Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Now if they ran this on the daily C 19 update...
Gab ^ | 10/18/2021 | SovereignSoul

Posted on 10/17/2021 9:50:20 PM PDT by Nextrush

Now if they ran this on the daily C19 update, maybe people might wake up. All those whom have died from Vax...


TOPICS: Government; Health/Medicine; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: australia; covid19; death; disabilities; stats; vaccination; vaccine; vax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
A memorial was set up in Brisbane, Australia with pictures and names of those who died after getting the jab. The video is embedded in the link.
1 posted on 10/17/2021 9:50:20 PM PDT by Nextrush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

Great idea. We need to do the same, everywhere.


2 posted on 10/17/2021 10:20:19 PM PDT by Sequoyah101 (Politicians are only marginally good at one thing, being politicians. Otherwise they are fools.I ha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush
All those whom have died from [...]

Ungrammatical!

Regards,

3 posted on 10/17/2021 10:39:25 PM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

Kudos to the people bringing attention to these deaths.


4 posted on 10/17/2021 10:59:18 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

Sarah Plumley BA PGCE
@SarahPlumleyUK

AUS Navy Stats:

In 31 years there have been 317 cases of myocarditis in service personnel.
This year, up to 28th September 2021, there have been:

1,113 cases of myocarditis.

It doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes to crack this case!
Are there any journalists out there? Any at all?

Via: https://mobile.twitter.com/Angelasfreenews


5 posted on 10/17/2021 11:08:52 PM PDT by sockmonkey (Conservative. Not a Neocon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek; Nextrush

>> who not whom

Quite some time ago, I once used ‘whom’ in the subjective. I recall the accusation of being a pretentious jackass. To this day, I fight the temptation to use it.

The rule, which I just reviewed, states that ‘whom’ is acceptable as the object of a verb or preposition.

That’s fine... but ‘who have died’ vs ‘who died’ is for me the real struggle — lol.


6 posted on 10/18/2021 12:09:41 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
Quite some time ago, I once used ‘whom’ in the subjective.

Sorry, but you lost me at "subjective."

Regards,

7 posted on 10/18/2021 12:20:50 AM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

... the subjective case


8 posted on 10/18/2021 12:35:16 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Nextrush

9 posted on 10/18/2021 1:14:04 AM PDT by ransomnote (IN GOD WE TRUST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek; Nextrush; Gene Eric

Freeper’s original use of “who” was correct. Other Freeper’s attempted grammar correction was incorrect.

FReegards.


10 posted on 10/18/2021 1:21:00 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker; alexander_busek; Nextrush

That’s cool

But again this: ‘who have died’ vs ‘who died’


11 posted on 10/18/2021 1:25:10 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmdGwttUfKU


12 posted on 10/18/2021 1:39:50 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
But again this: ‘who have died’ vs ‘who died’

Same diff as between "who have eaten" and "who ate" - or as between "who have attempted" and "who attempted."

You choose one over the other depending upon the given context and the given intention.

E.g., in certain cases / contexts, it might even be "more appropriate" to write "who had died." (Plusquamperfect)

That's the best I can say without resorting to all kinds of grammatical terminology which might only further confuse you.

Regards,

13 posted on 10/18/2021 2:38:27 AM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

>> which might only further confuse you.

Be generous and confuse me.


14 posted on 10/18/2021 2:52:15 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

>> Same diff as between “who have eaten” and “who ate” - or as between “who have attempted” and “who attempted.”

And those are not two equal analogies — the first is structurally different, that latter is simply a substitution of terms.


15 posted on 10/18/2021 3:04:11 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

“plusquamperfect”

you made that up, didnt you ?


16 posted on 10/18/2021 3:09:05 AM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing obamacare is worse than obamacare itself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

No, that’s one of them new plum hybrids. I had one last year. it was tasty.


17 posted on 10/18/2021 5:25:18 AM PDT by BipolarBob (Somebody tell Hunters dad that the American public is losing patience with him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
“plusquamperfect”

you made that up, didnt you ?

I sincerely hope that you are only indulging in a little playful humor, and not seriously attempting to troll me.

I am more comfortable with the German terminology, and would hence normally refer to the Vorvergangenheit, but no: There really is a plusquamperfect tense:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluperfect

Regards,

18 posted on 10/18/2021 5:50:30 AM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
>> Same diff as between “who have eaten” and “who ate” - or as between “who have attempted” and “who attempted.”

And those are not two equal analogies — the first is structurally different, that latter is simply a substitution of terms.

No, I'm sorry, but you are seriously mistaken.

"Who have died" is - grammatically speaking - IDENTICAL to "who have eaten." Merely the verb is a different one. But both sentences are in the Perfect Tense (or Aspect).

"Who died," "who ate," and "who attempted" all have essentially the same meaning as their Perfect Tense counterparts, but are in a different tense, namely: The Simple Past.

I have spent the past 35 years translating complex technical and legal texts from/into German, Russian, and English, i.e., my livelihood has depended upon my knowing the difference.

If you choose not to believe me, then I suggest that you consult, e.g., Wikipedia.

Regards,

19 posted on 10/18/2021 6:03:55 AM PDT by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

Now if you could explain how to use “:” vs “;”


20 posted on 10/18/2021 6:24:32 AM PDT by Luigi Vasellini (political class.......TERM LIMITS NOW!!!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson