Fred Roberts wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014 15:38:47 +0000 (UTC), Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:

There you go again. No one has a problem with provision for the
disabled.

You clearly stated that you disagree with questions being read out to
candidates and the answers being written down for them.

I do. Being less intelligent doesn't mean disabled.


Do you have a clinical psychiatry qualification?

Why do you continually state that the less intelligent are
disabled? They are not. I have a problem with the dense. I have a
problem with the dense and those pretending to be dense being given
"assistance" that beggars belief.

What assistance? Do you have any evidence to back this up?

Yes.

Please post it. If you refuse to, I can only conclude that you're lying.

What do I mean by dense? Look no
further than the Jocktards posting here. Do you think such scum belong
in amateur radio? They don't. I have major problems as does any right
thinking person about special provision being made for such people.


What evidence do you have that reader and scribe services have been
supplied to those who don't need it?

I have posted the details before only to have them roundly rubbished
by Katie.

Please post *evidence*, not unfounded accusations.

CB radio and PMR 446
exists for such people. This is a technical pursuit not a hobby that
was always within reach of anyone prepared to make an effort - ANYONE.
It did not need to be dumbed down to the level it has been. You *seem*
to be a clever chap Stephen you tell me why such people aren't allowed
readers and scribe assistants in their pursuit to become brain
surgeons and why such people aren't allowed to drive on our roads.

None of that remotely addresses the question, which is; why shouldn't
people with disabilities be provided services (reader and scribe) to help
them access amateur radio?

Disabled and dense are two entirely different things and you know it.

It's a fine line you're walking there, Frank. Unless you'd like to share
your clinical psychiatry qualifications and experience with us, I'd steer
clear of defining who has a disability and who doesn't if I were you.

You first Stephen, you're the one who introduced disability into this
thread , not I.

You attacked the provision of reader and scribe, a service for the
disabled, not I.

--
Stephen Thomas Cole // Sent from my iPhone