Drifloud threatens Twitter CEO with permanent hissy fit

Do you remember the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico a few summers ago? The one where the oil rig exploded, and massive amounts of crude oil billowed into the ocean waters for days…then weeks…then months? It just. Would. Not. Be. Stopped.

Well, Drifloud’s cranial eruption, which began with an explosion, is now threatening to go on and on, ad infinitum, possibly becoming the world’s longest-running temper tantrum.

Yes, after Monday’s extended rant at the Twitter CEO, he’s sent another email to Jack Dorsey (and copied in every citizen in the UK—if you didn’t receive one, check your spam inbox).

To Jack Dorsey, CEO Twitter.

I am sending you this email again as I have not yet received a reply, or even an acknowledgement from you.

This is a VERY SERIOUS matter and is about revealing to the public the systematic rape, torture and murder of children by people in the British school system, local authorities and police. These crimes are being covered up by the British government using the intelligence services, the Metropolitan police, members of the judiciary as well as the UK media.

I, and many others, are determined to expose these crimes.

Nameless Twitter employees have bowed to pressure from those determined to keep these crimes/criminals hiden, and have suspended my account, thereby aiding and abetting these crimes/criminals, and helping to prevent the public from realising what is going on. I have been falsely and slanderously accused of “participating in targeted abuse”. This is an utter, despicable LIE and it is also a criminal offence, namely, slander.

I insist that you, Jack Dorsey, as CEO of Twitter, and representative of all Twitter employees, make a FULL and UNRESERVED apology.

Failure to do so by 29th February, 2016 will be taken as acceptance that you are, in deed, guilty of slander against the conscious living being known as Drifloud.

NOTE: The above statement and demand of redress from you, the living human being known as Jack Dorsey, is NOT and CANNOT BE, a matter of LEGAL or CORPORATE “Law”; this is SOLELY a LAWFUL matter between living beings.

I hold only to that which is lawful, and do not consent to the transmutation of any living beings mentioned in the above statement (including myself) to that of “legal person” status, or to any legal interpretation of my words whatsoever. All words and combinations of words used in the above statement carry solely the meaning I intend them to convey, which is to tell the truth to the best of my ability in order to report the crimes detailed above and to bring about an end to the brutalisation, torture, rape and murder of innocents – as I know such things to be contrary to the laws of humanity.

from a conscious living being,

Drifloud     February 3rd 2016

Hello? We have a few questions:

  1. If calling Drippy out for “participating in targeted abuse” (which he totally was, by the way) is a “criminal offence, namely, slander”, what’s with all that gibberish at the bottom about how there’s no such thing as legalities, but only the laws of humanity?
  2. How come Drippy gets to call himself a conscious living being, while poor Jack is relegated to the status of living human being? This hardly seems fair.
  3. What will happen on 29th February, exactly? Will the Conscious Drippy One finally shut up? Will he cast a curse on Twitter? Enquiring minds want to know!
  4. Are there enough antipsychotic medications in the entire galaxy to bring Drippy back down to earth?
  5. If there were, would we want him here?

Drippy’s temper tantrum has been carrying on unabated since 30 January, which seems ambitious, even for a screaming toddler. We’re not sure there’s a dummy big enough to plug this one, folks, so prepare yourselves for a long ride.

Not to mention a whole barrel full of mixed metaphors.

russia_adopt_001-4_3

 

27 thoughts on “Drifloud threatens Twitter CEO with permanent hissy fit

  1. You mean libel, not slander, Drippy. It was written to you, not spoken:

    ‘I have been falsely and slanderously accused of “participating in targeted abuse”. This is an utter, despicable LIE and it is also a criminal offence, namely, slander.’

    Slander is the act of making a false, negative spoken statement about someone.
    In law, the word slander is contrasted with libel, which is the act of making a false written statement about someone.
    slander – Dictionary Definition : Vocabulary.com

    Liked by 1 person

  2. slander

    n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I am just wondering why Drippy gave Jack Dorsey so looooong to take it all back? Is it because Drippy knows he will look like the impotent fool he really is when Jack ignores his demands? He knows that by 29th Feb his deadline will pass without anyone remembering it as ‘the Drippy deadline day’.

    In the ever so fast forgetting land of internet, Drippy will be spared the shame of Jack Dorsey’s complete ignorance of him, in every sense of the word.

    But wait, is it some magical hocus pocus power to do with Monday, February 29, Leap Day 2016, that Drippy is relying on to give him the much awaited FULL and UNRESERVED apology?

    Don’t hold your breath, folks, this one could run on and on forever….

    Liked by 2 people

  4. LoudDrippyAbe’s been doing us all a favour here. When we reported him to Twitter, we had an uphill battle to convince them of his evil ways. But thankfully, Drippy was kind enough to come along and demonstrate to Twitter how right we were🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    • I seem to recall Charlotte Ward stating the same thing when she wrote her nasty letters out to the Schools – that failure to respond would be taken as guilt.
      Drippy is really starting to sound like Neelu now..and he’s just as nutty and pathetic.

      Quote from Drippy “This is a VERY SERIOUS matter and is about revealing to the public the systematic rape, torture and murder of children by people in the British school system, local authorities and police. These crimes are being covered up by the British government using the intelligence services, the Metropolitan police, members of the judiciary as well as the UK media.”

      Any proof about that, Drippy? eh? nope, didn’t think so…

      Mr Dorsey CEO will just think he’s dealing with a mentally ill individual. LOL!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Then by their own “logic” be damned. I experimented with that “failure to do so will prove you guilt” theory when Charlotte was bandying it around, by repeatedly asking her to prove that she herself wasn’t a paedophile. No proof was forthcoming. I’ve also asked Abe the same thing, again to no avail. And Debs too, who in her latest rambling video is banging on about how people should show their genitals down at the cop shop. Yet she’s unable to disprove the rumours about herself being barred from working with children. So I repeat – by their own “logic” be damned.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Dear Mr. Drifloud

    I hereby accuse you of participating in targeted abuse.

    Now feel free to take me to court. Just get your lawyer to fax the summons over to my lawyer and we’ll get the ball rolling. What colour hat do you think I should wear to court? Baby-blood red? Vegan green? Justice grey? I’m open to suggestions.

    See you there anyway🙂

    From a conscious living being
    Sally 4th February

    PS: happy transmuting, honey😮

    Liked by 2 people

  6. I think the Twitter staff will be having some fun with these e-mails by Abraham Christie, it is the sort of thing that will amuse them. I can see this evolving into claims by Christie of Twitter employees eating babies.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I wondered how long it would be until stupid freeman on the land beliefs reared their ugly head. Just because he doesn’t consent to something doesn’t mean it won’t be applied to him he should realise that

    Liked by 1 person

    • “All words and combinations of words used in the above statement carry solely the meaning I intend them to convey”

      Neelu loves to use that one on her million pound liens – it probably originated with Patrick Cullinane and as far as I can see is legally meaningless.

      Like

  8. “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Pingback: ACTION: Drifloud is back. You can help take him down for good | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.