bullybeef
Player Valuation: £50m
I doubt Bill actually gives one.
Conspiracy theories
- Thread starter gorgeousgeorgeEFC
- Start date
- Status
I doubt Bill actually gives one.
Tea_drinker
Player Valuation: £15m
I dont trust the motives of anyone who starts a 'foundation' named after themselves. They always seem sinister and self serving. Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Tony Blair foundation, Jamie Carragher 23 foundation....All well dodgy.
Dymak
Player Valuation: £40m
Especially if said foundation ends up having significant 'influence' over world-wide operational establishments like the World Health Organisation, and the entirely benign United Nations.
JimmyJeffers
Player Valuation: £80m
To be fair it does seem pretty egotistical but then they would likely be accused of being non-transparent if they didn’t.
Everything thing they do is open and transparent when it comes to the foundation.
You can look it up.
Giving away billions and having rich friends give away millions to charity is self serving?
GwladysPhil
Player Valuation: £35m
Tax dodging...
This just isn't true though is it?
What influence? Part of his foundation have a disease research group with actual experts and doctors some of who are part of the who. They work with the who on research and help other research companies with funding.
They are influencing no one. What they are doing is what countries can't do and that is pump millions into disease research. Much like we have private companies researching cancers etc....
This has always been the case. Governments don't want to waste funds on diseases
Their financial records are public.
I’ve heard some growing rumours that Bill Gates utilised stolen alien technology to develop COVID, Windows 95, Solitaire and MS Paint. Possibly true?
JimmyJeffers
Player Valuation: £80m
.I can imagine him monitoring my solitaire play to be honest
That'll be why the aliens crashed.
Dymak
Player Valuation: £40m
What influence?
You then go on to admit that they are reliant on the foundation’s money, with them being the second biggest donor behind the good old U.S of A. His money couldn’t buy him any influence at all could it? I mean, what influence? lol
I can’t be arsed with this thread anymore.
Yeah, critique and discussion about different conspiracies should be welcomed, but it’s been hijacked by a load of smart arses that want to do nothing but pretend that there’s never been a conspiracy. Not one. The mainstream narrative must be believed because the BBC don’t tell lies.
If it’s a thread where people think being the WHO’s second biggest funder to the tune of over 50 billion pound doesn’t come with any influence, then I think I’ll leave it here. You can’t discuss conspiracy theories properly if people are going to be so naive that handing over 50 billion dollars wouldn’t afford the donor any influence whatsoever.
It’s like arguing Usmanov or Phil Green would have no influence over Everton even if they’re the ones bankrolling them or keeping them in business. They’re doing what most chairman should be doing, but that doesn’t mean they have any influence
For what it’s worth, here’s an article quoting a load of scientists that have expressed concerns about the Gates’ funding of the WHO, their love of intellectual property rights, and their focus on technology:
I’m leaving it there, though. There are other places on the internet where conspiracy theories can be discussed properly, without conversing with people that become agitated when anything but the media narrative is accepted.
malcson
Player Valuation: £10m
The criticism though is whether they are spending money in the right way on the correct projects. These questions seem fair and rational, the article even states that the Gates Foundation is “not [seen as trying] to further its own interest”. Conspiracy theories require there to be a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. The people in this article make no such claims. Conspiracy theorists take facts and twist them to suggest that some secret plot is at hand. Yes Gates has influence on what his money is spent on and not everyone agrees with what he spends it on and it’s his money so I guess he gets to choose (I think it’s better than simply accumulating wealth and possessions?) The fact is though he is still spending it on good causes and not on a secret plot for his own ends.What influence?
You then go on to admit that they are reliant on the foundation’s money, with them being the second biggest donor behind the good old U.S of A. His money couldn’t buy him any influence at all could it? I mean, what influence? lol
I can’t be arsed with this thread anymore.
Yeah, critique and discussion about different conspiracies should be welcomed, but it’s been hijacked by a load of smart arses that want to do nothing but pretend that there’s never been a conspiracy. Not one. The mainstream narrative must be believed because the BBC don’t tell lies.
If it’s a thread where people think being the WHO’s second biggest funder to the tune of over 50 billion pound doesn’t come with any influence, then I think I’ll leave it here. You can’t discuss conspiracy theories properly if people are going to be so naive that handing over 50 billion dollars wouldn’t afford the donor any influence whatsoever.
It’s like arguing Usmanov or Phil Green would have no influence over Everton even if they’re the ones bankrolling them or keeping them in business. They’re doing what most chairman should be doing, but that doesn’t mean they have any influence
For what it’s worth, here’s an article quoting a load of scientists that have expressed concerns about the Gates’ funding of the WHO, their love of intellectual property rights, and their focus on technology:
I’m leaving it there, though. There are other places on the internet where conspiracy theories can be discussed properly, without conversing with people that become agitated when anything but the media narrative is accepted.
Do you want a dialogue that involves questioning opinions or one that simply agrees with a stated opinion. I thought that conspiracy theorists questioned things? Or do you prefer to “discuss” conspiracy theories in groups who echo your beliefs and add (often baseless) fuel to the conspiracy?
That is sort of the perfect thread by a conspiracy theorist.What influence?
You then go on to admit that they are reliant on the foundation’s money, with them being the second biggest donor behind the good old U.S of A. His money couldn’t buy him any influence at all could it? I mean, what influence? lol
I can’t be arsed with this thread anymore.
Yeah, critique and discussion about different conspiracies should be welcomed, but it’s been hijacked by a load of smart arses that want to do nothing but pretend that there’s never been a conspiracy. Not one. The mainstream narrative must be believed because the BBC don’t tell lies.
If it’s a thread where people think being the WHO’s second biggest funder to the tune of over 50 billion pound doesn’t come with any influence, then I think I’ll leave it here. You can’t discuss conspiracy theories properly if people are going to be so naive that handing over 50 billion dollars wouldn’t afford the donor any influence whatsoever.
It’s like arguing Usmanov or Phil Green would have no influence over Everton even if they’re the ones bankrolling them or keeping them in business. They’re doing what most chairman should be doing, but that doesn’t mean they have any influence
For what it’s worth, here’s an article quoting a load of scientists that have expressed concerns about the Gates’ funding of the WHO, their love of intellectual property rights, and their focus on technology:
I’m leaving it there, though. There are other places on the internet where conspiracy theories can be discussed properly, without conversing with people that become agitated when anything but the media narrative is accepted.
1. Greatly exaggerate the claim
2. Demonise "mainstream media"
3. Present a "scientific quote" out of context
4. Everyone who doesn't agree with you is naive
5. General broadsweeping statements which are not actually true
The only thing you missed was "open your eyes sheeple"
9 out of 10
Dymak
Player Valuation: £40m
That’s fair enough. You admit that he has influence as to how his money is spent and not everyone agrees with how it should be spent, and that some people have concerns about how it is bring spent. So the what influence question has been answered, even though I think it is a ridiculous question to ask.
Conspiracy theories rely on two things. One, there is actual proof of conspiracies having taken place in the past, conspiracies aren’t the same as magic. And two, something which can until now only be a theory, as the truth is unknown.
Thus, the Madeline McCann conspiracy theorists aren’t shouting as loud as they used to because compelling evidence has been unearthed that looks to contradict their hypotheses. Whereas the elite paedo conspiracy theorists, well, they haven’t just been proven correct but I think there is some way to go on that one!
I always thought the McCann’s were innocent, and have argued so here and elsewhere. But that’s not the point. The possibility of their parents being involved in her disappearance was a valid hypothesis until proven otherwise.
I wasn’t entering a conspiracy forum and jumping up and down demanding cast iron proof of the parents’ involvement. I wasn’t jumping on every topic of conversation and becoming agitated unless the mainstream narrative on any given topic was accepted.
For me, this isn’t a proper conspiracy thread if I’m being asked ‘What influence’? lol when the person asking the question already knows that Mr Gates is the WHO’s second biggest donor. Stuck in between the extremely noble USA and Great Britain.
I think there are better places to discuss conspiracy theories; where people aren’t so attached to their mainstream news providers.
- Status
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
