"While answering Schwab's question about Pfizer's non-profit plan for dispensing drugs to 45 economically disadvantaged nations, Bourla said the following, "I think that is really fulfilling of a dream that we had, together with our leadership team when we started in '19. The first week we met in January of '19 in California to set up the goals for the next five years, and one of them was by 2023, we will reduce the number of people in the world that cannot afford our medicines by 50 per cent. I think today, this dream is becoming a reality.'
"Thus, it became clear that in the viral video, Bourla’s words were cut out. Instead of, 'We will reduce the number of people in the world that cannot afford our medicines by 50 per cent,' the viral video shows him saying, 'We will reduce the number of people in the world by 50 per cent.' ”
pls compare: "we will reduce the number of people in the world that cannot afford our medicines by 50 per cent. ..." vs.: "We will reduce the number of people in the world by 50 per cent.' ” << HELLOOO, he's still talking about reducing a certain number of people, either those who cannot afford their drug prices (meaning poorer people - will they, therefore, make them more affluent? or will they keep them poor and reduce their drug prices instead?), or all people. it is a very, very ominous choice of words.
I'm seeing a lot of edited videos out there that are so expertly done one almost doesn't notice the editing. Most I come upon, as I look for items to transcribe, are edited down to promote a longer video or interview, but even with these, made with straightforward intentions, strike me as a bit too free-handed. I would strongly suggest paying attention to where one spots any cut in a video, because that's where, depending on the context, you might want to be skeptical.
Or maybe she's intersex? Some intersex people have a penis and also functioning ovaries and a uterus. Though they would usually be raised as boys until they have their period, or else have their junk cut off and raise them as girls.
I'm not an Obama fan at this point, but the story you tell seems preposterous. This subterfuge would have to have been adopted decades ago and would have required impeccable operational security to be maintained the entire time. And the evidence amounts to ... a bulge?
So, with all the high-level memory-hole manipulation required to create an artificial biography of a *woman*, not a trans-woman, but a *born* woman, with all that technologically-empowered, and spycraft-empowered effort, they still aren't able to maintain the kind of operational security that Ru Paul has been doing forever?
And how do they get the kids to cooperate? This whole thing sounds more like a frat-house fantasy than anything that could be real.
Be careful! You are probably referring to the edited video of an actual conversation between the two miscreants where no such thing was said:
https://www.indiatoday.in/fact-check/story/fact-check-pfizer-ceo-did-not-say-his-company-aims-to-cut-world-population-1989179-2022-08-17
"While answering Schwab's question about Pfizer's non-profit plan for dispensing drugs to 45 economically disadvantaged nations, Bourla said the following, "I think that is really fulfilling of a dream that we had, together with our leadership team when we started in '19. The first week we met in January of '19 in California to set up the goals for the next five years, and one of them was by 2023, we will reduce the number of people in the world that cannot afford our medicines by 50 per cent. I think today, this dream is becoming a reality.'
"Thus, it became clear that in the viral video, Bourla’s words were cut out. Instead of, 'We will reduce the number of people in the world that cannot afford our medicines by 50 per cent,' the viral video shows him saying, 'We will reduce the number of people in the world by 50 per cent.' ”
pls compare: "we will reduce the number of people in the world that cannot afford our medicines by 50 per cent. ..." vs.: "We will reduce the number of people in the world by 50 per cent.' ” << HELLOOO, he's still talking about reducing a certain number of people, either those who cannot afford their drug prices (meaning poorer people - will they, therefore, make them more affluent? or will they keep them poor and reduce their drug prices instead?), or all people. it is a very, very ominous choice of words.
I'm seeing a lot of edited videos out there that are so expertly done one almost doesn't notice the editing. Most I come upon, as I look for items to transcribe, are edited down to promote a longer video or interview, but even with these, made with straightforward intentions, strike me as a bit too free-handed. I would strongly suggest paying attention to where one spots any cut in a video, because that's where, depending on the context, you might want to be skeptical.
Or maybe she's intersex? Some intersex people have a penis and also functioning ovaries and a uterus. Though they would usually be raised as boys until they have their period, or else have their junk cut off and raise them as girls.
I'm not an Obama fan at this point, but the story you tell seems preposterous. This subterfuge would have to have been adopted decades ago and would have required impeccable operational security to be maintained the entire time. And the evidence amounts to ... a bulge?
So, with all the high-level memory-hole manipulation required to create an artificial biography of a *woman*, not a trans-woman, but a *born* woman, with all that technologically-empowered, and spycraft-empowered effort, they still aren't able to maintain the kind of operational security that Ru Paul has been doing forever?
And how do they get the kids to cooperate? This whole thing sounds more like a frat-house fantasy than anything that could be real.
This is something you’ll never see a vaccine proponent admit: they posted miss information