Iranian Nukes
Posted by: 7V on 20 November 2004
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by matthewr
Eeeeeewwwwwwww.
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by Justin
quote:
Originally posted by AlexG:
Is it me, law boy?
I don't practice law.
Judd
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by JonR
quote:
Originally posted by Justin:
I don't practice law.
Or, it seems, sod all else for that matter.
JR
PS: Are there any lapdog vacancies out there? I am really keen and can heel with the best of 'em.
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by bigmick
Alex I'd love to have you on board but you can't serve two masters and Matthew has me beat with those choccy drops.
Well it seems to be this season's must-have accessory so Jon, if you're up for the job I'm happy to share my stash of Gille Chocolate Gallettes hot from Stockholm.
Why this is a cracking idea!
Well it seems to be this season's must-have accessory so Jon, if you're up for the job I'm happy to share my stash of Gille Chocolate Gallettes hot from Stockholm.
Why this is a cracking idea!
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by JonR
quote:
Originally posted by bigmick:
Well it seems to be this season's must-have accessory so Jon, if you're up for the job I'm happy to share my stash of Gille Chocolate Gallettes hot from Stockholm.
Why this is a cracking idea!
Kewl!
Stockholm's a luvverly place too, so anything from there's ok by me.
Woof woof!!
JR
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by bigmick:
I also fail to see where I have bullied you and perhaps you are misconstruing unexpected robust argument as bullying. I do think it’s poignant that the very people who are supporting the threatening bullying tactics of the US and Israel in the Middle East finally lose patience at being asked to convincingly argue their case and accuse me of bullying. If in fatc you do sense that you are being bullied, think about that aggression and abuse that you’re subsequently exhibiting and think how the Iranians, Palestinians and Iraqis feel whenever they are threatened or attacked. Maybe you now understand why we see backlashes and inflammatory language?
Marvellous stuff btw, bigmick.
Steve M
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by sonofcolin
A lefto fascist bully? How would that work? Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't a fascist someone who may be regarded as slightly right of liberal? I think I get the 'Lefto' part, so if you put them together don't you get.....
Tony Blair???!!
Big Mick, are you really Tony or are you a neocon-commie-zionist-mujeheddin loving zealot?
I'm getting confused
Tony Blair???!!
Big Mick, are you really Tony or are you a neocon-commie-zionist-mujeheddin loving zealot?
I'm getting confused
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by sonofcolin:
A lefto fascist bully? How would that work? Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't a fascist someone who may be regarded as slightly right of liberal?
Dear confused,
I used the term 'fascist' in the third sense below (from Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary):
fascist
noun [C]
1 someone who supports fascism
2 a person of the far right in politics
3 DISAPPROVING someone who does not allow any opposition:
He reckons all policemen are fascists and bullies.
Regards
Steve M
PS: You think that Tony Blair is to the left? You really ARE confused.
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by Justin
quote:
Originally posted by JonR:quote:
Originally posted by Justin:
I don't practice law.
Or, it seems, sod all else for that matter.
JR
I don't know what this means. What is "sod all else" mean, exactly?
Judd
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by Steve Toy
"sod all else" is the same as "bugger all else."
In the grand scheme of things with Bible Belt laws on sodomy, I guess the polite version would be "fuck all else."
Any which way, none of them mean anything else, so they must all mean nothing else...
I hope this helps.
Regards,
Steve.
[This message was edited by Steve Toy on Thu 25 November 2004 at 4:28.]
In the grand scheme of things with Bible Belt laws on sodomy, I guess the polite version would be "fuck all else."
Any which way, none of them mean anything else, so they must all mean nothing else...
I hope this helps.
Regards,
Steve.
[This message was edited by Steve Toy on Thu 25 November 2004 at 4:28.]
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by Justin
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
"sod all else" is the same as "bugger all else."
In the grand scheme of things with Bible Belt laws on sodomy, I guess the polite version would be "fuck all else."
Any which way, none of them mean anything else, so they must all mean nothing else...
I hope this helps.
Regards,
Steve.
Oh, I see. This is true. I am, as it were, "between careers".
Judd
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by sonofcolin
7V
Thanks for clearing up your definition of fascist. I was sure you meant definition 1 of the Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary. I never got as far as 3.
I think a little more 'depth' in your explanations would help to make things slightly clearer, especially for the less 'informed' individuals such as myself (I never read your previous thread).
My Blair comment was supposed to be a weak minded joke. I will explain it as I know my abstract humour can be slightly confusing:
When you get extreme left ('leftie') and extreme right (fasict pig: see def 1 of Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary) they should balance out (like + and - charges) and produce something inbetween. This would be the 'Blair' particle I referenced.
As a technical note, the Blair particle would be seen as neutrally (liberal) charged when compared to the Bush particle.
I couldn't really find a more definitive definition that would satisfy our international audiance. Everyone knows Blair. Livingstone and Ben would have probably been too abstract
Thanks for clearing up your definition of fascist. I was sure you meant definition 1 of the Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary. I never got as far as 3.
I think a little more 'depth' in your explanations would help to make things slightly clearer, especially for the less 'informed' individuals such as myself (I never read your previous thread).
My Blair comment was supposed to be a weak minded joke. I will explain it as I know my abstract humour can be slightly confusing:
When you get extreme left ('leftie') and extreme right (fasict pig: see def 1 of Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary) they should balance out (like + and - charges) and produce something inbetween. This would be the 'Blair' particle I referenced.
As a technical note, the Blair particle would be seen as neutrally (liberal) charged when compared to the Bush particle.
I couldn't really find a more definitive definition that would satisfy our international audiance. Everyone knows Blair. Livingstone and Ben would have probably been too abstract
Posted on: 24 November 2004 by 7V
Sonofcolin,
Yes, it seems that both the extreme left and the extreme right are fascist in the sense that I used the word.
I suppose that in the US Blair might be considered more of a Democrat - is that true?
In the UK, he took over the Labour party that was quite socialist in its outlook and helped make it electable in modern times. His first act on being elected prime minister was to invite Margaret Thatcher to 10 Downing Street so he tends to be regarded here as right wing, particularly by comparison with the more traditional wing of his party. In truth he's probably a little right of centre, depending on your viewpoint.
Wouldn't it have been great if you could have put Hitler and Stalin in a room together and, by the forces of politics, they'd both disappeared?
Regards
Steve M
Yes, it seems that both the extreme left and the extreme right are fascist in the sense that I used the word.
I suppose that in the US Blair might be considered more of a Democrat - is that true?
In the UK, he took over the Labour party that was quite socialist in its outlook and helped make it electable in modern times. His first act on being elected prime minister was to invite Margaret Thatcher to 10 Downing Street so he tends to be regarded here as right wing, particularly by comparison with the more traditional wing of his party. In truth he's probably a little right of centre, depending on your viewpoint.
quote:
When you get extreme left ('leftie') and extreme right (fasict pig: see def 1 of Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary) they should balance out (like + and - charges) and produce something inbetween.
Wouldn't it have been great if you could have put Hitler and Stalin in a room together and, by the forces of politics, they'd both disappeared?
Regards
Steve M
Posted on: 25 November 2004 by JonR
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
"sod all else" is the same as "bugger all else."
In the grand scheme of things with Bible Belt laws on sodomy, I guess the polite version would be "fuck all else."
Any which way, none of them mean anything else, so they must all mean nothing else...
I hope this helps.
Cheers Steve!
That's as good a summary as I could wish for.
JR
Posted on: 25 November 2004 by Deane F
quote:
Originally posted by 7V:
Wouldn't it have been great if you could have put Hitler and Stalin in a room together and, by the forces of politics, they'd both disappeared?
It would have obviated the "holocaust denial" industry, which would be a good thing in my opinion. Free speech gone too far.
Deane
Posted on: 25 November 2004 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Deane F:
What always pisses me off is that, with all this 'World Jewish Conspiracy' going on, no one invited me to participate. Bastards.
Seriously though, Deane, this puts me in mind of two elderly Polish gentlemen I used to know (neither Jewish). They lived together in a house in London where an ex-girlfriend of mine (also Polish) was a lodger. During the war they were both interned in concentration camps, one in a Nazi camp, one in a Soviet.
I asked them how they felt the two compared and their answer was that in the Soviet concentration camp there was always the sense that if you adopted Communism as the true religion, you could survive. In the Nazi camp there was no hope; you were just there to die. Both gentlemen believed that Stalin and Hitler were equally evil but that there was this difference in the camps.
I always thought their views were interesting.
Steve M
Posted on: 25 November 2004 by Deane F
Steve
Jewish conspiracy theories have been rife since the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" bollocks came into circulation.
2000 years of x-tian anti-semitism has killed more people than cancer.
Perhaps I shouldn't say much more...
Deane
Jewish conspiracy theories have been rife since the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" bollocks came into circulation.
2000 years of x-tian anti-semitism has killed more people than cancer.
Perhaps I shouldn't say much more...
Deane
Posted on: 25 November 2004 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Deane F:
Jewish conspiracy theories have been rife since the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" bollocks came into circulation.
2000 years of x-tian anti-semitism has killed more people than cancer.
Perhaps I shouldn't say much more...
Absolutely Deane,
And as I suspect you already know, a Syrian series based on the "Protocols..." has recently been broadcast in France by Hezbollah's vehemently anti-Jewish 'Al-Manar' television station. Unsurprisingly, the broadcast resulted in a spate of attacks on Jews by French Moslems.
Following the broadcast, public pressure led to the French government banning Al-Manar on the grounds that it violated France's anti-incitement laws. However, this week, the ban was reversed by the French Broadcasting Authority, thereby permitting Al-Manar to continue broadcasting into France and elsewhere in Europe.
Like you, 'perhaps I shouldn't say much more'. I certainly will not be criticizing the French government for this sudden and surprising reversal as I've been told by another member of the forum that he finds such remarks by me to be 'as offensive as any anti-Semitic, racial or ethnic prejudice'.
Enough said.
Steve M
Posted on: 25 November 2004 by Jim Lawson
Happy Thanksgiving !
Sincerely
Jim
Sincerely
Jim
Posted on: 26 November 2004 by Berlin Fritz
To repeat those wise words once again from Dr Hans Blix the jist of which were basically, How can we possibly justify intervention into Iran as we ourselves in the West (right across the board) quite happily shipped to the Shar all the Nuclear technology and materials he requested (at a luvvly jubbly price naturally). Perhaps we should pre-emtively attack ourselves to counter-balance any wrong doing by us in the past or possibly the future.
Fritz Von Presidentputinsaysleaveukrainetoitsowndevicesandheshouldknowinnit
Fritz Von Presidentputinsaysleaveukrainetoitsowndevicesandheshouldknowinnit
Posted on: 26 November 2004 by JonR
quote:
Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
Presidentputinsaysleaveukrainetoitsowndevicesandheshouldknowinnit
Yeh - y'know like, Chechnya and all that
JR
Posted on: 26 November 2004 by Berlin Fritz
You win first prize John, and it's a weeks holiday in Siberia all expenses paid (bring yer own salt ) second prize goes to our Mat (Three weeks in Siberia)innit.
Fritz Von Leavedemocracytotheidealists
Fritz Von Leavedemocracytotheidealists
Posted on: 26 November 2004 by JonR
Yeeer-har! Frozen wasteland here I come!
Will table salt do?
JR
Will table salt do?
JR
Posted on: 26 November 2004 by JohanR
quote:
A lefto fascist
Nothing strange with that. Remember, Musolini was a member of the Italian Communist party before starting his own. Nazi stands for National Socialism. Communism and Fascism has most things in common, starting with them being totalitarian and non democratic.
What could be argued is that the words left and right in politics can only be used when we are talking democracy. I.e. a dictatorship can't be described with the terms left or right.
quote:
To repeat those wise words once again from Dr Hans Blix the jist of which were basically, How can we possibly justify intervention into Iran as we ourselves in the West (right across the board) quite happily shipped to the Shar all the Nuclear technology and materials he requested (at a luvvly jubbly price naturally).
Here in Hans Blix home country we only sell weapons to nations that's not at war. Like Yugoslavia in the 1970's and 80's (Swedes who was involved in the Zerbian conflict around 1999 has reported how strange it felt to be shot at by weapons of our own manufacture).
JohanR
Posted on: 26 November 2004 by bigmick
Steve
I do believe that for the purposes of a very cheap shot, you are deliberately conflating criticism of a policy or action of a French organisation with a drip feed of baseless prejudice against France and the countries of Europe. IMO the former is valid and the latter is offensive. Simple as that.
I happen to agree that the ban should not have been reversed but in the spirit of media balance, surely you should have added that the continuance of the licence is conditional on the company not broadcasting any material considered to be racist or inciting racism. If they do so, the license will be revoked forthwith.
I also think I'm right in saying that the CSA is an independent body and not under direct government control.
Whenever there was the outcry about the Oriana Fallaci's Islamophobic Rage and Pride which was a vile, paranoid polemic, a coalition of French Islamic and anti-racism groups sought, under a law intended to curb Holocaust denial, to get it's distribution banned in France. The French judiciary refused to do so and France was accused of being anti-Islamic. It's hard to win against such entrenched opinion.
Where there is a prejudice, be it anti French, Jew, Islam, British, there will always be a tendency to cherry pick the news and to establish the exception as the rule. Subconsciously I suspect we've all done it, but the trick is to stop doing it, to allow yourself to see and present the balanced picture.
Anyway, enough of this tedious wank. TGIF, I'm off to Moe's and all that.
I do believe that for the purposes of a very cheap shot, you are deliberately conflating criticism of a policy or action of a French organisation with a drip feed of baseless prejudice against France and the countries of Europe. IMO the former is valid and the latter is offensive. Simple as that.
I happen to agree that the ban should not have been reversed but in the spirit of media balance, surely you should have added that the continuance of the licence is conditional on the company not broadcasting any material considered to be racist or inciting racism. If they do so, the license will be revoked forthwith.
I also think I'm right in saying that the CSA is an independent body and not under direct government control.
Whenever there was the outcry about the Oriana Fallaci's Islamophobic Rage and Pride which was a vile, paranoid polemic, a coalition of French Islamic and anti-racism groups sought, under a law intended to curb Holocaust denial, to get it's distribution banned in France. The French judiciary refused to do so and France was accused of being anti-Islamic. It's hard to win against such entrenched opinion.
Where there is a prejudice, be it anti French, Jew, Islam, British, there will always be a tendency to cherry pick the news and to establish the exception as the rule. Subconsciously I suspect we've all done it, but the trick is to stop doing it, to allow yourself to see and present the balanced picture.
Anyway, enough of this tedious wank. TGIF, I'm off to Moe's and all that.