Walsingham

That's what they'd be in my neck of the woods. I'm not sure whether such species are present out in California. I got drafted to cook Easter dinner for 8 people yesterday. My wife's family is predominantly California-based, but her sister and brother-in-law live a short ways away from us in MD. Said sister-in-law has been hosting her husband's parents for the past week, visiting from their home in Tucson, AZ. Further, Wife & Sis have a cousin who moved to Norfolk, VA, because that's where the Navy sent him, and who stuck around after his commission expired, as a reservist going back to school full-time. As we're the only family he can get to in a day trip, he and his girlfriend were also invited. My sister-in-law tried to arrange a get-together at a restaurant, but reservations at anywhere decent were hard to come by, so she turned to me late last week as "the guy who cooks for family gatherings." This was complicated a bit because my in-law's in-laws don't eat red meat or pork. So, in a somewhat atypical move for Easter, we had fish. I went to the fancy grocery store and bought a few pounds of a big white fillets (from a beast called "Whiting" or, if you're being fancy, "Hake"), that I could slather with a dijon-thyme sauce and broil for a couple minutes. (I'm usually not especially picky about my ingredients-- all the other stuff was bought at the regular ol' grocery store-- but it doesn't pay to mess around when it comes to fishmongers.) That came out pretty well, but the best part was the scalloped potatoes with mushrooms and goat cheese. I've never lived near enough to the sea to stick to just fresh fish. But your strategy is certainly what I'd do given the chance. That or sushi.

My understanding was that the Executive operated a 'dual (****ed up) policy, resulting in both sides getting assurances of support that succeeded merely in instigating then prolonging the war. In fact, the Reagan Administration was sharply divided on the issue. Meeting on April 5, Haig and Assistant Secretary of State for Political Affairs Lawrence Eagleburger favoured backing Britain, concerned that equivocation would undermine the NATO alliance. Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Thomas Enders, however, feared that supporting Britain would undermine U.S. anti-communist efforts in Latin America. He received the firm backing of U.N. Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, Haig's nominal subordinate and political rival. Kirkpatrick was guest of honour at a dinner held by the Argentine ambassador to the United States, on the day that the Argentine armed forces landed on the islands. The White House continued its neutrality; Reagan famously declared at the time that he could not understand why two allies were arguing over "that little ice-cold bunch of land down there". But he assented to Haig and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger's position. Haig briefly (April 8–April 30) headed a "shuttle diplomacy" mission between London and Buenos Aires. According to a BBC documentary titled "The Falklands War and the White House",[19] Caspar Weinberger's Department of Defense began a number of non-public actions to support and supply the British military while Haig's shuttle diplomacy was still ongoing. Haig's message to the Argentines was that the British would indeed fight, and that the U.S. would support Britain, but at the time he was not aware that the U.S. was providing support already. A bit hackneyed, compared with other analyses I've read, but at least you can access it! EDIT: It is a personal maxim of mine that there is no such thing as divided loyalty. Loyalty is an integer of either one or zero.

You'd think so with the omnibus (?) collections they did, but they're difficult to find in my experience. I think the stores local to me got one volume. That sucks. You can even get them at the local library here.

It annoys the bojangles out of me that we have to accept weak spirits from the Obama administration over the Falklands. Arguably, such indecision helped provoke a war in the Falklands last time, and (much more famously) the invasion of Kuwait. As the interviewer above said, we NEVER fail to back up the US in a fight. Returning the favour might be gauche, but could make a real difference aroudn the world. Taiwan, anyone? I can only hope that this is a case of playing the public game different from the private. Britain is an old diplomatic hand. And while the Foreign Office were scandalously complicit in encouraging the Argentines in the 1970s/80s I don't get the feeling they're like that any more.

I hardly think it's a goddamn conspiracy. I was barely a teenager when I worked out the EC couldn't possibly work as more than a trade area. Not very secret, surely? Ultimately, we're talking about democracies here. People (most people) had at least some say in the creation of the EU. I think it should be scrapped now, but that doesn't mean I think we can just blame 'Ze Germans'.

Russian cholera also best.

Up betimes, and exploded from both ends. I'm running a fever as I write this. My immune system either over or under-reacting. All my joints are grinding together like a child playing reluctantly on the violin. Now listening to Schubert and eating oranges under an iron sky. Bit weird, but I've always liked those massive bees. There's something admirable in their size and broad benevolence.

Rediscovered Amanda Palmer. Two tracks from her Aussie tour rock me: - Vegemite - Bad Wine and Lemon Cake Really puts 'normal' song writing in perspective.

Doesn't the second pretty much follow from the first?

I hadn't considered that as factor in live performance, but now you mention it, I'd say you might be right.

You can get some very good Dredd compilations now. Great to have them all bound together without the somewhat sketchy other stories 2000AD used to run. Yes Skinless Man I'm looking at you.

At 2 and a half million attacks from Russia alone (according to that link) I'd say it's a serious issue. I believe that "ze barbarians" are one of many reasons why we're witnessing the death throes of the net as we've got used to it. Free traffic brings free exploitation. Fundamentally, and because these is a free-wheeling forum, I'll ask a test question: What does UK PLC gain by exposing our 'net to Russia? Besides Oby, of course.

The bloke in the water is actually on another horse.

I'd weigh in with an uncharacterictically nuanced view: I accept the notion in a federation of having binding principles - a constitution - without which the federation is meaningless. I am increasingly in favour of getting government with its mindless inertia, blind indifference, and rending energy out of most every day things I accept the notion of constraining 'ze natural urges'. To an extent it's dependent on context. But some things are just evil.* A balance should be struck with how much self control can be exerted, and the degree of evil. Small evil with high self control, like my burping, is to be excused in minor exceptions. Big evil, low self control like child molestation is not. If I were gay, as (I'm fairly sure) I'm straight I would be utterly incapable of not being gay. Forcing me to be otherwise would at best divert huge personal effort from other important issues like not talking in movie theatres. At worst my braincase would break apart like an old lady's knees. Seem like a no-brainer to me. In closing: Alan Turing. *Persons disagreeing will be introduced immediately to people I consider evil. In person. And left alone with them.

If you're embarassed by calling them comics then why not get embrassed about referring to 'novels'? I don't give a karate style flying funt what normal people think about "comics." What they ridicule isn't comics, it's nerds. And that means us. We're not going to stop being nerds by changing the name. On topic, I've been using my downtime to dig through my old Judge Dredd comics. Just awesome.

My one is pretty much perfect for me, I feel. For one minute I thought this thread was about the UK. That would have had massive social implications. In fact, now I think about it, it still might. Basically a big portion of private "public" schools rely on the Armed Forces sending their brats through to make up the numbers. No tuition and boarding allowances, no brats, no brats no cash. Schools shut down. Whole sector of society begins melting away like an embarrassing stain on a tie. Probably bothers no-one. But being public school myself it's like being last of the bloody mohicans.

I'd quite enjoy being disbarred in the State of Louisiana. Would look good on business cards.

A tax on tea, I might add. I notice that almost no bugger drinks tea any more. Good call, Bostonians. Good call.

Interesting. Care to elaborate? Like what is typically Swedish? Or German, French, English, Japanese or Chinese? For example, should Scotland declare itself independent from the UK? Why or why not? It is still somewhat topic-related since it goes back on how you should identify an Israeli/Palestinian nationstate. I'd care to run with the ball on this one point. I've been going beyond my normal stamping grounds - 19th Century Britain - as far back as the 1500s. My country is fething bonkers. And yet, here we are, a tiny landmass, without whom one cannot explain almost any significant historical happenstance of the last 500 years! Why? Because we are a nation. I don't suggest we are a logically founded nation. If anything perhaps we share much with Israel. We exist by virtue of our fiery opponents: Spain, France, Germany. Nations who have all undergone clamity, while we endured. Apologies for an unfocused post. But I shall flatter the forum by expecting you to make sense of what I cannot.

I can speak on behalf of a large slice of the British Armed Forces when I say that the last thing we want to do is get into another bloody war over the Falklands. I know several (old) bastards who fought and not a one hates any Argentines. The whole thing is nonsense dreamed up by failed Argentine politicos. However, I can equally say that to many people there is more cause to defend the Falklands than, say, Falkirk. Almost every bastard in the Falklands wants to be British. But not nearly so many in Scotland. Naurgalen, can I confirm that the claim is based - as I've been told by British media - on the _Spanish_ Empire?

I'm far too drink to make an intelligent response to anything that's been said so far. But in case no-one's said it: the weird thing about 'Labour' in the UK is that they consistently outspend the 'Tories' [that's left wing vs right wing] on defence. Don't do any bloody good with the money they spend, of course, but still... That should have read "drunk".

Hi Monte Don't forget to mention we want Chainmail bikini's in PE in the next Romance\Sex thread Actually, this is an area in which Europe totally needs to catch up. Bikinis in beer advertising. In fact, bikini ladies in general.

May I be the first to accuse all of you of being Belgian?

Bruce, I'm a card-carrying and oath taking patriot, but I'd certainly concede that states use force to suppress dissent and unrest. Britain couldn't have existed in its present form without the use of force. The question is degree of force and focus of force. I mean at a fundamental level the police keep order on pain of being ****ted on the head with a stick. The typical objection to the use of the kind of force being applied in Syria is proportionality and targeting. i.e. Targeting kids and non-combatants. This - to my understanding - does exceed what is necessary to maintain a government. But there is a school of thought which holds that it is PRECISELY this level which maintains shaky governments. Can't say I agree with them, but you can see the point. After all, the fact rthat we don't use it all the time in the UK is arguably down to reasonable standards of living and a homogenous baseline culture. I think the thing with Syria is that they looked at Sri Lanka and thought "If we can hit our internal dissent hard enough and brutally enough _and are done before any pressmen show up_ then the international comunity will do sod all." You can hardly blame them given that Sri Lanka's barely had a slap on the wrist.

Good short brief. What kind of doctrine are the 'Norks' using? Chinese? Fortune cookies? Spongebob Squarepants?