Walsingham

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.

Proportional representation FTW!

Can't stand barolo, no idea why. Confirm skinning rabbits is incredibly easy. Just be careful when you gut the wee bastards, because the stench is bloody hard to get off your hands.

ROFL. the end of the world is nigh! Why? Somebody's been making knob jokes at the airport!

+1 Enoch, really. My understanding of the tech is that one can improve the energy receiver, but you can't alter the delivery of the energy into the system except by shifting geographical location. Or more simply it don't blow regular and it don't shine at night. Not in northern Europe, anyway. Natural energy is predicated on a chaotic system. It's inherently uncontrollable. You can engineer catchment up the wazoo, but it won't get you an increase in efficiency in the order of 200/400% which is what I understand would be needed. Never mind the fact that the irregularity of the supply places huge strains on power storage. Reason we should ALL care, leaving aside geopolitics, and the fact that I regard Germany as on our side: Money spent on retooling and re-engineering the German power system is money that can't be spent on schooling, aid to the developing world, buying crap which we make over here, and so on and so forth. It's not OK to just write it off as 'basically green so it's ok'. Even if green power is your focus it would make far far more sense to devote the same money to delivering sustainable power in countries like Bangladesh or Brazil.

Well, very briefly I think gangs depend on a couple of things: 1. Lack of economic options 2. Individuals with a weak personal identity, few skills, few brains (for want of a better word); compounding point 1 3. Weak oversight, typically in schools and housing areas with a lot of people and no will to tackle the problem 4. A culture of gang membership, inculcated through social isolation or simply hollywood dreaming (immigrant groups and individuals labouring under point 2) But this is very distinct from organised crime. Organised crime is a system in itself and each archetype has its own mechanisms for propagating and maintaining itself. These usually vary depending on ethnicity and history. The UK is not currently suffering what could be regarded as a serious problem with either. The justice system is relatively good compared with many other European partners, and we have strong and effective courts and prisons (at the primary level). Really I think the main thing keeping either involved in the UK is the money available from dealing in illicit narcotics. The narcotics trade is dominated, here as elsewhere, by population centres and transport links. London is without doubt a focus for all kinds of activity. Although this is not just drugs, but human trafficking, extortion, prostitution and so forth. In terms of organised violence Manchester is probably the second city. But any port or port facility is important to them. I think that gangs are probably going to be the biggest problem we face in the UK in the coming years. The economy is poor, we have large amounts of immigration, a failing education system, and a complete lack of urgency by responsible bodies. More importantly, the overall outlook is going to be far worse in certain areas. this will compound a lack of wilingness on the part of government. Organised crime is likely to continue being a problem, but is unlikely to develop more fully unless and until they achieve some sort of engagement with politicians. It is hard to envisage such a nexus in the UK, since traditional routes to political power are absent. You aren't going to see org. crime strike breaking or mobilising a voting bloc, or violently suppressing a particular party. However, with more and more money transferring into the black market through drugs I can see an increasing risk of politicians simply selling themselves for cash. The main difficulty with that happening is that we have very strong and independent police and security services. So politcians can't do a great deal to protect any sponsor. Although it is possible that instead we will see a tendency for corruption to extend to local government contracting, as indeed has already been alleged in many cases. As an aside, I would say the biggest problem we have in the UK at the moment in tackling organised crime is witness intimidation. we have very poor protection for giving evidence, and a great many cases are lost before or during trial due to witnesses retracting statements or disappearing. This should be a prioirty for action, but as I have already said, most political parties are firmly buried headfirst in sand on this.

Just lumping every every US special forces unit into a 'specops' barrel says everything necessary about your astounding military judgement. What in the name of collectivist f*** do you think you achieve by posting this nonsense?