reSee.it - Related Post Feed
@Justicefor_CSA - Justice for Christian
I thought I would refresh some people’s memory who would like to pretend this didn’t happen… https://t.co/ctBkRYbd5z
Video Transcript AI Summary
We showed everyone the Geo Data on their own devices, presented in a PowerPoint. We included all evidence in the investigation, such as Knox, Ardens, and Max Hayes. We did not receive any physical evidence from NBI, only their file. Everything was transparent for the Grand Jury, with no information withheld.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're able to show them. You all have the Geo Data on their own storage and cell phone. Okay. We presented all of that to your entry in a PowerPoint presentation. Well, that's everybody's investigation we put out there.
So it was Even the eyes. Here it is. Y'all make I'd say this is a cover up. Here it is. Everybody's out here.
Y'all make it. Not one PIs. We put Knox. We put Ardens. We put Max Hayes.
It's not one that we did not put a PowerPoint and show them. Did NBI turn their evidence over to you guys as well? We did not get any physical evidence from NBI, we got their file. Okay. But no physical evidence.
We put their report in a in a PowerPoint show. There was not one piece of thing that Grand Jury did not have an opportunity to say. It was very, very transparent.
@WappieSebastian - 🧃Sebastiaan Ð
Marion Koopmans: Huh? We hebben geen verplichte vaccinatie gehad........................... * Nog net niet Marion🤡 #PrikPsychopaten https://t.co/BNMxUK4wqs
Video Transcript AI Summary
There comes a point when you may not want to participate despite the offered help. That's just how life is. In November last year, Mr. Pierick, from the Health Council, stated that he supports an indirect vaccination requirement if necessary. He believes that we are doing well in the Netherlands. So, think about it again. Not for us, but for yourself. Do it for your neighbor, your grandma, or those whose surgeries have been postponed. Do it for the healthcare workers. It's never too late to make the choice again. We know where the unvaccinated live and their reasons for not getting vaccinated. The Nazis kept records of Jews, and the same thing is happening now with the fingerprinting of every Dutch citizen to prevent confusion during elections. The ID card was a tool for the Germans and Dutch police to track down resistance fighters, Jews, and people in hiding. Sometimes, music can make you feel like you're in a game. And that's how it goes.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Er komt natuurlijk wel een moment als je echt niet mee wilt doen, ondanks de hulp die wij aanbieden, Ja, dan komt na de zachte arm, want papa Bruls komt de haren aan voor papa Bruls. Zo zit het leven ook in elkaar. Het is opvoeden,
Speaker 1: Ja, dat was in november vorig jaar. We zijn inmiddels ruim een half jaar verder. En meneer Pierick, u bent dit van de Gezondheidsraad onder andere die de overheid adviseert. En u zegt: indien nodig, ben ik wel voor zo'n indirecte vaccinatieplicht? Ja, ik ben het met zeventien dat we Nederland heel goed doen.
Speaker 2: Dus denk er nog een keer over na. Niet voor ons. Maar doe het voor jezelf. Doe het zeker voor je buurman of voor je oma. Of voor al die mensen voor wie de operatie nu weer wordt is uitgesteld.
Of doe het voor die mensen in de zorg? Het is nooit te laat om opnieuw de keuze te maken.
Speaker 3: Ik kan iets zeggen over de kenmerken. We weten namelijk inmiddels vrij goed waar ze wonen vrij precies eigenlijk per postcode weten we waar ze wonen en we weten ook vrij goed wat de redenen zijn waarom ze zich niet laten laten vaccineren
Speaker 0: de nazi's houden boekjes Daarin stonden alle namen van alle joden van Boel Portaal. Dat gebeurde in alle steden in Duitsland. Dus de nazi's wisten gewoon wie ze moest hebben.
Speaker 4: Onder andere Nederlanders.
Speaker 5: De uitstekende verzoenbeweging is de Rotterdam en het Feyenoord stadion begonnen. Daartoe worden van iedere Nederlander vingerafdrukken genomen. Zodat verkiezingen of verwarringen in de vervallen niet meer kunnen voorkomen
Speaker 4: Dat persoonsbewijs was een betekent hulpmiddel voor de Duitsers en voor de Nederlandse politie bij de opsporing van verzetslieden, Joden en onderduikers.
Speaker 6: Als het dat is je wel eens aan zo'n muziek dat is je ook onder je je wilt dat dan zo'n game van zo'n input soort zingen. En daarmee zaken als je kan voor Lanske Lanske Lanske
@euphorio_ - Yan.x |
@dom_lucre Is Andrew telling the truth ? 👀 https://t.co/uErX5J1Dxj
Video Transcript AI Summary
Prince Andrew denies any involvement in the activities of Jeffrey Epstein and maintains that he did not have any sexual encounters with Virginia Roberts. He claims that he stayed at Epstein's house out of convenience and that his judgment was clouded by his sense of honor. He denies sweating or having any recollection of the specific events described by Roberts. He acknowledges being in a photograph with her but cannot explain it. He also denies any knowledge of suspicious behavior or underage girls at Epstein's residences. Prince Andrew states that he would be willing to testify under oath if legally advised to do so. He emphasizes that he is focused on his philanthropic work and moving forward.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Tonight, for the 1st time, Prince Andrew speaks out.
Speaker 1: I don't know why I've I've I've, collected that title because I don't I I never have really partied, and, and, and I've never really felt the need to go and party.
Speaker 0: I'm gonna write something. You you threw a a birthday party, for Epstein's girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, at Sandringham.
Speaker 1: No, it was a shooting weekend.
Speaker 0: A shooting weekend?
Speaker 1: Just a straightforward, straightforward shooting weekend.
Speaker 0: Why? Why were you staying with a convicted sex offender?
Speaker 1: Right. Because this was, serious, and I felt that doing it over the telephone was the chicken's way of doing it. I had to go and see him and talk to him. Oh! In 2010, there wasn't certainly wasn't a party to celebrate his release in December because it was a small dinner party.
There were only 8 or 10 of us, I think, at the at the dinner.
Speaker 0: But you were staying at the house as a convicted sex offender?
Speaker 1: It was a convenient place to stay and I admit fully that my Judgement was probably colored by my, tendency to be too honorable. Okay. And your strengths?
Speaker 0: But that definitely wasn't you getting a foot massage from a Russian girl in Jeffrey Epstein's house? No, thanks. I don't want to be part of your sex festival. It might seem a funny way to break off a friendship. A 4 day house party of sorts with a dinner.
It's an odd way to break up the trenches. It's different way
Speaker 1: of put is that that's a very, stark way of putting it. Yes, you're absolutely right.
Speaker 0: She says she met you in 2001. She dined with you. She danced with you. You bought her drinks. You were in Tramp nightclub in London.
And she went on to have sex with you in a house in Belgravia belonging to Ghislaine Maxwell.
Speaker 1: Didn't happen. There are a number of things that are wrong with that story. One of which is that I don't know where the bar is in, tramps. I don't drink. I don't think I've ever bought a drink in Trant, whenever I was there.
Speaker 0: You know that you were at home with the children? Was it a memorable night?
Speaker 1: On that particular day that that that, we now understand is the date, which is the 10th March. I was at home, I was with the children and I'd taken Beatrice to, a pizza express in working for a party at a, I suppose, sort of 4, 5 in the afternoon.
Speaker 0: Why would you remember that so specifically? Why would you remember a a Pizza Express birthday and being at home?
Speaker 1: Because Going to Pizza Express in Woking is an unusual thing for me to do. A very unusual thing for me to do. I've never been, I've only been through Woking a couple of times, and I remember it weirdly, distinctly. But as soon as somebody reminded me of it, I went, oh, yes, I remember that.
Speaker 0: She was very specific about that night. She described dancing with you and you profusely sweating and that she went on to have Bar, possibly
Speaker 1: There's a slight problem with with with with the sweating, because, I I have a peculiar medical condition, which is that I don't sweat. That's what's that's bollocks. No. Or I didn't sweat at the time and that was oh, is she? Yes.
I didn't sweat at the time because I, had suffered what I would describe as an overdose of adrenaline in the Falklands War when I was shot at and I simply it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was, it was almost impossible for me to, sort of threat.
Speaker 0: She provided a photo of the 2 of you together.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Your arm was around Her waist?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: You've seen the photos?
Speaker 1: I've seen the photograph.
Speaker 0: How do you explain that?
Speaker 1: I can't.
Speaker 0: You think it is you next to her in the photo?
Speaker 1: Oh, it's definitely me. I mean, that's a that's a picture of me. It's not a picture of I don't believe it's a picture of me in London, because when I go out to when I go out in London, I wear a suit and a tie. That's what I would describe as those are my traveling clothes if I'm going to go if I'm going overseas. So there's a I've got plenty of photographs of me address in in in in those sorts of that sort of kit, but not there.
Speaker 0: There was a witness there, Johannes Stolberg, who says that You did visit the house in that month?
Speaker 1: I probably did. I don't think I've on one of the weird things, I was staying with the, because of the what I was doing, I was staying with the Consul General, which is further down the street, on on on 5th, so I wasn't I wasn't staying there. I may have visited, but, but, but No. Definitely didn't definitely definitely no no no activity.
Speaker 0: She said she had sex with you 3 times. Once in a London house When she was trafficked to you in Maxwell's house Yes. Once in New York, a month or so later at Epstein's mansion and once On his private island, in a group of 7 or 8 other girls.
Speaker 1: No.
Speaker 0: For the record, is there any way you could have had sex with that young woman or any young woman trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein in any of his residences? No.
Speaker 1: And without putting too fine a point on it, if you're a man, it is a positive act to have sex with somebody. You have to take some sort of positive action. And so therefore, if You try to forget. It's very difficult to try and forget positive action.
Speaker 0: Epstein's housekeeper, also in a Florida court legal deposition, said that you visited the Palm Beach residence around 4 times a year. You got a daily massage. Four times a year? That was what he said in a Florida court legal position.
Speaker 1: You know?
Speaker 0: I'm just wondering, when you look back now, is there a chance that those massages might have been the services of someone who was being 'Sextually exploited or trafficked by Epstein from the Palace. At no time did I see, witness or suspect -Any suspicious behavior. -Yeah. Virginia Roberts' legal team says you could not spend time around Epstein -And not know what was going on.
Speaker 1: If you are, somebody, like me. Then people behave in a subtly different way. You
Speaker 0: could not spend time around him And not know. But you'd notice if there were hundreds of underage girls in £1, wouldn't you?
Speaker 1: But you'd under but but sorry. You would notice if there were hundreds of underage girls in Geoffrey's house, wasn't there?
Speaker 0: -You seem utterly convinced you're telling the truth. Would you be willing to testify or give a statement under oath if you were asked?
Speaker 1: -Well, I'm like everybody else. And I would have to take, all the legal advice, that there was before I was to do that sort of thing, but if push came to shove and the legal advice was to do so, Then I would be duty bound to do so.
Speaker 0: -Because you've said there are many unanswered questions. Everyone affected wants closure. You would help To provide that closure.
Speaker 1: It was just as much, closure for me as there is for everybody else. But in the same way that I have questions to answer in the sense of what was what was I doing? What was I doing?
Speaker 0: When was your last contact with her?
Speaker 1: It was earlier this year, funnily enough, in the in the summer, in the spring summer.
Speaker 0: About what?
Speaker 1: She was here, doing some rally.
Speaker 0: So even though he had by then been arrested and was facing charges of sex trafficking?
Speaker 1: No, no, no. No, no, no. This was this was early spring, I think. It was long because when was he arrested?
Speaker 0: -July.
Speaker 1: -No, it was before July.
Speaker 0: -And that was the last time?
Speaker 1: -Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 0: Because -Could you discuss Epstein at all then?
Speaker 1: No. Not actually, funny enough. No, not at all. There wasn't anything to discuss about him, because it wasn't in the news, it wasn't, you know, it was just we moved on.
Speaker 0: How do you move on from this?
Speaker 1: Well, it's an interesting way of putting it. I'm carrying on with what I do. I have a number of things that I have been doing since 2011. We've got 500,000 or just over 500,000 young people, who are using the service and I'm trying to think what else we've got, but it's well, strings to Brent's bow, A for philanthropist.
Speaker 0: I know we have to bring this to a place because we're running out of time.
@DalesGeert63675 - Geert Dales
Is deze mevrouw de hoofdredacteur van @nosnieuws? Van het NOS Journaal dat dagelijks miljoenen kijkers op basis van feiten moet informeren? Echt? https://t.co/4RZ9YK0x9B
Video Transcript AI Summary
In this video, the speaker discusses the dilemma of how to refer to prisoners and hostages in the context of the Israeli conflict. They mention the release of Palestinian prisoners and the debate over whether to call them prisoners or hostages. The speaker also talks about the feedback they receive and the different perspectives on how to describe the situation. They highlight the complexity of the issue, stating that every terrorist can also be seen as a freedom fighter. Ultimately, the speaker emphasizes the challenges faced by journalists in making editorial decisions and justifying their choices.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Recentelijk. We zijn rond de oorlog in Israel gegaan. Het zijn tal van dilemma's. Hoe noem je wat? Heb je het over gevangenen of versus gijzelaars?
Gevangenen, die Palestijnse gevangenen, die vrijkomen, verre gijzelaars. Inga die de de mensen die gegijzeld zijn door een massa die ga ze vrij gelaten worden nu daar krijgen we feedback en feedback upload ik zou zeggen zeg je de Palestijnen in Breda ze komen Palestijnen om of zeg je ze worden vermoord En je zegt: Daar krijgen we al dat projecten opgevangen. Ja, heel veel prikken, natuurlijk. Dat mensen zeggen: Je moet het anders noemen. Dat is vaak zo.
Iedere terrorist is ook een vrijheidsstrijder. Dus in gepolitiek en in gespannen situaties en dat is oorlog per definitie zijn dat dilemma's waar je op een redactie heel veel over discussieert en daar probeer je dan uiteindelijk een koers in te maken keuze in kies je een kies een koers en probeert de rand dat ga je verantwoorden en dan moet je daarbij blijven maar dat is een dilemma
@VictorSinclair3 - AuBonTouiteFrançais 🍾🍾🍾
Question juridique. Est ce que, au regard de cette vidéo, j’ai le droit de dire que Karine Lacombe est une sale menteuse ou bien est ce considéré comme de la diffamation ? (Parce que de toute manière, c’est soit ca, soit c’est une idiote, soit un très très mauvais médecin)… https://t.co/fBCzbrGIdC
@enterfx - Oddvin
@Vltra_MK This could explain a few things ⚡️🎯 https://t.co/WeCc4DhE1r
Video Transcript AI Summary
A bible published in 1905 contains a map labeled "Palestine," contradicting claims that Palestine never existed. According to the speakers, pre-1948 Palestine was inhabited by Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Palestinians.
The speakers claim that after the 1917 Jewish Bolshevik revolution in Russia, Jewish Bolsheviks infiltrated Palestine in the 1920s and 30s. A Texas congressman, Lyndon B. Johnson, allegedly smuggled weapons to Jewish communist terrorists in Palestine, disguised as Texas grapefruits. These "settlers" killed Jewish, Christian, and Muslim residents of Palestine.
In 1948, they declared independence, and President Truman recognized the new country, leading to ongoing conflict. Palestinians mark this day as a "day of disaster" (Nakba), as Ashkenazi invaders continue to seize land from Palestinians who resist leaving.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Every church had a bible like this. You know, every Christian family had a a bible like this. And, they put their their family genealogy, the weddings
Speaker 1: Baptisms.
Speaker 0: Baptisms and burials. It was all put inside the bible and you passed it down generation to generation. This particular bible was published in in nineteen o five. Now, the reason I brought it out is that I I wanna show a map that's in this bible. Now, mind you, the Schofield bible was not published until 1913.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: And, I have in my office an original 1913 Schofield, which was the introduction of the Zionist Masonic heresies about a future state of Israel. And, separating the church from Israel. And, all that rapture stuff. That's where it came from. It was a Masonic Zionist heresy that was introduced into the American churches in 1913.
This is a nineteen o five bible.
Speaker 1: Pre Schofield.
Speaker 0: Pre Schofield with no Schofield notes in it. So, you open it up and this is on page 13. I mean, this thing's big. I wanna show you. Here is here is a map of The Holy Land.
And, it says, what?
Speaker 1: Oh, Palestine. Oh, the Holy Land. They misspelled Israel. No. Palestine.
Speaker 0: Palestine. And, all these Christian Zionists would tell me, Rick, there's never been a Palestine.
Speaker 1: Alright. So here's a still.
Speaker 0: There it is.
Speaker 1: Zoom in and show you here.
Speaker 0: Yeah. So, yeah. You hear these people like John Hagee. There's never been a Palestine. Well, look at this bible map from nineteen o five.
Speaker 1: And most most bibles Yes. From then had a map of? Palestine. Palestine.
Speaker 0: And Palestine is in the bible itself in the old testament. So, we're showing you this just because I'm trying to break through the propaganda, the confusion, the lies that the Zionists have implanted in millions of minds of Christians in America. And told them, there's never been a place called Palestine.
Speaker 1: But, I have a map, Rick.
Speaker 0: Right. There it is. So, with that in mind, do you know who lived in Palestine?
Speaker 1: Palestinians? Palestinians. I got that one right.
Speaker 0: Palestinians. And, Palestinians were Jewish, Christian And, Muslim. And, Muslim.
Speaker 1: Right. They they weren't of particular faith. They were citizens of a particular country. Palestine. Palestine.
Speaker 0: They were all Palestinians.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Following the nineteen seventeen Jewish Bolshevik revolution in Russia, where the Jewish Bolsheviks went in and slaughtered the Romanov families in a satanic ritual, Imposed communism on Russia. Killed hundreds of thousands, literally millions millions of Christians. Hundreds of thousands of of Christian Orthodox pastors. And burned their churches. And, just a horrible attack on the Russian church in 1917 and afterwards.
Then, they began to infiltrate Palestine in the nineteen twenties and the thirties. In the nineteen thirties, there was a congressman in Texas, Lyndon B Johnson. And, he was smuggling guns and rockets and grenades from Texas to Palestine. Putting them in the hands of the Jewish communist terrorists that were infiltrating Palestine. There was no Israel, no state of Israel.
It was Palestine.
Speaker 1: And, crow about that. That's not a, you know, conspiracy theory. That's right from the Lyndon B Johnson Library.
Speaker 0: The crates the crates were called they were marked Texas grapefruits. The the grenades, they were shipped as Texas grapefruits.
Speaker 1: The same grapefruits that blew up the King David Hotel. So
Speaker 0: so the nineteen twenties, the thirties, and into the forties, the European Ashkenazis invaded Palestine, infiltrated. The Arabs, Christian, Muslim, and Jewish, all Palestinians Mhmm. Were alarmed by the arrival of the communist Ashkenazis from Europe. The so called Jewish settlers were killing. They killed the Jewish residents of Palestine.
Speaker 1: Yes. Do you
Speaker 0: understand that? They killed the Jews who lived in Palestine. They killed Christians. They killed Muslims. They finally got enough critical mass that they had enough numbers that they took over Palestine.
And, declared their independence in 1948. And, Harry s Truman, a thirty third degree free mason, quickly recognized this new country as a real country. And, that's how we got to 1948 and the state of Israel. There's never been peace in The Middle East since that day. That day is marked by all Palestinians as a day of disaster.
Napka. Napka. A day of disaster. The disaster continues to this day. The Ashkenazi's invaders continue to take the land, the homes of the Palestinians who have resisted, refused to leave their houses, refused to leave their farms.
It's this day since 1948, they're still fighting them, trying to make them leave.
@unbaffle_me - UnBaffle.me
@FiveTimesAugust Some of this starts at 1min 30sec in this important video, for anyone who's memory has faded. https://t.co/k9rZcdW23r
@BigFish3000 - Big Fish
Did Fanni Willis perjure herself here? https://t.co/fbg8Rwejrl
Video Transcript AI Summary
I asked if she went to the White House during her trip to DC, but she said she did not.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My next question is based on her opening the door, and therefore I'll just ask it and your honor can decide whether or not it's appropriate. When you went to DC, did you go to the White House? I did not go to the White House.
@TruthSlingerX - Truth Slinger X
Did she really say this OUT LOUD???? https://t.co/1bnT5ecTbX
Video Transcript AI Summary
We are facing a soft coup where new laws are being created under the guise of pandemic preparedness, stripping away human rights protections. The WHO is pushing for a pandemic treaty that would enforce surveillance, censorship, and limit freedom of speech. Vaccines could be developed in just 100 days. These changes would give the WHO power to dictate which drugs countries can use during a pandemic. The concept of One Health would allow the WHO to control everything globally, with a belief that humans are no more valuable than animals.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're undergoing a soft coup, and the idea is to create a whole new set of laws and ignore the existing human rights laws and other laws under the pretext of pandemic preparedness and the biosecurity agenda. The WHO is developing through all its nations, but with the WHO director in the United States in charge, pandemic treaty and amendments to the existing international health regulations that will remove the human rights protections currently, embedded in the IHRs, will enforce surveillance, censorship, get rid of freedom of speech, require governments to censor and only push a single narrative. Also, we will be sub subject if if they can make this work to vaccines developed in a 100 days, which the organization CEPI is planning to do. And one of the people who founded CEPI was Jeremy Farrar, who is now the chief scientist at the WHO to bring this forward. Other things that, amendments do is to bind the states so they have no longer recommendations, but enforceable edicts.
Provide a liability shield, ports, and the director general of who can demand that a pandemic or a potential pandemic exists, he can just declare it with no standards, and then countries around the world will will have to obey. Also, the who will tell you what drugs you can and can't use in your nation once a pandemic is declared. Obviously, the budget will increase. One Health is another part of this. One Health is a concept that was created to enable the WHO with these documents to take over jurisdiction of everything in the world by Also, embedded in this concept is a peculiar notion that humans are no longer of greater value than animals.
@patriciajane456 - Patricia Jane
@waynetlc @ABridgen Wasn't that long ago she was in support of his stance ! I wonder what's changed 🤔🤔🤔 https://t.co/mJocP8DfN9
@ryangerritsen - Ryan Gerritsen🇨🇦🇳🇱
Came across this clip today. What are your thoughts on it. https://t.co/lhpZ3pRLZ5
Video Transcript AI Summary
Many fast food places in Canada are now staffed by workers from South Asia, a shift from a more diverse workforce in the past. The speaker questions the reasoning behind allowing individuals who entered the country illegally to stay, criticizing the system's leniency. They also highlight the issue of people lining up at food banks but driving for Uber to make extra money instead of attending school. The speaker expresses frustration with the unfair treatment of those who follow the rules compared to those who engage in illegal activities. They call for a reevaluation of the current system.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It's me again. This time, I'm just saying the things that I realize many Canadians are too polite to say. Like, 1, most of the fast food places are filled with workers from 1 country or one region, and it is not Canadians. They're not from Ontario or BC or New Brunswick. They're from South Asia.
How is that possible? How do you get workplaces filled with persons from 1 region and one country and these very same workplaces 5, 6 years ago were very mixed or 70, 80% on the white persons working there. How? How? Why?
What happened? I tell you what happened. Here's what happened. There were over 700 fake letters. Right?
This is what the news brought. You know? I'm not making this up. You can read this. You know of this.
It came on television. Fake acceptance letters. And when it was time to deport, what happened? Oh, we are going to, what, forgive them so everybody stays. Although it was proven that they came into the country illegally.
You have excused them, and they can stay. So why didn't you just hand out 700 Canadian passport at the same time? Because if you are going to tell persons that they're able to stay after it is proven that they entered the country illegally, what exactly are you saying? Let me deal with another set. The other set that thinks it is cute to line up in food banks to collect food and save their money.
Right? And the next thing you see them with a brand new car driving Uber. So they're supposed to be in school. They're not in school. They're in food bank line.
And, additionally, they now save up whatever money they work over the 20 hours which they are supposed to work. They save that money. They take out a vehicle, and they go and they drive Uber. Right, making more money. And at the end of the day, these same persons claim to be the ones victimized.
You know, this this country is really is really something. Trust me. It is really, really something. The persons who do things the right way are the persons who are screwed over. The ones who choose to do things illegally, like for instance, steal cars in the morning, get caught, brought before the judge, and tomorrow they're out stealing more cars.
It's just getting more and more ridiculous as the day goes by. And this is what I'm saying. When will it stop? If you're going to be giving persons points because they're 19 to 29 years old, right, then why are you not giving persons points when they have 2 years of experience, 3 years of experience, 4 years of experience? Why are they not getting points equal to the points given to persons when they are young without experience and don't have a care in the world.
Explain that to us. It is time some serious thought be placed into what you're doing. Time come to do that.
@ryangerritsen - Ryan Gerritsen🇨🇦🇳🇱
Is it a Liberal Party prerequisite to not answer questions? We don’t want “fact of the matter” lectures. We want answers. https://t.co/kzVgWZ3Vwj
Video Transcript AI Summary
Our government called those who supported others cold, cruel, and small. We need to engage with all Canadians, as voting differently doesn't mean you don't care about Canada. We must reflect on these lessons and stay true to our Liberal values.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yesterday, your government is is calling people who supported somebody else cold, cruel, and small. And today, you wanna engage and listen to them. Do you understand how that might fall on, deaf ears?
Speaker 1: So, you know, I have always been very clear about the fact that we need to engage with all Canadians. I mean, the the fact of the matter is and you can go back to 2015, when the prime minister was very clear that, you know, just because you vote for somebody else doesn't mean that you don't have the best interest of Canada in mind. I mean, you
Speaker 0: Then why is your party calling them cold, cruel, and small?
Speaker 1: So but this is where I think it's important for us to reflect on some of those lessons, and to make sure that, we're being true to who we are as Liberals
@BowesChay - Chay Bowes
Is she drunk? https://t.co/PM1h414WpG
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker's mother used to say, "I don't know what's wrong with you young people. You think you just fell out of a coconut tree?" The speaker explains that this saying meant that people exist in the context of all in which they live and what came before them.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Everything is in context. My mother used to she would give us a hard time sometimes, and she would say to us, I don't know what's wrong with you young people. You think you just fell out of a coconut tree? You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.
@Lisahudsonchow7 - Lisa 💃🏻💋🌹🍷
BOOM! She is telling the truth! https://t.co/vVt8DRfImD
Video Transcript AI Summary
Kamala Harris likely chose ABC for the debate. Haitian migrants are eating animals, and the media is manipulating people. When migrants arrive and costs rise, there should be no complaints. People advocate for a woman's right to choose but can't define what a woman is. Most voters are already decided, and Kamala supporters may be upset in November.
Kamala Harris should be in the debates and spin room to provide the absolute truth. A black woman will give you the exact truth. The speaker sometimes intentionally calls Kamala Harris "Camilla."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Think it's pretty damn obvious why Kamilla Harris insisted upon having the debate on ABC. And for the record, the migrants, the Haitian migrants are in fact eating the animals. So let's not pretend that Trump is saying some crazy ass. The media is manipulating your ass, and you're falling for it. When the migrants land on your front doorstep, don't complain.
When groceries and rent get so high that you can't afford to shelter or feed your family, don't complain. Don't say this is what you wanted. You wanna fight for a woman's right to choose, but you can't even define what the a woman is. At this point, everybody is prince decided. I don't think there's many undecided voters out there.
So let's take this thing to the because I got a feeling there's gonna be a lot of pissed off Kamala supporters come November.
Speaker 1: Tell us how you really feel. They need to have her on the on the debates day too. You need to have her in the spin room after 1 of the Yes. We we go into the system. Right?
Right? Soon as this is over so we can get the absolute truth. And it's like I said, a a black woman especially is gonna give you the exact truth. And when she called her Camilla, because you know we we that's We do that stuff on tech. I'll do it by purpose too.
Purpose. I'm not
@toobaffled - “Sudden And Unexpected”
She DID say this Out Loud ‼️ https://t.co/gRPrvqmm2K
Video Transcript AI Summary
The WHO is developing a pandemic treaty and amendments to international health regulations that will remove human rights protections and enforce surveillance and censorship. The goal is to develop vaccines in 100 days.
The amendments would bind states to enforceable edicts, provide a liability shield, remove intellectual property rights, move supplies between countries, and enforce digital passports. The WHO director general can declare a pandemic with no standards, and countries must obey. The WHO will dictate which drugs can be used.
One Health is a concept to enable the WHO to take over jurisdiction, suggesting humans are no longer of greater value than animals.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're undergoing a soft coup, and the idea is to create a whole new set of laws and ignore the existing human rights laws and other laws under the pretext of pandemic preparedness and the biosecurity agenda. The WHO is developing through all its nations, but with the WHO director in the United States in charge, a pandemic treaty and amendments to the existing international health regulations that will remove the human rights protections currently, embedded in the IHRs, will enforce surveillance, censorship, if they can make this work to vaccines developed in a 100 days, which the organization CEPI is planning to do. And one of the people who founded CEPI was Jeremy Farrar, who is now the chief scientist at the WHO to bring this forward. Other things that the amendments do is to bind the states so they have no longer recommendations, but enforceable edicts. Provide a liability shield, get rid of intellectual property rights, move supplies from one country to another, enforce digital passports, and the director general of who can demand that a pandemic or a potential pandemic exists.
He can just declare it with no standards, and then countries around the world will have to obey. Also, the WHO will tell you what drugs you can and can't use in your nation once a pandemic is declared. Obviously, the budget will increase. One Health is another part of this. One Health is a concept that was created to enable the WHO with these documents to take over jurisdiction Also, embedded in this concept is a peculiar notion that humans are no longer of greater value than animals.
@zerohedge - zerohedge
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but can we go back to what happened here? https://t.co/FkScNHivuU
@LiberalRipper - Deplorable Deangelo 🇺🇸
@MichelleMaxwell You think? 👇For those who've seen this, great - Burn it in your brains... For those who haven't - Now you have. https://t.co/yuPHbVqfsZ
Video Transcript AI Summary
One little-known aspect of my case involves a federal agent who claimed they intended to plant child pornography on my husband's computer. This was part of an operation by the FBI. In a separate case currently in litigation, an FBI agent has testified that such actions have occurred before, although it didn't happen in our situation. They halted this part of the operation before it could be executed. It's alarming to think about the implications, especially knowing we had a young daughter at home and that there was an alleged conspiracy to carry out such a heinous act.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: For too long to be able to clear those matters up. It sounds like you
Speaker 1: know May may I say one little reported facet of my case is one of the federal agents involved in one of the operations against me said that they intended to plant child porn in my husband's computer. This is the FBI. There's been a case, that's currently in litigation unrelated in which an FBI agent has testified that they did that. They have done that. It was not accomplished in my case.
I guess the the curtain was drawn on that facet of the operation prior to them doing it. But imagine how you ever get out of that. How you they they knew we had a young daughter at home and has allegedly conspired to do that.
@EricLDaugh - Eric Daugherty
I have a question Do you think Senator Chris Van Hollen watched this video? https://t.co/89bHc2Mn3H
@KathleenWinche3 - Kathleen Winchell ❤️🤍💙🇺🇸🇺🇸
What’s your take on this situation? https://t.co/PfiuKn83jg
Video Transcript AI Summary
A family was allegedly removed from a Delta Airlines flight from Hawaii to Los Angeles due to overbooking. Brian Sheer and his wife, Britney, were traveling with their infant son and daughter. They had purchased a seat for their teenage son, who took an earlier flight, and used it for their two-year-old.
The airline allegedly used this seat switch as justification to reassign the seat to a standby passenger. A flight attendant suggested the infant sit on a parent's lap. The family was stranded at midnight, and an airline employee allegedly told them they were on their own and that there were passengers waiting for their seats. A flight attendant allegedly threatened that the parents would be arrested and their kids would be taken away if they didn't give up their seats.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: It happened again. A family booted off an overbooked flight to make room for other passengers. What are we supposed to do once we're off this plane? And get this, a flight attendant actually said their kids would be taken away if they didn't surrender their seats. So there is gonna be a federal offense, and then you and your wife will be in jail, and your kids will be It happened on board a Delta Airlines flight from Hawaii to Los Angeles.
Brian Sheer and his wife, Britney, were returning from vacation with their infant son and daughter when they were told to give up one the seats. Brian had actually bought a seat for his teenage son. The teenager took an earlier flight. The family used that seat for their two year old. Apparently, that switch gave the airline an excuse to take the seat back and give it to a standby passenger.
A flight attendant actually suggested they take their infant son out of his car seat and sit on mom or dad's lap for the duration of the flight. It was midnight and the family was stranded. I got two infants and one. Have to stay. There's no more flights.
Who is this? Do you sleep in the airport? No. No. At this point, you guys are on your own.
Yep. She actually said, you guys are on your own. And as we're leaving the plane, there's four or five passengers there waiting for our seat. The bottom line is they oversold the flight.
