OT - Wootton Bassett
Simon S-B
they've got a point, the right will say there's no fucking way we'd be
allowed to do it in their country. I suspect that someone will do something
really distasteful to provoke the marchers into violence and there'll be a
bit of a riot. If it was you Didge, I want my inflatable sheep and Mohammed
doll back.
Mike
The difference between the muslim march and the retruning bodies of the
soldiers is that it's the locals of the town who started paying their
respects rather than a bunch of strangers (I'll wager all of the muslim
marchers will need to use their sat nav, as would I) hijacking the town
for their own ends.
Sure it's now been hijacked by the media fascinated as it always is by
outpouring of genuine emotion but essentially it still remains the
locals and the bereaved paying their respects rather than a political stunt.
If the muslim organisation want to protest about the war why not do it
in their towns or London? Unfortunately unless the council or the
police can come up with some serious public order issues it will go
ahead. Unfortunately (or fortunately) this is Britain and we don't
wantonly attack or imprison people for an opposing opinion, unlike most
muslim countries.
If no one turned out watch including the press then that would rain on
their parade far more effectively than any ban. Freedon of speech does
not mean anyone has to listen.
Mike
Virgin Mary
wrote:
where are George and Tony when you need them.....
Stephen Doyle
"Mike" <mikelovescham...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:hi0bqa$cj5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
FYI
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/05/brown-condemns-islamist-march-plan
Cheers
Stephen
Road_Hog
"Mike" <mikelovescham...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:hi0bqa$cj5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> serious public order issues it will go ahead. Unfortunately (or
> fortunately) this is Britain and we don't wantonly attack or imprison
> people for an opposing opinion, unlike most muslim countries.
Sorry Mike but I have to correct you there. It will not go ahead, and if by
any miracle the authorities do let it go ahead, they will have a bloodbath
on their hands (which is the only reason I believe that they will get a
backbone and ban it). There are organisations that will stand up to this.
However I believe Choudary is only after publicity like he did with his so
called December march in London that never happened.
The DDoS attack on his website has done well and kept it down for a couple
of days now ( visit www.islam4uk.com to see), not all of us are doing
nothing.
dechucka
"Simon S-B" <bait...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hi0b5n$8dj$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Thought they were carrying on a British tradition of marching through
neighborhoods to iratate the locals
dechucka
> they've got a point, the right will say there's no fucking way we'd be
> allowed to do it in their country.
I suspect that their country and your country are one and the same
snip
Simon S-B
"dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S8ydnUx-eMatV97W...@westnet.com.au...
And do you also suspect the right would say that?
dechucka
The right what?
Simon S-B
"dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:IrSdnT7N5-NXUN7W...@westnet.com.au...
Please don't make me whoosh you so early in the year.
dechucka
You may whoosh me if you want.
BTW I am the right
>
Chris Parslow
It is wasn't for yesterday's Daily Mash, I'd have assumed you were
talking about some new breed of short-arsed dog much fancied by yer
actual Mohamedan...
CP
Simon S-B
"Road_Hog" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:hi0hav$vng$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
I agree it won't happen and is nothing more than a stunt. Being as this
bloke has already founded 2 terrorist organisations in this country
(al-Muhajiroun, The Saviour Sect) and has urged Muslims not to cooperate
with anti-terrorist police, why is he still free? Also, can someone tell me
why we have legally binding Sharia courts in the UK?
Charles
wrote:
The only legally binding Sharia decisions which can be upheld by
British law, are those concerned with arbitration and which are
governed by the Arbitration Act of 1996.
However, this law applies to all decisions by legally constituted
Arbitration Tribunals, including Sharia Tribunals, whereby opposing
parties enter into voluntary arbitration and are obliged to accept the
Tribunal's findings, which are enforceable if necessary through other
processes of British Law.
Sharia Courts are fundamentally Arbitration Tribunals.
That is a far cry from Sharia Law being universally enforceable under
British Statute.
HTH
johnmhill
Some of us are discussing turning up, lining the streets and singing
"Onward Christian Soldiers" as a peaceful protest.
JH
johnmhill
> "Simon S-B" <baitt...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Not if they want to impose Sharia law it isn't.
JH
Klitty
Not even if their sweet kid pops around and filches your cookie jar?
(Before their he cuts off her hand and then stones her older
sister for kissing a boy in the school play).
Simon S-B
"johnmhill" <jo...@huntersm.com> wrote in message
news:2f26e8ae-cba7-4c64...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
Some friends have told me that The Fox in Tangley and The Boot in Shipton
Bellinger (both have strong ties to the military, as does the whole area)
will be sending 'away' teams. Both of these pubs play in a local league
(Sundays, 25 each way, half time beer then back to the pub for lunch) which
contains 12 pubs. The sides are usually made up of military, locals and the
farm boys. If they turn up it'll be carnage.
I really can't see it going ahead for this very reason. If the bigwigs in
government are condemning it, it's a bit of a green light for the mobs.
Klitty
> johnmhill <jo...@huntersm.com> writes:
>
>> On Jan 5, 11:24 pm, "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> "Simon S-B" <baitt...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:hi0b5n$8dj$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>> > So the lefty liberals will probably say that it's freedom of speech and
>>> > they've got a point, the right will say there's no fucking way we'd be
>>> > allowed to do it in their country.
>>>
>>> I suspect that their country and your country are one and the same
>>>
>>> snip
>>
>> Not if they want to impose Sharia law it isn't.
>>
>> JH
>
*edited with less sleep in the eyes*
Not even if their sweet kid pops around and rifles through your cookie jar?
(Before her father cuts off her hand for stealing and then stones her
Mark (newsgroups)
> "Mike" <mikeloveschampagneandru...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
You realise that DoS attacks are illegal?
Simon S-B
"Mark (newsgroups)" <marknew...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:27acaf7f-ff6d-45bb...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
So are PDoS, in more than one way.
Road_Hog
"Mark (newsgroups)" <marknew...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:27acaf7f-ff6d-45bb...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>other tens of thousands of us who have done this, I'll be happy to have my
>day in court and the publicity. Let them bring it on, some of us have a
>backbone and are willing to challenge these Jihadists and stick up for
>Great Britiain, the rest of you prepare to live in Dhimmitude.
dechucka
======================================
You live in a democracy so how are they going to do this without majority
support
dechucka
> news:hi0bqa$cj5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Unfortunately unless the council or the police can come up with some
>> serious public order issues it will go ahead. Unfortunately (or
>> fortunately) this is Britain and we don't wantonly attack or imprison
>> people for an opposing opinion, unlike most muslim countries.
>>Mike
> Sorry Mike but I have to correct you there. It will not go ahead, and if
> by any miracle the authorities do let it go ahead, they will have a
> bloodbath on their hands (which is the only reason I believe that they
> will get a backbone and ban it). There are organisations that will stand
> up to this.
The best organisation would be the Parachute Regiment as they have a history
of controlling marches and protecting the freedom of speech.
Actually maybe they could reinvent the Black and Tans from ME vets. Another
organisation with a history of supporting democracy and human rights
Mentalguy2k8
Or maybe the Islamic extremists could self-police, given their penchant for
tolerance and their exemplary human rights record.
Uncle Dave
It's part of the price of throwing in your lot with religious despots
like George Bush and assisting in their immoral crusades. In the
immortal words of George Carlin "any time a bunch of religious people
want to get together and kill each other that's fine by me" so WASPs
versus Muslims Round 993, might as well be in Wootton Bassett as
anywhere else. I have this odd idea that a life is a life, regardless
of species, sex, creed, colour etc. and I think that it's a sad
reflection on this country when pointing out that many innocent
people are dying needlessly is seen as bad. I agree the location
might be seen as insensitive but I think the outcry reflects badly on
what is supposed to be a secular society. By protesting against it,
people are throwing in their lot with the likes of Pope Tony Blair by
showing hatred of Muslims which is sadly ironic.
UD
Road_Hog
complete, total, 100% system of life.
Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military
components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other
components.
Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to
agitate for their religious privileges.
When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree
to Muslim demands for their religious
privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.
Here's how it works:
As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given
country, they will be for the
most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to
other citizens. This is the case in:
United States---- Muslim 0.6%
Australia---- Muslim 1.5%
Canada---- Muslim 1.9%
China----Muslim 1.8%
Italy---- Muslim 1.5%
Norway----Muslim 1.8%
At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and
disaffected groups, often with major
recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom-- Muslim 2.7% (actually we're now 4-5%)
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their
percentage of the population.
For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic
standards) food,
thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase
pressure on supermarket chains to
feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply.
This is occurring in:
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to
rule themselves (within their ghettos) under
Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish
Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase
lawlessness as a means of complaint about
their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings.
Any non-Muslim action offends Islam and results in uprisings and threats,
such as in Amsterdam , with
opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.
Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections in:
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 15%
After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia
formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of
Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%
At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and
ongoing militia warfare, such as in:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all
other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic
cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax
placed on
infidels, such as in:
Albania-- Muslim70%
Malaysia-- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%
After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run
ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the
infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in
some ways is on-going
in:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza-- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%
100%
will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace.
Here there's supposed to be
peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools,
and the Koran is the only word, such as
in:
Afghanista- -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 100%
Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, because, in these 100% states the
most radical Muslims intimidate and spew
hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a
variety of reasons.
'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life.
It was me against my brother;
me and my brother against our father;
my family against my cousins and the clan;
the clan against the tribe;
the tribe against the world,
and all of us against the infidel'. --
Leon Uris, 'The Haj'
It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100%
Muslim populations, such as France, the minority
Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100%Muslim, and
within which they live by Sharia Law.
The national police do not even enter these ghettos.
There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious
facilities.
In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large.
The children attend madrasses.
They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime
punishable by death.
Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists
exercise more power than the national average would indicate.
Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their
birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews,
and all other unbelievers.
Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this
century.
Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: "Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The
Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat"
Stephen Doyle
A similar case could be made for/against our so-called Christian society
could it not?
Crusades, right wing religious bigotry, anti Semitism, Cathloic Priests etc
etc.
Cheers
Stephen
Two Dogs
> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:avmdnUBimeKVjdjW...@westnet.com.au...
>
>
>
Excellent
TD
isimeli
> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:avmdnUBimeKVjdjW...@westnet.com.au...
>
>
>
Does the good Dr have anything to say about Muslims in Fiji? I live
within katyusha range of 2 mosques but you hardly here a thing from
them. At last count I believe Muslims made up at least 5% of the
population.
Road_Hog
"Stephen Doyle" <st...@dmsystems.co.nz> wrote in message
news:hi36e7$js1$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> ____________________________
> A similar case could be made for/against our so-called Christian society
> could it not?
> Crusades, right wing religious bigotry, anti Semitism, Cathloic Priests
> etc etc.
>
> Cheers
> Stephen
>
years ago. I like to think we've moved on since then, unlike Islam.
Road_Hog
"isimeli" <isi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6df5d635-398b-4557...@j5g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
within katyusha range of 2 mosques but you hardly here a thing from
them. At last count I believe Muslims made up at least 5% of the
population.
>
pursues actively the conversion of indigenous Fijians from Christianity to
Islam. Once it has enough converts, it will start to impose Islam's will on
the rest of the population. Would you like some links to videos or reading
material to enlighten you? Or will you be happy to become a Dhimmi?
Stephen Doyle
So the National Front welcome Jews now do they?
Cheers
Stephen
Road_Hog
life. Anyway the NF is now the BNP and yes they accept all races and
religions, not that has anything to do with my original (or follow up
posts).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/15/bnp-constitution-non-white-members
Simon S-B
"Uncle Dave" <david...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:81051880-5cd1-4b0f...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
You know I'm no fan of the war, but what's your explanation for the large
number of Muslims who have condemned not only the march but the main
protagonist? How do you explain the huge number of Afghans and Iraqis that
have come here since the war began? Why did they not stop in France? Because
they know they will be taken care of here, because compared to nearly every
other country we are incredibly generous to immigrants.
Take a poll in the country and nobody wanted the war before, and nobody
wants it now. However, 20 years ago nobody knew what a Muslim was. Lefty
liberals let Mosques, schools, community centres and various other 'Muslim
only' enclaves spring up everywhere in an uncontrolled way. The nature of
the religion is exclusive, so we are naturally suspicious as a largely
atheist country. The 'outcry' is simple statement that we've conceded a lot
over the years, so don't be so bloody insensitive. Something the vast
majority of Muslims completely understand.
isimeli
> "isimeli" <isim...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> them. At last count I believe Muslims made up at least 5% of the
> population.
>
> Yes, he says read up and you will find that The Fiji Muslim League also
> pursues actively the conversion of indigenous Fijians from Christianity to
> Islam. Once it has enough converts, it will start to impose Islam's will on
> the rest of the population. Would you like some links to videos or reading
> material to enlighten you? Or will you be happy to become a Dhimmi?
No thanks, you and the doc can scare yourselves watching those
videos. The Fiji Muslim League have been awfully remiss in their
conversion work. The Mormons and JWs have more than got their measure
when it comes to missionary work around here.
Stephen Doyle
Your anti-Islam rant, disguised as quotes from a book, just made me think of
all things intolerant. Thats all.
Cheers
Stephen
dechucka
"Mentalguy2k8" <Mental...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Us81n.2511$0a2....@newsfe21.ams2...
Extremist of any type arn't well known for their tolerance ( by definition )
or human rights records.
I'm just surprised at some of the calls/support in this thread for mob rule
in a suposed liberal democratic state. As Hall/Tallentyre wrote " I
disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say
it"
This IMO applies to peaceful marches no matter in how much bad taste they
are.
dechucka
now you sounding like any other extremist
dechucka
"Simon S-B" <bait...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hi3agj$eji$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Wonder if the Moslems serving in the British Army in the ME also get
condemned
Simon S-B
"dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8WdnQWDJeFWptjW...@westnet.com.au...
That's a ridiculous question because nobody is condemning Muslims here. What
they are doing is objecting to the insensitivity of an action planned by a
self-serving dipshit known for starting terrorist organisations. One idiot
does not speak for all Muslims as you well know.
You don't want to be lecturing us when you come from a nation that puts
their immigrants into cages.
dechucka
Read the thread there is a distinct anti moslem theme. I personally condem
extremists of all types
>
> You don't want to be lecturing us when you come from a nation that puts
> their immigrants into cages.
Never heard of us putting immigrants into cages, there isn't enough room
anyhow they are full of boat people :-( .
Luckily with a change of government we have become slightly more
enlightened.
Simon S-B
"dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:C7CdnbGzMptKOtjW...@westnet.com.au...
I don't think there is. There is a difference between being intolerant of
this march, and being intolerant of Muslims.
>>
>> You don't want to be lecturing us when you come from a nation that puts
>> their immigrants into cages.
>
> Never heard of us putting immigrants into cages, there isn't enough room
> anyhow they are full of boat people :-( .
>
What's your definition of immigrants that you don't include the boat people?
> Luckily with a change of government we have become slightly more
> enlightened.
We still get a TV program on here, think it's called Nothing To Declare. It
shows us just how welcoming Australian customs are to everyone and how
enlightened your policies are.
didgerman
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:28:32 -0000, "Simon S-B"<bait...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "Road_Hog"<nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> "Mike"<mikelovescham...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:hi0bqa$cj5$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Unfortunately unless the council or the police can come up with some
>>>> serious public order issues it will go ahead. Unfortunately (or
>>>> fortunately) this is Britain and we don't wantonly attack or imprison
>>>> people for an opposing opinion, unlike most muslim countries.
>>>> Mike
>>> Sorry Mike but I have to correct you there. It will not go ahead, and if
>>> by any miracle the authorities do let it go ahead, they will have a
>>> bloodbath on their hands (which is the only reason I believe that they
>>> will get a backbone and ban it). There are organisations that will stand
>>> with his so called December march in London that never happened. The DDoS
>>> attack on his website has done well and kept it down for a couple of days
>>> now ( visit www.islam4uk.com to see), not all of us are doing nothing.
>>>
>>
>> bloke has already founded 2 terrorist organisations in this country
>> (al-Muhajiroun, The Saviour Sect) and has urged Muslims not to cooperate
>> with anti-terrorist police, why is he still free? Also, can someone tell me
>> why we have legally binding Sharia courts in the UK?
>
> The only legally binding Sharia decisions which can be upheld by
> British law, are those concerned with arbitration and which are
> governed by the Arbitration Act of 1996.
>
> However, this law applies to all decisions by legally constituted
> Arbitration Tribunals, including Sharia Tribunals, whereby opposing
> parties enter into voluntary arbitration and are obliged to accept the
> Tribunal's findings, which are enforceable if necessary through other
> processes of British Law.
>
> Sharia Courts are fundamentally Arbitration Tribunals.
>
> That is a far cry from Sharia Law being universally enforceable under
> British Statute.
>
> HTH
Charles I'm proud of you son, good research.
didgerman
So is showing your arse in public. But that didn't stop you.
Charles
It is clear that most of your input is constructed for effect rather
from any firmly held beliefs or convictions.
In the unlikely event that your contribution to this thread is in any
way sincere, then it is clear that you, and many other muddled
thinkers like you, are very much part of the many social problems
contemporary society is obliged to confront.
Sadly, by being 'blissfully' unaware that you are part of the problem,
you are in no way capable of providing any coherent solutions.
Charles
wrote:
I am deeply indebted to you Sir; am I able to assume that my thesis
has now been peer reviewed?
Simon S-B
"Charles" <cha...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:3dbbk51gguodmue7c...@4ax.com...
Very interesting Charles.
didgerman
> So the lefty liberals will probably say that it's freedom of speech and
> they've got a point,
I'm not sure they do: it's not just speech is it.
the right will say there's no fucking way we'd be
> allowed to do it in their country.
Obvious, but that's the right for you.
I suspect that someone will do
> something really distasteful to provoke the marchers into violence and
> there'll be a bit of a riot.
Turn up to watch armed with bacon rolls?
If it was you Didge, I want my inflatable
> sheep and Mohammed doll back.
Ach, a couple of guys from the local will turn a few signposts around
after closing time and they'll all end up in Swindon going around an
eternal one way system. Easy....
didgerman
Hmm, not so good.
dechucka
I may be being overly sensitive but I felt some of the comments by Road Hog,
2 dogs and the Klit were aimed at Moslems as a whole rather than the
potentialmarchers
>
>>>
>>> You don't want to be lecturing us when you come from a nation that puts
>>> their immigrants into cages.
>>
>> Never heard of us putting immigrants into cages, there isn't enough room
>> anyhow they are full of boat people :-( .
>>
>
> What's your definition of immigrants that you don't include the boat
> people?
If they are immigrants they go through the immigration system, these people
are refugees ( well in principle they are) and are treated under the UN
refugee provisions
>
>> Luckily with a change of government we have become slightly more
>> enlightened.
>
> We still get a TV program on here, think it's called Nothing To Declare.
> It shows us just how welcoming Australian customs are to everyone and how
> enlightened your policies are.
Cool and we get a "Border Protection" style programme from the UK which if
you believe it is the literal truth of how everybody entering the UK is
treated you would get the same idea. Seen one from the US and NZ from which
you would get same idea.
While "reality TV" is reality it is heavily edited reality to make it
interesting and exciting. I would not use these shows to gain a deep and
meaningful understanding of the subject being filmed.
didgerman
I couldn't place myself on the level of your peers Charles, you know that.
Good point, well made though.
didgerman
Yeah, I didn't think we had, er, however you spell it, law here. But
wouldn't surprised if it was carried out outside our law with a blind
eye here and there.
Simon S-B
"dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3dydnU0hQepdJtjW...@westnet.com.au...
And how do you class the people fleeing Iraq and Afghanistan? By your
definition, they are refugees and we should fence them in.
>>
>>> Luckily with a change of government we have become slightly more
>>> enlightened.
>>
>> We still get a TV program on here, think it's called Nothing To Declare.
>> It shows us just how welcoming Australian customs are to everyone and how
>> enlightened your policies are.
>
> Cool and we get a "Border Protection" style programme from the UK which if
> you believe it is the literal truth of how everybody entering the UK is
> treated you would get the same idea. Seen one from the US and NZ from
> which you would get same idea.
>
You couldn't possibly get the same idea from watching a UK program, and if
you'd been to an airport in the UK in the last few years you'd know exactly
why. When you land, there are a number of customs and immigration officials
there. About 10% of them are white and it's like landing in a foreign
country. I don't personally have a problem with that as I don't speak
Gujarat and understand their purpose.
> While "reality TV" is reality it is heavily edited reality to make it
> interesting and exciting. I would not use these shows to gain a deep and
> meaningful understanding of the subject being filmed.
I can still picture the faces of all the 'refugees' peering through the
fence. I think that gives me a pretty good understanding of the subject
being filmed, and of the attitudes of the country they are in. After all,
you're pretty pushed for space compared to a country the size of the UK with
it's 60M population.
BrritSki
Simon S-B
"BrritSki" <Brri...@iname.com> wrote in message
news:7qm648...@mid.individual.net...
I'm not at all shocked. However, there are a number of white trash families
that you can say exactly the same about. I am fortunate enough to be off
work for the next couple of weeks, and I've found myself watching the king
of the gypsies Jeremy Kyle (don't - I warn you). The show is full of people
who are in and out of prison, breeding like rabbits and who have never had a
job. The government used to check that these people were looking for work
before paying them but alas that no longer seems to be the case. It also
used to be the case that after 6 months of claiming, you HAD to take
whatever job they offered you or you lost your benefits. I blame our overly
left government for removing these controls from a system that was already
being abused, and allowing it to degenerate to the comedy levels it has now.
This idiot declares that he is a 'cleric' - so why are we funding this? If
he wants to sit on his arse all day being a 'scholar', teaching about Islam,
and arbitrating on Sharia law - why is it not funded by his religion? Should
Christian clergy now all sign on and save the church a bit of money? If they
are not allowed to, are they being discriminated against?
Uncle Dave
> "Uncle Dave" <davidco...@t-online.de> wrote in message
I was going to reply to Charles, but trying to have a sensible
discussion with him is a complete waste of braincells as the man has
no idea that there can be any legitimate view other than his own, let
alone that he might listen to and consider it. So I shall reply to
you instead :-)
I don't disagree with anything you wrote as it's the way it is, what
I'm saying is that one should consider why it is. Your point about
not knowing what a Muslim was is the key I think. Twenty or more
years ago, countries which were mainly Muslim in religion were either
engaged in fighting their own people (e.g. Turkey, Somalia, Pakistan,
Yemen), fighting each other (e.g. Iran and Iraq) or establishing
themselves as extremely naughty in the eyes of the West (e.g.
Libya). You can't just split out the failure of the international
community (sic) in Bosnia, Somalia, Palestine and the gung-ho
brinkmanship of the USA against Iraq and Iran, their meddling in
Pakistan et al from the equation. The Western powers, particularly
the USA, by a mixture of ineptitude, laissez-faire and aggression have
made religion a focal point in a way that it never was before. There
were Islamic states but there was no "State of Islam". Muslim
extremism, though hardly new, has grown as much out of the actions of
ourselves and our allies as it has from a united Islam. (That would
be a misnomer anyway as they're just a bit less disjointed, but there
are more loonie elements eager, and rather more importantly organised
enough, to exploit the opportunities regularly afforded them by the
West).
The great majority of UK Muslims are decent law-abiding people - more
so in many ways than their indigenous neighbours - but their religion
has now become an issue for them in a way that it wasn't before. They
have been forced into "being Muslims" whereas before they would have
been identified by, and probably identified more with, their country
of origin/birth. This has not just come about because of Al-Qaeda -
there is no doubt that the vast majority of Muslims abhor that
organisation as much as the rest of us - but because Muslims have
become the new Jews, ironically in part because of the continued
persecution by Jews of Palestinians. Ah, you will say, but they fire
rockets into Israel, they send suicide bombers to kill innocent
people. And they do.
My point is that by forgetting how we got to this point, blindly
looking only at one side of the issue and saying that there is
something wrong about remembering the many innocent people who
continue to be killed in these wars is symptomatic of the failure of
the UK to recognise that 1) we are a multi-racial society and 2) we
should be proud of it. Every time a soldier is killed in Afghanistan
it makes the news, yet hundreds of civilians die there every day and
we only hear about them in the most spectacular cases. There is an
imbalance which should be questioned. Nobody wants to see more
soldiers killed, but why should we ignore the inevitable cost in lives
of those soldiers being there? Most of those dying never asked to
have these soldiers fighting "for" them. They never asked the Taliban
to fight for them either, and yet those soldiers and fighters are
there with the inevitable result of many innocent deaths.
*Why* are we there? Because we "have to fight them over there" or
because our political masters have other agendas as has been the case
so often in Muslim conflicts in recent times? Either way it's pretty
bloody flimsy (though personally I think it's the right thing, unlike
in Iraq) and to remind people that many innocent lives are being lost
in their name is no bad thing. "Lest we forget"...
That's all I have to say about that.
UD
Uncle Dave
> On 07/01/2010 09:44, Charles wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:54:54 -0800 (PST), Uncle Dave
The irony in that post was so thick it would be funny if it wasn't
tragic.
UD
didgerman
Yes, sad but true. Let's not talk about what Charles holds firmly
though, it could be the rail beside the bath, but I suspect it's smaller
and wrinklier than that.
Sorry Chaz, old habits, I promise to behave for the rest of the year....
>
> UD
Simon S-B
"Uncle Dave" <david...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:7d3799dd-ee37-4ed2...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
The issue is we spread ourselves too thin. We told the Afghans we'd pay them
not to grow poppies, and we didn't. We told them we'd rebuild the schools
and hospitals and we didn't. We told them we'd sort out their infrastructure
and we didn't. We didn't because we got pulled into an unjustified regime
change in Iraq. More recently we have been keeping our promises, and from
what I gather the attitudes of the locals to the soldiers is indeed
changing. I believe given enough time we will keep the promises that were
made. Lets not forget what the alternative to a democratically elected (yes,
I know it's not really but it's a start) government for Afghanistan is.
They've had numerous different groups over the years, but all have been
barbaric. There will be many in the country who have never known peace. A
lasting solution is necessary, and that's why we need to stay.
dechucka
Yes they are probably refugees and should be detained in civilised
conditions till their status is confirmed. I beleive the Christmas Island
facility where they are currently detained is such a facility. Camps like
Woomera were an absolute disgrace and a blight on Australia
>
>>>
>>>> Luckily with a change of government we have become slightly more
>>>> enlightened.
>>>
>>> We still get a TV program on here, think it's called Nothing To Declare.
>>> It shows us just how welcoming Australian customs are to everyone and
>>> how enlightened your policies are.
>>
>> Cool and we get a "Border Protection" style programme from the UK which
>> if you believe it is the literal truth of how everybody entering the UK
>> is treated you would get the same idea. Seen one from the US and NZ from
>> which you would get same idea.
>>
>
> You couldn't possibly get the same idea from watching a UK program, and if
> you'd been to an airport in the UK in the last few years you'd know
> exactly why. When you land, there are a number of customs and immigration
> officials there. About 10% of them are white and it's like landing in a
> foreign country. I don't personally have a problem with that as I don't
> speak Gujarat and understand their purpose.
Last time I went to the UK the customs and immigrattion people were
extremely polite and helpful. I assume they were British and they were much
easier to understand than most from Northern England, IMHO. Coming back
into Australia numerous times over the years I have found the customs and
immigration people very polite and obliging as have my o/s visitors.
Surprisingly not all people were given the 3rd degree, locked up in small
rooms, the purpose of their visit minutly examined or given cavity searches
( although last time there was 1 NZer, resident in Aus, who kept demanding
one, name sounded like Matoo or something ). However like the UK Australia
has the right to protect its borders from drugs, people who have lied on
their visa applications, overstayers ( the largest group being from the UK,
but very small in % terms from the latest figures I could find ),
biosecurity threats and other threats.
>
>> While "reality TV" is reality it is heavily edited reality to make it
>> interesting and exciting. I would not use these shows to gain a deep and
>> meaningful understanding of the subject being filmed.
>
> I can still picture the faces of all the 'refugees' peering through the
> fence. I think that gives me a pretty good understanding of the subject
> being filmed, and of the attitudes of the country they are in. After all,
> you're pretty pushed for space compared to a country the size of the UK
> with it's 60M population.
and I can still see the pictures of the massacres by British troops of their
own civilians in NO Ireland but that doesn't mean it is true today. Remember
that reality TV is made for TV and counties move on. I am not proud of a lot
of the history of Australia but it happened and must be accepted as part of
this county's history i.e. I don't like it but I must accept it.
dechucka
Good luck to the troops in Afghanistan but I am very pessamistic about the
outcome.
Uncle Dave
> "Simon S-B" <baitt...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:hi5bp1$utj$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
>
>
Ain't never gonna be no "outcome" to Afghanistan. It's like Vietnam,
only more so. From the occupation of Hanoi by the Vieet Minh to the
fall of Saigon took just under 30 years. It's now 36 years since the
first coup in Afghanistan...
UD
Simon S-B
"Uncle Dave" <david...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:8702aba8-390b-4247...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
The problem will be stopping the fanatics crawling out of the woodwork again
once we leave.
dechucka
====================================================
Unlike Vietnam I cannot see Afghanistan ever being united except by an
occupying force
dechucka
The fanatics are still there. The Afghan Goverement with the help of the UN
forces actually controls very little of the country
>
Charles
wrote:
... that would make a welcome change!
Charles
<david...@t-online.de> wrote:
>On Jan 7, 10:25锟絘m, didgerman <didger...@rfu.com> wrote:
>> On 07/01/2010 09:44, Charles wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:54:54 -0800 (PST), Uncle Dave
>> > <davidco...@t-online.de> 锟絯rote:
>>
>> >> On Jan 5, 9:32 pm, "Simon S-B"<baitt...@gmail.com> 锟絯rote:
>> >>> So the lefty liberals will probably say that it's freedom of speech and
>> >>> they've got a point, the right will say there's no fucking way we'd be
>> >>> allowed to do it in their country. I suspect that someone will do something
>> >>> really distasteful to provoke the marchers into violence and there'll be a
>> >>> bit of a riot. If it was you Didge, I want my inflatable sheep and Mohammed
>> >>> doll back.
>>
>> >> It's part of the price of throwing in your lot with religious despots
>> >> like George Bush and assisting in their immoral crusades. 锟絀n the
>> >> immortal words of George Carlin "any time a bunch of religious people
>> >> want to get together and kill each other that's fine by me" so WASPs
>> >> versus Muslims Round 993, might as well be in Wootton Bassett as
>> >> anywhere else. 锟絀 have this odd idea that a life is a life, regardless
>> >> of species, sex, creed, colour etc. and I think that it's a sad
>> >> reflection on this country when 锟絧ointing out that many innocent
>> >> people are dying needlessly is seen as bad. 锟絀 agree the location
>> >> might be seen as insensitive but I think the outcry reflects badly on
>> >> what is supposed to be a secular society. 锟紹y protesting against it,
>> >> people are throwing in their lot with the likes of Pope Tony Blair by
>> >> showing hatred of Muslims which is sadly ironic.
>>
>> > It is clear that most of your input is constructed for effect rather
>> > from any firmly held beliefs or convictions.
>>
>> > In the unlikely event that your contribution to this thread is in any
>> > way sincere, then it is clear that you, and many other muddled
>> > thinkers like you, are very much part of the many social problems
>> > contemporary society is obliged to confront.
>>
>> > Sadly, by being 'blissfully' unaware that you are part of the problem,
>> > you are in no way capable of providing any coherent solutions.
>>
>> Hmm, not so good.
>
>The irony in that post was so thick it would be funny if it wasn't
>tragic.
>
Any irony contained in my post was inserted therein by intent, whereas
the irony in your sentence above was written without any awareness of
its very amusingly ironic content.
You may not know that comedy and tragedy are the antithesis of each
other, and that in the absence of one there would never be the other.
If you had intended to post for that reason it would be very funny -
unfortunately ...
Klitty
Hilarious. How typical to wave around some extreme example to fire up
the shaven headed masses.
I bet you're the type that thinks our "brave boys" should be paid more
than, say, a doctor or whoever?
It's all bleeding heart rhetoric and you know it.
What makes us British is not to crow about how British we are and then
going on to condemn "free loading pakis" but to try and find a balanced
approach without allowing the extremists to dull our thoughts and
decency as they do in so many other countries.
The old "I'm not racist but..." line can be heard straining at the seams
in many recent posts.
Uncle Dave
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 10:56:21 -0800 (PST), Uncle Dave
>
>
>
> >On Jan 7, 10:25 am, didgerman <didger...@rfu.com> wrote:
> >> On 07/01/2010 09:44, Charles wrote:
>
> >> > On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:54:54 -0800 (PST), Uncle Dave
>
> >> >> On Jan 5, 9:32 pm, "Simon S-B"<baitt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> So the lefty liberals will probably say that it's freedom of speech and
> >> >>> they've got a point, the right will say there's no fucking way we'd be
> >> >>> allowed to do it in their country. I suspect that someone will do something
> >> >>> really distasteful to provoke the marchers into violence and there'll be a
> >> >>> bit of a riot. If it was you Didge, I want my inflatable sheep and Mohammed
> >> >>> doll back.
>
> >> >> It's part of the price of throwing in your lot with religious despots
> >> >> immortal words of George Carlin "any time a bunch of religious people
> >> >> want to get together and kill each other that's fine by me" so WASPs
> >> >> versus Muslims Round 993, might as well be in Wootton Bassett as
> >> >> of species, sex, creed, colour etc. and I think that it's a sad
> >> >> people are dying needlessly is seen as bad. I agree the location
> >> >> might be seen as insensitive but I think the outcry reflects badly on
> >> >> people are throwing in their lot with the likes of Pope Tony Blair by
> >> >> showing hatred of Muslims which is sadly ironic.
>
> >> > It is clear that most of your input is constructed for effect rather
> >> > from any firmly held beliefs or convictions.
>
> >> > In the unlikely event that your contribution to this thread is in any
> >> > way sincere, then it is clear that you, and many other muddled
> >> > thinkers like you, are very much part of the many social problems
> >> > contemporary society is obliged to confront.
>
> >> > Sadly, by being 'blissfully' unaware that you are part of the problem,
> >> > you are in no way capable of providing any coherent solutions.
>
> >> Hmm, not so good.
>
> >The irony in that post was so thick it would be funny if it wasn't
> >tragic.
>
> Any irony contained in my post was inserted therein by intent
So in other words it was entirely pointless? If only I could believe
you I would be happy as the world might be a safer place, but I can't
as that would involve one hell of a transformation on your part which
is extremely unlikely.
I think you meant every word of it and so you receive an extremely
long but rather sad WHOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSHHHHHHH.
UD
Charles
You are an inveterate 'snipper' UD and constantly responding to
fragments of a thread, completely out of context, which you think
enables you to conceal your ineptitude.
In fact such actions do no such thing and simply demonstrate what a
fraud you really are.
Here once again is what I actually said:
"Any irony contained in my post was inserted therein by intent,
whereas the irony in your sentence above was written without any
awareness of its very amusingly ironic content.
You may not know that comedy and tragedy are the antithesis of each
other, and that in the absence of one there would never be the other.
If you had intended to post for that reason it would be very funny -
unfortunately ..."
Have a great weekend David, you know I won't as I am once again on my
very boring and tiresome annual bant!!
Uncle Dave
<SNIP WHICH IS WHAT GROWN-UPS DO WHEN REPLYING TO A SPECIFIC PART OF
ANOTHER'S POST, PARTICULARLY ANOTHER WHO IS AN INVETERATE WINDBAG AND
COMPLAINS LIKE FUCK ABOUT EVERYTHING EVEN PEOPLE SNIPPING>
>
> You are an inveterate 'snipper' UD and constantly responding to
> fragments of a thread, completely out of context, which you think
> enables you to conceal your ineptitude.
Point of Order. Surely, if you conceal your ineptitude then you are
no longer inept? Even if you are unable to conceal your ineptitude,
then surely the fact that you recognised your ineptitude means that
you aren't actually inept but, rather, inadept?
Come on Charlie, if you're going to use big words, at least look up
their meanings and consider the implications of what you're writing.
Hope this helps you in your quest for internet immortality.
UD
Brent Hadley
> On Jan 8, 5:26 pm, Charles <char...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> <SNIP WHICH IS WHAT GROWN-UPS DO WHEN REPLYING TO A SPECIFIC PART OF
> ANOTHER'S POST, PARTICULARLY ANOTHER WHO IS AN INVETERATE WINDBAG AND
> COMPLAINS LIKE FUCK ABOUT EVERYTHING EVEN PEOPLE SNIPPING>
>
>
>
> > You are an inveterate 'snipper' UD and constantly responding to
> > fragments of a thread, completely out of context, which you think
> > enables you to conceal your ineptitude.
>
> Point of Order. Surely, if you conceal your ineptitude then you are
> no longer inept?
If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it
make a sound?
Cheers
Brent
Virgin Mary
yes
didgerman
If they're still there, and they are, we'll still be there.
I fully expect to be waving my grandchildren goodbye as they go on a
tour in Afghanistan.
We need a free world, when we have a free world, we'll have a united
world, when we have a united world, we can move to other worlds, then we
can work out how to break lightspeed and eventually escape the universe,
so humans can live forever in a multiverse.
And you thought Iraq was about oil......
>>
>
Lodi
and no.
HTH
Lodi
didgerman
I've heard that one before
>
> Cheers
>
> Brent
BrritSki
>
> Hilarious. How typical to wave around some extreme example to fire up
> the shaven headed masses.
>
> I bet you're the type that thinks our "brave boys" should be paid more
> than, say, a doctor or whoever?
>
> It's all bleeding heart rhetoric and you know it.
>
> What makes us British is not to crow about how British we are and then
> going on to condemn "free loading pakis" but to try and find a balanced
> approach without allowing the extremists to dull our thoughts and
> decency as they do in so many other countries.
>
> The old "I'm not racist but..." line can be heard straining at the seams
> in many recent posts.
Methinks he doth protest too much. FOAD Klotty
Stephen Doyle
>
> If they're still there, and they are, we'll still be there.
> I fully expect to be waving my grandchildren goodbye as they go on a tour
> in Afghanistan.
> We need a free world, when we have a free world, we'll have a united
> world, when we have a united world, we can move to other worlds, then we
> can work out how to break lightspeed and eventually escape the universe,
> so humans can live forever in a multiverse.
> And you thought Iraq was about oil......
>
>>>
>>
>
Cheers
Stephen
didgerman
We'll just shoot the ones that aren't united enough, easy.....
rick boyd
> So in other words it was entirely pointless? If only I could believe
> you I would be happy as the world might be a safer place, but I can't
> as that would involve one hell of a transformation on your part which
> is extremely unlikely.
>
> I think you meant every word of it and so you receive an extremely
> long but rather sad WHOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSHHHHHHH.
Dave, Dave, Dave -- haven't you learnt yet? Any posts wherein John
appears to be a witless buffoon are in fact him being doubly clever and
cunning as Baldric on a particularly cunning day, by using
double-reverse irony that simply eludes intellectual microbes like what
we is.
-- rick boyd
rick boyd
Only in circumstances where black is white, up is down, Nick is a master
of logic and philosophy, and Ernest is not a fat, lonely homosexual
whose sad, lonely life is lived entirely in a virtual world.
-- rick boyd
rick boyd
> If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it
> make a sound?
Yes. It does.
-- rick boyd
Charles
HEH!
You sound like Corporal Jones UD, all over the place like a mad
woman's shit, shouting "don't panic"!
You can bluster all you like with your 'bullshit baffles brains'
tactic, but it doesn't really work you know! ;o)
Charles
wrote:
Well observed Ricky, our mutual friend has much to learn before he is
able to get his head up his arse and hold his breath, as far and as
long as you can.
It's really nice to have you back; no doubt you'll be taking over
command of the loony bin again?
Oh lah, our cup runneth over!
dechucka
>> Unlike Vietnam I cannot see Afghanistan ever being united except by an
>> occupying force
>
> We'll just shoot the ones that aren't united enough, easy.....
not really. even with might of the US they can't find them to shoot them
dechucka
"rick boyd" <bo...@comswest.net.au> wrote in message
news:1q2dnYujEPG5XdrW...@westnet.com.au...
Go for it you Aussie good thing :-)
btw you really truly are now a member of the AGP ( I assume you are still
writing for the Perth thing)
Brent Hadley
This would mean Dave is wrong.
There you go Rick - more than a year away, but it's nice to know some
things never change.
Cheers
Brent
rick boyd
Of course Dave is wrong. Dave is always wrong. Like many a well-meaning
do-gooder brimming with noble principles delivered from the unassailable
ramparts of the higher moral ground; Dave has not wandered across the
path of common sense and actual practical reality for many a long year.
-- rick boyd
Lodi
Hate to be all intelligent and stuff but I've read a book so I know what I'm
talking about. No pictures in the book too. Only words!!!
The key phrase in the question is "and no-one is there". Current thinking
has it that with no observer present the tree is in a quantum superposition
state in that it is both fallen and not fallen. Hence my earlier answer.
And, for what it's worth, there are also universes where black is white,
Nick is clever and Ernest is happy. They're just an awfully long way away
from here.
Here's the book. Read it and give up....
http://tinyurl.com/ycpdhh5
In search of the Multiverse - John Gribbin
Lodi
Trying desperately to raise the average IQ of rsru in the off-season but
failing miserably....roll on S14
Klitty
That post kind of reminded me of when my Grandfather asked if George
Formby was still #1.
Klitty
And yet "Brit"tski, it was you waving headlines around and complaining
about the "Pakis and Wogs" getting more on social than our "brave
boys". Kiss my arse, you prick.
rick boyd
> And yet "Brit"tski, it was you waving headlines around and complaining
> about the "Pakis and Wogs" getting more on social than our "brave
> boys". Kiss my arse, you prick.
Look "Walter", if you insist on conversing with dribbling imbeciles like
Twitski and Michael "Smegma Breath" Newport, you really can't expect a
lucid conversation, so what on earth are you complaining about?
-- rick boyd
Virgin Mary
I was there dammit!
rick boyd
> Hate to be all intelligent and stuff but I've read a book so I know what I'm
> talking about. No pictures in the book too. Only words!!!
>
> The key phrase in the question is "and no-one is there". Current thinking
> has it that with no observer present the tree is in a quantum superposition
> state in that it is both fallen and not fallen. Hence my earlier answer.
Hence your reliance on completely posey, posturing academic,
philosophical felching. I am not interested in what some mincing
university babbler with an entire alphabet after his last name wants to
theorise about the meaning of reality.
Academics only real aim in life is to be published and since other
people have already said all the obvious stuff about atoms and things,
there's nothing left but for them to peddle ever more bizarre and
unlikely theories about utterly implausible bollocks.
The real question is not whether collapsing vegetation would create
sonic waves in the absence of homo sapiens, but whether I would cross
the road to piss on one of these scholarly windbags if he was on fire.
And the answer is no, I wouldn't.
-- rick boyd
BrritSki
QED
BrritSki
your absence. But now you're back it will become a load of endless
twaddle centred around you (as opposed to a lot of twaddle on all sorts
of subjects).
I CBAed to kf every thread where you appear so I'm off. Enjoy !
Uncle Dave
> > rick boyd wrote:
> >> Lodi wrote:
> >>> Virgin Mary wrote:
>
> >>>> On Jan 8, 6:46 pm, Brent Hadley <the_1a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it
> >>>> make a sound?
>
> >>>> Cheers
>
> >>>> Brent
> >>> yes
>
> >> and no.
>
> >> HTH
> >> Lodi
>
> > Only in circumstances where black is white, up is down, Nick is a master
> > of logic and philosophy, and Ernest is not a fat, lonely homosexual
> > whose sad, lonely life is lived entirely in a virtual world.
>
> > -- rick boyd
>
> Hate to be all intelligent and stuff but I've read a book so I know what I'm
> talking about. No pictures in the book too. Only words!!!
>
> The key phrase in the question is "and no-one is there". Current thinking
> has it that with no observer present the tree is in a quantum superposition
> state in that it is both fallen and not fallen. Hence my earlier answer.
The trouble with "current thinking" is that it is usually overtaken at
some point by, er, "current thinking". In our universe, with our
understanding of the world (i.e. based on such things as the so-called
"laws" of physics, or what we currently know (as we cannot know what
we do not yet know)), there can be only one answer, viz. who gives a
flying fuck.
I have spoken. Let it be so.
UD
Uncle Dave
> On Jan 8, 11:27 pm, rick boyd <b...@comswest.net.au> wrote:
>
> > Brent Hadley wrote:
> > > If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it
> > > make a sound?
>
> > Yes. It does.
>
> This would mean Dave is wrong.
How do you work that out? Wrong about what? You lost me when you
came over all strange and started asking silly pseudo-philosophical
questions.
UD
Uncle Dave
Says the journalist living in one of the remotest parts of the
planet...
UD