Breaking: YouTube has taken down the speech given by Andrew Bridgen in UK Parliament

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Encia22
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I am far from a vaccine apologetic. And when have I ever pushed the official narrative? I've always been against vaccinations, lockdowns, etc., and I believe it was all planned for nefarious reasons.

I simply presented my interpretation of the video's removal. You believe that some fact-checkers pulled it and should be fired. I believe the opposite; the video was flagged and obfuscated by an automated algorithm and, following an appeal by the M.P., reinstated by a human reviewer.

Finally, the extra part about the House of Commons walk out "in protest", was directed more at the members who have been following the other thread on the same subject. Unfortunately, I hadn't yet seen that thread and don't feel the need to duplicate my post across multiple threads. So, it was not intended to deviate from your topic which hasn't had much engagement, but maybe to give something extra to talk about considering the video is back up and running.

Oh, and next time please direct your true thoughts directly at the poster in question and not through chit chat with others.

I don't think I have said that you a vaccine apologist. I am also against lockdowns and mass vaccinations as well as against products that are untested and experimental but they are used as if they are safe and effective.

Ok, so who were you referring to in your comment...?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: nickyw

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Encia22

Yes.

You can show folk facts and explanations but if they don't fit their particular belief set.....

that goes both ways...

The member seems to still be engaging in vaccine apologetics and defending of the official narratives. He wanted to deviate earlier from the main story insinuating that the MPs were not obliged to listen to Andrew Bridgen and that's why they walked out.

Youtube is a joke, as is Fakebook, and Google and any other corporation that has allowed itself to be controlled by the national security state and is no longer operating in the interest of it's share holders. What is being done now is illegal but people have been conditioned to accept it. It's a slow roll out of tyranny, and people seem to just accept whatever happens now without questioning it.

a reply to: Encia22

Asmodeus3 was replying to me replying to another account, unless you are suggesting the other account is also yours..

I was replying to the other account that beliefs go both ways.

originally posted by: nickyw
a reply to: Encia22

Asmodeus3 was replying to me replying to another account, unless you are suggesting the other account is also yours..

I was replying to the other account that beliefs go both ways.

Yes, I know. Yet Asmodeus3 decided to have a rant about a member who mentioned The Commons shenanigans. I think I'm the only one to have mentioned that in this thread, so it seems his comment was directed at me.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
Youtube is a joke, as is Fakebook, and Google and any other corporation that has allowed itself to be controlled by the national security state and is no longer operating in the interest of it's share holders. What is being done now is illegal but people have been conditioned to accept it. It's a slow roll out of tyranny, and people seem to just accept whatever happens now without questioning it.

they are modern versions of the rc church.. hence my belief the only path ahead leads to a modern reformation to return us to a period of enlightenment and away from this unenlightened period..

a reply to: Encia22

Wasn't me?

originally posted by: Encia22

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Encia22
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I am far from a vaccine apologetic. And when have I ever pushed the official narrative? I've always been against vaccinations, lockdowns, etc., and I believe it was all planned for nefarious reasons.

I simply presented my interpretation of the video's removal. You believe that some fact-checkers pulled it and should be fired. I believe the opposite; the video was flagged and obfuscated by an automated algorithm and, following an appeal by the M.P., reinstated by a human reviewer.

Finally, the extra part about the House of Commons walk out "in protest", was directed more at the members who have been following the other thread on the same subject. Unfortunately, I hadn't yet seen that thread and don't feel the need to duplicate my post across multiple threads. So, it was not intended to deviate from your topic which hasn't had much engagement, but maybe to give something extra to talk about considering the video is back up and running.

Oh, and next time please direct your true thoughts directly at the poster in question and not through chit chat with others.

I don't think I have said that you a vaccine apologist. I am also against lockdowns and mass vaccinations as well as against products that are untested and experimental but they are used as if they are safe and effective.

Ok, so who were you referring to in your comment...?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: nickyw

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Encia22

Yes.

You can show folk facts and explanations but if they don't fit their particular belief set.....

that goes both ways...

The member seems to still be engaging in vaccine apologetics and defending of the official narratives. He wanted to deviate earlier from the main story insinuating that the MPs were not obliged to listen to Andrew Bridgen and that's why they walked out.

nickyw has replied above and if you go back to the posts you will see the only known person from all the members on this thread who engages in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality is someone else.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
Youtube is a joke, as is Fakebook, and Google and any other corporation that has allowed itself to be controlled by the national security state and is no longer operating in the interest of it's share holders. What is being done now is illegal but people have been conditioned to accept it. It's a slow roll out of tyranny, and people seem to just accept whatever happens now without questioning it.

Should be a matter for debate in the Parliament in the UK and obviously here in the US this must be discussed extensively. The platforms need to be dismantled if they continue upon this path. Their is no need for them. We will make better ones.

Do you know the names of the brave MPs who walked out? It would be great to know and send them emails criticising their behaviour. And keep pushing until they submit. They must resign.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

"The member seems to still be engaging in vaccine apologetics and defending of the official narratives. He wanted to deviate earlier from the main story insinuating that the MPs were not obliged to listen to Andrew Bridgen and that's why they walked out."

Well, that wasn't me?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

"They must resign."

I thought you were against MP's being censored?

Only those that share your beliefs, apparently.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

"They must resign."

I thought you were against MP's being censored?

Only those that share your beliefs, apparently.

They "must resign" doesn't mean they must be censored. What they did was coordinated and I don't think it has happened before. If they have feel any shame then they must resign.

You are detached from reality as it seems. It was Bridgen who has been censored again and again and not the MPs who walked out.

Try better next time

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

"The member seems to still be engaging in vaccine apologetics and defending of the official narratives. He wanted to deviate earlier from the main story insinuating that the MPs were not obliged to listen to Andrew Bridgen and that's why they walked out."

Well, that wasn't me?

Of course it was.

So engaging in vaccine apologetics, denialism of reality, and defending of the official narratives, including the new tactic of defending those who walked out in the parliament.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

What, MP's have never done anything coordinated before?!!!!

Newsflash for you - MP's don't generally feel shame, PM's even.

Get real.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

You are in turmoil and are confused.

It wasn't me who posted that.

Unless, you can show where I might have posted that?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

You are in turmoil and are confused.

It wasn't me who posted that.

Unless, you can show where I might have posted that?

No it is your arguments that are in a turmoil.
I don't have to show you anything.

So stop engaging in vaccine apologetics, denialism of reality, and defending of the official narratives, including the new tactic of defending those who walked out in the parliament.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yet you demand they must resign?

You do realise that what goes on in Parliament is a matter of record (Hansard etc) and tends to be more relevant than YouTube videos?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

"He wanted to deviate earlier from the main story insinuating that the MPs were not obliged to listen to Andrew Bridgen and that's why they walked out."

Look, old chap, for the umpteenth time it wasn't me who posted that.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yet you demand they must resign?

You do realise that what goes on in Parliament is a matter of record (Hansard etc) and tends to be more relevant than YouTube videos?

If they have any shame they must resign. Nobody forces them to do so but a few thousand emails could put some pressure to the already disgraced MPs.

YouTube is much more powerful than the UK Parliament.