Walsingham

The fact is that LoF will make any excuse he wants on the day to protect what he sees as the advance of socialism. He's not hiding anything when he does this. He's stated repeatedly that he feels terrible things can be done in support of this goal.* There's nothing hypocritical in his position. Or surprising. *Even if he does have the opinion that communism can be maintained through happy communes of democratically sound local groups. Imagine the waltons, but with guns and berets.

Since there's been so much talk of Sherlock Homlmes I thought I'd link to the BBC radio's current series done with Clive Merrison. It's absolutely cracking. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007k1w4

ROFL

Defending progressive revolutionaries is different from imperialism. Oh, I see. So the socialist's burden is different? Thanks for clearing that up. This reminds me of a Polish joke I heard recently. A Pawel is a small boy in class, and he is given the assignment of writing an essay entitled 'The benefits of living with our Communist friends' (meaning the Russians). When it is marked the teacher says "Your essay was good, but you got the title wrong. It should have been 'friends', not 'brothers'." To which Pawel replies "No I changed it on purpose. You get to choose your friends, but you don't choose family."

And I did. I flour coated the steaks, got some chilli and crushed garlic into some groundnut oil, put on some thyme and soy sauce then fried those babies up. Served with grated carrot, and palin boiled potatoes. Fantastic. That should have read plain boiled potatoes, but whatever.

Those atropine injectors are loaded for bear with morphine. The comment from our instructors was that even with the morphine, you'd probably rather be dead.

White man's burden is, always has been, and always will be, a naked justification for imperialism. Czechoslovakia 1968... Afghanistan 1979... Soviet involvement in the Spanish civil war...

"Take up the White Man's burden-- The savage wars of peace-- Fill full the mouth of Famine And bid the sickness cease; And when your goal is nearest The end for others sought, Watch sloth and heathen Folly Bring all your hopes to nought." Although I don't for one moment consider this really a white man thing.

I don't wish to mock your involvement, which is good. But your question is rather odd. Surely the whole point of democracy is that if rights and privileges are to be determined it must be by a majority?

I have never heard of it. I am partial to a bit of the old white man's (democratic) burden, however.

While I would not be surprised if it was 'Black Widows' I believe we should keep an open mind for four reasons. 1. Reports coming from Iraq and Afghanistan suggest a willingness by Jihadists* to use women who are subjected to normal suicide bomb training, rather than being self-maintainers. That is a period of enforced isolation, coupled with drug use, and ending in a drug-induced haze**. So it could be non-aggrieved women. 2. The utility of black widows is tremendous because they are so highly motivated. Although some have suggested they may have been chosen to hit this target because they are less well monitored by the security services this seems a very easy access target to use them up on. Why not another Beslan, or Mumbai attack? 3. It is quite possible that the mere appearance of ordinary veiled muslim women might have provoked an unfortunate connection in the minds of witnesses. 4. It is very common now for male terrorists to go about fully veiled as a means of evading search. ~~ *I use the term deliberately here as distinct from jifascist, since Chechen involvement is more complicated. ** It's unconnected, but at the bottom of that page you will see a brilliant comment. The author is upset that the bomb disposal guys disrobe the woman in the street. Rather than what? Take her someplace else where she might go off?

I misread that as 'Find someone to love with a stick'

I think the thing which really bugs me is the way people get fundamentalist about scientific theories. Science is a form of applied doubt, FFS! If you get fundamentalist about it anything beyond the principle of not being fundamentalist, then you fail. It doesn't mean you have to believe everything. It just means oh... who cares? i'm going to cook a steak.

OK. You lost me there, buddy. Expensive? The company lets you download it and pay whatever you like.

FAIL.

Sticky out ears are just fething retarded. First battle, mate. Choppy choppy down comes the sword, off go the ears.

Perhaps its just the displaced ancestral memory of having to sleep on wooden pillows, and live in a paper house. I'd get pretty fething crazy if I had to do that for 20 lifetimes.

I'd quite like a 5 page hatefest. It would be useful in bringing us all together.

BBC link Daily Telegraph Al Jazeera There will inevitably be people who will say this was justified in some way. That it is the execution of a weapon or method of war. Yet leaving aside the obvious question of who sanctions and empowers these terrorists to act, it is still possible to condemn such action as going too far even as a method of war. Irrespective of political leaning there are very very few who would condone the use of chemical or biological weapons, or high altitude carpet bombing, or systematic rape. Even though these have been used as warfighting methods. Rather than make excuses based on motivation, I argue that terrorism should be treated exactly the same way.

That makes sense.

Firstly, I believe you are not accustomed to see members opposing your politicalideology on this site. This made me happy as it made me think that I am adding a wealth to the political ideologies of this site. I'm not sure where you got the idea we're some political monolith on this forum. I've never seen such a mad mix. What I am not accustomed to is people arguing their views here without any apparent foundations or internal consistency. Are you for or against terrorism? You say there is a plot to commit genocide on all muslims, then make an offhand remark about suicide bombings? You claim to hate fascism in your sig, and then defend the government of Iran which although not fascist is totalitarian! For that matter you are saying right now that you think challenging people's views is worth making them annoyed, in a thread about other people doing precisely that!!!! What gives? What is your standpoint?

Question, as someone who nevertheless believes frimly in evolutionary theory: If we can comfortably state that we do not know what initiated the Big Bang then can we state for certain that there is no Outside entity such as a God which - by creating the fundamental rules of the universe - also created evolution? Do you see what I mean? Or am i way way way off topic?

The answer is clear. they are not running away from Cuba, but like LoF they are desparate to participate in building the socialist revolution in the United States.

OMG! You just reminded me I have a cake tin full of carrot cake!