On 02/11/2021 14:54, jak wrote:
> Il 02/11/2021 15:39, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>> On 02/11/2021 14:31, jak wrote:
>>> Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>>>> On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
>>>>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is
>>>>> precisely
>>>>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
>>>>> vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
>>>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected
>>>>> because
>>>>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>>
>>>>> The difference is that you who are
>>>>> vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
>>>>> young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
>>>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I
>>>>> have
>>>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
>>>>> because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated
>>>> hands will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into
>>>> someone unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
>>>>
>>>> Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
>>>>
>>>> As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
>>>>
>>>> The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
>>>> ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms =
>>>> protect/does not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent
>>>> infection.
>>>>
>>>> It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
>>>> rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
>>>>
>>>> which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
>>>> the disease.
>>>>
>>>> It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
>>> I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
>>> the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
>>
>> Then they are probably guilty of fake news.
>> Wiki:
>>
>> "COVID-19 transmits when people breathe in air contaminated by
>> droplets and small airborne particles containing the virus. The risk
>> of breathing these in is highest when people are in close proximity,
>> but they can be inhaled over longer distances, particularly indoors.
>> Transmission can also occur if splashed or sprayed with contaminated
>> fluids in the eyes, nose or mouth, and, rarely, via contaminated
>> surfaces. People remain contagious for up to 20 days, and can spread
>> the virus even if they do not develop symptoms"
>>
>>
>>> for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
>>> problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
>>> the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to
>>> manage what they can't.
>>>
>>
>> I think something got lost in translation there.???
>>
>>
>
> ...you are probably right :)
>
> Following the media, they talk a lot about the vaccinated and also a lot
> about those who refuse the vaccine. Unfortunately, they speak very
> little about how to behave those who cannot be vaccinated. This problem
> is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to
> go to work (in all europe, just here)

Yes, we had the same dialogue here. Some people cannot be vaccinated but
you need a vaccine 'passport' to go to some places.

Also for nurses in care homes 'get the jab, or lose the job' .

Personally I just got all the jabs. I've nearly died three times from
cancer and from heart disease and I trust the people who saved me. And
the ten pills a day I am now taking :-)

Had 4 vaccinations a zillion blood tests a nitro drip and another
angioplasty this year alone.

I was in emergency at hospital last time and a guy came in and wouldn't
be injected with anything. He was shrieking at the nurses. I thought 'if
you dont trust the doctors, why are you here at all?' Then I realised he
was slightly 'weird' and his mother had brought her *35 year old* son in
because he had had a seizure or a fit...well really the nurses could
have done without this lad being told that the doctors are trying to
control his mind with injections. I felt like telling him not to worry,
aliens had already got there first...

I dunno why people get so worked up about vaccinations. As a kid we all
got polio jabs, except a girl at school who had metal braces on her legs
instead. No sirree, I'll take the jab, thanks.

And we all got TAB as well. And smallpox.

Measles mumps and rubella were things children all caught and nearly
always recovered from as was chicken pox. All now vaccination candidates

Only other jab I got as a child was when the pet rabbit bit me and drew
blood. Bastard. Tetanus jab for that one.

I'm full of NHS drugs and bit of metal, I've got bits missing and parts
failing and frankly, anyone of a dozen things is gonna kill me before
any vaccine does, so I just get jabbed and hope the nurse is pretty.

Old age sucks.

--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

On 2021-11-02, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
> Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>> On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
>>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely
>>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
>>> vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because
>>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
>>
>> Exactly.
>>
>>> The difference is that you who are
>>> vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
>>> young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
>>> because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
>>
>> Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated hands
>> will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into someone
>> unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
>>
>> Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
>>
>> As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
>>
>> The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
>> ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms =  protect/does
>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
>>
>> It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
>> rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
>>
>> which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than the
>> disease.
>>
>> It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
> I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
> the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,

And they are wrong. The original theory was that they were transmitted
either by contact (the doorknob theory) or by big dropplets in the air.
HOwever by March 2020 it was clear that was wrong. One of the most
persuasive bits of evidence was the WAshington Choir mass infection.
There was an choir practice in Washington state, near SEattle. One
person walked in with covid. 60 people of a choir of 80 walked out with
with covid. There is simply no way that either the dropplet theory nor
the "doorknow" theory could account for this. The only reasonable
hypothesis is the aerosol theory-- the virus being spread by tiny
"droplets" ( although they rapidly dried out into dust specs) of size
less than 10 microns (1/100 of a millimeter, or 1/2500 of an inch) which
remain in the air for days. (In Italy, the forest fires in Greece this
year brought smog into the air in Italy, which had to have travelled for
a few days, staying in the air. The size of those smoke particles is
less than 10 microns.) There were a large number of other incidents
which demonstrated that it was these aerosols which was the primary
vector for transmission.

You get rid of them by replacing the air the with clean air about every
10 min of so-- either by bringing in outside air, or by filtering the
air with efficient filters (say Merv 13 or 14 or Hepa). Thus inside
with bad filtration and with a covid carrier is THE most dangerous place to be unless
the room has good filtration.

All fo the above has been completely clear for over a year and a half to
anyone who has looked at the data.

> for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
> problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
> the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to
> manage what they can't.

Certainly vaccination is a great idea and is essential to breaking the
back of the pandemic. But so is good indoor air filtration, which tends
not to be emphasised anywhere in the world. Masks could be if only the
masks people wore were worth a damn. Cloth masks are not, surgical masks
which are not properlly fitted are not. Masks worn so the nose is
outside the mask are not worth anything. Even most surgical mask have
attrocious nose seals ( the wire is not stiff enough to shape tightly
around the nose, and the elastics not tight enough to properlyseal
around the sides and bottom of the mask.) A mask with allows most of the
air to come in around the sides and around the nose is pretty useless
for filtering out the aerosols (100 microns or less).

>

On 2021-11-02, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
> Il 02/11/2021 15:39, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>> On 02/11/2021 14:31, jak wrote:
>>> Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>>>> On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
>>>>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is
>>>>> precisely
>>>>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
>>>>> vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
>>>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected
>>>>> because
>>>>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>>
>>>>> The difference is that you who are
>>>>> vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
>>>>> young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
>>>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
>>>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
>>>>> because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated
>>>> hands will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into
>>>> someone unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
>>>>
>>>> Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
>>>>
>>>> As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
>>>>
>>>> The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
>>>> ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms =  protect/does
>>>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
>>>>
>>>> It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
>>>> rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
>>>>
>>>> which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
>>>> the disease.
>>>>
>>>> It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
>>> I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
>>> the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
>>
>> Then they are probably guilty of fake news.
>> Wiki:
>>
>> "COVID-19 transmits when people breathe in air contaminated by droplets
>> and small airborne particles containing the virus. The risk of breathing
>> these in is highest when people are in close proximity, but they can be
>> inhaled over longer distances, particularly indoors. Transmission can
>> also occur if splashed or sprayed with contaminated fluids in the eyes,
>> nose or mouth, and, rarely, via contaminated surfaces. People remain
>> contagious for up to 20 days, and can spread the virus even if they do
>> not develop symptoms"
>>
>>
>>> for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
>>> problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
>>> the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to
>>> manage what they can't.
>>>
>>
>> I think something got lost in translation there.???
>>
>>
>
> ...you are probably right :)
>
> Following the media, they talk a lot about the vaccinated and also a lot
> about those who refuse the vaccine. Unfortunately, they speak very
> little about how to behave those who cannot be vaccinated. This problem

The problem is that those who "cannot" be vaccinated are a miniscule
part of the population. What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated? A
severe alergic reaction to some of the ingredents might be, but that is
very rare. If everyone but them were vaccinated, one would have no
worries. The virus would die out.

> is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to
> go to work (in all europe, just here)

>

On 02/11/2021 15:41, William Unruh wrote:
> On 2021-11-02, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
>> Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>>> On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
>>>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely
>>>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
>>>> vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
>>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because
>>>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
>>>
>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>>> The difference is that you who are
>>>> vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
>>>> young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
>>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
>>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
>>>> because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
>>>
>>> Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated hands
>>> will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into someone
>>> unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
>>>
>>> Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
>>>
>>> As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
>>>
>>> The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
>>> ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms =  protect/does
>>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
>>>
>>> It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
>>> rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
>>>
>>> which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than the
>>> disease.
>>>
>>> It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
>> I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
>> the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
>
> And they are wrong. The original theory was that they were transmitted
> either by contact (the doorknob theory) or by big dropplets in the air.
> HOwever by March 2020 it was clear that was wrong. One of the most
> persuasive bits of evidence was the WAshington Choir mass infection.
> There was an choir practice in Washington state, near SEattle. One
> person walked in with covid. 60 people of a choir of 80 walked out with
> with covid. There is simply no way that either the dropplet theory nor
> the "doorknow" theory could account for this. The only reasonable
> hypothesis is the aerosol theory-- the virus being spread by tiny
> "droplets" ( although they rapidly dried out into dust specs) of size
> less than 10 microns (1/100 of a millimeter, or 1/2500 of an inch) which
> remain in the air for days. (In Italy, the forest fires in Greece this
> year brought smog into the air in Italy, which had to have travelled for
> a few days, staying in the air. The size of those smoke particles is
> less than 10 microns.) There were a large number of other incidents
> which demonstrated that it was these aerosols which was the primary
> vector for transmission.
>
> You get rid of them by replacing the air the with clean air about every
> 10 min of so-- either by bringing in outside air, or by filtering the
> air with efficient filters (say Merv 13 or 14 or Hepa). Thus inside
> with bad filtration and with a covid carrier is THE most dangerous place to be unless
> the room has good filtration.
>
> All fo the above has been completely clear for over a year and a half to
> anyone who has looked at the data.
>
>
>> for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
>> problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
>> the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to
>> manage what they can't.
>
> Certainly vaccination is a great idea and is essential to breaking the
> back of the pandemic. But so is good indoor air filtration, which tends
> not to be emphasised anywhere in the world. Masks could be if only the
> masks people wore were worth a damn. Cloth masks are not, surgical masks
> which are not properlly fitted are not. Masks worn so the nose is
> outside the mask are not worth anything. Even most surgical mask have
> attrocious nose seals ( the wire is not stiff enough to shape tightly
> around the nose, and the elastics not tight enough to properlyseal
> around the sides and bottom of the mask.) A mask with allows most of the
> air to come in around the sides and around the nose is pretty useless
> for filtering out the aerosols (100 microns or less).

As far as masks go, yes but no. As you say, but there's no harm in
reiterating and emphasising some of your points: Certainly they need to
be worn properly, and probably 10% of the people you see walking around
with them on are not doings so, their nose or mouth is exposed, there is
too much gap along the sides of the nose, etc. Also, the mask itself
needs to be of a close woven material, so wool is a poor material to
use, denim better.

The out-breathings of people comes in a range of particle sizes from
actual droplets, which tend to fall to the ground quickly if they don't
hit another human first, down to the aerosols that you mention can be
carried on the air some distance. Masks will capture most of the
former, because their momentum carries them into its fabric, and even
some of the latter, but air escaping around the sides of the mask will
still contain some aerosols, and therefore still has the potential to
infect. Nevertheless experiments linked below have shown that even a
thin cotton handkerchief is significantly better than nothing; it was
the worst thing tested, but still caught around a quarter of the load.

This first video is worth a watch, and the other links worth reading:

Visualizing Speech-Generated Oral Fluid Droplets with Laser Light
Scattering:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2007800

Can Masks Capture Coronavirus Particles?
https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/can-masks-capture-coronavirus/

8 dangerous COVID-19 face mask myths you need to stop believing
https://www.cnet.com/health/8-dangerous-covid-19-face-mask-myths-you-need-to-stop-believing/

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 2021-11-02, William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
> On 2021-11-02, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
>> Il 02/11/2021 15:39, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>>> On 02/11/2021 14:31, jak wrote:
>>>> Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
>>>>> On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
>>>>>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is
>>>>>> precisely
>>>>>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
>>>>>> vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
>>>>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected
>>>>>> because
>>>>>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The difference is that you who are
>>>>>> vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
>>>>>> young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
>>>>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
>>>>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
>>>>>> because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated
>>>>> hands will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into
>>>>> someone unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
>>>>>
>>>>> As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
>>>>>
>>>>> The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
>>>>> ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms =  protect/does
>>>>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
>>>>> rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
>>>>>
>>>>> which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
>>>>> the disease.
>>>>>
>>>>> It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
>>>> I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
>>>> the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
>>>
>>> Then they are probably guilty of fake news.
>>> Wiki:
>>>
>>> "COVID-19 transmits when people breathe in air contaminated by droplets
>>> and small airborne particles containing the virus. The risk of breathing
>>> these in is highest when people are in close proximity, but they can be
>>> inhaled over longer distances, particularly indoors. Transmission can
>>> also occur if splashed or sprayed with contaminated fluids in the eyes,
>>> nose or mouth, and, rarely, via contaminated surfaces. People remain
>>> contagious for up to 20 days, and can spread the virus even if they do
>>> not develop symptoms"
>>>
>>>
>>>> for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
>>>> problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
>>>> the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to
>>>> manage what they can't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think something got lost in translation there.???
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ...you are probably right :)
>>
>> Following the media, they talk a lot about the vaccinated and also a lot
>> about those who refuse the vaccine. Unfortunately, they speak very
>> little about how to behave those who cannot be vaccinated. This problem
>
> The problem is that those who "cannot" be vaccinated are a miniscule
> part of the population. What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated? A
> severe alergic reaction to some of the ingredents might be, but that is
> very rare. If everyone but them were vaccinated, one would have no
> worries. The virus would die out.

"What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated?" Certain heart
conditions, for one. A few weeks ago, an elderly man told me his
cardiologist had told him that the "vaccine" it _WOULD_ damage
his heart. [quotation marks mine, emphasis his and his doctor's]

--
Robert Riches
spamtrap42@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

On 02/11/2021 15:47, William Unruh wrote:

> The problem is that those who "cannot" be vaccinated are a miniscule
> part of the population. What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated? A
> severe alergic reaction to some of the ingredents might be, but that is
> very rare. If everyone but them were vaccinated, one would have no
> worries. The virus would die out.
>

Polio yes, Sars-Cov-2 not so much. AIUI, the vaccines are not effective
enough at stopping transmission to eliminate the disease.

People should primarily take the vaccine to protect themselves. Only a
few people who mix with the vulnerable should take the vaccine to
protect others.

>> is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to
>> go to work (in all europe, just here)

The UK is no longer in Europe?

Il 03/11/2021 08:27, Pancho ha scritto:
> On 02/11/2021 15:47, William Unruh wrote:
>
>> The problem is that those who "cannot" be vaccinated are a miniscule
>> part of the population. What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated? A
>> severe alergic reaction to some of the ingredents might be, but that is
>> very rare. If everyone but them were vaccinated, one would have no
>> worries. The virus would die out.
>>
>
> Polio yes, Sars-Cov-2 not so much. AIUI, the vaccines are not effective
> enough at stopping transmission to eliminate the disease.
>
> People should primarily take the vaccine to protect themselves. Only a
> few people who mix with the vulnerable should take the vaccine to
> protect others.
>
>>> is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to
>>> go to work (in all europe, just here)
>
> The UK is no longer in Europe?

The question is vague and the answer will be too:
geographically yes, politically no.

On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:

> The UK is no longer in Europe?

Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.

Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
term Brexit ?

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>
> Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>
> Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
> term Brexit ?
>
Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?

--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On 03 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27 GMT, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>
>> Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
>> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>
>> Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
>> term Brexit ?
>>
> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
> politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?

The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.

--
Tim

On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 08:30:27 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
> > Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The UK is no longer in Europe?
> >
> > Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so
> > and went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
> > process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
> > this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
> > Eire/Northern Ireland border.
> >
> > Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter
> > the term Brexit ?
> >
> Do you really think that the EU - <snip> - represents Europe?

Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or
is not inside Europe then the context is political and that points to the
EU as the only all Europe political entity. So yes in this context I do
indeed think that the EU is what is meant by Europe because there's nothing
else it could be in context.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 08:30:27 +0000
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>>
>>> Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so
>>> and went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
>>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>>
>>> Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter
>>> the term Brexit ?
>>>
>> Do you really think that the EU - <snip> - represents Europe?
>
> Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or
> is not inside Europe then the context is political

Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.

> and that points to the EU as the only all Europe political entity.

Wrong again as the EU is not an all-Europe poltical entity.

> So yes in this context I do indeed think that the EU is what is meant by
> Europe because there's nothing else it could be in context.

Then you need to think again.

--
Tim

On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>
> On 03 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27 GMT, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>>>
>>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>>
>>> Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
>>> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
>>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>>
>>> Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
>>> term Brexit ?

But we're still in Europe, just not, more fool us, the EU.

>> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
>> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
>> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
>> politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?

Still lying about the EU, I see.

> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.

But does represent the greater part of it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Il 03/11/2021 09:30, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>
>>     Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
>> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>
>>     Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
>> term Brexit ?
>>
> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
> politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents
> Europe?
>
>

Italian Communist? Impossible! In Italy the communists died out before
the ceratoraptors. XD

On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:

>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>
> But does represent the greater part of it.

The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.

The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
which to put a snout.

--
Tim

On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>
>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>
>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>
> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
> referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected Commission
> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
> the same way that Xi did in China.
>
> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
> which to put a snout.

Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>
>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>
>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>
>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
>> referendums about EU membership.

This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.

>> That would allow its unelected Commission
>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
>> the same way that Xi did in China.

You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected?
Funny, I must have missed those elections.

>> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
>> which to put a snout.
>
> Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
> can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.

EU MEPs get expenses without having to account for them. That counts as an
example of a trough to get your snout into, in my book.

--
Tim

On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT
TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or
> > is not inside Europe then the context is political
>
> Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.

The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it sets
the context.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT
> TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>
>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or
>>> is not inside Europe then the context is political
>>
>> Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
>
> The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it sets
> the context.
>
Europe however, is not.

It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North America.

--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

On 03/11/2021 12:50, Java Jive wrote:
> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>
>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
>> <tnp@invalid.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>>>>
>>>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>>>
>>>>      Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
>>>> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>>>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the
>>>> start of
>>>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>>>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>>>
>>>>      Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
>>>> term Brexit ?
>
> But we're still in Europe, just not, more fool us, the EU.
>
>>> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
>>> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
>>> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
>>> politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents
>>> Europe?
>
> Still lying about the EU, I see.

Nope. It's all fact.

>
>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>
> But does represent the greater part of it.
>
Nope. It represents nobody but itself.

How could it? Why should it? Why would it? There are no democratically
elected members on its executive. It is under no obligation to do
anything except stop other members leaving it.

--
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>
>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>
>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>
> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
> referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected Commission
> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
> the same way that Xi did in China.
>
> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
> which to put a snout.
>
+1

--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

On 03/11/2021 14:07, Java Jive wrote:
> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>
>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>
>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>
>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to
>> abolish
>> referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected
>> Commission
>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally
>> unelected
>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president
>> "emerged" in
>> the same way that Xi did in China.
>>
>> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough
>> into
>> which to put a snout.
>
> Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations?  Until you
> can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
>
Show me how any member of the executive:

(a) got elected
(b) got sacked.

And look up ....

Altiero Spinelli (31 August 1907 – 23 May 1986) was an Italian communist
politician, political theorist and European federalist, referred to as
one of the founding fathers of the European Union.

A communist and militant anti-fascist in his youth, he spent 10 years
imprisoned by the Fascist regime. Having grown disillusioned with
Stalinism, he broke with the Italian Communist Party in 1937. Interned
in Ventotene during World War II he, along with fellow democratic
socialists, drafted the Manifesto for a free and united Europe (most
commonly known as the Ventotene Manifesto) in 1941, considered a
precursor of the European integration process.

He had a leading role in the foundation of the European federalist
movement, and had strong influence on the first few decades of
post-World War II European integration. Later, he helped to re-launch
the integration process in the 1980s. By the time of his death, he had
been a member of the European Commission for six years, a member of the
European Parliament for ten years right up until his death. The main
building of the European Parliament in Brussels is named after him. The
1987–1988 academic year at the College of Europe and the 2009–2010
academic year of the European College of Parma were named in his honour.

So don't tell me I am lying. It's not me who is lying to you about the EU...

--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
>
> On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>>
>>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>>
>>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
>>> referendums about EU membership.
>
> This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.

But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?

>>> That would allow its unelected Commission
>>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
>>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
>>> the same way that Xi did in China.

Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and
cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as
our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament. See link below ...

> You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected?
> Funny, I must have missed those elections.

Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
they are a member of the House of Lords.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf

"The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."

>>> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
>>> which to put a snout.

What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
UK has much right to lecture the EU equivalent of the civil service how
a civil service should be run!

>> Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
>> can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
>
> EU MEPs get expenses without having to account for them. That counts as an
> example of a trough to get your snout into, in my book.

What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
UK has much right to lecture the EU about members' of parliament expenses!

So, exactly as I thought, just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 03/11/2021 17:44, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On 03/11/2021 14:07, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>>>
>>>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>>>
>>> The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to
>>> abolish
>>> referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected
>>> Commission
>>> (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally
>>> unelected
>>> president to rule without interference. The current EU president
>>> "emerged" in
>>> the same way that Xi did in China.
>>>
>>> The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh
>>> trough into
>>> which to put a snout.
>>
>> Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations?  Until you
>> can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
>>
> Show me how any member of the executive:
>
> (a) got elected
> (b) got sacked.

Show me how any member of our civil service got elected.

> And look up ....
>
> Altiero Spinelli (31 August 1907 – 23 May 1986) was an Italian communist
> politician, political theorist and European federalist, referred to as
> one of the founding fathers of the European Union.
>
> A communist and militant anti-fascist in his youth, he spent 10 years
> imprisoned by the Fascist regime. Having grown disillusioned with
> Stalinism, he broke with the Italian Communist Party in 1937. Interned
> in Ventotene during World War II he, along with fellow democratic
> socialists, drafted the Manifesto for a free and united Europe (most
> commonly known as the Ventotene Manifesto) in 1941, considered a
> precursor of the European integration process.
>
> He had a leading role in the foundation of the European federalist
> movement, and had strong influence on the first few decades of
> post-World War II European integration. Later, he helped to re-launch
> the integration process in the 1980s. By the time of his death, he had
> been a member of the European Commission for six years, a member of the
> European Parliament for ten years right up until his death. The main
> building of the European Parliament in Brussels is named after him. The
> 1987–1988 academic year at the College of Europe and the 2009–2010
> academic year of the European College of Parma were named in his honour.
>
> So don't tell me I am lying. It's not me who is lying to you about the
> EU...

On 03/11/2021 08:30, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt

Where is your *EVIDENCE* for the word 'corrupt'.

> bureaucracy founded by an Italian communist that gathers and
> redistributes taxes, and attempts to be a self appointed

Where is your *EVIDENCE* for the phrase 'self appointed'.

> undemocratic

Where is your *EVIDENCE* for the word 'undemocratic'.

> lawmaker for 27 countries whose politicians were bribed or blackmailed

Where is your *EVIDENCE* for the words 'bribed or blackmailed'.

> into entering it - represents Europe?

See above, liar! And see my answer to TimS for how the Commission is
accountable to the European Parliament, just as the UK equivalent of
civil service and cabinet are accountable to the UK Parliament.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 03/11/2021 17:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/11/2021 12:50, Java Jive wrote:
>> On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
>>>>>
>>>>> Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The UK is no longer in Europe?
>>>>>
>>>>>      Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so
>>>>> and
>>>>> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
>>>>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the
>>>>> start of
>>>>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
>>>>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
>>>>>
>>>>>      Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter
>>>>> the
>>>>> term Brexit ?
>>
>> But we're still in Europe, just not, more fool us, the EU.
>>
>>>> Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy
>>>> founded by
>>>> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
>>>> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
>>>> politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents
>>>> Europe?
>>
>> Still lying about the EU, I see.
>
> Nope. It's all fact.

No, see other reply, it contains a number of still unsubstantiated claims.

>>> The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
>>
>> But does represent the greater part of it.
>
> Nope. It represents nobody but itself.

FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.

> How could it? Why should it? Why would it? There are no democratically
> elected members on its executive. It is under no obligation to do
> anything except stop other members leaving it.

FALSE! It is accountable to the European Parliament, just as our
equivalent of the cabinet and civil service combined are accountable to
our parliament.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk