Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Thurs nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts with FREE Prizes!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE Live AFA Seminar! See locations and details.


Scam free! Check out Christian Filipina - Meet Asian women with Christian values! Members screened.
Exclusive book offer! 75% off! How to Meet, Date and Marry Your Filipina Wife



View Active Topics       Latest 100 Topics       View Your Posts       FAQ Topics       Switch to Mobile


Is the WHO trying to kill off gays?

Discuss and talk about any general topic.

Moderators: jamesbond, fschmidt

Re: WHO wants to kill off faggots

Postby Teal Lantern » Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:54 am

Cornfed wrote:By getting them all to take"antiretrovirals". It is strange that on the one hand they are promoting a faggot agenda, while at the same time trying to poison them all. Funny old world.

Business 101: Encourage the behavior, then make money prolonging life and treating the symptoms.

Cornfed wrote:Blacks are also a high risk group for "HIV". Maybe they will try to poison them at some point as well.

See: Tuskegee experiment, or 1980s crack epidemic.
не поглеждай назад. 8)

"Even an American judge is unlikely to award child support for imputed children." - FredOnEverything
User avatar
Teal Lantern
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2686
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 11:48 pm
Location: Briar Patch, Universe 25







Postby Winston » Sun Jul 27, 2014 5:36 am

steve55 wrote:Winston, don't let trash mess up your forum. This post by cornfed is reason enough for a ban warning. This site isn't about killing anyone not about attacking gays to this degree. In fact, this post is no different than if he had said the "n" word either. I for one don't want to be associated with trash people like this. Cornfed, come on man, you should know better. Winston , I'll pm you since you probably haven't seen it.


You are right. Advocating killing people is crossing the line, dangerous and illegal too. Sorry Cornfed, but this is not protected by free speech. Free speech is not to be placed over safety and legal ramifications.

This thread will go into the NSFW board, and you will be given a warning by PM. If you post something like this again, you will be banned.
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23599
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm

Postby Cornfed » Sun Jul 27, 2014 5:41 am

Winston wrote:You are right. Advocating killing people is crossing the line, dangerous and illegal too. Sorry Cornfed, but this is not protected by free speech. Free speech is not to be placed over safety and legal ramifications.

What the hell are you on about? I did not advocate killing anyone. I am merely reporting what the World Health Organization appears to be doing. Of course the advocating killing non-specific groups is indeed covered by freedom of speech. If someone wrote that they were in favor of the death penalty for child rapists, would that not be covered by free speech?
Cornfed
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4640
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:22 am

Postby Winston » Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:10 am

Cornfed wrote:
Winston wrote:You are right. Advocating killing people is crossing the line, dangerous and illegal too. Sorry Cornfed, but this is not protected by free speech. Free speech is not to be placed over safety and legal ramifications.

What the hell are you on about? I did not advocate killing anyone. I am merely reporting what the World Health Organization appears to be doing. Of course the advocating killing non-specific groups is indeed covered by freedom of speech. If someone wrote that they were in favor of the death penalty for child rapists, would that not be covered by free speech?


Ok I see what you mean. I'll put this topic back in the regular forum then, and remove your warning. But I'll change the title to better reflect the topic so there's not such a misunderstanding.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. But you need to title your threads better next time.
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23599
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm

Postby Winston » Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:17 am

Maybe the reason why they want to promote gays while killing them off too, is because it's part of the elite's population reduction agenda, which they've admitted to publicly?

You see, by promoting gays, more gays come out, and do not reproduce with women. That reduces population.

By killing them off, it reduces population too.

Same with putting unhealthy chemicals in food, vaccines, drugs, etc. Destroying America's health helps reduce the population.

So does making women masculine and not needing men, thus creating a schism between men and women, and a battle of the sexes, which ultimately destroys families and relationships, so that couples do not produce children as much.

They are also promoting the "live for yourself" lifestyle, so less people want children now than before.

All of these agendas result in population reduction in western countries. So perhaps that's their agenda?
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23599
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm

Postby steve55 » Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:52 am

Cornfed wrote:
Winston wrote:You are right. Advocating killing people is crossing the line, dangerous and illegal too. Sorry Cornfed, but this is not protected by free speech. Free speech is not to be placed over safety and legal ramifications.

What the hell are you on about? I did not advocate killing anyone. I am merely reporting what the World Health Organization appears to be doing. Of course the advocating killing non-specific groups is indeed covered by freedom of speech. If someone wrote that they were in favor of the death penalty for child rapists, would that not be covered by free speech?


Cornfed, stop being such a duche. Dude, your excuse is so f'n lame it's laughable and an insult to Winston's intelligence. Winston, did you really buy that excuse? I'm surprised . Cornfed, what you "think" the WHO is doing was nowhere even close to what your thread title implied. I read that article in full and nowhere In that article does promote nor discuss anyone killing gays, and that article doesn't call them faggots either. Winston, did you read that article? Nothing about that article let's cornfed off the hook. Absolutely nothing. Visitors who come to this site see that thread title and that's what they think this site and the people who promote it are about. When a site owner allows that kind of impression it makes him and other members guilty by association. Anymore shaninigans like that and I hope Winston tosses you. See my avatar? Dr Phil is talking to YOU!!!
steve55
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:40 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby Cornfed » Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:03 am

steve55 wrote:Cornfed, stop being such a duche. Dude, your excuse is so f'n lame it's laughable and an insult to Winston's intelligence. Winston, did you really buy that excuse? I'm surprised . Cornfed, what you "think" the WHO is doing was nowhere even close to what your thread title implied. I read that article in full and nowhere In that article does promote nor discuss anyone killing gays, and that article doesn't call them faggots either.

Right, that is my commentary. DNA terminators like AZT killed its victims comparatively quickly and apparently this was thought to be unsustainable. "Antiretrovirals" inhibit reverse transcriptase, which appears to be part of a ubiquitous cellular repair mechanism. Thus death of AIDS like symptoms would be brought about over a longer period of time. Why should I not draw attention to this? Of course the UN is not going to openly admit what they are up to. When do they ever?
Cornfed
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4640
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:22 am

Postby Anatol » Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:41 am

Hello,

{(I will be forced to openly allude to the 3-letter g word, which is sin. I humbly beg your pardon, gentlemen!)}


I don't understand. Why is it wrong it say that the 3-letter g word people should be punished or at least sequestered??? They're so abnormal!

When I was in university, I told the class that the 3-letter g word and AIDS people should be put on an island. The professor didn't like this and said they had 'human rights'.

We're normal. They are abnormal. And in the case of the latter {(the dangerous HIV)}, they are EXTREMELY dangerous to society!!!

I don't understand why everyone is defending abnormal, immoral, dangerous people all the time!!!
Anatol
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 586
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 5:12 am

Previous

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests