Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:

On 2020-09-15 12:23 p.m., News wrote:

On 9/15/2020 3:02 PM, Alan Baker wrote:

On 2020-09-15 11:37 a.m., News wrote:

On 9/15/2020 1:25 PM, Alan Baker wrote:

On 2020-09-15 6:36 a.m., News wrote:

On 9/15/2020 8:52 AM, Brian Lawrence wrote:

-a-a-a-a <https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/54161846>

"Lewis Hamilton says he "won't let up" in his fight against
injustice as the FIA decided not to investigate his actions at the >>>>>>> Tuscan Grand Prix.

Formula 1's governing body had been considering whether Hamilton >>>>>>> broke its rules in wearing a T-shirt highlighting police brutality >>>>>>> at Sunday's race.

An FIA spokesman told BBC Sport an investigation had been ruled out." >>>>>>>

Was there police brutality to highlight at Sunday's race?

So you're only allowed to protest police brutality...

...what exactly should the rule be?

Ask FIA.

"Formula 1's governing body had been considering whether Hamilton
broke its rules in wearing a T-shirt highlighting police brutality at >>>> Sunday's race."

I'm asking you.

I'm asking you why you CARE if there was police brutality to highlight
AT Sunday's race.

You seem to be of the opinion that people can only protest if you
approve of the circumstances. If that's not true, please explain what
you meant by asking the question you did.

My point is it was a poorly worded statement.

And yet I instantly understood what they meant...

...so many the problem was that the statement was poorly worded.

:-)

Was there police brutality at Sunday's race?

No. Quite obviously not, so that interpretation was easily dismissed by anyone of even quite modest intelligence.

Nevertheless it does demonstrate how careless wording or lack of correct punctuation can completely alter the meaning of a sentence.
Just saying ...


--
Sir Tim
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
* Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)