[W:53] Twitter, Facebook remove Trump post

[GhostlyJoe]

Kids are almost immune to Covid -- I wouldn't say that, but I wouldn't censor someone for saying it either. It's not very egregious in the context of the policy discussion.

This is clearly a blatant, egregious lie.

Kids cannot get Covid -- They can, as the chart I've been posting all over this thread clearly demonstrates.

Then they are not "almost immune"

Kids cannot bring Covid home -- They probably can, although how much of a vector they are is not certain, thanks to their relative immunity (5% of all cases, per CDC).

It is not probably.

Kids cannot spread Covid -- Certainly the can, especially if they become symptomatic, which is, of course, much less likely than other demographics.

Learn about science.

Kids cannot spread Covid to more vulnerable populations -- probably can, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't open the schools, which many health officials have clearly signaled we should do if at all possible. As a parent, I want the schools open, even if that increases the risk for me personally

Again not probably. They can.


But the main idea here is you are saying that children are clearly not immune and therefore the bull**** Trump spewed is a lie.

They are relatively immune, as I've clearly demonstrated. Parsing words to justify censorship has been my main contention in this thread.

I think you've more than demonstrated that the censorship is based on partisanship and not the actual substance of the debate.

 

[Mr Person]

That has absolutely nothing to do with "almost immune".

Complications are not immunity. Low complications does not mean almost immune. You are arguing and using words and you don't know what they mean.


Do you believe any of the following. Address these things. Cause we aren't discussing death rates or complications among kids.

Kids are almost immune to Covid
Kids cannot get Covid
Kids cannot bring Covid home
Kids cannot spread Covid
Kids cannot spread Covid to more vulnerable populations

Stop posting about me and start posting facts, please.

Trump's original statement isn't really misleading, and the data largely support his assert, as I've shown. So why is censorship necessary?

I'm still waiting for someone to make a cogent argument about why the post should have been removed. Regardless of what you think of his statement, I've more than adequately proven that his claims are well within the bounds of reasonable debate.

He did post facts. "Complications are not immunity. Low complications does not mean almost immune." were the facts he posted.

"That has absolutely nothing to do with "almost immune"." and "You are arguing and using words and you don't know what they mean." were why what you are doing here is so stupid and dishonest. Hope this helps.

They are relatively immune, as I've clearly demonstrated. Parsing words to justify censorship has been my main contention in this thread.

I think you've more than demonstrated that the censorship is based on partisanship and not the actual substance of the debate.

How hopelessly moronic. They are not "relatively immune" nor are they "almost immune", nor does either term actually mean anything in medicine. You are either immune or you are not immune. Immunity can last X months or years depending on the type of virus we are speaking of.

But then, you're the guy who think children are immune to the common cold because they never die from it, even though they constantly get the common cold. Or just trolling. Neither is any better.



Is the idea to just keep repeating your stupid lies until everyone rolls their eyes and walks away? Maybe then you think you can award yourself an Internets Point? I hope not, because that would only be "winning" in this sense:



Get it?

No?

Ok, the point was that Sheen was convinced he won. But over in reality Sheen lost, hard and repeatedly.

 

[Kreton]

They are relatively immune, as I've clearly demonstrated. Parsing words to justify censorship has been my main contention in this thread.

I think you've more than demonstrated that the censorship is based on partisanship and not the actual substance of the debate.

You are trolling me now. Bye

 

[GhostlyJoe]

You are trolling me now. Bye

If proving you wrong is trolling, then sure.

 

[Mr Person]

Arguing over what the word "almost" means reminds me of another such argument where a Democrat proclaimed "it depends on what the meaning of "IS" is.

But, as to Twitter banning this from Twitter, consider that the Twitter staffer who announced the Trump censorship is a former Kamala Harris press secretary and Democratic presidential candidate, who may become Joe Biden’s running mate, Nick Pacilio. Not a bit of possible bias there.

Twitter Staffer in Trump Attack Worked for Kamala Harris

Children do not die from the common cold. Do you think that proves they are immune to the common cold?

:lamo




Man, you people. You'll say anything no matter how utterly moronic, if you feel it is required. It's the dumbest kind of knee-jerk contrarianism.

"Oooo a liberal said the sky was blue. I have to say it's red!"

 

[GhostlyJoe]

He did post facts. "Complications are not immunity. Low complications does not mean almost immune." were the facts he posted.

"That has absolutely nothing to do with "almost immune"." and "You are arguing and using words and you don't know what they mean." were why what you are doing here is so stupid and dishonest. Hope this helps.



How hopelessly moronic. They are not "relatively immune" nor are they "almost immune", nor does either term actually mean anything in medicine. You are either immune or you are not immune. Immunity can last X months or years depending on the type of virus we are speaking of.

But then, you're the guy who think children are immune to the common cold because they never die from it, even though they constantly get the common cold. Or just trolling. Neither is any better.



Is the idea to just keep repeating your stupid lies until everyone rolls their eyes and walks away? Maybe then you think you can award yourself an Internets Point? I hope not, because that would only be "winning" in this sense:

View attachment 67290373

Get it?

No?

Ok, the point was that Sheen was convinced he won. But over in reality Sheen lost, hard and repeatedly.

If you were going to roll your eyes and walk away, you would have by now. If you didn't think I had a reasonable point, you wouldn't be so desperate to try to discredit me and you would either ignore my posts or attack my arguments instead. Your posts have been needlessly personal and rarely on topic.

Anyway, the censorship is wrong, and kids aren't at high risk from the virus. :shrug:

 

[Mr Person]

If you were going to roll your eyes and walk away, you would have by now. If you didn't think I had a reasonable point, you wouldn't be so desperate to try to discredit me and you would either ignore my posts or attack my arguments instead. Your posts have been needlessly personal and rarely on topic. Anyway, the censorship is wrong, and kids aren't at high risk from the virus. :shrug:

Lying and evading again. How predictable.

:coffeepap

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Lying and evading again. How predictable.

:coffeepap

 

[Mr Person]

He did post facts. "Complications are not immunity. Low complications does not mean almost immune." were the facts he posted.

"That has absolutely nothing to do with "almost immune"." and "You are arguing and using words and you don't know what they mean." were why what you are doing here is so stupid and dishonest. Hope this helps.





How hopelessly moronic. They are not "relatively immune" nor are they "almost immune", nor does either term actually mean anything in medicine. You are either immune or you are not immune. Immunity can last X months or years depending on the type of virus we are speaking of.

But then, you're the guy who think children are immune to the common cold because they never die from it, even though they constantly get the common cold. Or just trolling. Neither is any better.



Is the idea to just keep repeating your stupid lies until everyone rolls their eyes and walks away? Maybe then you think you can award yourself an Internets Point? I hope not, because that would only be "winning" in this sense:

View attachment 67290373

Get it?

No?

Ok, the point was that Sheen was convinced he won. But over in reality Sheen lost, hard and repeatedly.

Called it.

:coffeepap

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Called it.

:coffeepap

 

[Sabre]

Children do not die from the common cold. Do you think that proves they are immune to the common cold?

:lamo


Man, you people. You'll say anything no matter how utterly moronic, if you feel it is required. It's the dumbest kind of knee-jerk contrarianism.

"Oooo a liberal said the sky was blue. I have to say it's red!"

Really, no child ever died from complications of a common cold? You libs will pull any distraction to side track a post. The part about "almost" and "is" - was just my musing on parsing words. The real meat of the post is what you clearly wanted to avoid, bias.

But you knew that and wanted to take a side step you felt you could make light of the entire post with. I have come to realize that when libs use this emoji :lamo - it means : I have noting of importance to add so I will toss this in to hide that fact.

 

[Jonsa]

When you say a few hundred thousand, surely you mean general population and not children. But either way, that's a gross exaggeration of the impact of opening schools.

Without question children are less susceptible to the virus effects (a small mercy) but there is no question they can get it and they can pass it along.


Covid-19 rates are significantly higher among minority children and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, study finds - CNN

Children over age 10 spread COVID-19 as much as adults, study finds | CTV News

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Without question children are less susceptible to the virus effects (a small mercy) but there is no question they can get it and they can pass it along.


Covid-19 rates are significantly higher among minority children and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, study finds - CNN

Children over age 10 spread COVID-19 as much as adults, study finds | CTV News

I don't dispute that. I just think the long-term effects of keeping schools closed will be worse. The effect this is having on kids is really hard to quantify, but it's severe, and it will be long-lasting.

 

[Jonsa]

I don't dispute that. I just think the long-term effects of keeping schools closed will be worse. The effect this is having on kids is really hard to quantify, but it's severe, and it will be long-lasting.

I agree that there are consequences for the kids to be kept out of school but development is not straight line and for the vast majority the interruption will be nothing more than a wistful memory for them sitting in some hot classroom on a friday afternoon in years to come.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

I agree that there are consequences for the kids to be kept out of school but development is not straight line and for the vast majority the interruption will be nothing more than a whistful memory for them sitting in some hot classroom on a friday afternoon in years to come.

I really hope so. I know of at least one kid who graduated last year who was set to go to culinary school in the fall, but they've delayed opening, and the living situation is tenuous. As of today, he's homeless, sleeping on friends' couches. Just turned 18; rotten home life; was headed toward righting the ship.

Not sure what's gonna become of him, but he's probably not going to school.

An anecdote is an anecdote. It's gonna be up to him to make this happen. But many of the support networks that once existed are either on hiatus or struggling to cope.

 

[Kreton]

Children do not die from the common cold. Do you think that proves they are immune to the common cold?

:lamo




Man, you people. You'll say anything no matter how utterly moronic, if you feel it is required. It's the dumbest kind of knee-jerk contrarianism.

"Oooo a liberal said the sky was blue. I have to say it's red!"

I just realized something. I have never died from anything. Therefore I am immune to everything. Does that make me a God or just immortal?

 

[Mr Person]

I just realized something. I have never died from anything. Therefore I am immune to everything. Does that make me a God or just immortal?

There can only be one!

 

[jonny5]

I still find it funny people think we should take Trump literally. Most everyone knows what we was saying here, and that it was not a medical or scientific statement of fact. Yet some people are so dumb they might take everything a politician says literally, that facetwit has to protect them. And then of course partisans have to take it literal so they can use it to win elections.

People are now even dumber because they will rely on twitbook and democrats to be arbiters of truth, instead of thinking for themselves.

FYI - immunity is not just a scientific term. It also means "not affected or influenced by something."

 

[Scrabaholic]

Then they should and will lose their federal protections and be drowned in a tsunami of lawsuits.

Why is the USA so lawsuit-happy? They would lose. Private companies can suspend anyone they want.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Why is the USA so lawsuit-happy? They would lose. Private companies can suspend anyone they want.

Sure they can. That's not why they would be sued. They could become financially accountable for every piece of libel published on their platforms, every defamation case, every copyright claim, etc., etc. They are enjoying legal protections that other publishers don't enjoy. That won't last long if they don't wise up.

 

[Luce]

I still find it funny people think we should take Trump literally.

I can't improve on the comedy of this statement.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Sure they can. That's not why they would be sued. They could become financially accountable for every piece of libel published on their platforms, every defamation case, every copyright claim, etc., etc. They are enjoying legal protections that other publishers don't enjoy. That won't last long if they don't wise up.

:lamo Thanks for the laugh.

Don't like their rules? Don't use their platforms. Too easy.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

:lamo Thanks for the laugh.

Don't like their rules? Don't use their platforms. Too easy.

Here is the relevant law.

Decent article on the subject here.

 

[bluesmoke]

View attachment 67290299

You're "almost" not delusional!

You "are" delusional.

 

[Mr Person]

So they took down a mainstream media interview with a sitting president? WTF?

How is what he said a lie exactly?

View attachment 67290297

Liberals are so full of crap. lol!

Remember how I told you that a low death rate in children has nothing to do with immunity?

"97,000 children reportedly test positive for coronavirus in two weeks as schools gear up for instruction"

97,000 children reportedly test positive for coronavirus in two weeks as schools gear up for instruction - CBS News

:lol: