Bill and Melinda Gates are divorcing

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, which is it? Because the article you've linked here to debunk the island trips is also confirmation that Gates and Epstein were "associated" with each other, and Gates along with several employees of his foundation met with Epstein on multiple occasions (as reported by the NYT).

and what conclusions do you draw from that?

costacorta

According to Melinda Gates, Bill just didn't Excel at his marriage. Apparently his tool in bed was Microsoft, he had no Power Points, and he always had to have the last Word.
And they are now throwing their 27 years marriage out the Windows 😂

PintOfView

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, which is it? Because the article you've linked here to debunk the island trips is also confirmation that Gates and Epstein were "associated" with each other, and Gates along with several employees of his foundation met with Epstein on multiple occasions (as reported by the NYT).

Even if Gates did know Epstein, would you expect him to do a background check on everyone he dealt with?

And are you sure that everyone that you yourself do business with, or are 'associated' with, have 100% clean backgrounds?

We can all jump to conclusions on the flimsiest of connections, but it doesn't mean that we're right!

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, which is it? Because the article you've linked here to debunk the island trips is also confirmation that Gates and Epstein were "associated" with each other, and Gates along with several employees of his foundation met with Epstein on multiple occasions (as reported by the NYT).

What?

never said that they didn't meet each other

yes they met each other

as said Epstein was at hundreds if not thousands of events over the years where other well-known people were at and they actually talk to other people at these events and end up in photos - shock horror

doesn't mean that bill gates is a child rapist ffs or has any connection to same

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and what conclusions do you draw from that?

I draw the conclusion that it's inaccurate to say that trying to associate Bill Gates with Epstein is "moving firmly into conspiracy theory territory".

It's demonstrably not, since there was an association there.

giles lynchwood

It's as plain as day why they are divorcing anything she get's will go to the kid's after she dies.kid's will be set up and she will have got one up on that miserable git who wanted to give it all away.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I draw the conclusion that it's inaccurate to say that trying to associate Bill Gates with Epstein is "moving firmly into conspiracy theory territory".

It's demonstrably not, since there was an association there.

but why mention the association? why is it relevant? it is clear to me why the association was made. Clear to others as well.

PintOfView

PintOfView wrote: »

Even if Gates did know Epstein, would you expect him to do a background check on everyone he dealt with?

No. Why do you think I would?

PintOfView wrote: »

And are you sure that everyone that you yourself do business with, or are 'associated' with, have 100% clean backgrounds?

No. Nor is anyone.

I mean I would probably have steered clear of someone who told my associates that their conviction for sex with underage girls was no worse than "stealing a bagel", but that's just me.

PintOfView wrote: »

We can all jump to conclusions on the flimsiest of connections, but it doesn't mean that we're right!

I'm not making assumption. I'm stating that Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein were demonstrably associated.

Doesn't mean Gates was banging teenagers on pedo island.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I draw the conclusion that it's inaccurate to say that trying to associate Bill Gates with Epstein is "moving firmly into conspiracy theory territory".

It's demonstrably not, since there was an association there.

no link of any kind that Gates was involved in any bad things

the Gates foundation raises a lot of money from other wealthy people - that's part of Gates' job in it so it's not surprising at all reallly

“I met him,” Gates told the Journal. “I didn’t have any business relationship or friendship with him. I didn’t go to New Mexico or Florida or Palm Beach or any of that. There were people around him who were saying, hey, if you want to raise money for global health and get more philanthropy, he knows a lot of rich people.”

Bill Gates later admitted “I made a mistake”

throwing in Epstein in the post at the end like the other poster did was in an attempt to taint Gates wtih Epstein's nefarious activities, no other purpose

https://moguldom.com/351416/bill-and-melinda-gates-announce-divorce-here-are-the-facts-on-gates-and-jeffrey-epstein/

grogi

Stihl waters wrote: »

But how does it influence me, I dont use boards or any social media because Microsoft has anything to do with it, that's like saying the wright brothers influence me because I flew to ibiza on holidays

But they did exactly for that reason. You fly for holidays.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

but why mention the association? why is it relevant? it is clear to me why the association was made. Clear to others as well.

I didn't "mention" the association.

I replied to a post that denied any association, and pointed out that the article they linked to support this claim categorically stated that there was an association.

Your personal fever fantasies about my motivations are not my business.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't "mention" the association.

I replied to a post that denied any association, and pointed out that the article they linked to support this claim categorically stated that there was an association.

Your personal fever fantasies about my motivations are not my business.

I didn't say YOU mentioned the association. I asked why would the association be mentioned if not to try and throw some dirt.

glasso

glasso wrote: »

no link of any kind that Gates was involved in any bad things

Never said there was.

glasso wrote: »

throwing in Epstein in the post at the end like the other poster did was in an attempt to taint Gates wtih Epstein's nefarious activities, no other purpose

Maybe. But I was merely correcting your assertion that there was no association, after reading the article you linked that pointed out the association.

glasso wrote: »

“I met him,” Gates told the Journal. “I didn’t have any business relationship or friendship with him. I didn’t go to New Mexico or Florida or Palm Beach or any of that. There were people around him who were saying, hey, if you want to raise money for global health and get more philanthropy, he knows a lot of rich people.”

Bill Gates later admitted “I made a mistake”

https://moguldom.com/351416/bill-and-melinda-gates-announce-divorce-here-are-the-facts-on-gates-and-jeffrey-epstein/

Aaaaaaaand you've done it again. Apparently completely purposely.

From the article you linked:

“I met him,” Gates told the Journal. “I didn’t have any business relationship or friendship with him. I didn’t go to New Mexico or Florida or Palm Beach or any of that. There were people around him who were saying, hey, if you want to raise money for global health and get more philanthropy, he knows a lot of rich people.”

But The New York Times found that Gates met with Epstein “numerous times,” including at least three times at Epstein’s townhouse.

In 2011, Gates had a team to meet Epstein at his townhouse to discuss philanthropic fundraising, The New York Times reported.

Epstein, who committed suicide while in jail in 2019, reportedly said that his conviction for soliciting prostitution from an underage girl was no worse than “stealing a bagel,” The Verge reported.

In 2013, Gates flew on Epstein’s jet from New Jersey to Palm Beach, Florida, according to a flight manifest. The Gates Foundation remained in contact with Epstein through 2017.

Bill Gates later admitted “I made a mistake” Epstein, CNBC reported.

I mean you literally had to DELETE EVERYTHING SURROUNDING THE QUOTED DENIAL FROM GATES in order to make it fit your narrative.

What the hell are you doing, dude?

I didn't delete anything

I quoted that part and linked the article for all to read

he was looking to raise money - simple as

couldn't be arsed whatever your agenda is

waste of time and space....

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I didn't say YOU mentioned the association. I asked why would the association be mentioned if not to try and throw some dirt.

Well it might be to make some sort of suggestion that Gates went to pedo island. (Which he did not).

Or it might be to point out that Gates was associated with someone widely known to have been convicted of raping a minor, and to perhaps plant the idea that just because Gates wants to do good or feels that he's doing good, he's not infallible, and he obviously can associate with bad people either through ignorance or an ability to disregard things like child rape where there is potential business to be done.

I think that's probably the sort of thing people should know when someone has an incredible amount of wealth, unfathomable to most people, and the corresponding influence that goes along with it. Especially if that person has aspirations on changing the world.

glasso

glasso wrote: »

I didn't delete anything

I quoted that part and linked the article for all to read

he was looking to raise money - simple as

couldn't be arsed whatever your agenda is

waste of time and space....

Yeeeeah the person not deleting half of every article to bend it to their narrative is the one with an "agenda" here.

Whew lad.

aidoh

osarusan wrote: »

Been seeing this across loads of platforms all day, don't know why it's such big news really. Beyond them being famous, there is no wider impact.

Same as Bezos' divorce, not sure why news organisations think people will care.

Seems like they'd agreed on the division of the estate before announcing the divorce anyway.

I think the Twitter announcement was because he is such a hugely wealthy and publicly known person that a 'shock' divorce could cause panic in the global investment market.

I suspect that the news is out there to calm hedge funds, not because you or I could give a fvck.

I also suspect he's in the same club as Epstein and co.

paw patrol

glasso wrote: »

this is moving firmly into conspiracy theory territory

trying to associate him with Epstein and by extension child rape

more debunked conspiracy theories about Gates going to Epstein's island where were of course rubbish

but he associated with Epstein post conviction. that's no conspiracy that's fact.

so yes there is a whiff off him maybe not quite the stench of "Prince Andrew of the Lizard People" but you wouldn't accept this (rightly) off our leaders so why off Gates.

glasso wrote: »

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-bill-gates-epstein-island-idUSKBN22R2C4

forgive me if I don't bet my house on a fact checked article from some media in the US as if flight logs cant be altered or not filled at billionaire status :rolleyes:

New York times had a decent investigation on Epstein and Gates . of course , not at the island but elsewhere. Oddly you chose to zero in on the island visit claim as if Epstein only did wrong there.. an odd assertion.

I'm not saying Gates sexually abused young girls - i'm saying he associated with the men that did and after the world knew about it.

glasso wrote: »

classic conspiracy theory tactic and complete rubbish

nope . read what i actually said.

glasso wrote: »

lots of people were at hundreds of events where that scumbag Epstein would have been at before he was outed as a child rapist.

Yup, but afterwards....

https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-jeffrey-epstein-friendship-swedish-mother-daughter-meeting-2019-10?r=US&IR=T

plenty of post conviction stuff there which was 2008/2009 (if my brain works)

glasso wrote: »

Gates is a very wealthy guy and chosen to do something with his money and also other people's money in the purpose of what he sees as good

certainly has helped in a lot of initiatives in developing countries in the health arena

of course he is meeting with serious politicians and industry leaders - you can't do these things over gmail or probably outlook in his case

yeah , I don't doubt that he thinks he is doing good and some of it probably is. that's the god complex - he assumes we need saving from what he perceives the problems to be.
Didn't he want to spray dust particles to block out the sun? For our own good.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2021/01/11/bill-gates-backed-climate-solution-gains-traction-but-concerns-linger/

Fcuk off there you absolute lunatic wannabe James Bond villian...

glasso wrote: »

(again some absolute rubbish stories from India were pushed around by the conspiracy theorists but were surprise surprise complete bs in reality https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-gates-india-idUSKBN22V27F )

I didn't make claims about India
Been to India for work. Unlikely I'll go for pleasure.

But it is odd that the vaccine rollouts happen not in the west but with the poor and corrupt nations. thought provoking question, i think.

paw patrol

PintOfView wrote: »

Even if Gates did know Epstein, would you expect him to do a background check on everyone he dealt with?

And are you sure that everyone that you yourself do business with, or are 'associated' with, have 100% clean backgrounds?

We can all jump to conclusions on the flimsiest of connections, but it doesn't mean that we're right!

after his conviction though. It's hard to hide that conviction..
You think they weren't aware of that even if they weren't (which they were) that's what your admin/secretaries and PR are for which

Tell me how

punisher5112 wrote: »

2 very dangerous people, have way too much influence in the world and people's lives.

FFS.

It must be a terrifying existence to be automatically wired to look at people like this and what they have done and to think this.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

FFS.

It must be a terrifying existence to be automatically wired to look at people like this and what they have done and to think this.

the conspiratards depend on this sort of thought process though.

Montage of Feck

I don't get the hate as Bill comes across as the most affable of the big tech founders.

jmayo

Blowfish wrote: »

All that is besides the point though, the original comment was this:
Neither of them have much current influence at all. I mean Bill can give his opinions and views on tech via talks etc and has various shareholder votes (just ~1% of Microsofts), but that's about it.

Yeah the guy that runs a foundation investing billions in third world (don't care if that is not term anymore) doesn't have influence.
The guy that gets to go over to Davos every other year to hobnob with leadrs of biggest economic states, the IMF, UN, etc.

Shure what influence could he have. :rolleyes:

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah come on, that's not exactly fair. You don't have much energy left for things like creating good, finished products and improving on them after you've spent your entire work week trying (and usually succeeding) to brutally shut down innovative competitors.

You forgot buy them up as well.
All thanks to running his massive profits through the likes of the old Dutch Irish sandwich thingy me bobs.

jmayo

costacorta wrote: »

According to Melinda Gates, Bill just didn't Excel at his marriage. Apparently his tool in bed was Microsoft, he had no Power Points, and he always had to have the last Word.
And they are now throwing their 27 years marriage out the Windows ��

I heard he just couldn't patch things up, just couldn't update Wife 1 anymore, couldn't reboot it.
So following usual Microsoft advice he is now going to try out the new product Girlfriend 1.1, which has a lot more features, will look a lot sleeker, it runs faster but he should really beware that it will hog even more resources, will require new cars installed, new house install, new jewelry install and it may not agree with and get on with existing installed items i.e. Kids 1 and Kids2.

Some one should tell him that sometimes hanging on to the old version, stop trying to update it, is the way to go.

Part of me always wonders if he ever screams or shouts when his tablet or laptop freezes when the latest Windows 10 update fooks it up.

Blowfish

jmayo wrote: »

Yeah the guy that runs a foundation investing billions in third world (don't care if that is not term anymore) doesn't have influence.
The guy that gets to go over to Davos every other year to hobnob with leadrs of biggest economic states, the IMF, UN, etc.

Shure what influence could he have. :rolleyes:

So how does that make him dangerous as per the original comment?

Lirange

km991148 wrote: »

I don't think so. I think they genuinely try to use their money for good.

Lots of way worse billionaires kicking around.

Agreed. Big contrast between someone like Gates, a decent skin for an obscenely wealthy man & rapacious billionaires like Bezos & Zuckerberg. I say this as someone that generally dislikes Microsoft products.

jmayo

jmayo wrote: »

Yeah the guy that runs a foundation investing billions in third world (don't care if that is not term anymore) doesn't have influence.
The guy that gets to go over to Davos every other year to hobnob with leadrs of biggest economic states, the IMF, UN, etc.

Shure what influence could he have. :rolleyes:



You forgot buy them up as well.
All thanks to running his massive profits through the likes of the old Dutch Irish sandwich thingy me bobs.

Most of the established tec companies buy other smaller companies to obtain their products to get a foothold in a specific sector, and/or as s way to try and keep themselves afloat.
Some do it well, others cash cow the products and screw them up, something organisations using Red Hat should be wary of given it's acquisition by IBM.
Their head honchos also attend world economic forums.

jmayo

Blowfish wrote: »

So how does that make him dangerous as per the original comment?

I would have said my comment was in response to someone saying he wasn't influential.

Lirange wrote: »

Agreed. Big contrast between someone like Gates, a decent skin for an obscenely wealthy man & rapacious billionaires like Bezos & Zuckerberg. I say this as someone that generally dislikes Microsoft products.

Granted in the grand scheme of things he isn't the worst.
Zuckerberg, Ellison, Jobbs seem to be or have been bigger assholes to work for or do business with.
But Gates is the man responsible for Microsoft and they to a massive extent set the bar for modern tech.

Also I will say none of them appear anywhere as bad as the fooking Koch brothers.
The only good thing to say about them is one of them is dead.

DubInMeath wrote: »

Most of the established tec companies buy other smaller companies to obtain their products to get a foothold in a specific sector, and/or as s way to try and keep themselves afloat.
Some do it well, others cash cow the products and screw them up, something organisations using Red Hat should be wary of given it's acquisition by IBM.
Their head honchos also attend world economic forums.

Microsoft went out of their way to try handicap the possible competitors using their position. Anyone hear remember or ever hear of undocumented DOS?
They were at it from the start.

glasso

glasso wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that

but the ramifications of their influence and serious amount of money can be huge

e.g. if they didn't put that $1.75 billion in, where else was it going to come from....?

you wouldn't have heard that they didn't put in the money, but that would have been a hugely negative thing.

This seems to be an argument against billionaires in general rather than Bill in particular.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This seems to be an argument against billionaires in general rather than Bill in particular.

It's about the gates Foundation and Bill gates.

Can't get any more specific than that.