Simple question…if you have a problem answering it, not my problem.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
As for taking offence, I simply like to know what I’m dealing with.
You’ll need to go some to offend me [emoji6]
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
At the risk of repeating my self. Nobody but you mentioned colour.
Yes…I mentioned it in a question.
Questions are usually proceeded by an answer.
Are you struggling?
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
“Proceeded by an answer” I think the term you are looking for is “followed by an answer” . You’re welcome. This time I’ll spell it out in a small words so you can grasp it; there was no mention of colour, you, yes YOU brought that into the equation. I appreciate that I’m not dealing with the sharpest tool in the box here but you must at least have an inkling that your faux offence that you were preparing to unleash is all in your head.
Simple enough for you sonny?
No.
Proceeded by an answer is quite correct. Think of it in terms of a question preceding an answer
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
the maoster:
“Proceeded by an answer” I think the term you are looking for is “followed by an answer” . You’re welcome. This time I’ll spell it out in a small words so you can grasp it; there was no mention of colour, you, yes YOU brought that into the equation. I appreciate that I’m not dealing with the sharpest tool in the box here but you must at least have an inkling that your faux offence that you were preparing to unleash is all in your head.Simple enough for you sonny?
As for faux offence, the faux element is in your head, and probably quite lonely it is too.
I asked you a question. It really is that simple
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Can’t remember if i have already linked this video, it was posted back in May, Mike Yeadon explains the govt lies clearly.
by Monkey241 » Thu Aug 19, 2021 7:32 pm
Yes…I mentioned it in a question.
Questions are usually proceeded [sic]by an answer.Are you struggling?
Monkey241:
No.Proceeded [sic]by an answer is quite correct. Think of it in terms of a question preceding an answer
I think you mean “Preceded”, not as bright as you like to think you are, are you?
Grumpy_old_trucker:
by Monkey241 » Thu Aug 19, 2021 7:32 pm
Yes…I mentioned it in a question.
Questions are usually proceeded [sic]by an answer.Are you struggling?
Monkey241:
No.Proceeded [sic]by an answer is quite correct. Think of it in terms of a question preceding an answer
I think you mean “Preceded”, not as bright as you like to think you are, are you?
No.
Preceded is used in the correct context.
Using it where you suggest would result in an answer coming before the question [emoji1787]
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Monkey241:
Grumpy_old_trucker:
by Monkey241 » Thu Aug 19, 2021 7:32 pm
Yes…I mentioned it in a question.
Questions are usually proceeded [sic]by an answer.Are you struggling?
Monkey241:
No.Proceeded [sic]by an answer is quite correct. Think of it in terms of a question preceding an answer
I think you mean “Preceded”, not as bright as you like to think you are, are you?
No.
Preceded is used in the correct context.
Using it where you suggest would result in an answer coming before the question [emoji1787]
You didn’t use the word “preceded”, you used the word “proceeded” twice in different posts.
Once again I say you’re not as clever as you think you are, filing all those police charge sheets I would’ve expected you to at least have basic grammar skills.
An answer is preceded by question.
After a question, one may proceed to give an answer.
.
Monkey241:
Questions are usually proceeded by an answer.
Isn`t this mixing different tenses?
Although I am very unsure, the sentence form seems to be mixing future conditional (are usually) and a past form of proceed (proceeded) ?
.
.
But I do wholeheartedly agree here
Grumpy_old_trucker:
not as bright as you like to think you are, are you?
So true for all of us
Franglais:
An answer is preceded by question.
After a question, one may proceed to give an answer.
.Monkey241:
Questions are usually proceeded by an answer.Isn`t this mixing different tenses?
Although I am very unsure, the sentence form seems to be mixing future conditional (are usually) and a past form of proceed (proceeded) ?
.
.
But I do wholeheartedly agree hereGrumpy_old_trucker:
not as bright as you like to think you are, are you?So true for all of us
I’m calling him out because he’s regularly giving it the big “I am” on the forum because of his past employment as a policeman, I would’ve thought he would’ve used the word “Proceeded” many times whilst filling out statements and charge sheets so would be aware of its meaning.
I’m quite aware of proceeded and preceded and where to use them.
Hence, that’s what I did [emoji16]
The “big I am”? Usually used by insecure individuals who don’t like to be challenged.
Never filled in a charge sheet in my life.
As for grammar etc, I wasn’t dependent on the military to teach me that. No shame if you were.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Irish doctors questioning vaccines, especially for children.
Those with children in the 12/15 or any age group would be well advised to read this article, it gives the basics about your rights re strongly ‘encouraged’ experimental medical treatments, and also covers the Gillick Competence meanings where the state and its lackeys may (and will) try to coerce children into accepting such treatment even if their parents object.
We have a govt if you can call it that who’s been trotting out the ‘‘following the science’’ line to suit their agenda all through this, yet when the govt advisory scientists in JVCI give advice that doesn’t suit, ie that children of this age group should not be treated, then the science is ignored and overridden by our current PM and his disciples.
You just know that using the long established salami slice method of rule verging on totalitarianism that eventually they’ll be injecting yours and your childrens babies with this experimental concoction if you don’t start saying NO, what do these people have planned next, the microchip inserted into your baby’s brain?
Please read this whatever your believe or wish for yourselves for whatever reasons you may have, when they come for your children (wasn’t i condemned as a conspiracy theorist among other things when i said they’ll come for your children months ago?) if you have any objections and wish to make your chidren aware of their (and your) rights, please ensure you are forewarned = forearmed even if the majority just go along with whatever these people require.
Juddian:
Those with children in the 12/15 or any age group would be well advised to read this article, it gives the basics about your rights re strongly ‘encouraged’ experimental medical treatments, and also covers the Gillick Competence meanings where the state and its lackeys may (and will) try to coerce children into accepting such treatment even if their parents object.We have a govt if you can call it that who’s been trotting out the ‘‘following the science’’ line to suit their agenda all through this, yet when the govt advisory scientists in JVCI give advice that doesn’t suit, ie that children of this age group should not be treated, then the science is ignored and overridden by our current PM and his disciples.
You just know that using the long established salami slice method of rule verging on totalitarianism that eventually they’ll be injecting yours and your childrens babies with this experimental concoction if you don’t start saying NO, what do these people have planned next, the microchip inserted into your baby’s brain?Please read this whatever your believe or wish for yourselves for whatever reasons you may have, when they come for your children (wasn’t i condemned as a conspiracy theorist among other things when i said they’ll come for your children months ago?) if you have any objections and wish to make your chidren aware of their (and your) rights, please ensure you are forewarned = forearmed even if the majority just go along with whatever these people require.
There is a discussion to be had on the risk/benefit balance between vaccinating kids or not doing so.
But “conservativewoman” isn’t the site I would choose for a balanced view.
.
Laura Perrins states “foreign Presidents, and Prime Ministers, the military, the intelligence services, the police, the charities, the stars, celebrities and virtue signallers, the universities and the crooked academics – almost the entire financial, political, media, military/industrial, intelligence agency, cultural, academic are all elements of this hybrid state, the Deep State.”
She thinks the UK Tories are the enemy within, for being too left wing.
Juddian, give it up chap. None of them will bother reading anything what you or anyone else writes unless you can back it up with a link to their paid BBC propaganda “news” source. At best all you’ll get is a load of irrelevant strawman argument ‘noise’, as you can see. 99% of them won’t have any issue with vaxxing kids and babies and probably think it’s a good thing. The other 1% who don’t agree won’t do anything about it and will just go along with it.
DCPCFML:
Juddian, give it up chap. None of them will bother reading anything what you or anyone else writes unless you can back it up with a link to their paid BBC propaganda “news” source. At best all you’ll get is a load of irrelevant strawman argument ‘noise’, as you can see. 99% of them won’t have any issue with vaxxing kids and babies and probably think it’s a good thing. The other 1% who don’t agree won’t do anything about it and will just go along with it.
On the contrary I’ll balance the available evidence and make a decision based on that.
I’m intrigued though…at what point in time after it being introduced would you deem it safe?
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
