UK doctors involved in climate protests face threat of being struck off

[RayC]

59 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I agree completely, but they should NOT be proclaiming that they are medical people while doing so. They can be medical people, or they can protest. they should not be both at the same time.

If I was her patient, and I made some comment about loving my petrol using car, could I trust her to treat me properly?

 

Yes because she is bound by the terms of the Hippocratic Oath.

"I shall work with my profession to improve the quality of medical care and to improve the public health, but I shall not let any lesser public or professional consideration interfere with my primary commitment to provide the best and most appropriate care available to each of my patients."

[James105]

29 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

They can have their opinions. That's no problem. They can believe the earth is flat and Greta is the reincarnated daughter of the virgin Mary for all I care. 

 

It is their criminal convictions that we are discussing here. Stop trying to conflate the 2 very separate issues. 

 

Convicted criminals should not be practicing medicine. Especially those with suspended jail sentences. 

 

It's the misleading headline of the post that makes it difficult for those that have trouble reading any further than the title.   The headline is:

 

"UK doctors involved in climate protests face threat of being struck off"

 

That sounds terrible as everyone, including doctors dressed in uniform or literally anything at all, are entitled to protest peacefully even on the most nonsensical of causes, such as this one.   Of course, a little further down is the crucial information:

 

"her involvement in climate activism led to a series of criminal convictions."

 

I think if the title is updated to accurately reflect the content e.g "UK doctors convicted of crimes face threat of being struck off" then this will be of great help to those who have trouble reading anything other than big bold text and help them get to the same level of understanding of the story as those capable of reading more than the title.   

[RayC]

1 minute ago, James105 said:

 

It's the misleading headline of the post that makes it difficult for those that have trouble reading any further than the title.   The headline is:

 

"UK doctors involved in climate protests face threat of being struck off"

 

That sounds terrible as everyone, including doctors dressed in uniform or literally anything at all, are entitled to protest peacefully even on the most nonsensical of causes, such as this one.   Of course, a little further down is the crucial information:

 

"her involvement in climate activism led to a series of criminal convictions."

 

I think if the title is updated to accurately reflect the content e.g "UK doctors convicted of crimes face threat of being struck off" then this will be of great help to those who have trouble reading anything other than big bold text and help them get to the same level of understanding of the story as those capable of reading more than the title.   

 

All well and good but nowhere in the article does it explain how these particular convictions prevent these individuals from carrying out their duties and responsibilities as doctors.

[James105]

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

All well and good but nowhere in the article does it explain how these particular convictions prevent these individuals from carrying out their duties and responsibilities as doctors.

 

There are many professions that will lead to loss of job when convicted of a crime not related to the job they do.  Off the top of my head that would include military, judges, laywers, police and probably many, many more.   What all these jobs have in common though is that when someone joins that profession they do so in the full understanding that a conviction of any kind (other than speeding, parking tickets etc) could lead to the loss of their job.  

 

Most people do not have a problem with obeying the laws of the land and if they wish to carry on in their profession it really isn't that difficult to simply not break the law.  Even easier if that person is in a well paid profession I should think.   

Edited March 19 by James105

[JonnyF]

15 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I agree that the issues should not be conflated but that is exactly what you are doing ("Convicted criminals should not be practicing medicine"). I disagree.

 

If these two doctors have broken the law, then they should be punished. However, their crimes have nothing to do with their medical abilities and there is no evidence to suggest that they would use their medical knowledge to harm the public. Therefore, once they have served their punishment, they should be allowed to resume their medical careers.

 

 

 

OK so now we agree it is about criminal records. Let's put the free speech thing to bed then. That was a diversionary tactic and not a very good one if I may say so. 

 

So you'd allow someone who was convicted of willfully committing criminal damage to a research lab (in the case of Sarah Benn) to resume practicing as a Doctor? Nothing to do with their medical abilities, until possibly she disagrees with something happening at her lab and decides the best course of action is to smash it up. I wonder what she would do if her patients disagree with such strongly held beliefs? Refuse treatment like the nurse who said Tory voters should be refused treatment on the NHS? Or worse? Maybe we shouldn't wait to find out. I certainly wouldn't want her treating me if she found out my opinions on Stop Oil and the climate cult given her propensity to breaking the law and criminal damage. 

 

Certain jobs like Doctor, teacher, nurse etc. should have a clear criminal record. I believe theirs will be clean after 10 years if they stop getting caught committing criminal acts. They can reapply for jobs then. 

[JonnyF]

28 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

It's the misleading headline of the post that makes it difficult for those that have trouble reading any further than the title.   The headline is:

 

"UK doctors involved in climate protests face threat of being struck off"

 

That sounds terrible as everyone, including doctors dressed in uniform or literally anything at all, are entitled to protest peacefully even on the most nonsensical of causes, such as this one.   Of course, a little further down is the crucial information:

 

"her involvement in climate activism led to a series of criminal convictions."

 

I think if the title is updated to accurately reflect the content e.g "UK doctors convicted of crimes face threat of being struck off" then this will be of great help to those who have trouble reading anything other than big bold text and help them get to the same level of understanding of the story as those capable of reading more than the title.   

 

Exactly.

 

Convictions for criminal damage to a research lab of all things. And she's a Doctor. Smashing up a research lab on her day off. 

 

Yet people try to portray it as a free speech issue. 😆

[RayC]

2 hours ago, James105 said:

 

There are many professions that will lead to loss of job when convicted of a crime not related to the job they do.  Off the top of my head that would include military, judges, laywers, police and probably many, many more.   What all these jobs have in common though is that when someone joins that profession they do so in the full understanding that a conviction of any kind (other than speeding, parking tickets etc) could lead to the loss of their job.  

 

Most people do not have a problem with obeying the laws of the land and if they wish to carry on in their profession it really isn't that difficult to simply not break the law.  Even easier if that person is in a well paid profession I should think.   

 

Upholding the law (all laws) is implicit to the duties of judges, the police, lawyers and the military, so I would agree that any type of conviction should disbar individuals from practising again in those professions.

 

But what about other professions? Should footballers convicted of rape be prevented from resuming their careers? Personally I find individuals such as Mason Greenwood odious, and fully deserving of all the stick that he may get from the terraces, but I don't support the idea that he should be legally prevented from trying to resume his footballing career 

[RayC]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

OK so now we agree it is about criminal records. Let's put the free speech thing to bed then. That was a diversionary tactic and not a very good one if I may say so. 

 

So you'd allow someone who was convicted of willfully committing criminal damage to a research lab (in the case of Sarah Benn) to resume practicing as a Doctor? Nothing to do with their medical abilities, until possibly she disagrees with something happening at her lab and decides the best course of action is to smash it up. I wonder what she would do if her patients disagree with such strongly held beliefs? Refuse treatment like the nurse who said Tory voters should be refused treatment on the NHS? Or worse? Maybe we shouldn't wait to find out. I certainly wouldn't want her treating me if she found out my opinions on Stop Oil and the climate cult given her propensity to breaking the law and criminal damage. 

 

Certain jobs like Doctor, teacher, nurse etc. should have a clear criminal record. I believe theirs will be clean after 10 years if they stop getting caught committing criminal acts. They can reapply for jobs then. 

 

Perhaps you would be good enough to produce evidence to support your claim that Sarah Benn has been convicted of " .. willfully committing criminal damage to a research lab", as my - admittedly cursory - web search didn't come up with anything.

 

Benn is 55 and has been a doctor for many years both before and after her convictions without there being any concerns about her medical ability. There is no evidence to suggest that she would be a danger to any of her patients as you infer. It would be a loss to the country if she is unable to resume her career.

 

I agree that individuals should be precluded from resuming their careers in certain professions (see my reply to James105) but do not agree that this list should include health professionals unless they were convicted of a crime against the person.

[James105]

3 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Upholding the law (all laws) is implicit to the duties of judges, the police, lawyers and the military, so I would agree that any type of conviction should disbar individuals from practising again in those professions.

 

But what about other professions? Should footballers convicted of rape be prevented from resuming their careers? Personally I find individuals such as Mason Greenwood odious, and fully deserving of all the stick that he may get from the terraces, but I don't support the idea that he should be legally prevented from trying to resume his footballing career 

 

It's irrelevant.  Every doctor knows before they start that if they get convicted of crimes then they can lose their ability to practice doctoring.   All she had to do was abide by the law.  It wasn't a big ask and it is really not difficult for the vast majority of people to go through life without breaking laws (other than speeding tickets of course).  She could have protested without causing vandalism but she did and demonstrated behaviour that would be expected of an overgrown child, so this brings into question both her character and her judgement which are essential qualities a doctor should have.   

[RayC]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

 

It's irrelevant.  Every doctor knows before they start that if they get convicted of crimes then they can lose their ability to practice doctoring.   All she had to do was abide by the law.  It wasn't a big ask and it is really not difficult for the vast majority of people to go through life without breaking laws (other than speeding tickets of course).  She could have protested without causing vandalism but she did and demonstrated behaviour that would be expected of an overgrown child, so this brings into question both her character and her judgement which are essential qualities a doctor should have.   

 

What precisely is irrelevant?

 

What acts of vandalism did Benn engage in?

 

You state that " ... this brings into question both (Benn's) character and her judgement which are essential qualities a doctor should have". I agree which why the GMC investigated the incidents. They subsequently concluded that Benn presented no danger to the public and could continue to practice. 

[JonnyF]

4 hours ago, RayC said:

Perhaps you would be good enough to produce evidence to support your claim that Sarah Benn has been convicted of " .. willfully committing criminal damage to a research lab", as my - admittedly cursory - web search didn't come up with anything.

 

Sure.

 

Doctors vandalizing research labs on their day off. 

 

She's a criminal. A convicted criminal. 

 

Links below.

 

https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/23798974.protesters-sentenced-damage-caused-sequani-ledbury/

 

 

 

 

 

 

[transam]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Sure.

 

Doctors vandalizing research labs on their day off. 

 

She's a criminal. A convicted criminal. 

 

Links below.

 

https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/23798974.protesters-sentenced-damage-caused-sequani-ledbury/

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think they should have been hurt in their pocket, and pay for damages caused..

[RayC]

7 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Sure.

 

Doctors vandalizing research labs on their day off. 

 

She's a criminal. A convicted criminal. 

 

Links below.

 

https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/23798974.protesters-sentenced-damage-caused-sequani-ledbury/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"The group (including Benn) used red chalk spray to daub anti-vivisection slogans at the entrance to Sequani and handcuffed themselves to the gates until police arrived to arrest them."

 

Well personally I won't rest easy until the UK's public enemy #1 is safely behind bars and they've thrown away the keys.

 

As TransAm says, get them to pay for the clean-up operation. 

 

Bit of a juvenile protest imo but back to the original discussion point: How does this relate to Benn's ability to do her (medical) job?

[transam]

1 minute ago, RayC said:

 

"The group (including Benn) used red chalk spray to daub anti-vivisection slogans at the entrance to Sequani and handcuffed themselves to the gates until police arrived to arrest them."

 

Well personally I won't rest easy until the UK's public enemy #1 is safely behind bars and they've thrown away the keys.

 

As TransAm says, get them to pay for the clean-up operation. 

 

Bit of a juvenile protest imo but back to the original discussion point: How does this relate to Benn's ability to do her (medical) job?

These creeps who handcuff themselves to a gate should be left there, put a safety rail around them and let their chums come and rescue them, same for these people who glue themselves to the road, let them stew..

 

I saw a vid the other night where just stop oil had glued themselves to the road, not the UK, police came and ripped their hands off the tarmac, the screams were quite funny, in a morbid kinda way......😆

[JonnyF]

57 minutes ago, transam said:

I think they should have been hurt in their pocket, and pay for damages caused..

 

I disagree.

 

Background check. Criminal conviction found. Removed. Same as everyone else.

 

Just because Tarquin/Penelope has a degree and a high salary and loves hugging trees makes them no different. Especially in a position like Doctor/Teacher. Struck off until their records clear in 2034. 

 

A doctor smashing up a research lab is disgraceful. 

[JonnyF]

50 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

"The group (including Benn) used red chalk spray to daub anti-vivisection slogans at the entrance to Sequani and handcuffed themselves to the gates until police arrived to arrest them."

 

Well personally I won't rest easy until the UK's public enemy #1 is safely behind bars and they've thrown away the keys.

 

As TransAm says, get them to pay for the clean-up operation. 

 

Bit of a juvenile protest imo but back to the original discussion point: How does this relate to Benn's ability to do her (medical) job?

 

A doctor that cannot control themselves to the point that they get a criminal conviction for smashing up a research lab on their day off should have their ability to practice removed. Unfit for the job. Totally unprofessional. Reapply in 10 years if they don't re-offend. It's akin to a teacher who burns down libraries at the weekends because they don't like the books in there. 

 

Why treat them differently because they are pearl clutching middle class, leftist hand wringers who agree with your doomsday cult predictions? Oh, wait a minute...😃

 

The medical profession doesn't need convicted criminal vandals who smash up things they disagree with. We have higher standards in the UK. 

[metisdead]

A troll post in which the quoted content had been altered out of context has been removed.

[RayC]

21 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

A doctor that cannot control themselves to the point that they get a criminal conviction for smashing up a research lab on their day off should have their ability to practice removed. Unfit for the job. Totally unprofessional. Reapply in 10 years if they don't re-offend. It's . 

 

Why treat them differently because they are pearl clutching middle class, leftist hand wringers who agree with your doomsday cult predictions? Oh, wait a minute...😃

 

The medical profession doesn't need convicted criminal vandals who smash up things they disagree with. We have higher standards in the UK. 

 

" .. cannot control herself"

(Whether her actions were justified or not, Benn seems to know exactly what she was doing)

 

"Smashing up a research lab"

(She daubed paint on the outside walls of a lab and chained herself to some railings. Juvenile and, no doubt, bloody annoying for those affected (which I guess was one of Benn's objectives?). It was no more, no less than that.)

 

" ... akin to a teacher who burns down libraries at the weekends"

(Oh my giddy Aunt!!!)

 

" ... treat them differently because they are pearl clutching middle class, leftist hand wringers"

(Who said anything about treating anyone differently?)

 

" (my) doomsday cult predictions"?

(I'll repeat: They are NOT my "doomsday cult". I have little time for either 'Just Stop Oil' or 'Extinction Rebellion')

 

What complete and utter nonsense. Hyperbole of the highest order. Do you realise quite how ridiculous this all sounds? Don't bother answering: It's a rhetorical question. 

 

You still have not addressed how any of this is related to Benn's ability to practise medicine. Why? For the simple reason that there is no connection.

 

The truth of the matter is that this has nothing to do with the separation of an individual's professional and private lives and everything to do with your irrational hatred of all things you perceive as being 'woke' and/or 'left wing'. 'Just Stop Oil' is left-wing; this doctor supports 'Just Stop Oil', therefore this doctor is 'left wing' and deserves all that she gets. No nuance. No analysis of the details. Black and white: I suspect that if a doctor was involved with an act of civil disobedience by, say, Fathers 4 Justice you would be less inclined to be calling for his disbarment.

 

Btw: What would you do with Banksy if they can find him/her? He's painted god knows how many walls. Given your concept of justice, I imagine that s/he will be lucky to come out alive.

[JonnyF]

9 hours ago, RayC said:

You still have not addressed how any of this is related to Benn's ability to practise medicine. Why? For the simple reason that there is no connection.

 

Of course there is a connection. She smashed up a research lab. Committing GBH doesn't affect your ability to be a surgeon but good luck getting a position with that on your record. Both crimes prove one thing, you are a criminal who willfully breaks the law when they disagree with something.

 

9 hours ago, RayC said:

 

Btw: What would you do with Banksy if they can find him/her? He's painted god knows how many walls. Given your concept of justice, I imagine that s/he will be lucky to come out alive.

 

Banksy paints brilliant murals on walls that people enjoy. He doesn't go around smashing up research labs while working as a doctor. He doesn't stop people doing their daily jobs. Strictly speaking he should probably be fined but you can't compare it to this woman's crimes who clearly lacks ethics and maturity. He also isn't a doctor.

 

I'm not saying lock her up and throw away they key. I'm saying she lacks the ethics, judgement and maturity that we expect from our doctors. She is also a convicted criminal. Strike the entitled brat off until her criminal record has expired.  

[transam]

13 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

I disagree.

 

Background check. Criminal conviction found. Removed. Same as everyone else.

 

Just because Tarquin/Penelope has a degree and a high salary and loves hugging trees makes them no different. Especially in a position like Doctor/Teacher. Struck off until their records clear in 2034. 

 

A doctor smashing up a research lab is disgraceful. 

As well as that.........😉

[RayC]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Of course there is a connection. She smashed up a research lab. Committing GBH doesn't affect your ability to be a surgeon but good luck getting a position with that on your record. Both crimes prove one thing, you are a criminal who willfully breaks the law when they disagree with something.

 

 

Banksy paints brilliant murals on walls that people enjoy. He doesn't go around smashing up research labs while working as a doctor. He doesn't stop people doing their daily jobs. Strictly speaking he should probably be fined but you can't compare it to this woman's crimes who clearly lacks ethics and maturity. He also isn't

 

I'm not saying lock her up and throw away they key. I'm saying she lacks the ethics, judgement and maturity that we expect from our doctors. She is also a convicted criminal. Strike the entitled brat off until her criminal record has expired.  

 

To smash

verb

1: to break or crush by violence
2a: to drive or throw violently especially with a shattering or battering effect
also : to effect in this way
b: to hit violently: BATTER
3: to destroy utterly : WRECK

 

(Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smash)

 

Unless you are redefining the meaning of the word 'smash', daubing paint on a wall and chaining yourself to the gates/railings/door does not equate to "smashing up a research laboratory" no matter how often you suggest that it does.

 

Benn was found guilty of crimes and was punished. As the article states, upon her release, Benn appeared before the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) to determine whether she was fit to resume her medical career. They concluded that she was. Apparently, this (additional) trial, judgement by her peers - which I think would be sufficient for the vast majority of the public - isn't enough to satisfy you.

 

You previously complained that " ... pearl clutching middle class, leftist hand wringers ..." should not be treated differently, however, you have no problem treating the likes of Banksy differently despite him being guilty of the same crime. (Personally, I like Banksy's work, but by the letter of the law, he is guilty of criminal damage; the same offence which Benn was found guilty of).

 

Anyway, thanks for proving my point that your objection to Benn has nothing to do with concerns about her ability to perform her role as a doctor - or for that matter equity in the eyes of the law - and everything to do with your irrationally hatred of any perceived left-wing cause which must therefore, if course, be suppressed.

Edited March 20 by RayC
Missing word added

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

To smash

verb

1: to break or crush by violence
2a: to drive or throw violently especially with a shattering or battering effect
also : to effect in this way
b: to hit violently: BATTER
3: to destroy utterly : WRECK

 

(Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/smash)

 

Unless you are redefining the meaning of the word 'smash', daubing paint on a wall and chaining yourself to the gates/railings/door does not equate to "smashing up a research laboratory" no matter how often you suggest that it does.

 

Benn was found guilty of crimes and was punished. As the article states, upon her release, Benn appeared before the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) to determine whether she was fit to resume her medical career. They concluded that she was. Apparently, this (additional) safeguard by her peers - which I think would be sufficient for the vast majority of the public - isn't enough to satisfy you.

 

You previously complained that " ... pearl clutching middle class, leftist hand wringers ..." should not be treated differently, however, you have no problem treating the likes of Banksy differently despite him being guilty of the same crime. (Personally, I like Banksy's work, but by the letter of the law, he is guilty of criminal damage; the same offence which Benn was found guilty of).

 

Anyway, thanks for proving my point that your objection to Benn has nothing to do with concerns about her ability to perform her role as a doctor - or for that matter equity in the eyes of the law - and everything to do with your irrationally hatred of any perceived left-wing cause which must therefore, if course, be suppressed.

Don’t expect any retraction of the allegation of ‘smashing up a research center’.

 

Hyperbole is easily invoked, not so easily put back in its box

[JonnyF]

9 minutes ago, RayC said:

You previously complained that " ... pearl clutching middle class, leftist hand wringers ..." should not be treated differently, however, you have no problem treating the likes of Banksy differently despite him being guilty of the same crime. (Personally, I like Banksy's work, but by the letter of the law, he is guilty of criminal damage; the same offence which Benn was found guilty of).

 

Not sure why you are obsessed with Banksy but painting a mural on a wall is not the same as vandalizing a research lab, then preventing access to the workforce by chaining yourself to the gate.

 

What next? Refusing to give her patients medicine that was tested on animals? Refusing to treat patients that drive SUV's? 

 

Nah, strike her off. Doctors should have ethics and maturity. This convicted criminal has neither. 

 

 

[JonnyF]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Don’t expect any retraction of the allegation of ‘smashing up a research center’.

 

Hyperbole is easily invoked, not so easily put back in its box

 

Semantics. 

 

I'm happy to use vandalized, desecrated, defaced, smashed, whatever. We know what she did, the convicted criminal. 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

18 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Semantics. 

 

I'm happy to use vandalized, desecrated, defaced, smashed, whatever. We know what she did, the convicted criminal. 

 

 

And yet ‘defaced’ and ‘smashed up’ are by no stretch of the rational imagination the same thing.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Not sure why you are obsessed with Banksy but painting a mural on a wall is not the same as vandalizing a research lab, then preventing access to the workforce by chaining yourself to the gate.

 

What next? Refusing to give her patients medicine that was tested on animals? Refusing to treat patients that drive SUV's? 

 

Nah, strike her off. Doctors should have ethics and maturity. This convicted criminal has neither. 

 

 

More hyperbole and all in the service of your penchant to ‘cancel’.

 

 

[RayC]

25 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Not sure why you are obsessed with Banksy but painting a mural on a wall is not the same as vandalizing a research lab, then preventing access to the workforce by chaining yourself to the gate.

 

Straw clutching at its' finest.

 

Or alternatively, "vandalizing a wall by painting a mural on it is not the same as daubing paint on the walls of a research lab". The power of words, eh?

 

I'm not obsessed with Banksy at all, although I admire his work. I'm happy to substitute your favourite graffiti artist's name for Banksys'. The point remains the same: I'm just using Banksy as an example to show the inconsistencies in your argument. 

 

25 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

What next? Refusing to give her patients medicine that was tested on animals? Refusing to treat patients that drive SUV's? 

 

If that were to happen, then Benn would almost certainly be the subject of a complaint and, if proven, almost certainly struck off.

 

..... But given that these events are imaginary we don't have to be overly concerned by them.

 

25 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Nah, strike her off. Doctors should have ethics and maturity. This convicted criminal has neither. 

 

 

 

Says the man who can judge a doctor's professional competence better than her professional peers.

Edited March 20 by RayC
Rephrasing

[JonnyF]

59 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

More hyperbole and all in the service of your penchant to ‘cancel’.

 

 

 

Cancel? 😃

 

She's free to vandalize research labs.

 

Just as she is free to be struck off due to her criminal convictions for doing so.

 

I wonder how you'd feel about a right leaning doctor convicted of vandalizing an abortion clinic? No doubt you'd love to be treated by him/her for your pedantry. 😃

[Chomper Higgot]

19 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Cancel? 😃

 

She's free to vandalize research labs.

 

Just as she is free to be struck off due to her criminal convictions for doing so.

 

I wonder how you'd feel about a right leaning doctor convicted of vandalizing an abortion clinic? No doubt you'd love to be treated by him/her for your pedantry. 😃

 

You’ll just have to go on wondering.

 

I don’t feel included to encourage your whataboutary anymore than I do your hyperbole.

 

 

Edited March 20 by Chomper Higgot

[JonnyF]

53 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

You’ll just have to go on wondering.

 

I don’t feel included to encourage your whataboutary anymore than I do your hyperbole.

 

 

 

I know exactly how you would feel.

 

The fact you glibly refuse to answer again merely confirms it. 😆