A bike helmet covers more of your face than a mask.
And I can tell someone's feelings while they have a mask on. It's not hard.

Weren't you getting upset about name calling earlier?
Seems you pick and choose your logic, inhuman definition and names that upset you depending on whether it affects your point.

Quote ="Miro"Really? Then what does this mean? From your link. No mention of the 43,000 “with early data from their promising vaccine candidate showing that it could be 90% effective at preventing the disease with no serious safety concerns observed. “ with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration signalling that it would accept a Covid-19 vaccine effective in only half of those vaccinated.  The positive results mean the companies are likely on track to meet their mid-November goal of filing for emergency regulatory approval in the U.S., I can't see anywhere in that article where it points to the 90% infections only in the placebo group. I believe the November vaccine yet to be peer reviewed cannot be considered safe due to no data at all for the long term affects the vaccine may have on the human immune system. see below. As quoted by the CDC “These stages are mandated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), with its Centre for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) division officially in charge of regulating vaccines. It’s not unusual for a vaccine to take 10 to 15 years to complete all the phases under normal circumstances. Yet this vaccine is being rushed through in a matter of months, not even a year. Considering A virus that has a recovery rate between 94% and 99.97% (depending on age) and most of it's cases are asymptomatic why the rush for a vaccine? Furthermore, a rushed vaccine that isn’t properly tested could ultimately prove to be just as dangerous as the virus. That's according to: https://www.reference.com/science/how-l ... op-vaccine'" From the link: Quote KEY FACTS The positive results mean the companies are likely on track to meet their mid-November goal of filing for emergency regulatory approval in the U.S., which CEO Albert Bourla announced a month ago. The findings come from a preliminary analysis — undertaken by an independent data monitoring board — of [i[u=#FF0000[size=150a study that has enrolled over 43,000 people to test the two-dose Covid-19 vaccine[/size[/u[/i. The early results, which may change as the trial continues, are far better than many had expected, with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration signalling that it would accept a Covid-19 vaccine effective in only half of those vaccinated. The study will continue until 164 infections have been recorded, the company said, with 94 infections reported to date. Ugur Sahin, co-founder and CEO of BioNTech, said the findings are “a victory for innovation, science and a global collaborative effort.” With the trial ongoing, these findings have not yet been peer reviewed or opened up for scrutiny, with Pfizer saying it intends to do so once the entire trial has finished. '" What else do you think "90% effective" means in the context of the trial? https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/ ... tion6.html How does someone with no symptoms recover? recover from what?

Quote ="Miro"Really? Then what does this mean? From your link. No mention of the 43,000 “with early data from their promising vaccine candidate showing that it could be 90% effective at preventing the disease with no serious safety concerns observed. “ with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration signalling that it would accept a Covid-19 vaccine effective in only half of those vaccinated.  The positive results mean the companies are likely on track to meet their mid-November goal of filing for emergency regulatory approval in the U.S., I can't see anywhere in that article where it points to the 90% infections only in the placebo group. I believe the November vaccine yet to be peer reviewed cannot be considered safe due to no data at all for the long term affects the vaccine may have on the human immune system. see below. As quoted by the CDC “These stages are mandated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), with its Centre for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) division officially in charge of regulating vaccines. It’s not unusual for a vaccine to take 10 to 15 years to complete all the phases under normal circumstances. Yet this vaccine is being rushed through in a matter of months, not even a year. Considering A virus that has a recovery rate between 94% and 99.97% (depending on age) and most of it's cases are asymptomatic why the rush for a vaccine? Furthermore, a rushed vaccine that isn’t properly tested could ultimately prove to be just as dangerous as the virus. That's according to: https://www.reference.com/science/how-l ... op-vaccine'" From the link: Quote KEY FACTS The positive results mean the companies are likely on track to meet their mid-November goal of filing for emergency regulatory approval in the U.S., which CEO Albert Bourla announced a month ago. The findings come from a preliminary analysis — undertaken by an independent data monitoring board — of [i[u=#FF0000[size=150a study that has enrolled over 43,000 people to test the two-dose Covid-19 vaccine[/size[/u[/i. The early results, which may change as the trial continues, are far better than many had expected, with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration signalling that it would accept a Covid-19 vaccine effective in only half of those vaccinated. The study will continue until 164 infections have been recorded, the company said, with 94 infections reported to date. Ugur Sahin, co-founder and CEO of BioNTech, said the findings are “a victory for innovation, science and a global collaborative effort.” With the trial ongoing, these findings have not yet been peer reviewed or opened up for scrutiny, with Pfizer saying it intends to do so once the entire trial has finished. '" What else do you think "90% effective" means in the context of the trial? https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/ ... tion6.html How does someone with no symptoms recover? recover from what?

Wrencat (me) was being ironic, didn't you notice.



I find it unbelievable for ANY person to believe that, a vaccine for covid is any more or less controlling that a vaccine for flu, MMR (or the 3 single vaccines), TB or any other mass inoculation.

I find it utterly ridiculous that gullible people are so easily taken in by the overthought ramblings of a few individuals on t'internet.

Questions do need to be asked and answers found for where the virus came from but, beyond that, it's both sad and hilarious (in equal measure) that ANYONE can believe that EVERY government has been taken in by some unknown new world order, as opposed to them trying to protect the population of the planet.

At least it's helped keep us occupied whilst in lockdown

Quote ="coco the fullback"From the link: What else do you think "90% effective" means in the context of the trial? https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/ ... tion6.html How does someone with no symptoms recover? recover from what?'" Ok, no need to shout. My bad, it does mention 43,000 further down the page but not reffered to in the main, stand alone quote. " it could be 90% effective at preventing the disease with no serious safety concerns observed. " By the way, where does it quote the 90% nfections in the placebo group? You ask =#800000How does someone with no symptoms recover? I suppose it depends what you call "symptoms" Sometimes I feel I'm coming down with something, a cold for instance. Just a feeling initially my immune system kinda telling me to "watch out" I guess. But the actual symptoms, sore through, headache, runny nose etc. never actually appear because my immune system has kicked in preumably. I guess that's what it may mean?

Quote ="coco the fullback"From the link: What else do you think "90% effective" means in the context of the trial? https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/ ... tion6.html How does someone with no symptoms recover? recover from what?'" Ok, no need to shout. My bad, it does mention 43,000 further down the page but not reffered to in the main, stand alone quote. " it could be 90% effective at preventing the disease with no serious safety concerns observed. " By the way, where does it quote the 90% nfections in the placebo group? You ask =#800000How does someone with no symptoms recover? I suppose it depends what you call "symptoms" Sometimes I feel I'm coming down with something, a cold for instance. Just a feeling initially my immune system kinda telling me to "watch out" I guess. But the actual symptoms, sore through, headache, runny nose etc. never actually appear because my immune system has kicked in preumably. I guess that's what it may mean?

And maybe I was being facetious



Look, I have explained many times how I can believe governments all over this globalised interlocking world can march to the same tune. Yet whenever I do you fail to come up with a counter argument. Yet every dozen or so posts you ask the same question....

" that ANYONE can believe that EVERY government has been taken in by some unknown new world order!

The counter argument is simple for even you to understand
There are currently governments and ruling bodies right accross the political spectrum, with substantially different motives and beliefs, ALL following roughly the same path to TRY and protect "their people".

I'm sorry that it doesn't fit your narrative but, your crackpot theory has NEVER happened in the 1000's of years of humans roaming the earth.
Yes, different groups have tried to take over another country and have hoped to rule ever larger parts of the world, some with religious beliefs, others with their own ideology,
However, your reason for believing that a new world order seems to be based on an annual event that happened to discuss the possibility of a global pandemic - hardly surprising given smaller less virulent outbreaks over the past century and "talk" of a global reset, which again, YOU have taken literally.

Sorry bud, but, it just isn't happening, although there is a pandemic which needs tackling.

There is no counter argument apart from there being no evidence of it in the history of time.
If you'd said one particular country or group were trying to take over the world then although it's unlikely to succeed it has been tried before many times so perfectly feasible. I would then be interested to look at your evidence.
But saying all the governments are conspiring together is just so fanciful there isn't even a science fiction version of that story.

So you are welcome to believe it, but that is why some people are putting you in the David Icke category as he had equally unfeasible ideas with no evidence. I'm not saying you are the same or that you have said the same as him before you write a page in false outrage. I'm just explaining why people raise the subject when you try to discuss that topic.

Wow. I just clicked on David Icke's web page. There are quite a few references on there that are similar to yours Miro. I'm getting a bit worried for you now.

Here we go, that old guilty by association trick, pathetic Pop Tart. C'mon pal, raise your game.

I do not read David Icke. Maybe you can tell everyone what he is saying and why he is wrong. Why worried? Do tell.

I bet you do.


You've put up links to all sorts of folk and for you not to have read up on one of the fore fathers on wacky theories would seem just a little bit strange, even if it were just to rule out some of his "ideas".
Your ideology does seem remarkably similar though, maybe it's just another coincidence

=#BF0000
There is no counter argument apart from there being no evidence of it in the history of time.

I see, if it's not in history it can't happen. Wonderful logic there Pop Tart.
=#BF0000
If you'd said one particular country or group were trying to take over the world then although it's unlikely to succeed it has been tried before many times so perfectly feasible. I would then be interested to look at your evidence.

Hmm!, I'm just a teeny bit suspicious of this lot.... The USA....800 military bases around the world. Umpteen invasions, constantly at war, sanctions everywhere. CIA plots everywhere, especially South America. Corporations with more economic clout than the many countries they rape and pillage, sorry, operate in. A good book to read..”Confessions of an economic hit man.” No, it's not a comedy. .Need I go on?

=#BF0000
But saying all the governments are conspiring together is just so fanciful there isn't even a science fiction version of that story.

I don't read science fiction and it's years since I read Aldous Huxley's “Brave New World” or even Orwells “1984”.

=#BF0000So you are welcome to believe it, but that is why some people are putting you in the David Icke category as he had equally unfeasible ideas with no evidence. I'm not saying you are the same or that you have said the same as him before you write a page in false outrage. I'm just explaining why people raise the subject when you try to discuss that topic.

How do you know Icke has “no evidence,” where is yours to make that statement? You seem to be lecturing others over “lack of evidence.

It seems to me Icke is used as a stick to beat people with but when challenged it appears no one has the slightest knowledge of him, just a perceived third hand view or a ten second gander of a web page.

Let me just try an analogy here. To try and discount Pop Tart and wrencats CONSPIRACY THEORY about David Icke and I.

Pop Tart and wrencat and I go the the cup final, not together mind. We leave at the end and go our separate ways.

We all three go onto the forum and recount, almost word for word, a summary of what happened there.

What possible explanation can there be for that?

Is it:
a) We have all three collaborated together to come up with the same tale. NO!

b) It's purely coincidental. NO!

c) We all read each others post before posting ours. NO!

d) It's the truth as we all saw it. BINGO !!!!!!

Or, the flipside

Miro, so desperate to "prove" his ideas, reads up on anything and everything to try and find "evidence" to back up his "unusual" ideas. Yet, strangely ignores one of the most obvious "sources".

Using your analogy, it's like being at Wembley and missing every try in a 16 try thriller. Possible but, very unlikely

Again, I didn't say you have any association with him. I just pointed out why people link you too him as he plugs similarly unfeasible conspiracy theories as you.
He talks about One World Order, Talks about how lockdown is all about taking our freedom not for our safety, quotes the nurse you quoted.
You don't have to be so outraged about it. I'm just using it as a way of explaining how people see you based on your posts. You are free to be how you want to be.

I don't think I need to explain why David Icke is wrong. I think that is pretty clear but I have no problem with you or anyone else believing what you want.
Not as keen when you preach it to everyone else though.

Quote ="PopTart"Again, I didn't say you have any association with him. I just pointed out why people link you too him as he plugs similarly unfeasible conspiracy theories as you. He talks about One World Order, Talks about how lockdown is all about taking our freedom not for our safety, quotes the nurse you quoted. You don't have to be so outraged about it. I'm just using it as a way of explaining how people see you based on your posts. You are free to be how you want to be. I don't think I need to explain why David Icke is wrong. I think that is pretty clear but I have no problem with you or anyone else believing what you want. Not as keen when you preach it to everyone else though.'" One day Pop Tart I shall go back through my posts to find those that challenge you to refute my “theories” as you call them. I can count on both hands the number of times you “go to ground” as I call it then re-appear a week later hoping it's all forgotten. I believe you mean “New World Order” because I have never used the term “one world order” Why don't you do some research and find out where the term “New World Order” has been used. Or originated even. I shall do it for you just to prove neither I nor Icke made it up. https://www.diis.dk/en/research/what-is-world-order Thirty years ago, a new world order was announced. After the Cold War the world would be a peaceful place and conflicts would be solved multilaterally. In the West it was expected that the only superpower and ‘leader of the free world’, the US, would indeed lead the fulfilment of the new world order. https://opinionrepublic.wordpress.com/2 ... ome-of-it/ The phrase ‘new world order’ traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government. The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used it in a 1989 speech. Has the “lockdown” taken away our freedoms? Yes it has. Now you either believe it's to take our freedoms away or it's for our safety. There is a 50 50 chance Icke and I will agree. No shock there then. He quotes a nurse I quoted but then so did the Daily Mail, Talk Radio and a host of other media outlets. Apart from the usual half dozen posters on here, including two “snipers”who contribute absolutely zero who are these “people” you mention who compare me to Icke, and does it matter? Not at all.

Quote ="PopTart"Again, I didn't say you have any association with him. I just pointed out why people link you too him as he plugs similarly unfeasible conspiracy theories as you. He talks about One World Order, Talks about how lockdown is all about taking our freedom not for our safety, quotes the nurse you quoted. You don't have to be so outraged about it. I'm just using it as a way of explaining how people see you based on your posts. You are free to be how you want to be. I don't think I need to explain why David Icke is wrong. I think that is pretty clear but I have no problem with you or anyone else believing what you want. Not as keen when you preach it to everyone else though.'" One day Pop Tart I shall go back through my posts to find those that challenge you to refute my “theories” as you call them. I can count on both hands the number of times you “go to ground” as I call it then re-appear a week later hoping it's all forgotten. I believe you mean “New World Order” because I have never used the term “one world order” Why don't you do some research and find out where the term “New World Order” has been used. Or originated even. I shall do it for you just to prove neither I nor Icke made it up. https://www.diis.dk/en/research/what-is-world-order Thirty years ago, a new world order was announced. After the Cold War the world would be a peaceful place and conflicts would be solved multilaterally. In the West it was expected that the only superpower and ‘leader of the free world’, the US, would indeed lead the fulfilment of the new world order. https://opinionrepublic.wordpress.com/2 ... ome-of-it/ The phrase ‘new world order’ traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government. The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used it in a 1989 speech. Has the “lockdown” taken away our freedoms? Yes it has. Now you either believe it's to take our freedoms away or it's for our safety. There is a 50 50 chance Icke and I will agree. No shock there then. He quotes a nurse I quoted but then so did the Daily Mail, Talk Radio and a host of other media outlets. Apart from the usual half dozen posters on here, including two “snipers”who contribute absolutely zero who are these “people” you mention who compare me to Icke, and does it matter? Not at all.

Here are a few of Pop Tarts and wrencats ramblings against those, including me, they disagree with.
Actually, their posts are so simmilar and timed to appear together I'm not so sure they are both one and the same poster.
Hows that for a conspiracy theory/



unfeasible conspiracy theories
unfeasible ideas with no evidence.
fore fathers on wacky theories
overthought ramblings of a few individuals on t'internet.
crackpot theory
"unusual" ideas

A challenge then. Other than just repeating Boris's podium speeches. Can they present proof to back up their claims.
Can they back up their claims with hard facts. That should be oh so easy, After all, they appear so sure of themselves.
Lets face it, anyone can come out with baseless insulting remarks, but to back them up? I doubt it.
Should they do so then this poster will pack up his keyboard and do one.
If they cannot then they are no more credible than anyone else on the internet.

Quote ="Miro"Here are a few of Pop Tarts and wrencats ramblings against those, including me, they disagree with. Actually, their posts are so simmilar and timed to appear together I'm not so sure they are both one and the same poster. Hows that for a conspiracy theory/ unfeasible conspiracy theories unfeasible ideas with no evidence. fore fathers on wacky theories overthought ramblings of a few individuals on t'internet. crackpot theory "unusual" ideas A challenge then. Other than just repeating Boris's podium speeches. Can they present proof to back up their claims. Can they back up their claims with hard facts. That should be oh so easy, After all, they appear so sure of themselves. Lets face it, anyone can come out with baseless insulting remarks, but to back them up? I doubt it. Should they do so then this poster will pack up his keyboard and do one. If they cannot then they are no more credible than anyone else on the internet.'" Once again, they are not making any claims, you are. They are refuting the claims you make because you repeatedly fail to provide any credible evidence (or any evidence at all) for them. Quoting what someone posts on the internet is not evidence. You are free to believe anything you wish, but claims/assertions without evidence can simply be dismissed. It is not possible to [i[uprove [/u[/iyour claims not to be true, other than to show that there is no credible evidence to back them up. Oh, by the way, did you know that Donald Trump is a reptilian shape-shifter Here's the 'evidence' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuDTidbziZI or maybe he's a space alien? more 'evidence' https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ufo-aler ... _b_9471748

Quote ="Miro"Here are a few of Pop Tarts and wrencats ramblings against those, including me, they disagree with. Actually, their posts are so simmilar and timed to appear together I'm not so sure they are both one and the same poster. Hows that for a conspiracy theory/ unfeasible conspiracy theories unfeasible ideas with no evidence. fore fathers on wacky theories overthought ramblings of a few individuals on t'internet. crackpot theory "unusual" ideas A challenge then. Other than just repeating Boris's podium speeches. Can they present proof to back up their claims. Can they back up their claims with hard facts. That should be oh so easy, After all, they appear so sure of themselves. Lets face it, anyone can come out with baseless insulting remarks, but to back them up? I doubt it. Should they do so then this poster will pack up his keyboard and do one. If they cannot then they are no more credible than anyone else on the internet.'" Once again, they are not making any claims, you are. They are refuting the claims you make because you repeatedly fail to provide any credible evidence (or any evidence at all) for them. Quoting what someone posts on the internet is not evidence. You are free to believe anything you wish, but claims/assertions without evidence can simply be dismissed. It is not possible to [i[uprove [/u[/iyour claims not to be true, other than to show that there is no credible evidence to back them up. Oh, by the way, did you know that Donald Trump is a reptilian shape-shifter Here's the 'evidence' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuDTidbziZI or maybe he's a space alien? more 'evidence' https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ufo-aler ... _b_9471748

You can't prove the absence of something.
You can only prove something is there or theorise it isn't through lack of evidence.

Indeed

His many arguments have holes appearing at a vast rate of knots and his increasing desperation to try and show that we are all being "controlled" and that the "global reset" is happening look weaker by the day.
Having someone on here that happily admits that he allows people into his "shop" while not adhering to government advice, which will help spread the virus is just ridiculous and selfish in equal measure.

Mind you, credit where it's due.
He's spent hour upon hour finding tenuous links to like minded people (not David Ike though

) and probably will continue in his quest and good luck to him.

Quote ="coco the fullback"Once again, they are not making any claims, you are. They are refuting the claims you make because you repeatedly fail to provide any credible evidence (or any evidence at all) for them. Quoting what someone posts on the internet is not evidence. You are free to believe anything you wish, but claims/assertions without evidence can simply be dismissed. It is not possible to [i[uprove [/u[/iyour claims not to be true, other than to show that there is no credible evidence to back them up. Oh, by the way, did you know that Donald Trump is a reptilian shape-shifter Here's the 'evidence' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuDTidbziZI or maybe he's a space alien? more 'evidence' https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ufo-aler ... _b_9471748'" Absolutely spot on post no evidence offered whatsoever

Quote ="coco the fullback"Once again, they are not making any claims, you are. They are refuting the claims you make because you repeatedly fail to provide any credible evidence (or any evidence at all) for them. Quoting what someone posts on the internet is not evidence. You are free to believe anything you wish, but claims/assertions without evidence can simply be dismissed. It is not possible to [i[uprove [/u[/iyour claims not to be true, other than to show that there is no credible evidence to back them up. Oh, by the way, did you know that Donald Trump is a reptilian shape-shifter Here's the 'evidence' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuDTidbziZI or maybe he's a space alien? more 'evidence' https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ufo-aler ... _b_9471748'" Absolutely spot on post no evidence offered whatsoever

Should have chosen the blue pill

Allrightee. Just as I thought, not one, not one single post of mine have they brought up to dissect and prove that it is a load a balls. And that's after giving them almost 24 hours to collaborate and come up with something, anything. And to think their incentive was the chance to get rid of me, and they failed miserably at the very first hurdle. Instead just the usual name calling and cheap character assassinations and sarcasm, the lowest form of wit. (Yes I know, I'm guilty of that too now and again) And here they are, the terrible two with their backing band. =#408040Pop Tart Wrencat Red white and blue Billy Butcher Charlie ????? Coco Not even an acknowledgement that my research did not come from Icke. Not proof but certainly evidence. See here. viewtopic.php?f=33&t=630163&start=890 Instead this is the kind of childish garbage they retort with: =#800000 Oh, by the way, did you know that Donald Trump is a reptilian shape-shifter Here's the 'evidence' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuDTidbziZI or maybe he's a space alien? more 'evidence' https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ufo-aler ... _b_9471748 Unfortunately I do not know the ages of the above posters so I shall be kind and leave it at that.

Allrightee. Just as I thought, not one, not one single post of mine have they brought up to dissect and prove that it is a load a balls. And that's after giving them almost 24 hours to collaborate and come up with something, anything. And to think their incentive was the chance to get rid of me, and they failed miserably at the very first hurdle. Instead just the usual name calling and cheap character assassinations and sarcasm, the lowest form of wit. (Yes I know, I'm guilty of that too now and again) And here they are, the terrible two with their backing band. =#408040Pop Tart Wrencat Red white and blue Billy Butcher Charlie ????? Coco Not even an acknowledgement that my research did not come from Icke. Not proof but certainly evidence. See here. viewtopic.php?f=33&t=630163&start=890 Instead this is the kind of childish garbage they retort with: =#800000 Oh, by the way, did you know that Donald Trump is a reptilian shape-shifter Here's the 'evidence' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuDTidbziZI or maybe he's a space alien? more 'evidence' https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ufo-aler ... _b_9471748 Unfortunately I do not know the ages of the above posters so I shall be kind and leave it at that.

Should anyone wants to do a little research they can take the advice of a couple of posters on here, mentioned in previous post, and hop over to the likes of David Icke or they can do as I do and go to source material.

By the way, I personaly have no problem with Icke, as I know very little about him. But there you have it, more ammunition for the snipers.


They fail to realise that copying someone else's research is not, in the true sense of the word, research, though admittedly it is helpful at times to back up your own conclusions.

Here are two books I have found very helpful though admitedly it's years since I last read them.
The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, clue is in the title.

The second by John Perkins is more first hand knowledge of how the powerful corporations and the system works and should partly answer the question so often posed “How is it that most countries etc.etc. And when you realise this was before the internet and globalism really took a hold it is even more of an eye opener.
Below are the books and a short review (not mine) of them both.

Some posters, you know who they are, will come on here and say ”What the hell has this got to do with covid” Followed by the usual '*^$%£?@^£”
Well, I believe they have a great insight into the situation we find ourselves in today with corporations and governments handling of the covid flu and peoples reactions.

The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists,
Robert Tressell.
The novel is set in the fictional town of Mugsborough,

for example – for the parlous situation in which they, fellow workers, find themselves. Their ignorance is exacerbated by their preferred reading matter, principally the gutter press. In contrast, Owen, is regarded as a crank and an agitator:
“It was because he was in the habit of speaking on these subjects that his fellow workmen came to the conclusion that there was probably something wrong with his mind.”

I'm happy to say the The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists was a great incentive for the labour movement and no longer is the author, a painter and decorator by trade at the turn of the century, regarded as a “crank”

George Orwell first read The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists in the 1930s when he himself was dirt poor and struggling to make his way as a writer. Its influence on his work is patent, in particular on Down and Out in Paris and London. Like Tressell, Orwell went out of his way to assure his readers that everything he wrote was more or less true and that nothing had been invented. Tressell’s novel, he felt, was “wonderful”, albeit not beautifully written. “It recorded things that were everyday experience but which simply had not been noticed before – just as, so it is said, no one before AD 1800 ever noticed that the sea was blue.

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: The shocking story of how America really took over the world
As an Economic Hit Man (EHM), John Perkins helped further American imperial interests in countries such as Ecuador, Panama, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. As Chief Economist for the international consulting firm Chas. T. Main, he convinced underdeveloped countries to accept massive loans for infrastructure development and ensured that the projects were contracted to multinational corporations. The countries acquired enormous debt, and the US and international aid agencies were able to control their economies.

He tried to write this book four times but was threatened or bribed each time to halt. The events of 9/11 - a direct result of the activities of EHMs in the 1970s - finally forced him to confront the role he played himself, and to reveal the truth to the rest of the world.
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man has become a word-of-mouth bestseller in the US. It has been called the book that finally 'connects the dots, the book that best explains what is really going on in the world'.

You're claiming all of that as your own work again are you?

I don't necessarily disagree with some of your prose, but you need to reference and then back it up.