| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:32 PM: Still claiming no one waits for treatment in Canada? I never said that. ==================== Yes, you did liarman. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. ================== Yes, it does fool. Your next sentence even emphsised what you said in this one, liarman. 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. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ============================ LOL You just made my point for me, liarman. Your first statement is declarative. 'No one is waiting for treatment.' The next sentence just emphasizes it. Her you are making sure that treatment and scans are seperate things, and saying people are witing for those. Unfortunately for you, I have preseneted facts that tell that canadaians are in fact waiting for treatment, and you have now had to try to tap dance your way out of this lie. ===== 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 ====================== No, you are lying, liarman. I never made the statement that no one in Canada waits for treatment. =============== Yes, you did, and you've even kindly quoted yourself above, liarman. You owe me an apology. ===================== No, fool, you owe the apology. I have proven that peple wwait for treatment, AND that some die waiting for treatment. I don't expect you're honest enough to admit your lies though, liarman. But I bet you are too weak to do it. ================= No need to. I haven't lied... 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. ====================== Yes, you did, and you even provided the quote yourself... 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. ============================ No fool. You didn't say that the people in the story were not waiting for treatment, you claimed that "NO" candaians are waiting for treatment. When you lie was exposed, you had to change your tune, eh liarman? You owe me an apology. ================ Nope. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:32 PM: Still claiming no one waits for treatment in Canada? I never said that. ==================== Yes, you did liarman. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. ================== Yes, it does fool. Your next sentence even emphsised what you said in this one, liarman. 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. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ============================ LOL You just made my point for me, liarman. Your first statement is declarative. 'No one is waiting for treatment.' NO ONE IS WAITING FOR TREATMENT - IN THE EXAMPLE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT. Stop being such a scumbag. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"KMAN" wrote in message ... "rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:32 PM: Still claiming no one waits for treatment in Canada? I never said that. ==================== Yes, you did liarman. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. ================== Yes, it does fool. Your next sentence even emphsised what you said in this one, liarman. 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. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ============================ LOL You just made my point for me, liarman. Your first statement is declarative. 'No one is waiting for treatment.' NO ONE IS WAITING FOR TREATMENT - IN THE EXAMPLE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT. ====================== That wasn't the statement you amde at that time, now was it, liarman. Now that you've gotten on board with people DO wait for treatment, and sometimes for excessive time. (or do you agree with that yet) How is your refutation that no one dies waiting for their treatment coming along? Readly to present it yet, or have you finally seen enogh of the real facst to sgree about that too? Stop being such a scumbag. ================= Stop being such a liar, liarman... |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 5:57 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... "rick" wrote in message ink.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/1/05 11:32 PM: Still claiming no one waits for treatment in Canada? I never said that. ==================== Yes, you did liarman. "...No one is waiting for treatment..." Just because it is a sentence doesn't mean it is a complete statement. ================== Yes, it does fool. Your next sentence even emphsised what you said in this one, liarman. 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. It's about a specific type of scan in a specific geographic area and the waiting is for non-emergencies. ============================ LOL You just made my point for me, liarman. Your first statement is declarative. 'No one is waiting for treatment.' NO ONE IS WAITING FOR TREATMENT - IN THE EXAMPLE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT. ====================== That wasn't the statement you amde at that time, now was it, liarman. That's exactly the statement I made. See above. You blathered on about the people in Newfoundland waiting 2 1/2 years for treatment, and I responded that they are not waiting for treatment. And they aren't. So stop being a scumbag, stop being a coward, suck it up and apologize. Or are you just too weak? ====================== Nope. Not too weak at all to expose your willful ignorance. Why the sudden urge to drop your claims about no body dying, and continue with a lie you have already taken back? Could it be you don't want to return to your continued stupidity being exposed, liarman? |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Crimes Against Nature-- RFK, Jr. Interview | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
