This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SW-User
No I turned them off.
Not complying with their BS fear mongering crap.
Not complying with their BS fear mongering crap.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@SW-User Had you received it you'd still not be "complying" with anything - but even if you had it's still your choice whether to act on any genuine alarm in future.
I choose not to have a "smart"-'phone so would not have received what was only a system test anyway; but if I had it would not have worried me. Nor do I see any "fear-mongering" in it.
Just don't refuse to comply with a red stop traffic light, or a fire-alarm... or are they fear-mongering too? :-)
I choose not to have a "smart"-'phone so would not have received what was only a system test anyway; but if I had it would not have worried me. Nor do I see any "fear-mongering" in it.
Just don't refuse to comply with a red stop traffic light, or a fire-alarm... or are they fear-mongering too? :-)
SW-User
@ArishMell
I don’t need an alarm from the corrupt governments.
They want you to comply, like good citizens!
I don’t need an alarm from the corrupt governments.
They want you to comply, like good citizens!
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@SW-User You really have it wrong! It's not to make you "comply" with anything, and it has nothing to do with "corruption" or indeed probity.
Best replace your 'phone with a basic one like mine then: PAYG, no Internet access, no worrying about receiving alarm signals.
(I worry about the handful of US companies who have monopolised the Internet, but not about our Government.)
Best replace your 'phone with a basic one like mine then: PAYG, no Internet access, no worrying about receiving alarm signals.
(I worry about the handful of US companies who have monopolised the Internet, but not about our Government.)
SW-User
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@SW-User By whom, do you think; and why?
I do know you are not the only one to be so suspicious in one ill-defined way or another, and prone to do a lot of tar-brushing; and I wonder who is driving such suspicion.
Or conversely, if no-one is really, and it's just some sort of on-line craze to live in ill-defined fear.
I do know you are not the only one to be so suspicious in one ill-defined way or another, and prone to do a lot of tar-brushing; and I wonder who is driving such suspicion.
Or conversely, if no-one is really, and it's just some sort of on-line craze to live in ill-defined fear.
SW-User
@ArishMell The WEF, he brags about it too! Also says we’ll own nothing and be happy, eat bugs and live in their smart cities!
Rishi is part of the wef, as was Boris, Gordon brown, the king.
It’s not online crazy stuff, it’s real and a threat to our freedom.
Rishi is part of the wef, as was Boris, Gordon brown, the king.
It’s not online crazy stuff, it’s real and a threat to our freedom.
SW-User
SW-User
@autumngirl27 I reckon it was a test to see how many would go along with it.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@SW-User There wasn't anything to "go along with". It was just a test of an annunciator. I think you are worrying needlessly.
SW-User
@ArishMell
No, our governments have sold us out.
The news is a fairytale, owned by them to deceive you.
No, our governments have sold us out.
The news is a fairytale, owned by them to deceive you.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@SW-User I don't agree with either of those allegations, and you not the only to make similar claims, but why do you think them?
Governments - plural? - we have only one Government in our own country, multi-Party and elected, albeit also part of a huge range of international laws, organisations and treaties it has helped build over the last Century; but "sold", you think, to whom and why?
If you refuse to accept the news from any normal source, from what or whom do you know what's happening in the world? Or do you select only Internet opinion-pieces with which you agree?
The question was not about conspiracy theories though.
It was about a public alarm system of a type used in countries that are prone to severe natural disasters, and though I have no qualms about doing that, I do question its point here:
- I find it hard to see what might justify it in reality here, in Britain. We are hit by severe storms occasionally, and these are warned of in the terrestrial weather-forecasts and the Shipping Forecasts. We don't have hurricanes though; and our numerous cyclones and earthquakes are very rarely strong enough to cause any damage. (Earthquakes are not very predictable anyway.) If the threat is military I think we'd all be horribly aware of what is building up; and then we'd all be glad of whatever alarms are given!
- It will only be heard by those owning the appropriate form of portable telephone and then only when it is switched on. There are many instances when we need turn it off, irrespective of its type.
- How would we who don't own such a 'phone anyway, receive any such public alarm?
Governments - plural? - we have only one Government in our own country, multi-Party and elected, albeit also part of a huge range of international laws, organisations and treaties it has helped build over the last Century; but "sold", you think, to whom and why?
If you refuse to accept the news from any normal source, from what or whom do you know what's happening in the world? Or do you select only Internet opinion-pieces with which you agree?
The question was not about conspiracy theories though.
It was about a public alarm system of a type used in countries that are prone to severe natural disasters, and though I have no qualms about doing that, I do question its point here:
- I find it hard to see what might justify it in reality here, in Britain. We are hit by severe storms occasionally, and these are warned of in the terrestrial weather-forecasts and the Shipping Forecasts. We don't have hurricanes though; and our numerous cyclones and earthquakes are very rarely strong enough to cause any damage. (Earthquakes are not very predictable anyway.) If the threat is military I think we'd all be horribly aware of what is building up; and then we'd all be glad of whatever alarms are given!
- It will only be heard by those owning the appropriate form of portable telephone and then only when it is switched on. There are many instances when we need turn it off, irrespective of its type.
- How would we who don't own such a 'phone anyway, receive any such public alarm?
SW-User
@ArishMell
because I’ve looked into it , I seen the lies during covid, I seen how they cover up what they don’t want you to see.
They have an agenda and need us to keep complying with their lies.
Some people will see through it, many can’t and won’t accept it, this has been going on for years, before you were born, we are living in the Truman show.
It’s not hard to find information out away from the MSM., I knew over the years different things, I knew the pharmaceutical world was corrupted, pedophiles high up, child trafficking, satanic music industry, Hollywood, it took me for covid to unfold to join all the dots, it’s all connected.
But I don’t expect you to believe me, you haven’t seen what I’ve seen.
because I’ve looked into it , I seen the lies during covid, I seen how they cover up what they don’t want you to see.
They have an agenda and need us to keep complying with their lies.
Some people will see through it, many can’t and won’t accept it, this has been going on for years, before you were born, we are living in the Truman show.
It’s not hard to find information out away from the MSM., I knew over the years different things, I knew the pharmaceutical world was corrupted, pedophiles high up, child trafficking, satanic music industry, Hollywood, it took me for covid to unfold to join all the dots, it’s all connected.
But I don’t expect you to believe me, you haven’t seen what I’ve seen.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@SW-User Sorry, I don't know what MSM stands for. I know there is an American broadcaster called MSN, as a PM correspondent here sometimes shows me links to it; but I do not live in America. so don't see or hear it regularly. So are these two separate organisations or did you simply mis-type it?
Essentially you believe in Qanon, then? Although Qanon's creator has not yet been identified, or has not the courage to admit it and explain why, much of that lot is basically Qanon's ideology.
What is Qanon? A blot on society. Qanon came to the fore only when an American political-party activist called Tracey ['Beans'] Diaz found it on a grotty little forum called 8-Chan which catered for various antisocial "~isms". 8-Chan is or was run by two Philippines-resident Americans, the Watkins father and son; though they did not invent Qanon. They just hosted it. Diaz brought Qanon onto Facebook as part of supporting her Party in the previous Presidential campaign, in extremely nasty, lying but ultimately lazy and self-destructive ways.
MSN - the journalism organisation - does at least seem careful to show when a piece is straight reporting or is opinion; and it does cite its sources and credit its writers - something seriously lacking in some areas. Judged against other professional news sources, MSN seems reasonably neutral, although I suppose it might be attacked by many in its own land for being "biased" for giving both sides instead of only the critics' side!
Essentially you believe in Qanon, then? Although Qanon's creator has not yet been identified, or has not the courage to admit it and explain why, much of that lot is basically Qanon's ideology.
What is Qanon? A blot on society. Qanon came to the fore only when an American political-party activist called Tracey ['Beans'] Diaz found it on a grotty little forum called 8-Chan which catered for various antisocial "~isms". 8-Chan is or was run by two Philippines-resident Americans, the Watkins father and son; though they did not invent Qanon. They just hosted it. Diaz brought Qanon onto Facebook as part of supporting her Party in the previous Presidential campaign, in extremely nasty, lying but ultimately lazy and self-destructive ways.
MSN - the journalism organisation - does at least seem careful to show when a piece is straight reporting or is opinion; and it does cite its sources and credit its writers - something seriously lacking in some areas. Judged against other professional news sources, MSN seems reasonably neutral, although I suppose it might be attacked by many in its own land for being "biased" for giving both sides instead of only the critics' side!
SW-User
SW-User
@SW-User Glad to see you clearly get your information from far-right sources :)
SW-User
@SW-User
I don’t follow either, I just see the lies and corruption from both sides.
I don’t follow either, I just see the lies and corruption from both sides.