Walsingham

The next man to use latin will be shot by firing squad. Unless we're listing what the Romans did for us.

By leting him run the country I presume you mean fighting against him for years and finally giving up.

I have to say that this argument is pleasing on one level. I mean if we can't agree that drugging and forcing sex on a kid is bad then it's not surprising we seem incapable of agreeing on anything more complex like healthcare or terrorism or marxism. Speaking of which, where is LoF? Surely there must be a marxist spin on this.

I nearly forgot to say: today is a rest day, so chill out.

Actually they HAVE noticed, and appear to be doing something. Having said this, they SAID they would stop selling baby formula in the third world, and didn't.

I'd say he was a multi-talented mule.

She's one of the signatories.

Like mkreku I'm beginning to wonder if I shouldn't have tried so hard in my tests to start with.

I just read in the Telegraph that there's like a 100 person list of celebrities rallying round him. WTF, people? _WTF_ ????? Apparently Monica Bellucci regards being drugged and forced into sex as something that isn't rape. Which could be a dangerous stance to adopt in her case.

Thanks for explaining a bit more. I've thought about this, and suggest you can divide the use of games into three areas. I was a teahcer for a while, and have designed games in teh past, make of that what you will. 1) Skills You give the user as many real world real task cues as possible to get them practicing. PROS: Direct intervention, demonstrable effects, can use analogous situations (for example teaching civilian teamwork by crewing a simulated tank) CONS: Only works for relatively simplistic tasks, can mistrain people to ignore important cues. 2) Drills You give the user a computer administered test. Think driving written tests. PROS: Can train to test. Simple memory testing can improve basic discipline capability. CONS: I hate drills, they deaden the brain 3) Motivate You paint as exciting a picture of a discipline as possible to encourage further study PROS: No conflict with fun CONS: Often conflicts with reality. Also, can create unrealistic expectations.

Prince Buster -

Quick quiz: does anyone here with experience of trying to help victims of child abuse feel the age of consent is too high? Is it just me who feel you chaps are being rather blase?

Well that was hardly impressive Good points: I went, which given how much I drank last night is no mean feat. I also ran a substantial portion uphill. Bad points: I shambled a lot of the run, and got stuck in traffic for two whole minutes, unable to cross the road because of all the bastards in cars refusing to let me across from the median. Also, I don't see the sense in suddenly doubling the pressups and situps. I managed the target quite well on the first sets, and then only got half-way on the second set before running out of time. Basically I tried, and have decided to feel pleased with that, and the knowledge that my guts and arms ache so I must have done well. Oh yes, and the dorsal raises and tricep dips were incredibly easy.

I don't think there's owt wrong with what he's saying. In large parts of the world they don't drink clean water or have freedom of speech. It doesn't mean the heathen buggers are on a winner.

I stopped watching when they had the crime scene guys doing arrests. I don't know what the hell you yanks teach in science class. Basically it seems to me that people want Judge Dredd, they just don't know they want Judge Dredd.

phase 1: 1 min walk, 3 min run, for 29 mins 2 x pressup max 2x6 dorsakl raises 2x6 tricep dips 2x situp max ~~ Phase 2 people: steady run for 20 mins 3x pressups max 3x 10 lunges 3x 8 dorsal raises ~~~ All sets as usual with 30-90 secs rest.

I think I've cracked it, but I'm not sure. Blank's biblical pointer set me thinking. Swords in my mind are very complex, and probably not symbolic per se. What kind of sword are we talking, after all? a sword of memory metal, a sword of shark's teeth, a sword in parliament? No. No good at all. It had to be symbolic outside my specific frame of reference if at all. Swords in the bible are potent symbols. They can be in the mouth of the righteous, or the hands of angels. They are symbols of judgement. The one universal theme is that they are weilded. This in turn set me thinking on another path. The question is upside down, but to a good purpose. The sword is a creation of the smith. The smith has a purpose, and the sword fulfils that purpose or is supposed to. The sword becomes a thing OF hate, or destruction; of separation (as in judgement, cleaving the just from the unjust), the reverse of love. But in doing so it is bound in love to the smith. It becomes correctly unified with its purpose, and with itself. If on the other hand the sword becomes a thing OF love, loving all around it then it is separated from itself and the smith. It hates completely and utterly. Indeed it ahtes so completely that it ceases to be a sword, is no longer the creation intended. One might almost say the smith is no longer the creator since the sword is not a sword. I'm still confused as to what the hell I'm supposed to learn from all this.

You mean the sword will hate the smith then love the smith?

Howw is that not a positive? I was trying to think of something unusual and wrong. Just you try it. It's bloody weird and difficult and unpleasant. I figured she might be shy, mkreku. I just like to raise these issues for the benefit of the younger chaps on the boards who may not know any better.

I was wondering when one of you testosterhunks was going to field the "I would have loved it at 13" argument. I have two responses: 1. You only think you'd have enjoyed it. I felt the same way, but I suggest you consider other things you thought would be awesome. I would have given one arm to lose my virginity, and the other arm to have been at Rorke's drift.* The latter would certainly have been terrifying and probably fatal and not at all awesome. 2. I know a couple of guys who did, and while they aren't as messed up as the women I've met they've never coped with women well ever since. Could be a coincidence. Numbers, if you're simply saying we should discuss it, then fine. But this isn't about whether it's ok for an adult to have sex with a 13 year old kid. It's more to do with the fact that we normally demand harsh justice for someone who drugs up and rapes kids. But for some inexplicable reason if you're an artist then it's suddenly OK. Or are you sugggesting that if he came from some small town in the hills of the massachusetts he would be treated the same way? *The simple fact I would have had no arms at this point and be pretty pointless escaped me.

That's really pretty interesting, Blank. if I've understood your analogy correctly you're saying that in submission to its place and role the sword finds love, but in rebellion only hate. I know you hinted at the Christian notion that the violence in being a sword was unlikely to be that purpose, but I'm hardly a Christian in the modern sense. More of "Get ye up on horses, and glory in chariots, and let the valiant men come forth, the Ethiopians, and the Libyans that hold the shield, and the Lydians that take, and shoot arrows. Jeremiah

I gave up the notion of being toned ages ago. I am a good cook, and I like the taste and social cachet of ale. I weighed up the notion of bagging someone very slightly hotter than I usually do and decided there was neither a requirement or any honour in doing so. The only woman I'm prepared to compromise the above for is HM Queen Elizabeth II. Continuing this line of thinking, am I the only bloke here who wants to see a girl's FACE before deciding she's hot? No offence mkreku, but yon lass could be damp-eyed and flaring nostriled, or have a habit of biting through crisp packets.

Quiet, you.

Oh, has it? Well then. I feel so reassured, now. It's a good thing that legislators don't ever reverse changes by previous legislators and go back on old topics, and always tackle new issues and problems, right? Further, I am now going to switch my brain off. Given that I have my dear politicians to shape my opinions for me, I don't really need to waste glucose pointlessly - choosing which brand of toothpaste to purchase doesn't really require that much brainpower anyway. After all, it is the LAW and God forbid I question my betters. Gimme a break. Loo, if you want to gad about the room adopting intellectual poses that's fine. But there's a damn good reason there's an age of consent. Child abuse doesn't just hurt the victim, it ruins lives. Statutory rape isn't a game played by legislators it's real. Legislators have to codify it so they put an age on it. That age is just whatever is written down, but I say again that doesn't make it any less real when you back to the reason for it. I have known people who have been abused as children, and the thought that their abusers would be feted just becaue they are middle class is quite literally sickening.

****? I don't need my subconscious to tell me that. Perfect strangers helpfully point it out when I try to buy a loaf of bread.