Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

1.3K

Climate child Greta Thunberg is the subject of a new criminal investigation after she tweeted a list of her scripted marching orders, apparently accidentally, to her 4.8 million Twitter followers.

It appears as though the 18-year-old global warming activist was trying to tweet an “organic” post in support of the farmers protest in India when she mistakenly shared a document from her handlers outlining tactics for rallying left-wing Twitter users to join the movement.

“These are just some suggested posts, but feel free to tweet your own,” read the first bullet point on the document, which Greta quickly deleted once she realized, apparently, what she had done.

“It’s helpful if you add images or videos to your tweets (some images below),” the document went on to explain. “You can also tag others who can either reshare and/or the potential tags listed above to put pressure on them as well.”

Below these instructions was a series of sample tweets with a “CLICK HERE TO TWEET” button for each one. All Greta had to do, it appears, was click on one and pretend it was her own, and voila: instant support from her drone followers.

“The list gave a series of tips on what to post, asking her to also repost and tag other celebrities tweeting about it, including pop star Rihanna,” reported the New York Post.

“As well as the Twitter storm, the ‘toolkit’ she shared also suggested highlighting planned demonstrations at Indian embassies.”

Climate child Greta Thunberg is the subject of a new criminal investigation after she tweeted a list of her scripted marching orders, apparently accidentally, to her 4.8 million Twitter followers. It appears as though the 18-year-old global warming activist was trying to tweet an “organic” post in support of the farmers protest in India when she mistakenly shared a document from her handlers outlining tactics for rallying left-wing Twitter users to join the movement. “These are just some suggested posts, but feel free to tweet your own,” read the first bullet point on the document, which Greta quickly deleted once she realized, apparently, what she had done. “It’s helpful if you add images or videos to your tweets (some images below),” the document went on to explain. “You can also tag others who can either reshare and/or the potential tags listed above to put pressure on them as well.” Below these instructions was a series of sample tweets with a “CLICK HERE TO TWEET” button for each one. All Greta had to do, it appears, was click on one and pretend it was her own, and voila: instant support from her drone followers. “The list gave a series of tips on what to post, asking her to also repost and tag other celebrities tweeting about it, including pop star Rihanna,” reported the New York Post. “As well as the Twitter storm, the ‘toolkit’ she shared also suggested highlighting planned demonstrations at Indian embassies.”

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (116).
[–] • 0 pt

and... did you miss the part where space is fake & gay??

if you needed Elon to showup on Rogan before you realized that he is a total sellout shill then evidently your brain is also that which is fake and gay.

[–] • 0 pt

Where do you locate the sun...

[–] • 0 pt

in the sky above (within your firmament)

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

I thought this might be your answer, but I wanted at least to verify that you'd thought about this as opposed to just parroting a meme.

I'm not altogether interested in the flat earth or fake-space debates any longer. I don't go for them myself, but I don't begrudge the people who do. These views just aren't consequential enough to truly bother me (at least at this moment; perhaps I'm wrong and they are immensely important).

That said, I am 'with' a couple of the positions that tend to get clustered with this crowd. First, I don't believe man has stepped foot on the moon. Second, there's something going on with Antarctica. I don't endorse any of the concrete stories about what's going on with Antarctica (there's too much wild fucking speculation), but I feel confident there are secrets being kept from us about Antarctica, and human history more generally. Humans didn't just suddenly civilize six thousand years ago.

But as it concerns space being fake, there are some things I'm not prepared to accept. First, that the sun and stars are all located in a firmament surrounding earth - something like a dome. That requires two different explanations for both kinds of object, when there is the simpler explanation that they are all objects of the same kind at vastly greater distances from each other. Second, there are planetary bodies in this system that would require some explanation. I'm not at all prepared to accept that the photographs we have of these planets are all 'faked'.

Typically when it comes to a conspiracy, I need to be able to see the means, motive and opportunity. In terms of means and opportunity, there exists a disinformation machine today that satisfies both of these in almost all cases. But when it comes to space, I don't see the motive. All too often I'm met with the answer that the motive is religious, i.e. to cause us to lose faith in the scriptures or something, and this just doesn't do it for me. The Bible shouldn't be considered as giving us a literal astronomy. A cosmogony, sure, but not a literal account of the crude structure of the universe. I don't put a scientific explanation above the Bible - please don't get me wrong here; rather, I see them as dealing with different domains needing explanation.

Maybe @PS or @KingOfWhiteAmerica would care to weigh in. The one thing I will say re: space is that I do consider geocentrism a strong possibility, which might be thought to fit with a scriptural interpretation of the cosmos. In the end, to unequivocally prove geocentrism v. heliocentrism would seem to require a fixed object to triangulate against, and everything in space is in motion. Perhaps it is the case that earth is not, and the universe moves about the fixed planet earth, or perhaps it's a relativistic issue where one could arrive at the same result by considering everything else as moving relative to our inertial frame. Again, these are interesting topics, but not ones which my worldview requires for a foundation.