Would they tell us if they knew space ships have visited
Are we likely to be told if knowing may change the world
History is full of question about what governments knew and what we are told

Belly, these things called govt, which I prefer to call them something more like what they are, NEVER tell us, the people the truth.
If we could ever extract the truth from them, through 'other' means, we would find that they believe that by not telling us the truth, is for the 'greater good', or to our benefit.
Now I can see what they mean when I look around me.
Too many people are too immature and out of touch with what is really going on around them, to entrust them to process information which calls for an extreme level of understanding and maturity.
Two things sadly lacking in people today, and there are plenty more.
Now because pollies know that people are such a mixed bag, and cannot agree on what is in front of them let alone what they can't see or touch, they create stories that are based on the message they wish to convey, when in actuality, they have no intention of fulfilling that which they have just explained.
It's called;
Political Correctness.
The main purpose of anyone going into politics is to 'feather their own nest'.
Even if someone was naive or innocent or well meaning enough to win a seat, it would not be long before they were either 'turned' to the 'dark side' or they would just sit back and wait it out, and get no-where, or resign, as the corruption would be to much to bare for an honest and good person.
This is the way it is, because if you do not succumb to the 'dark side' you will not be trusted by the others who are well entrenched, and so you will just be another useless, well intentioned polly that just goes along for the ride.
I for one have always been skeptical of govts, to the point where I don't believe anything they say, like Climate Change, to be as serious or relevant as they make out.
I am reminded of the boy who cried 'WOLF'.

I do not think governments tell us every thing, I think they dare not
Say in the matter of travelers from outer space, if the knew they existed think about the implications of telling us they do
What God, if any would be theirs
How would the world, over night, handle a new God? or none at all
Are we humans able to handle the truth, maybe not
Questions from history, did America know the Japanese would bomb Peal Harbor
Did America need it to bring its then isolationist people in to the war
Many questions are possible, but just maybe we are not always told the truth

Dear Belly,

Of course governments don't tell us every thing.
The security of the country, often doesn't all it.
To prevent panic and maintain good relations with allies
and neighbours also influences how much we need to be
told. Then there's also during election times - party's
will protect their interests.

Yes true Foxy never doubted it
But just how much are we to blame for that?
Humans seem more and more to fight and complain about every thing
Just maybe we could not handle the truth
We get the politicians we deserve, we make statements about them all being the same, then reward the very same people by reelecting them

Well we are not going to run with it but the question remains
How much are we told, what is hidden from us
My view is a great deal, and do not blame one side of politics
Both sides and even world wide, hide secretes from us
Leave it there and try to pick a more interesting subject next time

Dear Belly,

We need to ask ourselves - to what extent do
ordinary voters get actively involved in the
political process? Most people I suspect
take little active part in politics.
Polls have shown that only a small percentage of
the population belong to a political organisation,
and even less have ever contacted a local, state
or national office on any political matter.

As we know political power is exercised by small elites
and the nature of the elites varies from one party to
another. They're influenced by their own self-interests
and those of powerful vested interests - therefore
of course the public is not always informed.

Foxy you have hit it on the head
My lifelong view is apathy and the quite wrong, they are all the same kills better politicians
No need to aim at one side it clearly is all sides
Some do not even understand their vote goes not to the person they vote for but the next down the list [preferences]
In the end it suits politicians t know many just do not care enough, or know enough to get involved
We however, every now and again, get even those types involved and see such as Howard and Hawk, elected
Obama stands out
Sewing the seeds of miss trust, against the other side become a blood sport and blinds some to policy that is not worth having
Why would governments tell us every thing?
We seem uninterested until it is us who are the victims

"Do Governments always tell us every thing"

No. Never have, never will. Knowledge is power and government is all about protecting their power.

BUT the idea that they can keep the really big stuff a secret is fanciful.

One of the few (only?) benefits of the massive expansion of government over the past century is that there are ever greater numbers of people privy to the great secrets of government. The notion that something like proof of alien life would remain a secret is fairy-land.

Such knowledge would be available to multiple governments and therefore many many thousands of people. It would take just one of them to decided to write his name in history by releasing the proof of such a thing. It hasn't happened because there is no such information.

As to the Pearl Harbour conspiracy theories - they are just ahistoric rubbish. Whilst the US government might have missed vital clues, the notion that they knew of the attack and kept it quiet has no evidence and again relies on the nonsensical notion that 100s of people who would have known of such a thing all kept quiet their entire lives.
Its also mixed with a degree of racism. How could it be that mere Japanese could out-smart the US like this? They must have had some white help. Do you notice that there's no conspiracy theory about how the Germans out-smarted the Russians with Barbarossa? Why? Because no one doubts that German's were smart enough to do it. But not so the Japanese. Think about why.

mhaze it will shock you but past questions about governments not informing us include
Did Whitlam know in advance Kerr was going to sack him
Was it a put up job to try to get Labor re elected
Did America, as it surely should have, know Japan was going to attack Peal Harbor
America needed some thing like that to drag its people in to a war they wanted nothing to do with
Yes governments lie, do not tell us every thing, we empower them, because we fail to demand an end to it
I would put more current questions but want the thread to not become a verbal warfare one

Did Whitlam know in advance Kerr was going to sack him...

No

Was it a put up job to try to get Labor re elected....

No

Did America, as it surely should have, know Japan was going to attack Peal Harbor....

No

Zero evidence for any of those claims

Did America know about the possibility of a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour?

Yes; see the papers written by General Billy Mitchel and this article (one of many),

"In 1924 General Pershing, perhaps to keep Mitchell out of harm’s way, sent him out on an inspection tour of the Pacific. In his notes of that tour, later reduced to a 323 page report, Mitchell took a look at the weakness of the US in the Pacific and the rising power of Japan. He predicted war between Japan and the US, and a Japanese strike on Pearl Harbor and Clark Field in the Philippines:

“Japan knows full well that the United States will probably enter the next war with the methods and weapons of the former war…It also knows full well that the defense of the Hawaiian group is based on the island of Oahu and not on the defense of the whole group.”

*

“The Japanese bombardment, (would be) 100 (air) ships organized into four squadrons of 25 (air) ships each. The objectives for attack are:

Ford Island, airdrome, hangers, storehouses and ammunition dumps;

Navy fuel oil tanks;

Water supply of Honolulu;

Water supply of Schofield;

Schofield Barracks airdrome and troop establishments;

Naval submarine station;

City and wharves of Honolulu.”

“Attack will be launched as follows: bombardment, attack to be made on Ford Island at 7:30 a.m."
http://www.the-american-catholic.com/2016/12/06/billy-mitchell-predicts-pearl-harbor-attack-in-1924/

General Mitchell was out on the timing by 18 minutes and there was no bombardment just an all-out attack, technology had moved on since Mitchell wrote his report.

"The attack commenced at 7:48 a.m. Hawaiian Time (18:18 GMT).[nb 3][16] The base was attacked by 353[17] Imperial Japanese aircraft (including fighters, level and dive bombers, and torpedo bombers) in two waves, launched from six aircraft carriers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor

Coincidentally the vital US Aircraft Carriers, which played an important part in the defeat of Japan, were at sea.

mhaze fair suck of the sav bloke
How did you make my questions claims
And think with me on this, as you said no evidence exists, how can you prove your point
Did Howard know his Minister pied about children over board
Did a deputy PM leader of the Nats resign because he knew it would be found he lied about the grain deals with Saddam Hussein?
As a Labor supporter I some times think Kerr may have played a Judas roll
And you know, or should America was reading the Japanese cores and Australian coast watchers had warned them

Belly,

"And you know, or should America was reading the Japanese cores and Australian coast watchers had warned them"

What is that supposed to mean?

What did the Coast Watchers warn them of, and when?

Is Mise,

When Belly writes 'cores' I think he means 'codes'.

He is of coarse wrong. The Japanese changed their naval codes on 4/12/41, just before the Pearl Harbour attack, and that code wasn't breached until 1942. Still why let the facts get in the way of the narrative?

Yes, the US had examined the possibility of a Japanese attack on Hawaii but that's not the same as saying they had prior warning of an attack on 7/12/41. Incidentally, they'd also examined the consequences of an attack on San Francisco, LA and Seattle as well as Alaska and Manila. That's what military planners do. They'd also developed plans for their own attacks on most major world cities. I can absolutely guarantee that somewhere in the Pentagon is a plan of attack for Sydney and Canberra. And Australia would have plans for an attack on Jakarta. They're just plans, but the military needs to be ready if circumstances change.

Also Mitchell getting the timing right is hardly a surprise. Sneak attacks almost always happen at sunrise

is mise assure you it is common knowledge America had been warned about Japanese shipping by Ham Radio operators
Called coast watchers who did inform America
You have a combative style of asking questions, some times it is hard to see why
Do you think the American personnel who reported the planes approaching should have been listened to
After that Sub was sunk, hours before the attack should an alarm have been posted
Did Australia, or England, then clearly looking for America to come in to the war, warn as we have been told America
The subject is worth goggling, it intensely interests me, many many hours have been put in reading of those events

"[I] assure you it is common knowledge America had been warned about Japanese shipping by Ham Radio operators".

It might be common knowledge among those who haven't really followed the history of this, but it also wrong.

The Japanese had maintained strict radio silence for the entire voyage, even to extent of disabling every radio on the ships and the aircraft to avoid mistaken transmissions. There are plenty of other reasons to doubt this 'ham radio' misinformation but I see no value in going into them.

" many many hours have been put in reading of those events"

Might I suggest many many more hours might be needed.

One other point while I'm here.

"Coincidentally the vital US Aircraft Carriers, which played an important part in the defeat of Japan, were at sea."

Its a common error among non-historians (and many historians as well) to look back with 20/20 hindsight and assume that the people of the time also knew the future.
In 1941 the aircraft carrier wasn't considered to be the most important or even an important vessel in the fleet. They weren't even considered to be capital vessels. Aircraft carriers were thought of as just being scouting and transport tools, which is why they were at sea at the time. It was only after Pearl Harbour and especially Midway that the true importance of the aircraft carrier became understood.

Sooooo, if the US command had prior warning of the attack, they would have had what they considered the more important vessels like the destroyers set to sea and not the unimportant vessels like Enterprise.

mhaze ok if you want to ignore long ago questions about the whole event do so
It remains true America had reason not to tell its people what it knew then or even now
And that many governments still do not tell us every thing

Belly,

There were no Australian Coast Watchers anywhere North of the Hawaiian Islands to inform the US of Japanese movements; from whence did you get your information?

Mhaze,

"Coincidentally the vital US Aircraft Carriers, which played an important part in the defeat of Japan, were at sea."

Yes, a coincidence, as I said.

Dear Belly,

We need to remember that giving information to the
people means giving information to the whole world.
We have a right to know - what's needed, but not everything.
However governments should keep important secrets - for
the sake of our national security. Things like the specifics
of our military plans, or the exact capabilities of our
weapons, are just two things that come to mind.

President Kennedy did not tell the American people about
the Cuban Missile crisis when the US was close to nuclear
war. He did not want to cause panic. Anyway you get the drift.

Foxy,

"Monday, October 22
President Kennedy addresses the American public and announces his plan to implement a naval blockade of Cuba. U.S. military alert is set at DEFCON 3 and Castro mobilizes all of Cuba's military forces

Sunday, October 28
The crisis is over. In a speech aired on Radio Moscow, Khrushchev announces the dismantling of Soviet missiles in Cuba and does not insist on his demands concerning the removal of U.S. missiles from Turkey.

Monday, October 29
President Kennedy orders US ships to remain on the quarantine line and authorizes continuation of low-level reconnaissance flights.

Wednesday, November 21
Just over a month after the crisis began, President Kennedy terminates the quarantine when Khrushchev agrees after several weeks of tense negotiations at the UN to withdraw Soviet IL-28 nuclear bombers from Cuba."
http://www.atomicarchive.com/History/cuba/timeline.shtml

It was hardly a secret and the 6 days between Kennedy's announcement and the Russian back down was plenty of time for panic

On a lighter note, keeping things secret from the enemy is sometimes mirth provoking.

Wireless operators in the UN forces in Korea were under strict instructions not to use slang words in transmissions as this could tell the enemy where they were from and could lead to the identification of their unit.

One Scots Officer, at an Orders Group, brought the house down when he asked what he was supposed to do about his mens' accents.

Is Mise,

The leaders of the US and the Soviet Union engaged in
a military stand-off - For 13 days in October 1962
the world came close to a nuclear war. President
Kennedy did not tell the American people until his TV
address on October 22nd.

http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/cuban-missile-crisis

My memory tells me John F Kennedy was saved in part after he made contact with a missionary, maybe an Australian one?
In those days until recently missionary's had ham radio licenses and became coast watchers
Yes Foxy, some things we will never be told
And it truth it maybe better that way
But too some things that are hidden from us should not be
The aircraft carriers not being in port could point to knowing?

Belly,

"My memory tells me John F Kennedy was saved in part after he made contact with a missionary, maybe an Australian one?"

Maybe the missionary was Australian, or he could have been Irish if Catholic or English if Anglican, what he was not was an Australian Coast Watcher; you are floundering and clutching at straws.

Foxy,

Six days was plenty of time for panic>

"What is known as the Cuban Missile Crisis actually began on October 15, 1962—the day that U.S. intelligence personnel analyzing U-2 spy plane data discovered that the Soviets were building medium-range missile sites in Cuba. The next day, President Kennedy secretly convened an emergency meeting of his senior military, political, and diplomatic advisers to discuss the ominous development. The group became known as ExCom, short for Executive Committee. After rejecting a surgical air strike against the missile sites, ExCom decided on a naval quarantine and a demand that the bases be dismantled and missiles removed. On the night of October 22, Kennedy went on national television to announce his decision. During the next six days, the crisis escalated to a breaking point as the world tottered on the brink of nuclear war between the two superpowers."

So it was kept secret for 7 days, hardly amazing and apparently as soon as plans were formalized, Kennedy told the nation and the world.
I'd call the American reticence, prudent, not secretive.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/cuban-missile-crisis

Is Mise,

The President was indeed prudent.

He told the American public only what he
felt they needed to know. It was a very
wise and commendable move.

Not only did JFK keep the danger secret but he also kept the details of the settlement secret. To get Khrushchev to agree to withdraw from Cuba, the US agreed to remove missiles from Turkey. This was to be done six months later so that JFK could try to hide the fact that the two things were linked. All of that was kept secret for a time.

But its one thing for a government or heads of government to keep sensitive negotiations secret while they proceed lest they be derailed by opposing forces. Its quite another thing to suppose that a government and its leaders would wilfully sit back and allow 2500 citizens to die in an attack that they could have stopped.

I'm no fan of FDR and think he's massively over-rated as a president and especially as a wartime leader. But I wouldn't for a moment think so little of him or think that he was so callous and Machiavellian as to simply not lift a finger to save lives just so he could get the war he wanted.
Additionally, I'm not prepared to believe that the dozens of other members of the government who would have know if they had advanced warning of the attack, would have sat back and let it happen and/or then stayed quiet about it for the rest of their lives and into their deaths.

People like Belly just want it to be true because of their innate anti-US proclivities and they aren't terribly concerned that there isn't a skerrick of evidence for what they want to be true.

There's a well known saying in historic circles - if its a choice between a conspiracy and a cock-up always assume it was a cock-up.

The US government missed many signs that might have allowed them to intercept the invasion fleet, just as they missed many signs that might have averted 9/11. But they didn't conspire to let the Japanese killed 2500 US citizens.

Mhaze,

I agree, the Us should have anticipated the attack but hey had no one watching the north (despite Belly's belief that the Australian coast watchers were there to report any hostile movements).

Had they anticipated the attack they could have engaged the Japs at sea and entry into the war would have been assured.

Theories that FDR and his advisers sacrificed Pearl Harbour are ludicrous.

The Government is not telling us something that potentially could be a matter of life or death.

Bungling surgeons left medical instruments inside at least 23 patients – and 430,000 were poisoned, infected or injured in hospitals in just a year

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6646307/Surgeons-left-medical-instruments-inside-patients-430-000-poisoned-infected-injured.html

A shocking new report reveals hundreds of thousands of patients across Australia endured additional suffering thanks to hospital blunders.

The Productivity Commission review found 437,468 patients were poisoned, ­infected or injured while in hospital care over the course of just one year.

Alarmingly, 23 of those had medical instruments left inside them by surgical staff.

The startling figures mean one in every 15 hospital patients suffer due to botched procedures, human errors and hospital infections.

Across Australia 167,000 medicated patients suffered drug side-effects, while a further 215,246 suffered adverse reactions or problems arising from medical procedures.

About 38,000 patients were also injured due to falls they had while in hospital.

A further ten patients died from medication errors.

The report also revealed that there were almost three million ‘avoidable’ appointments made in hospitals in just one year.

The unneeded appointments are said to occur when patients struggle to see their local GP, but the influx in appointments can put a strain on primary care.

However, the report shows the government has pumped an additional $2billion into public hospitals in one year.

In 2015-16 the overall government spend on hospitals was $42billion, while in 2016-17 it rose to $44billion

** They won't say which are the worst hospitals **

Philip, WOW!! I desperately want to say, 'your kidding, right'?
I've been sitting here in front of the screen, literally, 'GOB SMACKED'.
Now I am really pissed off and angry.
WTF, is going on, of all places I demand zero problems and 'worlds best practice', would obviously be a hospital.
I hate it when something I know to be bad and can affect me or anyone badly, and yet I get mocked and knocked for broadcasting it.
Well I can now stand up and say once more what a sh!thole Australia is.
The BS govt tell us we have 'worlds best practices', BS!
Whenever I bag Australia or Australians, it is no different than a Judge or Magistrate giving a member of the legal profession a good reaming for having stuffed up, and in doing so has caused the case to be dropped or lost, because of typically sloppy and lax work ethics and attitudes.
His reason for the verballing is so as to stop mistakes occurring, resulting in a waste of time and resources, and most of all the offender has to be let go without charges.
Everyone's too busy talking sh!t about some stupid sport or some irrelevant thing they did on the weekend, all along distracted, not focused on the job, and most of all NOT INTERESTED, because like all the other plebs in this place, he's too busy going on about the fact that 'he works to live' and 'not lives to work'.
My God that is a sickening set of stats Philip, I am sitting here numb with disbelief.
I really dare anyone to even think of a comeback on my posting on this one.
You'd have to be mentally challenged or a vegetable to even think about it.

Just in case paul1405 complains it is from the daily mail.

http://www.9news.com.au/2019/01/30/14/55/australia-news-surgeons-left-medical-instruments-in-23-hospital-patients-report

http://www.australiama.com/news/australia/medical-instruments-left-in-23-hospital-patients/

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/medical-instruments-left-in-23-hospital-patients/ar-BBSVNzA

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/medical-disasters-operations-on-the-wrong-patients-instruments-left-inside-bodies-and-wrong-blood-types-transfused/news-story/b10fb50a4d1489debf0db7c2276b79b9

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-30/medical-disasters-in-sa-hospitals-revealed/9373176

This one from Victoria. They never said which were the worst so you could avoid them.

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/australias-worst-hospitals-revealed-shocking-errors-have-led-to-more-than-120-deaths-surgeons-operating-on-the-wrong-body-part-and-medical-equipment-being-left-inside-patients/ar-AAAtXBg

Australia's worst hospitals revealed: Shocking errors have led to more than 120 deaths, surgeons operating on the wrong body part and medical equipment being left inside patients
BY Wade Sellers For Daily Mail Australia 22/09/2018 (note the date)

More than 120 patients have died or suffered serious harm due to medical errors.

The deaths were due to medical blunders, administrative errors and under-reporting from hospitals around Victoria in the last two years.

Reports of the errors, which are being made available to the public for the first time, come as agencies strive to improve Victorian health standards, Nine News reported.

The incidents, known as Sentinel events, have begun to be recorded annually and are now a mandatory requirement for all Victorian hospitals.

Collated reports found that Monash Health recorded ten events, Melbourne Health with nine, Eastern Health reported seven and Mercy Hospital had four in the last year.

In one incident, a person died after being administered the wrong dose of medication from nurses, receiving a dose ten times higher than prescribed.

Other deaths have been caused by surgery being carried out on the wrong body part, while in other cases, medical equipment has been left in patients.

Despite the alarming numbers, Mary Wooldridge, the shadow health minister says there could be even more that we don't know about.

'Under-reporting is very significant in our hospitals and more needs to be done to make sure reporting happens quickly,' Ms Wooldridge said.

see link for more.

Philip, please OMG, this is sickening stuff.
I can honestly say, this has to be the MOST significant piece of news or information I have EVER heard on the work standards and ethics of an industry which is reputed to or supposed to be beyond reproach.
Out of all the garbage this country has produced, this has now taken top billing.
We can tolerate sh!tty service, shoddy work, lazy, slack, indifferent work attitudes and ethics, and a myriad of other bad practices, but I for one will not stand by and let this kind of dangerous behaviour go unnoticed.
I will keep up my campaign of denigrating this country and it's people, until I see a very real improvement in performance and attitudes towards work.
My God, hospitals, none the less.
The very people in which we trust the lives of ourselves and our family and friends.
Oh this place has got a lot of soul searching to do, before I will now ever trust it again.
I have always been skeptical, but now I am vindicated, but not in a good way.
I don't want to be right about something so horribly wrong, but like it or not, I have been right all along.

is mise your self confidence in your view is not some thing we share
Not sure government is covering up alleged medical stuff ups, who ever is must be closer to the events described
Coast watchers, a generic term for people who in fact may have been settlers, Ministers or farmers, and had radios usually ham radio, and reported what they saw
Is mise not sure it is worth continuing to talk about any issue with you
You have a combative self assurance that seems unable to see others point of view

Belly,

You said, "And you know, or should America was reading the Japanese cores and Australian coast watchers had warned them"

America was not reading the codes as was also pointed out to you, and your assertion that Australian coast watchers had warned them has no base in fact and you cannot give any references to back that claim.

No one warned the US of the approach of the Japanese ships because, as Mhaze also pointed out, there was no radio traffic by the Japanese, and they kept their ships out of sight of land.

Start being critical in your reading and, please, get Grammarly or similar and you won't write 'cores' when you obviously meant 'codes', the 'd' on a 'qwerty' board is close to the 'r' so it's easy to miss hit, Grammarly will let you know almost instantly and you can correct it.
I use a Dvorak board, you might also find a change to that system useful as it is a more logical layout than 'qwerty'.

is mise I will continue to miss spelling mistakes in my re reading before posting
However Sir unlike your self I will never be a nit picker looking for some thing to complain about
Tell me, the American manning coastal Radar did not report the planes as they passed over
Tell me what action took place after a sub was sunk out side the harbor
It has been your intention to find fault with me, and in truth you are a nit picker of no real substance
Your self confidence is sadly miss placed

Philip S

The thread is about governments hiding information and/or data.

While you're story may be shocking its the very opposite of governments hiding data. There's gigantic volumes of data which allowed those you refer to to collate their reports.

Agreed, the situation is bad. But this is government controlled health system. How was it ever not going to be bad. When the aim is not to deliver good health outcomes but to instead deliver results on government targets, the outcomes are inevitably going to be bad.

Welcome to socialised medicine.

Belly,

So are you of the view that FDR and the rest of the Democratic Party hierarchy were so despicable, so morally bereft that they'd allow 2500 US citizens to die undefended just so they could achieve their political aims?

We need to question the funding of our hospitals.
Is it adequate? If not patient care will
suffer. Health costs are soaring
due to trends including a rise in patients
with increasingly complex and chronic diseases
and increased reports of mental health and
family violence problems. Drug and alcohol abuse
are also extremely strong drives towards
increased costs in certain areas - because of the
need to change the service model to respond to it.

Most hospitals have rigid rules in place affecting
the data on patients. Information is gathered
regarding medical histories, the type of procedure
to be done, the place on the body where it will be
performed, the medications necessary, any allergies,
and so forth. The doctors and nurses ensure that
they get all this information about a patient, and
they equally inform the patient on what will be
happening - and the care to be provided and the costs
involved.

Our family has always had private health cover and a
choice in hospitals and doctors. So far there has
not been any problems in our care. We have been
very choosy in where we go and who takes care of us.
Of course maintaining a vigilance is important when
it comes to one's health. Checking on the reputation
of any hospital or medical practitioner - getting
referrals also helps.

Back to the topic.

The following link from Britannica on Pearl Harbor
makes interesting reading:

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Pearl-Harbor-and-the-back-door-to-war-theory-1688287

mhaze Quote "The thread is about governments hiding information and/or data."

Your comprehension with that statement borders on ignorance, if the Government releases the mistakes some of which caused deaths BUT refuses to tell the public which hospitals, in the view of any normal person that would be covered by this thread.

You tried that on another thread when I replied how you were totally hypocritical in comment in not addressing the main issue.

** If you think it is off topic hit the little red X and complain, you won't do that because it is totally 100% on topic, enjoy the egg you now wear on your face. **

ALTRAV Yes it is rather concerning if someone needs to go to a hospital and there are X amount and in some because of carelessness some people have died, you now play Russian roulette and hope you don't pick the wrong one because the Government will not say which ones are the worst.

mhaze Quote "So are you of the view that FDR and the rest of the Democratic Party hierarchy were so despicable, so morally bereft that they'd allow 2500 US citizens to die undefended just so they could achieve their political aims?"

** Your ignorance of real world events are astounding, that is exactly what the did just as in WW1 they did the same with the sinking of the RMS Lusitania. **

Foxy,

Doctors cause more deaths than gun owners.

Belly,

"...and in truth you are a nit picker of no real substance".

Had you Grammarly installed you'd have been told that a comma comes after 'truth' and that nitpicker is one word.

I am a nitpicker of substance, and a pedant of long practice but to spare your feelings I usually ignore your linguistic gaffes.

I will point out to you, so that you may increase your knowledge, that although 'coastwatcher' is generic, 'Australian coast watchers' as you used is a particular; a particular which you cannot substaniate, or perhaps you can, with a reference.

Is Mise,

And curtains fade because of global warming.

Some 40 years ago a friend of mine was hit by a car outside Strathfield Railway station, he was reading his paper as he waited at the lights and as the crowd around him moved forward so did he, those around him suddenly saw the car coming and jumped back, he didn't.

He ended up in a nearby hospital, since closed and demolished; he wasn't doing well at all and the Matron advised his wife to get him moved to another hospital as "If he stays here he'll die.
His wife asked to see the Resident only to be told "He's not here, he nicked off to play golf'.

That's why the onus should be on us to check
the reputations of hospitals - to know
which ones to avoid.

And curtains fade because of global warming.
Foxy,
Yep, particularly in the 40° below in Al Gore's neighborhood.

is mise let me be frank, all those years ago on leaving the last school of a few I attended I was not quite 13
Had in the last two years wagged it to work most of the time
Picked peas beans turnips, even pumpkins
That last hurt, my hungry siblings would have loved them
I was paid to boil them and feed them to the pigs
So stick your complaints about my spelling and the rest
Know, without doubt you sad man,you are not forced to read my posts
I doubt you have the intellectual ability to think out side your own silly ways
I expect less posts in my threads
See I am avoiding some lost far right posters
IF your aim is to taunt me know you will get your serve returned

'And curtains fade because of global warming.'

well you seem to into the gw fraud/conspiracy. Why not this one? Moore's record is only second to Flannery and Gore.

the onus should be on us to check the reputations of hospitals.
Foxy,
You can't be serious !

//And curtains fade because of global warming.//

//Yep, particularly in the 40° below in Al Gore's neighborhood.//

//well you seem to into the gw fraud/conspiracy.//

Whoosh.

Belly,

Don't be so ungrateful; I have never complained about your spelling, only tried to help you.

Grammarly is free.

Foxy,

"And curtains fade because of global warming."

No, they don't, they fade more in daylight saving because of an hour extra exposure to the sun, as the shutters (whatever) are opened an hour earlier.

//as the shutters (whatever) are opened an hour earlier.//

But they're also shut an hour earlier.

Philip S.

Wow, does throwing a tantrum every time someone points out that one of you moronic raves is...ahem... a moronic rave, often work for you. I know my 3 yr old grandchild thinks it works for her but I'm sure she'll grow out of it soon. Hoping you will also.

Normally I'd just let your ignorance flow by but "egg you now wear on your face" and all that requires that you put in your place.

1. this isn't a government report, its from the Productivity Commission which is independent of government.
2. this report is merely a compilation of data gathered from each state which shows state-wide information, not hospital by hospital information. So they weren't hiding anything, just aggregating data they'd been given.
3. So if anyone's hiding stuff, its the state governments.
4. But wait...they aren't hiding it either. I haven't checked every state but in NSW you can go to the site for any hospital to see data relevant to that hospital for things like "Healthcare-associated infections".
5. So what you're really complaining about is that the data is being hidden from YOU because its not presented in a nice package in a format that even the most innumerate can understand. The government isn't hiding data, they just haven't dumbed the data down far enough for you to access it.

Re your Lusitania comparison, might I suggest that there's little logic in asserting that something done at a different time, by a different country, in a different place for different reasons, doesn't much apply to FDR and Pearl Harbour. That Churchill might have allowed the Lusitania to be attacked (and even here the data is iffy) doesn't mean it proves that FDR let Pearl Harbour be attacked. Drawing such a conclusion or analogy indicates someone who is struggling to find two brain cells to rub together.

Now I understand that you were upset that I didn't support your attempts to get Steely to apologise when he showed you to be wrong but you really do need to get a grip and ponder before you pontificate.

Foxy,

The ' Britannica on Pearl Harbour' article is pretty much spot on. I'd have a few quibbles but its a reasonable canvassing of the main points. It does a good job of pointing out that there are only a few who think that FDR engineered the whole thing. What it doesn't point out is the very important point that some of these (eg Beard and Tansill) were anti-FDR long before the war and argued for an alliance with Japan. They felt they needed to try to vindicate their shattered reputations by concocting this story.

Another important point missed is that if, as these people say, FDR forced Japan to attack so that he could get his war with Hitler, it failed.After the attack, the US immediately prepared to fight Japan but FDR was no closer to getting his war in Europe. That problem was solved when Hitler declared war on the USA.

FDR didn't want to fight Japan - he wanted to fight Hitler. He, FDR, like pretty much everyone else on the planet, massively under-estimated the sheer manufacturing power unleashed by the USA once they committed to the two front fight. Japan thought they'd have 1-2 years to bed down their conquests before the US could gear up to fight back. Hitler thought the US would have its hands full for 2-3 years fighting Japan. FDR and his advisers, in the early days agreed with that. But once the US juggernaut got going they were producing so much that they could fight both Japan and Germany while supplying basically all of Britain's needs and 25% of the Soviet armaments as well as supplying China, Australia and Canada. But in 1941 that was in the future.

There is no aspect of the theory that he engineered the Japan attack that makes sense in 1941. Many people look back knowing the outcome and assume that those in Washington somehow also knew the outcome.

Is Mise,

Your comparison between doctors and guns that
led to my curtain response - was inane.
It matters little if natural causes, or doctors,
or cars, or AIDS, kill more people than guns.

Guns are a significant "preventable"contributor,
to our mortality and guns ought to be dealt with in their own
right rather than being diminished through apples
to oranges comparisons.

We should not minimise or apologise for medical
errors, which clearly occur. But I don't think we
should close our eyes and hold our noses and swallow
something whose odour tells us it is obviously
rotten either.

mhaze,

Thank You for taking the time to read the link from
Britannia. And Thanks for the additional information.
Much appreciated.

mhaze Quote "1. this isn't a government report, its from the Productivity Commission which is independent of government."

** When you can't attack the content attack the source of the content. Simple question can you provide evidence the information is false, if not your whole statement is irrelevant. **

Quote "2. this report is merely a compilation of data gathered from each state which shows state-wide information, not hospital by hospital information. So they weren't hiding anything, just aggregating data they'd been given."

** Wrong again, this info came out before but at the time the headlines were that the Government would not be releasing to the public which hospitals had the worst records. **

Quote "3. So if anyone's hiding stuff, its the state governments."

** Again you display your ignorance with your absurd statement, your statement itself displays that.
Please show me where in the thread or anywhere else here there is a delineation between Government being State, Federal or even Local.
( Do Governments always tell us every thing ) **

Quote "4. But wait...they aren't hiding it either. I haven't checked every state but in NSW you can go to the site for any hospital to see data relevant to that hospital for things like "Healthcare-associated infections"."

** Does it give information about how many people died because of medical malpractice, surgical instruments left inside patients, wrongly prescribed medication, NO again you are plain ignorant. **

For your point 5 I refer you to the answer to Point 4.
With the addition of Look in the mirror for dumb.

Quote "Now I understand that you were upset that I didn't support your attempts to get Steely to apologise when he showed you to be wrong but you really do need to get a grip and ponder before you pontificate."

** You surpassed yourself with that one because you stated there "To tell the truth, I haven't really followed it so can't judge error or not." ALSO "SR acted honourably." implying to all matters but you admit not having followed it.

Foxy,

"Guns are a significant "preventable"contributor,
to our mortality and guns ought to be dealt with in their own
right rather than being diminished through apples
to oranges comparisons"

Very true and as the crime rates are falling where there are more guns in civilian hands, don't you think that we should encourage the ownership of guns?

"Your comparison between doctors and guns that
led to my curtain response - was inane.
It matters little if natural causes, or doctors,
or cars, or AIDS, kill more people than guns"

What?
Are you saying that it matters little that more people die from preventable causes because it doesn't suit your anti-gun owner stance; that's a bit callous.

mhaze It appears you get your world history knowledge from Hollywood movies.

The Lusitania was classified as an auxiliary warship, her identity had been disguised, and she flew no flags. She was a non-neutral vessel in a declared war zone, with orders to evade capture and ram challenging submarines.

The sinking caused a storm of protest in the United States because 128 American citizens were among the dead. The sinking helped shift public opinion in the United States against Germany and was a factor in the United States' declaration of war nearly two years later. After the First World War, successive British governments maintained that there were no munitions on board Lusitania, and the Germans were not justified in treating the ship as a naval vessel. In 1982, the head of the British Foreign Office's North America department finally admitted that there is a large amount of ammunition in the wreck, some of which is highly dangerous and poses a safety risk to salvage teams.

The Germany put notices in American newspapers that it was going to be a target because of the cargo.

http://www.corbettreport.com/the-wwi-conspiracy/

http://www.corbettreport.com/episode-348-the-wwi-conspiracy-part-two-the-american-front/

http://www.corbettreport.com/episode-349-the-wwi-conspiracy-part-three-a-new-world-order/

The 1st one will give info about the Lusitania

** Doubt if you will educate yourself, but if you do all claims are supported by links to the hard evidence on the pages. **

It will give you an indication of how the world really works most politicians really did not want war but it was other people that did and they got their way.

Foxy, your naive, sweet, girlish, childlike mindset gives you away, once more.
To re-align your thinking; There can be NO reason or excuse for a person to die or suffer at the hands of any medical practitioner, Doctor, Nurse and all the other branches of medicine.
It is inexcusable and unfathomable to even begin to believe that this kind of thing is happening AT ALL!
If this example of complete incompetence and irrelevance towards the public is as described by these reports, then I am right once more that Aussies are inept and incapable of attaining or rising to a level of maturity and focus which would even come close to mediocre.
I am going to keep putting this place, and it's people, down, until they rise to the occasion and 'man up' to their responsibilities.
Until then my assessment of this place and it's people stand.

Toni

"//as the shutters (whatever) are opened an hour earlier.//

But they're also shut an hour earlier"

Not around here, we enjoy the late sunshine.

//To re-align your thinking; There can be NO reason or excuse for a person to die or suffer at the hands of any medical practitioner, Doctor, Nurse and all the other branches of medicine.//

Actually, there are lot of reasons. Medical practitioners aren't wizards, mate. Frankly, it's a wonder that so many people come out of hospitals alive, given the condition they generally enter in. Nobody goes to hospital for a mild cough, except new mums with their first child.

Think about it: if you're sick enough to be admitted to hospital, your chances probably aren't great to begin with. It just comes down to a numbers game: are you better off staying home and avoiding treatment and malpractice and trying to cure your ailment with herbal teas and crystals, or are you better off going to the hospital and receiving treatment with a slight risk of malpractice? If the risk of your ailment killing you outweighs the risk of malpractice killing you, I'd side with the treatment and associated risk.

But by all means, please feel free to stay home and cure your own diseases through the power of positive thought, ALTRAV. As much as it would pain me to see you eschew conventional medicine, if you think that's what best then go for it. Armchair Critic knows a lot more about alternative medicine than I do, you might like to ask him about it.

//Not around here, we enjoy the late sunshine.//

And the early darkness, apparently.

Why not just adjust your shutter opening routine by an hour during daylight savings?

I'm pretty sure you're clever enough to understand basic principles of astronomy and navigation. Surely you can work this one out for yourself?

I wish I had studied the language of the 'left' at school, because I'm having a dandy of a time trying understand some of the sarcasm and innuendo being bandied around on this topic.
For example, what the heck does 'But I don't think we should close our eyes, and hold our noses and swallow something who's odour tells us it is obviously rotten either'.
I didn't do 'sarcasm 101' at school, it must have been a 'left' subject, so I have trouble with nonsensical sentences.
I do however know the difference between 'The right' and obviously the other MUST be 'The wrong', aka the left.
I may have already told the story of how the 'left' came to get a 'bad rap'.
It derives from the Latin word 'sinistra' and later the very same word was adopted in the Italian language.
Long story short it meant 'left' and later and to this day it also means 'sinister'. HAH.
No seriously, look it up.
So all you righties, guess what?
It's official, (well it always has been, just that the left don't want anyone to know they're wrong-ens, not a good look, you see)the left are and have always been 'sinister', or bad!

//Long story short it meant 'left' and later and to this day it also means 'sinister'. HAH.//

Yes, it's a fascinating bit of etymology. Why did left-handedness - the original meaning of the word sinister (because obviously the Romans had no possible inkling of of the political interpretation of 'left'; that wouldn't be introduced until much later, by the French) come to be associated with evil?

I've seen a few theories, but the one I found most convincing was the fact that when you're fighting with a sword, your dominant hand makes a very big difference - most people (around 90%, not sure of the exact figure) are right hand dominant. If you're right handed, most of the time - in training or in battle - you'll be fighting against right-handed opponents. Which means when you come up against a southpaw, you'll be less well prepared. And if you're a southpaw, you'll be used to right-handed opponents but they won't be used to you. Which gives the southpaws a significant advantage. They can get in under your defences; you're not used to lefties, but they're used to righties.... they would have kicked arse. No wonder they came to be seen as evil and wicked.

Could all be bollocks, of course. But it's plausible theory and I like it, so I'll stick with it for now.

Toni, so your OK with the stats shown earlier?
Well mate, I understand and can even agree with you about your chances without medical attention, but Toni, leaving surgical paraphernalia 'inside' your body, and at such enormous numbers.
Wrong medications, overdoses, I don't need to repeat the list, it's back there for everyone to read.
No I'm sorry Toni, I can expect errors in many things today, but not when it is a matter of life or death.
I understand people die all the time, by some incurable or irreparable illness or incident.
But I go to a hospital to get 'fixed up', not 'fuxed up'.
I once had an aortic aneurysm burst, near the heart.
Luckily I was very close to the hospital, I bled out during examination, died for as long as it took to get a supply of blood into me then I suppose they got on with the job of getting my heart running again, I don't know the exact proto-col, but anyway three weeks later woke up paralysed from the neck down with organ failures from here to eternity and back again.
But don't despair, I'm an angry arrogant prick and refused to accept my situation.
Anyway my point is that although the ICU staff were SO BLOODY GOOD, I believe only my mother, (had she been alive) could have done a better and more caring job.
ICU was a 24/7 ordeal for the first two to three weeks.
In contrast, when I was in the ward, just starting to move a little, the night shift was absolute crap.
I could see the difference, uncaring, distant, distracted, laughing and carrying on like dumb dizzy idiots.
Anyone of you would have demanded better service than that.
So I should not be surprised, I suppose, at the bad stats and rap on hospitals.

Toni, sorry, your rendition is as you say, a 'theory'.
My comments are fact and backed up by google if you just want a quick 'fact check' or confirmation.
I will cede to the reason we tip our hats, (or at least the poms did) was because in the good ole' days of 'knights in shining armour' if they were in full regalia, they would lift their face shield of their helmet when passing a another, i suppose, important person so the person coming towards him could see his face and identify him or give him/each other a nod of courtesy.
And so it is today when passing someone in the street it is the practice and proto-col to reach up and 'tip ones hat'.
Just thought I'd throw that in for the ell' of it.

//I once had an aortic aneurysm burst, near the heart.
Luckily I was very close to the hospital//

In that case, ALTRAV, the next time you have an aortic aneurysm burst near the heart, I sincerely hope you are very long way away from a hospital. Then you won't have to worry about some 'dumb dizzy idiot' leaving their surgical implements inside you. Phew, what a load off your mind, eh?

Toni, do you actually write your comments?
Do you read them back to yourself to ensure you got it right?
Because seriously, you're sick.
You argue just for the sake of arguing.
Are you all alone with no-one to talk to?
Because if you are, I can understand where you're coming from then.
Toni, there is no need to be so belligerent, when I slag off at someone it's because they're talking sh!t.
I'm disliked for many things, but mostly my language.
I've explained why, because I can't stand being lied to or people giving unrealistic immature advice, even if they mean well.
It's not the truth and it's not healthy.
Anyway, back to you.
Give it your best shot, it's been a little boring lately.
I mean for Christ's sake.
Do Govt's always tell us everything?
I mean, c'mon, one word would have sufficed and all these pages would have been unnecessary.
The word, and the answer to this topoic's question is: NO!
There's your posting, and it's taken twelve pages to say NO!

//My comments are fact//

They aren't fact; the division of politics into left and right wings is a throwback to the French revolution, in the late 1800's:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum#History_of_the_terms

//and backed up by google if you just want a quick 'fact check' or confirmation.//

We've been over this before; google's search algorithm is different for both of us, and you know that, so quoting 'google' as your reference is meaningless - we won't get the same results, and even if (by some miracle/spectacular breakdown of the google algorithm) we did, who's to say we'd click on the same links?

Just give (valid) links to specific urls. Saves a lot of time and bother, and makes you look like less of complete spaz when it comes to the interwebs and therefore less likely to attract the attention of hackers preying on the woefully ignorant.

Toni, your talking crossed purposes.
My reference to left and right, if you go back and have 'mummy' read, you will see I am referring to the 'meaning' of the words.
You can refer to whatever medium you want, I'm not taking your word that Google is wrong, what a long bow, mate give it a rest, I gave my reference to what 'I' was talking about, that's it end of.
Mate I have no idea what you're on about the French and politics and url's, etc,etc.
Do you now understand that my line was that the left means sinister, evil, bad, do you get it now?
Because I really don't care to have to elaborate further.
I'm not arguing or contesting whatever it is you are suggesting, I'm sure you're right, but we are talking about two different things, OK?

Tony Lavis is in fact close to the truth
A very very real danger to mankind is not the invisible left
It is in fact a right that openly has abandoned all links to truth
Why have they done this? have they conned their followers
Just maybe if that right ever achieved its target those followers would become first victims
Those targets include cheap labour/lower living standards for most
And more profit for the very rich
Breath easy
They are on the way out, lead by Americas Trump, they never existed in numbers big enough to control this country
Even in their natural home Queensland
After the election it will be seen even by the strongest supporters, the roll they played in removing the Federal government was and is toxic

Toni,

"Why did left-handedness - the original meaning of the word sinister ...come to be associated with evil?"

First, I think you're wrong about people using their left hand in battle. In ancient warfare, at least in organised, disciplined armies like Rome's, everyone carried their shield on their left arm and fought with their right. The army needed to present a wall of shields and that meant each man was partially protected by the shield to his right. Someone placing the shield on his right arm would have caused a gap in the shield wall. (Note this applies to the pre-Marian army but by then the suspicion of lefties was already established.) For more check out phalanx battle tactics...eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx#Shields

So why the distrust of leftness?

Its to do with individual safety and personal attack. Most societies develop some method for people, when they meet to demonstrate that they aren't a threat....handshake, the roman salute (raised right arm), the military salute (right arm to the forehead), even the Amer-Indian half raised right arm. All were about showing that you were benign..ie I am no threat and here's my empty right hand showing that I'm not hiding a weapon. But lefties could show their right hand but still be able to wield a weapon in their left. So they were devious...sinister.

//Because seriously, you're sick.//

Cry me a river, ya big Jessie.

What a sad case you are... happy to bully, abuse and harass all and sundry, but as soon as anybody says something you dislike you turn into a sooky little girl. Where's all your bullying bluster then, eh ALTRAV? Just pathetic, mate.

//Toni, there is no need to be so belligerent, when I slag off at someone it's because they're talking sh!t.//

Given that all you ever do is talk sh!t, ALTRAV, it's a wonder that people are as nice to you as they are.

//you will see I am referring to the 'meaning' of the words.//

Yes. So was I. You just seem to think that the definitions I've referred to are incorrect; although you've made no attempt at your own argument, nor cited any others, to explain why we should consider them incorrect. It's not me you need to try to shout down; it's wikipedia.

//I'm not taking your word that Google is wrong//

Seriously, you can't possibly be that thick. Stop pretending. You know the difference between a search engine and a website.

//I gave my reference to what 'I' was talking about//

Where? All you've done is say tell me to google it. But as has been explained to you, that isn't a useful reference. A useful reference directs a person to the SAME SOURCE you got your material from. A google search won't do that, because google doesn't produce the SAME results for everybody. It prodcuces DIFFERENT results for different people. So how am I supposed to look at the SAME SOURCE as you, when google gives DIFFERENT results?

Jesus mate, it's not rocket science.

Toni, your just another stubborn hard headed petulant.
Are you related to Foxy by any chance.
You see Toni, seeing as how I come from a 'proud' people I thought I'd look up your beloved Wikipedia.
Typed in the word 'sinister', and shock horror I got the same result only with fewer words, so not as descriptive as Google and therefore not as informative.
You twat, next time you want to impress your followers do some actual thinking.
Just because you have an aversion for the truth doesn't mean I, or anyone else has.
Wiki wrote, and I quote; "Sinister, commonly to: Evil, Ominous, Sinister may also refer to: Sinister, for the direction, "left"." unquote.
So Toni, as I said and I'll say it again I was talking about the difference and distinction of the meaning, and the origins of the 'WORD', and how it described the labour party, either by choice or by accident, the labour party has always been described as 'left', at least for as long as I have been alive, therefore being that they are 'left', means, by definition, that they are sinister or evil.
I saw no reference to the French or any such thing you were on about, so I'm not sure which Wikipedia you were referring to but the one I used gave me the same answer as Google.
How many times do I have to say it, If I make a comment, it is because I have come to know about it through one or more of the many mediums used by man to communicate, I don't just pull it out of my arse like some on OLO.
So Toni, I'm right again, so sit down take a deep breath and work on how your going to stop badgering people in opposing everything they say just for the sake of trying to look like you know what your talking about.
Obviously you don't as your continually referring to Wiki for information.
I on the other hand know what I'm talking about and 'sometimes' refer to Google for 'confirmation'.

ALTRAV,

"...How many times do I have to say it, If I make a comment, it is because I have come to know about it through one or more of the many mediums used by man to communicate"

You still need to give a reference, even if only through common courtesy, (except for things of common knowledge, such as 'The sun sets in the west').

Tony Lavis truth is not welcomed by all here big round of applause for your telling it
Again, CLEARLY, the toxic right will use any untruth
And ignore the truth the very right are the biggest threat to world peace

Issy, I do concur, I really do, and I would love to, BUT, many of the things I know or say are from memory, such as it is, so if I can remember the origin of the fact I speak, I will quote it.
Even then, in my haste to get the words down I might forget to supply a reference.
But in truth, I have never had to before, so it is alien to me and of course I would have to remember to do so, if and when it was required.
Unlike Foxy, who has 'lived' in books all her life I have lived in workshops all mine.
So I did not get much, if any, exposure to books and linguistic or forum proto-cols, so this might explain my shortcomings in those areas.

Belly Quote "is in fact close to the truth
A very very real danger to mankind is not the invisible left
It is in fact a right that openly has abandoned all links to truth"

** That is your opinion, you may not like this but your opinion on any subject does not make it a fact, unless you have supporting evidence. Which you virtually never do.**

A statement made without evidence in most cases is only an opinion.

Philip S,

Pretty much everything you write about the Lusitania is correct or arguable. Its also utterly irrelevant to what we were discussing.

You were trying to show that the cover-up around the Lusitania was analogous to your supposed cover-up around Pearl Harbour. Bonkers as that notion is, nothing you wrote advances your screwy claims.

You see, proving the Lusitania carried munitions (true) doesn't prove anything about Pearl Harbour except in the fevered minds of the true conspiratorialist.

Might I suggest, if you want to go down this path, that you examine the notion that Churchill engineered the sinking to draw the US into the war. I'm sure there's plenty around - I've got a book called 'Dead Wake' which you could look up and which covers this issue.

But going to a fantasist like Corbett!! ! oh dear. A man who hasn't seen a conspiracy he doesn't like and won't fall for.
Remember, this is one of the chem-trail lunatics.


Really, why am I even bothering with you?

By the way, the Lusitania was downed in 1915 but war wasn't declared until 1917. Not exactly analogous to Pearl Harbour where one followed t'other immediately.

Also by the way, while the sinking did move the needle in the USA somewhat against Germany, the real clincher was the Zimmerman telegrams. But strangely, these don't so much as get a mention in your utterly hilarious links.

You're going to educate me on the way the world works? Now that's funny, on so many levels.

the toxic right will use any untruth
Belly,
the only toxic outfit is the one you're supporting ! I admit the present Govt is failing to address most social issues but at least they're not poisoned by what your lot has been afflicted by.
I put it to you that your mind is so poisoned through brainwashing that you're incapable to see truth. You're always on about truth, as a matter of fact it is the word you use the most so, if you're so keen on truth why do still defend & promote the party whose policies are ruining this Nation ? I fully support your criticism of the present Govt's follies but to not criticise Labor's follies & actually promote them is just a step too far over the line of decency.

Philip S,

"Simple question can you provide evidence the information is false,"

Did I say it was false? Your comprehension skills seem somewhat stretched here.

"Wrong again, this info came out before but at the time the headlines were that the Government would not be releasing to the public which hospitals had the worst records."

Evidence?

"Does it give information about how many people died because of medical malpractice, surgical instruments left inside patients, wrongly prescribed medication, NO again you are plain ignorant."

Actually yes. Seek, my lad, and ye shall find. The data isn't hidden its just inaccessible to the feeble minded.

"You surpassed yourself with that one because you stated there "To tell the truth, I haven't really followed it so can't judge error or not." ALSO "SR acted honourably." implying to all matters but you admit not having followed it."

Again, you display the inability to follow the logic of a discussion. Yes, initially I didn't concern myself with a childish spat between you and SR. But later after you'd thrown such a tantrum I went back and had a bit of a look and found that I sided with SR.

As to SR acting honourably, I've explained to you several times I was referring to the way he acted in regards to the discussion between he and I.

mhaze Quote "Really, why am I even bothering with you?"

Exactly the statement one would expect from a person with nothing to add.

** It is more apparent you are the one with a lack of comprehension. **
Here is the whole statement not just part of it.
** When you can't attack the content attack the source of the content. Simple question can you provide evidence the information is false, if not your whole statement is irrelevant. **

I am simply asking you if you can provide evidence the article is false, I did not say or imply you said it was false.

So mhaze you come out with this stupid comment.
"Did I say it was false? Your comprehension skills seem somewhat stretched here."
______________________________________________
If a person is talking about a subject and another person does not agree with the first person a valid question could be do you have evidence that it is false, just as the second person could say to the first person do you have evidence it is true.

If you agree with the above statement then you are the one in this instance with a lack of comprehension.
_______________________________________________

You original comment is your problem, just to remind you.
"I'm no fan of FDR and think he's massively over-rated as a president and especially as a wartime leader. But I wouldn't for a moment think so little of him or think that he was so callous and Machiavellian as to simply not lift a finger to save lives just so he could get the war he wanted.
Additionally, I'm not prepared to believe that the dozens of other members of the government who would have know if they had advanced warning of the attack, would have sat back and let it happen and/or then stayed quiet about it for the rest of their lives and into their deaths."

They did know beforehand.
The Lusitania was introduced to provide evidence that people will sit back and watch people getting killed needlessly if it furthers their agenda.

As the thread is dragged away from its intended path I am no longer sure what it is about
AH any chance the poster talking to me here can see I am actively avoiding him
Quite prepared for posts in my links to drop off, but not wading in to the increasingly MANIC Dads arm ones
Governments of every shade lie/omit to tell us the truth.
I repeat the toxic far right is the biggest danger to the world right now
Post election a true Liberalism will begin the hard task of repairing the damage done by the demented right

mhaze Quote "But going to a fantasist like Corbett!! ! oh dear. A man who hasn't seen a conspiracy he doesn't like and won't fall for.
Remember, this is one of the chem-trail lunatics."

I have not looked into chem-trails, assuming you are correct and it is fake, we will mark him for one fake story.

One fake story out of more than 100 covered is a good reputation, so you give me one MSM or other media outlet with a 100% accuracy rating.

If you can't try not casting aspersions on someone when you can only point to one error.
If someone was to look at your comments on here I am confident they would find at least one error you made.

I am listening to the video now and will see, so far he has not said it is 100% true he is only interviewing someone who does believe in chem-trails.

Philip S,

If I thought the data was wrong I had plenty of opportunity to say so. Instead I supported the report. The only thing wrong was your understanding (actually misunderstanding) of the report and tantrums that the report didn't tell you what you wanted to hear. Actually I got upset this morning when the ABC told me what time the sun will set but not which direction - they are obviously trying to hide that data.

"when you can only point to one error. "

Actually I pointed out two - he also screwed up on the US entry in WW1 but you'd already missed that as well so you probably din't notice the error. That I only mentioned one bit of Corbett's idiocy doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of others. I just pointed out the most egregious and hilarious.

"They did know beforehand." (that the Lusitania was going to be sunk).

Any evidence? Thought not.

Earlier I responded to your infantile attempts to show me in error with "Normally I'd just let your ignorance flow by but "egg you now wear on your face" and all that requires that you put in your place."

Mission accomplished.

Foxy,

I meant to post this earlier but what with all the fun with Philip I missed it....

You wrote: "Thank You for taking the time to read the link from Britannia."

Take it as given Foxy that I read all your links. Please keep 'em coming.

I'd given up on www.britannica.com a few years back as they went totally PC. But they seem to have lifted their game and I'll be giving them a second go. So I enjoyed the link for several reasons.

mhaze Your reply just provides more evidence of your ignorance.

Quote "Mission accomplished." President Bush said the same in 2003, did not go well for him as the war is still ongoing thus making it a LIE by a deluded person, now we have you saying it.

Also Quote "I meant to post this earlier but what with all the fun with Philip I missed it...."

** I guess the fact you loose so many times you do have to delude yourself in some manner, if this is fun you must live a very boring lifestyle.
_______________________________________________
The German authorities had made it plain that they considered the Lusitania an enemy ship; a legitimate target.
Notices to that effect were published in all major American newspapers on 30 April 1915, specifically warning that the Imperial German Government considered any vessel flying the British flag as ‘liable to destruction’ and that travellers did so ‘at their own risk’.
Like many other papers, The Washington Times splashed a warning from the German Ambassador to the United States, Count Bernstorff, across their front page with an account of ‘scores of prominent passengers receiving anonymous telegrams’ warning that the Lusitania would be sunk.
_______________________________________
Historians wonder if the ship may have been deliberately placed in danger by British authorities. This is backed up by a letter Winston Churchill wrote, which said that it was “most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hope especially of embroiling the United States with Germany.” On top of that, although British authorities knew of the presence of a U-boat, they did not divert the Lusitania, nor did they move to protect it as it approached the location.
_______________________________________
Between the time of the ship’s departure from New York and its sinking on the coast of Ireland, there were a total of 23 sunken ships off the coast of Ireland. The Lusitania received directives to stay away from the coast of Ireland in the days leading up to its sinking, but they did not receive any news about the sinking of any other ships.

mhaze I find myself in total support for you in the child like verbal war that has been imposed on you

Quote "Mission accomplished." President Bush said the same in 2003, did not go well for him as the war is still ongoing thus making it a LIE by a deluded person, now we have you saying it.
PhilipS,
Aren't you telling the lie here ? That on-going war you're talking about is, to my perception of the situation, the one that flared up again after the Mission was accomplished.

mhaze,

I appreciate your reading my links.

I value and respect your opinion.

Belly - Quote "mhaze I find myself in total support for you in the child like verbal war that has been imposed on you"

Your statement above contradicts what you and mhaze have said on this thread, just a few comments from both of you.

Belly you say.
"it is common knowledge America had been warned about Japanese shipping by Ham Radio operators"

BUT mhaze says
"It might be common knowledge among those who haven't really followed the history of this, but it also wrong."

Belly you then say to him.
"mhaze ok if you want to ignore long ago questions about the whole event do so"

Belly you further disagree with mhaze
"The aircraft carriers not being in port could point to knowing?"
__________________________________________

** Looking at the comments above I thank god you are not supporting me, that would be a real disaster. **

mhaze, I wish you and your new besty good luck for the future you will need it.

With the support of Belly who needs enemies

individual

mhaze wrote Quote
"Any evidence? Thought not.

Earlier I responded to your infantile attempts to show me in error with "Normally I'd just let your ignorance flow by but "egg you now wear on your face" and all that requires that you put in your place."

Mission accomplished."

** He is sarcastically implying he won the discussion **
I replied
"Mission accomplished." President Bush said the same in 2003, did not go well for him as the war is still ongoing thus making it a LIE by a deluded person, now we have you saying it."
** That was my sarcastic reply that he told a lie because just as the Iraq war did not end with that statement neither did our discussion.

YOU then come in with your comment.
"PhilipS,
Aren't you telling the lie here ? That on-going war you're talking about is, to my perception of the situation, the one that flared up again after the Mission was accomplished."

Maybe a better understanding by you would be in order it is nothing to do with the war.

Mission accomplished implying something is over.

Mhaze would you agree or not agree with what I have just written regarding the two posts being sarcasm back and forth?
____________________________________________
Just because one person says something has ended does not mean it has.
“Major combat operations in Iraq have ended,” he told the crowd. “In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.”

A few months earlier, Congress approved what would become the Iraq War, and the invasion began in March of that year.

Of course, the notion of “mission accomplished” could not have been further from the truth.

The war lasted another eight years. Congress decided to send in 20,000 more troops into the country in 2007. The war claimed the lives of at least 190,000 people–the bulk of whom were civilians, in addition to 4,488 U.S. soldiers and 3,400 U.S. contractors.

In December 2011, President Obama marked the exit of the last American troops from Iraq, ending nearly nine years of war there.

May I? some think I post too much and too often
Maybe I do
But read the volumes in just this thread
See the combative insults that are used
Even the street corner soapbox type insistence that we line up to be insulted
And informed that our view is wrong always
I believe, truly, no government ever, tells us every thing
Never tells us the truth on some matters
The implications?
Endless
We or should I say our service men and women, went to war, and died, on a known lie that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction

Philip S,

" I guess the fact you loose so many times..."

Well tell yourself whatever you need to so as to salvage some self-esteem but I have a sneaking feeling that the next time to want to crow that you've left me with egg on my face, you'll be a tad more circumspect.

"Your reply just provides more evidence of your ignorance.

Quote "Mission accomplished." President Bush said the same in 2003..."

Poor Philip, the gift that just keeps giving. You just can't help yourself, can you. You think you find someone in error and just go for the jugular..."more evidence of your ignorance".

Not that I mentioned Bush but...

Despite your certainty, Bush never actually used those words. Its just one of those things the naive have come to mistakenly believe.

I'm bored with educating you so look it up for yourself.

(Standby for Philip's attempt to dig himself out of ANOTHER error ..."when I said he said it I totally knew he didn't say it and just because I said he said it doesn't prove that I thought he said it because...reasons... and that proves that I'm totally right even though what I said was totally wrong....or something".)

"Historians wonder if the ship may have been deliberately placed in danger by British authorities."

Well some of historians. Still they have some evidence. Of coarse, I had suggested to you a few days back that "..if you want to go down this path, that you examine the notion that Churchill engineered the sinking to draw the US into the war.."

Its pleasing to see that you are not total uneducable. But if you think that showing or claiming that the British sending a ship in harms way at a different time, in a different place, in a different war and with different outcomes has any relevance to Pearl Harbour well...nup.

"Mission accomplished implying something is over."

I wasn't really saying the discussion was over, just that my original aim of putting you in your place had been achieved. I didn't expect you to agree, but I was satisfied

Thanks Belly,

"mhaze I find myself in total support for you in the child like verbal war that has been imposed on you".

Well I appreciate that Belly. But I'm a big boy. I can look after myself. But its nice to see that others can see through Phil's cant.

mhaze well bet you and I are not alone in seeing that
In fact the site is not helped by such rants
And self confidence in this case has been poorly used

Are we to be *big boys* or to have some responsibility for what we say and how we say it?

mhaze - Thanking Belly for his blatant attempt to suck up to you, even though he by his and your own words in no way agree on events. There is a joke.

Your comment very long winded with a lot of opinion of what I will do based on what you psychology degree obtained by reading comic books, lets see how that works out, oh failed again.

The words were written on the banner behind Bush.

Quote "Mission accomplished implying something is over." Problem is when one side thinks it is over and the other side does not.

Quote "I wasn't really saying the discussion was over, just that my original aim of putting you in your place had been achieved. I didn't expect you to agree, but I was satisfied"

Self-satisfaction says it all in other words you were so deluded you preempted the real ending.

Belly Quote "Are we to be *big boys* or to have some responsibility for what we say and how we say it?"

I was going to write a longer comment but laughter at your comment "Are we to be *big boys*" does not permit.

What goes around comes around.

looks like you two bestys deserve each other the two stooges.

Philip s some forms of self amusement are not a good idea
You have written reems of put downs to or about me so here is some truth you need to address
You post heaps of rubbish, some times getting only the dads army posters
You seem to think mass production of one sided pure right of reality junk is called for
Yet you find insulting me your only defense for truth
Mate take a look in your mirror you need help
Go back to the dads army and share your views about me there
See I DO NOT WANT to read your child like stuff or theirs

Belly Quote "See I DO NOT WANT to read your child like stuff or theirs"

But you do you have said that before many times but how did you come into this discussion between mhaze & me if your were not reading my comments. You have just shown yourself to LIE.

Quote "You have written reems of put downs to or about me" All deserved, you conveniently forget how you have done that to other people.

Quote "You post heaps of rubbish, some times getting only the dads army posters" Please provide examples nearly all you have stuck your nose into, time to put up or shut up.

If you had half a brain you would also notice some of the threads I post are just for information purposes or to warn about things that the MSM do not report on or are late to report on, they do not require comments hence receive very few.

Warning for iPhone or Mac iPad with FaceTime app.
Crypto currency warning.
Contactless payment, what can go wrong?

Quote "You seem to think mass production of one sided pure right of reality junk is called for"

** As opposed to what Belly posts which is usually gibberish or pure left of reality junk **
** That comes under the heading of the rantings of a hypocrite, Belly can do it you can't **

I notice you have moved your fixation from Trump and children to "dads army", sorry to be the one to tell you but it is you that needs help.

** Belly will now provide examples of threads that I have started that were not put up as warning, where he has not participated **

Philip S.,

Remember when Belly asked for your opinion?

Yeah, me neither!

Philip S,

"The words were written on the banner behind Bush."

Yes they were. But not written by Bush and not said (as you claimed) by Bush. Indeed his speech made it clear the mission wasn't over.

Still I think this is as close to an admission of error as we get from the likes of poor old Phil.

"looks like you two bestys deserve each other the two stooges"

You should join us Phil. Larry and Moe, now joined by Surly.

Philip s RUOK? have you not noticed I am not posting in your childlike threads
Or those of you dads army mates
You flood this site with drivel
Unattached to truth or reasonable thought, you rant
This thread is one I started, not your property
YOU remind me of another poster, we worked together, he however awaits his first original thought
Telling me after a *thing* from within the Queensland ALP was put in prison for the filthy act of child molesting
He tried to tell me every ALP politician, was a pedophile
PS I have zero regard for your ability to think

Belly Quote "have you not noticed I am not posting in your childlike threads"

You are right, I wondered why they were now not full of gibberish, it is a pleasure not to deal with you.

So this was the last one, 10 times you commented.
If this is true some bureaucrats need to be sacked.

Quote "This thread is one I started, not your property"

** Deluded, I never said or implied it was, sorry to have to bring you back to reality it is not yours either. It is now property of this site. **

Quote "PS I have zero regard for your ability to think"

** It is very hard to think when you have to decipher comments from Belly. **

Belly Quote "have you not noticed I am not posting in your childlike threads"

** Or could it be you have nothing constructive to add, you can't even say why you consider them childlike so say nothing. **

** You are welcome as always to criticize the content of any thread, your lack of doing it but bragging how you are avoiding them is more of an indictment on your lacking the ability too express yourself. **

Well leaving what has been a subject we could have talked about all year
In truth our trust in government is often miss placed, yes my mob too
Surely others get the feeling they think we are all mugs some times
Yes weaving and ducking Philip s, an avalanche of words/insults/thoughts so very different than the average
We all do it, even at work walk quickly by hoping to avoid a pest
Trouble is the pest in this case refuses to let go, it is my view we should have different opinions on every thing
But surely my past assailant was a gentleman compared to this bloke

Dear Belly,

Thanks for this discussion.

On a public forum like this one, we're going
to get a wide variety of approaches in the
way people react to the opinions of others.
I've found it useful to remember that not
everyone is going to agree with you and some
will even stoop to personal insults instead of
addressing the arguments put forward. These
obviously are people who are not experienced
in debating and of course you can't be
responsible for their insecurity.

You're not
going to change these people - they don't respect
you - so what's the point. Walk away.

Foxy Quote "they don't respect you - so what's the point. Walk away."

TOO bad you did not take your own advise.
Quote "Philip S.,
Remember when Belly asked for your opinion?
Yeah, me neither!"

Belly
What can I say but see you on the next one.
.... .- .... .- .... .-

Philip S.,

I was not trying to bring Belly down like you were
with your comments. Hence my remark to you. He
did not ask for your opinion. I'm sure he does not
object to what I said. You have to take responsibility
for your own actions instead of attempting to redirect
them onto others. Bad show.

"so what's the point. Walk away."

Well sometimes its just fun to show that pompous fools are...pompous fools.

There are, as far as I'm concerned three reasons to be and trying to change minds isn't one of them....

1. To put your own views out there and see what holes others can poke in them.

2. See what others think and see if they can offer perspectives that you haven't thought of. That's why I'll always follow up on links that people (well not all people) here offer because you'll never know what other views or facts might come up.

3. Have fun...see above.

Foxy You were the one who stuck their nose in, so a precedent you have set.

Philip S.,

I was the one who "stuck my nose in?"

Personal attacks have no place in discussions.
Take responsibility for your own actions.
Setting the precedent for nastiness is not
a good look.

Foxy You are too biased to accept reasoning, so I will not waste time on you.
You often show your bias and accept the words of a few as gospel truths, when someone is brainwashed to that point sensible reasoning is pointless.

mhaze Quote "Well sometimes its just fun to show that pompous fools are...pompous fools."

** You obviously therefore know a lot about yourself, being head fool with you besty Belly and Foxy at you side. **

You also forgot to mention you will also try the deny other the opportunity to admit information relevant to a thread.

In case for forgot Page 7
"Philip S
The thread is about governments hiding information and/or data."

Which is exactly what my links and information were about.

That showed you as the pompous one, elevating yourself higher than the moderator.

Phil,

"You obviously therefore know a lot about yourself"

Oh, the I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I come-back. Oh so very witty...if you're in the 3rd grade. Don't worry, you'll grow out of it.

" you will also try the deny other the opportunity to admit information relevant to a thread."

Nowhere did I try to stop your posting on this thread. I was merely pointing out that the data you thought was being hidden, was indeed way out in the open for anyone prepared to look for it. You couldn't see it because it wasn't presented in a nice package, presumably with pictures to help the less fortunate to understand it.

But I wasn't trying to stop you posting. I rather enjoy watching dills demonstrate their dillishness.

Foxy in no way did I see your comment as helpful advice from a friend
Trying to bring King of the childish posts to heel is not easy
He insults just about every one
Failing to understand some of his posts insult him

Dear Belly,

He does behave rather oddly. And then he's accused me
of bias when I don't refer to him as "Dear ..."

mhaze Dill look in the mirror.

Belly Quote "He insults just about every one" No just the 3 stooges and one other before.

Foxy Lack of comprehension again, where did I say what you allege.

Dear Philip, not for me.

Philip S.,

Your negative mind will never give anything
a positive spin.

Enjoy your gruntlement.

Foxy best take the advice you gave me
Only a matter of time before the insults are noticed

That is because Belly did report. Weak.

I have left before to come back would prove me weak. So after this thread it is a firm goodby from me. Posted by Belly, Thursday, 6 March 2014 1:19:54 PM

mhaze gee your thoughts seem powered by a lard burning candle in a tin
YES age about 12 to 16, not very bright then
Dreamer, grew up, have you any intentions of joining me
Sorry to inform you some ugly side effects can threaten the likes of you
Understanding
you have wasted a life by not using your brain is one
THAT WAS needlessly rude
But am I to behave any better than you
Gee I hope so, in matters that involve thinking at least
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 12 January 2019 4:09:01 PM

mhaze yes still rethinking my rude reply
But I ask you this question
You agree you do not like me? take weak shots often?
End question start statement, * based only on your words* *I place no value on your intellectual ability's*
Question, is it your view my job is to take what I see as childlike insult without return serve*?
Sadly mhaze you can not do better, but thanks for proving that post after post
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 13 January 2019 5:21:36 AM

Belly,
Wow. Quite the tantrum. I can see you don't like your little fibs pointed out.

Don't fret over insulting me - water off a ducks back. Or "like being flogged with a warm lettuce". As a life-long ALP man (chuckle) you'd know that quote, wouldn't you?
Posted by mhaze, Sunday, 13 January 2019 9:11:01 AM

** Watch your back the knives are being sharpened. **

Foxy Quote "Enjoy your gruntlement."

Educating yourself at your advanced age is a good thing.

Your usage of an extremely rarely used word, more than likely you look for synonyms to words.

Your usage of the word in the following way supports this theory "Enjoy your gruntlement." you are only able to use it in a very easily constructed three word sentence.

Most people on this forum would not know or have ever heard this word before, myself being one I know I have never used it and don't recall ever hearing or seeing it before.

Some people may think of the word disgruntled which all should know from high school and think they know the meaning, but please don't confuse the words foxy used " gruntlement ".

When you use vocabulary to try to impress people and make them think you are more highly educated that you actually are, may I suggest you use the word in a sentence of around 10 to 12 words, preferably use two sentences that compliment each other, then people may bow to your higher education. BUT that poses a problem because like in a classroom educators that use words their students do not understand would be considered by some as idiots. What is the good of giving a lecture very few understand.

To anyone with half a brain using the word in a three word sentence indicates you do not really know how to use it and are sitting there with a book of synonyms

Roughly, gruntlement means a state of happiness, peacefulness and tranquillity.

Thank you foxy I will enjoy my tranquility and me with my grade 3 education.

Philip, you might have just scored on that one.
I am a little surprised at Foxy making that comment, although in all fairness Google reckons 'gruntle' was introduced as an antonym to 'disgruntled' back in the 20's.
But if there is no record of the word being removed from our vocabulary then I would say, it still holds sway.
I have learned something.
Thanks to both of you.

Philip S.,

There's a children's picture-book -
"Grunter: the story of a pig with attitude"
who comes to an explosive end. It's very
popular in Storytime Sessions. The kids love it.
Grunter hates everything ...and everyone.
He's overfed...and overweight. He is mad, bad, ANGRY
and sad. (and dangerous to know on days with a "d"
in ). He has serious attitude...and shocking wind.

Anyway, I thought it appropriate to use the
word "gruntlement" in my post to you.

Foxy With all your sarcasm lately why would use that word, from a book that I will bet you did not know the meaning when you read it, the word is not even in a lot of dictionaries.

Roughly, gruntlement means a state of happiness, peacefulness and tranquillity.

It took me a long time on google and other places to confirm what it meant, it is an extremely rarely used word, and to use it in a three word sentence.

Quote "He is mad, bad, ANGRY and sad." that description contradicts the meaning that I have come to think the word means, (a state of happiness, peacefulness and tranquillity.)

Maybe if it was prefixed with dis it might be in line with your opinion of me as sometime you get the opposite.( proportionate becomes disproportionate - trust becomes distrust )

disgruntlement possibly would have been better, in keeping with your low opinion of me.

Philip S.,

You still don't get it.

"Gruntlement"is a made up word.

I used it
on you because that's what you do - you grunt.
The message to you was meant - Don't be a
Grunter - be nice. It was meant to tell you how
NOT to treat your fellow posters.

You don't want to continue to be a breath of foul air.

Foxy I don't understand your logic, you say it is a made up word implying it is not a real word, in that case why would you use a word that was not a word and therefore had no meaning except in the book you read.

A word no one would be able to find the meaning of unless they had that book.

The problem with that logic is it is a word and can be found in use, but as stated before extremely rarely.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0607/S00357/getting-to-a-state-of-gruntlement.htm
Getting To A State Of Gruntlement
Sunday, 30 July 2006, 12:30 am
Speech: Association of Salaried Medical Specialists

Philip S.,

You obviously have never heard of Dr Seuss,
Roald Dahl, JR Tolkien, JK Rowling, to name just a few
writers who use language as they see fit -
for the sheer fun of it. Authors often use language with
feeling, language which involves us emotionally and this
involvement is essential if language is to live and
work. You seem to approach language and language-related
skills as though intellectual understanding were the sole key
to them.

I prefer authors who are riotous and inventive as in
Roald Dahl's description of the äwesome snozzcumber"in
the BFG (1982):

Ït's disgusterous!"the BFG gurgled.
Ït's sickable! It's rotsome! It's maggotwise!
Try it yourself, this foulsome snozzcumber!

"cont'd ...

Philip S.,

Whatever words do - they serve a purpose in a good book.
They come together to tell a story whether its of Bilbo
Baggins in "The Hobbit"- its the skill of the writer that
welds the words together so that they may work a special
magic of their own. I tried to widen you mind. Obviously
I failed.

Philip,I find Foxy's comments tending towards humour and irony, perhaps it is 'humony'.
By her logic emotions ARE acceptable in conversation yet we must not use emotionas when speaking/writing to/about someone, for fear of offending or upsetting the listener/reader.
If Foxy is correct then I must also be riotous and inventive, due to the colourful language I use.
Interesting, I have been called colourful and inventive before for other attributes but never for my linguistic skills.
Well I guess this is another run on the board, I can chalk up as a new experience as well then.

Foxy Quote "I tried to widen you mind. Obviously I failed."

You try to wiggle out of it with that statement, but it does not pass the reality test with what you said before.

1st "I tried to widen you mind." (I assume you meant "your mind")

** But as you stated before quote "Gruntlement"is a made up word.", the only way anyone would know its meaning was if they had read the book "Grunter". How do you widen a persons mind by using a word no one could find the meaning of unless they knew of the book where it was used. **

** Therefore that statement can not be true. **

Quote "Obviously I failed"
** That is correct but not for the reason you gave, which I have proven to be false. **

** Anyone that would use any none words that had been made up by any author without reference to where someone can find the meaning of it, needs to be ridiculed, I am confident you will not make the mistake again. **

ALTRAV You must have been composing your comment while I was doing mine, going back and forth checking details took longer.

Foxy does not mind offending me so that was not used with that in mind, I can't give the exact reason only one person can, but if you see my post above yours her excuse does not make sense when you take her past statements into account.

I put it down to a mistake that will not be made again, unless she says otherwise.

Looks like Foxy just can't admit error.

So much for truth

ALTRAV Foxy has finally admitted Thursday, 7 February 2019 6:30:14 PM "I made up the word because I thought it suited you. The word was never used in the book"

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8646&page=7

More so now than before it could be prudent if in doubt to ask Foxy if something is real or she just made it up.

Even though it is a real word, she just did not know that, not quite as smart as she thought.