Should people who refuse a Covid vaccine be denied treatment or charged for it?

[Brigadier]

Now if you think I have misunderstood or misrepresented his arguments, by all means explain how.

I just did. But you are only interested in prolonging threads, as always.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Those on here who profess BJ and his band to be liars, yet choose to believe his utterances and ramblings when it suits them.
That's one group, not two.

I'm amazed at some people on here who were rightly highly sceptical of a lying Johnson and his merry men, but suddenly turn a blind eye to his failings and unquestioningly believe his inflated stats and are eagre to follow ever more bizarre, draconian rules.​

Those that are law abiding are not necessarily the same group that were highly sceptical, nor the same group that now turn a blind eye.
He, and you have conflated all those people into one and the same group.

RnC didn't say the group were critical but abided by the rules anyway; he said they were eager to follow them.

Of course he would say that wouldn't he. (Mandy Rice-Davies) It suits his agenda.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

I just did. But you are only interested in prolonging threads, as always.

No you didn't explain. You merely stated:

No, he, hasn't. You have misunderstood / misrepresented RnC's post, which is why you think it is "extremely fallible".​

You made a simple assertion: "No he hasn't" and "You have misunderstood/misrepresented his post".
If, in your world, that passes as an explanation, I wouldn't bother with anymore of your explanations, because you can't tell the difference between simple assertions and explanations.

 

[durhamplumber]

lock down the over 60s and those with pre-existing conditions

And allow the rest to wander the planet..Freekin pleased you not the head of planning!

 

[Brigadier]

I'm amazed at some people on here who were rightly highly sceptical of a lying Johnson and his merry men, but suddenly turn a blind eye to his failings and unquestioningly believe his inflated stats and are eagre to follow ever more bizarre, draconian rules.

Those that are law abiding are not necessarily the same group that were highly sceptical, nor the same group that now turn a blind eye.
He, and you have conflated all those people into one and the same group.

You're wrong.
You have missed out two crucial words: "....on here".

I'm amazed at some people on here who were rightly highly sceptical of a lying Johnson and his merry men, but suddenly turn a blind eye to his failings and unquestioningly believe his inflated stats and are eagre to follow ever more bizarre, draconian rules.

Neither he nor I have conflated them into one group; they have self-declared themselves to be, in their posts ON HERE.

Of course he would say that wouldn't he. (Mandy Rice-Davies) It suits his agenda.

Again, the people ON HERE self-declared themselves to be: see for yourself.

 

[durhamplumber]

The first sign of madness/stupidity

Second sign is calling yourself BobbyDazzler and spouting endless shíte on here.

 

[Brigadier]

No you didn't explain.

I did; you just chose to not quote it.

 

[ReganAndCarter]

And so are your racist comments.
Have you ever been banned for your racist comments?

 

[durhamplumber]

Have you ever been banned for your racist comments?

No worries Dazzler..Your banning record is safe.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

You're wrong.
You have missed out two crucial words: "....on here".



Neither he nor I have conflated them into one group; they have self-declared themselves to be, in their posts ON HERE.




Again, the people ON HERE self-declared themselves to be: see for yourself.

So who, on here, "were highly sceptical of lying Johnson and his merry men, but suddenly turn a blind eye to his failings and unquestioningly believe his inflated stats and are eagre to follow ever more bizarre, draconian rules."

 

[ReganAndCarter]

I just did. But you are only interested in prolonging threads, as always.

Himmy is keen on lockdown, and the mods will oblige.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

I did; you just chose to not quote it.

Kindly repeat this explanation, because I can't find it.
All I can find are simple assertions: "No, he, hasn't. You have misunderstood / misrepresented RnC's post, which is why you think it is "extremely fallible".

That won't pass as an explanation. What/how have I misunderstood? What/how have I misrepresented? How does my misunderstanding or misrepresenting (if there is any) demonstrate that his argument is not infallible?

You're just flanneling because that's all you've got.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Second sign is calling yourself BobbyDazzler and spouting endless shíte on here.

No worries Dazzler..Your banning record is safe.

Himmy is keen on lockdown, and the mods will oblige.

ReganandCarter, and durhamplumber are reduce to puerile behaviour.
No surprises there.

 

[durhamplumber]

durhamplumber are reduce to puerile behaviour.

I do try Razzler.....to be as puerile as possible..Are you coming on to Me?

 

[Brigadier]

So who, on here, "were highly sceptical of lying Johnson and his merry men, but suddenly turn a blind eye to his failings and unquestioningly believe his inflated stats and are eagre to follow ever more bizarre, draconian rules."

Is your post meant to be a question?