Simply not true. As for the stat of no-one being infected through spillages of blood that's actually irrelevant. The relevant comparison would be through a needle-stick injury, which has about a low but real chance of resulting in persistent HIV infection.
ST you post twice as much as me on here. I've already proved that. You split it between 2 accounts though Both your accounts have an overdrive award as well
When I was younger a fella beside me got jumped by some notorious local thug. He knew who he was and was quite prepared to go to the police to get him put behind bars. The police warned that by doing so his house could attacked with paint or possibly firebombs. His car and/or family car could be attacked with painstriper, firebombs etc. Grafitti might be written at his home, close by or beside his work. The peelers basically had to make him aware of the possibilities that could happen. What happened to the fella. Nothin. Turns out that his statement wasn't that important afterall as he was caught red handed breaking into a house a few days later and had left his fingerprints in the houses of 5 others.
I think this conclusively proves that the journalists and QC involved in all this were talking ****e. QED 2-0 to Medro. How can we possibly compete?
Did I say they wre talking ****e. The Peelers sound like they have went over the top on giving the details of what can be sent in a hateful letter. ****in ricin & AIDS blades That's like bein warned that a dog **** on a spring could be inside a parcel or a diseased rat. Likely to happen. Naaaaa
Previously I'd bet most people thought it wasn't likely that football fans should send letter bombs to people they took a disliking to ...
Who Alex Thomson? I agree. Pretty sure I read somewhere the difference between a bomb and a viable device.
