been administered in the UK thus far, you have just confirmed how safe the immunisation programme is. You've also confirmed how utterly clueless you are. Before you splutter some convoluted nonsense/issue a retaliatory personal insult/post a multi-emoji, you should know three thousand people die in the UK per year from taking aspirin.

Science is indeed "great", the application of same not necessarily so. Your post is a pile of facts-averse cack. Who has mugged you off this time?

The UK remains a member of the Council of Europe and as such, abides by ECHR rulings.