| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:27 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 9:34 PM: kman also claimed that no one in Canada waits for treatment, yet another lie http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...anbacklog.html I never made that claim, =========================== Yes, you did. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." 2/20/2005 2:14pm Complete sentence. No "and", "or", "but". Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. Example: What do you mean rick is a bit of an idiot, that's not true. He's got to be the biggest idiot on the planet! To paste only the first sentence and then claim that I don't think rick is an idiot would be just as dishonest as what you have been doing with my sentence about waiting. Here is more of the context: ====== As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for the high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of diagnostic imaging at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is "less than ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one. ====================== LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered more than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment. You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get real. ==================== Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their 'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years for treatment. No one is waiting for treatment. ====================== Yes, they are. Weeks months and years. Even you have agreed to that, now. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ==================== Nope. You claimed that no Canadians were waiting for treatment. ===== What I am saying (clearly) is that nobody is waiting 2 1/2 years to get treatment. They get treatment the day they walk into the hospital. What they are waiting for, as the article says, is a specific type of high-tech scan. Note from the above: "While the wait is "less than ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one. Now, let's get back to what you have been saying: rick: kman also claimed that no one in Canada waits for treatment, yet another lie ================== Nope. You clearly made that statement, liarman. I never made the statement that no one in Canada waits for treatment. ================== Yes, you did. You even posted it yourself above, liarman. You owe me an apology. ==================== No, fool, you are the one that has been lying all along, and have been proven to have been doing so. But I bet you are too weak to do it. as I've told you a dozen times (but you are such a scumbag that you keep on lying) there are wait times in every health care system, including Canada. ======================= That's not waht you claimed earlier, until your lies were exposed, liarman. No, I didn't. You owe me an apology. ==================== No, fool, you are the one that has been lying all along, and have been proven to have been doing so. In fact, you will recall that you yourself posted an article about people waiting for a specific test in Newfoundland. ======================== Which is where you denied that Candaians are waiting for treatment. You lied then, liarman... As you can see above, clearly I was explaining that those people were not waiting for treatment, they were waiting for a specific type of high tech test. You owe me an apology. ==================== No, fool, you are the one that has been lying all along, and have been proven to have been doing so. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:27 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 9:34 PM: kman also claimed that no one in Canada waits for treatment, yet another lie http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...anbacklog.html I never made that claim, =========================== Yes, you did. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." 2/20/2005 2:14pm Complete sentence. No "and", "or", "but". Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. Example: What do you mean rick is a bit of an idiot, that's not true. He's got to be the biggest idiot on the planet! To paste only the first sentence and then claim that I don't think rick is an idiot would be just as dishonest as what you have been doing with my sentence about waiting. Here is more of the context: ====== As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for the high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of diagnostic imaging at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is "less than ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one. ====================== LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered more than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment. You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get real. ==================== Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their 'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years for treatment. No one is waiting for treatment. ====================== Yes, they are. Weeks months and years. Even you have agreed to that, now. Nono. Stop being dishonest. I never said no one in Canada is waiting for treatment. See the context above again. It is not that complicated. I responded to your claim that the people in your example were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment. They are not. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ==================== Nope. You claimed that no Canadians were waiting for treatment. I made no such claim, you are a liar and a scumbag. There is no such thing as a health care system where no one waits for treatment. You owe me an apology. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
KMAN wrote: "rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:27 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 9:34 PM: kman also claimed that no one in Canada waits for treatment, yet another lie http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...anbacklog.html I never made that claim, =========================== Yes, you did. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." 2/20/2005 2:14pm Complete sentence. No "and", "or", "but". Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. Example: What do you mean rick is a bit of an idiot, that's not true. He's got to be the biggest idiot on the planet! To paste only the first sentence and then claim that I don't think rick is an idiot would be just as dishonest as what you have been doing with my sentence about waiting. Here is more of the context: ====== As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for the high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of diagnostic imaging at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is "less than ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one. ====================== LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered more than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment. You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get real. ==================== Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their 'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years for treatment. No one is waiting for treatment. ====================== Yes, they are. Weeks months and years. Even you have agreed to that, now. Nono. Stop being dishonest. I never said no one in Canada is waiting for treatment. See the context above again. It is not that complicated. I responded to your claim that the people in your example were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment. They are not. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ==================== Nope. You claimed that no Canadians were waiting for treatment. I made no such claim, you are a liar and a scumbag. There is no such thing as a health care system where no one waits for treatment. You owe me an apology. rick, I believe that you owe KMAN an apology for being so quick to beat him up when he misspoke. You were correct to recognize his untenable position intitially, and confront him with it, but he has since modified and clarified that statement, and you owe him the civility of his response when he recognized that he had misspoke. If he did not initially recognize his misspeak, he definitly has at this time. I would recommend that you allow his retraction, so that you can get on with a meaningful discussion, unless you appear intransient and bring disrepute on your obviously defendable position. TnT |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: "rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:27 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 9:34 PM: kman also claimed that no one in Canada waits for treatment, yet another lie http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...anbacklog.html I never made that claim, =========================== Yes, you did. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." 2/20/2005 2:14pm Complete sentence. No "and", "or", "but". Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. Example: What do you mean rick is a bit of an idiot, that's not true. He's got to be the biggest idiot on the planet! To paste only the first sentence and then claim that I don't think rick is an idiot would be just as dishonest as what you have been doing with my sentence about waiting. Here is more of the context: ====== As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for the high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of diagnostic imaging at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is "less than ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one. ====================== LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered more than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment. You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get real. ==================== Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their 'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years for treatment. No one is waiting for treatment. ====================== Yes, they are. Weeks months and years. Even you have agreed to that, now. Nono. Stop being dishonest. I never said no one in Canada is waiting for treatment. See the context above again. It is not that complicated. I responded to your claim that the people in your example were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment. They are not. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ==================== Nope. You claimed that no Canadians were waiting for treatment. I made no such claim, you are a liar and a scumbag. There is no such thing as a health care system where no one waits for treatment. You owe me an apology. rick, I believe that you owe KMAN an apology for being so quick to beat him up when he misspoke. You were correct to recognize his untenable position intitially, and confront him with it, but he has since modified and clarified that statement, and you owe him the civility of his response when he recognized that he had misspoke. If he did not initially recognize his misspeak, he definitly has at this time. I would recommend that you allow his retraction, so that you can get on with a meaningful discussion, unless you appear intransient and bring disrepute on your obviously defendable position. TnT Tinkerntom, you are mixing up two different situations. There was the situation where I was challenging rick to prove that Canadians are dying in waiting lines for health care. What is happening above is an entirely different scenario. Rick accused me of stating that there is no one in Canada waiting for treatment. That is an absurd statement and I never made it. Being the sneaky scum that he is, he posted one sentence out of a long conversation without the relevant context to try and make him look like less of a liar. But as you can see from the context, all I was telling him was that in the case of Newfoundland that he was talking about, the people concerned were in fact under the constant care of a doctor and therefore were not waiting for treatment. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"KMAN" wrote in message . .. snip... rick, I believe that you owe KMAN an apology for being so quick to beat him up when he misspoke. You were correct to recognize his untenable position intitially, and confront him with it, but he has since modified and clarified that statement, and you owe him the civility of his response when he recognized that he had misspoke. If he did not initially recognize his misspeak, he definitly has at this time. I would recommend that you allow his retraction, so that you can get on with a meaningful discussion, unless you appear intransient and bring disrepute on your obviously defendable position. TnT Tinkerntom, you are mixing up two different situations. There was the situation where I was challenging rick to prove that Canadians are dying in waiting lines for health care. =============== Which has now been proven over and over. What is happening above is an entirely different scenario. Rick accused me of stating that there is no one in Canada waiting for treatment. That is an absurd statement and I never made it. ======================= LOL Even after Tnt tried to give you a way out, you still insist on lying. You just can'r help yourself, can you, liarman? Being the sneaky scum that he is, he posted one sentence out of a long conversation without the relevant context to try and make him look like less of a liar. ================= LOL The context made the statement even more declarative you ignorant liar. But as you can see from the context, all I was telling him was that in the case of Newfoundland that he was talking about, the people concerned were in fact under the constant care of a doctor and therefore were not waiting for treatment. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message . .. snip... rick, I believe that you owe KMAN an apology for being so quick to beat him up when he misspoke. You were correct to recognize his untenable position intitially, and confront him with it, but he has since modified and clarified that statement, and you owe him the civility of his response when he recognized that he had misspoke. If he did not initially recognize his misspeak, he definitly has at this time. I would recommend that you allow his retraction, so that you can get on with a meaningful discussion, unless you appear intransient and bring disrepute on your obviously defendable position. TnT Tinkerntom, you are mixing up two different situations. There was the situation where I was challenging rick to prove that Canadians are dying in waiting lines for health care. =============== Which has now been proven over and over. What is happening above is an entirely different scenario. Rick accused me of stating that there is no one in Canada waiting for treatment. That is an absurd statement and I never made it. ======================= LOL Even after Tnt tried to give you a way out, you still insist on lying. You just can'r help yourself, can you, liarman? Being the sneaky scum that he is, he posted one sentence out of a long conversation without the relevant context to try and make him look like less of a liar. ================= LOL The context made the statement even more declarative you ignorant liar. It was declarative that you were misrepresenting the information in the story about the people in Newfoundland. All of those people were under care, as it states in the article. Stop being a scumbag. You owe me an apology. But you are too big of a coward to admit it. But as you can see from the context, all I was telling him was that in the case of Newfoundland that he was talking about, the people concerned were in fact under the constant care of a doctor and therefore were not waiting for treatment. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tinkerntom" wrote in message oups.com... KMAN wrote: "rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:27 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 9:34 PM: kman also claimed that no one in Canada waits for treatment, yet another lie http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...anbacklog.html I never made that claim, =========================== Yes, you did. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." 2/20/2005 2:14pm Complete sentence. No "and", "or", "but". Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. Example: What do you mean rick is a bit of an idiot, that's not true. He's got to be the biggest idiot on the planet! To paste only the first sentence and then claim that I don't think rick is an idiot would be just as dishonest as what you have been doing with my sentence about waiting. Here is more of the context: ====== As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for the high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of diagnostic imaging at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is "less than ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one. ====================== LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered more than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment. You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get real. ==================== Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their 'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years for treatment. No one is waiting for treatment. ====================== Yes, they are. Weeks months and years. Even you have agreed to that, now. Nono. Stop being dishonest. I never said no one in Canada is waiting for treatment. See the context above again. It is not that complicated. I responded to your claim that the people in your example were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment. They are not. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ==================== Nope. You claimed that no Canadians were waiting for treatment. I made no such claim, you are a liar and a scumbag. There is no such thing as a health care system where no one waits for treatment. You owe me an apology. rick, I believe that you owe KMAN an apology for being so quick to beat him up when he misspoke. You were correct to recognize his untenable position intitially, and confront him with it, but he has since modified and clarified that statement, and you owe him the civility of his response when he recognized that he had misspoke. ====================== That's the problem, he continue to claim he never made the statement that he did. He continues to try to get around it by tap dancing. He has never said that he made a mistake, or that he mispoke, he keeps claiming he never said it. If he did not initially recognize his misspeak, he definitly has at this time. I would recommend that you allow his retraction, so that you can get on with a meaningful discussion, unless you appear intransient and bring disrepute on your obviously defendable position. TnT |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2-Mar-2005, "KMAN" wrote:
Nono. Stop being dishonest. Forget it - he's pulling a weiser. Mike |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"KMAN" wrote in message . .. "rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:27 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 9:34 PM: kman also claimed that no one in Canada waits for treatment, yet another lie http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman...anbacklog.html I never made that claim, =========================== Yes, you did. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." 2/20/2005 2:14pm Complete sentence. No "and", "or", "but". Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. Example: What do you mean rick is a bit of an idiot, that's not true. He's got to be the biggest idiot on the planet! To paste only the first sentence and then claim that I don't think rick is an idiot would be just as dishonest as what you have been doing with my sentence about waiting. Here is more of the context: ====== As many as 100 children in Newfoundland face 30-month waits for the high-tech scans, said Geoffrey Higgins, clinical chief of diagnostic imaging at the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. While the wait is "less than ideal," he said patients' conditions are being investigated and followed by other medical means, and that anyone needing an emergency scan gets one. ====================== LOL Sure, 2 years into a wait he might really NEED emegency treatment, eh? At that time he goes right to the top of the list. Maybe too late, eh? At the least, he has suffered more than was medically necessary, and at worst is now beyond treatment, or too weak to survive the treatment. You're telling me there aren't poor people in the US in isolated or slum areas where they have a hard time getting a scan at their convenience? Get real. ==================== Another strawman, I see. We aren't talking about their 'convenience', we're talking about the convenience of the medical systam. When that 'poor' person arrives at a medical facility in need, then yes, I'm saying that they will not wait 2 1/2 years for treatment. No one is waiting for treatment. ====================== Yes, they are. Weeks months and years. Even you have agreed to that, now. Nono. Stop being dishonest. I never said no one in Canada is waiting for treatment. ================ Yes, you did. See the context above again. It is not that complicated. ================ The context digs you in deeper into your lies, liarman. I responded to your claim that the people in your example were waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment. They are not. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ==================== Nope. You claimed that no Canadians were waiting for treatment. I made no such claim, you are a liar and a scumbag. There is no such thing as a health care system where no one waits for treatment. You owe me an apology. ============== No fool. You lied, and continue to lie. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Crimes Against Nature-- RFK, Jr. Interview | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
