Walsingham

I DON'T KNOW WHAT IN THE NAME OF SOYLENT F*** THAT FRIDAY SONG WAS, BUT I'M GLAD IT'S GONE.

Ooooh yeah.

To kick off, let's have nominations for a tune with such an inescapably rump shaking beat that even I will be forced to wiggle, in spite of medical advice to the contrary.

10:1 he's trying to impress the girl form the wedding. I ain't pretty enough to get smart AND sexy in one girl. My mate is having a few issues surrounding custody and his 'baby mother'. Said 'd try and give him some perspective on the importance of being around for different stages, and what things he could leverage to leave an impact.

ROFL. *ow* I sincerely doubt there's that much ecstacy being taken! Not to romanticise it, but I'd swap our heroin users for MDMA users any day! Hard to say, of course. You might possibly see more doses being taken, but in terms of dollar volume or addiction I'd bet good money on cocaine or heroin. These days maybe even ketamine would pip it.

Thanks Hurlshot. I already read that one! I've finished the brief now, and can summarise my conclusions: 1. Children begin to develop a sense of identity by the time they can speak, and perhaps as soon as they recognise their parents 2. The development of identity occurs most strongly through interaction with others. In particular primary caregivers. 3. Identity continues to change throughout childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. But extreme divergence from norms in early identity forming is associated with problems in later life.

Shenanigans is a great word. I believe Gfted1 used it a while back and I've been trying to put it into use as much as possible ever since. ~ While researching this I came across the theory of communicative action. That we are defined by and through our communications with others. If you read the wiki page there, you will see that Habermas felt that it was through reasoned egalitarian discourse that oppressive social structures could best be combated. Check us out! Mo'f'in freedom fighters up in heah!

With thanks to Stratfor.com Emphasis mine.

yes, I think we are working on the assumption - however incorrect - that the child in question is not going possess any aberrant neurological shenanigans.

Well, I'd imagine there would be multiple stages in that development. Or at least I imagine that developmental psychologists, being the scum tha tthey are, will have decided there are stages for ease of reference.

That, my boy, was the anti-pope or somesuch medeival monstrosity. A sign of dark times. For lo' is it not written that there shall come unto the blackened place of lamentation one who is a smiter of trolls. But he shall be known unto the beast. And the name of the beast shall be Volo. And they shall fall unto deviation together. And great shall be the drivelling. (Revelation of Saint Walsingham, Chapter 213, verse 1)

A friend has asked me to try and produce some articles and references on the age at which a child forms a definite sense of personal identity. Further, when does that child attach to a specific family/parents? And what factors influence this process? I'm trying to do this online and failing miserably. Curse my bias towards cognitive methods!

Doomed!

Great day for work. Had a good singing lesson. Wound up in pub, where bloke at the bar managed to solve a technical problem for me in one of those "It's obvious, mate" moments that make me love pubs.

The best thing about the ghurkas is that they aren't classed as special forces, but they are clearly an elite. They just don't do the kind of keeni meeni stuff one expects these days. Just listen to the way he describes what he did as if it was an innings of cricket. ~ Boo, I normally like you, man. But you have some seriously conspiracist notions about warfare. I really think you need to take a step back from your personal experiences (which I'm guessing have been pretty severe) and look at the science of what you're saying.

Hah! interesting thought: they should really try to retain some of their family oriented members. Otherwise you've got a skills bleed. Unless... now I think about it... family oriented members may also begin to express divided loyalties so it could be a means of protecting the organisation against people turning 'snitch'. EDIT: That link is a little worrying in some of its language, concerning aryan gangs. http://prisonoffenders.com/aryan_circle.html

1. The use of air power is not garbage. I'd give examples but I think it would be more dignified if you conceded this on reflection. 2. I would agree that the use of air power as a weapon of terror, indeed all weapons of terror, are garbage. Because they function like a drug. You need ever increasing doses to achieve the same 'hit'. 3. A guiding principle of civilised warfare is that it use of force should be proportionate. If a single strike can decapitate a regime and end a policy of atrocity, you prefer a campaign of military bombing which may or may not end that same violence at a cost of thousands of lives? Achieving this without killing a 'great leader's children is only going to be achievable if the great leader does not hide amongst them. But we will no doubt agree to disagree on who bears the chief responsibility there. Ditto reporst that Ghaddafi has been concealing himself in hospitals, which are of course protected under the Geneva conventions.

Yeah because the Pope didn't like nobles dying, and that rule that only knights could engage other knights. But **** the peasants they can go in and die first for their betters If it's reasonable for a peasant to not want to die, then it's also reasonable for a noble to want the same. Actually, reminds me of this recent business(es) where it's 'legal' to bomb some country because of what their leader is doing, but 'illegal' to bomb the leader. Plus ca change plus ca meme chose, ne c'est pas?

When I was actively into this we're talking mid '90s so at that time you didn't really see the sort of behaviour from what you might call 'meta-gangs' like the Crips, or the resurgent Hell's Angels (types). So you may well know a lot more about them than I do. If this is the case, care to share?

No offence meant, sleepy fellah, but you're talking balls. War is not a sport. It's a matter of life and death. Barring war crimes, I wouldn't order anyone to endanger their own life so someone else has a 'fair shot' at them, and by inference I wouldn't do it myself. If you think you'd do otherwise I can only imagine it's because you've never faced the imminent possibility of dying. If you absolutely insist that opponents should be allowed a fair crack at our pilots then perhaps you should encourage them to run their countries and economies in a more sensible way so they can afford proper air defences.

Why not just go back to fighting with assegais?

I have to disagree about your theory of how organised crime arises. By which I mean and distinguish between a gang which attempts to vertically integrate its supply chain, and a single family who attempt to diversify their income using violence. The distinction in my mind, however incorrect, is that organised crime must constitute some formal code and structure. The above tends to be brain guy, plus enforcer, plus a dozen halfwits. That's not the same thing as you have with say the 14k Triad or 'Ndrangheta.

I just did 30 ascents of hillstamping. Not feeling too hot. Did half of them at jogging speed. Think main problem was had only eaten banana all day. Bought bread and eggs and coke on the way home. Feeling a bit better for the coke. In future will definitely eat first. Pretty impressed that I stuck it out though. Fingers crossed I keep improving!

Cultists? *noise of bolt on elephant rifle*

I have a relative who is seeking funding for a PhD on the reproductive habits of a specific small amphibian. He is perplexed by a lack of funding. Too many people want to do pointless PhDs. Although IMO this is as much the fault of the scientific community as a whole. Study is becoming more and more specialised, and our ability to make use of most of the research is getting worse and worse.