You really want to know my point of view?
I've suggested that spending your time to invent the time machine.
As a outsider, you never know what happened in 30 ~ 50 years ago.
About the fact you claimed, You just can't take Mercury & Me as a reference.
It's really strange you think the book is lie and believing it.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Knowledge is hammered out on the anvil of
discussion, dissent, and debate. ~ Unknown
Only two out of my nine points depends primarily on M&M
Please address the rest of the factual points I laid out and provide your own sources.
P.S. You don't know whether I'm an outsider or have inside knowledge or what.
discussion, dissent, and debate. ~ Unknown
Only two out of my nine points depends primarily on M&M
Please address the rest of the factual points I laid out and provide your own sources.
P.S. You don't know whether I'm an outsider or have inside knowledge or what.
Truth matters, and if you wish to react negatively to the truth or pretend it happened another way, that's a shame.
If you think that truth and facts can not be determined through research, photographic evidence, circumstantial evidence, anecdotal evidence, historical evidence, analogical evidence, dates, timelines, book, journalism, character evidence, exculpatory evidence, inculpatory evidence, physical evidence, statistical evidence prima facie evidence, testimonial evidence, direct evidence, logic and inductive or deductive reasoning ... then you choose to live in perpetual ignorance and truth does not exist in your world.
However not does in mine.
Shrugging your shoulders and denying everything you don't wish to be true is intellectually lazy.
Everyone here now sees that you've offered NOTHING to support your own POV except knee-jerk blind denial.
If you think that truth and facts can not be determined through research, photographic evidence, circumstantial evidence, anecdotal evidence, historical evidence, analogical evidence, dates, timelines, book, journalism, character evidence, exculpatory evidence, inculpatory evidence, physical evidence, statistical evidence prima facie evidence, testimonial evidence, direct evidence, logic and inductive or deductive reasoning ... then you choose to live in perpetual ignorance and truth does not exist in your world.
However not does in mine.
Shrugging your shoulders and denying everything you don't wish to be true is intellectually lazy.
Everyone here now sees that you've offered NOTHING to support your own POV except knee-jerk blind denial.
@ FreddieDearie
OK. I'm not from UK and
my native language isn't English.
But I like Queen and Freddie and their music. I like Jim and so what?
All this what you said as a fact can be observed in other ways. For example:
- You say " Mary said". So when she says something that's true. But when Jim says anything, you say " he lied". Why Freddie lived five years far from Mary (New York and Munich) and live six years with Jim?
- Freddie likely used Winnie to make Jim jealous.
- If Winnie was more important to Freddie than Jim why he was not with Winnie then. Or with somebody else? He later had AIDS but he had alternative for other choice and other people, with sex or without it.
- If Freddie didn't want Jim's ring he wouldn't wore it.
- Jim was with Freddie in Japan. Does the employer guide his barbers and gardeners to such a trip?
And many more... But
I don't intend to argue and respond to your every post.
I searched images on Google and found this.
Maybe photos doesn't so good but we can see that they wear rings. It's obvious that Jim's ring is different than ring of photos from Japan.
FreddieDearie-
I know who you are on instagram. You have taken your precious time on earth and decided to make several accounts dedicated to hating Jim- a man Freddie loved.
This is some sort of mental illness and it isn't normal. You can ran all you want, but no one is going to change their mind.
Jim wrote a book, and what he said was backed up by everyone that knew Freddie. You don't take your gardener to Japan. Why would he lie? Freddie had a series of boyfriends and Jim was the one he was with the longest.
Mary worked for Freddie too. She also gave several paid interviews. When I brought this up with one of your Jim hating cohorts on instagram, she called me a "gutter whore"
So take your hate elsewhere. Freddie loved Jim. You are not a fan if you spend your time hating a man he trusted and loved.
I know who you are on instagram. You have taken your precious time on earth and decided to make several accounts dedicated to hating Jim- a man Freddie loved.
This is some sort of mental illness and it isn't normal. You can ran all you want, but no one is going to change their mind.
Jim wrote a book, and what he said was backed up by everyone that knew Freddie. You don't take your gardener to Japan. Why would he lie? Freddie had a series of boyfriends and Jim was the one he was with the longest.
Mary worked for Freddie too. She also gave several paid interviews. When I brought this up with one of your Jim hating cohorts on instagram, she called me a "gutter whore"
So take your hate elsewhere. Freddie loved Jim. You are not a fan if you spend your time hating a man he trusted and loved.
Everyone here:
FreddieDearie is a seriously ill woman who has several accounts on instagram dedicated to hating Jim.
She now has several in this thread alone.
DO NOT FEED HER. She is a sick individual that needs psychiatric help.
FreddieDearie is a seriously ill woman who has several accounts on instagram dedicated to hating Jim.
She now has several in this thread alone.
DO NOT FEED HER. She is a sick individual that needs psychiatric help.
Everyone here:
FreddieDearie is a seriously ill woman who has several accounts on instagram dedicated to hating Jim.
She now has several in this thread alone.
DO NOT FEED HER. She is a sick individual that needs psychiatric help.
FreddieDearie is a seriously ill woman who has several accounts on instagram dedicated to hating Jim.
She now has several in this thread alone.
DO NOT FEED HER. She is a sick individual that needs psychiatric help.
Everyone here:
FreddieDearie is a seriously ill woman who has several accounts on instagram dedicated to hating Jim.
She now has several in this thread alone.
DO NOT FEED HER. She is a sick individual that needs psychiatric help.
FreddieDearie is a seriously ill woman who has several accounts on instagram dedicated to hating Jim.
She now has several in this thread alone.
DO NOT FEED HER. She is a sick individual that needs psychiatric help.
Low and behold, the Jim hate has entered QZ!
Please stop it, Freddie was happy with Jim, why can't you accept that?
Please stop it, Freddie was happy with Jim, why can't you accept that?
Sorry for the multiple posts. It happens here
Invisible Woman.
I already addressed that.
That is the same signet ring Jim wore on his left hand in June of '85. And during the trip to Japan in 86.
That ring has nothing to do with Freddie, sweetie.
https://i.imgur.com/Ipdsdph.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/VKeS5eq.jpg
Secondly, he's wearing it on his left hand. That does not signal to gay men that you're in a gay committed in the 1980's relationship.
I already addressed that.
That is the same signet ring Jim wore on his left hand in June of '85. And during the trip to Japan in 86.
That ring has nothing to do with Freddie, sweetie.
https://i.imgur.com/Ipdsdph.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/VKeS5eq.jpg
Secondly, he's wearing it on his left hand. That does not signal to gay men that you're in a gay committed in the 1980's relationship.
Invisible woman, MarchOfTheLocdQueen, Sweetandtenderholligan, RandomProcess2
Two intellectually-honest tactics
There are only two intellectually-honest debate tactics:
1. pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s facts
2. pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s logic
That’s it. Simple! The dishonest list is much longer.
Ignorance is not an opinion. It's just your ignorance of information.
Just SOME of your Intellectually dishonest tactics here.
1. Ad hominem. This tells the listener/reader more about the speaker than the person being spoken about;
When you have to resort to name calling you're showing everyone you don't have the necessary facts or logic to back up your claim.
2. Cult of personality: debater attempts to make the likability of each debate opponent the focus of the debate because he believes he is more likable than the opponent
3. Changing the subject: debater is losing so he tries to redirect the attention of the audience to another subject area where he thinks he can look better.
4. Misrepresentation. Taking a quote or claim out of context so the lack of the context misrepresents the author’s position.
5. Rejecting facts or logic as mere opinion, preference, personal taste, or like: It is true that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But everyone is not entitled to their own facts or logic. Nor is anyone allowed to characterize a factual/logical argument as merely the opinion, preference, personal taste, or like of the opponent. Facts are facts. 2 +2 = 4 is not my opinion. It is a fact.
6. Argument from intimidation
7. Dismissing your failure to abandon your position because you “just don’t get it.” "Can' we all get along".
8. Claiming an intellectually-dishonest debate tactic is okay because the person using it is not debating you. If I say X is true, and you say it is not, you ARE debating me.
9. Claiming to “disagree” with non-opinion statements. "Agree to disagree" fallacy Users of intellectually-dishonest arguments often claim they just disagree and they are entitled to do so in all cases. False. You make a claim in a debate, you are indebted to prove it, or abandon your opinion.
Two intellectually-honest tactics
There are only two intellectually-honest debate tactics:
1. pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s facts
2. pointing out errors or omissions in your opponent’s logic
That’s it. Simple! The dishonest list is much longer.
Ignorance is not an opinion. It's just your ignorance of information.
Just SOME of your Intellectually dishonest tactics here.
1. Ad hominem. This tells the listener/reader more about the speaker than the person being spoken about;
When you have to resort to name calling you're showing everyone you don't have the necessary facts or logic to back up your claim.
2. Cult of personality: debater attempts to make the likability of each debate opponent the focus of the debate because he believes he is more likable than the opponent
3. Changing the subject: debater is losing so he tries to redirect the attention of the audience to another subject area where he thinks he can look better.
4. Misrepresentation. Taking a quote or claim out of context so the lack of the context misrepresents the author’s position.
5. Rejecting facts or logic as mere opinion, preference, personal taste, or like: It is true that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But everyone is not entitled to their own facts or logic. Nor is anyone allowed to characterize a factual/logical argument as merely the opinion, preference, personal taste, or like of the opponent. Facts are facts. 2 +2 = 4 is not my opinion. It is a fact.
6. Argument from intimidation
7. Dismissing your failure to abandon your position because you “just don’t get it.” "Can' we all get along".
8. Claiming an intellectually-dishonest debate tactic is okay because the person using it is not debating you. If I say X is true, and you say it is not, you ARE debating me.
9. Claiming to “disagree” with non-opinion statements. "Agree to disagree" fallacy Users of intellectually-dishonest arguments often claim they just disagree and they are entitled to do so in all cases. False. You make a claim in a debate, you are indebted to prove it, or abandon your opinion.
^ I think it's not the same ring, but let everyone see what thinks that see. Someone is wrong and someone is right. I certainly will not argue about it. Bye,bye.
Hi Freddiedearie:
Hmm. I certainly don't want to do much more in this, uhh, "debate" than point out two things:
2) Freddie stayed married to Winnie and continued to wear Winnie's ring over a year after Jim and Freddie hooked up. (May 12, 1986)
-- I thought there was no "civil union/marriage" at the time, so what's with the "married to Winnie" bit?
5) Jim had to coax Freddie into wearing Jims ring.
Where's this "factoid" from? I admit I'm not up on the "Freddie's lovers" lore, so someone point me to it, please?
My takeaway from these posts though is that you seem to be way more inclined to like Winnie the abuser and hate Jim the caretaker.
What gives?
Hmm. I certainly don't want to do much more in this, uhh, "debate" than point out two things:
2) Freddie stayed married to Winnie and continued to wear Winnie's ring over a year after Jim and Freddie hooked up. (May 12, 1986)
-- I thought there was no "civil union/marriage" at the time, so what's with the "married to Winnie" bit?
5) Jim had to coax Freddie into wearing Jims ring.
Where's this "factoid" from? I admit I'm not up on the "Freddie's lovers" lore, so someone point me to it, please?
My takeaway from these posts though is that you seem to be way more inclined to like Winnie the abuser and hate Jim the caretaker.
What gives?
Invisible Woman... To address your questions, RESPECTFULLY, point by point
- You say " Mary said". .
NO,I said Mary said AND backed it up with the bands agreement, said in many, interviews that Freddie know or suspected the had AIDS in 86. It's called CORROBERATION.
-Why Freddie lived five years far from Mary (New York and Munich) and live six years with Jim?
Mary was in New York and Munich very often, But Mary had Her own life and relationships.
Jim lived with Freddie as a gardner, (and many other menial tasks) just as Joe lived with Freddie as the cook, (and many other menial tasks), just as Phoebe switched jobs with Joe at the end as cook, and Joe primary caregiver.
- Freddie likely used Winnie to make Jim jealous.
That's what Jim and everyone around them at the time has said.
- If Winnie was more important to Freddie than Jim why he was not with Winnie then.
He WAS with Winnie.
But Im not saying Winnie is MORE important, just that Jim was LESS important than he makes himself out to be.
Freddie broke up with Winnie because it was a tempestuous, toxic, passionate relationship (he also called Winnie "My Husband). And also Freddie was moving back to England after his "tax exile", and Win is was not interested in moving to England.
When Queen finished recording their album in Munich, and Queen started their "Magic" tour, THAT is when Freddie took off Winnie's wedding ring.
- If Freddie didn't want Jim's ring he wouldn't wore it.
Not necessarily.
It was important for Freddie and for the sake of Queen... Then we're in the process of renegotiating their contract with EMI and publishing rights. People were losing their recording contracts because an ignorant, homophobic society was blaming AIDS patients for their own illness, saying they deserved it because they were permiscuious.
Secondly, by this time, Freddie had CONFIRMED he had AIDS and he would've felt obligation for likely exposing Jim to *his* strain of the virus. (Although Jim could've been carrying his own strain The medical community didn't really know much about HIV superinfection [also called HIV reinfection] - a condition in which a person with an established human immunodeficiency virus infection acquires a second strain of HIV, often of a different subtype)
- Jim was with Freddie in Japan. Does the employer guide his barbers and gardeners to such a trip?
Yes, He brought Joe as well. Especially if Phoebe or Mary couldn't go, Jim might be needed for other menial tasks. They all had "primary" jobs, but switch off on tasks when needed.
- I don't intend to argue and respond to your every post.
Of course not. That would require you either, admit you're not correct or, post ANY evidence to support your own POV. Too much to expect from Jimercury-monomaniacs.
-Maybe photos doesn't so good but we can see that they wear rings. It's obvious that Jim's ring is different than ring of photos from Japan.
No, not obvious at all.
Besides. What difference does it make? Jim BOUGHT THE RING FOR HIMSELF.
Freddie was infamous for picking out special gifts for those he loved... yet he couldn't be bothered to pick out a supposed wedding band??? Not say to Jim "Dont worry, we'll pick out a special wedding band for you?
Jim had given Freddie a ring in September 86, which Freddie didn't want to wear out in public FOR A YEAR. When Jim's birthday came, he didnt choose to give Jim a ring in return. He wanted to get him a bracelet.
- You say " Mary said". .
NO,I said Mary said AND backed it up with the bands agreement, said in many, interviews that Freddie know or suspected the had AIDS in 86. It's called CORROBERATION.
-Why Freddie lived five years far from Mary (New York and Munich) and live six years with Jim?
Mary was in New York and Munich very often, But Mary had Her own life and relationships.
Jim lived with Freddie as a gardner, (and many other menial tasks) just as Joe lived with Freddie as the cook, (and many other menial tasks), just as Phoebe switched jobs with Joe at the end as cook, and Joe primary caregiver.
- Freddie likely used Winnie to make Jim jealous.
That's what Jim and everyone around them at the time has said.
- If Winnie was more important to Freddie than Jim why he was not with Winnie then.
He WAS with Winnie.
But Im not saying Winnie is MORE important, just that Jim was LESS important than he makes himself out to be.
Freddie broke up with Winnie because it was a tempestuous, toxic, passionate relationship (he also called Winnie "My Husband). And also Freddie was moving back to England after his "tax exile", and Win is was not interested in moving to England.
When Queen finished recording their album in Munich, and Queen started their "Magic" tour, THAT is when Freddie took off Winnie's wedding ring.
- If Freddie didn't want Jim's ring he wouldn't wore it.
Not necessarily.
It was important for Freddie and for the sake of Queen... Then we're in the process of renegotiating their contract with EMI and publishing rights. People were losing their recording contracts because an ignorant, homophobic society was blaming AIDS patients for their own illness, saying they deserved it because they were permiscuious.
Secondly, by this time, Freddie had CONFIRMED he had AIDS and he would've felt obligation for likely exposing Jim to *his* strain of the virus. (Although Jim could've been carrying his own strain The medical community didn't really know much about HIV superinfection [also called HIV reinfection] - a condition in which a person with an established human immunodeficiency virus infection acquires a second strain of HIV, often of a different subtype)
- Jim was with Freddie in Japan. Does the employer guide his barbers and gardeners to such a trip?
Yes, He brought Joe as well. Especially if Phoebe or Mary couldn't go, Jim might be needed for other menial tasks. They all had "primary" jobs, but switch off on tasks when needed.
- I don't intend to argue and respond to your every post.
Of course not. That would require you either, admit you're not correct or, post ANY evidence to support your own POV. Too much to expect from Jimercury-monomaniacs.
-Maybe photos doesn't so good but we can see that they wear rings. It's obvious that Jim's ring is different than ring of photos from Japan.
No, not obvious at all.
Besides. What difference does it make? Jim BOUGHT THE RING FOR HIMSELF.
Freddie was infamous for picking out special gifts for those he loved... yet he couldn't be bothered to pick out a supposed wedding band??? Not say to Jim "Dont worry, we'll pick out a special wedding band for you?
Jim had given Freddie a ring in September 86, which Freddie didn't want to wear out in public FOR A YEAR. When Jim's birthday came, he didnt choose to give Jim a ring in return. He wanted to get him a bracelet.