kill all the stupid people

cal wrote:

"%" wrote:
"cal" wrote:
[snip]
i'm game, long as i get to be king.

you haven't got what it takes to be a king

kiss my ring, peon.

At which point any sensible peon uses his pitchfork to depose the ruler
in a very straightforward fashion. Either that, or simply applies a
hard-driven boot to an appropriate spot.

No sensible king would bare his bottom to an angry commoner if said
commoner were close enough to kiss his arse - not unless he had a very
reliable guard which was *fully* in control.

I don't think you quite get the idea of monarchy. It's all about
imposing power on others - and they usually don't like it. And not all
commoners count as peons or peasants - certainly they did not in England
even when it was feudal (`thanks' to the Norman *******s).

So I think he's right: you don't have what it takes to be a king. But
please don't let that stop you - it'd be great! You'd be killed within
the week; that's how kingship was passed down during the Dark Ages.

Rowland.

--
Remove the animal for email address:
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking

you haven't got what it takes to be a king

_/ Rowland McDonnell wrote \_
As I've explained elsewhere, I only bang on like this is response to
ignorant, arrogant Yanks for the purposes of winding them up.

It's a form of humour; I realise that most USAians are deficient in
humour, so it's neccessary to point it out.

Well, I find your attempts funny, and your brainwashed ignorance
hilarious!

Me. And I did win - you did fail to read it all, didn't you?

You bet against yourself? What'd you wager? and I read it all.

chuckle That's your excuse for doing nothing but posting dishonest
and snide remarks that ignore all the relevant issues - mostly because
you simply don't have the mental capacity for comprehending complex
ideas, let alone writing them down.

No, I'm just not a blowhard who "bangs on" because of some kind of
inferiority issues about my country.

cackle Bullseye!

I have touched a raw nerve, haven't I?

Not at all. I could care less what you have to say, you're just my toy
for the moment. Keep on dancing.

You Yanks are quite funny, aren't you?

Yes.

You get the idea that everyone in the world is jealous of your
******** country with its ingrained institutionalised racism (the USA
was founded on the basis of whites lording it over the `lesser' races,
of whom the blacks were to be slaves and the `Indians' were to be
exterminated) and other social iniquity, its unjust laws, its corrupt
government, its massive state-funded (by way of direct purchase and
illegal subsidy) death-tech business, its unsustainable and illegally
subsidised agriculture and business, its appalling environmental
record (the USA is as bad at land desecration as the Warsaw Pact
nations were, but they at least are cleaning up their mess now). It
goes on like this. And oh! The ugliness of it all - ugly cities,
ugly countryside. Ugh!

No, it's just you who's jealous.

Believe it or not, I've never wanted to live in the USA. I have
relatives over there and - well, I know what it's like living in the USA
for real and I do not find the prospect attractive.

Yea, sure. That's why you go on and on about the US.

Backwards, you say? Well, one of us lives in a free country with
universal health care (compare the UK's success in dealing with AIDS to
the dreadful mess in the USA, for example) and a sound welfare state
that does the job properly. And also has an economy in roaringly good
shape, gets on well with its neighbours, has low crime, safe streets,
and so on.

I said you were backwards, not your country. I'm not a limey
generalizing scumfucc like yourself.

Part of the reason the UK economy is doing so well is that the UK is one
of the preferred destinations for Poles and other `new accession' EU
nationals who want to earn some money. They come here, they work like,
well, Poles, earn shed loads of money, and give us bloody good service.
Big wins all round - well, hardly surprising what Poles tending to be
well-educated, intelligent, sophisticated, and incredibly hard-working.
We're not so paranoid about foreigners as you lot in the USA - did you
know that the USA is losing business because of your paranoia about
foreigners? I do know that quite a lot of academic conferences have had
to be moved to venues outside the USA because of the trouble involved in
actually getting permission to attend, and then being allowed in even
when permission has been obtained.

I'm a modern educated European - we've all given up on old-fashioned
narrow-minded nationalism. We also know that Europe is the most
socially advanced and civilised place on the planet. In terms of social
issues, the USA is third world by comparison.

*Yawn*

--
-slunky

On 10/26/07 2:03 PM, in article
, "Rowland
McDonnell" wrote:

cal wrote:

" Rowland McDonnell" wrote:
Both elections were frauds. The US electoral system is a fraud.
There's nothing to stop electoral districts being rigged - and they are.
The US system's rotten in fashions that were dealt with in the UK
electoral system in the 19th century. We *used* to have the same
problems here, but we got rid of them. Time the USA advanced to the
19th century, I reckon.

every country gets the government they deserve, ah reckin.

Ah reckin you know **** about the world. No-one deserves Pol Pot or
Hitler or Stalin running things.

ah reckin you know **** about living under a dictatorship. the people who
acquiesce to it deserve it. the rest go underground and work and wait. when
enough people decide they've had enough, they get rid of it. pretty much
invariably. regrettably it takes a while, and the reason it takes a while is
the people who deserve it.

hitler acquired political power mostly by democratic means. translation: a
lot of people voted for the asshole at a time when they didn't have to, and
when they knew what he stood for. did they deserve him? most definitely.

but it's not just his supporters who deserved him. everybody who turned a
blind eye and a deaf ear to what was going on deserved him. everybody who
could vote and didn't vote against him deserved him. everybody who said, "i
don't get involved in politics" deserved him. everybody who said, "he's the
chancellor, he must know what he's doing" deserved him.

India did not *deserve* to be run by Britain, surely? I mean, that was
just plain `us stealing their country from under their feet' (it didn't
take a lot of actual fighting at all - mostly political manoeuvering and
suchlike).

short version: they let themselves get diddled out of autonomy. but the 13
colonies didn't deserve to be run by britain either, and so...

The French didn't deserve the monarchy they had - so they threw it out,

exactly.

and then went through several worse governments.

that's arguable. they went through some brutal upheaval at first, which was
almost to be expected.

They're on to their
fifth republic at the moment - they're due for another revolution soon,
so people think, but that's a bit of a problem because things are too
stable for a revolution to actually happen.

they have their problems as you have yours. they're bright people; they'll
figure it out.

All I have to do is take a short trip over the sea to the west and I can
find any number of very highly educated people who can explain to me at
very, very great length and in excruciating detail exactly how it is
their nation didn't deserve the government that was imposed on it by
*my* nation for several centuries (although to be completely fair, one
should point out that it was the Norman *******s who started the
business of controlling Ireland from England).

you obfuscate. being conquered by a foreign power isn't the same as
acquiescing to government. do the north koreans deserve "dear leader"? yes.
did the iraqis deserve saddam? yes. did they deserve the american occupation
of their country? no.

[If you get into an argument with an Irishman about history, don't even
think about questioning his assertions of fact: his education was better
than yours, and he was paying attention. It's best to retire gracefully
and admit defeat most of the time]

The people who were living in the USA before the European invasion got a
government imposed upon them that resulted in their cultures being
utterly destroyed, their livihoods wiped out, their lands stolen, and
most of the people being killed.

And you say they deserved it...

no, i don't. see above.

Like all the black people forcibly transported to the USA deserved the
government they got too - the one that insisted that they weren't fully
human and had no right to freedom and could be owned as property. They
deserved the horrors of slavery in the USA, did they?

no. see above.

i just don't
think it's reasonable for them to expect the rest of us to get the
government they deserve, and like it.

I have no idea what this might mean.

it's clear anough. don't complain, read it again.

What we need is a world in which all governments act in a sane and
reasonable fashion for the good of all. There's no way to do that when
governments are selected to serve a national interest. That's why we
need some sort of global government.

i agree.

Isn't this great?:


"at a concert at the Hollywood bowl in July, Mar. Albarran-
dressed in a tight fitting mod suit... asked audiences to
idnationality: mexicans, preuvians, Salvadorians, Bolivians. Then,
over the waves of partisan cheers, he announced that countries don't
really exist; They are just illusions.

When we started as a band, we talked about a need to find a
national identity," he said. "Now I think that's stupidd, that it
doesn't exist. We are trapped by those categories. It's like soccer
fans who say 'i'm for Galaxy' or 'I'm for Chivas'. that's how the
illusion begins...."



-New York Times

"slunky" wrote in message
...
I said you were backwards, not your country. I'm not a limey
generalizing scumfucc like yourself.

--
-slunky

Damn! seems I have to X-post again. You guys must know by now, I don't like
it, but how will I know the right guy gets to read it, unless I do X-post.

Anyway, I must admit, I am rather backward myself. Can you explain the word
scumfucc to me, as I don't see an entry in my dictionary for it. I hope this
is not an american swearword, and I am being obtuse here. If it is some form
of american gutter language, then please do not bother explaining, as I will
be content not to know.
I wish you well,
--
Mal
Three fifths of the time or more, I am usually wrong.
So am I drunk or what?

On 10/26/07 2:47 PM, in article
, "Rowland
McDonnell" wrote:

cal wrote:

"%" wrote:
"cal" wrote:
[snip]
i'm game, long as i get to be king.

you haven't got what it takes to be a king

kiss my ring, peon.

At which point any sensible peon uses his pitchfork to depose the ruler
in a very straightforward fashion. Either that, or simply applies a
hard-driven boot to an appropriate spot.

you have an incendiary nature which is in need of quelling. we will consign
you to the water wheel for your moral betterment.

On 10/26/07 2:40 PM, in article
, "Rowland
McDonnell" wrote:

cal wrote:

"Rowland McDonnell" wrote:

cal wrote:

McDonnell" wrote:

cal wrote:
[snip]

as we get increasingly dumb, we survive longer and in far greater
numbers.

You have data to back up this claim?

that we're living longer and in far greater numbers is self-evident.

Is it really? Have you compared life expectancy in modern Russia with
that which obtained during the later Soviet era? Or the predictions
made about the UK population, based on the increasingly unhealthy
lifestyles that people are living?

There are many commentators who think that we've hit a peak and we're
going to slip off it in terms of life expectancy.

prognostication isn't my game.

Erm, no: it's exactly what you were doing. Now I point out that you
were talking ********, you claim that you weren't playing that game.

you don't seem to know what the word means. it means to predict the future.

Believe it or not, some of us have the intellectual capacity to spot
this sort of dishonesty. All it takes is the ability to read
substantial quantities of prose, remember the details, and to analyse
them.

seems to me the need for a basic vocabulary precedes all that.

It's a common skill that any educated person can and does learn -
unfortunately, you seem to have missed out on most of your education.
What's entertaining is that you seem to think that everyone else in the
world is as intellectually incapable as you are yourself.

Look, you just happen to be a certain type of really annoying idiot that
I happen to enjoy ripping the **** out of. I've been doing so for some
time. I suppose it counts as trolling - but my motivation is not to
disrupt, but to provide entertainment, and you're certainly helping me
get some giggles.

I hope others are amused too.

something i notice repeatedly in these usenet discussions is that whenever
someone starts going on about how amused they are and all the giggles
they're having, what they're actually doing is getting annoyed.

which is interesting in its anthropological way, but since there's nothing
following this that's any more substantial than what comes before, i'll stop
here.

On Oct 26, 3:05 pm, jordy wrote:
Isn't this great?:

"At a concert at the Hollywood bowl in July, Mr. Albarran,
dressed in a tight fitting mod suit... asked audiences to
identify themselves by nationality: Mexicans, Peruvians,
Salvadorians, Bolivians. Then,
over the waves of partisan cheers, he announced that countries don't
really exist; They are just illusions.

When we started as a band, we talked about a need to find a
national identity," he said. "Now I think that's stupid, that it
doesn't exist. We are trapped by those categories. It's like soccer
fans who say 'I'm for Galaxy' or 'I'm for Chivas'. that's how the
illusion begins. You start to think you are different from an
Egyptian
or a Romanian when really there's no need for seperation. There's
beauty
everywhere."

-New York Times

_/ Mally wrote \_
Damn! seems I have to X-post again. You guys must know by now, I don't like
it, but how will I know the right guy gets to read it, unless I do X-post.

Anyway, I must admit, I am rather backward myself. Can you explain the word
scumfucc to me, as I don't see an entry in my dictionary for it. I hope this
is not an american swearword, and I am being obtuse here. If it is some form
of american gutter language, then please do not bother explaining, as I will
be content not to know.
I wish you well,

It's American gutter language, but there are very few people who use it.
If you want to know, look up G.G. Allin.

--
-slunky