On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 1:22:15 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, September 25, 2021 at 8:03:14 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org
> > On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 9:43:21 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 7:48:05 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org
> > > > On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 12:12:41 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 1:42:18 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org
> > > > > > On Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 3:37:53 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 9:39:09 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org
> > > > > > > > On Monday, September 13, 2021 at 3:59:32 AM UTC+10, blo...@columbus.rr.com
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 1:45:53 PM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 1:39:05 PM UTC-4, blo...@columbus.rr.com
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 8:59:07 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/12/2021 5:25 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/09/2021 22:31, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > Hey Sloman, that decision was wrong, not for the reason you state, but because it is immoral for the State to manipulate the lives of the governed without their knowledge or consent.
> > So it was immoral to conscript people into the Army and send them overseas to get shot to defend American democracy?
> Different issue and you know it - society agrees on the draft, but didn't on experimenting on Blacks with dangerous diseases and enforced sterilization.
At the time society was perfectly happy with enforced sterilsation. That didn't make it moral.
> > > But that doesn't both libtards such as yourself because you have such an inflated view of your intelligence that you think you libtards know best.
> > Knowing better than twits like you is a pretty low bar.
> You prove my point - you think you KNOW BETTER than the rest of us. NEWS FLASH: YOU DON'T!!
I know I know better than you do. Few other people are clearly mentally defective as you are, so I'm being realistic, rather than arrogant.
> > > Hitler was one of your devotees.
> > I doubt that Hitler was aware that I existed. I was about two and half and living in Tasmania when he died.
> A devotee to the libtard creed that you cling to.
Hitler is generally seen as a deluded - if intelligent - right-winger. You seem to be just as deluded as he was, but much less intelligent
> > His devotion to remarkably silly ideas looks very much like your behavior to me, but this isn't a point of view that you have the wit to comprehend.
> No, it is YOUR silly ideas.
That is a very silly idea.
> > > > Vaccination works, and it works well enough that not getting vaccinated against and infectious disease is criminally stupid.
> > > >
> > > So, are you going to put the unvaccinated in jail - it wouldn't surprise EVEN if they had better immunity because of a prior COVID infection.
> > They don't. They may have more antibodies against Covid-19 immediately after they have recovered from a natural Covid-9 infection than a vaccinated person would, but those antibodies will recognise a chunk of the Covid-9 virus capsule that includes a number of spike proteins. This changes more between strains than the highly conserved spike protein itself. The Covid-19 vaccines used in the west use a version of the spike protein as their antigen, and the immunity does seem to work across a wider range of strains.
> You called it "criminal behavior" you turd - criminal means you lock people up for it. Do you now have a change of mind?
Are you old enough to remember tuberculosis? If you caught the disease you got locked up in a sanitorium until you died of it or got cured.
Streptomycin was the first drug that was effective against it - it was discovered in 1943, but didn't start getting used on patients until about five years later. Bob Dole seems to have been the first patient where the cure worked well.
is about the author;s year in a sanitorium in the 1930's.
> > > > > It shows what happens when libtards like you are given power you should NEVER have.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, it shows how rightards like you can't think straight. Give you a set of facts, and you will come to the conclusion that you like - ignoring all the inconvenient facts that show it isn't the right conclusion. The right-wing position is that they want to change the world as little as possible. The left wing position involves looking at all the evidence and thinking about its implications - which isn't a process you can understand at all, and find deeply suspicious.
> > > >
> > > "Rightards?" REALLY?? Boy, does that ever roll off the tongue! The libtards are currently in power in the US and look how they have FUCKED UP the country in a few short months.
> > Not that you can say which features of the US they have degraded since they came to power. Like every other rightard, you are happy to claim that the country is going to hell in handbasket, but are totally incapable of specifying the problem you have in mind.
> It's a long list that everyone in the US is very aware of (especially Afghanistan) - it's why Joe Biden's polls are in the toilet.
Afghanistan is just one of the disasters that George W. Bush wished on America. It doesn't even belong on the list that you claim exists, but can't be bothered to spell, mainly because it doesn't exist.
> > > Now, Joe Biden has been exposed as a tax cheat after berating others to "pay their fair share!" His best defense: he was too demented to know what he was doing.
> > https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-biden-used-tax-code-loophole-obama-tried-to-plug-11562779300
> > That's the Murdoch press for you. Tax evasion is a crime. Tax avoidance isn't. If the Obama administration had been able to ban that particular manoeuvre, they'd have something to complain about, but presumably it had enough legitimate applications that they couldn't.
> Still can't spell, I see.
That is the way the way the French and the English spell the word. The Cambridge dictionary lists "maneuver" as the American spelling. Noam Webster has a lot to answer for.
> The WSJ reports the facts, something that is foreign to you.
The Murdoch press does report some of the facts - the ones that suit their point of view. They are prone to leave the inconvenient ones that don't - in this case the point that what Biden is doing is perfectly legal.
> Joe Biden EVADED taxes, he didn't AVOID them - avoidance is the LEGAL manipulation of a tax situation (like taken a casualty loss or R&D tax credit) that Joe Biden says is unfair.
The Obama administration would have liked to block that particular loophole, but - in the end - they didn't. If everybody else can exploit it, it isn't fair to Joe Biden to claim that he shouldn't.
If what Joe Biden is doing is illegal, why isn't he being prosecuted? The Rupert Murdoch, who owns the Wall Street Journal, has enough money and influence to get such as prosecution launched. Oddly, he seems to have settled for published a slanted report designed to make Joe Biden look bad.
Bill Sloman, Sydney