egg

For comparison, please show the starting point and the movement. Thanks.

Me and others are merely commenting on Musk's actions. His intentions and beliefs are unknown, yet you assume them.

It can't be a settled issue as people see it differently. I fully agree on the highlighted part, but you seek to debate everything to the nth degree, seemingly not accepting that people do and can have differing opinions. I think it was a nazi salute, you don't, you seemingly don't believe he's a nazi, I don't have any thoughts on whether he is or isn't. Those differences of opinion do not need ongoing discussion and will solve nothing.

Ok, so some people agree with you, well done. That doesn't make them or you correct.

Prime Wincey Willis?

That's dafter than daft. People don't have to label him a nazi to highlight that he did a nazi salute. That he hasn't clarified his actions doesn't help his cause.

We're not here to do your explaining for you mate.

Bless. As long as you're fooling yourself poppet x

Musk is now an extension of Trump. Psychophants who need and/or don't want to upset Trump and/or Musk will suck up to them or keep quiet.

I've never been able to make sense of you mate. Your prejudices are clear to me, and seemingly to others.

But you're the gift that gives on giving so I'll continue to highlight your obvious prejudices.

Your posts and opinions suggest that you are.

Who's called him a nazi? People have highlighted his nazi salute.

Great, more of your shite to look forward to.

Have a day off mate. It was a nazi salute, because, you know, it was a nazi salute. What he may or may not be is a separate point and one I won't speculate about.

I'm sure it'd go down a storm in downtown Tel Aviv as well.

Lucy Verasmy. Always perky weather when she's on.

Doing terrorist stuff from a terrorist instruction manual is enough for me. The inquiry will reveal more though, and more importantly, will hopefully reduce the prospects of anything like this happening again. That should be the focus.

I'm with you on the first part, that's all pretty obvious. I can't agree on the second part tho.

A) will never be said, and B) is a timing issue. Moreover, none of us have a right to this information. For whatever reason people feel an entitlement to it, but they shouldn't. People need to get over themselves.

It's a very simple issue. The wider public were not benefited by knowing more than they did. None of us needed to know that he had a manual and knocked up ricin. I repeat, a perception of an entitlement to information is not the test, it's what's in the public interests. We got the right outcome which suggests that it was dealt with properly.

There's no way of safely saying, and I paraphrase, "we ain't telling you knuckle draggers what we know cos we don't trust to react like decent human beings". It's tue that a criminal process could have been prejudiced, and it's equally true that the public did not need to know any more - yearning for information in some quarters is not the test, it's about public interest.

That's one perspective. Another is that telling angry people stuff that will fuel their anger is another. I think people encourage their own conspiracies, and an unchecked SM gives them a platform to air them, and have others fan the flames.

It wasn't in the public interests to release information that would a) inflame public feeling, and b) jeopardise the criminal investigation/trial. Both seem like genuine concerns. What's telling to me is this perception that people have a right to know stuff that they don't actually need to know. The key here was convicting this loon and we've done that.

Reading the stuff he read could just about be passed off as being inquisitive. Once he's implemented terrorist instructions, I think it indisputable that he's a terrorist.