here is a similar excerpt from your same comment above, with different highlighting by me, which shows even better, your "weaselness" (for lack of a better word

here is a similar excerpt from your same comment above, with different highlighting by me, which shows even better, your "weaselness" (for lack of a better word - maybe weaselishness or weasel(ish) nature? ): >wasn't particularly more detached than aristocrats at the time were generally (which, to be fair, is quite a lot, but not all laughable comment. iow, what is evident to someone who sees beyond the surface meaning of the words you used, like I can, is that you want to attack someone verbally, without being held responsible for the consequences of your attack. in other words, you are a weakling and a coward. that is why you waffle or equivocate. and that is true of a lot of people, not just here but in the world. i have seen enough over my lifetime to know that that is the case. for a very relevant and important current example, check out the news about the SignalGate scandal involving the topmost echelons of the US govt., how they fucked up, made a fool of themselves in front of the whole world, and then tried, unsuccessfully, like you, to cover it up. jokers, and beggars, all such people. update: wow, fuck, again. proof. some time after writing this comment, on a whim, I thought of googling for the term signalgate, and what was my surprise, to see this Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_group_chat_leak https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_gro... It just goes to show the notability of it, because Wikipedia only allows what they consider notable pages (according to their criteria, of course). iow, the topic is considered important by them.