OutofDate1980
Android Expert
None of it confuses me in and of itself, but what is confusing is how you interpret it as an answer to my question, or as 'proof' of your assertions??
I suspect that you're aware this statement you've quoted isn't confusing, but you pose your question to infer that I'm somehow less able to understand it than you, because we disagree on another issue; and to some reading it will appear that you're 'point scoring'
I'm sure the irony of you posing your particular argument by exaggeration of the truth won't be lost on the more astute readers.
Read posts starting at #23. I cite links that support a conclusion a crime had been committed. A corporation has agreed manipulation of the LIBOR rates has been committed and agreed to accept a penalty. Individuals have not been charged or convicted, we do know that corporations aren't people, but are composed of people, therefor a corporation has admitted a crime has been committed by unnamed individuals of said corporation.
We haven't yet started on the warfare aspect.