Matt Le Tissier

When you work out the answer to that, you might get somewhere.

Until then, enjoy your both siding to bait the rhetoric.

AHT out.
You have to stand back and see it for what it is though. He's literally a retired football player with a penchant for conspiracy theories. A bit of a nobody with very little influence - it's not like Taylor swift telling her legions of fans to avoid the vaccine really is it?
I had all my COVID jabs (about 4 iirc) but honestly think the pro vaccine cranks are as bonkers as the anti vax cranks, particularly as they remain so vexed as the pandemic disappears in the rear view mirror of history.
Are we really so fragile that we can't just shrug our shoulders and move on with le tiss just as we would with David Ike or any number of cranks ? - that's why I think this is a bit mental
 
The bigger loons are the "experts" (retired footballers) spreading fake news and misinformation freely and the further loons then trust that man over actual experts. It is a scary world we live in.

To try and bring it closer to home, it is like every other football fan now being a lawyer and legal expert when it comes to our case, off the back of a load of misinformation or lack of intelligence to begin with.
Does anyone actually know anyone who's mind has been changed by Matt le tissier other than where they should position themselves when he's taking a free kick?
 
I'm not sure normal people are either taken in or even arsed tbh. I can't see anything here to be upset about unless it's a pathological need to be 'right' and have everyone think the same as you do?
Organised religion as an example spreads misinformation on a grand scale and we managed to rub along without being particularly arsed. The COVID vaccine is pretty much receding into history, and I don't understand why le Tiss having some 'niche' viewpoint on it is anymore concerning than a newsreader not sharing your favourite colour.

well , that aside, he still comes out with constant batshit bollox and is rightly either laughed at or called a twat.
 
You have to stand back and see it for what it is though. He's literally a retired football player with a penchant for conspiracy theories. A bit of a nobody with very little influence - it's not like Taylor swift telling her legions of fans to avoid the vaccine really is it?
I had all my COVID jabs (about 4 iirc) but honestly think the pro vaccine cranks are as bonkers as the anti vax cranks, particularly as they remain so vexed as the pandemic disappears in the rear view mirror of history.
Are we really so fragile that we can't just shrug our shoulders and move on with le tiss just as we would with David Ike or any number of cranks ? - that's why I think this is a bit mental
Who says it is immaterial. The knock on effect is what is important.

It’s not about the Covid vaccine anymore. It’s now cretins not having other vaccines as a result of this rhetoric and kids dying of measles etc.
 
Does anyone actually know anyone who's mind has been changed by Matt le tissier other than where they should position themselves when he's taking a free kick?

Same as you I can't muster any anger for him, he's a bit lazy headed but that's about it.
 
Who says it is immaterial. The knock on effect is what is important.

It’s not about the Covid vaccine anymore. It’s now cretins not having other vaccines as a result of this rhetoric and kids dying of measles etc.
I don't see any evidence of Matt le tissier causing an infant measles pandemic tbh. I just don't think he has any audience beyond the mentally fragile. Either those already down that rabbit hole or others trying to rationalise uncertainties about their own pro-vaccine stance.
We all live with our choices. I decided on balance that it was best for me and my family to have the vaccine. I think I'm right, but history may show I'm a fool I suppose. We're barely a generation or two away from cigarettes being prescribed for breathing conditions after all.
 
I don't see any evidence of Matt le tissier causing an infant measles pandemic tbh. I just don't think he has any audience beyond the mentally fragile. Either those already down that rabbit hole or others trying to rationalise uncertainties about their own pro-vaccine stance.
We all live with our choices. I decided on balance that it was best for me and my family to have the vaccine. I think I'm right, but history may show I'm a fool I suppose. We're barely a generation or two away from cigarettes being prescribed for breathing conditions after all.
Congratulations on being able to see through the charlatans that made people doubt the vaccine.

Others weren’t as fortunate and were taken in and have potentially risked their and their dependents’ lives more.

MLT is one of many people who have done this for the grift. If he’s made one parent not allow their child to have any sort of approved vaccine, then he’s a ****.

If that makes me mentally fragile in your eyes, then I’ll just have to live with that.
 
A lot of conspiracies today are presented in a pretty compelling way online with well made videos that you can see how the easily lead can for for it.

Even the flat earth videos, you know it's absolutely horse shit but they do great job selling it.

I remember watching a fake moon landing conspiracy video and there was a lot of decent points made and I thought maybe it's true. 5 minutes later I was reading about structures on the moon that astronauts had seen and it was pretty compelling...so withim 5 minutes I went from thinking they didn't go to the moon to thinking they did and there's structures there haha.

Anyway, I don't think all conspiracies should be seen as loony. There is an element of truth to many theories and many things we are told are not the complete truth, we all know that.

But it's like I said earlier, everything should be questioned but question it sensibly. Don't just automatically assume every conspiracy is the absolute truth and not really look into it.

Anyway, Le Tiss scored some great goals.
 
“Getting upset about his views on vaccines, COVID, Ukraine etc is like being annoyed that your family gp doesn't know how to service your car.”

It isn’t this. It’s the astonishment that some people think that their GP knows how to service a car better than their actual mechanic and will die on that hill, however you debate with them.

Then the “devil’s advocate” guy comes on to antagonise the rhetoric.
The GP would try and do it by phone consultation. If you ever got past the receptionist.
 
A lot of conspiracies today are presented in a pretty compelling way online with well made videos that you can see how the easily lead can for for it.

Even the flat earth videos, you know it's absolutely horse shit but they do great job selling it.

I remember watching a fake moon landing conspiracy video and there was a lot of decent points made and I thought maybe it's true. 5 minutes later I was reading about structures on the moon that astronauts had seen and it was pretty compelling...so withim 5 minutes I went from thinking they didn't go to the moon to thinking they did and there's structures there haha.

Anyway, I don't think all conspiracies should be seen as loony. There is an element of truth to many theories and many things we are told are not the complete truth, we all know that.

But it's like I said earlier, everything should be questioned but question it sensibly. Don't just automatically assume every conspiracy is the absolute truth and not really look into it.

Anyway, Le Tiss scored some great goals.
20 odd years later im still a bit obsessed with 9/11...particularly the Twin Towers...and i found myself falling down that conspiracy rabbit hole a few years back. Many very interesting and compelling theories......but i came to realise its how certain "facts" are framed and presented....knowing the audience and telling them what they want to hear and leading them down new paths!
 
20 odd years later im still a bit obsessed with 9/11...particularly the Twin Towers...and i found myself falling down that conspiracy rabbit hole a few years back. Many very interesting and compelling theories......but i came to realise its how certain "facts" are framed and presented....knowing the audience and telling them what they want to hear and leading them down new paths!


I still think the collapse of the building 7 is extremely shady. The towers too really for that matter. That building 7 really had no reason at all to collapse like that. No buildings in history have essentially collapsed due to fire in a way that looks extremely close to what a controlled demolition looks like, yet we got 3 in one day. Even if you put the towers down to structural damage, not fire, that still doesn't explain building 7 falling into its own footprint. Something is really off about that. Especially when someone from the fire department is on video saying they're gonna pull the building...you don't just pull a building, it takes advanced planning and arranging to do a demolition to make it collapse that way, you cannot do it in hours to a burning building. People close by said they clearly heard explosions like in a controlled demolition.

Their excuse about jet fuel meeting the beams in the towers causing the collapse is a crock of shit too. You saw the size of those towers compared to the planes. Those domestic flight planes wouldn't carry enough fuel to get down to the bottom of the buildings to cause it to collapse in its own footprint. Any structural damage at that point of entry to building would only really cause a toppling effect on a section of the building at the very worst. You need to do insane levels of structural damage in almost instant and with precision in a much lower part of the building to get a building to collapse into its own footprint, especially a skyscraper. Jet fuel doing it is laughable.

Something is really off about official reports reasonings. I still do believe there's a lot more to 9/11. That's the one big one I truly believe there's a lot more to the story. Not saying it was purely an inside job but there's a lot more to it than we're told.
 
I still think the collapse of the building 7 is extremely shady. The towers too really for that matter. That building 7 really had no reason at all to collapse like that. No buildings in history have essentially collapsed due to fire in a way that looks extremely close to what a controlled demolition looks like, yet we got 3 in one day. Even if you put the towers down to structural damage, not fire, that still doesn't explain building 7 falling into its own footprint. Something is really off about that. Especially when someone from the fire department is on video saying they're gonna pull the building...you don't just pull a building, it takes advanced planning and arranging to do a demolition to make it collapse that way, you cannot do it in hours to a burning building. People close by said they clearly heard explosions like in a controlled demolition.

Their excuse about jet fuel meeting the beams in the towers causing the collapse is a crock of shit too. You saw the size of those towers compared to the planes. Those domestic flight planes wouldn't carry enough fuel to get down to the bottom of the buildings to cause it to collapse in its own footprint. Any structural damage at that point of entry to building would only really cause a toppling effect on a section of the building at the very worst. You need to do insane levels of structural damage in almost instant and with precision in a much lower part of the building to get a building to collapse into its own footprint, especially a skyscraper. Jet fuel doing it is laughable.

Something is really off about official reports reasonings. I still do believe there's a lot more to 9/11. That's the one big one I truly believe there's a lot more to the story. Not saying it was purely an inside job but there's a lot more to it than we're told.
Re: the pull it comment-

Larry Silverstein, the leaseholder of the World Trade Center complex, made a controversial statement regarding the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) during a PBS documentary in 2002. In that interview, he mentioned that he made the decision to "pull it," which some interpreted as an admission that he ordered the building to be intentionally demolished.
However, Silverstein clarified that his use of the term "pull" referred to the decision to evacuate the firefighters still inside the building, not to demolish it. The collapse of WTC 7, which occurred on September 11, 2001, was attributed to fires that burned for several hours, fueled by office contents and the damage from debris from the collapse of the nearby North Tower.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top