uk: 
 berlin. 
 x=1762877355; b= 
 3cL19GV1jmrnNted/RBNhYIxTAg 
 ijAkyVMMQKp33dWrvpSeBi7YgB/ 
 Received: 
 From: martinharran@gmail.com 
  
 On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 10:19:03 +0000, Pancho 
  wrote: 
  
 >On 11/4/25 09:29, Norman Wells wrote: 
 >> Martin Harran  Wrote in message:r 
 >>> On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 14:26:37 +0000, Norman Wells wrote:>On 31/10/2025 11:30, 
 >> 
 >>>> However, if you asked those who applauded so loudly what exactly Andrew 
 had done that was actually illegal or even so awful that would justify the 
 censures against him, I doubt if you'd get much in the way of sensible 
 answers. 
 >> 
 >>> So you don't grasp the difference between *illegal* and *immoral* -fair 
 enough. 
 >> 
 >> A nation's morality is generally what is expressed as its laws. 
 >>   Anything else is down to the individual to decide and is 
 >>   therefore entirely subjective. 
 >> 
 > 
 >I thought yesterday about making a very similar comment, but on 
 >reflection decided not to. Morality is a social construct. Morality 
 >doesn't have to be sensible or pragmatic, it can just be group prejudice. 
  
 "Can be" != "always is". 
  
 > 
 >The fact the media can whip up sentiment against Andrew and have it 
 >supported by the majority, suggests his behaviour could reasonably be 
 >characterised as immoral. Immoral for this week, anyway, next week, who 
 >knows? 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)