It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Narvasis
a reply to: AaarghZombies
I know exactly what you were talking about in the other thread AZ, you were comparing a clergyman raping children to Pfizer being a clean company as a whole, that was the context, stop trying to make what you said excusable,
You are saying that the kids weren’t “vaxxed”? Prove it with actual sources.
originally posted by: Narvasis
a reply to: Dae
I’m sorry but I read through your entire source that you posted and nowhere in it does it say that the children were not “vaccinated”. If I missed it please clip and quote it! This link and source is from the same site though.
Vaccine Trials in UK on Children Under The Age of 10
That was PUBLISHED on December of 2021. So for EVERYONE in this thread saying that the UK wasn’t “vaccinating” children under the age of 10 you are wrong. What you all seem to be talking about is, made available to everyone, “vaccinations”.
Yes, it’s a long shot, I’m not delusional. However there is nothing in any article about this, whether or not the children were “vaccinated”, even if it was part of a trial or study. The best you are all doing is venturing a guess. As am I.
originally posted by: Narvasis
a reply to: Thejaybird
they almost never post sources or links for things,
originally posted by: Narvasis
a reply to: AaarghZombies
Ok? As requested, the link to what you yourself typed in… don’t really know what you’re trying to prove. They are literally the words you typed in not out of context. Why you said such a thing is beyond me, but hell, if you want to try and rationalize that statement, you’re more then welcome to.
Your Clergymen Pedophile Comment
In regards to your other links, you may have us on this one! We shall see though.
originally posted by: Narvasis
a reply to: AaarghZombies
Thank you for actually posting links AZ! Good job!
originally posted by: AaarghZombies
originally posted by: Narvasis
a reply to: AaarghZombies
Ok? As requested, the link to what you yourself typed in… don’t really know what you’re trying to prove. They are literally the words you typed in not out of context. Why you said such a thing is beyond me, but hell, if you want to try and rationalize that statement, you’re more then welcome to.
Your Clergymen Pedophile Comment
In regards to your other links, you may have us on this one! We shall see though.
You might want to read the comment again, you've clearly not understood what I was saying.
In brief. It's all about scale.
If you have an organization that has 100 people in it, and only one of them turns out to be bad, then the other 99 people aren't bad, and by definition the organization itself isn't bad.
You can't take a handful of incidents over the course of decades and use it to demonstrate anything other than the fact that these things are the exceptions.