IF GEORGE WILL FEELS THIS WAY...

It’s not like he’s got a lot to go round.

Falsely accusing me of your own lack of intelligence does not make me any less smart or you any more smart.

I've never listed my IQ. You see, I have nothing to prove to you. I'm quite sure of my intelligence and factual knowledge. There is no need to go on and on (and on) about a meaningless number.

Even if you have an IQ of 17 it might have just been sheer luck that you scored so, um, high. Isn't it about time you started wearing big boy pants and got on with life?

You are certainly insecure enough that you keep going on and on about people who are smarter than you are.

Why are you blaming me for your obsession with my superior intelligence?

Have you seen his IQ test???? Neither have I....

You wouldn't be smart enough to comprehend it even if you had seen it. All you are capable of doing is spouting childish name-calling.

If he wants people to stop saying he’s stupid all he has to do is stop posting stupid stuff.

He can’t it’s all he posts, so he’s only got himself to blame.

First of all Trump emphatically does not want to open this particular wet market in China which is viewed as a breeding ground for diseases. Second, we were talking about the WHO and your comment that they didn't do anything wrong.

I am not remotely condoning either racism or unjustified actions by the police against any person. I take it as a given that the death of George Floyd was a very cruel murder with torture. I want to see every policeman involved punished. I am talking about the fact that you even up to this last post display an utter indifference to the widespread violence against the innocent which is now being done in the name of George Floyd.

Are we now?

You claimed there was proof that the WHO was supporting China, but you’ve not provided any proof at all.

Trump claimed the virus was developed in a lab in Wuhan. Now you finally accepting what most scientists are saying about the virus starting from animal to human contact in a livestock market.

Why do you think the WHO can tell China what to do but can’t tell America the same?

What about gun shows in America? They’re one of the biggest sources of unlicensed firearms getting into the hands of criminals. Should the WHO try to compel America to shut those down?

There’s no greater risk to public health than a nutjob on the loose with automatic weapons.

The only proof of anything you’ve provided is that you think the WHO should stop China from doing what Trump is already doing, or attempting to do, in America.

I never said the WHO didn’t do anything wrong, I said there should be an impartial investigation.

I don’t think Trump should be allowed to shut down businesses in China or anywhere else. He’s not the president of the World. Didn’t you know that?

@izzythepush,
Your inability to comprehend my posts is not evidence of stupidity on my part. It is evidence of stupidity on your part.

I guess he thinks he is another stable genius like his hero!

False. I did not claim there was proof the WHO was supporting China. I claimed the WHO was supporting China opening a certain wet market in Wuhan. In the Jerusalem Post article I linked in, it said, "Incredibly, the WHO supported China opening wet markets in mid-April, despite it being a possible origin of COVID-19. "


I made no such claim.


False, I don't think the WHO can tell China what to do, but I don't think they should endorse China opening a dangerous wet market.



No, but they shouldn't promote bad policies, or object to good policies, or uncritically report Chinese medical statements without checking them.


I don't think the WHO can or should stop China from doing anything, but they don't have to endorse bad policies, or oppose good policies, or uncritically repeat Chinese medical analysis if they don't know whether it's right.


Yes, you did. You said, "The WHO hasn’t behaved improperly."


I don't think he should either, but like all Americans, he has the right to criticize things he thinks are bad.

Who else besides Trump spoke out about security concerns during these demonstrations? When you have demonstrations and people taking advantage of them to destroy property, steal, and/or just engage in civil disobedience to practice their leftist anti-police collectivism; someone has to speak out against and stand up to crime piggybacking along with legitimate protest.

The Democrats have this subtle racist rhetorical twist they do where if you say that predominantly/historically black neighborhoods need the same protection against crime as any other area, they accuse you of labeling the area criminal because it's black. When/if you say that there should be more done about crime generally, they always twist it to make it taboo to mention crime, and by doing so they allow crime to go undetected, i.e. by making it a social taboo to talk about it for fear of someone getting insulted.

It is basically the same thing that happens when you try to address any problem and people get defensive because they don't want to be stigmatized by association with the problem. So if you say that people need more exercise and/or better diets to be healthy, they get defensive about you calling them fat, and the Democrats use that same ego-defense mechanism to shield crime from police in predominantly/historically black areas, and thus protect crime in those areas from police.

Why do Democrats want to protect crime in historically/predominantly black areas while calling Republicans 'racist' for wanting to liberate people, including black people, from crime? Answer: because Democrats aren't ultimately against crime because they see it as part of a Marxist progression of capitalism toward socialism. Many if not most historically black areas have or had strong church/religious communities, but Marxism views religion as 'the opium of the people' that deters them from feeling the pain of capitalism and thus rising up against it; and these social movements designed to emphasize the pain of oppression and encourage people to rise up against oppression are exactly what Marx prescribed, along with elimination of religion.

Religion and spirituality are not 'the opium of the people,' but their gold. Material wealth does not solve social problems or make people happy generally, because the allure of getting more stuff fades once you have it. For people to be happy and prosperous at whatever level of material wealth, they need freedom of religion to achieve the spiritual blessings that come with moral discipline.

Who besides Trump and his supporters are challenging this Marxist/socialist logic of driving people into a frenzy against oppression and allowing destruction of property and theft as a consolation prize for anger over police brutality? Of course police brutality is wrong, but the solution for it is to revive religion as the GOLD of the people, not 'the opium.' Law abiding people, black or white, benefit from police presence to keep criminality out of morally strong areas. Who else besides Trump is advocating law enforcement to remove crime so that historically/predominantly black areas can have peace and prosperity? If there is anyone besides Trump/Republicans who want to stop crime, who are they and what is their plan?

There is no one here, besides you, who believes you have an exception IQ. There are are a few people here I find to be quite intelligent, and there are others who have solid reasoning skills. You often make basic mistakes in logic (although I attribute that to ideological narrowness rather than cognitive difficulties).

It is possible that you are so intelligent that none of us can recognize it. For whatever reason, none of us recognize it.

Your inability to recognize reality does not make it any less real.

You're bluffing. I call your bluff. You cannot point out any mistakes in my logic.

Actually I know for a fact that my IQ is 170.

That is true. I am not excluding the possibility that you are a supergenius at a level that us mere mortals can't possibly understand.

So are we going to keep discussing my intellectual superiority, or are you going to try to point out these supposed logical errors of mine, or are we going to address the facts of what BLM really stands for?

The latter two would be the more interesting choices in my opinion.

Considering the remit the WHO has I don’t think they’re acting improperly.

You can make the same argument about wet markets that you make about gun shows, they’ve been running for so long and only a few times have viruses caused pandemics, or guns have ended up in mass shootings, so they should go on.

All this nonsense about the WHO from Trump, and it’s only really from Trump, is a massive distraction. Singapore, South Korea, New Zealand and Germany all got the same advice from the WHO that Trump got. The outcomes are different because Trump is an idiot who puts profits before people.

So is Johnson, lockdown should have started a lot sooner and the Cheltenham festival should not have gone ahead.