Apple may have to strip watch's oximeter function to be legal to sell

[Rich]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html

Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
Apple's free rent in Rich's head.

PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

[Alfred Molon]

Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>
> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>
> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.

I'm getting this when I click on the link:

Browser Blocked

We apologize, but your web browser is configured in such a way that it
is preventing this site from implementing required components that
protect your privacy and allow you to view and change your privacy
settings. This functionality is required for privacy legislation in your
region.

We recommend you use a different browser
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

[Rich]

On Tuesday 16 January 2024 at 12:34:39 UTC-5, Alfred Molon wrote:
> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> >> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
> >
> > Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> >
> > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>
> Browser Blocked
>
> We apologize, but your web browser is configured in such a way that it
> is preventing this site from implementing required components that
> protect your privacy and allow you to view and change your privacy
> settings. This functionality is required for privacy legislation in your
> region.
>
> We recommend you use a different browser

VPN

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>
>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>
>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>
> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>
>  Browser Blocked

No issue here.

[Rich]

There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network) lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.

[Rich]

On Monday 15 January 2024 at 23:58:36 UTC-5, Rich wrote:
> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html

Re-banned:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68014619

[Alan Browne]

CNN has free rent in your head too?

[Alan Browne]

Same ban. Sell during proceedings allowance lifted is all.

Sure is great that you're keeping on top of this photography subject though.

[geoff]

It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 18, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<3HSdnWPE5rKoPjT4...@giganews.com>):

> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> > > > > Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > > > > > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> > > > > > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> > > > >
> > > > > Browser Blocked
> > > > No issue here.
> > > > --
> > > > “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
> > > > - John Maynard Keynes.
> > >
> > > There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> > > lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
> > > stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> >
> > CNN has free rent in your head too?
>

> objective news like CNN or
> BBC,
>

> Geoff

Hilarious. I always appreciate a sense of humor.

[Alan Browne]

Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
sense backwards as well...

[geoff]

Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.

You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
tragi-comedy ?

And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?

The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4...@giganews.com>):

> Geoff
And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
“hugely more objective" a bit meaningless. Please explain how your
perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.

[Alan Browne]

In Canada we generally spell it humour, but American media influence is
eroding that. OTOH, we're slowly infecting them with the metric system.

But you get points for flying objects.

>
> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> tragi-comedy ?

I've seen the "real news" side of Fox correctly presented and fairly
centrist. (However, they do pick their stories...).

Since Fox is not a broadcast network (it is "cable") it is not beholden
to the standards of broadcast journalism. They tend to skip that whole
fact checking burden...

Their "hosted content" is of course right wing babble.

> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?

I'd put the BBC as more objective than many. CNN to the left a little;
ABC, CBS, NBC - centre left, etc.

There is a site called Ground News that weigh stories according to
presentation by various sources - so they will indicate if it is left or
right leaning and how much. Subscription service alas.

>
> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.

Americans are extremely polarized these days to the point that when Fox
actually tells it like it is the "network" gets threatening calls and
letters.

You may recall the Clinton (SecState) era Uranium One debacle. This
was a favourite issue to criticize Clinton. Shep Smith (a host on Fox)
clarified the whole thing which exonerated Clinton from any impropriety.
This angered the "right". But took the issue off of the table (even
Trump shut up about it.

He "left" Fox soon after ...

A summary vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G1z6Rh2N4M (2:04).

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-21 11:59, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote

>> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
>> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
>>
>> Geoff
> And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for

Even its most "neutral" news (real news) leans right. While more
accurate and factual (and not extrapolating nonsense as its "hosts" tend
to do on their programs), Fox real news is right leaning, often by omission.

> a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless. Please explain how your
> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.

Painting one as a liberal is a pretty weak argument.

I'm conservative, but I certainly would never vote for most GOPers -
they are not conservative at all - they just want low taxes and for the
government to spend money on what concerns them and not what concerns
others.

(Rightwing Americans would probably paint me as "liberal" too, but such
terms have been abused so much that they've lost real meaning).

[Bill W]

On Jan 21, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <docrN.240106$c3Ea....@fx10.iad>):

> On 2024-01-21 11:59, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
>
> > > The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> > > petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> > And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> > News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
>
> Even its most "neutral" news (real news) leans right. While more
> accurate and factual (and not extrapolating nonsense as its "hosts" tend
> to do on their programs), Fox real news is right leaning, often by omission.
>
> > a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> > isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> > “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless. Please explain how your
> > perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>
> Painting one as a liberal is a pretty weak argument.

It’s not intended as an argument. It was intended only as bashing an
arrogant liberal (redundancy) who has been taking shots at conservatives for
as long as I can remember. I always ignored it to avoid contributing to the
infestation of politics on this group. But this group, like pretty much all
of usenet, is near death now, so what the hell.

> I'm conservative, but I certainly would never vote for most GOPers -
> they are not conservative at all - they just want low taxes and for the
> government to spend money on what concerns them and not what concerns
> others.
>
> (Rightwing Americans would probably paint me as "liberal" too, but such
> terms have been abused so much that they've lost real meaning).

I can respect liberals, just not asshole liberals. Same with conservatives.

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-21 13:09, Bill W wrote:

> arrogant liberal (redundancy)
Proving my point. Not worth discussing with you.

Less so in this group.

[geoff]

Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
objective than others.

Please explain how your
> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>

What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
likes of Trump and Putin.

Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote

(in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4...@giganews.com>):

It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have many
sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.

> Please explain how your
> > perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>
> What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
> likes of Trump and Putin.

And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity. I
have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals. You
just “know”.

> Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
> bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.

As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
you know. Or should know.

[geoff]

I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.

>
>> Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
>> bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
>
> As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
> you know. Or should know.

My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?

Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
that argued, but one is demonstrably false.

geoff

[Whisky-dave]

I guess we're lucky as there is only one colour of blue.

Just like in photography there's black and white photography and colour photography :-D

>
> Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
> that argued, but one is demonstrably false.

Most side could be vile while the other is evil.

I aslo believe that most things have more than two sides. Unless you live in 2 dimentional space

>
> geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 22, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<LM6cnVQwcoRLjzL4...@giganews.com>):

Sure. Pretty much all of us “feel able to” do lots of very good things.
And we all tend to feel we do and think the “right’ things. All very
objective.

> > > Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
> > > bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
> >
> > As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
> > you know. Or should know.
>
> My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?

I consider you intelligent. That comment is objectively stupid.

> Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
> that argued, but one is demonstrably false.

Politicians tend to be quite vile, but many of them hide that under their
statesman-like posing. Objective people who make the effort to expose
themselves to varied sources are all aware of that. Your sources are clearly
limited. It’s a shame. You are clearly capable of learning, but choose not
to.

[geoff]

I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 23, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<4PednU1bDcWgry34...@giganews.com>):

> Geoff
What have I said that is right-wing?

[geoff]

Labeling anything just one or two goose-steps to the left of (the likes
of) GOP attitudes as left-wing and arrogantly liberal gives some sort of
hint.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 24, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<QoCdnfld6IbNfiz4...@giganews.com>):

> Geoff

So I assume it’s okay to call you left-wing?

[geoff]

On 25/01/2024 5:33 pm, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2024, geoff wrote

>>>> I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
>>>> varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
>>>> suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.
>>>>
>>>> Geoff
>>> What have I said that is right-wing?
>>
>> Labeling anything just one or two goose-steps to the left of (the likes
>> of) GOP attitudes as left-wing and arrogantly liberal gives some sort of
>> hint.
>>
>> Geoff
>
> So I assume it’s okay to call you left-wing?
>
>

As you like. If that means that I have a problem with inequality,
inequity, xenophobia, racism, misogyny, greed, etc - then OK.

But as the general perception of political and philosophical outlooks in
the USA tends to term as 'extreme left-wing' anything vaguely to the
left of the mainstream right-wing, whereas most of the world would
consider those commonly such described as 'centre', or slightly
left-of-centre' at the most, such labels are rather meaningless in that
context.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 25, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<Nbicncklbfd_SS_4...@giganews.com>):

> On 25/01/2024 5:33 pm, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 24, 2024, geoff wrote
>
> > > > > I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
> > > > > varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
> > > > > suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.
> > > > >
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > What have I said that is right-wing?
> > >
> > > Labeling anything just one or two goose-steps to the left of (the likes
> > > of) GOP attitudes as left-wing and arrogantly liberal gives some sort of
> > > hint.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> >
> > So I assume it’s okay to call you left-wing?
>
> As you like. If that means that I have a problem with inequality,
> inequity, xenophobia, racism, misogyny, greed, etc - then OK.

If you have wondered why I keep using the term “arrogant liberal”, all
you need to do is read what you just wrote up there. All I can say is golly
gee, you are against bad things. In your mind that makes you special. You are
special. All liberals are special. You all know to say the right things, and
you never stop saying them. It is oh so important for everyone to know just
how good and smart y’all are. I’m convinced. But I do wonder if you’ve
ever asked yourself if conservatives might also be against bad things, or if
some liberals might actually not be against those things, and are all talk.

> But as the general perception of political and philosophical outlooks in
> the USA tends to term as 'extreme left-wing' anything vaguely to the
> left of the mainstream right-wing, whereas most of the world would
> consider those commonly such described as 'centre', or slightly
> left-of-centre' at the most, such labels are rather meaningless in that
> context.

I’m pretty sure you don’t know much of anything about the US of the real
world. I think of you as an MSNBC scholar.

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-25 17:47, Bill W wrote:

>
> If you have wondered why I keep using the term “arrogant liberal”, all

(Bill: when you've dug yourself into a hole, CW holds the first thing to
do is: stop digging).

[Bill W]

On Jan 25, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <LCBsN.169105$yEgf....@fx09.iad>):

> On 2024-01-25 17:47, Bill W wrote:
>
> >
> > If you have wondered why I keep using the term “arrogant liberal”, all
> (Bill: when you've dug yourself into a hole, CW holds the first thing to
> do is: stop digging).

You have differing opinions, so I'm in a hole? Gotcha.

[Alan Browne]

It's your kneejerk labeling. When you do that it dilutes and washes
away anything contributory you might have to make.

[Bill W]

On Jan 26, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <%OPsN.16841$mMj7...@fx01.iad>):

> On 2024-01-25 19:35, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 25, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> > (in article <LCBsN.169105$yEgf....@fx09.iad>):
> >
> > > On 2024-01-25 17:47, Bill W wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > If you have wondered why I keep using the term “arrogant liberal”, all
> > > (Bill: when you've dug yourself into a hole, CW holds the first thing to
> > > do is: stop digging).
> >
> > You have differing opinions, so I'm in a hole? Gotcha.
>
> It's your kneejerk labeling.

Anyone who ever posts anything slightly conservative sounding gets the full
maga treatment here. I’ve never seen you criticize those posts. Why is
that? Those posts should qualify for “knee-jerk” status. I’m pretty
sure you’re just another lockstep liberal, in spite of your denials. That
doesn’t make you evil, just impossible to take seriously.

> When you do that it dilutes and washes
> away anything contributory you might have to make.

Does that also apply to Geoff? I must have overlooked you calling him out,
too.

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-26 13:29, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> (in article <%OPsN.16841$mMj7...@fx01.iad>):
>
>> On 2024-01-25 19:35, Bill W wrote:
>>> On Jan 25, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
>>> (in article <LCBsN.169105$yEgf....@fx09.iad>):
>>>
>>>> On 2024-01-25 17:47, Bill W wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have wondered why I keep using the term “arrogant liberal”, all
>>>> (Bill: when you've dug yourself into a hole, CW holds the first thing to
>>>> do is: stop digging).
>>>
>>> You have differing opinions, so I'm in a hole? Gotcha.
>>
>> It's your kneejerk labeling.
>
> Anyone who ever posts anything slightly conservative sounding gets the full
> maga treatment here. I’ve never seen you criticize those posts. Why is
> that? Those posts should qualify for “knee-jerk” status. I’m pretty
> sure you’re just another lockstep liberal, in spite of your denials. That
> doesn’t make you evil, just impossible to take seriously.

More of your judgemental BS.

>
>> When you do that it dilutes and washes
>> away anything contributory you might have to make.
>
> Does that also apply to Geoff? I must have overlooked you calling him out,
> too.

He's been quite moderate IMO - you on the other hand retort with things
like:

QUOTE

On 2024-01-21 13:09, Bill W wrote:

> arrogant liberal (redundancy)

END QUOTE

So - your protests ring hollow.

[Bill W]

On Jan 26, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

(in article <TwWsN.286377$PuZ9....@fx11.iad>):

Here’s a little something he wrote: "I certainly feel able to differentiate
better than some who have an agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.”
He’s referring to conservatives, right? You feel that’s more moderate
than what I wrote? Are you digging yourself into a hole?

[geoff]

It appears many US right-wingers appear to not have so much of a problem
with those things in that many appear happy to nominate and vote for a
president who proudly displays all those factors.

geoff

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-26 23:48, Bill W wrote:

> Here’s a little something he wrote: "I certainly feel able to differentiate
> better than some who have an agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.”
> He’s referring to conservatives, right? You feel that’s more moderate
> than what I wrote? Are you digging yourself into a hole?

That wasn't aimed at conservatives, that was aimed at the right wing.
If you don't know the difference, that is probably something you should
look into.

[Bill W]

On Jan 26, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<q4GdnSGe-ZofDSn4...@giganews.com>):

Do any voters on the left also vote for any politicians who display any of
those traits? I mean... in your world, wherever that might exist. And are you
aware of any recent displays of virulent hatred and racism from the left -
maybe thinking about after Oct 7? Anything at all?

[Bill W]

On Jan 27, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <0i8tN.255546$7sbb....@fx16.iad>):

> On 2024-01-26 23:48, Bill W wrote:
>
> > Here’s a little something he wrote: "I certainly feel able to
> > differentiate
> > better than some who have an agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.”
> > He’s referring to conservatives, right? You feel that’s more moderate
> > than what I wrote? Are you digging yourself into a hole?
>
> That wasn't aimed at conservatives, that was aimed at the right wing.
> If you don't know the difference, that is probably something you should
> look into.

Why don’t you explain it to me? You’re a liberal, so you just know things
without any effort. Save me some time.

[Alan Browne]

First off, I'm not a liberal.

Secondly, if you haven't figured out the difference yet, no amount of
explaining is going to help you.

Any good colleges offering night classes for "adult" students near you?
They probably have something to fill you.

[Bill W]

On Jan 27, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

(in article <AUhtN.256281$7sbb....@fx16.iad>):

> On 2024-01-27 12:54, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> > (in article <0i8tN.255546$7sbb....@fx16.iad>):
> >
> > > On 2024-01-26 23:48, Bill W wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here’s a little something he wrote: "I certainly feel able to
> > > > differentiate
> > > > better than some who have an agenda based on privilege, greed, and
> > > > hate.”
> > > > He’s referring to conservatives, right? You feel that’s more moderate
> > > > than what I wrote? Are you digging yourself into a hole?
> > >
> > > That wasn't aimed at conservatives, that was aimed at the right wing.
> > > If you don't know the difference, that is probably something you should
> > > look into.
> >
> > Why don’t you explain it to me? You’re a liberal, so you just know
> > things
> > without any effort. Save me some time.
>
> First off, I'm not a liberal.

At least you have a sense of humor.

> Secondly, if you haven't figured out the difference yet, no amount of
> explaining is going to help you.

You are right, no amount of explaining from a clueless liberal is going to
help. I asked you to explain it to me because you are clearly clueless. I was
curious what sort of nonsense you might come up with. You disappointed me.

[geoff]

Only hatred of virulent extremism, racism and fascism.

geoff

[Alan Browne]

I'm not here to educate you. And with the above it's clear that finding
the person who can could be a personal challenge for you - but as I
mentioned (and you snipped) there is likely a college nearby with some
night classes that might help you.

[Bill W]

On Jan 28, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<qQOdnbE2HbS6uCv4...@giganews.com>):

> Geoff

Those words are pretty negative, but also would be far too kind for the
despicable likes of you. You can’t even condemn the targeting of innocents
for mass murder, torture and rape? What a fucking pig. You are why I hate the
left.

[Bill W]

On Jan 28, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <kxutN.314255$xHn7....@fx14.iad>):

Likely because you understand that you can’t, and you can’t because you
are wrong, and that is rooted in ignorance. There is no bright-line generally
agreed on distinction between “right-wing” and “conservative”, and
the only people who don’t understand that are the MSNBC addicts who live
among us.

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-28 12:34, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 28, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> (in article <kxutN.314255$xHn7....@fx14.iad>):
>
>> On 2024-01-27 21:31, Bill W wrote:
>>> On Jan 27, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
>>> (in article <AUhtN.256281$7sbb....@fx16.iad>):
>>>
>>>> On 2024-01-27 12:54, Bill W wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 27, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

<S>

>>>> Secondly, if you haven't figured out the difference yet, no amount of
>>>> explaining is going to help you.
>>>
>>> You are right, no amount of explaining from a clueless liberal is going to
>>> help. I asked you to explain it to me because you are clearly clueless. I
>>> was
>>> curious what sort of nonsense you might come up with. You disappointed me.
>>
>> I'm not here to educate you.
>
> Likely because you understand that you can’t, and you can’t because you

You're correct that I can't educate you. But that's not my problem.

> are wrong, and that is rooted in ignorance. There is no bright-line generally
> agreed on distinction between “right-wing” and “conservative”, and

You should know that differences of such things are not discrete, but
fall at different places on a smoothish, non-linear continuum.

> the only people who don’t understand that are the MSNBC addicts who live
> among us.

Indirect insults aren't any classier than the direct kind - esp. when
poorly and wrongly aimed.

Funny how you keep snipping away the suggestion that you attend some
night classes to brush up your understanding of things...

[Bill W]

On Jan 28, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

(in article <SXztN.301654$c3Ea....@fx10.iad>):

> On 2024-01-28 12:34, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> > (in article <kxutN.314255$xHn7....@fx14.iad>):
> >
> > > On 2024-01-27 21:31, Bill W wrote:
> > > > On Jan 27, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> > > > (in article <AUhtN.256281$7sbb....@fx16.iad>):
> > > >
> > > > > On 2024-01-27 12:54, Bill W wrote:
> > > > > > On Jan 27, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> <S>
> > > > > Secondly, if you haven't figured out the difference yet, no amount of
> > > > > explaining is going to help you.
> > > >
> > > > You are right, no amount of explaining from a clueless liberal is going to
> > > > help. I asked you to explain it to me because you are clearly clueless. I
> > > > was
> > > > curious what sort of nonsense you might come up with. You disappointed me.
> > >
> > > I'm not here to educate you.
> >
> > Likely because you understand that you can’t, and you can’t because you
>
> You're correct that I can't educate you. But that's not my problem.
>
> > are wrong, and that is rooted in ignorance. There is no bright-line
> > generally
> > agreed on distinction between “right-wing” and “conservative”, and
>
> You should know that differences of such things are not discrete, but
> fall at different places on a smoothish, non-linear continuum.

Please, I’m asking nicely. Just tell me your version of the difference, and
then cite your source. But I think we both know that the source is somewhere
in your head only. I know that “right-wing” is intended as some sort of
pejorative, but it’s meaningless without some definition from the person
using it.

> > the only people who don’t understand that are the MSNBC addicts who live
> > among us.
>
> Indirect insults aren't any classier than the direct kind - esp. when
> poorly and wrongly aimed.
>
> Funny how you keep snipping away the suggestion that you attend some
> night classes to brush up your understanding of things...

Just sparing you the embarrassment of anyone seeing it over and over again.
Out of kindness, I’ll give you a tip: no need for night school for you, you
can just Google “right-wing” before you go on looking ignorant. It’s so
easy.

[Alan Browne]

Weak. (Wrong too).

>
>>> the only people who don’t understand that are the MSNBC addicts who live
>>> among us.
>>
>> Indirect insults aren't any classier than the direct kind - esp. when
>> poorly and wrongly aimed.
>>
>> Funny how you keep snipping away the suggestion that you attend some
>> night classes to brush up your understanding of things...
>
> Just sparing you the embarrassment of anyone seeing it over and over again.
> Out of kindness, I’ll give you a tip: no need for night school for you, you
> can just Google “right-wing” before you go on looking ignorant. It’s so
> easy.

Google huh? The confirmation bias seeking engine. I'm sure you're very
familiar with it.

I'm done.

[Bill W]

On Jan 29, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <SINtN.258087$7sbb....@fx16.iad>):

Of course you’re done. You have no choice now that you’ve Googled it and
couldn’t find the confirmation you sought. But nice try anyway. BTW,
another characteristic of liberals is that they are forbidden to ever admit
that they might be wrong about anything. It might be time to stop claiming
that you are conservative. Unless you meant that you are a conservative
dresser, or something.

[geoff]

Why are you calling me a fucking pig for your *imagined* failure on my
part of condemning the Hamas terrorists who carried out that evil attack
? Of course I condemn it, in the strongest of terms and on several
grounds. But that statement of yours,... well, I won't bother posting
here what I think of you in response.

I don't think too many people of any persuasion wouldn't condemn the
actions of those conservative religo/political fanatics.

However (and by no means any excuse for the Hamas violence), try
thinking hard about was gave rise to Hamas. And think even harder (yes,
it may be an effort for you) what the far-right (ie
fascist/nazi/whatever) current Israeli government's indiscriminate and
immoral extreme response has been will achieve. Wipe out Hamas, or
reinforce its base with a new and larger generation of even more extreme
activists ?

The only way to prevent the above would be to exterminate the whole
race/nationality. Ring a bell ?

[geoff]

Or those attempting to obfuscate.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 29, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<qW6dnY3ZAsefqSX4...@giganews.com>):

Hardly imagined. See below.

> failure on my
> part of condemning the Hamas terrorists who carried out that evil attack
> ? Of course I condemn it, in the strongest of terms and on several
> grounds. But that statement of yours,... well, I won't bother posting
> here what I think of you in response.
>
> I don't think too many people of any persuasion wouldn't condemn the
> actions of those conservative religo/political fanatics.
>
> However

... of course. “However”. If you saw video of an IDF soldier point blank
executing an infant, would you “condemn it in the strongest possible
terms”, and then follow immediately with “however”? Be honest.

> (and by no means any excuse for the Hamas violence),

Of course - the required disclaimer, even though that’s exactly what you
are about to do.

> try
> thinking hard about was gave rise to Hamas.

And stop there? Why? What gave rise to whatever gave rise to Hamas? And on
and on it goes. You stop there because that is what your liberal handlers
have commanded. Liberal followers like yourself never think at all about what
they are repeating. There is no independent thought, and it’s so obvious.
Everything you’ve written I could just watch MSNBC to see it first. You
really need to expand your sources. Just throw in a little right leaning
anything to see if some brain cells wake up.

> And think even harder (yes,
> it may be an effort for you) what the far-right (ie
> fascist/nazi/whatever) current Israeli government's indiscriminate and
> immoral extreme response has been will achieve.

Oh I forgot, Netanyahu is conservative, and so the root of all this trouble.
Simple thoughts come so easily to liberals. And being nothing more than a
repeater outlet for the leftist media comes easily to you.

> Wipe out Hamas, or
> reinforce its base with a new and larger generation of even more extreme
> activists ?
> The only way to prevent the above would be to exterminate the whole
> race/nationality. Ring a bell ?

The *only* way? I think you are severely deficient in your understanding of
Hamas and Palestinians and pretty much everything about that part of the
world.

[geoff]

You somehow don't agree that he is conservative, and extreme right-wing ?

>
>> Wipe out Hamas, or
>> reinforce its base with a new and larger generation of even more extreme
>> activists ?
>> The only way to prevent the above would be to exterminate the whole
>> race/nationality. Ring a bell ?
>
> The *only* way? I think you are severely deficient in your understanding of
> Hamas and Palestinians and pretty much everything about that part of the
> world.
>
>

I'm clearly have a much better grasp on the reality of the region than
you. Having lived there also helps.

So you'd be happy if, say, persecuted Cubans were set up in a large
proportion of your country, then proceeded to treat your population like
shit and also encroach on the small territory your nation was allocated ?

geoff

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-29 10:07, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

>> I'm done.
>
> Of course you’re done. You have no choice now that you’ve Googled it and
> couldn’t find the confirmation you sought.

Didn't even try.

Just bored with you and the subject. You're a boor too.

[Bill W]

On Jan 30, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<A82dne05rb_iIyX4...@giganews.com>):

I don’t agree his being a conservative justifies mass murder of innocents.
And I don’t know what you might mean by “extreme right wing”.

> >
> > > Wipe out Hamas, or
> > > reinforce its base with a new and larger generation of even more extreme
> > > activists ?
> > > The only way to prevent the above would be to exterminate the whole
> > > race/nationality. Ring a bell ?
> >
> > The *only* way? I think you are severely deficient in your understanding of
> > Hamas and Palestinians and pretty much everything about that part of the
> > world.
>
> I'm clearly have a much better grasp on the reality of the region than
> you. Having lived there also helps.
>
> So you'd be happy if, say, persecuted Cubans were set up in a large
> proportion of your country, then proceeded to treat your population like
> shit and also encroach on the small territory your nation was allocated ?
>
> geoff

OH MY GOD!!! Why didn’t you say so? When you put it like that, now it’s
clear that I would carefully find as many innocent non-military Cuban
civilians as possible, rape, torture and kill parents in front of their kids,
rape torture and kill kids in front of their parents - including infants,
massacre men and women of all ages, even while knowing that those Cubans had
treated me better than any other population ever did, and that maybe my
perception of them might be wrong, and that maybe my “elected leaders” -
let’s call them... is Hamas taken?... might be the real cause of all my
problems. And all this while knowing that you would defend my actions,
because, uh, reasons!

BTW, what is “my country” in your wheezing analogy?

[Bill W]

On Jan 30, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <GZ6uN.273479$Wp_8....@fx17.iad>):

> On 2024-01-29 10:07, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
>
> > > I'm done.
> >
> > Of course you’re done. You have no choice now that you’ve Googled it and
> > couldn’t find the confirmation you sought.
>
> Didn't even try.
>
> Just bored with you and the subject. You're a boor too.

Of course you’re bored. You’re bored easily - so easily that you never
bother to learn anything that might clash with your preconceptions.

[geoff]

On 31/01/2024 5:51 am, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2024, geoff wrote
> (in article<A82dne05rb_iIyX4...@giganews.com>):

And think even harder (yes,
>>>> it may be an effort for you) what the far-right (ie
>>>> fascist/nazi/whatever) current Israeli government's indiscriminate and
>>>> immoral extreme response has been will achieve.
>>>
>>> Oh I forgot, Netanyahu is conservative, and so the root of all this trouble.
>>> Simple thoughts come so easily to liberals. And being nothing more than a
>>> repeater outlet for the leftist media comes easily to you.
>>
>> You somehow don't agree that he is conservative, and extreme right-wing ?
>
> I don’t agree his being a conservative justifies mass murder of innocents

His acknowledged right-wing conservative views seem sufficient
justification for' him' to justify it.

.
> And I don’t know what you might mean by “extreme right wing”.

No you don't apparently.

>>>
>>>> Wipe out Hamas, or
>>>> reinforce its base with a new and larger generation of even more extreme
>>>> activists ?
>>>> The only way to prevent the above would be to exterminate the whole
>>>> race/nationality. Ring a bell ?
>>>
>>> The *only* way? I think you are severely deficient in your understanding of
>>> Hamas and Palestinians and pretty much everything about that part of the
>>> world.
>>
>> I'm clearly have a much better grasp on the reality of the region than
>> you. Having lived there also helps.
>>
>> So you'd be happy if, say, persecuted Cubans were set up in a large
>> proportion of your country, then proceeded to treat your population like
>> shit and also encroach on the small territory your nation was allocated ?
>>
>> geoff
>
> OH MY GOD!!! Why didn’t you say so? When you put it like that, now it’s
> clear that I would carefully find as many innocent non-military Cuban
> civilians as possible, rape, torture and kill parents in front of their kids,
> rape torture and kill kids in front of their parents - including infants,
> massacre men and women of all ages, even while knowing that those Cubans had
> treated me better than any other population ever did,

Ha ha.

and that maybe my
> perception of them might be wrong, and that maybe my “elected leaders” -
> let’s call them... is Hamas taken?... might be the real cause of all my
> problems. And all this while knowing that you would defend my actions,
> because, uh, reasons!

Many may indeed be driven to do such heinous things in the circumstances.

>
> BTW, what is “my country” in your wheezing analogy?

I don't know, but I am guessing USA.

geoff

[Alan Browne]

Not at all. But...

******

On 2024-01-21 13:09, Bill W wrote:

> arrogant liberal (redundancy)

*******+

9 days ago, based on the above ***/***, I said to myself, "Alan old
dude, don't waste your time on this dweeb." But - I didn't heed my own
advice. That's on me. I will now.

[Bill W]

On Jan 30, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

(in article <wqduN.103737$JLvf....@fx44.iad>):

> On 2024-01-30 11:54, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 30, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> > (in article <GZ6uN.273479$Wp_8....@fx17.iad>):
> >
> > > On 2024-01-29 10:07, Bill W wrote:
> > > > On Jan 29, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> > >
> > > > > I'm done.
> > > >
> > > > Of course you’re done. You have no choice now that you’ve Googled it
> > > > and
> > > > couldn’t find the confirmation you sought.
> > >
> > > Didn't even try.
> > >
> > > Just bored with you and the subject. You're a boor too.
> >
> > Of course you’re bored. You’re bored easily - so easily that you never
> > bother to learn anything that might clash with your preconceptions.
>
> Not at all. But...
>
> ******
> On 2024-01-21 13:09, Bill W wrote:
>
> > arrogant liberal (redundancy)
> *******+
>
> 9 days ago, based on the above ***/***, I said to myself, "Alan old
> dude, don't waste your time on this dweeb." But - I didn't heed my own
> advice. That's on me. I will now.

I thought that you weren’t a liberal.

[Bill W]

On Jan 30, 2024, geoff wrote

(in article<2VidnRHCm-WDxST4...@giganews.com>):

Or maybe just the sorts of people who are indoctrinated into unbounded hatred
from birth, and taught that everyone of a certain group, let’s say Jews for
this example, must be wiped from the face of the earth. Maybe the very people
who declare this openly.

> > BTW, what is “my country” in your wheezing analogy?
>
> I don't know, but I am guessing USA.
>
> geoff

Not my country, “my country" in your little fable. Are you really saying
that all of Israel is actually the Palestinian’s country? You know, from
the river to the sea?

Why not answer my original question? Where I asked if you could think of any
leftists who supported Hamas’s murders? You seem to have danced around that
one. I wondered why you failed to criticize those folks, but it’s clear
that the reason is that you are one of them. Be proud.

[geoff]

Once was, now isn't. 2 small bits of it still are, are under occupation,
and are increasingly encroached upon. Don't you know that ?

>
> Why not answer my original question? Where I asked if you could think of any
> leftists who supported Hamas’s murders? You seem to have danced around that
> one.

Must have missed that specific question amongst the rest of your
diatribe. No I can't, but that's hardly relevant - I'm sure there would
be some, as equally there would be plenty of rightists.

I wondered why you failed to criticize those folks, but it’s clear
> that the reason is that you are one of them. Be proud.

Did I (wrong)? Do you assume I wouldn't have ? I have said here that I
find their action vile. As I also find the nature and extent of the
response vile.

Proud ? Dunno about that, but I am comfortable with my outlook which
isn't that which you rather nastily attempt to asperse.

geoff

[Alan Browne]

I'm not. But thanks for confirming your comprehension limitations.

[Bill W]

On Jan 30, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

(in article <nLguN.103739$JLvf....@fx44.iad>):

Then what do you care that I used the term, “arrogant liberal”?

[Bill W]

On Jan 30, 2024, geoff wrote

(in article<U5icnYDNDZN1GCT4...@giganews.com>):

> Geoff

It’s simple. To moral, rational people, some evil actions cannot be judged
within some context. The things Hamas did include those actions. There is no
way at all to explain them away, there is no justification to “condemn”
those actions, and then follow with the word, “however”. Anyone who does
is also evil. Or do you just refuse to believe what they actually did? Were
the videos shown to certain people AI generated fakes? Are you just under the
spell of the Jew hating leftist supporters of Hamas? Again, the likes of you

[geoff]

Yes, no justification to 'not condemn' .... I think is what you mean.

>and then follow with the word, “however”.

So no historical background to a situation can even be referred to ?
Denial of history - convenient for you.

>Anyone who does
> is also evil.

Well fuck you too arsehole.

> Or do you just refuse to believe what they actually did? Were
> the videos shown to certain people AI generated fakes? Are you just under
> the spell of the Jew hating leftist supporters of Hamas?

Why do you imagine that anybody thinks anything so ridiculous ? Do you
use such a bizarre assertion to justify your twisted POV ?

> Again, the likes of you
> are why I hate the left.

Well I take that as a complement, considering.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 30, 2024, geoff wrote

(in article<V8mcnUdKgYiMUiT4...@giganews.com>):

I meant what I wrote - there were more words after that.

>
>
> > and then follow with the word, “however”.
>
> So no historical background to a situation can even be referred to ?
> Denial of history - convenient for you.

I said nothing of the sort, and you should know it. Following a rote
condemnation with some “explanation” for monstrous behavior is not
intended as a history lesson, it’s a way to maintain your liberal status
without upsetting the crackpots openly supporting Hamas.

> > Anyone who does
> > is also evil.
>
> Well fuck you too arsehole.
>
> > Or do you just refuse to believe what they actually did? Were
> > the videos shown to certain people AI generated fakes? Are you just under
> > the spell of the Jew hating leftist supporters of Hamas?
>
> Why do you imagine that anybody thinks anything so ridiculous ? Do you
> use such a bizarre assertion to justify your twisted POV ?

No human could see those videos, or acknolwledge that they exist, and still
try to justify what happened. Only a subhuman with zero morals, with no moral
center at all could do it. Enjoy the company you’ve joined.

[Alan Browne]

On 2024-01-30 20:56, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
> (in article <nLguN.103739$JLvf....@fx44.iad>):
>
>> On 2024-01-30 17:18, Bill W wrote:
>>> On Jan 30, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
>>> (in article <wqduN.103737$JLvf....@fx44.iad>):
>>>
>>>> On 2024-01-30 11:54, Bill W wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 30, 2024, Alan Browne wrote

>>>>> (in article <GZ6uN.273479$Wp_8.25642

>>>> ******
>>>> On 2024-01-21 13:09, Bill W wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> arrogant liberal (redundancy)
>>>> *******+
>>>>
>>>> 9 days ago, based on the above ***/***, I said to myself, "Alan old
>>>> dude, don't waste your time on this dweeb." But - I didn't heed my own
>>>> advice. That's on me. I will now.
>>>
>>> I thought that you weren’t a liberal.
>>
>> I'm not. But thanks for confirming your comprehension limitations.
>
> Then what do you care that I used the term, “arrogant liberal”?

Destroys your credibility, obviously.

[geoff]

Again, who is attempting to JUSTIFY those actions ?

Pointing out the historic background is not the same thing at all -
clearly difficult for you to comprehend.

geoff

[Bill W]

On Jan 31, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<MQydnRxXdqvjXCf4...@giganews.com>):

> Geoff

Selectively pointing out only one side of a limited version of a very complex
history is *exactly* that.