turkish14 Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 The main problem with dear Adolf is he wanted to do too much too soon. His undoing was his impatience. HIstory is written by the winners so he will never be looked upon favourably. Was he completely wrong though? Had he finished what he had started then my half Jewish wife would not be here today, sometimes only wish he had got it right! Damn you adolf
Zingari Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 The main problem with dear Adolf is he wanted to do too much too soon. His undoing was his impatience. HIstory is written by the winners so he will never be looked upon favourably. Was he completely wrong though? Yes !!! He wanted to take over the whole of Europe and centralise power into the hands of unelected faceless bureaucrats and ………..err hang on a minute !!
Leicester Piggott Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 davieG - man up and name names! Afterall, a vague threat is no threat at all...
FurtiveFox Posted 8 February 2013 Author Posted 8 February 2013 Yes !!! He wanted to take over the whole of Europe and centralise power into the hands of unelected faceless bureaucrats and ………..err hang on a minute !! Had he lived he would be delighted at how Blighty has turned out. As I say though no patience.
turkish14 Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Turkish, what would you class as 'disabled'? Would a woman with no arms pass your test? Hmmm tough one, disabled for me is someone suffering with quadriplegia. Anyone else is ok to spawn children. Most favourable would be those suffering some some neurological condition.
Mark 'expert' Lawrenson Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Great topic, I have read something very similar regarding the human race gradually being dumbed down before, those people of lower inteligence having more kids because of the nature of the benefit system, then those kids more than likely go on to do the same themselves, while more inteligent people have the difficult choice of whether they can afford children because they work. There are 14 15 16 year old girls getting pregnant who will probably never do a days work in their lives, stuck in the system of living from one benefit day to the next, the state of course wil look after them, plop another kid out get some more money, the father nowhere to be found, its too easy for them. Its not the childs fault so benefit must be paid to these families, so something must be done to stop girls getting pregnant at such a young age in the first place, there are contraceptives that can be used or fitted which would stop pregnancies and used until the girls are mature enough and have had some experience of work and life, and contributed to our society, who are able to make a mature decsion when the time comes to start a family.
Leicester Piggott Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 They can do those contraceptive implants to prevent pregnancy long(ish) term can't they? ie 6 months/1 year?
Guest Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Only got through the first page. Full of newbie second accounters by the looks of things. Is there anything more pathetic than setting up a second account on an internet board? The idea of population control through birth management is not really a stupid idea, the problem is putting it into practice and the holier than thou sorts who think it is ridiculous and don't see how their actions contradict what they say.
Finnegan Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 At Ken's age it's hard enough logging in to one account let alone duplicates. These newfangled computers. And Sun readers are the new Daily Mail readers.
Leicester Piggott Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Only got through the first page. Full of newbie second accounters by the looks of things. Is there anything more pathetic than setting up a second account on an internet board? The idea of population control through birth management is not really a stupid idea, the problem is putting it into practice and the holier than thou sorts who think it is ridiculous and don't see how their actions contradict what they say. Wow, two barbs in one post!
Guest Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 And Sun readers are the new Daily Mail readers. Having listened to BBC Radio 4 over the last few decades I was under the impression that most children left school unable to read and the few that could had the intelligence to find any news located in a paper, online for free. Why does anyone read the Daily Mail or the Sun?
Guest Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Wow, two barbs in one post! Ah! one of the "new" posters who immediately start posting in tens of threads. It is as though it's a second account but the poster doesn't want to "tarnish" their reputation! So what other name do you post under on this board?
Webbo Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Ah! one of the "new" posters who immediately start posting in tens of threads. It is as though it's a second account but the poster doesn't want to "tarnish" their reputation! So what other name do you post under on this board? It's not hard to work out. I don't know who other newbies are though.
Leicester Piggott Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 I've lapsed really by entering in to gen chat. I'm off back to the betting thread.
Guest Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 It's not hard to work out. I don't know who other newbies are though. That's normally the case for all these second pseudos. I only read selective threads though and rarely register the poster.
Finnegan Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Having listened to BBC Radio 4 over the last few decades I was under the impression that most children left school unable to read and the few that could had the intelligence to find any news located in a paper, online for free. Why does anyone read the Daily Mail or the Sun? Because reading the news isn't important, having something to look at in your white van over lunch is.
Guest BlueBrett Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Having listened to BBC Radio 4 over the last few decades I was under the impression that most children left school unable to read and the few that could had the intelligence to find any news located in a paper, online for free. Why does anyone read the Daily Mail or the Sun? Listening to a quasi-elitist, complacent station that devotes most of it's time preening the egos of 'expert opinion' merchants as they discuss 'academic' subjects in a cursory and middle-aged manner can unsurprisingly be misleading.
MooseBreath Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 The troll is talking about people being sheeple in the other thread. Too adolescent for shrapnel, I'm thinking. I would suspect our resident chemist and all things scientific superhero the paedo general but he is engaged in a full blown argument with said troll so it surely can't be him, unless he is very commited
Guest Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 [/size] Listening to a quasi-elitist, complacent station that devotes most of it's time preening the egos of 'expert opinion' merchants as they discuss 'academic' subjects in a cursory and middle-aged manner can unsurprisingly be misleading.
Guest Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Because reading the news isn't important, having something to look at in your white van over lunch is. For someone I enjoy disagreeing with as much as possible we do see the world in a very similar way on far too many subjects.
Webbo Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 I may be way off here but there was a Nazi who claimed to be a professor at some university who used to troll here every couple of years until he was banned. I've got a feeling it might be him.
MooseBreath Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 For someone I enjoy disagreeing with as much as possible we do see the world in a very similar way on far too many subjects. Subjects like hiding your fear of white van men by acting as if you are superior to them on foxestalk?
Finnegan Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 I may be way off here but there was a Nazi who claimed to be a professor at some university who used to troll here every couple of years until he was banned. I've got a feeling it might be him. Chandler? For someone I enjoy disagreeing with as much as possible we do see the world in a very similar way on far too many subjects. You appreciate I've got my tongue firmly in my cheek half the time, right?
Guest Posted 8 February 2013 Posted 8 February 2013 Chandler? You appreciate I've got my tongue firmly in my cheek half the time, right? Whoevers cheek you've got your tongue pressed firmly into is of no concern of mine. it may affect how Moosey relates to you though.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.