Replies

This is a genuine question: how does the length of time that a person has been posting on FR relevant to the legitimacy or acceptability of their posts? If I was posting things positive about Musk, the people who make an issue out of it wouldn’t have even looked at my start date. Very strange.

Donald Trump walks the walk, every day. If you can find something I’ve posted critical of him, please feel free to post it here.

I post questions here about Musk that no one wants to answer. All I get is either anger and vitriol for asking reasonable questions (akin to a weird religious fervor); or pivots to changing the subject, as in disregarding the questions and just adding more information that supports the narrative. The reason I keep posting about Musk is to prove the double standard that exists for him and him alone. And the Elon fanboys and girls do not disappoint!

Musk is completely onboard with the globalist agenda: world government, transhumanism and human enhancement; universal basic income; sustainable energy; climate change. I’d post the supporting proof, but it wouldn’t make any difference to you. I’ve posted it before on other threads and nobody touches it because it can’t be defended. It’s much easier to ignore facts and attack the person who posts uncomfortable truths, I guess.

Musk's history includes the fact that at the time of starting SpaceX, he was working closely with Mike Griffin, President and CEO of In-Q-Tel, the venture capital arm of the CIA. His association with high-level intel is extremely relevant, yet largely ignored.

Musk’s vision is the same as Klaus Schwab and Yuval Harari. Totalitarian world government and surveillance state. That’s part of what he’s been doing for the last twenty years - helping to build the infrastructure (Starlink).

It’s world-class irony that Musk’s fans here on FR defend him for his alleged stance against censorship, but would happily censor those on FR they disagree with.

He’s not Jesus, he’s a human being. He should be vetted like any other powerful public figure. His past, his work, are all relevant to what he’s doing now with Twitter. But if anyone tries to do that here, they are attacked, ridiculed and marginalized. That is a clever, disingenuous form of soft censorship. More irony: censoring those who disagree with “the guy who’s against censorship!

”To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” - Voltaire