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: FarmerSimulation
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: RussianTroll
a reply to: Annee
Autism is life behind glass from the outside world. My question is - who and how placed the child behind this glass?
Propaganda. You really don't have a clue.
BACK ON TOPIC
I say the same for you Anne.
I know for a fact, as in factually because certain scientists, who are infallible because they are "scientists" have shown most autism in children are the result of childhood vaccines.
But you think it is from your genes and autism is a sign of Xmen super powers.
You simply have no clue.
So get back on topic.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: RussianTroll
a reply to: Annee
Autism is life behind glass from the outside world. My question is - who and how placed the child behind this glass?
Propaganda. You really don't have a clue.
BACK ON TOPIC
I say the same for you Anne.
I know for a fact, as in factually because certain scientists, who are infallible because they are "scientists" have shown most autism in children are the result of childhood vaccines.
But you think it is from your genes and autism is a sign of Xmen super powers.
You simply have no clue.
So get back on topic.
NO -- they haven't.
All ya gotta do is "cancel" any doctor that's made that claim.
Fixed it for you
How ridiculous.
Again -- research -- find me a doctor that supports vaccines cause Autism.
Don't waste your time if its Wakefield.
originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: FarmerSimulation
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: RussianTroll
a reply to: Annee
Autism is life behind glass from the outside world. My question is - who and how placed the child behind this glass?
Propaganda. You really don't have a clue.
BACK ON TOPIC
I say the same for you Anne.
I know for a fact, as in factually because certain scientists, who are infallible because they are "scientists" have shown most autism in children are the result of childhood vaccines.
But you think it is from your genes and autism is a sign of Xmen super powers.
You simply have no clue.
So get back on topic.
NO -- they haven't.
All ya gotta do is "cancel" any doctor that's made that claim.
Fixed it for you
How ridiculous.
Again -- research -- find me a doctor that supports vaccines cause Autism.
Don't waste your time if its Wakefield.
I am not going to waste my time at all.
How silly of you.
Any Dr. Or scientist or lab, or clinician or anyone ESPECIALLY a Dr. that exposes the link gets canceled, discredited and financially destroyed.
Period. End of subject. End of story.
You simply have no clue.
I'll bet dollars to dimes you pump sugar into your kids too
originally posted by: Annee
It was the OP Russian Troll who commented first on Autism.
However, thread title: The Supreme Court of Russia declared the LGBT movement extremist and banned it
Robert S. Mendelsohn, M.D. (1926-1988) engaged in irresponsible criticism of the medical profession and science-based health care during most of his medical career. Although he had taught at several medical schools and been chairman of the Illinois state licensing board, Mendelsohn considered himself a “medical heretic.” He opposed water fluoridation, immunization, coronary bypass surgery, licensing of nutritionists, and screening examinations to detect breast cancer. One of his books charged that “Modern Medicine’s treatments for disease are seldom effective, and they’re often more dangerous than the diseases they’re designed to treat”; that “around ninety percent of surgery is a waste of time, energy, money and life”; and that most hospitals are so loosely run that “murder is even a clear and present danger.”
His unfair attack on immunization on Phil Donahue’s show was so irresponsible that spokespeople from the American Academy of Pediatrics were permitted to rebut that he said in a follow-up program shortly afterward. As far as I know, this is the only time that Donahue’s producers ever permitted unopposed criticism of quack nonsense.
quackwatch.org...
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
Took you long enough.
I have no interest in radical quackery or unfounded holistic claims.
I support real science.
Robert S. Mendelsohn, M.D. (1926-1988) engaged in irresponsible criticism of the medical profession and science-based health care during most of his medical career. Although he had taught at several medical schools and been chairman of the Illinois state licensing board, Mendelsohn considered himself a “medical heretic.” He opposed water fluoridation, immunization, coronary bypass surgery, licensing of nutritionists, and screening examinations to detect breast cancer. One of his books charged that “Modern Medicine’s treatments for disease are seldom effective, and they’re often more dangerous than the diseases they’re designed to treat”; that “around ninety percent of surgery is a waste of time, energy, money and life”; and that most hospitals are so loosely run that “murder is even a clear and present danger.”
His unfair attack on immunization on Phil Donahue’s show was so irresponsible that spokespeople from the American Academy of Pediatrics were permitted to rebut that he said in a follow-up program shortly afterward. As far as I know, this is the only time that Donahue’s producers ever permitted unopposed criticism of quack nonsense.
quackwatch.org...
Although he had taught at several medical schools and been chairman of the Illinois state licensing board,
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: FarmerSimulation
I was a manager at a Self-Help publishing company.
I know some well-known metaphysical/holistic authors personally.
I am not ignorant on this subject.
But, of course, the internet -- you can always find . . . .
END
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACK TO: The Supreme Court of Russia declared the LGBT movement extremist and banned it
originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: RussianTroll
Back on topic, can you explain exactly what this LBTQ organisation is that has now been criminalized?
Is there even one, or is it just general gay bashing?
Do you approve of gay nightclubs and such being raided by Police?
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: RussianTroll
So what does this mean in practical terms?
Its ok to be gay but not to talk about it in public?
Not to demonstrate your gayness or whatever peculiar brand of gayness?
Not to meet with other like minded individuals in clubs/pubs etc?
Not to write about gaydom or publicise it?
I'm no fan of the LGBQT+ whatever else agenda and the publicity and support they receive in MSM and other quarters but I've got to say this ruling does seem repressive and somewhat draconian and only one-step away from throwing people off buildings because of their sexuality like some of Russia's Islamic extremist friends do.
originally posted by: RussianTroll
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: RussianTroll
So what does this mean in practical terms?
Its ok to be gay but not to talk about it in public?
Not to demonstrate your gayness or whatever peculiar brand of gayness?
Not to meet with other like minded individuals in clubs/pubs etc?
Not to write about gaydom or publicise it?
I'm no fan of the LGBQT+ whatever else agenda and the publicity and support they receive in MSM and other quarters but I've got to say this ruling does seem repressive and somewhat draconian and only one-step away from throwing people off buildings because of their sexuality like some of Russia's Islamic extremist friends do.
Private life has nothing to do with this.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: RussianTroll
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: RussianTroll
So what does this mean in practical terms?
Its ok to be gay but not to talk about it in public?
Not to demonstrate your gayness or whatever peculiar brand of gayness?
Not to meet with other like minded individuals in clubs/pubs etc?
Not to write about gaydom or publicise it?
I'm no fan of the LGBQT+ whatever else agenda and the publicity and support they receive in MSM and other quarters but I've got to say this ruling does seem repressive and somewhat draconian and only one-step away from throwing people off buildings because of their sexuality like some of Russia's Islamic extremist friends do.
Private life has nothing to do with this.
Unless you’re privately inside a bar that caters to LGBTQ +. Because “protect the children”.
Private homes next.
Stop making excuses. You can’t manipulate or justify what this is.
originally posted by: RussianTroll
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: RussianTroll
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: RussianTroll
So what does this mean in practical terms?
Its ok to be gay but not to talk about it in public?
Not to demonstrate your gayness or whatever peculiar brand of gayness?
Not to meet with other like minded individuals in clubs/pubs etc?
Not to write about gaydom or publicise it?
I'm no fan of the LGBQT+ whatever else agenda and the publicity and support they receive in MSM and other quarters but I've got to say this ruling does seem repressive and somewhat draconian and only one-step away from throwing people off buildings because of their sexuality like some of Russia's Islamic extremist friends do.
Private life has nothing to do with this.
Unless you’re privately inside a bar that caters to LGBTQ +. Because “protect the children”.
Private homes next.
Stop making excuses. You can’t manipulate or justify what this is.
So, you justify ISIS? Very nice)))
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: RussianTroll
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: RussianTroll
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: RussianTroll
So what does this mean in practical terms?
Its ok to be gay but not to talk about it in public?
Not to demonstrate your gayness or whatever peculiar brand of gayness?
Not to meet with other like minded individuals in clubs/pubs etc?
Not to write about gaydom or publicise it?
I'm no fan of the LGBQT+ whatever else agenda and the publicity and support they receive in MSM and other quarters but I've got to say this ruling does seem repressive and somewhat draconian and only one-step away from throwing people off buildings because of their sexuality like some of Russia's Islamic extremist friends do.
Private life has nothing to do with this.
Unless you’re privately inside a bar that caters to LGBTQ +. Because “protect the children”.
Private homes next.
Stop making excuses. You can’t manipulate or justify what this is.
So, you justify ISIS? Very nice)))
“Pass the Trash”
That’s what you do when you have no justified position to stand on.
That’s what you do when you have no justified position to stand on.