Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

  1. 18
  2. 18
  3. 18
  4. 18
  5. 18
  6. 17
  7. 17
  8. 17
  9. 17
  10. 17
  11. 17
  12. 17
  13. 17
  14. 17
  15. 17
  16. 16
  17. 16
  18. 16
  19. 16
  20. 16
  21. 16
  22. 16
  23. 16
  24. 16
  25. 15
  26. 15
  27. 15
  28. 15
  29. 15
  30. 14
  31. 14
  32. 14
  33. 14
  34. 14
  35. 14
  36. 14
  37. 14
  38. 14
  39. 13
  40. 13
  41. As Australians we all studied Orwell in English class at some point because it was considered "a must" if we were to UNDERSTAND what our ideological opponents were. I did Animal Farm during the American equivalent of Freshman/Sophomore and 1984 during the American equivalent of Junior/Senior High School. I went to college in America (late 80s) and could barely believe that almost NONE of my classmates understood anything about these books. When I studied Animal Farm that included a basic history of the Russian Revolution and how certain characters in the book related to real historical figures and what they did. When I studied 1984 we looked at how authoritarian states OPERATED. We had doublespeak explained to us. Its the political concept of making a statement that has 2 equal and opposite meanings. It was how Big Brother was 100% right about everything. Because even when he said something utterly wrong the opposite meaning was still correct. The classic I remember from the book was all the government ministries were abbreviated from "Ministry of Something" to "mini something." Orwell's implication was that these governments were the opposite of what the label claimed. So the Ministry of Peace was called Mini-peace and it was where wars were fought from. The "Ministry of Love" was called Mini-love and it was where they tortured Winston (and others). The other thing I remember (and my English teacher at the time hammered this home to all of us) is the actual purpose of doublespeak was to utterly confuse the population to the point where they could not form coherent thoughts in opposition to the regime. Its actually described at one point in the book.
    13
  42. 13
  43. Yes I am. Here's a link to the article Sagaar was talking about he other day that was done by Nicholas Wade. I would not call it the exact opposite of what David is saying, but its clearly not pro-Fauci as David is. The article by Nicholas Wade is very well done, but its a longer article than most people will read. -> https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/ In a nutshell: - There was "gain of function" research going on in Wuhan. - There was research there being funded by other nations including America. - One of the main people investigating Wuhan with the W.H.O. Peter Daszak has an obvious conflict of interest. As a result we DO NOT have a fully detailed account of what was going on in Wuhan. From that article and other professionals I have heard, I do NOT think it was a genetically engineered weapon. Most likely it was something that became modified or enhanced in the lab that got out into the general population. How it became modified or enhanced is something NO ONE has answered. Its possible it was from deliberate "gain of function" research. Its also possible it just came from an accidental mutation in a petri dish. We just don't know and one of the principal investigators has a serious conflict of interest. BUT Rand Paul is the worst kind of opportunistic maggot politician to be asking anything of such a serious subject and we wont get the answers we need with a clown like him running the show. 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♀️
    13
  44. 13
  45. 13
  46. 13
  47. 13
  48. 12
  49. 12
  50. 12