Sign into an existing account

My grandpa used to use this phrase all the time and it was clearly synonymous with "mighty kind of you". So naturally I adopted the term and use it regularly but recently a retard asked what it meant and so they looked it up.

This is an interesting firsthand experience of something I know to be true in my lifetime erased and replaced by a bunch of fiction.

I'm not too old (36) so for this phrase to be used positively in my lifetime and in my memory indicates it wasn't "last used in the 1910's".

Anyway, after learning about the fake history being written about this phrase I've 10x my usage of it.

Your recycled kike worshipping faggot of a president imposing tariffs on Canada? Don't really care about that tbh would be good to see a little nationalism in Canada for once.

But now, that fat kike-slurping faggot has joined forces with the Royal Spic Queen herself, the mighty jewess of Mexico, creating a jew supremacy in America and wants to drag Canada down with it.

Keep your incestuous israel loving faggotry to yourselves. Canada is already a shithole, thanks, we don't need help from the fat wannabe kike or the hispanic heebcunt.

Faggots.

Sincerely, Canada

PS plz send bullets

https://files.catbox.moe/fu503h.jpg

Let's start by making some simple points that I'm going to assume most can agree on. Smoking is bad for your health, like drinking, eating ultra-processed food, sedentary lifestyles and breathing in silica, etc. Not really definitve but it's likely the previous statement is all true.

In a place like UK, Canada, Australia... Anywhere with publicly funded healthcare really, the aforementioned activities create a burden on the taxpayer. Therefore, as a taxpayer, should you be responsible for funding the health problems created by poor decision making?

If not, should those that participate be excluded from public healthcare? If so, then should those that are unvaccinated be excluded? Or what about those with low social-credit scores? What about people that have 14 abortions? 11 children?

The government says "smoking is bad and we're going to eliminate it." Not because smoking is bad but because the money they make off cigarettes is less than the cost on healthcare. The same reason they'll sell a kid a bottle of Pepsi in elementary school but not a cigarette. Both addictive, both killers, both a burden on taxpayers... But the government makes more selling high-fructose corn syrup to children than it costs them in the long run.

The government says, get the jab, stop smoking, eat like shit, sit around, be stressed out, fight EACHOTHER and then die.

A smoking ban is good for people but bad for liberty. Although the UK doesn't have a well-established history of standing for liberty it's an interesting discussion because once a globalist plague starts spreading it becomes hard to subdue.

I'm sure it's been asked fourteen hundred and eighty- eight times but could I get a few book recommendations?

I don't want anything diverse, nothing written by a woman and preferably nothing written since 1990.

Edit: Also where to purchase said book. Thanks.

I don't generally have conversations with women. I have a wife, Mom, Grandmother, Sister. My life quota on women is maxed out, the rest of them are some other guys problem but I was conversing with my friends wife while he was outback with his dog.

She was describing her neighbour and said he was just an average guy, nothing special. So I said... You mean normal?

I realized it's an odd perspective shift between men and women. Men enjoy being normal people, not average but a regular, civilized person who is in control of their life and vices. To women this is average.

That's an odd language difference and speaks volumes on why women behave the way they do today.

Talking about niggers etc. It's hilarious but I lost it. Any help appreciated.

I know he was killed because he was a whistle-blower but beyond that I can't find any answers.

I'm trying to talk about him with a friend but have no real answers.

The Fukashima, Chernobyl, etc. Because of how much they'd fuck you up. They were all selling great and got rave reviews except for the Auschwitz. Customers claimed they were burning too fast.

Varying tiers of fiction.

Tier 1) You watch fiction movies and they are fiction.

Tier 2) Influencers posting fiction on social media

Tier 3) Mainstream News is fiction

Tier 4) Politics is fiction

Tier 5) Global conflict is fiction

Tier 6) "Health" care is fiction

Tier 7) Public education is fiction

Tier 8) Mass agriculture providing food is fiction

Tier 9) Interracial harmony is fiction

Tier 10) Niggers functioning in a society is fiction

Tier 10) The lopsided coincidence theory of jews in positions of power is fiction

Tier 11) Regional evolution theories that deny intellectual deficits in non-whites is fiction

Tier 12) The holocaust is fiction

Tier 13) Slavery as a black problem is fiction

Tier 14) Hitler as an antagonist is fiction

Tier 15) Historical world builders as anything but Scythians is fiction

Tier 16) Kikes as members of our society is fiction

Deep through the fiction we live, we traverse the tiers and learn the truth about what's around us. We must find some solace in the fact that they had to create an entire simulation of reality to convince people that we aren't the greatest thing that's ever happened to this planet.

I have been noticing a dangerous trend recently whereas townships, city councils and municipalities are using skewed methods to achieve results on projects/bylaws/rules that are not indicative of actual opinions. This method of "faking" results is more widespread and used by almost all sides at this point and makes the oxymoron "information is fake" borderline truthful.

We usually delve into deeper and more concerning topics on Voat here and I understand that this is surface-level shit but I would argue it has more of an impact on our day-to-day lives than most of us care to realize.

I want to shoehorn in a quick anecdote here that acted as my first indicator of an easy manipulation tactic that's being used. My area was looking to pass a bylaw that banned fireworks outright, even on the otherwise acceptable holidays. They said "give us your opinion by responding to a survey." The survey required a job application level of information to even start and then the questions were phrased in the way of "have you ever been bothered by fireworks in your life?" Or "Should fireworks be controlled so they're not being used in residential neighborhoods at 3am on a Sunday."

Due to the barrier of entry into this survey most people who do not care, which based on common receptions to the survey is most people, care so little that spending 20 minutes entering info to participate in a survey just did not care enough.

Lo' and behold, this survey was used as evidence that my municipality supported the control of fireworks although in reality the majority of people did not.

The survey was setup to garner an exact response, not to get insight into how people felt about the topic but surgically dissect and amputate the responses they wanted.

As a side, this did pass and created a committee that gets paid, likely staffed by women and useless minority hires, to handle the fireworks.

The same can be said about when an article has that profoundly retarded and anti-journalistic phrase "many reddit users voiced outrage" or "twitter users in an uproar over..."

These sites have most of us banned or buried beneath bot controlled comments that if truly an open forum would be scrutinized but today's world is less microscopic to the truth.

On a larger scale, having those members of your community or inner circle that are completely removed from reality and perpetually online would believe that something as unsupported as gun-control or internet-censorship is required based on similar credentials as stated above.

Even trying to call out the complete inaccuracy of the information provided creates a barrier conversation of "well how do you know it's fake?" "Maybe they were banned for a reason" a conversation we've all had but is an exhausting waste of words that inevitably ends without even reaching the core point.

The entire system that attempts to gather opinions and insight from the public has been entirely manipulated to create more government oversight, fester a self-censoring society and embellish false narratives.

Also, just to pat myself on the back here and piggyback my post. My 4th child was just brought into this world a couple days ago and my wife and baby are healthy and home.

I'm probably more of a brainwashed faggot than most here, or in the very least less inclined to unabashedly hide my retarded levels trash consumption.

Sometimes I'll be listening to something presumably neutral and there'll be a pointed comment made by the youtuber, podcaster, etc.

Let's say it's just some generic video game reviewer but they sneak in a seemingly innocent jab at all republicans being braindead. Or some tutorial about increasing the power of my air fryer and they bash Christianity.

Without getting too sidetracked I understand a lot of people on this site have an issue with Christianity but they're also likely critical of the other religions as well and if push came to shove they'd likely back us Christians before the kikes or pedo-worshipping camel fuckers.

Despite my mass-consumption of dogshit 'entertainment' I've retained my ability to think critically or at least my ability to believe I have.

Anyway, are people generally just brainwashed and so they turn out to be retarded? Or is there nefarious funding involved even on a small scale?

I think the greenroots influence is more dangerous to the youth then any mainstream bullshit. Either it's been mastermind levels of bullshit-layering to achieve the micro-levels of success or outright manipulation of the small creators.

I wonder, how deep does the fuckery go?

1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members

2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society.

3. Its spokespeople are self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and have charisma.

4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds recruit people.

5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society.

Although it may sound like I'm describing science with the above list it's actually a checklist used to identify cults.

Trust Christianity. Betray science as a cult.