 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / December 2007I thought there were only nice people to the north
Who would have thought it. http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/12/09/canada.murder.trial.ap/index.html > Who would have thought it. http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/12/09/canada.murder.trial.ap/index.htmlClearly a false report of events that never happened. There's no need forpersonal defense in Canada, none at all, just ask John.I suspect that all the female victims are really consorting with criminal USgun nuts. The body parts eaten by the pigs are surely fakes.Lee >> Who would have thought it. > http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/12/09/canada.murder.trial.ap/index.htmlClearly a false report of events that never happened. There's no need forpersonal defense in Canada, none at all, just ask John.I suspect that all the female victims are really consorting with criminal USgun nuts. The body parts eaten by the pigs are surely fakes.Lee There's another diference between you gun zealots and civilized folks. Your zeal to defend the cause outweighs any sympathy for the victims and the survivors. It's the kind of thing that makes civilized folks really want to get right on side with y'all. At least you're staying mum on the occurences on your side of the border. JF > >> Who would have thought it. http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/12/09/canada.murder.trial.ap/index.htmlClearly a false report of events that never happened. There's no need forpersonal defense in Canada, none at all, just ask John.I suspect that all the female victims are really consorting with criminal USgun nuts. The body parts eaten by the pigs are surely fakes.Lee > There's another diference between you gun zealots and civilized folks. > Your zeal to defend the cause outweighs any sympathy for the victims > and the survivors. It's the kind of thing that makes civilized folks > really want to get right on side with y'all. Uhmm...John...it's BECAUSE we have sympathy for the victims and survivors of violent crime....well....crime in general, that we want 'em to be able to defend themselves. > At least you're staying mum on the occurences on your side of the > border. We know that there's crime here, crime that occurs when there aren't any police around to apprehend the crook. So who's responsible for insuring your safety? That would be you. Dennis > There's another diference between you gun zealots and civilized folks. > Your zeal to defend the cause outweighs any sympathy for the victims > and the survivors. It's the kind of thing that makes civilized folks > really want to get right on side with y'all. What victims and survivors. It couldn't happen there. Remember? > We know that there's crime here, crime that occurs when there aren't any > police around to apprehend the crook. Here, when there's no copy around, we're allowed to defend ourselves. There, well, her piggy piggy. Lee >> Who would have thought it. > http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/12/09/canada.murder.trial.ap/index.htmlClearly a false report of events that never happened. There's no need forpersonal defense in Canada, none at all, just ask John.I suspect that all the female victims are really consorting with criminal USgun nuts. The body parts eaten by the pigs are surely fakes.Lee "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes -- would you like to see them owning guns? I thought you & the other Yes-men wanted only responsible gun ownership? Even if a junkie had a gun, would she be able to use it efficiently? I somehow doubt it. Anyway, I find it very odd that some of you Merkans take pleasure in some really terrible tragedies here. That's rather sad. These women were mothers and daughters, and they are missed by their families. > Even if a junkie had a gun, would she be able to use it efficiently? I > somehow doubt it. Of course they'd use it efficiently, either to trade for drugs or to mug people to buy drugs or to steal drugs. Guns have many uses. >> Even if a junkie had a gun, would she be able to use it efficiently? I >> somehow doubt it. > >Of course they'd use it efficiently, either to trade for drugs or to >mug people to buy drugs or to steal drugs. Guns have many uses. True. I suppose the most important thing is that they also have the right to defend themselves, even if they use it most often for theft. > >> Even if a junkie had a gun, would she be able to use it efficiently? I > >> somehow doubt it. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > True. I suppose the most important thing is that they also have the > right to defend themselves, even if they use it most often for theft. Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed security guards? > Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed security > guards? Interesting question. Obviously I don't know the answer as stated. Here, the answer is yes. Many churches down here, and even more synagogues, hire police to help with both pedestrian and vehicular traffic control. For the visibly Jewish people in my area, it seems to be mostly pedestrians. Apparently their beliefs preclude driving to their religious services. The uniformed police providing the service are armed. Further, I guarantee that there are plain clothes policemen that are armed while attending. Is it really different there? Lee. >> Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed >> security guards? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > are armed. Further, I guarantee that there are plain clothes policemen > that are armed while attending. Why? >>> Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed >>> security guards? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> are armed. Further, I guarantee that there are plain clothes policemen >> that are armed while attending. > Why? Why there are plain clothes policemen in church? Sometimes because it's departmental policy. Sometimes, it's because they consider themselves to be policemen 24/7. Sometimes it's probably because both Christian and Jewish places of worship have been specifically identified as terrorist targets. Lee >> Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed security >> guards? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Lee. Yeah, it certainly is. I've never heard of that. You folks really do live in an armed camp. >>> Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed >>> security [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Yeah, it certainly is. I've never heard of that. The fact that you have not heard of it does not mean it's not happening. Don't be too vocal about the fact that your places of worship are not secure. You do know that both Christian and Jewish places of worship have, on numerous occasions, mentioned as targets of terrorist groups, right? > You folks really do live in an armed camp. An armed camp looks pretty much like an unarmed one until the stuff hits the fan. That's when you find out what's really there. Greg's survived several trips in the presence of people that were armed from the time he met them until the time he left for home. As I understand it, he may have asked Grumman if he was armed. He never asked me and, as a result, has no idea if or when I was armed or not. Lee > An armed camp looks pretty much like an unarmed one until the stuff hits the > fan. That's when you find out what's really there. Greg's survived several > trips in the presence of people that were armed from the time he met them > until the time he left for home. As I understand it, he may have asked > Grumman if he was armed. He never asked me and, as a result, has no idea if > or when I was armed or not. I successfully disarmed Grumman, at least one of his arms. That's better than Curtis's record as he never got a single one of mine. I can't remember whether I disarmed Popeye or not. I think he slipped me a roofie. As for you, I've seen you in Speedos, a traumatic experience to be sure so whether I "survived" or not is debatable. I'm mentally scarred. But you were armed then, I really don't want to know where you were hiding it. >>>> Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed >>>> security [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >secure. You do know that both Christian and Jewish places of worship have, >on numerous occasions, mentioned as targets of terrorist groups, right? Get real. I've never heard, read or seen anything about churches here being "attacked" or "not secure." What bizarre language. You would be such an alien here with your bizarre notions, and people would laugh you right back across the border. >> You folks really do live in an armed camp. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Grumman if he was armed. He never asked me and, as a result, has no idea if >or when I was armed or not. Well, you seem to feel the need to be armed all the time. Must be something like Beirut or Iraq, I guess. Damn boogeymen everwhere. > Get real. I've never heard, read or seen anything about churches here > being "attacked" or "not secure." What bizarre language. You would > be such an alien here with your bizarre notions, and people would > laugh you right back across the border. As you would be here. Difference is we dont try to tell you how to live there. Your "superiority" is an illusion that you obviously need to fabricate. > Get real. I've never heard, read or seen anything about churches here > being "attacked" or "not secure." Perhaps you should look a bit further than the limited resources that are leading you so far astray. > Well, you seem to feel the need to be armed all the time. You've obviously not been paying any attention to what's been said at all. You won't find those words said by me either. Just so you'll know what I have said, I firmly believe in the right to keep and bear arms and that the more people that are known to have that right, the more often criminals are likely to consider the risk to their own lives before committing a crime. > I guess. Damn boogeymen everwhere. How many Canadians was it that were fed to the hogs? Lee > How many Canadians was it that were fed to the hogs? Two important numbers; zero and more than zero. >> How many Canadians was it that were fed to the hogs? > > Two important numbers; zero and more than zero. Are you allowing for fractions? > > Get real. I've never heard, read or seen anything about churches here > > being "attacked" or "not secure." [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > How many Canadians was it that were fed to the hogs? http://www.denverpost.com/popular/ci_7705242 >> > Get real. I've never heard, read or seen anything about churches here >> > being "attacked" or "not secure." [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >http://www.denverpost.com/popular/ci_7705242 49 but hey they were just hookers, no real loss I guess ? > >> How many Canadians was it that were fed to the hogs? > >http://www.denverpost.com/popular/ci_7705242 > 49 but hey they were just hookers, no real loss I guess ? Hookers? Particularly heinous serial murderers? In Canada? No f.cking way. >> >> How many Canadians was it that were fed to the hogs? > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >No f.cking way. Yea, it's probably just rhetoric stired up by the French to justify their next attempt to take over. > > >> Even if a junkie had a gun, would she be able to use it efficiently? I > > >> somehow doubt it. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Do you know of any churches up here in Canuk land that have armed security > guards? I know a minister who hunts and fishes. Does that count? >> > >> Even if a junkie had a gun, would she be able to use it efficiently? >> > >> I [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I know a minister who hunts and fishes. Does that count? but he only needs to catch only one to feed the whole congregation >>> > >> Even if a junkie had a gun, would she be able to use it efficiently? >>> > >> I [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >but he only needs to catch only one to feed the whole congregation I think that only works with fish, and mebbe elephants. JF >>>> > >On Dec 10, 10:07 pm, Mike from Ottawa <mev at tikaCANOE dot ca> >>>> > >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >> > I think that only works with fish, and mebbe elephants. I think you will find that is "loaves" The story about the "elepphants and the fishes " doesn't come to mind and I won the Divinity prize at school when I was 10. That was a long time ago so they may have revised the story in a new edition. >>>>> > >On Dec 10, 10:07 pm, Mike from Ottawa <mev at tikaCANOE dot ca> >>>>> > >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >when I was 10. That was a long time ago so they may have revised the story >in a new edition. You say loaves, I say elephants. It's that crazy Ozzie accent of yours. JF >>>>>> > >On Dec 10, 10:07 pm, Mike from Ottawa <mev at tikaCANOE dot ca> >>>>>> > >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > You say loaves, I say elephants. It's that crazy Ozzie accent of > yours. I don't have an accent you people do. I speak "proper" > JF >>>>>>> > >On Dec 10, 10:07 pm, Mike from Ottawa <mev at tikaCANOE dot ca> >>>>>>> > >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > >I don't have an accent you people do. I speak "proper" Then I guess it's just me that makes elephants sound like loaves, eh Cobber? JF >>>>>>>> > >On Dec 10, 10:07 pm, Mike from Ottawa <mev at tikaCANOE dot ca> >>>>>>>> > >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > Then I guess it's just me that makes elephants sound like loaves, eh > Cobber? I'll have a think about that as I throw another shrimp on the barbie and crack a few tubes of fosters from the esky and recite out oath iof allegience. "Under the Southern Cross I stand a can of fosters in my hand, a symbol of my native land. Australia you bloody beauty" Actually thinking about that we don't have shrimps ( well only in adds for the septics) we have prawns and nobody in their right mind drinks fosters > Actually thinking about that we don't have shrimps ( well only in adds for > the septics) we have prawns and nobody in their right mind drinks fosters I prefer Toohey's... Unfortunately, it is not easy to find around here in the proper container (i.e. the 25-oz can)... Then again, once they quit using steel cans, it's just not the same... I mean, awh 'ell, *anyone* can crush an *aluminum* can on their head... The Foster's Bitter is not too bad though... Better than any of the mass produced beers here in the States... Obviously, 'roo piss tastes better than horse piss... >> Actually thinking about that we don't have shrimps ( well only in adds >> for >> the septics) we have prawns and nobody in their right mind drinks fosters > > I prefer Toohey's... nearly but not quite as bad, actually I always thought of you as a KB man >Unfortunately, it is not easy to find around here in > the proper container (i.e. the 25-oz can)... Then again, once they quit > using steel cans, it's just not the same... I mean, awh 'ell, *anyone* can > crush an *aluminum* can on their head... The Foster's Bitter is not too > bad though... Better than any of the mass produced beers here in the > States... Obviously, 'roo piss tastes better than horse piss... not sure why anybody in the States would drink "mass produced beer" when you have so many boutique breweries producing such great "style" beers. Notice that most Aussies don't put their hands over their hearts when reciting our Oath? Its because you tend to poor the beer down your chest > nearly but not quite as bad, actually I always thought of you as a KB man That one is a bit difficult to find around here... I've probably tried it over the years, but it's been too long ago, so I don't remember much about it... I'll have to make an effort to see if I can find it around here... > not sure why anybody in the States would drink "mass produced beer" when you > have so many boutique breweries producing such great "style" beers. Depends upon the definition of "mass produced"... One of my more favorite local brews is one I discovered over in New Orleans a couple of years ago -- Abita TurboDog... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abita_Brewing_Company 75,000 barrels of beer produced per year among all their various brews, so it's not exactly at the level of Budweiser which has sales of over 100 *million* barrels per year... >> nearly but not quite as bad, actually I always thought of you as a KB man > > That one is a bit difficult to find around here... I've probably tried it > over the years, but it's been too long ago, so I don't remember much about > it... I'll have to make an effort to see if I can find it around here... don't bother >> not sure why anybody in the States would drink "mass produced beer" when >> you have so many boutique breweries producing such great "style" beers. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > it's not exactly at the level of Budweiser which has sales of over 100 > *million* barrels per year... I'll give it ago next time I'm over, can't say I've seen it around here > don't bother Is it not any good? > I'll give it ago next time I'm over, can't say I've seen it around here It's somewhat difficult to find... I can find it at some stores here in the Houston area, but not as many as over in the New Orleans area... Greg and I drank quite a few of them when he was visiting New Orleans, so maybe he'll pipe in on his impression of it... > > don't bother > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > and I drank quite a few of them when he was visiting New Orleans, so maybe > he'll pipe in on his impression of it... I saw turbodog here in Midland a few weeks ago. I don't recall where it was and I thought of you when I saw it. I don't drink beer, so I didn't get one. On Dec 11, 11:54 pm, Grumman-581 <grumman581-rec-sc...@spambob.net> wrote: > > I'll give it ago next time I'm over, can't say I've seen it around here > > It's somewhat difficult to find... I can find it at some stores here in > the Houston area, but not as many as over in the New Orleans area... Greg > and I drank quite a few of them when he was visiting New Orleans, so maybe > he'll pipe in on his impression of it... Personally, while I thought it highly drinkable, I'm not sure it merits your level of obsession about it. But then I've always been a big supporter of diversity and don't let myself get tied down to a single brand or style. In other words, I'll happily drink anything. > Personally, while I thought it highly drinkable, I'm not sure it merits > your level of obsession about it. But then I've always been a big > supporter of diversity and don't let myself get tied down to a single > brand or style. In other words, I'll happily drink anything. I guess I'm just surprised to find an American beer that is truly dark and on the level with Guinness... The fact that it came from Louisiana even made it more remarkable considering the tint of hydrogen sulfide that is in many water wells in the region... Apparently Abita is one of the few springs around there that does not have the slight tint of H2S in their water... I ran my drinking water through a filter when I lived over there and it completely removed the smell... Apparently, when the water goes through the water heater, it also removes the H2S smell from it since I don't remember it being noticeable when taking a shower... I remember with Michelob tried to do a dark beer at one time... It was basically their regular beer with some carmel color added to it... <bleeeccchhhh> >I'll have a think about that as I throw another shrimp on the barbie and >crack a few tubes of fosters from the esky and recite out oath iof [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Actually thinking about that we don't have shrimps ( well only in adds for >the septics) we have prawns and nobody in their right mind drinks fosters Jeez. You sound like a cheesy travel ad for Qantas. JF >>I'll have a think about that as I throw another shrimp on the barbie and >>crack a few tubes of fosters from the esky and recite out oath iof [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Jeez. You sound like a cheesy travel ad for Qantas. Blood oath mate ( cracks a tinny ), me and the sheila always travel on the flying kangaroo when we go home to the motherland, only way you can get a decent supply of Fosters. sh.t I'm starting to sound like Bazza McKenzies >>>I'll have a think about that as I throw another shrimp on the barbie and >>>crack a few tubes of fosters from the esky and recite out oath iof [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >sh.t I'm starting to sound like Bazza McKenzies Please don't try to tell us yer nickname is Crocodile, and if you start singing about jumbucks I'll puke. JF >>>>I'll have a think about that as I throw another shrimp on the barbie and >>>>crack a few tubes of fosters from the esky and recite out oath iof [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Please don't try to tell us yer nickname is Crocodile, and if you > start singing about jumbucks I'll puke. I'll puke is much closer to what people call me. dechucka > JF > On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:26:41 +1100, "dechucka" > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Jeez. You sound like a cheesy travel ad for Qantas. From his last paragraph I was thinking more along the lines of the "I am Canadian" Molson ads. >> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:26:41 +1100, "dechucka" >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >From his last paragraph I was thinking more along the lines of the "I >am Canadian" Molson ads. 'struth. " I am a flamin' okker, and I come from a Land Down Under." BTW, Molson sucks. As does Labatts. > BTW, Molson sucks. As does Labatts. Caribou piss... http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Beer >> BTW, Molson sucks. As does Labatts. > >Caribou piss... > >http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Beer That's some pretty nasty anti-Canadian stuff on that site -- at least they gave Merkan beer a roughly equal bashing. http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/American_beer BTW, you simply cannot play hockey while plastered. I tried once. I had taken a girl out & ordered a pitcher of beer. She didn't want much, so I drank most of it (waste is ungodly). I dropped her off at a subway stop and went and played hockey. Whle warming up, I ran into a goal post. I've never since had a drink before a game. Afterwards is a different story... > That's some pretty nasty anti-Canadian stuff on that site -- at least > they gave Merkan beer a roughly equal bashing. > http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/American_beer Total BS... American beer has different origins... Budweiser is horse piss (specifically Clydesdale's)... Coors is Rocky Mountain sheep piss... Lone Star is longhorn (cattle) piss... Dixie beer is gator piss... Miller is dog piss -- especially the "Red Dog" brand... > BTW, you simply cannot play hockey while plastered. I tried once. > > I had taken a girl out & ordered a pitcher of beer. She didn't want > much, so I drank most of it (waste is ungodly). I dropped her off at > a subway stop and went and played hockey. Whle warming up, I ran into > a goal post. So, even though you were drunk, she wouldn't take advantage of you? The only advantage that I see in living up north is that your beer doesn't get warm if you are too slow of a drinker... Not that I've ever had that problem even in the heat of Texas... I guess up there you have to worry about your beer freezing if you drink too slow... >> That's some pretty nasty anti-Canadian stuff on that site -- at least >> they gave Merkan beer a roughly equal bashing. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >piss... Lone Star is longhorn (cattle) piss... Dixie beer is gator >piss... Miller is dog piss -- especially the "Red Dog" brand... Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the mass-produced piss. Same story here. I really appreciate the Bavarian Purity Law of 1516, although you still need to brew it carefully. >> BTW, you simply cannot play hockey while plastered. I tried once. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >So, even though you were drunk, she wouldn't take advantage of you? I wasn't drunk, and really didn't feel the effects. Too many Toronto girls were out for a good time, not to give you a good time. >The only advantage that I see in living up north is that your beer >doesn't get warm if you are too slow of a drinker... Not that I've ever >had that problem even in the heat of Texas... I guess up there you have >to worry about your beer freezing if you drink too slow... No, can't recall that ever being an issue. We do enjoy our cold beer. I lived 6 months in Oz, and, regardless of the heat, every pub had frosty-cold beer. Damn civilised, that. Again, too many of them were mass-produced, but there's nothing like a really cold beer on a hot day. > Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the > mass-produced piss. Same story here. So, what is the best of the Canadian beers? Any good dark ales up there? > I really appreciate the Bavarian Purity Law of 1516 Wasn't that what started WW-II? > We do enjoy our cold beer. I lived 6 months in Oz, and, regardless of > the heat, every pub had frosty-cold beer. Damn civilised, that. Again, > too many of them were mass-produced, but there's nothing like a really > cold beer on a hot day. Yep, that's one thing that I liked about the Aussies... They knew what temperature to keep their beer at... The Brits and their warm beer just is *wrong*... I like a Guinness, but I want it *cold*... >> Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the >> mass-produced piss. Same story here. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > temperature to keep their beer at... The Brits and their warm beer just is > *wrong*... I like a Guinness, but I want it *cold*... If beer is to cold you can't taste it which is why fosters etc should be served icy cold. In general with beers the darker and heavier it is the warmer it should be served. The coldness in a pilsner style accentuates the crisp hops taste while serving darker beers slightly warmer accentuates the volatile esters which give those beers their flavours. Here are some suggested serving temperatures http://www.tastebeer.com.au/beer/133 I must admit that these are a bit warm for me I would knock of 2 to 3 degrees for the lighter beers and 5-6 degrees for the darker beers when I serve my home brew or boutique beers ( the serving temp for the dark ales IMHO is extremely high ) > If beer is to cold you can't taste it which is why fosters etc should be > served icy cold. In general with beers the darker and heavier it is the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > degrees for the darker beers when I serve my home brew or boutique beers ( > the serving temp for the dark ales IMHO is extremely high ) I know the theory / reasoning behind it, but living in a warm climate, I want *all* my beers cold... If figure there are two beer temperatures -- ice just starting to form and ice clogging up the bottle opening... I prefer the former... >> If beer is to cold you can't taste it which is why fosters etc should be >> served icy cold. In general with beers the darker and heavier it is the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > ice just starting to form and ice clogging up the bottle opening... I > prefer the former... Fair enough, 36/38 degrees outside and following a day of spraying or fencing or whatever I enjoy a couple of icy cold ones probably a Melbourne Bitter. However sitting down at a BBQ or in front of an open fire or watching the rugby or cricket on the TV I prefer a more "sophisticated" brew (sh.t that sounds snobby) and with those I prefer them served a bit warmer so I can taste their characteristics. I don't give a monkeys how people drink there beer or what they drink, I drink it my way others do it theirs. I am not the beer police I wouldn't dare tell other people what to do just suggest they may like to try something different or maybe point out the benefits and advantages of doing it a different way >> Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the >> mass-produced piss. Same story here. > >So, what is the best of the Canadian beers? Any good dark ales up there? You can find porters, Upper Canada makes a dark ale, and Sleeman's, too. I tend to drink the darker ones during the winter. Each region has its own micro-breweries. At pubs, I often go for a Kilkenny, Boddington's or Smithwick's. Sleeman's is making a good IPA right now, with more of a punch than Keith's. >> I really appreciate the Bavarian Purity Law of 1516 > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >temperature to keep their beer at... The Brits and their warm beer just is >*wrong*... I like a Guinness, but I want it *cold*... I've had Guinness in Ireland -- those sly ones keep the best stuff at home. I tried it again in England, Wales & Scotland, but it just didn't taste the same. Ditto for this continent. Now that I've been spoiled, I usually can't face a Guinness here. >>> Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the >>> mass-produced piss. Same story here. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > didn't taste the same. Ditto for this continent. Now that I've been > spoiled, I usually can't face a Guinness here. Guiness outside Ireland is brewed differently to match the local tastes. Here in Aus it is a lot more bitter than the Irish brewed product >>> Yeah, but I hear you've got some good ones, too. Just not the >>> mass-produced piss. Same story here. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >didn't taste the same. Ditto for this continent. Now that I've been >spoiled, I usually can't face a Guinness here. The flavour is like licking stainless steel. JF <snip> >>I've had Guinness in Ireland -- those sly ones keep the best stuff at >>home. I tried it again in England, Wales & Scotland, but it just >>didn't taste the same. Ditto for this continent. Now that I've been >>spoiled, I usually can't face a Guinness here. > >The flavour is like licking stainless steel. No way. You've got to take a trip to Eire and try their Guinness. Extraordinary. >>> BTW, Molson sucks. As does Labatts. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >a subway stop and went and played hockey. Whle warming up, I ran into >a goal post. Besides. The boys hate when you puke on the ice. >I've never since had a drink before a game. Afterwards is a different >story... JF > >>>>>>"JOF" <jofrancis@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > Actually thinking about that we don't have shrimps ( well only in adds for > the septics) we have prawns and nobody in their right mind drinks fosters Fosters: Australian for bad beer. > Fosters: Australian for bad beer. Have you tried their Fosters Bitter? > > Fosters: Australian for bad beer. > > Have you tried their Fosters Bitter? So far, I've only ever found one beer that I thought was reasonably tolerable. It's a strawberry pale ale that's brewed in a microbrewery in Alpine, TX. I call it a microbrewery, but nanobrewery might be more accurate. As I understand it, they only have two beers breweing at any given moment and then only 250 gallons of each. It's probably the next step up from cooking the mash on the stove in your home. >Fosters: Australian for bad beer. We were able to buy Swans for a while here. Even it was better. JF >>Fosters: Australian for bad beer. >> > We were able to buy Swans for a while here. Even it was better. nice bird but the beer is Swan. Now owned by Lion Natham and is losing it's regional taste. Seems as the big boys take over the taste starts to become neutral to suit all tastes.Same with West End a not bad Sth Aus beer even XXXX ( called that because Queenslanders can't spell beer) >>>Fosters: Australian for bad beer. >>> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >neutral to suit all tastes.Same with West End a not bad Sth Aus beer even >XXXX ( called that because Queenslanders can't spell beer) I spent most of my time there around Perth, and really got to like Emu Export. Does that still exist? It was 30 years ago (cheerist, I'm aging myself). >>>>Fosters: Australian for bad beer. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Export. Does that still exist? It was 30 years ago (cheerist, I'm > aging myself). not sure will check, last drank it from cans in the NSW beer strike in the early 1980s, my footy club ( rugby) had to import beer from interstate to keep the club going. Many a committee meeting was spent on this vexed issue, f.ck the football some things are more important > "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes -- would you > like to see them owning guns? I thought you & the other Yes-men wanted > only responsible gun ownership? And who said that prostitutes were not responsible? Come on now, it *is* the world's oldest profession, right? Of course, just like there are stores like Saks Fifth Avenue all the way down to the local quickie mart [pun-intended], there are prostitutes of the same variety... As we've always said, "If it flies, floats, or f.cks, it's cheaper to rent than to buy"... > "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . . The right to defense does not stop with the victim. It extends to those that might, if allowed, have protected them too. Nobody suggested arming elementary, middle or high school students so they could protect themselves, but it was suggested that just one responsibly and legally armed teacher might have put a quick stop to the serial killings that occasionally happen in our schools and have happened in schools around the world. In my country, we value the lives of all citizens, even junkies and prostitutes. Apparently they don't count in yours. The point, however, one that you very obviously chose to ignore, is that the basis for promoting a disarmed public, according to John, is that there is no need for personal defense. He doesn't live in a world where the threat of death or serious injury is a problem. He's clearly and demonstrably wrong. > Anyway, I find it very odd that some of you Merkans take pleasure in > some really terrible tragedies here. No pleasure at all. We Mercans take no pleasure in tragedies anywhere. We warned you that the problem was escalating. We warned you that it would only get worse. We warned you that your blind insistance that there is no risk was not right and that, sooner or later, it would catch up with you. We advised you then, that, when the stuff hit the fan, it would be your fault for ignoring all the warnings, all the evidence and all the history that proves that only those that are willing and prepared to defend their lives, property and rights, could expect to retain them. Don't blame us when we point out that we were right and you were wrong. > These women were mothers and daughters, and they are missed by their > families. Yes they were. The next ones, and the next ones will be too. It's about time you guys got your heads out of the sand and recognized what we've been saying from the start. You are at risk. Your families, mothers, grandmothers, fathers, grandfathers, children, junkies and prostitutes or businessmen and housewives are all at risk. Not only can the police not protect you, it's not even their job to protect you. It's each citizen's job to protect themselves, their way of life, and those around them. It's a really good idea to ensure you retain the means to do so when it's your turn to do your part. It's even more important to quit trying to deny my right to do the same and that's what John has been doing for years.. Lee > > "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . . > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Lee So 'splain this one Lucy. I am continually told that no one is trying to force guns on us non-gun types throats, but how else is one to interpret this latest post of yours. Certainly it's couched in concern for my safety, but isn't it a sales pitch for more guns? JF > So 'splain this one Lucy. I am continually told that no one is trying > to force guns on us non-gun types throats, but how else is one to > interpret this latest post of yours. Certainly it's couched in concern > for my safety, but isn't it a sales pitch for more guns? > > JF I would say that it is a sales pitch for choice.  Signature“TANSTAAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American. ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 >> So 'splain this one Lucy. I am continually told that no one is trying >> to force guns on us non-gun types throats, but how else is one to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >I would say that it is a sales pitch for choice. Choose guns or die? JF On Dec 11, 9:20 am, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> wrote: > > So 'splain this one Lucy. I am continually told that no one is trying > > to force guns on us non-gun types throats, but how else is one to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I would say that it is a sales pitch for choice. But you, Diapered and Constipated, do not have a brain. > On Dec 11, 9:20 am, dazed and confuzzed <dedmann@comcast_remove.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > But you, Diapered and Constipated, do not have a brain. and you, fishie, have proven that yours does not work. Signature“TANSTAAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American. ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 > > > "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . . > > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > JF I don't presume to speak for Lee, but my interpretation is that he wants you to have the opportunity to carry firearms, not the directive to. > > > > "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . . > [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > > - Show quoted Of course. I guess the tone of the writing just gives an illusion of coercion. JF > > > > "Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . . > [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] > I don't presume to speak for Lee, but my interpretation is that he wants you > to have the opportunity to carry firearms, not the directive to. If, as some here claim, JOF has no right to tell Americans what to do, what gives Lee or any other American the right to tell Canadians what they should do? If John's government, which is democratically elected, as far as I know, has decided to restrict his opportunity to carry firearms, and John is okay with that, what business is it of Lee's, a resident of Florida who pays no taxes in Canada and has no say and no vote there? gc >>>>>"Personal defence?" The victims were junkies and prostitutes . . . >> [quoted text clipped - 119 lines] > > gc Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included? Signature“TANSTAAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American. ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 George Cathcart wrote: >> If, as some here claim, JOF has no right to tell Americans what to do, >> what gives Lee or any other American the right to tell Canadians what [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> resident of Florida who pays no taxes in Canada and has no say and no >> vote there? For someone that specifically asked to be put in my blocked list, you certainly have a lot to say to me. First, I've never told Canadians what to do in their own country. What I have done is warned Canadian citizens, you know, our allies and sometime friends, that the path they are on is high risk. I've tried to point out, again and again, that it's been tried repeatedly and has never worked out anywhere. I've warned that it's not working anywhere right now and that the increasing instances of violent crime in Canada are likely to be at least partly because the country is systematically disarming it's citizens and that it will continue to get worst as the country continues down that road. If that's what your citizens want, it's fine with me. Just make sure I don't ever seen you, or John blaming us again for the rising violent crime rate in your country. Lee > George Cathcart wrote: > >> If, as some here claim, JOF has no right to tell Americans what to do, [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Lee First, for someone who claimed to have put me on his killfile, you certainly seem interested in what I say. Second, you cleverly snipped out the post I was responding to, which was not from you but from Chris Guynn, which is why I spoke of you in the third person (i.e., "Lee" instead of "you."). Here's what Chris said: > I don't presume to speak for Lee, but my interpretation is that he wants you > to have the opportunity to carry firearms, not the directive to. Chris was speaking to John (the "you" in his sentence). Since you didn't deny that Chris's interpretation was accurate, my question remains, why is it okay for you to advise Canadians about their laws and politics, but John has no right to offer his advice to Americans? At least John has visited the U.S., many times, and I'd be willing to bet John knows more about the U.S. than you know about Canada. This has nothing to do with which of you, if either, is right. It's all about a very uneven playing field. And, as we've discussed before, you don't own the playing field. gc >Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included? Your lack of comprehension is world class. Where and when have I ever advocated disarming everyone. I gotta see a cite on that. Produce it or admit you just lied for effect. JF > >Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included? > > Your lack of comprehension is world class. Where and when have I ever > advocated disarming everyone. I gotta see a cite on that. Produce it > or admit you just lied for effect. Before you start demanding references from folks, don;t you think it'd be a good idea if you provided the ones you've been asked for, but ignored? Dennis On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:39:27 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: >> >Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Before you start demanding references from folks, don;t you think it'd be a >good idea if you provided the ones you've been asked for, but ignored? Your evasion speaks volumes. Did you lie deliberately or was it innocent misrepresentation? JF > On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:39:27 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" > <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Your evasion speaks volumes. Did you lie deliberately or was it > innocent misrepresentation? It's not misrepresentation. I've asked you for cites when you've accused me of something - saying something, misunderstanding, etc, and you've not done so. Don't ask from other that which you're unwilling to provide. Dennis On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: >> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:39:27 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" >> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >so. >Don't ask from other that which you're unwilling to provide. Wow. You're getting really really good at this obfuscation stuff. JF > On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" > <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Wow. You're getting really really good at this obfuscation stuff. All I'm doing is speaking the truth. Think back to how you picked up the nickname "futile" from Popeye. Dennis On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:04:19 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: >> Wow. You're getting really really good at this obfuscation stuff. > >All I'm doing is speaking the truth. >Think back to how you picked up the nickname "futile" from Popeye. And squirming around the rest of the truth in the process. Truth that's used to avoid less comfortable truth is tantamount to a lie. JF > On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:04:19 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" > <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > And squirming around the rest of the truth in the process. Truth > that's used to avoid less comfortable truth is tantamount to a lie. What "rest of the truth" am Isquirming around? I've just commented opn your refusal to provid cites backing what you claim others have posted here. In fact, you said something to the effect that you'd let "others who took this stuff more seriously" do that. :-) Dennis >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" >> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > All I'm doing is speaking the truth. > Think back to how you picked up the nickname "futile" from Popeye. IF IT CAME FROM POPEYE IT MUST BE TRUE, All hail the God of rec.scuba. Hey Scott can Popeye fly like a bumblebee or a humming bird? If so he must be God becayuse according to you the law of physics say they can't > >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" > >> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Scott can Popeye fly like a bumblebee or a humming bird? If so he must be > God becayuse according to you the law of physics say they can't Uhm....dechucka, John got the name "futile" because it was futile to expect hom to honor requests for cites backing what he claimed others have said. The facts stand - he's been asked for, and not provided, cites regarding what he's claimed others have said. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/msg/d0bfd90ebcf1214d http://groups.google.com/group/rec.scuba/msg/49edcabd1b065d91 Dennis >> >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" >> >> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > The facts stand - he's been asked for, and not provided, cites regarding > what he's claimed others have said. I've moved on. Let JOF defend himself . Just love pointing out the schizoid Scott/Puget divers shortcomings (probably threaten to punch me in the nose that is its level of debate). btw to get this thread OT I have dive Puget Sound (some nice shore dives except for the one near that bridge which was in a fast current dirty water) when I was discussing stuff with some of your military drs at a nearby base. Bloody cold though. People in general seemed very paranoid about Canadians iirc > >> >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" > >> >> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > I've moved on. Let JOF defend himself . Just love pointing out the schizoid That was fast. Of course, whne one has facts it does make things pretty clear, doesn't it? <snip> Dennis >> >> >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" >> >> >> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > That was fast. Of course, whne one has facts it does make things pretty > clear, doesn't it? yep so why do you still keep pushing our pov > >> >> >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:45:43 -0600, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" > >> >> >> <nojunkmail@ever.invalid> wrote: <snip> > >> >> >> >> Your evasion speaks volumes. Did you lie deliberately or was it > >> >> >> >> innocent misrepresentation? [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > yep so why do you still keep pushing our pov I thought you'd moved on? No worries. All I did was acknowledge our retreat once the facts were made clear. That's "pushing our POV"? :-) Dennis On Dec 12, 9:39 pm, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkm...@ever.invalid> wrote: > > >Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Dennis No. It would not in this instance. STFU. > On Dec 12, 9:39 pm, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkm...@ever.invalid> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > No. It would not in this instance. STFU. No. Try using a killfile or setitng up ignore rules if you don't care to see my posts. :-) Dennis On Dec 13, 10:32 pm, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkm...@ever.invalid> wrote: > <hierophantf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Who said I don't care to see them ? I like getting a laugh out of what you babble. > On Dec 13, 10:32 pm, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkm...@ever.invalid> > wrote: > > <hierophantf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:872a751e-35e5-44a3-a995-3818751cca1e@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com... > > > On Dec 12, 9:39 pm, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkm...@ever.invalid> > > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Who said I don't care to see them ? I like getting a laugh out of > what you babble. Really, then why did you tell me to STFU? Typically this is an acronym for "Shut The f.ck Up" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STFU Perhaps you meant something different, though I somehow doubt you were talking about the Southern Tenants Farmers Union. Dennis >>Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > JF Look up your own posts. You advocate confiscation of weapons with automatic loading mechanisms, "high rates of fire", That are "too powerful" "scary looking" and confiscation from those who you feel don't need them. What else could I believe? If I am wrong, feel free to correct my interpretation of your ramblings over the years. Make a statement as to what you really mean and believe. Else I will have to continue to infer your beliefs from your statements. Signature“TANSTAAFL” ____________________________________________________________________________ America: Ironically, the safest place to be anti-American. ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 > Look up your own posts. You advocate confiscation of weapons with > automatic loading mechanisms, "high rates of fire", That are "too [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Else I will have to continue to infer your beliefs from your statements. Good luck with that. >>>Because JOF advocates disarming everyone, Us citizens included? >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Else I will have to continue to infer your beliefs from your statements. How many times do I have to say this and have it ignored? I absolutely do believe that certain kinds of weapons have no place in any kind of civilized society other than as weapons of war and perhaps law enforcement. I absolutely believe that certain kinds of people should be restricted from possessing guns of any kind to any reasonably enforceable extent. I have absolutely never said that guns generally should be banned and/or confiscated. Your lawmakers seem to agree with me. This is not to say that several pro-gun folks here haven't [ersisted in attributing these things to me, but that's all you'll find no matter how diligently you search the archives - lies and misrepresentations by the favoured few. It's the classic situation of something being said often enough that it finally starts to ressemble the truth. In short, some of you have lied so many times about this that you're tricked yerselves into believing the lie. How much clearer can I say that? JF > How much clearer can I say that? Doesn't matter. You try and obfuscate the bigoted sh.t you spew like "gunnys" "steel dicks" on and on ad infinitum. If you want or seek the smallest shred of respect, try backing up your bigoted blanket insults with a shred of fact or honesty. Otherwise, you just look like another lying, spineless, f.cking gun grabbing coward. >> How much clearer can I say that? > >Doesn't matter. Exactly my point. JF > >> How much clearer can I say that? > > > >Doesn't matter. > > Exactly my point. Your "point" is that your point changes from day to day, hour to hour, minute to minute, post to post. Depends upon which corner you have painted yourself into. And, you conveniently, like always, snipped the direct accusation/question you haven't the guts or basic honesty to address. >> >> How much clearer can I s |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message