XPost: uk.politics.misc, uk.media, uk.local.hertfordshire
XPost: alt.conspiracy, alt.conspiracy.new-world-order
From: no@no.com
"banana" wrote in message
news:+y73UIAoGZnDFwb5@borve.demon.co.uk...
> In article , tw writes
>
> >"banana" wrote in message
> >news:SvysDKANqUnDFwPp@borve.demon.co.uk...
> >> In article , Dr Zen
> >> writes
> >>
> >> >Eek! A mouse... erm, sorry, no, it's banana
> >> > doing the squeaking, and it
> >> >goes like this:
> >> >
> >> >>In article , Dr Zen
> >> >> writes
> >> >>
> >> >>>Eek! A mouse... erm, sorry, no, it's banana
> >> >>> doing the squeaking, and it
>
>
>
> >> >>>>Media operators are obviously involved in writing such articles as
> >this.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>You have to be kidding. Geeks with fast computers write the
articles.
> >> >>
> >> >>Who happen to be BBC fans? And why would computer clockspeed matter?
> >> >
> >> >Jeez, you sure aren't a geek!
> >>
> >> What's the answer to the question though?
> >
> >As you aren't a geek, there is no point explaining why clockspeed
matters,
> >see?
>
> Pathetic.
Sentence fragment.
>
> >> >Well, people simply accept what the police tell them in the absence of
> >> >any evidence, because, erm, what the police tell them is the only
> >> >evidence they actually have.
> >>
> >> Your use of 'erm' suggests that you're unaware that people in most
> >> places in the world aren't so stupid.
> >
> >I don't think you understood his point...
>
> Did you miss out a full stop after 'you' and before 'understood'?
"I don't think you. Understood." Eh?
I think you might want to check your attempt at humour there, sparky.
> >> >>I think the story will change. To what, I don't know.
> >> >
> >> >Maybe. I don't think it bears much speculation though.
> >>
> >> !
> >
> >Well, in the absence of any evidence to the contrarty, what would be the
> >point?
>
> You could say that about either of the main propositions, couldn't you?
> But you only appear to be saying it about the one the cops *aren't*
> asserting on the telly along with zero evidence. Why's that?
I'm intersted in what the COMPANY who owns the site is saying. Theire saying
"well, it looks like an accident so far". I'll go with that, it's their
faciliity.
> >> >>Never been into in-jokes...
> >> >
> >> >Ah. Maybe you should try. It's good fun.
> >>
> >> They kind of hold people back mentally and shore up self-regarding
> >> hierarchies.
> >
> >How do they hold people back mentally?
>
> I'm snipping the rest.
..and I'll just put it straight back, because it was full of pertinent stuff
which you've ignored
>If you want an answer to this question, I suggest
> you think about what I typed above, in my generous attempt to help you
> self-educate.
I did think about what you typed above whcih is why I'd like you to back up
your assertion.
> >>>If you can't point the finger at those
> >>>groups, why are you posting your tinfoil-hatted bollocks here?
> >>
> >>'Tinfoil hat' could function as metaphor for what in-joke-artists wrap
> >>themselves in.
> >
> >Hmm, no. The metaphor's already taken.
>
> I refer you to my last-typed sentence above. I walked off with an
> in-crowd's metaphor and changed its meaning - oh dear! Will I get my
> bottom smacked?
No, it's just that your version of the metaphor is subservient to the much
wider one. For example, you could "walk off "with the metaphor "choking the
chicken" and change its meaning to playing video games, but don't be
surpised if people look strangely at you when you tell them you were up all
night choking your chicken with your roommate.
>
> >> 'Defensive' against...well maybe against something other
> >>than 'dialogues between the major viewpoints'?
> >
> >I'm kidding you, dude. Lighten up. In the absence of any other
> >evidence, you're just wildly speculating.
>
> It may have been caused deliberately.
True.It may also have been cause by pink killer penguins.
> (Which doesn't mean it was; it just may have been). If it was in Russia
everyone would know that.
Britain is somewhat different from e.g. Communist era Russia because it's a
small place and there are few restrictions on travel or communications.
Notice how quickly the police got it in the neck when they went crazy and
emptied a magazine into that poor Brazilian fucker? They let a few
eyewitness statements (which they knew to be untrue but showed them in a
better light) reach the media without correcting them and it caused a
shitstorm within a week or so. And they weren't even puttin gforward a bent
"official version"! This means most people are perhaps a little less
suspicious of the official story because they know it is more likely to be
true because 2) you don't get 20 years in the frozen wastes mining salt if
you do a little fact checking yourself.
>
> >I'm as willing to listen to
> >conspiracy theories as anyone, but there must be some juicy evidence.
>
> Don't you need 'evidence' for 'whoopsadaisyist' 'theories' then?
It's called Occam's Razor - Briefly - don't make the explanation any more
complex than is needed. Fuel depots are full of stuff that burns (duh..) ,
they blow up *fairly* regularly. In the absence of any evidence to the
contrary (and the absence of any reason to risk killing yourself by blowing
the thing up) , I think it's fair to assume it was non-deliberate until
proven otherwise.
>
> --
> banana "The thing I hate about you, Rowntree, is the way you
> give Coca-Cola to your scum, and your best teddy-bear to
> Oxfam, and expect us to lick your frigid fingers for the
> rest of your frigid life." (Mick Travis, 'If...', 1968)
Hmm, you're going to be a sulky teenager all your life are you?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
