leftworks

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

- Pete Townshend

Tweets / retweets do not necessarily imply endorsement.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

Just one example of how, on 20th March 2020, Oliver Kamm had to eat his words with pepper and salt regarding Neil Clark. Full analysis will come later. Watch this space! Pip-pip! :D

https://t.co/4BfIq3YglC

https://t.co/Zo05N2wZux

Word swallow #1: is Neil Clark a racist?

[Neil Clark @NeilClark66]

Statement re Legal Case:

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@MichaelRosenYes I’m sorry.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@brigitfilm @beansandstuff @PulaRJS @up_again @DoubleDownNews @MichaelRosenYes https://t.co/WVa2Zju0rq

[leftworks @leftworks1]

Vile conscienceless scumbag twits @MichaelRosenYes over the body of his dead son.

It beats me how some people are not poisoned by their own saliva.

@brigitfilm

[leftworks @leftworks1]

Vile conscienceless scumbag twits @MichaelRosenYes over the body of his dead son.

It beats me how some people are not poisoned by their own saliva.

@brigitfilm

[Brigit Grant @brigitfilm]

He is none of those things. I thought his own bereavement would inform him but it has only done that in respect of the group that will give him the popular vote. Clever ? Clever enough to ride on the back of an existing story that he claims as his own. Check the bear hunt history for clarity . And the company he keeps shows how disingenuous he is . There are better children’s authors to follow.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@lizyeld @UKinjustice2025 I wonder how Lord Denning would have felt if he had been framed for corruption and had had a false confession beaten out of him? Would he then have sat in a prison cell instead of at his cosy desk and said it was fine, that the justice system was more important than he was?

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@MichaelRosenYes @brigitfilm Do you know what? If that’s the worst mud the haters can throw at you, you really don’t have much to worry about. :D

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@ScotNational @CraigMurrayOrg

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@Christo99392204 @Makoto_Says What you mean is, you believe that what you think is correct, and what those who believe differently to you think is incorrect, which is the very definition of “subjective”.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@Christo99392204 @Makoto_Says If it is not possible to discern which, then claiming that one is right is not meaningful.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@Christo99392204 @Makoto_Says So you claim. If religious believer X says proposition A is immoral, and religious believer Y says it is not immoral, where is your objective morality then? Both are equally sincere. It then boils down to who agrees with you is the objective measure of who is right. Nonsense.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@Christo99392204 @Makoto_Says You’re in no better case yourself. Assuming that God is real, how do you know what He does or does not regard as morality? That is necessarily filtered through human minds. Stating that murder is objectively wrong means no more than that a lot of religious believers agree it is.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@jeffbeckGOAT @CraigMurrayOrg That’s not what he said. Put your reading glasses on. ;D

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@johncwright2001 @PhysicistTx Tell you what. Answer my question and I’ll answer yours, you whitewashed wall. Where did the founder of your Church, and the Son of God Himself, urge the abolition of slavery? Where did He denounce it as a moral evil?

Show me. I’ll wait.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@mwgbanks1 @TheIndyNinja1 @CraigMurrayOrg @PiersRobinson1 @medialens I haven’t been able to access this article, but it looks as if it might be critical of Nicola Sturgeon. Which, given Garavelli’s previous writings and associations, would be pretty startling.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@LascauxIan @antitheistdad I did say I thought an explanation of free will might lie beyond the structural scope of the human mind. Which is not to say that it cannot be pointed to as a phenomenon. I think it’s clear that it can be.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@LascauxIan @antitheistdad I would dispute that: the “act of putting on a watch” requires volitional exercise of muscles. Any description omitting that would seem to me to be inadequate.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@LascauxIan @antitheistdad Paraphrasing Noam Chomsky: I am perfectly aware that I can choose, or not, to take off my watch and throw it out of the window. Maybe that’s an illusion. But you are going to need a very powerful argument to convince me that something as obvious as free will is an illusion.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@LascauxIan No, but the point is that a great many people fervently believe that they *can* say things with certainty. Emphatically so. So much so, that they would be entirely prepared to execute people who disagree with them: Dominionists, for example.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@LascauxIan @antitheistdad I would have to dispute that: I think concrete examples could delineate them clearly, particularly free will.

But the proposition: “Space and time can arise from nothing, and here is how it happened” also seems to me capable of access. Maybe. Maybe not.

[leftworks @leftworks1]

@ashleyxxdancer Thump the bastard