Greta's Back

[webbo3]

She needed to keep herself in the public eye, so shes now an expert in virology.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/29/greta-thunberg-launches-campaign-fight-coronavirus/

\\Thunberg said in a statement that “like the climate crisis, the coronavirus pandemic is a child-rights crisis” that will affect youngsters now and in the long-term, especially the most vulnerable.//

Childs rights ?, its affecting everyone.

[naomi24]

AH, // If you agreed with what she said, would you be quite so vociferous in your criticism? //

I’ve not read all the posts but if Jim’s question above was to me my answer is yes. The girl is being exploited.

[sanmac]

OK, Mozz, so be it.

[naomi24]

Jim, // That's a complete lie. Or, rather, a misinterpretation.//

It’s neither. //The real reason, I said before, for any objection to Thunberg is discomfort with the message. //

That^ is not ambiguous. It means what it says.

[Theland]

This must be the second time around the circuit.
You all deserve a medal :-)

[jim360]

It means what it says, yes, which makes it unfortunate that you've attached a different meaning to it. I mean, no, I don't believe that your concern for Thunberg's welfare would be quite so acute if you agreed with what she said -- although, again, there is an opportunity to test that. But that is not the same as calling you, or anyone else, a liar.

[andy-hughes]

Jim - you appear to suggest that Naomi would have no issue with the exploitation of GT if GT were pedaling a message of which she approves.

Hardly a ringing endorsement of Naomi's morality, is it!!

[andy-hughes]

We cross-posted, but I am hardly surprised to see I am right.

Naomi and I often disagree, but I am never in doubt about her basic sense of morality lies.

In the case of an exploited teenager, it's in the same location as mine.

[jim360]

A shame you couldn't defend yourself without taking an unwarranted, and inaccurate, swipe at me. I don't abandon my moral principles either.

[naomi24]

Jim, No swipes - and absolutely accurate. This is what you said. //I can't say I have a problem with being manipulated into caring about something that objectively is worth caring about. //

You have no problem with people being manipulated if you support the cause. Some moral principle!

[jim360]

First, as I've made clear, I don't agree that she's being manipulated; secondly, I said that on such a major issue I think the message is far more important, and that perceptions of the messenger shouldn't be allowed to distract from that. At no point have I abandoned my principles.

[jim360]

Oh, and thirdly, the person I was talking about in that quote was me. If someone suckered me into caring about trying to save the planet... who exactly is the loser there?

[jim360]

So, no. It's inaccurate. Although not the first time you've managed to misunderstand me, and I'm sure it won't be the last. In either case, no. It was, and remains, an inaccurate swipe.

[naomi24]

Jim, //At no point have I abandoned my principles. //

Since you're happy to see people exploited for a cause you support, I can only say you've missed out by a mile on a gold star.

[jim360]

Which bit of "I don't agree that Greta Thunberg is being exploited" is unclear?

[naomi24]

Jim, // Although not the first time you've managed to misunderstand me//

I've told you several times I read what you write - nothing more. If that causes you a problem perhaps you should consider thinking a little more carefully before you put finger to key.

[jim360]

Thanks again for the advice, but I wish you'd read the bit where I asked you not to waste your time offering unsolicited and unwelcome advice more carefully.

[naomi24]

You write what you write jim. Look to yourself for the response it generates.

Bedtime. Goodnight.

[douglas9401]

Wonder if this will ever reach 420.

[douglas9401]

Well well, it did.