Walsingham

I love how some of you chaps are perfectly happy to accept his legacy. Hence the original article. I feel sorry for any nation which has been so poorly lead it has to idolise a complete economic illiterate, and raging egomaniac who has effectively squandered billions of their natural resources just to strike a pose. Venezuela doesn't have to align with the US, but given they are a huge consumer of oil and gas, and they're effectively next door, agreeing a nationally beneficial supply relationship is pure nuts and bolts common sense. Doing otherwise strikes me as political posing.

Yup. Plus I've actually met Harry Harrison.

Perhaps the computer could be small and handheld. Maybe link it to some sort of telephone? Speaking just for myself, and being a dinosaur from before the rise of the net, I don't see why we need to net so badly in big organisations. 95% of what comes through it is pure bureaucratic hogwash. Even when a genuine instruction or idea is sent the impact of the medium is so weak you might as well sound the charge by farting through a trumpet.

I'm convinced by your analysis.

Wait. What commercial?

Bruce VC's advice is spot on. Practice, practice, practice. Timing is crucial in any language. I'd also suggest simplifying the language and concepts to mitigate the risk of causing offence. Anger, jail, these are things which even MLK would struggle to use lightly. The jail anecdote really only works in a lengthier context, IMO.

"Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Gerry Adams all said he was a great man, which is pretty much all you need to know about Hugo Chavez." Guardian readers pay tribute to man who would have banned The Guardian

greylord, while I can approve of your egalitarian instinct in retsraining government I don't think you are really squaring your logic all the way round. The nature of democratic law is PRECISELY and COMPLETELY about people forcing their opinions on other people. All democracy gets you is the right to stand up and debate it before it happens. Our democratic stance in most countries ensures against discrimination on grounds of sexuality. If you really don't want government sticking its nose into religion, then I would respectfully suggest that religion stop relying on government to protect its corner. Stop religions being able to confer civil benefits - tax breaks for married couples, exemption from giving testimony, contractual and financial capabilities - on religious institutions. Then it must rely solely upon the force of its arguments and the integrity of its proponents.

Do not want become boring Europeans. http://youtu.be/YiTrcnsgmVQ Yes, I can see why not.

So, hang on, let me see if I understand this? Private industry owns both the insurance against the event, and the provision for the event? So their ideal point (in graph terms) is where premium intake and cost of provision are at maximum? GD, you will concede that in the limited sense of this dynamic private health insurance and private healthcare provision are a poor combination? However, I am oliged to concede that given a proliferation of providers it would be harder for a small number of commercial agencies to monopolise both in a given area, bringing costs down.

Please do continue. Rest assured this is a wonderful use of your time, and we're enthralled.

South Africa is very much the exception which proves the rule. Look at the entire rest of Africa. You might also want to brush up on your Irish history. There were widespread and appalling reprisals against non-Republicans following independence. Not to mention an exodus (no joke intended) of Protestants. Besides, as I say, even in South Africa you've seen the gradual and sliding elimination of the Afrikaans culture. And however you feel about that, expecting a nation to vote itself into nonexistence is damned foolish. They might do it, but I'm buggered if I know how I'd sell it to them. Any problem that communism solves is a problem I'd rather live with. It's the political equivalent of castration.

Good for you. I couldn't face it. Better than getting eaten by worms, I suppose.

Cyber warfare is a win/win for China. - Assume that the only really effective action is to enact throttling or filtering of traffic across the Chinese internet 'border'. * - Either we enact this by throttling, in which case we help the Chinese government control their citizens' access and integration with the WWW... OR - We don't, and the People Liberation Army Cyber Funtbags (PLACF) continue thieving profit enabling data and designs. *I'm probably being too simplistic, but that's fun.

1) Governments spend money on pointless crap. Stuff that burdens the country with redundant infrastructure and lossmaking industries. Padded civil service pensions, fleets of unwanted obsolescent military aircraft, windfarms that cost money to run. 2) If you think your taxes go exclusively on stuff you wanted I heartily recommend you spend some time spending the government's money. 3) I can't emphasise this last point enough. You may object to people setting up successful enterprises and making money. Hell if they do it by exploiting people I get as angry as the next man. But if your solution is to mallet the issue by blanket taxing everyone, then I will credit your intelligence sufficiently that you may freely assume my opinion of your education. ~ GD may be interested to note that I've moderated my views somewhat in the last year or two. I do pay attention to what people say in these debates.

What the FETH? Seriously? As bongoed as we've let the NHS get at least I don't have to worry about choosing between my home and dying. ~ GD, I take your point about an 'access all areas' pass. But this would be resolved if we'd just follow a few good engineering principles and agree what we expect up front and in the open. It has to be results oriented, not process or sodding behaviour focussed. I get to live till I'm eighty, or until I break in ten places at once. Something like that. No pain more than 60% of the time. If you feel I can't do certain things then I'm happy to sign a waiver to provision if I get to do them. Not perfect, but good enough.

Lol. This 'Murican expected something different. Putin's a heid the baw. He makes a calculated stance out of refusing to play the international game, because he thinks it makes his junk look weightier. I guess many Russians agree. Personally, I find being impressed by his macho posturing, given his corruption, opposition to free speech etc. a bit kinky/creepy. Russia needs to find better role models.

Unusually for me, sunk in depression the last three days. OK now, I think. Am off to the pub for a quiet pint to celebrate.

Gentlemen, please! In the spirit of Atlantic amity I propose we seal Piers Morgan in an oil drum and dump him in the ocean mid-way across. Madonna can be easily burned as a witch under some old legislation. Sharon Osbourne can be packed off to French Guyana, because I don't know where it is.

Apologies, but I don't follow your Algerian analogy. I follow the concept of settlers etc. but I doubt the French had spent the last millenium saying "next year in Algiers". I guess that must be why you brought up South Africa, which - for the Afrikaaners - was an emotional issue. Prognostications that an end to apartheid meant an end to their national identity have proven sadly all too true. But the RSA [checks Wikipedia] [...a long time later...] OK, I needed setting straight there. I had been going to say that it gave a stronger position to Mandela on assuming power. But in fact it looks like the capability to enact change came about through the very rare situation of F.W. de Klerk and Mandela and Mangosuthu Buthelezi agreeing on the way forward. I can't see an analogous situation emerging in Israel/Palestine. Not entirely sure why. Ideas?

That reminds me: what happened to your book?

It's like some sort of Eastern European arms fair. But without the bikini models.

Well, Valsuelm, that's a pretty relaxed and positive comeback, and I'm grateful. I do simplify things. but I've learned that simple is the nature of our existence at the primal level. Complexity is for art, wine, song, etc. Simplicity is for life and death decisions. If a direct appeal isn't floating you, try a read of the Hagakure some time. What the Hagakure usefully teaches is also that while simple, life and death decisions often involve both at once. In living life we must confront death. I'm not saying it's easy. Just simple. The relevance is that the OP criticises persons choosing to eat something called a heart attack burger (or what have you). I do not disagree, but I know that I'd rather hang out with them than the OP.

Got everything wrong yesterday. You know when the dice are against you? ....

How is being accused of being gay trolling? Surely there's nothing wrong with being gay?