This Thursday marks six months since Donald Trump became President of the United States.

He’s provided the seismic shock politics needed internationally, reassuring people that it’s still possible to govern in the public interest.
In an era when most voters have grown to despise the political class — the self-serving and often corrupt insiders’ club — Trump is dedicated to “draining the swamp”.
He is leading an administration governing for the many, not just the few.
He’s putting the interests of people in suburban and regional communities ahead of political lobbyists, fundraisers, Hollywood celebrities and every other spiv leeching off a broken system.

The elites hate him for it.

They hated him during last year’s election campaign because he wasn’t one of them.
He came from outside the system: a larrikin New York property developer — in the eyes of the elites, a “vulgarian” to be sneered at.
They have hated Trump in office because he has refused to submit to political orthodoxy, to sign up to their club.

Two weeks ago, he stood apart from the other G20 leaders and confirmed his decision to withdraw from the farcical Paris climate accord. (Note; this author is a climate alarmist)
This was a genuine test of leadership, perhaps the hardest thing to do in politics: to stand resolute against a hectoring majority, to stand alone as a minority of one.

Washington’s foreign policy establishment hates Trump because he is implementing his election promise to normalise America’s place in the world — to no longer act as a global policeman.

The new President hasn’t been to hundreds of backslapping international talkfests, duchessed by diplomats and armaments corporations, with everyone arguing for “more American intervention” — code for more wars.

Trump is a practical person who judges the evidence as he finds it.

The US intervention in Iraq was a disaster. It upset the fragile sectarian balance in the Middle East, created ferocious local resistance to foreign occupation and unleashed upon the Western world the evil of Islamic State.

What sort of fool would want the United States to repeat this kind of folly?

The sorts of fools who go to ¬international summits and submit to the wishes of weapon-making multinational corporations.

When he left office in 1961, President Eisenhower warned the American people to “guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence by the military-industrial complex”.
“The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist,” he said.
From his time in office, Bill Clinton lamented how: “The problem in my country is we have powerful ¬people who think the US always needs enemies.”

Trump is the first president to act on these warnings.

He is making American foreign policy normal again. He’s restoring the sensible pre-Cold War doctrine of non-interventionism.
Trump will only take decisive military action in defence of American interests. He’s not in the business of invading countries and occupying foreign lands.

He has already made the world a safer place by establishing cordial relations with Russia.
It makes sense for these two nuclear powers to get along.
Trump’s presidency has become an important safeguard against the hawks of the military-industrial complex wanting to provoke conflict with Russia.

The other great Trumpian achievement has been on the domestic front.
He has forged a new type of politics, one where he readily defines himself by his enemies.
The more the mainstream media condemn him, ramping up their Trump Derangement Syndrome, the more the President is able to ¬confirm his credentials as the world’s best hope for fighting political ¬correctness.

He has been true to his supporters. And he’s been an inspiration to those of us who are alarmed by the march of leftist social engineering through public institutions.

Importantly, Trump is not a conservative. Instead, his presidency is filling a gap left by the collapse of conservatism around the world.
Conservatives see their role as protecting the traditional institutions and values of society.
But recently two problems have arisen.

Leftists have taken control of many of these institutions, such as the education system, the public broadcasters and the government bureaucracies.
Elsewhere, public trust in the conventional pillars of society — big business, churches, the media and democracy itself — has been in steady decline. Conservatives have got little left to conserve.
They have become clueless in knowing how to respond to this ¬dilemma.

We see this in Australia with the cavernous divisions within the Liberal Party.
The “progressive” or Turnbull wing of the Liberals cheers on the leftist takeover, while the “conservative” wing is frozen with inaction — utterly hopeless in pushing back against cultural Marxism.
Even worse, these ineffective “civility conservatives” see Trump as part of the problem.
They attack his language as “too rough and unbecoming”.
What a pack of dithering imbeciles.

The genius of Trump is in being “institution-free”.
He is not beholden to any of the traditional institutions of politics, and often speaks out against them.
Instead of sucking up to the media, he has created a cage-match of animosity, a fight to the death with leftist outfits like CNN.

Trump’s appeal is directly to the people, bypassing the need for support from journalists, interest groups and even his own party.

With conservatism dying, modern politics is now a choice between two competing paradigms: the leftist march through institutions (insider elites) and the Trumpian fightback (outsider rebellion).
There is no third way.

Trump is about maintaining the status quo more than anyone else, he’s a rich businessman who politics will directly benefit him and his cronies.

Cymek said:

Trump is about maintaining the status quo more than anyone else, he’s a rich businessman who politics will directly benefit him and his cronies.

no, trumps for the people. Rich as he might be, he is one of the “deplorables” LOL.
Unlike the left, Trump cares about his country & its people & the western ideologies that have made the west such a success.

I’m afraid you suffer from Trump derangement syndrome

Is that your own spiel or have you again forgotten to quote your source?

Witty Rejoinder said:

Is that your own spiel or have you again forgotten to quote your source?

If you read the post you would have picked up that it is not my “spiel”.

I don’t bother with links, or point out who the author is, for two reasons.

1. you can easily find out yourself

2. that will slightly delay the boring old attack of the publication & the author as some rightwing nutjob

make it three. try taking in the words, rather than who’s writing them!

I read it all so now i’m allowed to make fun of the source. Mark Latham hey.. I bet you wish he had gotten into power in 2004. FMD if there is one ex pollie suffering from relevance deprivation syndrome it’s him.

What utter trollish behaviour.

Witty Rejoinder said:

I read it all so now i’m allowed to make fun of the source. Mark Latham hey.. I bet you wish he had gotten into power in 2004. FMD if there is one ex pollie suffering from relevance deprivation syndrome it’s him.

see, this is exactly what I meant. Not one word about what he has said. Just “oh, here’s a nutcaseI dislike like writing about someone else I dislike, so whatever he’s saying is wrong”

kii said:

What utter trollish behaviour.

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

Isn’t Trumps idea of making America great again a USA that is racist sexist boorish and irresponsible and cares only about the now and to hell with the future.

Cymek said:

Isn’t Trumps idea of making America great again a USA that is racist sexist boorish and irresponsible and cares only about the now and to hell with the future.

No, you see this is where you have been led astray, possibly willingly.

Trump is not racist because he doesn’t want open boarders. He is not against legal immigration & many immigrants agree with him.
He is not racist because he wants to temporarily suspend immigration from, for good reasons, some majority muslim countries, countries named by Obama, and countries Obama himself suspended immigration to for 6 or 9 months.

Namke calling, leftist name calling.

Does the USA and the world for that matter have a responsibility to clean up the mess it’s created over the last couple of decades with policies of interference or should we just ignore it and the millions of refugees.

Cymek said:

Does the USA and the world for that matter have a responsibility to clean up the mess it’s created over the last couple of decades with policies of interference or should we just ignore it and the millions of refugees.

the millions of refugees are not the result of US or western anything.. These refugees are pining to get to successful western democracies to exploit their wealth.

Take africa for example. A continent of approx 1 billion, that cannot sustain itself, fleeing to europe & onto the rest of the world. With an expected population of 4 billion by the end of the century, where do you think they’ll be heading?

Cymek said:

Does the USA and the world for that matter have a responsibility to clean up the mess it’s created over the last couple of decades with policies of interference or should we just ignore it and the millions of refugees.

Do you not think that most governments/world leaders are a disgrace and either authorise or ignore events that affect millions if not billions of people detrimentally. Governments allows so many abhorrent acts to take place all in the name of politics or mutual gain.

The_observer said:

see, this is exactly what I meant. Not one word about what he has said. Just “oh, here’s a nutcaseI dislike like writing about someone else I dislike, so whatever he’s saying is wrong”

Some people have said that despite his politics ML is a good writer. Don’t see it myself.

Can’t really be bothered critiquing an article that is so all over the place but i can pick one problem immediately. Trump claims he wants to ‘drain the swamp’. Instead he appoints the wealthiest and most connected cabinet ever.

Cymek said:

Cymek said:

Does the USA and the world for that matter have a responsibility to clean up the mess it’s created over the last couple of decades with policies of interference or should we just ignore it and the millions of refugees.

Do you not think that most governments/world leaders are a disgrace

yes particulaly in the middle east & africa.

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Does the USA and the world for that matter have a responsibility to clean up the mess it’s created over the last couple of decades with policies of interference or should we just ignore it and the millions of refugees.

the millions of refugees are not the result of US or western anything.. These refugees are pining to get to successful western democracies to exploit their wealth.

Take africa for example. A continent of approx 1 billion, that cannot sustain itself, fleeing to europe & onto the rest of the world. With an expected population of 4 billion by the end of the century, where do you think they’ll be heading?

An example of vested interests is why aren’t nations that sell weapons used to quell populations/commit genocide not charged with war crimes and held accountable. People flee war zones and become refugees

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

see, this is exactly what I meant. Not one word about what he has said. Just “oh, here’s a nutcaseI dislike like writing about someone else I dislike, so whatever he’s saying is wrong”

Some people have said that despite his politics ML is a good writer. Don’t see it myself.

Can’t really be bothered critiquing an article that is so all over the place but i can pick one problem immediately. Trump claims he wants to ‘drain the swamp’. Instead he appoints the wealthiest and most connected cabinet ever.

I didn’t find it to be all over the place. Maybe a bit much for you to take in?

He appoints people who are successful. What, do you want him to get a street sweepers to help him run the joint?

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Cymek said:

Does the USA and the world for that matter have a responsibility to clean up the mess it’s created over the last couple of decades with policies of interference or should we just ignore it and the millions of refugees.

Do you not think that most governments/world leaders are a disgrace

yes particulaly in the middle east & africa.

Indeed, I’m not West blaming the whole world needs to take a hard look at itself and grow up as the future of our species and the planet is at stake. Why would you want to leave a legacy of greed, death and destruction.

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Does the USA and the world for that matter have a responsibility to clean up the mess it’s created over the last couple of decades with policies of interference or should we just ignore it and the millions of refugees.

the millions of refugees are not the result of US or western anything.. These refugees are pining to get to successful western democracies to exploit their wealth.

Take africa for example. A continent of approx 1 billion, that cannot sustain itself, fleeing to europe & onto the rest of the world. With an expected population of 4 billion by the end of the century, where do you think they’ll be heading?

An example of vested interests is why aren’t nations that sell weapons used to quell populations/commit genocide not charged with war crimes and held accountable. People flee war zones and become refugees

People fleeing warzones can just move next door, so to speak, to find safety. any moves after that are for economic reasons

The_observer said:

He appoints people who are successful. What, do you want him to get a street sweepers to help him run the joint?

Who can appoint who he wants but he is certainly not draining the swamp.

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

He appoints people who are successful. What, do you want him to get a street sweepers to help him run the joint?

Who can appoint who he wants but he is certainly not draining the swamp.

He can…

>>>the future of our species and the planet is at stake<<,

well you never know when a nuclear war might break out, considering Nth Korea & Iran

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

He appoints people who are successful. What, do you want him to get a street sweepers to help him run the joint?

Who can appoint who he wants but he is certainly not draining the swamp.

well he does need some people, with experience of how the system works, to get things done.

Of course Trump is in a battle with – a legal system where a third rate county judge can over-rule him – an unelected bureaucracy targeting him, & an overt facist violent leftwing movement wanting to destroy him, not to mention a 4 million member spook-force leaking to undermine him.

Trump is one tough bunny

>>& an overt facist …… leftwing movement<<

What?

No matter what Trump does, he’s on a hiding to nothing.

No matter how well his policies might improve the lives of his countrymen, the left is out to crucify him.

The better his policies help to prosper his country, the more relaxed the citizens become, & the more likely they’ll return to the unhelpful norm.

buffy said:

>>& an overt facist …… leftwing movement<<

What?

facists, not pretty enough.

buffy said:

>>& an overt facist …… leftwing movement<<

What?

yes, the left just cannot accept that a person who is not a democrate won the election, & have turned violent.

Hail the democracy, but only as long as its a democrate democrising

If it wasn’t Trump being vilified, it would have been which every other Republican had won the election.

poikilotherm said:

buffy said:

>>& an overt facist …… leftwing movement<<

What?

facists, not pretty enough.

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

The_observer said:

poikilotherm said:

buffy said:

>>& an overt facist …… leftwing movement<<

What?

facists, not pretty enough.

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

buffy said:

The_observer said:

poikilotherm said:

facists, not pretty enough.

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

I wasn’t aware facists were fascists too.

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Isn’t Trumps idea of making America great again a USA that is racist sexist boorish and irresponsible and cares only about the now and to hell with the future.

No, you see this is where you have been led astray, possibly willingly.

Trump is not racist because he doesn’t want open boarders. He is not against legal immigration & many immigrants agree with him.
He is not racist because he wants to temporarily suspend immigration from, for good reasons, some majority muslim countries, countries named by Obama, and countries Obama himself suspended immigration to for 6 or 9 months.

Namke calling, leftist name calling.

and cymec, you post is an example of the political correctness Latham writes of. Proctecting your boarders from illegal immigrants is racist, unless its a democrate like Hillary doing it.

Banning muslim immigration from a particular region is racist, unless your a democrate like Obama.

Imagine if Trump & his administration had been responsible for Gaddafi inglorious death. Imagine if it was Trumpy & his team, sitting their cheering the TV screen, as Gaddafi copped it, instead of Hilliary & Barrack.

go on, imagine the outcry from the american anti trump briggade. It not hard.

I was reading between the lines. It’s murky in there, but sometimes you can make out the shapes.

buffy said:

The_observer said:

poikilotherm said:

facists, not pretty enough.

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

It’s morphed into that with constant repetition but the original fascists enforced state control of the means of production, so left wing.

buffy said:

The_observer said:

poikilotherm said:

facists, not pretty enough.

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

“A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator”

the dictatorship of the left.

No Republicans allowed. No conservatives allowed. “He’s not our President”

sorry he is. He was elected! but the left won’t accept it.

It a fine line

buffy said:

The_observer said:

poikilotherm said:

facists, not pretty enough.

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

Not in 2017. Everyone gets to yell fascist now.

Fake news and all that.

The_observer said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Isn’t Trumps idea of making America great again a USA that is racist sexist boorish and irresponsible and cares only about the now and to hell with the future.

No, you see this is where you have been led astray, possibly willingly.

Trump is not racist because he doesn’t want open boarders. He is not against legal immigration & many immigrants agree with him.
He is not racist because he wants to temporarily suspend immigration from, for good reasons, some majority muslim countries, countries named by Obama, and countries Obama himself suspended immigration to for 6 or 9 months.

Namke calling, leftist name calling.

and cymec, you post is an example of the political correctness Latham writes of. Proctecting your boarders from illegal immigrants is racist, unless its a democrate like Hillary doing it.

Banning muslim immigration from a particular region is racist, unless your a democrate like Obama.

Imagine if Trump & his administration had been responsible for Gaddafi inglorious death. Imagine if it was Trumpy & his team, sitting their cheering the TV screen, as Gaddafi copped it, instead of Hilliary & Barrack.

go on, imagine the outcry from the american anti trump briggade. It not hard.

borders.

Protecting boarders is a whole different thing. I could ignore it once.

sarahs mum said:

buffy said:

The_observer said:

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

Not in 2017. Everyone gets to yell fascist now.

Fake news and all that.

hey, jump on board the inner city outrage tram.

Every ones a Hitler. Everyone a racist. Everyone a homophobe, an islamaphobe, (add you preference here)

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

The_observer said:

No, you see this is where you have been led astray, possibly willingly.

Trump is not racist because he doesn’t want open boarders. He is not against legal immigration & many immigrants agree with him.
He is not racist because he wants to temporarily suspend immigration from, for good reasons, some majority muslim countries, countries named by Obama, and countries Obama himself suspended immigration to for 6 or 9 months.

Namke calling, leftist name calling.

and cymec, you post is an example of the political correctness Latham writes of. Proctecting your boarders from illegal immigrants is racist, unless its a democrate like Hillary doing it.

Banning muslim immigration from a particular region is racist, unless your a democrate like Obama.

Imagine if Trump & his administration had been responsible for Gaddafi inglorious death. Imagine if it was Trumpy & his team, sitting their cheering the TV screen, as Gaddafi copped it, instead of Hilliary & Barrack.

go on, imagine the outcry from the american anti trump briggade. It not hard.

borders.

Protecting boarders is a whole different thing. I could ignore it once.

LOL, yes, its funny – border breakers become boarders, he he, get it

The Internet God says right wing

“Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce, that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before it spread to other European countries. Opposed to liberalism, Marxism, and anarchism, fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.”

Ref: Wikipedia

I am thinking of making something like this tonight, and using ground up skippy in the meatballs. The notion of boiled meatballs intrigues me.

http://omnivorescookbook.com/napa-cabbage-soup

Michael V said:

I am thinking of making something like this tonight, and using ground up skippy in the meatballs. The notion of boiled meatballs intrigues me.

http://omnivorescookbook.com/napa-cabbage-soup

fake news.

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

The_observer said:

No, you see this is where you have been led astray, possibly willingly.

Trump is not racist because he doesn’t want open boarders. He is not against legal immigration & many immigrants agree with him.
He is not racist because he wants to temporarily suspend immigration from, for good reasons, some majority muslim countries, countries named by Obama, and countries Obama himself suspended immigration to for 6 or 9 months.

Namke calling, leftist name calling.

and cymec, you post is an example of the political correctness Latham writes of. Proctecting your boarders from illegal immigrants is racist, unless its a democrate like Hillary doing it.

Banning muslim immigration from a particular region is racist, unless your a democrate like Obama.

Imagine if Trump & his administration had been responsible for Gaddafi inglorious death. Imagine if it was Trumpy & his team, sitting their cheering the TV screen, as Gaddafi copped it, instead of Hilliary & Barrack.

go on, imagine the outcry from the american anti trump briggade. It not hard.

borders.

Protecting boarders is a whole different thing. I could ignore it once.

“Democrates” grates too.

AwesomeO said:

buffy said:

The_observer said:

my enemy’s enemy is my friend.

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

It’s morphed into that with constant repetition but the original fascists enforced state control of the means of production, so left wing.

Sometimes it seems to be a loop rather than a linear continuum. That’s the trouble with labels.

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

buffy said:

I think you will find the word fascist refers to the right wing.

Not in 2017. Everyone gets to yell fascist now.

Fake news and all that.

hey, jump on board the inner city outrage tram.

Every ones a Hitler. Everyone a racist. Everyone a homophobe, an islamaphobe, (add you preference here)

I dislike people who are dicks, everything else is irrelevant,

I have also been saving mandarin, orange and lemon peels to attempt this Chinese orange sauce, from the same source.

http://omnivorescookbook.com/orange-chicken-sauce/

sarahs mum said:

Michael V said:

I am thinking of making something like this tonight, and using ground up skippy in the meatballs. The notion of boiled meatballs intrigues me.

http://omnivorescookbook.com/napa-cabbage-soup

fake news.

It’s not.

Stamps feet.

AwesomeO said:

It’s morphed into that with constant repetition but the original fascists enforced state control of the means of production, so left wing.

Can you cite any historians who support that contention?

Is fascism normally associated with a police state and big brother, something that people in power would like as the pesky population get in the way

Witty Rejoinder said:

AwesomeO said:

It’s morphed into that with constant repetition but the original fascists enforced state control of the means of production, so left wing.

Can you cite any historians who support that contention?

I thought it was well known that the Italian and German fascists took control of industries, that they hated communists doesn’t automatically make them the opposite to the left ie socialism, they even had it in their name, state control of the industry is a left thing.

Chinese Flo recipe.

I might try that too some time soon, because I inadvertently bought a can of sweetened red bean paste.

http://omnivorescookbook.com/recipes/chinese-pumpkin-bun

buffy said:

The Internet God says right wing

“Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce, that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before it spread to other European countries. Opposed to liberalism, Marxism, and anarchism, fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.”

Ref: Wikipedia

>>characterized by dictatorial power<< “he not my President”

>>forcible suppression of opposition <<
- like opposition to mass immigration from third world islam (islamaphobe – racist)
- opposition to authoritarian enforcement of climate policy (deniers) & the attempted silencing of sceptics

>>and control of industry and commerce<<

Obama’s war on coal & fossil fuels in general. His over-riding of Congress to implement green agendas through Executive Orders.

AwesomeO said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

AwesomeO said:

It’s morphed into that with constant repetition but the original fascists enforced state control of the means of production, so left wing.

Can you cite any historians who support that contention?

I thought it was well known that the Italian and German fascists took control of industries, that they hated communists doesn’t automatically make them the opposite to the left ie socialism, they even had it in their name, state control of the industry is a left thing.

State ownership is left-wing; state control not necessarily. I don’t think early fascists were lumped in with communists and socialists but if any historians did initially then I am prepared to be corrected.

AwesomeO said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

AwesomeO said:

It’s morphed into that with constant repetition but the original fascists enforced state control of the means of production, so left wing.

Can you cite any historians who support that contention?

I thought it was well known that the Italian and German fascists took control of industries, that they hated communists doesn’t automatically make them the opposite to the left ie socialism, they even had it in their name, state control of the industry is a left thing.

Using that sort of logic you could also argue that communism is right wing.

Or you could just say both communism and fascism seek state control (let’s not talk about ownership) of industry, but for different reasons.

Michael V said:

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

and cymec, you post is an example of the political correctness Latham writes of. Proctecting your boarders from illegal immigrants is racist, unless its a democrate like Hillary doing it.

Banning muslim immigration from a particular region is racist, unless your a democrate like Obama.

Imagine if Trump & his administration had been responsible for Gaddafi inglorious death. Imagine if it was Trumpy & his team, sitting their cheering the TV screen, as Gaddafi copped it, instead of Hilliary & Barrack.

go on, imagine the outcry from the american anti trump briggade. It not hard.

borders.

Protecting boarders is a whole different thing. I could ignore it once.

“Democrates” grates too.

Its simple to distract people with spelling mistakes & grammatical errers

For example government control of the economy goes way back:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism

Many nations applied the theory, notably France, which was the most important state economically in Europe at the time. King Louis XIV followed the guidance of Jean Baptiste Colbert, his controller general of finances (1665–1683). It was determined that the state should rule in the economic realm as it did in the diplomatic, and that the interests of the state as identified by the king were superior to those of merchants and of everyone else. The goal of mercantilist economic policies was to build up the state, especially in an age of incessant warfare, and the state should look for ways to strengthen the economy and to weaken foreign adversaries.

The_observer said:

Michael V said:

sarahs mum said:

borders.

Protecting boarders is a whole different thing. I could ignore it once.

“Democrates” grates too.

Its simple to distract people with spelling mistakes & grammatical errers

I’m simple and easily distracted. Maybe that’s why it’s happened. Do you do that stuff deliberately?

• Do you do that stuff deliberately?

It is hard to type accurately when you have stumps for hands…

Michael V said:

The_observer said:

Michael V said:

“Democrates” grates too.

Its simple to distract people with spelling mistakes & grammatical errers

I’m simple and easily distracted. Maybe that’s why it’s happened. Do you do that stuff deliberately?

Look, I’m here to please, so I’ll just say, than k s for pointing out my speling erers

furious said:

• Do you do that stuff deliberately?

It is hard to type accurately when you have stumps for hands…

Love the gif!

:)

Michael V said:

furious said:

• Do you do that stuff deliberately?

It is hard to type accurately when you have stumps for hands…

Love the gif

:)

I don’t love the gif.

you should’ve put a link to the source, or attribution, some clear indication of where/whom it originated.

transition said:

you should’ve put a link to the source, or attribution, some clear indication of where/whom it originated.

I addressed that issue. No i shouldn’t have.

The authors identy only matters if your not interested in the content

buffy said:

The Internet God says right wing

“Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and control of industry and commerce, that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. The first fascist movements emerged in Italy during World War I, before it spread to other European countries. Opposed to liberalism, Marxism, and anarchism, fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.”

Ref: Wikipedia

Maybe it (the government – or state) makes friends with big business/industry (rendering them indistinguishable), and they rule together. Contrasted with more left authoritarianism, private endeavors and private ownership’s expediently tolerated, though not in a way that dilutes the state (or state power).

And as somebody once put it…

‘everyone shall have a job, and nobody shall work against the state’

The_observer said:

transition said:

you should’ve put a link to the source, or attribution, some clear indication of where/whom it originated.

I addressed that issue. No i shouldn’t have.

The authors identy only matters if your not interested in the content

well, it’d be nice to check if the rant was copy and pasted verbatim, and if it was copyright.

Larissa Waters
23 mins ·

It is with great shock and sadness that I have discovered that I hold dual citizenship of Australia and Canada. As people would know after the recent departure of my dear friend and former colleague Scott Ludlam, section 44 of the Australian constitution means I cannot hold office in the federal Parliament.

I left Canada as a baby, born to Australian parents studying and working briefly in Canada before they returned home. I have lived my life thinking that as a baby I was naturalised to be Australian and only Australian, and my parents told me that I had until age 21 to actively seek Canadian citizenship. At 21, I chose not to seek dual citizenship, and I have never even visited Canada since leaving at 11 months old.

However after Scott’s shock discovery, I immediately sought legal advice, and was devastated to learn that because of 70 year old Canadian laws I had been a dual citizen from birth, and that Canadian law changed a week after I was born and required me to have actively renounced Canadian citizenship.

I had not renounced since I was unaware that I was a dual citizen. Obviously this is something that I should have sought advice on when I first nominated for the Senate in 2007, and I take full responsibility for this grave mistake and oversight. I am deeply sorry for the impact that it will have.

It is with a heavy heart that I am forced to resign as Senator for Queensland and Co-Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, effective today.

I apologise wholeheartedly to all those who have supported me and helped me to become a representative for the wonderful people of Queensland over the last six years.

I have been incredibly fortunate to be able to represent my values and speak for Queenslanders who want a fairer and cleaner world. There is no greater honour than to be entrusted with that responsibility and I have discharged it to the best of my ability, with the support of many.

The Queensland Greens have never been stronger. Despite today’s events, Queensland will still have a Green voice in the federal Parliament. And I am confident that we will continue to grow by electing some Greens MPs into our State parliament this coming election.

From being the first woman to breastfeed in federal parliament, to being part of stopping the dumping of dredge spoil on the Great Barrier Reef, overturning cuts to domestic violence services and keeping key environmental decision making powers in federal hands, I have relished every moment to make positive change as a Greens Senator.

But the challenges we face as a nation are still so great, and I will not be stepping away from them. I have spent my working life protecting the environment and helping the community have better say in decision making, and that will not cease.

We must stop the Adani mega mine, and we must support women to be free from violence, sexism, and pay discrimination. While my future remains uncertain, I have more to contribute and will be talking with my party about what lies ahead. Whatever the outcome, I will always work for gender equality and to protect the environment.

It has been an honour to work with my Greens colleagues in the parliament and in the Queensland party. They are the best of people and I am devastated to leave them. My focus now is on working with the party to ensure Queenslanders still have a strong Green voice in the Senate, and working with our state candidates, members and supporters to elect Greens into the Queensland State Parliament.

Despite my personal circumstances, I still have unshakeable hope for our common future on this planet. Our movement is so much bigger than any one person, and we will win in the end.

Farewell dear friends.

sarahs mum said:

Larissa Waters
23 mins ·

It is with great shock and sadness that I have discovered that I hold dual citizenship of Australia and Canada. As people would know after the recent departure of my dear friend and former colleague Scott Ludlam, section 44 of the Australian constitution means I cannot hold office in the federal Parliament.

I left Canada as a baby, born to Australian parents studying and working briefly in Canada before they returned home. I have lived my life thinking that as a baby I was naturalised to be Australian and only Australian, and my parents told me that I had until age 21 to actively seek Canadian citizenship. At 21, I chose not to seek dual citizenship, and I have never even visited Canada since leaving at 11 months old.

However after Scott’s shock discovery, I immediately sought legal advice, and was devastated to learn that because of 70 year old Canadian laws I had been a dual citizen from birth, and that Canadian law changed a week after I was born and required me to have actively renounced Canadian citizenship.

I had not renounced since I was unaware that I was a dual citizen. Obviously this is something that I should have sought advice on when I first nominated for the Senate in 2007, and I take full responsibility for this grave mistake and oversight. I am deeply sorry for the impact that it will have.

It is with a heavy heart that I am forced to resign as Senator for Queensland and Co-Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, effective today.

I apologise wholeheartedly to all those who have supported me and helped me to become a representative for the wonderful people of Queensland over the last six years.

I have been incredibly fortunate to be able to represent my values and speak for Queenslanders who want a fairer and cleaner world. There is no greater honour than to be entrusted with that responsibility and I have discharged it to the best of my ability, with the support of many.

The Queensland Greens have never been stronger. Despite today’s events, Queensland will still have a Green voice in the federal Parliament. And I am confident that we will continue to grow by electing some Greens MPs into our State parliament this coming election.

From being the first woman to breastfeed in federal parliament, to being part of stopping the dumping of dredge spoil on the Great Barrier Reef, overturning cuts to domestic violence services and keeping key environmental decision making powers in federal hands, I have relished every moment to make positive change as a Greens Senator.

But the challenges we face as a nation are still so great, and I will not be stepping away from them. I have spent my working life protecting the environment and helping the community have better say in decision making, and that will not cease.

We must stop the Adani mega mine, and we must support women to be free from violence, sexism, and pay discrimination. While my future remains uncertain, I have more to contribute and will be talking with my party about what lies ahead. Whatever the outcome, I will always work for gender equality and to protect the environment.

It has been an honour to work with my Greens colleagues in the parliament and in the Queensland party. They are the best of people and I am devastated to leave them. My focus now is on working with the party to ensure Queenslanders still have a strong Green voice in the Senate, and working with our state candidates, members and supporters to elect Greens into the Queensland State Parliament.

Despite my personal circumstances, I still have unshakeable hope for our common future on this planet. Our movement is so much bigger than any one person, and we will win in the end.

Farewell dear friends.

fake news. sorry.

transition said:

The_observer said:

transition said:

you should’ve put a link to the source, or attribution, some clear indication of where/whom it originated.

I addressed that issue. No i shouldn’t have.

The authors identy only matters if your not interested in the content

well, it’d be nice to check if the rant was copy and pasted verbatim, and if it was copyright.

Mark Latham, Daily Telegraph.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=He+has+been+true+to+his+supporters.+And+he%E2%80%99s+been+an+inspiration+to+those+of+us+who+are+alarmed+by+the+march+of+leftist+social+engineering+through+public+institutions.&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU701AU701&oq=He+has+been+true+to+his+supporters.+And+he%E2%80%99s+been+an+inspiration+to+those+of+us+who+are+alarmed+by+the+march+of+leftist+social+engineering+through+public+institutions.&aqs=chrome..69i57.1261j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

transition said:

The_observer said:

transition said:

you should’ve put a link to the source, or attribution, some clear indication of where/whom it originated.

I addressed that issue. No i shouldn’t have.

The authors identy only matters if your not interested in the content

well, it’d be nice to check if the rant was copy and pasted verbatim, and if it was copyright.

The rant you say.

Would it be a rant if it had been – Trump Brilliance.. by Hilliary Clinton ?

LOL

sarahs mum said:

sarahs mum said:

Larissa Waters
23 mins ·

It is with great shock and sadness that I have discovered that I hold dual citizenship of Australia and Canada. As people would know after the recent departure of my dear friend and former colleague Scott Ludlam, section 44 of the Australian constitution means I cannot hold office in the federal Parliament.

I left Canada as a baby, born to Australian parents studying and working briefly in Canada before they returned home. I have lived my life thinking that as a baby I was naturalised to be Australian and only Australian, and my parents told me that I had until age 21 to actively seek Canadian citizenship. At 21, I chose not to seek dual citizenship, and I have never even visited Canada since leaving at 11 months old.

However after Scott’s shock discovery, I immediately sought legal advice, and was devastated to learn that because of 70 year old Canadian laws I had been a dual citizen from birth, and that Canadian law changed a week after I was born and required me to have actively renounced Canadian citizenship.

I had not renounced since I was unaware that I was a dual citizen. Obviously this is something that I should have sought advice on when I first nominated for the Senate in 2007, and I take full responsibility for this grave mistake and oversight. I am deeply sorry for the impact that it will have.

It is with a heavy heart that I am forced to resign as Senator for Queensland and Co-Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, effective today.

I apologise wholeheartedly to all those who have supported me and helped me to become a representative for the wonderful people of Queensland over the last six years.

I have been incredibly fortunate to be able to represent my values and speak for Queenslanders who want a fairer and cleaner world. There is no greater honour than to be entrusted with that responsibility and I have discharged it to the best of my ability, with the support of many.

The Queensland Greens have never been stronger. Despite today’s events, Queensland will still have a Green voice in the federal Parliament. And I am confident that we will continue to grow by electing some Greens MPs into our State parliament this coming election.

From being the first woman to breastfeed in federal parliament, to being part of stopping the dumping of dredge spoil on the Great Barrier Reef, overturning cuts to domestic violence services and keeping key environmental decision making powers in federal hands, I have relished every moment to make positive change as a Greens Senator.

But the challenges we face as a nation are still so great, and I will not be stepping away from them. I have spent my working life protecting the environment and helping the community have better say in decision making, and that will not cease.

We must stop the Adani mega mine, and we must support women to be free from violence, sexism, and pay discrimination. While my future remains uncertain, I have more to contribute and will be talking with my party about what lies ahead. Whatever the outcome, I will always work for gender equality and to protect the environment.

It has been an honour to work with my Greens colleagues in the parliament and in the Queensland party. They are the best of people and I am devastated to leave them. My focus now is on working with the party to ensure Queenslanders still have a strong Green voice in the Senate, and working with our state candidates, members and supporters to elect Greens into the Queensland State Parliament.

Despite my personal circumstances, I still have unshakeable hope for our common future on this planet. Our movement is so much bigger than any one person, and we will win in the end.

Farewell dear friends.

fake news. sorry.

LOL

sarahs mum said:

Larissa Waters
23 mins ·

It is with great shock and sadness that I have discovered that I hold dual citizenship of Australia and Canada. As people would know after the recent departure of my dear friend and former colleague Scott Ludlam, section 44 of the Australian constitution means I cannot hold office in the federal Parliament.

I left Canada as a baby, born to Australian parents studying and working briefly in Canada before they returned home. I have lived my life thinking that as a baby I was naturalised to be Australian and only Australian, and my parents told me that I had until age 21 to actively seek Canadian citizenship. At 21, I chose not to seek dual citizenship, and I have never even visited Canada since leaving at 11 months old.

However after Scott’s shock discovery, I immediately sought legal advice, and was devastated to learn that because of 70 year old Canadian laws I had been a dual citizen from birth, and that Canadian law changed a week after I was born and required me to have actively renounced Canadian citizenship.

I had not renounced since I was unaware that I was a dual citizen. Obviously this is something that I should have sought advice on when I first nominated for the Senate in 2007, and I take full responsibility for this grave mistake and oversight. I am deeply sorry for the impact that it will have.

It is with a heavy heart that I am forced to resign as Senator for Queensland and Co-Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, effective today.

I apologise wholeheartedly to all those who have supported me and helped me to become a representative for the wonderful people of Queensland over the last six years.

I have been incredibly fortunate to be able to represent my values and speak for Queenslanders who want a fairer and cleaner world. There is no greater honour than to be entrusted with that responsibility and I have discharged it to the best of my ability, with the support of many.

The Queensland Greens have never been stronger. Despite today’s events, Queensland will still have a Green voice in the federal Parliament. And I am confident that we will continue to grow by electing some Greens MPs into our State parliament this coming election.

From being the first woman to breastfeed in federal parliament, to being part of stopping the dumping of dredge spoil on the Great Barrier Reef, overturning cuts to domestic violence services and keeping key environmental decision making powers in federal hands, I have relished every moment to make positive change as a Greens Senator.

But the challenges we face as a nation are still so great, and I will not be stepping away from them. I have spent my working life protecting the environment and helping the community have better say in decision making, and that will not cease.

We must stop the Adani mega mine, and we must support women to be free from violence, sexism, and pay discrimination. While my future remains uncertain, I have more to contribute and will be talking with my party about what lies ahead. Whatever the outcome, I will always work for gender equality and to protect the environment.

It has been an honour to work with my Greens colleagues in the parliament and in the Queensland party. They are the best of people and I am devastated to leave them. My focus now is on working with the party to ensure Queenslanders still have a strong Green voice in the Senate, and working with our state candidates, members and supporters to elect Greens into the Queensland State Parliament.

Despite my personal circumstances, I still have unshakeable hope for our common future on this planet. Our movement is so much bigger than any one person, and we will win in the end.

Farewell dear friends.

Fuck worrying about NZ or Canadian citizenship, all Greens come from another planet

The_observer said:

transition said:

The_observer said:

I addressed that issue. No i shouldn’t have.

The authors identy only matters if your not interested in the content

well, it’d be nice to check if the rant was copy and pasted verbatim, and if it was copyright.

The rant you say.

Would it be a rant if it had been – Trump Brilliance.. by Hilliary Clinton ?

LOL

was it copyright?

given the source i’d expect it wanted for virus-like contagion status, and’s somewhat replicated in your three neurons.

• Would it be a rant if it had been – Trump Brilliance.. by Hilliary Clinton ?

Even more so…

furious said:

• Would it be a rant if it had been – Trump Brilliance.. by Hilliary Clinton ?

Even more so…

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

sarahs mum said:

sarahs mum said:

Larissa Waters
23 mins ·

It is with great shock and sadness that I have discovered that I hold dual citizenship of Australia and Canada. As people would know after the recent departure of my dear friend and former colleague Scott Ludlam, section 44 of the Australian constitution means I cannot hold office in the federal Parliament.

I left Canada as a baby, born to Australian parents studying and working briefly in Canada before they returned home. I have lived my life thinking that as a baby I was naturalised to be Australian and only Australian, and my parents told me that I had until age 21 to actively seek Canadian citizenship. At 21, I chose not to seek dual citizenship, and I have never even visited Canada since leaving at 11 months old.

However after Scott’s shock discovery, I immediately sought legal advice, and was devastated to learn that because of 70 year old Canadian laws I had been a dual citizen from birth, and that Canadian law changed a week after I was born and required me to have actively renounced Canadian citizenship.

I had not renounced since I was unaware that I was a dual citizen. Obviously this is something that I should have sought advice on when I first nominated for the Senate in 2007, and I take full responsibility for this grave mistake and oversight. I am deeply sorry for the impact that it will have.

It is with a heavy heart that I am forced to resign as Senator for Queensland and Co-Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens, effective today.

I apologise wholeheartedly to all those who have supported me and helped me to become a representative for the wonderful people of Queensland over the last six years.

I have been incredibly fortunate to be able to represent my values and speak for Queenslanders who want a fairer and cleaner world. There is no greater honour than to be entrusted with that responsibility and I have discharged it to the best of my ability, with the support of many.

The Queensland Greens have never been stronger. Despite today’s events, Queensland will still have a Green voice in the federal Parliament. And I am confident that we will continue to grow by electing some Greens MPs into our State parliament this coming election.

From being the first woman to breastfeed in federal parliament, to being part of stopping the dumping of dredge spoil on the Great Barrier Reef, overturning cuts to domestic violence services and keeping key environmental decision making powers in federal hands, I have relished every moment to make positive change as a Greens Senator.

But the challenges we face as a nation are still so great, and I will not be stepping away from them. I have spent my working life protecting the environment and helping the community have better say in decision making, and that will not cease.

We must stop the Adani mega mine, and we must support women to be free from violence, sexism, and pay discrimination. While my future remains uncertain, I have more to contribute and will be talking with my party about what lies ahead. Whatever the outcome, I will always work for gender equality and to protect the environment.

It has been an honour to work with my Greens colleagues in the parliament and in the Queensland party. They are the best of people and I am devastated to leave them. My focus now is on working with the party to ensure Queenslanders still have a strong Green voice in the Senate, and working with our state candidates, members and supporters to elect Greens into the Queensland State Parliament.

Despite my personal circumstances, I still have unshakeable hope for our common future on this planet. Our movement is so much bigger than any one person, and we will win in the end.

Farewell dear friends.

fake news. sorry.

Seems not fake news.

(Unless someone in the ABC is very very good at making fake videos.)

The_observer said:

furious said:

• Would it be a rant if it had been – Trump Brilliance.. by Hilliary Clinton ?

Even more so…

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

She might if he could actually achieve something.

Neophyte said:

The_observer said:

furious said:

• Would it be a rant if it had been – Trump Brilliance.. by Hilliary Clinton ?

Even more so…

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

She might if he could actually achieve something.

Oo…he’s united many people :D and got a lot of them out resisting his administration, being vocal and fighting back. I think that’s a great achievement.

kii said:

Neophyte said:

The_observer said:

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

She might if he could actually achieve something.

Oo…he’s united many people :D and got a lot of them out resisting his administration, being vocal and fighting back. I think that’s a great achievement.

Well he’s stopped wasting so much of US citizens taxes on the climate alarmism industry. There’s plenty of US citizens happy about that especially since Obama spent around 80 billion during his two terms. What did that spending achieve?

Absolutely sweet fuck all.

Making America Great Again.

Making Australia Safe Again

;))

The_observer said:

kii said:

Neophyte said:

She might if he could actually achieve something.

Oo…he’s united many people :D and got a lot of them out resisting his administration, being vocal and fighting back. I think that’s a great achievement.

Well he’s stopped wasting so much of US citizens taxes on the climate alarmism industry. There’s plenty of US citizens happy about that especially since Obama spent around 80 billion during his two terms. What did that spending achieve?

Absolutely sweet fuck all.

Yeah, the dumpster fire is just pocketing the taxes that citizens and non-citizens (like me) pay.

Just fucking fantastic .

The_observer said:

kii said:

Neophyte said:

She might if he could actually achieve something.

Oo…he’s united many people :D and got a lot of them out resisting his administration, being vocal and fighting back. I think that’s a great achievement.

Well he’s stopped wasting so much of US citizens taxes on the climate alarmism industry. There’s plenty of US citizens happy about that especially since Obama spent around 80 billion during his two terms. What did that spending achieve?

Absolutely sweet fuck all.

What was $80 billion spent on exactly? Subsidies for renewables?

kii said:

The_observer said:

kii said:

Oo…he’s united many people :D and got a lot of them out resisting his administration, being vocal and fighting back. I think that’s a great achievement.

Well he’s stopped wasting so much of US citizens taxes on the climate alarmism industry. There’s plenty of US citizens happy about that especially since Obama spent around 80 billion during his two terms. What did that spending achieve?

Absolutely sweet fuck all.

Yeah, the dumpster fire is just pocketing the taxes that citizens and non-citizens (like me) pay.

Just fucking fantastic .

Your delusional kii.

Read the op for an accurate & informative assessment of how well President Trump is doing.

kii, turn on, tune in, to the Trump movement & drop out” from the falsehoods & manipulation of the left.

Phil_C said:

The_observer said:

kii said:

Oo…he’s united many people :D and got a lot of them out resisting his administration, being vocal and fighting back. I think that’s a great achievement.

Well he’s stopped wasting so much of US citizens taxes on the climate alarmism industry. There’s plenty of US citizens happy about that especially since Obama spent around 80 billion during his two terms. What did that spending achieve?

Absolutely sweet fuck all.

What was $80 billion spent on exactly? Subsidies for renewables?

Hi phil. Over all total spent on climate crap

The_observer said:

Read the op for an accurate & informative assessment of how well President Trump is doing.

If he’s doing so well why are his polling numbers getting lower and lower?

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Read the op for an accurate & informative assessment of how well President Trump is doing.

If he’s doing so well why are his polling numbers getting lower and lower?

Possibly the leftwing media attack b is having an affect. Their failing terribly if it isn’t.

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Read the op for an accurate & informative assessment of how well President Trump is doing.

If he’s doing so well why are his polling numbers getting lower and lower?

And there’s probably quite a few annoyed he hasn’t built a wall yet, &, that he hasn’t dumped the UN totally

The_observer said:

Phil_C said:

The_observer said:

Well he’s stopped wasting so much of US citizens taxes on the climate alarmism industry. There’s plenty of US citizens happy about that especially since Obama spent around 80 billion during his two terms. What did that spending achieve?

Absolutely sweet fuck all.

What was $80 billion spent on exactly? Subsidies for renewables?

Hi phil. Over all total spent on climate crap

You do realise Observer, you typify the normal global warming denier, apparently the science is not the problem as it is simply does not register, but the ideology where their world would fall apart if they had to admit that capitalism cannot rectify the world’s problems and if they admitted the reality, everything they have fought so hard to preserve would be dismantled. Well that is to be kind, as vested interests and payment from the fossil fuel industry would probably account for most decenters.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Phil_C said:

What was $80 billion spent on exactly? Subsidies for renewables?

Hi phil. Over all total spent on climate crap

You do realise Observer, you typify the normal global warming denier, apparently the science is not the problem as it is simply does not register, but the ideology where their world would fall apart if they had to admit that capitalism cannot rectify the world’s problems and if they admitted the reality, everything they have fought so hard to preserve would be dismantled. Well that is to be kind, as vested interests and payment from the fossil fuel industry would probably account for most decenters.

Yeh pf, the science is- 2 x CO2 – (direct effect) is .4 to 1C increase in AGT. Then you apply net feedback to get equilibrium warming. Hypothesised net feedback is positive. So you get more than 1C equilibrium warming. But data proves net feed back ain’t positive, so, equilibrium warming for a doubling is less than .4 to 1C. So no problem.

Capitalism has made the world a better place & can defeat any real problem better than any other system.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Hi phil. Over all total spent on climate crap

You do realise Observer, you typify the normal global warming denier, apparently the science is not the problem as it is simply does not register, but the ideology where their world would fall apart if they had to admit that capitalism cannot rectify the world’s problems and if they admitted the reality, everything they have fought so hard to preserve would be dismantled. Well that is to be kind, as vested interests and payment from the fossil fuel industry would probably account for most decenters.

Yeh pf, the science is- 2 x CO2 – (direct effect) is .4 to 1C increase in AGT. Then you apply net feedback to get equilibrium warming. Hypothesised net feedback is positive. So you get more than 1C equilibrium warming. But data proves net feed back ain’t positive, so, equilibrium warming for a doubling is less than .4 to 1C. So no problem.

Capitalism has made the world a better place & can defeat any real problem better than any other system.

What is defined as ‘not a real problem’, then?

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Hi phil. Over all total spent on climate crap

You do realise Observer, you typify the normal global warming denier, apparently the science is not the problem as it is simply does not register, but the ideology where their world would fall apart if they had to admit that capitalism cannot rectify the world’s problems and if they admitted the reality, everything they have fought so hard to preserve would be dismantled. Well that is to be kind, as vested interests and payment from the fossil fuel industry would probably account for most decenters.

Yeh pf, the science is- 2 x CO2 – (direct effect) is .4 to 1C increase in AGT. Then you apply net feedback to get equilibrium warming. Hypothesised net feedback is positive. So you get more than 1C equilibrium warming. But data proves net feed back ain’t positive, so, equilibrium warming for a doubling is less than .4 to 1C. So no problem.

Capitalism has made the world a better place & can defeat any real problem better than any other system.

I’m pleased we agree on the matter Observer.

mcgoon said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

You do realise Observer, you typify the normal global warming denier, apparently the science is not the problem as it is simply does not register, but the ideology where their world would fall apart if they had to admit that capitalism cannot rectify the world’s problems and if they admitted the reality, everything they have fought so hard to preserve would be dismantled. Well that is to be kind, as vested interests and payment from the fossil fuel industry would probably account for most decenters.

Yeh pf, the science is- 2 x CO2 – (direct effect) is .4 to 1C increase in AGT. Then you apply net feedback to get equilibrium warming. Hypothesised net feedback is positive. So you get more than 1C equilibrium warming. But data proves net feed back ain’t positive, so, equilibrium warming for a doubling is less than .4 to 1C. So no problem.

Capitalism has made the world a better place & can defeat any real problem better than any other system.

What is defined as ‘not a real problem’, then?

Well you might create a concept whereby we live in a Goldie Locks climate & any deviation in AGT will be a catastrophe.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

You do realise Observer, you typify the normal global warming denier, apparently the science is not the problem as it is simply does not register, but the ideology where their world would fall apart if they had to admit that capitalism cannot rectify the world’s problems and if they admitted the reality, everything they have fought so hard to preserve would be dismantled. Well that is to be kind, as vested interests and payment from the fossil fuel industry would probably account for most decenters.

Yeh pf, the science is- 2 x CO2 – (direct effect) is .4 to 1C increase in AGT. Then you apply net feedback to get equilibrium warming. Hypothesised net feedback is positive. So you get more than 1C equilibrium warming. But data proves net feed back ain’t positive, so, equilibrium warming for a doubling is less than .4 to 1C. So no problem.

Capitalism has made the world a better place & can defeat any real problem better than any other system.

I’m pleased we agree on the matter Observer.

Well no,we don’t agree.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Yeh pf, the science is- 2 x CO2 – (direct effect) is .4 to 1C increase in AGT. Then you apply net feedback to get equilibrium warming. Hypothesised net feedback is positive. So you get more than 1C equilibrium warming. But data proves net feed back ain’t positive, so, equilibrium warming for a doubling is less than .4 to 1C. So no problem.

Capitalism has made the world a better place & can defeat any real problem better than any other system.

I’m pleased we agree on the matter Observer.

Well no,we don’t agree.

Yes we do, you don’t believe in the science and I don’t believe in your ideology.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

I’m pleased we agree on the matter Observer.

Well no,we don’t agree.

Yes we do, you don’t believe in the science and I don’t believe in your ideology.

No I don’t believe in the alarmist hypothesis because it doesn’t fit the data. You don’t care for the data.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Well no,we don’t agree.

Yes we do, you don’t believe in the science and I don’t believe in your ideology.

No I don’t believe in the alarmist hypothesis because it doesn’t fit the data. You don’t care for the data.

So science is produced by alarmists in your opinion, so you don’t believe in the science, which is what I said.

Michael V said:

transition said:

The_observer said:

I addressed that issue. No i shouldn’t have.

The authors identy only matters if your not interested in the content

well, it’d be nice to check if the rant was copy and pasted verbatim, and if it was copyright.

Mark Latham, Daily Telegraph.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=He+has+been+true+to+his+supporters.+And+he%E2%80%99s+been+an+inspiration+to+those+of+us+who+are+alarmed+by+the+march+of+leftist+social+engineering+through+public+institutions.&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU701AU701&oq=He+has+been+true+to+his+supporters.+And+he%E2%80%99s+been+an+inspiration+to+those+of+us+who+are+alarmed+by+the+march+of+leftist+social+engineering+through+public+institutions.&aqs=chrome..69i57.1261j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Ahhh, The Daily Telegraph. I get the whiff of mothballs when I see a copy, as they give it away to the old dears in my mum’s retirement village.

I see that Mark Latham joined the Liberal Democrats earlier this year. The rant looks like it is aimed at cementing his place with them. It’s worth rereading the original post with this in mind.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

Yes we do, you don’t believe in the science and I don’t believe in your ideology.

No I don’t believe in the alarmist hypothesis because it doesn’t fit the data. You don’t care for the data.

So science is produced by alarmists in your opinion, so you don’t believe in the science, which is what I said.

All the temperature data sets show far less warming than the models projected pf, which shows the climate is far less sensitive to CO2 than hypothesised

ruby said:

Michael V said:

transition said:

well, it’d be nice to check if the rant was copy and pasted verbatim, and if it was copyright.

Mark Latham, Daily Telegraph.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=He+has+been+true+to+his+supporters.+And+he%E2%80%99s+been+an+inspiration+to+those+of+us+who+are+alarmed+by+the+march+of+leftist+social+engineering+through+public+institutions.&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU701AU701&oq=He+has+been+true+to+his+supporters.+And+he%E2%80%99s+been+an+inspiration+to+those+of+us+who+are+alarmed+by+the+march+of+leftist+social+engineering+through+public+institutions.&aqs=chrome..69i57.1261j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Ahhh, The Daily Telegraph. I get the whiff of mothballs when I see a copy, as they give it away to the old dears in my mum’s retirement village.

I see that Mark Latham joined the Liberal Democrats earlier this year. The rant looks like it is aimed at cementing his place with them. It’s worth rereading the original post with this in mind.

Again, nothing he wrote is addressed. Just play the man. “ I don’t like him so he’s wrong”

The_observer said:

Again, nothing he wrote is addressed. Just play the man. “ I don’t like him so he’s wrong”

True dinks, on the matter of Latham, if you claim he’s wrong, without even having an inkling about what he said, 99.999999% of the time you’ll be right.

There are certainly some egos on the right that’d have nature largely displaced by the activity of human minds (their own to great extent), as if reality ought be largely determined so, a social construction that way. They’ll promise you some sort of freedoms, and turn their backs on the reality democracy is somewhat socialist.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

No I don’t believe in the alarmist hypothesis because it doesn’t fit the data. You don’t care for the data.

So science is produced by alarmists in your opinion, so you don’t believe in the science, which is what I said.

All the temperature data sets show far less warming than the models projected pf, which shows the climate is far less sensitive to CO2 than hypothesised

Therefore you do not accept the science of which the vast majority of climate scientists support. Be truthful, we could argue all night and you would not change your mind on anything, largely because you are ideologically driven. Those are the facts and are the reason why I don’t waste my time trying to convince you of anything; there is absolutely no point.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

So science is produced by alarmists in your opinion, so you don’t believe in the science, which is what I said.

All the temperature data sets show far less warming than the models projected pf, which shows the climate is far less sensitive to CO2 than hypothesised

Therefore you do not accept the science of which the vast majority of climate scientists support. Be truthful,

Do you see how ridiculous your statement is pf, on a second look?

No, I doubt you do.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

All the temperature data sets show far less warming than the models projected pf, which shows the climate is far less sensitive to CO2 than hypothesised

Therefore you do not accept the science of which the vast majority of climate scientists support. Be truthful,

Do you see how ridiculous your statement is pf, on a second look?

No, I doubt you do.

I only see that you do not support the science. You have been saying the same thing for years, why don’t you want to admit it now?

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

All the temperature data sets show far less warming than the models projected pf, which shows the climate is far less sensitive to CO2 than hypothesised

Therefore you do not accept the science of which the vast majority of climate scientists support. Be truthful,

Do you see how ridiculous your statement is pf, on a second look?

No, I doubt you do.

I include the rest of my post that you omitted as it is very relevant, in that it is a total waste of time discussing anything with you.

>>Be truthful, we could argue all night and you would not change your mind on anything, largely because you are ideologically driven. Those are the facts and are the reason why I don’t waste my time trying to convince you of anything; there is absolutely no point.<<

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

Therefore you do not accept the science of which the vast majority of climate scientists support. Be truthful,

Do you see how ridiculous your statement is pf, on a second look?

No, I doubt you do.

I only see that you do not support the science. You have been saying the same thing for years, why don’t you want to admit it now?

I’m not denying anything?

pf, firstly, you can have a hundred scientists all hypothesize the same thing. But if the data shows their hypothesis to be wrong then its wrong. You just don’t get it.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Do you see how ridiculous your statement is pf, on a second look?

No, I doubt you do.

I only see that you do not support the science. You have been saying the same thing for years, why don’t you want to admit it now?

I’m not denying anything?

pf, firstly, you can have a hundred scientists all hypothesize the same thing. But if the data shows their hypothesis to be wrong then its wrong. You just don’t get it.

A model is NOT, I repeat NOT a definitive scientific measure, but only a guide to be modified and improved upon. I think you are the one not getting it. Anyway I can’t be bothered with you. Goodnight.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

I only see that you do not support the science. You have been saying the same thing for years, why don’t you want to admit it now?

I’m not denying anything?

pf, firstly, you can have a hundred scientists all hypothesize the same thing. But if the data shows their hypothesis to be wrong then its wrong. You just don’t get it.

A model is NOT, I repeat NOT a definitive scientific measure, but only a guide to be modified and improved upon. I think you are the one not getting it. Anyway I can’t be bothered with you. Goodnight.

Ok then. You agree the models are wrong. Good.
They show much more warming than reality.
Your “science” is based upon the projections of those models so no one should agree with that false concensus.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

I’m not denying anything?

pf, firstly, you can have a hundred scientists all hypothesize the same thing. But if the data shows their hypothesis to be wrong then its wrong. You just don’t get it.

A model is NOT, I repeat NOT a definitive scientific measure, but only a guide to be modified and improved upon. I think you are the one not getting it. Anyway I can’t be bothered with you. Goodnight.

Ok then. You agree the models are wrong. Good.
They show much more warming than reality.
Your “science” is based upon the projections of those models so no one should agree with that false concensus.

You are worse than that clown in One Nation, totally insane!

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

A model is NOT, I repeat NOT a definitive scientific measure, but only a guide to be modified and improved upon. I think you are the one not getting it. Anyway I can’t be bothered with you. Goodnight.

Ok then. You agree the models are wrong. Good.
They show much more warming than reality.
Your “science” is based upon the projections of those models so no one should agree with that false concensus.

You are worse than that clown in One Nation, totally insane!

Apparently evidence doesn’t matter to you if its a hypothesis you want to support. Thats not science pf. Your hard wired to a belief that the environment is under threat, even if the evidence doesn’t support that belief.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Ok then. You agree the models are wrong. Good.
They show much more warming than reality.
Your “science” is based upon the projections of those models so no one should agree with that false concensus.

You are worse than that clown in One Nation, totally insane!

Apparently evidence doesn’t matter to you if its a hypothesis you want to support. Thats not science pf. Your hard wired to a belief that the environment is under threat, even if the evidence doesn’t support that belief.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

You are worse than that clown in One Nation, totally insane!

Apparently evidence doesn’t matter to you if its a hypothesis you want to support. Thats not science pf. Your hard wired to a belief that the environment is under threat, even if the evidence doesn’t support that belief.

That 97% is environmental propaganda.

pf, you simply don’t have a clue what the hypothesis is. You don’t know because your not interested in what it actually is because you just willingly accept it.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Apparently evidence doesn’t matter to you if its a hypothesis you want to support. Thats not science pf. Your hard wired to a belief that the environment is under threat, even if the evidence doesn’t support that belief.

That 97% is environmental propaganda.

pf, you simply don’t have a clue what the hypothesis is. You don’t know because your not interested in what it actually is because you just willingly accept it.

Leave you with one more.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

That 97% is environmental propaganda.

pf, you simply don’t have a clue what the hypothesis is. You don’t know because your not interested in what it actually is because you just willingly accept it.

You can continue posting irrelevant pictures, but what have you to say on the temperature data not suporting the hypothesis

PermeateFree said:

Leave you with one more.

See, your void of a scientific argument

Stop it!!

I’ve dealt with better behaved 3 year olds with limited social skills and no boundaries on their behaviour.

kii said:

Stop it!!

I’ve dealt with better behaved 3 year olds with limited social skills and no boundaries on their behaviour.

Yeh, take note pf & cease with the childish pictures

The_observer said:

kii said:

Stop it!!

I’ve dealt with better behaved 3 year olds with limited social skills and no boundaries on their behaviour.

Yeh, take note pf & cease with the childish pictures

Get in the corner! Sit on the time-out chair! NOW! Sit there and think about why you are sitting in the corner.

grrrrr……

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

Leave you with one more.

See, your void of a scientific argument

I like the graph on Trumpy’s picture you posted pf. Although it fraudulently leaves out the 18 odd year hiatus in warming it also leaves out all the warming prior to the warming cycle that started around 1978. The warming that began since the end of the little ice age, what, 2 hundred years ago. Not caused by CO2 all that warming. What caused that warming pf? Oh they don’t know. But we’ll blame the most recent warming conveniently on CO2. No evidence, but who cares.

kii said:

The_observer said:

kii said:

Stop it!!

I’ve dealt with better behaved 3 year olds with limited social skills and no boundaries on their behaviour.

Yeh, take note pf & cease with the childish pictures

Get in the corner! Sit on the time-out chair! NOW! Sit there and think about why you are sitting in the corner.

grrrrr……

Go away

The_observer said:

kii said:

The_observer said:

Yeh, take note pf & cease with the childish pictures

Get in the corner! Sit on the time-out chair! NOW! Sit there and think about why you are sitting in the corner.

grrrrr……

Go away

No. You go away.

The_observer said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

Leave you with one more.

See, your void of a scientific argument

I like the graph on Trumpy’s picture you posted pf. Although it fraudulently leaves out the 18 odd year hiatus in warming it also leaves out all the warming prior to the warming cycle that started around 1978. The warming that began since the end of the little ice age, what, 2 hundred years ago. Not caused by CO2 all that warming. What caused that warming pf? Oh they don’t know. But we’ll blame the most recent warming conveniently on CO2. No evidence, but who cares.

There is absolutely no way of getting past your far right-wing ideology Observer, so I wont try, other to say I think your beliefs are the most stupid I have ever encountered and the sooner they pack you and everyone like you into a rocket-ship and send you off to infinity, the sooner this world and everyone else will be better off.

what about direct heating from a goodly part of this?

The_observer said:

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

…and Donald DUMP is a Deplorable CHEAT
that’s trying to sell-out America (and indeed THE WORLD)
to the Russians who stand to benefit from Global Climate Change*

…read that WARMING<—DUH!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0biE6wvMHo

The Media Must Fight Back | The Resistance with Keith Olbermann | GQ

The_observer said:

kii said:

What utter trollish behaviour.

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

I don’t think it is even your opinion.

Ogmog said:

The_observer said:

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

…and Donald DUMP is a Deplorable CHEAT
that’s trying to sell-out America (and indeed THE WORLD)
to the Russians who stand to benefit from Global Climate Change*

…read that WARMING<—DUH!

Wow, a case of peak Trump delusion

Ogmog said:

The_observer said:

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

…and Donald DUMP is a Deplorable CHEAT
that’s trying to sell-out America (and indeed THE WORLD)
to the Russians who stand to benefit from Global Climate Change*

…read that WARMING<—DUH!

Hmmm, I had not really given it close thought about how much Russia will benefit from a warmer climate.
So, it’s coming to light they were at the helm of a whole bunch of work on social media and other online platforms to get Trump elected….not a great stretch then to think that Russia could also have contributed to some of the vehement countering of the work of climate scientists.

And I don’t think Trump is trying to sell out America, I think in his own mind he really is doing OK. But that’s the problem with narcissistic thinking, if they feel good, that’s where it stops.

ruby said:

Ogmog said:

The_observer said:

Yes, Hillary is a pathetically sore loser that would never author an article positively highlighting any Trump achievement

…and Donald DUMP is a Deplorable CHEAT
that’s trying to sell-out America (and indeed THE WORLD)
to the Russians who stand to benefit from Global Climate Change*

…read that WARMING<—DUH!

Hmmm, I had not really given it close thought about how much Russia will benefit from a warmer climate.
So, it’s coming to light they were at the helm of a whole bunch of work on social media and other online platforms to get Trump elected….not a great stretch then to think that Russia could also have contributed to some of the vehement countering of the work of climate scientists.

And I don’t think Trump is trying to sell out America, I think in his own mind he really is doing OK. But that’s the problem with narcissistic thinking, if they feel good, that’s where it stops.

>>>>Hmmm, I had not really given it close thought about how much Russia will benefit from a warmer climate. <<<

please elaborate?

>>>>So, it’s coming to light they were at the helm of a whole bunch of work on social media and other online platforms to get Trump elected<<<

sorry; this is a leftwing conspiracy. No facts to back it up. Just leftist shrill. Hillary lost because she was crap and corrupt. “Mrs. Clinton appears to have converted the office of secretary of state into a racketeering enterprise. This would be a violation of the RICO law — the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1971 (codified in the U.S. penal code at sections 1961 et seq.).
Hillary and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, operated the Clinton Foundation. Ostensibly a charity, the foundation was a de facto fraud scheme to monetize Hillary’s power as secretary of state (among other aspects of the Clintons’ political influence).

The scheme involved (a) the exchange of political favors, access, and influence for millions of dollars in donations; (b) the circumvention of campaign-finance laws that prohibit political donations by foreign sources; © a vehicle for Mrs. Clinton to shield her State Department e-mail communications from public and congressional scrutiny while she and her husband exploited the fundraising potential of her position; and (d) a means for Clinton insiders to receive private-sector compensation and explore lucrative employment opportunities while drawing taxpayer-funded government salaries.

While the foundation did perform some charitable work, this camouflaged the fact that contributions were substantially diverted to pay lavish salaries and underwrite luxury travel for Clinton insiders. Contributions skyrocketed to $126 million in 2009, the year Mrs. Clinton arrived at Foggy Bottom.

Breathtaking sums were “donated” by high-rollers and foreign governments that had crucial business before the State Department. Along with those staggering donations came a spike in speaking opportunities and fees for Bill Clinton. Of course, disproportionate payments and gifts to a spouse are common ways of bribing public officials — which is why, for example, high-ranking government officeholders must reveal their spouses’ income and other asset information on their financial-disclosure forms.

While there are other egregious transactions, the most notorious corruption episode of Secretary Clinton’s tenure involves the State Department’s approval of a deal that surrendered fully one-fifth of the United States’ uranium-mining capacity to Vladimir Putin’s anti-American thugocracy in Russia.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441573/hillary-clinton-corruption-foundation-was-key

>>>>not a great stretch then to think that Russia could also have contributed to some of the vehement countering of the work of climate scientists.<<,

funny, there’s is evidence that Russia has been financially supporting american green groups to protest against fracking, because the massive amount of gas recovered as a result of fracking, & the gas exported affects russian gas exports. This makes sense to most people.

The_observer said:

kii said:

What utter trollish behaviour.

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

kii said:

The_observer said:

kii said:

What utter trollish behaviour.

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

Kii; Your original post, refering to me, was trolling. But you’re not aware of that. Why?-

When participants in an internet forum consider pictures posted of >>golf courses<<< as trolling, its a demonstration that the forum has tolerance issues.

When participants consider opinions put forward as trolling, purily because they don’t agree with those opinions, then that shows not only intolerence, but a deep seated foundation of parochialism, insularity, fanaticism, and dogmatism.

I couldn’t stand posting on a forum where the majority agreed with me. Boring & pointless.

Getting a reaction to what I post is fullfilling. No, I’m not trying to upset anybody. People will only become upset if they allow them selves to become upset. I like to put forward an opinion, my opinion, in a positive way, an opinion that would never see the light of day here, at the Holiday, otherwise.

kii said:

The_observer said:

kii said:

What utter trollish behaviour.

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

Trolls do tend to have narrow views of the world, and to focus on particular hobby-horses, often seeing themselves as reliable sources of information to counter what they perceive as well-organised conspiracies that are invisible to the majority of people, interpreting (if not actually creating) evidence only to support their own view. They do hate to see their hobby-horse fade from attention, and will frequently return to resurrect it in whatever forum they choose as their outlet.

The question in this instance is: how closely does The Observer fit this profile?

mcgoon said:

kii said:

The_observer said:

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

Trolls do tend to have narrow views of the world, and to focus on particular hobby-horses, often seeing themselves as reliable sources of information to counter what they perceive as well-organised conspiracies that are invisible to the majority of people, interpreting (if not actually creating) evidence only to support their own view. They do hate to see their hobby-horse fade from attention, and will frequently return to resurrect it in whatever forum they choose as their outlet.

The question in this instance is: how closely does The Observer fit this profile?

now this is deogatry, a typical attack on the holders of conflicting views, that I could also apply it to many people here. forget about me.

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

kii said:

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

Trolls do tend to have narrow views of the world, and to focus on particular hobby-horses, often seeing themselves as reliable sources of information to counter what they perceive as well-organised conspiracies that are invisible to the majority of people, interpreting (if not actually creating) evidence only to support their own view. They do hate to see their hobby-horse fade from attention, and will frequently return to resurrect it in whatever forum they choose as their outlet.

The question in this instance is: how closely does The Observer fit this profile?

now this is deogatry, a typical attack on the holders of conflicting views, that I could also apply it to many people here. forget about me.

Someone else described you as ‘a troll’. I presented a profile of ‘a troll’, and ask whether or not you fit the profile.

You have not actually said whether or not the hat fits.

The_observer said:

kii said:

The_observer said:

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

Kii; Your original post, refering to me, was trolling. But you’re not aware of that. Why?-

When participants in an internet forum consider pictures posted of >>golf courses<<< as trolling, its a demonstration that the forum has tolerance issues.

When participants consider opinions put forward as trolling, purily because they don’t agree with those opinions, then that shows not only intolerence, but a deep seated foundation of parochialism, insularity, fanaticism, and dogmatism.

I couldn’t stand posting on a forum where the majority agreed with me. Boring & pointless.

Getting a reaction to what I post is fullfilling. No, I’m not trying to upset anybody. People will only become upset if they allow them selves to become upset. I like to put forward an opinion, my opinion, in a positive way, an opinion that would never see the light of day here, at the Holiday, otherwise.

I will add, I make this forum complete. In relation to diversity, of which otherwise there would be little.

Inclusion is an interesting word. Acceptance another.

mcgoon said:

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

Trolls do tend to have narrow views of the world, and to focus on particular hobby-horses, often seeing themselves as reliable sources of information to counter what they perceive as well-organised conspiracies that are invisible to the majority of people, interpreting (if not actually creating) evidence only to support their own view. They do hate to see their hobby-horse fade from attention, and will frequently return to resurrect it in whatever forum they choose as their outlet.

The question in this instance is: how closely does The Observer fit this profile?

now this is deogatry, a typical attack on the holders of conflicting views, that I could also apply it to many people here. forget about me.

Someone else described you as ‘a troll’. I presented a profile of ‘a troll’, and ask whether or not you fit the profile.

You have not actually said whether or not the hat fits.

Yeh the hat fits. YOU

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

The_observer said:

now this is deogatry, a typical attack on the holders of conflicting views, that I could also apply it to many people here. forget about me.

Someone else described you as ‘a troll’. I presented a profile of ‘a troll’, and ask whether or not you fit the profile.

You have not actually said whether or not the hat fits.

Yeh the hat fits. YOU

I’ll take that as a ‘no’.

The fact is with all you Trump haters, you people that suffer Trump Derangement Syndrome, to one level or another, is, you would be attacking whoever made the white house, if that person was a Republican.

Because Trump is an easy target you have all convinced yourselves that this is a warranted attitude.

The_observer said:

kii said:

The_observer said:

I don’t understand?

Oh, hang on. You mean – “fuck off, I don’t like your opinion”

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

Kii; Your original post, refering to me, was trolling. But you’re not aware of that. Why?-

Your thread title: Trump the brilliant & why the US needs him!

To me that is trolling.

The_observer said:

The fact is with all you Trump haters, you people that suffer Trump Derangement Syndrome, to one level or another, is, you would be attacking whoever made the white house, if that person was a Republican.

Because Trump is an easy target you have all convinced yourselves that this is a warranted attitude.

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

He just doesn’t tick any boxes, well not for the left & the self loathers.

kii said:

The_observer said:

kii said:

No, I mean…your behaviour is trollish. Like a troll. “Trump the brilliant….” Have you heard him speak at all?

Kii; Your original post, refering to me, was trolling. But you’re not aware of that. Why?-

Your thread title: Trump the brilliant & why the US needs him!

To me that is trolling.

Well yes, thats why you cut off the rest of my original post. The bit that concerned you!

The_observer said:

The_observer said:

The fact is with all you Trump haters, you people that suffer Trump Derangement Syndrome, to one level or another, is, you would be attacking whoever made the white house, if that person was a Republican.

Because Trump is an easy target you have all convinced yourselves that this is a warranted attitude.

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

He just doesn’t tick any boxes, well not for the left & the self loathers.

Why would you get into politics to be conservative, you’d get into politics to shake up the corrupt status quo and try to make the world a better place, conservatives want the world to stay the same or go backwards were only they have the power and the rights.

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

The_observer said:

The fact is with all you Trump haters, you people that suffer Trump Derangement Syndrome, to one level or another, is, you would be attacking whoever made the white house, if that person was a Republican.

Because Trump is an easy target you have all convinced yourselves that this is a warranted attitude.

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

He just doesn’t tick any boxes, well not for the left & the self loathers.

Why would you get into politics to be conservative, you’d get into politics to shake up the corrupt status quo and try to make the world a better place, conservatives want the world to stay the same or go backwards were only they have the power and the rights.

Most politicians are self serving, uninspiring, unimaginative and unworthy of having a position of power, they bow to either big business or unions, very little cooperation for the greater good of their nation or the world. Most would probably think the ideal world is a police state with then in charge.

I know that at least one person here, at The Holiday, contacted cb88 in an attempt to get him to fit me with a set of concrete shoes, & then relocate this holiday resort to a location on a small pontoon, floating somewhere among the corals of the Great Barrier reef. I’d bet there are others who offered to commission this.

Apparently, cb88 wasn’t interested, not because I believe he agrees with my opinions, but he agrees that I have a right to state them. And he probably reckons that if I can put up with the back lash, you lot can put up with me.

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

The_observer said:

The fact is with all you Trump haters, you people that suffer Trump Derangement Syndrome, to one level or another, is, you would be attacking whoever made the white house, if that person was a Republican.

Because Trump is an easy target you have all convinced yourselves that this is a warranted attitude.

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

He just doesn’t tick any boxes, well not for the left & the self loathers.

Why would you get into politics to be conservative, you’d get into politics to shake up the corrupt status quo and try to make the world a better place, conservatives want the world to stay the same or go backwards were only they have the power and the rights.

200 years ago

The_observer said:

I know that at least one person here, at The Holiday, contacted cb88 in an attempt to get him to fit me with a set of concrete shoes, & then relocate this holiday resort to a location on a small pontoon, floating somewhere among the corals of the Great Barrier reef. I’d bet there are others who offered to commission this.

Apparently, cb88 wasn’t interested, not because I believe he agrees with my opinions, but he agrees that I have a right to state them. And he probably reckons that if I can put up with the back lash, you lot can put up with me.

Why would anyone want to do that, I wouldn’t ask for anyone to be banned.

The_observer said:

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

And wholly unprepared and ill-suited to be POTUS. His dismal performance so far shows this. What has he done that actually takes some of his famous deal-making? His two biggest actions so far are withdrawing from the TPP and the Paris Agreement which did not require any real effort on his part.

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

And wholly unprepared and ill-suited to be POTUS. His dismal performance so far shows this. What has he done that actually takes some of his famous deal-making? His two biggest actions so far are withdrawing from the TPP and the Paris Agreement which did not require any real effort on his part.

It does seem that when you can elect a single person to office you run the risk they can be a moron but have money and power and a good PR team to make them seem sane

The_observer said:

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

And just the other day you supported Mark Latham’s opinion that Trump isn’t a conservative, but an outsider. Which is it?

Cymek said:

It does seem that when you can elect a single person to office you run the risk they can be a moron but have money and power and a good PR team to make them seem sane

Trump obviously isn’t spending enough on PR.

Just dropped in while i wait for a download of info i need for my project here today.

Heard a good remark about Trump on ‘media’ while working outside: it was said that he has a great advantage, because, never having been a politician, he can claim ignorance of how the Presidency functions.

He can run about, putting his foot in anything and everything, and when it’s subsequently pointed out to him that the President really isn’t allowed to do ‘that’, he can say “oh, really? Didn’t know that. Sorry.”.

So, hes got that going for him

Which is nice.

mcgoon said:

Just dropped in while i wait for a download of info i need for my project here today.

Heard a good remark about Trump on ‘media’ while working outside: it was said that he has a great advantage, because, never having been a politician, he can claim ignorance of how the Presidency functions.

He can run about, putting his foot in anything and everything, and when it’s subsequently pointed out to him that the President really isn’t allowed to do ‘that’, he can say “oh, really? Didn’t know that. Sorry.”.

So, hes got that going for him

Which is nice.

Yes but people only suffer fools for so long.

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

Just dropped in while i wait for a download of info i need for my project here today.

Heard a good remark about Trump on ‘media’ while working outside: it was said that he has a great advantage, because, never having been a politician, he can claim ignorance of how the Presidency functions.

He can run about, putting his foot in anything and everything, and when it’s subsequently pointed out to him that the President really isn’t allowed to do ‘that’, he can say “oh, really? Didn’t know that. Sorry.”.

So, hes got that going for him

Which is nice.

Yes but people only suffer fools for so long.

I worry he will get the nuclear launch codes mixed up with his Netflix password and start World War 3

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

Just dropped in while i wait for a download of info i need for my project here today.

Heard a good remark about Trump on ‘media’ while working outside: it was said that he has a great advantage, because, never having been a politician, he can claim ignorance of how the Presidency functions.

He can run about, putting his foot in anything and everything, and when it’s subsequently pointed out to him that the President really isn’t allowed to do ‘that’, he can say “oh, really? Didn’t know that. Sorry.”.

So, hes got that going for him

Which is nice.

Yes but people only suffer fools for so long.

I worry he will get the nuclear launch codes mixed up with his Netflix password and start World War 3

covfefe: which is it?

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

Just dropped in while i wait for a download of info i need for my project here today.

Heard a good remark about Trump on ‘media’ while working outside: it was said that he has a great advantage, because, never having been a politician, he can claim ignorance of how the Presidency functions.

He can run about, putting his foot in anything and everything, and when it’s subsequently pointed out to him that the President really isn’t allowed to do ‘that’, he can say “oh, really? Didn’t know that. Sorry.”.

So, hes got that going for him

Which is nice.

Yes but people only suffer fools for so long.

I could not watch the Apprentice. If I could have put up with that crap or if I was the sort of person who enjoyed that crap, I probably wouldn’t be so outraged by Trump and his bad theatrics.

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

And just the other day you supported Mark Latham’s opinion that Trump isn’t a conservative, but an outsider. Which is it?

well, not a Republican conservative. I’d describe trump as a person, proud of western civilisation & the white race, & capitalism, & it’s achievements, as opposed to being a blathering apologist for it.

That makes him the opposite of, & the enemy of the left

The_observer said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

The worst thing about Trump is, he’s a Westerner, white, male, hetrosexual, a businessman, rich, but most of all, he’s a conservative.

And just the other day you supported Mark Latham’s opinion that Trump isn’t a conservative, but an outsider. Which is it?

well, not a Republican conservative. I’d describe trump as a person, proud of western civilisation & the white race, & capitalism, & it’s achievements, as opposed to being a blathering apologist for it.

That makes him the opposite of, & the enemy of the left

This left and right bullshit is all you seem to know.

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/18/537885042/inside-the-shakespearean-irony-of-trump-and-bannons-relationship

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

And just the other day you supported Mark Latham’s opinion that Trump isn’t a conservative, but an outsider. Which is it?

well, not a Republican conservative. I’d describe trump as a person, proud of western civilisation & the white race, & capitalism, & it’s achievements, as opposed to being a blathering apologist for it.

That makes him the opposite of, & the enemy of the left

This left and right bullshit is all you seem to know.

Well it is somewhat a generalisation, but comfortable applicable

kii said:

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/18/537885042/inside-the-shakespearean-irony-of-trump-and-bannons-relationship

“Attack Bannon, quickly. He’s evil”

“Why”

“He holds conservative values”

The_observer said:

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

well, not a Republican conservative. I’d describe trump as a person, proud of western civilisation & the white race, & capitalism, & it’s achievements, as opposed to being a blathering apologist for it.

That makes him the opposite of, & the enemy of the left

This left and right bullshit is all you seem to know.

Well it is somewhat a generalisation, but comfortable applicable

Apparently for you it is.

The_observer said:

kii said:

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/18/537885042/inside-the-shakespearean-irony-of-trump-and-bannons-relationship

“Attack Bannon, quickly. He’s evil”

“Why”

“He holds conservative values”

I think somebody should re-read the dictionary.

The_observer said:

kii said:

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/18/537885042/inside-the-shakespearean-irony-of-trump-and-bannons-relationship

“Attack Bannon, quickly. He’s evil”

“Why”

“He holds conservative values”

Not mainstream conservative. The far right is just as batshit crazy as the far left.

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

kii said:

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/18/537885042/inside-the-shakespearean-irony-of-trump-and-bannons-relationship

“Attack Bannon, quickly. He’s evil”

“Why”

“He holds conservative values”

Not mainstream conservative. The far right is just as batshit crazy as the far left.

Batshit is crazy. They don’t have any idea of right or left.

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

roughbarked said:

This left and right bullshit is all you seem to know.

Well it is somewhat a generalisation, but comfortable applicable

Apparently for you it is.

No, most everyone here. Any articles I post are described as being written by rightwing nutjobs.

Someone here the other day refused to believe I was non religious because all right wing nutjobs are religious.

Right is how I’m described here at The Resort.

The_observer said:

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

Well it is somewhat a generalisation, but comfortable applicable

Apparently for you it is.

No, most everyone here. Any articles I post are described as being written by rightwing nutjobs.

Someone here the other day refused to believe I was non religious because all right wing nutjobs are religious.

Right is how I’m described here at The Resort.

Well, I’m not always right but I’m never wrong.

bump

Peak Warming Man said:

bump

could rhyme with Trump?

The_observer said:

kii said:

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/18/537885042/inside-the-shakespearean-irony-of-trump-and-bannons-relationship

“Attack Bannon, quickly. He’s evil”

“Why”

“He holds conservative values”

I posted this for others to read.

roughbarked said:

Peak Warming Man said:

bump

could rhyme with Trump?

Will the Trump Presidency one day be referred to as ‘the Trump Bump’?

It seems that the orange dumpster fire wants to pardon himself.

kii said:

It seems that the orange dumpster fire wants to pardon himself.

What’s that little imp gone and done now?!

todf’s spokesman for his legal team has resigned.

mcgoon said:

kii said:

It seems that the orange dumpster fire wants to pardon himself.

What’s that little imp gone and done now?!

Oh, you know…..he’s fucked up a few things, but it’s okay…he’s new at the POTUS thing.

Whitehouse Unveils Trump Presidential Portrait

Ian said:

Whitehouse Unveils Trump Presidential Portrait

No, No. That Clintons portrait. Their taking it down. You see they were so sure she would win, they prematualy hung it, only for her to hang herself

Ian said:

Whitehouse Unveils Trump Presidential Portrait

No, No. That Clintons portrait. Their taking it down. You see they were so sure she would win, they prematualy hung it, only for her to hang herself

The_observer said:

Ian said:

Whitehouse Unveils Trump Presidential Portrait

No, No. That Clintons portrait. Their taking it down. You see they were so sure she would win, they prematualy hung it, only for her to hang herself

You can see her sitting for the portrait here -

Seems most of the american public don’t agree with you T_o…..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

tauto said:

Seems most of the american public don’t agree with you T_o…..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

The people that matter agree.

The_observer said:

tauto said:

Seems most of the american public don’t agree with you T_o…..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

The people that matter agree.

tauto, what was his approval rating leading up to the election?

LOL

The_observer said:

tauto said:

Seems most of the american public don’t agree with you T_o…..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

The people that matter agree.

The 1%

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

tauto said:

Seems most of the american public don’t agree with you T_o…..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

The people that matter agree.

The 1%

Yeh, I’m not sure what percentage figure the former upper echelon commissars of the USSR, come billionairs, make up. But they can’t vote for making america great again.

I think Trump is the most statesmanlike, perhaps finest diplomat the US has ever had.

transition said:

I think Trump is the most statesmanlike, perhaps finest diplomat the US has ever had.

Mate, you do need to take that medication, the doctor was right.

party_pants said:

transition said:

I think Trump is the most statesmanlike, perhaps finest diplomat the US has ever had.

Mate, you do need to take that medication, the doctor was right.

nobody would seriously ever say what I said

transition said:

party_pants said:

transition said:

I think Trump is the most statesmanlike, perhaps finest diplomat the US has ever had.

Mate, you do need to take that medication, the doctor was right.

nobody would seriously ever say what I said

And he doesn’t have to be any of those things to be a great president while making america great again

The_observer said:

transition said:

party_pants said:

Mate, you do need to take that medication, the doctor was right.

nobody would seriously ever say what I said

And he doesn’t have to be any of those things to be a great president while making america great again

Not so far. We can only hope that history never repeats.

It is impossible in this modern industrialised world for any nation to be a great nation without full engagement with science. This also means accepting the science behind evolution and climate change, and it means marginalising Christian evangelicals rather than embracing them. Trump is symptomatic of America doing all the opposite things towards greatness and is evidence of their decline. Sadly, America is kaput.

party_pants said:

It is impossible in this modern industrialised world for any nation to be a great nation without full engagement with science. This also means accepting the science behind evolution and climate change, and it means marginalising Christian evangelicals rather than embracing them. Trump is symptomatic of America doing all the opposite things towards greatness and is evidence of their decline. Sadly, America is kaput.

Once the states start becoming disunited, the end is always nigh.

transition said:

party_pants said:

transition said:

I think Trump is the most statesmanlike, perhaps finest diplomat the US has ever had.

Mate, you do need to take that medication, the doctor was right.

nobody would seriously ever say what I said

You need to be careful. With regards to the US Presidency, there’s an increasingly fine line between ridicule and reality these days.

party_pants said:

It is impossible in this modern industrialised world for any nation to be a great nation without full engagement with science. This also means accepting the science behind evolution and climate change, and it means marginalising Christian evangelicals rather than embracing them. Trump is symptomatic of America doing all the opposite things towards greatness and is evidence of their decline. Sadly, America is kaput.

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

as far as climate science is concerned, its not science. Its politics.

and your possibly right as far as america being kaput. But this will be due to political correctness, self loathing & a misplaced guilt complex & the fact that america is on track to become a nation of negative millionairs.

The_observer said:

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

The_observer said:

transition said:

party_pants said:

Mate, you do need to take that medication, the doctor was right.

nobody would seriously ever say what I said

And he doesn’t have to be any of those things to be a great president while making america great again

are you saying he’s not statesmanlike, or a fine diplomat?

Once the states start becoming disunited, the end is always nigh.

—————

“The future’s uncertain and the end is always near.”

Nothing much changed in 50 years

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I think that the original post may have incorporated some confusion between the terms ‘orthodox’, ‘fundamentalist’, and ‘radical’ in reference to Islam.

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I said orthodox

The_observer said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I said orthodox

Orthodox Islam is just normal Sunni Islam.

The_observer said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I said orthodox

Indeed you did.

The question is, what did you mean by it?

mcgoon said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I think that the original post may have incorporated some confusion between the terms ‘orthodox’, ‘fundamentalist’, and ‘radical’ in reference to Islam.

ISIS & boko harem, for example, are orthodox

The_observer said:

party_pants said:

It is impossible in this modern industrialised world for any nation to be a great nation without full engagement with science. This also means accepting the science behind evolution and climate change, and it means marginalising Christian evangelicals rather than embracing them. Trump is symptomatic of America doing all the opposite things towards greatness and is evidence of their decline. Sadly, America is kaput.

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

as far as climate science is concerned, its not science. Its politics.

and your possibly right as far as america being kaput. But this will be due to political correctness, self loathing & a misplaced guilt complex & the fact that america is on track to become a nation of negative millionairs.

Islam is already done for. Has been since about the 1200s when some influential Imam declared mathematics was the work of the Devil. Before 1200 the Islamic world and the city of Baghdad in particular was the leading centre of learning and science throughout the known world. They invented algebra and the very numerals we still use today. Since then they have become a moribund intellectual backwater. The USA is going through that process right now, today. They are splitting themselves off from the rest of the western world. Biblical literalism is the driving force.

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I think that the original post may have incorporated some confusion between the terms ‘orthodox’, ‘fundamentalist’, and ‘radical’ in reference to Islam.

ISIS & boko harem, for example, are orthodox

No they are not. Where are you getting this from?

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I think that the original post may have incorporated some confusion between the terms ‘orthodox’, ‘fundamentalist’, and ‘radical’ in reference to Islam.

ISIS & boko harem, for example, are orthodox

If i was to refer to such groups, i’d probably opt for ‘radical’, or at least ‘fundamentalist’, rather than ‘orthodox’. ‘Radical’ is better, i think.

The_observer said:

party_pants said:

It is impossible in this modern industrialised world for any nation to be a great nation without full engagement with science. This also means accepting the science behind evolution and climate change, and it means marginalising Christian evangelicals rather than embracing them. Trump is symptomatic of America doing all the opposite things towards greatness and is evidence of their decline. Sadly, America is kaput.

Now this is an interesting post. Firstly, asking for science to be accepted and then targeting Christian evangelicals,. No mention of athodox islam, a religion that rejects critical thought & cause & effect. what are their views on evolution, hmmmm. no orthodox muslims have won a nobel for science. everything is the will of Allah.

as far as climate science is concerned, its not science. Its politics.

and your possibly right as far as america being kaput. But this will be due to political correctness, self loathing & a misplaced guilt complex & the fact that america is on track to become a nation of negative millionairs.

We wouldn’t have all this crap if we still had the Cold War with Russia. The far right need someone to blame.

>…/cut/….They invented algebra ../cut/….”

the formalism maybe, but i’d expect humans have been doing basic algebra for at least a couple of hundred thousand years.

transition said:

>…/cut/….They invented algebra ../cut/….”

the formalism maybe, but i’d expect humans have been doing basic algebra for at least a couple of hundred thousand years.

Algebra itself is an Arabic word.

transition said:

>…/cut/….They invented algebra ../cut/….”

the formalism maybe, but i’d expect humans have been doing basic algebra for at least a couple of hundred thousand years.

It was hard to move on to the higher levels of the subject when all you had for writing materials was a flat stone and a burnt stick.

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

The recipient of the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics, Abdus Salam, was a member of the Ahmadiyya community of Pakistan. Aziz Sancar is the second Turkish Nobel laureate and the first Muslim to be awarded Nobel prize in the field of molecular biology in 2015

.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_Nobel_laureates

I think that the original post may have incorporated some confusion between the terms ‘orthodox’, ‘fundamentalist’, and ‘radical’ in reference to Islam.

ISIS & boko harem, for example, are orthodox

Are you sure of that?

party_pants said:

transition said:

>…/cut/….They invented algebra ../cut/….”

the formalism maybe, but i’d expect humans have been doing basic algebra for at least a couple of hundred thousand years.

Algebra itself is an Arabic word.

yes I get that, but mind’s do the basics of algrebra minus the formalism, just as humans do other math computation.

transition said:

party_pants said:

transition said:

>…/cut/….They invented algebra ../cut/….”

the formalism maybe, but i’d expect humans have been doing basic algebra for at least a couple of hundred thousand years.

Algebra itself is an Arabic word.

yes I get that, but mind’s do the basics of algrebra minus the formalism, just as humans do other math computation.

Basic algebra you can do in your head like x + 7 = 9. But it does reach a point where you need to have a formal structure.

Don’t forget that at the same time western Europe was still using Roman Numerals.

party_pants said:

transition said:

party_pants said:

Algebra itself is an Arabic word.

yes I get that, but mind’s do the basics of algrebra minus the formalism, just as humans do other math computation.

Basic algebra you can do in your head like x + 7 = 9. But it does reach a point where you need to have a formal structure.

Don’t forget that at the same time western Europe was still using Roman Numerals.

I was diluting invented a tad. It’s a stretch to think it was all so entirely recently invented.

transition said:

party_pants said:

transition said:

yes I get that, but mind’s do the basics of algrebra minus the formalism, just as humans do other math computation.

Basic algebra you can do in your head like x + 7 = 9. But it does reach a point where you need to have a formal structure.

Don’t forget that at the same time western Europe was still using Roman Numerals.

I was diluting invented a tad. It’s a stretch to think it was all so entirely recently invented.

meaning the mentalese of computation need not require the symbols etc adopted.

transition said:

transition said:

party_pants said:

Basic algebra you can do in your head like x + 7 = 9. But it does reach a point where you need to have a formal structure.

Don’t forget that at the same time western Europe was still using Roman Numerals.

I was diluting invented a tad. It’s a stretch to think it was all so entirely recently invented.

meaning the mentalese of computation need not require the symbols etc adopted.

Different cultures invent different things. The concept of zero as a tangible quantity was invented by the Maya.Without this understanding calculus is impossible.

mcgoon said:

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

I think that the original post may have incorporated some confusion between the terms ‘orthodox’, ‘fundamentalist’, and ‘radical’ in reference to Islam.

ISIS & boko harem, for example, are orthodox

If i was to refer to such groups, i’d probably opt for ‘radical’, or at least ‘fundamentalist’, rather than ‘orthodox’. ‘Radical’ is better, i think.

muhammad spent his first 13 years using his religion to convert people around mecca. in that time he convinced 150 people, mostly family & friends, that god spoke to him through the angel Gabriel, that he was a prophet, & to spread the word of god for how to live their lives.

Mecca basically turfed him out. He went to Medina, mostly jewish, to try & convince them to follow him, so he have more influence. He adopted many of the jewish practices from the old testement, like a fasting period, not eating pork, praying three times a day, so he would be more acceptable to them. The jews told him to piss off mate. we’re not converting, we don’t recognise you as a prophet. So, to Muhammad, the jews, and christians, were refered to as Kafirs, non believers. Yes, they all believed in the same god, but they did not believe in him. This is very important. as the trilogy – the koran, the biography of Muhammad & the traditions of Muhammad are little about god, but all about muhammad & the kafir, how to treat them.

muhammad, a businessman, became a politician in medina, gathered an army, & spread the word of islam, not through the message of the peaceful religion, but the violent political islam, jihad. He slaughtered the three jewish tribes of medin, enslaved the jewish woman, & adopted out the children to muslim families.

From there he started slaughtering jews & christians if they refused to convert,or forced them to pay a non muslim tax, that left them as 2nd class citizens & slaves. He concured arabia, went to iran, which was half christian half persian, iran which was christian, turkey – christian – Egypt, nth africa – christian, and slaughted & enslaved them, India & pakistan, the same. Controlled the medterrean, went into europe. Muhammad, spread islam, through jihad, murdering millions of christians jews hindis, etc until the day he died, then his followers carried on the same. He made laws that a muslim man could have four wives, that must obey him or else, & he took sex slaves.

Muhammad in the koran, his biography, is the perfect muslim, and to be a god muslim one must aim to be like him.

Witty Rejoinder said:

transition said:

transition said:

I was diluting invented a tad. It’s a stretch to think it was all so entirely recently invented.

meaning the mentalese of computation need not require the symbols etc adopted.

Different cultures invent different things. The concept of zero as a tangible quantity was invented by the Maya.Without this understanding calculus is impossible.

depends what you mean by invented I guess, like was geometry invented, or was there some native intuitive geometry happening in mentalese previous to the formalism.

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

The_observer said:

ISIS & boko harem, for example, are orthodox

If i was to refer to such groups, i’d probably opt for ‘radical’, or at least ‘fundamentalist’, rather than ‘orthodox’. ‘Radical’ is better, i think.

muhammad spent his first 13 years using his religion to convert people around mecca. in that time he convinced 150 people, mostly family & friends, that god spoke to him through the angel Gabriel, that he was a prophet, & to spread the word of god for how to live their lives.

Mecca basically turfed him out. He went to Medina, mostly jewish, to try & convince them to follow him, so he have more influence. He adopted many of the jewish practices from the old testement, like a fasting period, not eating pork, praying three times a day, so he would be more acceptable to them. The jews told him to piss off mate. we’re not converting, we don’t recognise you as a prophet. So, to Muhammad, the jews, and christians, were refered to as Kafirs, non believers. Yes, they all believed in the same god, but they did not believe in him. This is very important. as the trilogy – the koran, the biography of Muhammad & the traditions of Muhammad are little about god, but all about muhammad & the kafir, how to treat them.

muhammad, a businessman, became a politician in medina, gathered an army, & spread the word of islam, not through the message of the peaceful religion, but the violent political islam, jihad. He slaughtered the three jewish tribes of medin, enslaved the jewish woman, & adopted out the children to muslim families.

From there he started slaughtering jews & christians if they refused to convert,or forced them to pay a non muslim tax, that left them as 2nd class citizens & slaves. He concured arabia, went to iran, which was half christian half persian, iran which was christian, turkey – christian – Egypt, nth africa – christian, and slaughted & enslaved them, India & pakistan, the same. Controlled the medterrean, went into europe. Muhammad, spread islam, through jihad, murdering millions of christians jews hindis, etc until the day he died, then his followers carried on the same. He made laws that a muslim man could have four wives, that must obey him or else, & he took sex slaves.

Muhammad in the koran, his biography, is the perfect muslim, and to be a god muslim one must aim to be like him.

It’s not about Islam. We already know they’re fucked. But can’t you see that biblical literalism is dragging the west down the same path of self-destruction?

party_pants said:

The_observer said:

mcgoon said:

If i was to refer to such groups, i’d probably opt for ‘radical’, or at least ‘fundamentalist’, rather than ‘orthodox’. ‘Radical’ is better, i think.

muhammad spent his first 13 years using his religion to convert people around mecca. in that time he convinced 150 people, mostly family & friends, that god spoke to him through the angel Gabriel, that he was a prophet, & to spread the word of god for how to live their lives.

Mecca basically turfed him out. He went to Medina, mostly jewish, to try & convince them to follow him, so he have more influence. He adopted many of the jewish practices from the old testement, like a fasting period, not eating pork, praying three times a day, so he would be more acceptable to them. The jews told him to piss off mate. we’re not converting, we don’t recognise you as a prophet. So, to Muhammad, the jews, and christians, were refered to as Kafirs, non believers. Yes, they all believed in the same god, but they did not believe in him. This is very important. as the trilogy – the koran, the biography of Muhammad & the traditions of Muhammad are little about god, but all about muhammad & the kafir, how to treat them.

muhammad, a businessman, became a politician in medina, gathered an army, & spread the word of islam, not through the message of the peaceful religion, but the violent political islam, jihad. He slaughtered the three jewish tribes of medin, enslaved the jewish woman, & adopted out the children to muslim families.

From there he started slaughtering jews & christians if they refused to convert,or forced them to pay a non muslim tax, that left them as 2nd class citizens & slaves. He concured arabia, went to iran, which was half christian half persian, iran which was christian, turkey – christian – Egypt, nth africa – christian, and slaughted & enslaved them, India & pakistan, the same. Controlled the medterrean, went into europe. Muhammad, spread islam, through jihad, murdering millions of christians jews hindis, etc until the day he died, then his followers carried on the same. He made laws that a muslim man could have four wives, that must obey him or else, & he took sex slaves.

Muhammad in the koran, his biography, is the perfect muslim, and to be a god muslim one must aim to be like him.

It’s not about Islam. We already know they’re fucked. But can’t you see that biblical literalism is dragging the west down the same path of self-destruction?

I’m not fond of any religion, & the more orthodox it is the less i like it

Have you got any sense of objectivity when discussing the behaviour of Muslims hundreds of years ago? 70 years ago Germans were turning people into soap. Does this have an effect on your opinion of Germans?

History is full of religious people performing acts condemned by their religion: Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists etc.

For Christ’s sake only 200 years ago public executions were common in Europeans capitals, corporal punishment was routine and people were kept as slaves.

If you want to condemn the past actions of Muslims you should expand your repertoire.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Have you got any sense of objectivity when discussing the behaviour of Muslims hundreds of years ago? 70 years ago Germans were turning people into soap. Does this have an effect on your opinion of Germans?

History is full of religious people performing acts condemned by their religion: Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists etc.

For Christ’s sake only 200 years ago public executions were common in Europeans capitals, corporal punishment was routine and people were kept as slaves.

If you want to condemn the past actions of Muslims you should expand your repertoire.

The violent expansion of islam spand from Muhammads time in Medina to the early 1920s.

It has resumed, if it ever actually stoped, with ISIS & boko haram. Thats now on my calendar. And nothing else compares to it.

The_observer said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Have you got any sense of objectivity when discussing the behaviour of Muslims hundreds of years ago? 70 years ago Germans were turning people into soap. Does this have an effect on your opinion of Germans?

History is full of religious people performing acts condemned by their religion: Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists etc.

For Christ’s sake only 200 years ago public executions were common in Europeans capitals, corporal punishment was routine and people were kept as slaves.

If you want to condemn the past actions of Muslims you should expand your repertoire.

The violent expansion of islam spand from Muhammads time in Medina to the early 1920s.

It has resumed, if it ever actually stoped, with ISIS & boko haram. Thats now on my calendar. And nothing else compares to it.

And besides this muslim jihad being responsible for far more deaths & suffering through the ages than any other cause, & they are unapologetic for any of it.

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

transition said:

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

The headwear is a political statement, so its intended to attract attention

The_observer said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Have you got any sense of objectivity when discussing the behaviour of Muslims hundreds of years ago? 70 years ago Germans were turning people into soap. Does this have an effect on your opinion of Germans?

History is full of religious people performing acts condemned by their religion: Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists etc.

For Christ’s sake only 200 years ago public executions were common in Europeans capitals, corporal punishment was routine and people were kept as slaves.

If you want to condemn the past actions of Muslims you should expand your repertoire.

The violent expansion of islam spand from Muhammads time in Medina to the early 1920s.

It has resumed, if it ever actually stoped, with ISIS & boko haram. Thats now on my calendar. And nothing else compares to it.

The Observers mind in like a railway track with no stations to permit anybody on to influence his outlook, meanwhile his full attention is taken by the rails that lead to his idea of utopia.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Have you got any sense of objectivity when discussing the behaviour of Muslims hundreds of years ago? 70 years ago Germans were turning people into soap. Does this have an effect on your opinion of Germans?

History is full of religious people performing acts condemned by their religion: Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists etc.

For Christ’s sake only 200 years ago public executions were common in Europeans capitals, corporal punishment was routine and people were kept as slaves.

If you want to condemn the past actions of Muslims you should expand your repertoire.

The violent expansion of islam spand from Muhammads time in Medina to the early 1920s.

It has resumed, if it ever actually stoped, with ISIS & boko haram. Thats now on my calendar. And nothing else compares to it.

The Observers mind in like a railway track with no stations to permit anybody on to influence his outlook, meanwhile his full attention is taken by the rails that lead to his idea of utopia.

Fuck n off dickhead

The_observer said:

transition said:

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

The headwear is a political statement, so its intended to attract attention

right.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

The violent expansion of islam spand from Muhammads time in Medina to the early 1920s.

It has resumed, if it ever actually stoped, with ISIS & boko haram. Thats now on my calendar. And nothing else compares to it.

The Observers mind in like a railway track with no stations to permit anybody on to influence his outlook, meanwhile his full attention is taken by the rails that lead to his idea of utopia.

Fuck n off dickhead

Both saying the same thing in different languages.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

The violent expansion of islam spand from Muhammads time in Medina to the early 1920s.

It has resumed, if it ever actually stoped, with ISIS & boko haram. Thats now on my calendar. And nothing else compares to it.

The Observers mind in like a railway track with no stations to permit anybody on to influence his outlook, meanwhile his full attention is taken by the rails that lead to his idea of utopia.

Fuck n off dickhead

You are to be pitied Observer.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The Observers mind in like a railway track with no stations to permit anybody on to influence his outlook, meanwhile his full attention is taken by the rails that lead to his idea of utopia.

Fuck n off dickhead

You are to be pitied Observer.

pf, you get around here lecturing everyone like your the god of all knowledge & to disagree with your wisdom is unacceptable.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Fuck n off dickhead

You are to be pitied Observer.

pf, you get around here lecturing everyone like your the god of all knowledge & to disagree with your wisdom is unacceptable.

Not really Observer, whilst I like logic, you like fantasy.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Fuck n off dickhead

You are to be pitied Observer.

pf, you get around here lecturing everyone like your the god of all knowledge & to disagree with your wisdom is unacceptable.

pot, kettle.

transition said:

The_observer said:

transition said:

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

The headwear is a political statement, so its intended to attract attention

right.

Raheel Raza, a Pakistani muslim lady, clearly states that the burka is not required by religous islam , but by political islam. The koran says that woman & men should dress modestly. Saudi Wahhabism & the more orthodox islamic practices have pushed thisdress code.

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

You are to be pitied Observer.

pf, you get around here lecturing everyone like your the god of all knowledge & to disagree with your wisdom is unacceptable.

pot, kettle.

No i givemy opinion. There’s a difference

The_observer said:

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

pf, you get around here lecturing everyone like your the god of all knowledge & to disagree with your wisdom is unacceptable.

pot, kettle.

No i givemy opinion. There’s a difference

Observer if I were a god, you would not exist.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

roughbarked said:

pot, kettle.

No i givemy opinion. There’s a difference

Observer if I were a god, you would not exist.

Is that a threat arsehole?

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

No i givemy opinion. There’s a difference

Observer if I were a god, you would not exist.

Is that a threat arsehole?

Only if I were a god, although I thank you for your high opinion of me.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

Observer if I were a god, you would not exist.

Is that a threat arsehole?

Only if I were a god, although I thank you for your high opinion of me.

Ah its ok. I don’t take you seriously

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Is that a threat arsehole?

Only if I were a god, although I thank you for your high opinion of me.

Ah its ok. I don’t take you seriously

Now that is a co-incidence.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

Only if I were a god, although I thank you for your high opinion of me.

Ah its ok. I don’t take you seriously

Now that is a co-incidence.

Think the Observer has gone off to end it all.

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Ah its ok. I don’t take you seriously

Now that is a co-incidence.

Think the Observer has gone off to end it all.

Are all people in Esperance a bit quirky like you pf?

Must be a fair bit of violence if thats tha case

transition said:

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

sarahs mum said:

transition said:

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

W h ats the social thinking on beanies?

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

transition said:

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

W h ats the social thinking on beanies?

Any headcover must be removed at airport checks. Mrs rb had to be embarrassed by being forced to remove her scullcap and reveal her bald head. She still wonders why.

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

transition said:

funny place Australia, you wear a hoodie, practical in winter, and you get comments like you look sinister, or like a _grave robber_(granted jokingly, but it’s spontaneous and speaks of a truth about behavior controls), and if you venture out onto the footpath for a smoke, or go for a walk down the footpath with a hoodie on it’s not at all uncommon to have police stop for a hello, or drive by slow for a look.

so, I wouldn’t like to be a muslin wearing as they do, here.

so there’s some ‘religion’ about what you’ll wear around your head.

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

W h ats the social thinking on beanies?

Hippies, greenies, fishermen and dairymen.

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

W h ats the social thinking on beanies?

Hippies, greenies, fishermen and dairymen.

… and football fans.

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

W h ats the social thinking on beanies?

Hippies, greenies, fishermen and dairymen.

And Central Australian aboriginals.

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

W h ats the social thinking on beanies?

Any headcover must be removed at airport checks. Mrs rb had to be embarrassed by being forced to remove her scullcap and reveal her bald head. She still wonders why.

:(
Sorry.

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

My sister said on the phone that she thinks hoodies should be banned.
I reply..‘Okay, all good. I’ll just sit here and freeze.

W h ats the social thinking on beanies?

Hippies, greenies, fishermen and dairymen.

And ski instructors

PermeateFree said:

Beanies

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

Beanies

>What’s the social thinking on beanies?

probably indicative of working class, or at least not alienating them. Generally acceptable though, I mean they have quite a range through to dressy/stylish. It’s more difficult to have a bad hair day with a beanie on too.

a hoodie though (excepting babies in prams maybe), unfortunately, while insulating head, side of face and neck, also makes it difficult to see if the creature inside the hoodie is trustworthy. Trustworthy people have more evolved natural insulation, and the bulb-of-good-intentions stands prominent, a full view of is unobscured.

but, truth is much of shelter and privacy overlap, of many species, have done for millions of years, not something modern man is inclined to understand, being a contemporary social construct you know.

transition said:

>What’s the social thinking on beanies?

probably indicative of working class, or at least not alienating them. Generally acceptable though, I mean they have quite a range through to dressy/stylish. It’s more difficult to have a bad hair day with a beanie on too.

a hoodie though (excepting babies in prams maybe), unfortunately, while insulating head, side of face and neck, also makes it difficult to see if the creature inside the hoodie is trustworthy. Trustworthy people have more evolved natural insulation, and the bulb-of-good-intentions stands prominent, a full view of is unobscured.

but, truth is much of shelter and privacy overlap, of many species, have done for millions of years, not something modern man is inclined to understand, being a contemporary social construct you know.

The trustworthy don’t hide behind beards?

roughbarked said:

transition said:

>What’s the social thinking on beanies?

probably indicative of working class, or at least not alienating them. Generally acceptable though, I mean they have quite a range through to dressy/stylish. It’s more difficult to have a bad hair day with a beanie on too.

a hoodie though (excepting babies in prams maybe), unfortunately, while insulating head, side of face and neck, also makes it difficult to see if the creature inside the hoodie is trustworthy. Trustworthy people have more evolved natural insulation, and the bulb-of-good-intentions stands prominent, a full view of is unobscured.

but, truth is much of shelter and privacy overlap, of many species, have done for millions of years, not something modern man is inclined to understand, being a contemporary social construct you know.

The trustworthy don’t hide behind beards?

beards are sexy

roughbarked said:

transition said:

>What’s the social thinking on beanies?

probably indicative of working class, or at least not alienating them. Generally acceptable though, I mean they have quite a range through to dressy/stylish. It’s more difficult to have a bad hair day with a beanie on too.

a hoodie though (excepting babies in prams maybe), unfortunately, while insulating head, side of face and neck, also makes it difficult to see if the creature inside the hoodie is trustworthy. Trustworthy people have more evolved natural insulation, and the bulb-of-good-intentions stands prominent, a full view of is unobscured.

but, truth is much of shelter and privacy overlap, of many species, have done for millions of years, not something modern man is inclined to understand, being a contemporary social construct you know.

The trustworthy don’t hide behind beards?

bearded people remind the unbearded they not long ago swung out of the trees.

transition said:

>What’s the social thinking on beanies?

probably indicative of working class, or at least not alienating them. Generally acceptable though, I mean they have quite a range through to dressy/stylish. It’s more difficult to have a bad hair day with a beanie on too.

a hoodie though (excepting babies in prams maybe), unfortunately, while insulating head, side of face and neck, also makes it difficult to see if the creature inside the hoodie is trustworthy. Trustworthy people have more evolved natural insulation, and the bulb-of-good-intentions stands prominent, a full view of is unobscured.

but, truth is much of shelter and privacy overlap, of many species, have done for millions of years, not something modern man is inclined to understand, being a contemporary social construct you know.

party_pants said:

beards are sexy

I never pictured you being into lumberjacks.

roughbarked said:

The trustworthy don’t hide behind beards?

An Australian destroyer called at the South African port of Durban during WW2, and the local services organisation put on a dance to entertain the crew.

A lot of the Australians wore beards, partly because it relieved them of shaving each day, and parly because it made them look ‘salty’.

The chaps with beards had a lot of trouble persuading the local girls to dance with them. Finally, one sailor asked the question ‘why?’ directly.

‘Because’, said one lass, ‘the sailors from that Australian ship that was here last week told us that, in the Australian Navy, sailors with beards all have a…a..a social disease!’

There was some ‘pay-back’ when those two ships next crossed paths.

!!

!

Donald Trump reportedly exploring ways to hamper Russia probe, pardon himself

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-21/donald-trump-team-exploring-ways-to-hamper-russia-probe/8732166

tauto said:

Donald Trump reportedly exploring ways to hamper Russia probe, pardon himself

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-21/donald-trump-team-exploring-ways-to-hamper-russia-probe/8732166

that headline could have been funnier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sB3Fjw3Uvc

Spicer…gone.

http://krwg.org/post/sean-spicer-resigns-white-house-press-secretary

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

transition said:

>What’s the social thinking on beanies?

probably indicative of working class, or at least not alienating them. Generally acceptable though, I mean they have quite a range through to dressy/stylish. It’s more difficult to have a bad hair day with a beanie on too.

a hoodie though (excepting babies in prams maybe), unfortunately, while insulating head, side of face and neck, also makes it difficult to see if the creature inside the hoodie is trustworthy. Trustworthy people have more evolved natural insulation, and the bulb-of-good-intentions stands prominent, a full view of is unobscured.

but, truth is much of shelter and privacy overlap, of many species, have done for millions of years, not something modern man is inclined to understand, being a contemporary social construct you know.

The trustworthy don’t hide behind beards?

beards are sexy

That’s what I’ve been told but my records show that it hasn’t drawn crowds of those wanting sex.

#howmanydayswilltrumplast

Tau.Neutrino said:

#howmanydayswilltrumplast

I was wondering if you say words together really fast, could they sound like other words?

Are they any examples around?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

#howmanydayswilltrumplast

I was wondering if you say words together really fast, could they sound like other words?

Are they any examples around?

check out Australian strine.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

#howmanydayswilltrumplast

I was wondering if you say words together really fast, could they sound like other words?

Are they any examples around?

It’s a device commonly used in cryptic crossword clues.

In today’s cryptic on the Lovatt’s website, the clue for 22-across is:

‘‘A knife foreign?’ I say in retaliation’ (2,3,3,2,3)

The answer is ‘an eye for an eye’.

mcgoon said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

#howmanydayswilltrumplast

I was wondering if you say words together really fast, could they sound like other words?

Are they any examples around?

It’s a device commonly used in cryptic crossword clues.

In today’s cryptic on the Lovatt’s website, the clue for 22-across is:

‘‘A knife foreign?’ I say in retaliation’ (2,3,3,2,3)

The answer is ‘an eye for an eye’.

That’s one of the easy cryptic clues.

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I was wondering if you say words together really fast, could they sound like other words?

Are they any examples around?

It’s a device commonly used in cryptic crossword clues.

In today’s cryptic on the Lovatt’s website, the clue for 22-across is:

‘‘A knife foreign?’ I say in retaliation’ (2,3,3,2,3)

The answer is ‘an eye for an eye’.

That’s one of the easy cryptic clues.

I have never solved even one cryptic clue. Even borrowed a book on solving cryptics. Couldn’t solve the examples. I’m convinced my brain doesn’t function crypticwise.

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

It’s a device commonly used in cryptic crossword clues.

In today’s cryptic on the Lovatt’s website, the clue for 22-across is:

‘‘A knife foreign?’ I say in retaliation’ (2,3,3,2,3)

The answer is ‘an eye for an eye’.

That’s one of the easy cryptic clues.

I have never solved even one cryptic clue. Even borrowed a book on solving cryptics. Couldn’t solve the examples. I’m convinced my brain doesn’t function crypticwise.

That’s why there are also quick crossword puzzles. Cryptics aren’t for everyone. I know this because most people frown rather than get my jokes.

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

That’s one of the easy cryptic clues.

I have never solved even one cryptic clue. Even borrowed a book on solving cryptics. Couldn’t solve the examples. I’m convinced my brain doesn’t function crypticwise.

That’s why there are also quick crossword puzzles. Cryptics aren’t for everyone. I know this because most people frown rather than get my jokes.

I like your jokes & get most of them. I prefer to do Sodokus & can solve even the advanced/fiendish ones. It’s just those cryptics that don’t work for me.

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

Tamb said:

I have never solved even one cryptic clue. Even borrowed a book on solving cryptics. Couldn’t solve the examples. I’m convinced my brain doesn’t function crypticwise.

That’s why there are also quick crossword puzzles. Cryptics aren’t for everyone. I know this because most people frown rather than get my jokes.

I like your jokes & get most of them. I prefer to do Sodokus & can solve even the advanced/fiendish ones. It’s just those cryptics that don’t work for me.

By the time I finish the crossword, it is time to stop smoko and get back to work. I don’t seem to get the time to look at the sodoku.

Tamb said:

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

It’s a device commonly used in cryptic crossword clues.

In today’s cryptic on the Lovatt’s website, the clue for 22-across is:

‘‘A knife foreign?’ I say in retaliation’ (2,3,3,2,3)

The answer is ‘an eye for an eye’.

That’s one of the easy cryptic clues.

I have never solved even one cryptic clue. Even borrowed a book on solving cryptics. Couldn’t solve the examples. I’m convinced my brain doesn’t function crypticwise.

+1

I think the blood just ran out my brain. Have you guys heard Scaramucci speak?

kii said:

I think the blood just ran out my brain. Have you guys heard Scaramucci speak?

who?

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

That’s one of the easy cryptic clues.

Yes, it is, but it’s an readily-grasped example.

mcgoon said:

roughbarked said:

mcgoon said:

That’s one of the easy cryptic clues.

Yes, it is, but it’s an readily-grasped example.

dilygras. ;) nods.

kii said:

I think the blood just ran out my brain. Have you guys heard Scaramucci speak?

He does seem to be an excellent example of a reptile in a suit.

mcgoon said:

kii said:

I think the blood just ran out my brain. Have you guys heard Scaramucci speak?

He does seem to be an excellent example of a reptile in a suit.

Yes, he is. It’s so surreal.

Sessions has been caught out. Again.

mcgoon said:

kii said:

I think the blood just ran out my brain. Have you guys heard Scaramucci speak?

He does seem to be an excellent example of a reptile in a suit.

Hate speech

An interesting article about the downside of neglecting science.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-21/for-the-impact-of-trump-slashing-science-funding-look-north

Worse part about DT is so much of the chap has leaked out, more than anyone could ever mop up.

You know, things were tidier before, and anyway I’m glad Australia’s not some sort of US satellite. Gravity’s the same, the sun still rises, and a different time of the day. So mostly everything’s unchanged. All good.

transition said:

You know, things were tidier before, and anyway I’m glad Australia’s not some sort of US satellite.

um..

PermeateFree said:

An interesting article about the downside of neglecting science.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-21/for-the-impact-of-trump-slashing-science-funding-look-north

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

An interesting article about the downside of neglecting science.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-21/for-the-impact-of-trump-slashing-science-funding-look-north

All downhill for Republicans, which no doubt will continue. Sad!

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

An interesting article about the downside of neglecting science.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-21/for-the-impact-of-trump-slashing-science-funding-look-north

All downhill for Republicans, which no doubt will continue. Sad!

its downhill for them all sweetheart

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

An interesting article about the downside of neglecting science.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-21/for-the-impact-of-trump-slashing-science-funding-look-north

All downhill for Republicans, which no doubt will continue. Sad!

Graph shows more Republicans couldn’t give a shit about the environment and that the Democrats have picked up a few people who give a shit.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

All downhill for Republicans, which no doubt will continue. Sad!

its downhill for them all sweetheart

The Democrats are on the way up according to that chart. Still very sad though. I think that lack of concern for the environment is not restricted to America, which probably is the main reason why the environment is in such a mess.

sarahs mum said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

All downhill for Republicans, which no doubt will continue. Sad!

Graph shows more Republicans couldn’t give a shit about the environment and that the Democrats have picked up a few people who give a shit.

the environment is fine

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

PermeateFree said:

All downhill for Republicans, which no doubt will continue. Sad!

Graph shows more Republicans couldn’t give a shit about the environment and that the Democrats have picked up a few people who give a shit.

the environment is fine

Where?

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

Graph shows more Republicans couldn’t give a shit about the environment and that the Democrats have picked up a few people who give a shit.

the environment is fine

Where?

it could be better in the poor nations, but overall its fine.

The_observer said:

sarahs mum said:

The_observer said:

the environment is fine

Where?

it could be better in the poor nations, but overall its fine.

Well where in the wealthy nations?