Walsingham

But wouldn't you rather vote for an ideology, a set of political opinions? . No I f***ing wouldn't. I don't mind voting for a set of standards, but ideologies are for people who struggle with complex problems. No one can be more surprised than me to find that I regard Chris Rock as making the definitive point: Republicans are ****ing idiots. Democrats are ****ing idiots. Conservatives are idiots and liberals are idiots. Anyone who makes up their mind before they hear the issue is a ****ing fool. Everybody, nah, nah, nah, everybody is so busy wanting to be down with a gang! I’m a conservative! I’m a liberal! I’m a conservative! It’s bull****! Be a ****ing person. Listen. Let it swirl around your head. Then form your opinion. You wouldn't buy a car because it was red or blue or yellow. Don't spend your vote buying a politician that way.

...Charlie Parker was my delight.

Points for using this to torture information out of a baddie.

All foreigners, and many Britishers get this totally wrong. The key point is that we don't actually need to vote for parties AT ALL. We vote for a person. Parties are supposed to form when the monarch asks a given person if they can form a government. The government doesn't even technically need to have the majority of MPs. Hence what I'll end up doing is voting for the bugger I like, rather than the party they are in.

Like Monte I'm contemptuous of the choices on offer. Perhaps like Monte I'm tempted to vote for the biggest ****hole because this is emphatically what the British public deserve for even pausing to listen to that sack of hairy oddments, Whosit Brand.

UK elections soon. Quick brief to get everyone up to speed. THE BRITISH PUBLIC Incapable of understanding the concept of balancing income against expenditure. Unwilling to understand everything else. CONSERVATIVES Well educated forehead, apologetically leading Britain with no specific plan. Certain doom to follow, with reassuring accent. LABOUR Goggled-eyed student union activist, ready to give Britain whatever it wants, like a pathetic step-parent. certain doom to follow, with reassuring blame attached to fat men in top hats. LIB-DEMS World's tiredest trouser knees, torn between contempt and hope for the public it is desperately trying to spoon-feed. Like in that film. Will impart prosecco, elderflower, nuances to certain doom if part of coalition. GREENS Corduroy prophetess(?) of greater doom befalling nation. Billions will die, lakes of blood, drought, plagues of locusts. Manifesto emphasis: saving wetland animals and defying simple mathematics. True emphasis: passive-aggressive shoes. SNP Socialist nationalist party seeks ethnic re-awakening while blaming foreigners for all problems, during economic trouble. Seeks to unite Europe. Nothing worrying here at all. EDIT: UKIP Sandworm president of local golf club seeks subsidised drinking privileges, shouting at foreigners. Certain feelings of inferiority, shame, and lust around foreigners; particularly shirtless Russians. Certain use of world map found on cornflakes packet ca. 1935.

Nobility of calling is rather out of fashion, my friend.

What, no De Ruyter smoking the English fleet at Chatham? That's as good for a history troll as the Volournians burning Washington in 1814. Actually all true Englishmen swear revenge on the Dutch. It's hilarious.

True. But while there are likely to be any number of attempts to combat racism in police culture now... I wonder how many attempts there will be to combat shooting cops in popular culture. Having said that I'm sure you and your naxalite fantasies enjoy seeing cops get shot, so whatever.

Thought: If I posted the statement "Laws are for arseholes" I suspect many people I completely disagree with would upvote it, having misconstrued the syntax.

I'm still amazed that people are so amazed by all this. In a society full of guns, the police need guns. If the police have guns then it's reasonable to expect people to get shot. If people get shot it's reasonable to expect some of those people to be wrongly shot. It doesn't make all the shootings wrong. Or all the cops wrong.

Query: if a man were born without hands, and wanted hands is that body dismorphia?

I hate cats. Go me!

Fun fact: those side panels actually taste like daim bars.

Yeah, well, we wouldn't have lost if you hadn't insisted on not using vaseline.

I just realised that this whole forum makes more sense if you're all frenchfries. Except Calax, who's obviously mustard.

It's too bad France never got over the English invasion to rediscover the spirit of Toulouse. If they inherit their political culture and institutions from Edward III of England things are gonna be... difficult. Same bull****. Yet mysteriously in correct English. How odd. Shouldn't that have been a copy-pasted picture of Obama riding a turtle or something?

I rate being a Paladin higher than a fighter because of the roleplaying element. I especially like that I don't have to JUST do things in line with my order. But if I go contrary then I have tow ork even harder to compensate.

Still struggling with the 'foreigner speak', eh? Do try to make the same type of errors consistently. A least on the same page.

As an aside I'm relieved to note that I'm not the only one who thinks Bruce is an alt.

Are you really saying that the USA is entirely to blame for how Iraq has turned out? Because if you are then that's patronising _at best_. EDIT: My point above is irrelevant. The real issue here is that a paid shill is taking the piss out of the mods, and out of the forum rules. I don't think it could possibly be any clearer.

Glad it's struck a chord. But I was hoping we might discuss the general memes and architecture of such a mystery. So anyone reading can make their own. Thoughts?

I need ideas for a medical mystery for use in a medieaval fantasy setting. One of the players is a chirurgeon.

Non intervention would have been great, wouldn't it? Imagine if the dear old Hutus hadn't have had french help and aid in escaping post genocide.... ah yes, such a nice daydream, at least some of those million murdered people would likely still be alive if the french hadn't 'intervened'. Funny isn't it, how people forget about who was propping up, arming and supporting the government and its militias at the time- and established 'safe zones', post genocide, to allow those militia to escape when it became clear they'd lose- in their rush to use the 'never again' (unless it's inconvenient, they're our enemies, their friends are too powerful, we're bored, there's no advantage in it, there's no money in it, the french are helping the perpetrators, the US is helping the perpetrators, the brits are starving them and helping the perpetrators etc) justification for everything, ain't it. Praise god though, lessons were learned! the french intervened in the CAR! and... well, they 'solved' muslim militias killing christians by getting christian militia killing muslims instead. Y'know, I'm not sure they actually did learn, did they? Except maybe that most people will ignore their complicity if it's convenient, of course. ..and more generally NATO turned Libya into a asteriskhole, stuffed up Iraq, broke up a sovereign state arbitrarily (funny how when Russia does it it's terrible though) stabbing the idea of international law (stupid idea as it is, but anyway) straight through the eye socket while creating an organ stealing klepto/ narco/ criminocratic statelet wholly dependent on NATO etc etc. Please tell me you didn't just exploit the Rwandan genocide to make a rather feeble (if true) point about French policy.