The All Things Political Topic - Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities

[Zoraptor]

Sure Gromnir, keep bleating on about Blix and trying the old gaslight route- at least this time you're aren't misrepresenting my views with something disprovable literally on the same page, I guess.

Keep trying to defend statements like "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised" as being honest mistakes when there was an absolutely deliberate policy to remove any doubt; then accusing someone else of spin. If you say there's no doubt and there is, you're lying, and 100% deliberately removing every references to any doubts makes the lie worse, not better.

12 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

I've gotten the impression elsewhere that Putin is basically mad at Ukraine for existing instead of being part of the USSR, run by him

That would be far closer to the Russian Empire, run by him. Putin isn't actually a big fan of the USSR or communism, that's more Zyuganov's dream. Putin even got grumpy at Lenin for 'creating' Ukraine in his big speech the other day.

(Not that Lenin had much choice, the Germans wanted Russia broken up after their surrender in WW1 and it was a requirement of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk)

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

33 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

I've gotten the impression elsewhere that Putin is basically mad at Ukraine for existing instead of being part of the USSR, run by him

In the recent speech Putin blamed Lenin for creating Ukraine and Stalin and Khrushchev for carving up parts of the Russian Empire to add to Ukraine. He then refers to the annexation of Ukraine as "decommunization", as it is undoing the actions of the Bolsheviks. It's more accurate to say that he wants to restore the Russian Empire than the USSR.

I imagine that decommunization speech probably confused a lot of western (terminally online) people who are reevaluating their opposition or support of Putin.

[BruceVC]

2 hours ago, Chairchucker said:

I've gotten the impression elsewhere that Putin is basically mad at Ukraine for existing instead of being part of the USSR, run by him

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna7632057

Yes thats basically correct, Putin has made several comments like the collapse of the USSR  "was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” it supports the view he is trying to recreate the old borders of the USSR. Obviously ignoring the fact that most countries that were part of the USSR were not given a choice to join after WW2 and Stalin simply refused to pull back Soviet forces after defeating the NAZI 

Also what makes this latest Russian military hegemony difficult to accept is for the last 20  years  some people have convinced themselves with a certain narrative that the " US and the West " are the worlds greatest warmongers and like to bomb countries into submission. So when that image is shattered by another example of Russian warmongering its hard to handwave  it and its a bitter pill to swallow. Because now Russia is suddenly doing the same thing that people have been outraged about for years around the US 

My advice to any Russian apologist, take some Vodka with that " bitter pill " ...I heard it helps 

@majestic

I haven't heard anything from about the confirmation that Russia has illegally recognized the separatist regions and moved troops into these regions. I know you and KP were laughing about " babies being thrown in fires " and all that but whats your opinion now? Is this whole thing still a fabrication of Western media ?

Edited February 23, 2022 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

Here is a great speech from the Kenyan ambassador to the UN, it highlights the condemnation accurately of Russia's actions 

 https://www.kenyans.co.ke/news/73274-kenyan-ambassador-makes-powerful-speech-ukraine-russia-crisis-global-event-video

[Gromnir]

har har.

again, zor is the guy who were bleating 'bout blix, but he made the mistake o' doing so with Gromnir in metaphorical earshot, 'cause we were in the freaking audience for the linked "mythical video" and we knew zor were talking out his arse on yet another issue. so 'course we weren't gonna let go o' zor's blix blunder as zor kept digging himself ever deeper each time he insisted on his silly and self destructive complaint 'bout Gromnir's wmd lies position... which, again, is just so typical zor. 'course zor don't wanna talk 'bout blix who explicit rejects his position in spite o' zor being the guy to use blix as an authority. is tough to gaslight the video, but he sure has tried.

y'know, the genuine crazy part is six months from now when zor self embarrasses himself regarding some new issue he talks outta his arse regarding, he will be unable to resist bringing up Gromnir's take on wmd lies, and we will once again bleat (HA!) 'bout how his authority, hans blix, refuted another untenable zor position. weird.

isn't any easier for a few folks to gaslight regarding their past bad week o' russian humping, but they will give it the old college try. on some level you gotta admire the tenacity and verve in spite o' the utter folly.

edit:  'cause trump couldn't read the room and once again did his putin stooge routine, am recollecting a story from 2016 which @Guard Dog  & @Gorthwould no doubt enjoy 'cause it does kinda make one wanna just get rid o' politicians.

House majority leader to colleagues in 2016: ‘I think Putin pays’ Trump

doesn't look to be paywall blocked. if you don't wanna read story, just watch the brief video to get the gist.

is timely to reflect on epic gaslighting efforts original revealed in 2016. our boardies is rank amateurs by comparison.

HA! Good Fun!

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Gromnir

[Gromnir]

moving on (unlikely, eh?)...

Clarence Thomas refuses the clear and obvious path forward

Judges are supposed to evaluate cases impartially. Given his wife's involvement, there is no way for the public to trust that Thomas will impartially judge the cases she's tied to. And Thomas himself has defied a whole series of ethical guidelines that apply to every other judge in the country, appearing at events for right-wing organizations and causes, and, according to the Times report, being in contact with at least one conservative politician, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, at the same time he was facing battles in federal court (DeSantis did not respond to the Times' request for comment).

...

our opinion o' j. thomas has soured the past couple years as he has become transparent political. however, am actual disagreeing with the position o' the opinion piece, even if we wanna agree.

other than Justice Kagan, am believing every other SCOTUS Justice has a spouse. if you think any o' those spouses remain mute on political and legal issues o' the day, you is nuts. we met Justice Kennedy's wife, mary, on literal dozens o' occasions over the years, and in spite 'o the fact she were a third grade school teacher for many years, underestimating her would be a grave mistake. is rare when she were not the smartest person in a room, and considering the crowd Justice Kennedy attracted, that is an admitted bold statement. if you think for a second mary kennedy were any less influential regarding her husband's legal opinions than ginny is regarding clarence, then you are not giving mary the credit she is due. 

am not believing ginni is altering j. thomas' opinions. might be more accurate to say ginny activities is symptomatic o' the thomas couples' beliefs. is rare the partner o' a SCOTUS Justice is so transparent regarding their political leanings, but that don't mean other partners is any less opinionated and influential insofar as the legal opinions o' their respective spouses.

perhaps unfortunate, is also a fact the ethic standards for SCOTUS is different for Justices than judges. should standards be changed? is it even possible to change such standards in a meaningful way w/o a Constitutional Amendment? am thinking is wasted breath to argue, 'cause spouses is typical gonna be the most influential factor in Justice opinions, whether any o' us realizes or admits to such.

HA! Good Fun!

Edited February 23, 2022 by Gromnir

[Zoraptor]

Jesus Christ. Oh well...

First mention of Blix is by me, certainly. It is, quoted directly except added emphasis "And we absolutely know that coercion was tried on Hans Blix and El Baradei, they're just not american so don't count." That was followed by near word for word Gromnir's spiel on how Blix said the US admin didn't lie, despite the assertion being of coercion, not lying. Which, of course, he didn't deal with in a classic example of the strawman argument, refuting something that wasn't actually said. For anyone interested the coercion assertion was based on this, as well as multiple other similar sources. Pertinent parts:

"A Swedish diplomat, Hans Blix, was placed in charge and visited with Cheney on October 30, 2002. According to Blix, Cheney delivered a stern message: If inspectors failed to discover WMDs, the administration would discredit them. [..] For example, officials told Blix that two items found by inspectors—a balsa wood drone with a motorcycle engine and a rusted, decades-old bomb that amounted to little more than a massive paperweight—should be declared violations of the WMD restrictions. When Blix scoffed at this, administration officials anonymously leaked lies that misrepresented what the two items were, falsely declared that the inspection team thought they constituted violations of the U.N. weapons restrictions on Iraq, and attacked Blix for hiding the truth to prevent war. Ultimately, Blix found nothing. And, just as Cheney promised, the administration dismissed this strong intelligence as meaningless."

So yes, coercion was definitely tried on Blix. Whole thing is a good read, since it pretty clearly illustrates how the source manipulation went well beyond mere 'lack of critical thinking' but was a deliberate policy to ignore, exclude and discredit anything they didn't agree with. Hence the assertion 2nd time around that the 2003 intelligence amounted to a conspiracy theory. That time Gromnir brought up Blix, out of context again since, let's be frank, the assessment above including those attributed to Blix are pretty classic conspiracy theory fare; start with your conclusion and work backwards.

Did I ever say that Blix said that the Bush Admin lied? I'm not going to read every post, obviously, especially when it's Gromnir making the assertion and he loves a classic bit of gaslighting*. I certainly didn't say it in anything he's linked to though. My opinion is and always will be that you cannot exonerate yourself from lying by being willfully stupid and deliberately ignoring facts, and that making unequivocal statements of facts when the situation isn't unequivocal is lying for that reason. I can, uh, understand why Gromnir would like that to be true though.

*Those with good memories might remember back a couple of weeks to when Gromnir insisted I'd said that the Soviet invasion of Manchuria didn't have an effect on Japan's decision to surrender, when I'd demonstrably said the complete opposite literally four posts up, and still on the same page.

 

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Zoraptor

[majestic]

4 hours ago, BruceVC said:

@majestic

I haven't heard anything from about the confirmation that Russia has illegally recognized the separatist regions and moved troops into these regions. I know you and KP were laughing about " babies being thrown in fires " and all that but whats your opinion now? Is this whole thing still a fabrication of Western media ?

That's okay because it's Russia, not the West!

[Gromnir]

16 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

He's about the only person in existence who believes there were no lies from the US about Iraqi WMDs, they were just 100% honestly mistaken in their conservative and well researched attributions.

blix. why you would wanna yet again bullseye yourself with japan is bordering on insane given the numbers o' historians we has shared comments from who disagree with zor, and zor offering no such authorities to refute.  'course zor indulges in same misrepresentation we blew up mere weeks past. even so, is improbable zor forgets his own post from mere a page removed and seeming suffers some kinda weird transient amnesiac event. note, blix is one o' the guys who believed there weren't lies from the bush administration-- said so on the not-so mythical video. looking for a person in existence who believes as does Gromnir that the administration were honest mistaken but negligent in their efforts to confirm wmd existence? blix, your injected authority, is one o' those existing people.

as to coercion, blix also said he didn't feel coercion in the "mythical video," so more gaslighting. blix didn't need to share anecdote where he were brought in to see bush, with powell, cheney and others present, and bush made clear and in no uncertain terms that blix had his confidence and support. bush wanted inspections and so blix felt he had bush administration backing, even if a bit later the administration would foolish ignore his pleas for more time to inspect.

btw, clear neither Gromnir nor blix suggested bush administration efforts were well researched (more zor misrepresenting) 'cause is a whole bunch o' posts now easy to review which describe how the key failure o' bush insofar o' iraqi wmd's as a justification for invasion were the insufficiency o' their efforts to find evidence o' wmds in 2002 and early 2003. repeating self but is necessary with zor.

am also the guy who has said over and over again that the administration lied 'bout iraq to the american people, but the lie were 'bout the necessary cost to maintain peace post invasion. am offering now 'cause is a frequent zor misrepresentation, "that the US Government Did Nothing Wrong in the lead up to Iraq."  has never been our position... evar. gotta knock down these strawmen before zor creates 'em. 

and again, lets not forget how blix were brought up by zor. 

so, as a response to a claim bush didn't lie regarding wmds, you offer second-hand description o' an incident o' coercion which ignores first hand recollections o' the victim himself that not only did he feel no coercion but that bush went out o' his way to show support for the victim? serious? gonna serious bring up logic fallacies with that nonsense? zor's blix observation comes in response to Gromnir pointing out the bad example o' using the wmd lies bit to attack bush (bush specific) as a Presidential liar... 

for years now, just as a mere page past, zor frequent resurrects, misrepresenting Gromnir position and ignoring the fact that his own interjected authority undermines his "only person in existence" fantasies 'bout wmd lies and the bush administration... which is same as his fever dreams 'bout how russia were not planning an invasion o' hokkaido before the collapse o' japanese forces in manchuria. 

...

real insanity is we need waste so much time on zor who is impervious to reality... he cannot help but gaslight and then every few months does he dredge up his past blunders and somehow reimagines. is so... weird.

but yeah, blix is clear one o' those fantastimagorical people in existence who believe the bush administration were not lying 'bout wmds. thanks for framing such so we will be able to use the next time you inevitable and reflexive bring up this ridiculous claim.

HA! Good Fun!

Edited February 23, 2022 by Gromnir

[Gorth]

6 hours ago, Gromnir said:

am recollecting a story from 2016 which @Guard Dog  & @Gorthwould no doubt enjoy 'cause it does kinda make one wanna just get rid o' politicians.

How can we not love politicians??? Time to reveal a secret... I sometimes have wet dreams at night, featuring a naked Scott Morrison... his body all covered in glistening syrup... while tied, spread eagled, over a fire ant nest

 

Ok, so maybe there isn't much love lost on politicians... I usually grade them a bit though internally. Politicians playing the sad nationalist violin is never to be trusted. They are usually kept up by unthinking masses (yes, there really is something about people getting the government they deserve). Long list... Putin (Russia), Xi (Mainland China), Trump (ex US president), Modi (India),  Poroshenko (ex Ukrainian president) Bolsonaro (Brazil), Orban (Hungary) etc. On this list, Putin and Xi are by far the most dangerous, because they possess what appears to be a modicum of intelligence and nukes to back up their policy. Our very own Scott from Marketing has neither brains nor charisma.

 

That being said, there are probably "good" politicians out there. The media just tend to be media and ignore them, for the same reason most news channels sell bad news, disasters and the next new crisis to keep ratings up. That somebody in Canberra decided to put up same sex marriage to be tested by a binding referendum was a nice touch. People just forget something like that two weeks after the referendum. I still remember a conservative government back in Denmark in the 80's that introduced harsh austerity measures (many years before the PIGS countries made it a buzz word) to save an economy in free fall and left a legacy of a nation which has been generally in the black ever since. They got much flak back then, especially from the The Socialist Party, Social Democrats and the Danish Communist Party, but guess what... in the decades after, people enjoyed economic stability without thinking much about why it is so (it was "affectionately" known as the Potato Diet, because people had to leave out the meat and just eat vegetables).

[Gromnir]

Just now, Gorth said:

How can we not love politicians??? Time to reveal a secret... I sometimes have wet dreams at night, featuring a naked Scott Morrison... his body all covered in glistening syrup... while tied, spread eagled, over a fire ant nest

 

 

am personal believing perceived politician evil is the result o' a desire to ignore widespread human flaw. is coincidental why we find @Gorth anarchist leaning to be naïve. not trying to offend, but am incapable o' squaring history and personal experience with gorth anarchy. get rid o' national boundaries and identities solves nothing 'cause is humanity which is the core problem. wave a magic wand and do away with borders, national identities and armies. how long before some person(s) get the bright idea to collective pool their strength, perhaps initial to protect themselves from genuine bad individuals. is easy to see how things evolve from there, no?

if am misrepresenting, please clarify 'cause am honest not trying to be flippant or dismissive. am just not seeing how national identities is the problem when for us such is mere symptomatic o' fundamental human nature and condition. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

Just now, Gromnir said:

if am misrepresenting, please clarify 'cause am honest not trying to be flippant or dismissive. am just not seeing how national identities is the problem when for us such is mere symptomatic o' fundamental human nature and condition.

Nope, not misrepresenting. Sadly Idealism is not a tradable currency, but we all have our flaws... as for national identities, the world did just "fine" without them before the 17th century. People still identified as something, but it seems to have been things less abstract and closer to home. Didn't prevent warlords from rounding up the peasants and equipping them with pitchforks and wooden sticks so they could go out and bash each others brains in for the glory of their clan chief/tribal leader/feudal lord/whatever. Nationalism just doesn't change anything for the better. If anything, it enables the same thing on a larger scale and with more enthusiasm.

[Guard Dog]

Trump praises Putin's 'genius' incursion into Ukraine

Hold up here! What the hell did I just read here??????

Quote

This is genius," he said of Putin's decision on Monday to officially recognize the breakaway provinces and authorize the use of Russian military personnel to assist them. "So Putin is now saying it’s independent — a large section of Ukraine. I said, how smart is that? And he’s gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. We could use that on our southern border. 

Are you f---g KIDDING me? Did that son of a bitch just suggest we invade Mexico? As for Putin's "genius" I've always noticed how dictators stick together. I guess that includes wanna-be's. 

I'd wager in 1938 he'd have been praising Hitler for invading Austria. The similarities between this situation and that are striking. 

[BruceVC]

7 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Trump praises Putin's 'genius' incursion into Ukraine

Hold up here! What the hell did I just read here??????

Are you f---g KIDDING me? Did that son of a bitch just suggest we invade Mexico? As for Putin's "genius" I've always noticed how dictators stick together. I guess that includes wanna-be's. 

I'd wager in 1938 he'd have been praising Hitler for invading Austria. The similarities between this situation and that are striking. 

I dont allow myself to get emotional by anything Trump says anymore because he has demonstrated time and time again he has no interest or knowledge in anything meaningful outside the US and especially now that he is not president anymore 

And  yes he is suggesting the US " invades " Mexico to control the border problem. If the US would do that and use  its military to control the border Im sure it would reduce illegal immigration but why not just do the same thing on the US side of the border if its such a good idea? And of course he didnt do that when he was president so the idea is not just ridiculous and against international law ....its not practical and I cant see it being politically popular ?
 

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

Nope, not misrepresenting. Sadly Idealism is not a tradable currency, but we all have our flaws... as for national identities, the world did just "fine" without them before the 17th century. People still identified as something, but it seems to have been things less abstract and closer to home. Didn't prevent warlords from rounding up the peasants and equipping them with pitchforks and wooden sticks so they could go out and bash each others brains in for the glory of their clan chief/tribal leader/feudal lord/whatever. Nationalism just doesn't change anything for the better. If anything, it enables the same thing on a larger scale and with more enthusiasm.

Idealism does matter because it contributes towards a better world and it  is where some good social and political  changes can come from

But its  mostly a first world way of thinking, I cant be an idealist unfortunately. Im a realist 

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

Nope, not misrepresenting. Sadly Idealism is not a tradable currency, but we all have our flaws... as for national identities, the world did just "fine" without them before the 17th century. People still identified as something, but it seems to have been things less abstract and closer to home. Didn't prevent warlords from rounding up the peasants and equipping them with pitchforks and wooden sticks so they could go out and bash each others brains in for the glory of their clan chief/tribal leader/feudal lord/whatever. Nationalism just doesn't change anything for the better. If anything, it enables the same thing on a larger scale and with more enthusiasm.

just seems like you got cause and effect reversed. as means o' war and advances in agriculture made large and more lethal armies possible...

*shrug*

from our pov, is not nations or national identity which were the cause. @MedicineDan would happily share how the nation-state identities o' the greeks didn't make their politics and warfare more huggable than 21st century examples. scale were smaller. 

perhaps blame invention o' the plow which started the chain o' events which led to the first nations way before the 17th century? for europeans, is arguable it were the introduction o' the bean (and later the potatoes) to diets which led to fundamental alterations in western national identify, 'cause were the explosion in the populations which brought 'bout the need for the kinda great nations which had previous only existed along the great river deltas o' the world: egypt, china, babylon.

etc.

am not claiming to have right answers on this, but is hard for us to point to national identity as the root cause when is so many other possibilities, not least o' which is the aforementioned human nature conundrum.

HA! Good Fun!

ps am not being dismissive o' other great ancient nations, but roman expansion, for example, relied on the grain from egypt. the mongols ironic needed china agriculture expand. etc. other nations in asia and the americas developed in part 'cause o' advances in bean and maize cultivation... and am happily willing to again link some o' the agricultural and irrigation advances o' the aztecs and incas respective.

Edited February 23, 2022 by Gromnir

[Sarex]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

Nationalism just doesn't change anything for the better.

Problem is that in some countries we call it Nationalism and in others we call it Patriotism...

[Gorth]

I don't really see nationalism (patriotism) as a "cause" for atrocities, but a means to commit such. The first war(s) probably started when the first field of arable land was cultivated and people started fighting over it (because the people cultivating it couldn't be picked up and carry it with them). Personally, I see the most significant cause wars as greed. The desire to accumulate as much wealth and resources as possible. Everything else, including nationalism are tools to mobilize as many people as possible to do the dying for you. It struck me as a very abstract and very absurd reason to kill your fellow man, that his home was located on the other side of some line, powerful people drew on a map. No, I'm not necessarily rational. Just thinking if a major tool for mobilizing people in large numbers to kill each other vigorously, faded away over time, maybe the world would be a better place.

 

Edit: I know it wasn't exactly what @Gromnir said, but I guess we can blame the peasants after all....

 

[Hurlshort]

7 hours ago, Gromnir said:

we met Justice Kennedy's wife, mary, on literal dozens o' occasions over the years, and in spite 'o the fact she were a third grade school teacher for many years, underestimating her would be a grave mistake.

Why "in spite of the fact"? Third grade teachers should never be underestimated. They teach entire generations of children how to read fluently.

[Gromnir]

28 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Just thinking if a major tool for mobilizing people in large numbers to kill each other vigorously, faded away over time, maybe the world would be a better place.

would like to agree with you. 

...

have you ever as an adult had to deal with a large group o' kids: sports team, classroom, camp, whatever? takes no time at all for kids to begin developing us v. them politics. is not the teacher or coaches fault kids is capable o' spiteful, hateful and petty, with such instincts magnified in a group. we worked at a juvenile hall for a time and were a football coach and we saw same same cycle repeated. one goal as a football coach, to minimize the infighting and to make possible a dynamic whereby diverse people who would otherwise never interact positive with each other if left to their own devices, were to promote a shared team identity as Bears, Eagles, Cowboys, or whatever were the team moniker. almost every coach attempts to create traditions and esprit de corps and whatnot to establish a team identity as an effort to in part negate those horrible clique dynamics which undermine group efforts. such schemes don't come about 'cause football coaches is trying to create future mindless soldiers willing to die for imaginary national identity. is a reaction to the (in)human nature o' teens and young adults.

we do change fundamental once our brain final develops in teens but as late as early 20s, but same approaches is used with adult sport teams... and nations. 

10 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

Why "in spite of the fact"? Third grade teachers should never be underestimated. They teach entire generations of children how to read fluently.

am agreeing they should not be underestimated, but in a room full o' judges, generals, diplomats and others, is all too often the serving staff and the odd third grade teacher is gonna be foolish dismissed. am not stating what should be. am recognizing what is an all too familiar failing o' the s'posed educated.

HA! Good Fun!

ps so is clear, am not suggesting the real problem is agriculture, technological innovation, human nature, or... etc. am saying the problems linked to nationalism is complex and is unlikely gonna be solved with a simple if improbable solution. get rid o' religion. get rid o' nationalism. from our pov, such solutions is impractical and far too big to address meaningful particularly as it appears is working backwards by trying to fix symptoms as 'posed to causes.

start small. get rid o' oversized foam fingers at US sporting events. manage that and call it a win.

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Gromnir

[BruceVC]

42 minutes ago, Sarex said:

Problem is that in some countries we call it Nationalism and in others we call it Patriotism...

Some people think patriotism is a bad thing, its not. Because it just means you support and believe in your country

 I think people confuse patriotism  with jingoism which is a bad thing 

[Gromnir]

ps

our work at juvenile hall also irrevocable colored our pov.

one o' the great dangers in the hall, and any american correctional or predisposition facility (jails and prisons) for that matter, is dealing with gangs. if you genuine want details we will provide, but the well-intentioned schemes for combating group identity were rare effective, and while the not-so-benign schemes were arguable effective in a limited way, overall am dubious as to the positive impact. am also betting @Gorth would be most unhappy to hear what were the effective approaches used to combat gang identity 'mongst minors at a predisposition facility where kids ain't yet had their cases adjudicated, so innocent until proven guilty and all that.  

HA! Good Fun!

Edited February 23, 2022 by Gromnir

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

Just thinking if a major tool for mobilizing people in large numbers to kill each other vigorously, faded away over time, maybe the world would be a better place.

Never going to happen though.

[Gorth]

It’s 2:20am here, so I’ll have to give this thread a break until tomorrow afternoon (Eastern Aussie time)

[BruceVC]

2 minutes ago, Gorth said:

It’s 2:20am here, so I’ll have to give this thread a break until tomorrow afternoon (Eastern Aussie time)

Nooooo,......its far too early to go sleep, I thought you were hardcore ?