Where did come from my "me" ?

I've discovered strange thing : "me" that I feel and that defines me is in 
fact "me" of the materia of which is complexed my brain. That materia had 
it's "me" even before I was born, but it realises it's "me" just when it 
gained a counsciousness.

So thus all materia has it's "me" even if some of it isn't able to feel it 
or realise it and this is fascinating thing.


 

On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:

> So thus all materia has it's "me" even if some of it isn't able to feel it 
> or realise it and this is fascinating thing.

Look out, Bohus's pencils are talking to him again!

Mine have learned to do it only when I'm not around, or they'll get
sharpened.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

No.

You're not "me", I'm me.

MikeW 

"Mike Wynne" <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> nap�sal

> No.
>
> You're not "me", I'm me.

Everybody feels the same "me".

B 

On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:

> Everybody feels the same "me".

That's illegal in this country!

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 10:37:49 +0200, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:

>
>"Mike Wynne" <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> nap�sal
>
>> No.
>>
>> You're not "me", I'm me.
>
>Everybody feels the same "me".


F'nar

> "Mike Wynne" <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> nap=EDsal
>
> > No.
> >
> > You're not "me", I'm me.
>=20
> Everybody feels the same "me".
>=20
> B

Feel me up, Scotty

> "Mike Wynne" <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> nap=EDsal
>
> > No.
> >
> > You're not "me", I'm me.
>=20
> Everybody feels the same "me".
>=20
> B

Feel me up, Scotty

"zx128k" <zx128k@gmail.com> nap�sal

> > No.
> >
> > You're not "me", I'm me.
>
> Everybody feels the same "me".
>
> B

Feel me up, Scotty

I meant that people do not feel "me" eachother, but each individual feeling 
of my "me" is the same.

B

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 09:04:21 +0100 da kidz on comp.sys.sinclair were rappin'
to MC Ian Rawlings:

> On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:
> 
> > So thus all materia has it's "me" even if some of it isn't able to feel it 
> > or realise it and this is fascinating thing.
> 
> Look out, Bohus's pencils are talking to him again!
> 
> Mine have learned to do it only when I'm not around, or they'll get
> sharpened.

They let you have pencils?  I only get crayons, nurse says I'm not
allowed any sharp objects.

Chris


-- 
+-------------------------------------------+
| Unsatisfactory Software - "because it is" |
|  http://www.unsatisfactorysoftware.co.uk  |
| Your Sinclair: A Celebration              |
+- http://www.yoursinclair.co.uk -----------+

DISCLAIMER: I may be making all this stuff up again.

On 2006-07-29, Chris Young <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com> wrote:

> They let you have pencils?  I only get crayons, nurse says I'm not
> allowed any sharp objects.

No, I sneak the pencils in, I'm not allowed anything sharper than sponge.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:

> I meant that people do not feel "me" eachother, but each individual feeling 
> of my "me" is the same.

I wouldn't worry too much about philosophy Bohus, it's not something
that can ever be "right", being entirely subjective.  It's an
interesting hobby on occasion, thought provoking but ultimately
largely pointless.  I wasted a lot of time in university bars with
philosophy students arguing about things that aren't real and have no
practical value.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 11:46:25 +0200, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:

>
>"zx128k" <zx128k@gmail.com> nap�sal
>
>> > No.
>> >
>> > You're not "me", I'm me.
>>
>> Everybody feels the same "me".
>>
>> B
>
>Feel me up, Scotty
>
>I meant that people do not feel "me" eachother, but each individual feeling 
>of my "me" is the same.
>
>B


Now you're making even less sense :)

"Ian Rawlings" <news05@tarcus.org.uk> nap�sal

> I wouldn't worry too much about philosophy Bohus, it's not something
> that can ever be "right", being entirely subjective.  It's an
> interesting hobby on occasion, thought provoking but ultimately
> largely pointless.  I wasted a lot of time in university bars with
> philosophy students arguing about things that aren't real and have no
> practical value.

OK, let's it be......

B 

Search me... or is that you?

Brian

-- 
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
 graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


"Bohus Kr�l" <bohusk@host.sk> wrote in message 
news:44cb149e$0$15795$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
> Where did come from my "me" ?
>
> I've discovered strange thing : "me" that I feel and that defines me is in 
> fact "me" of the materia of which is complexed my brain. That materia had 
> it's "me" even before I was born, but it realises it's "me" just when it 
> gained a counsciousness.
>
> So thus all materia has it's "me" even if some of it isn't able to feel it 
> or realise it and this is fascinating thing.
>
>
>
> 

> I meant that people do not feel "me" eachother, but each individual feeling
> of my "me" is the same.

Yes, everybody feels a similiar sort of 'individuality'.
This self-awareness, and the ability to express, discuss,
and debate it and it's implications is what separates
humans from other terrestrial mammals, and all other
animals.

I'm going to look this up, but I believe that a gorilla
named Koko was trained to use a computer
interface, which had various symbols in place
of raw letters. These symbols corrresponded to
concepts, like 'hungry', 'love', 'bannana', and 'Koko'.

IIRC, Koko had evinced a limited form of
'self-awareness'. That fact, if true, can lead to a series of
of interrelated conclusions:

1) Perhaps self-awareness is a function of brain density
and complexity.
2) Given 1), perhaps other animals,who meet the criteria of 1),
are 'self-aware' (dolphins, perhaps? elephants?).

Certain Eastern systems of belief teach that this
experience of 'individuality' is an illusion, that
everyone and everything is interconnected and interrelated.
Once the illusion is broken, a 'true' awareness can then be
developed.

Western culture tends to focus on idividuality, especially
here in the good old USA. Witness the zombie movies-
one bite renders 'you' one of 'them', and your only
overriding thought is of biting someone else.
Or take the Borg, a fictional enemy from "Star Trek,
The Next Generation". A cybernetic race, whose goal
is to 'assimilate' every higher living creature in their
quest for perfection. Assimiliation consists of  denying
and subverting individuality, and dedicating an individual's
existence to serving the needs of the 'collective', a hive-mind.

TTFN,
     Tarkin

On 2006-07-29, Tarkin <Tarkin000@gmail.com> wrote:

> Western culture tends to focus on idividuality, especially
> here in the good old USA.

The US is a country where flag-waving patriotism and religion are
taken much further than most western countries, e.g. most of europe,
given that neither are traits that encourage individualism I'd
disagree with your "especially" above.

> Assimiliation consists of denying and subverting individuality, and
> dedicating an individual's existence to serving the needs of the
> 'collective', a hive-mind.

The above are traits of patriotism and religion.  I'm not having a dig
at the U.S. BTW, despite that being in vogue at the moment!  Just
trying to point out that the hive mind is closer than you might think ;-)

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> nap�sal

> IIRC, Koko had evinced a limited form of
> 'self-awareness'. That fact, if true, can lead to a series of
> of interrelated conclusions:

To the animals : yes, they have limited (in comparison to humans) "self 
awareness" , but the deep matter of self awareness is the same in all 
mammals. It is limited by capacity of brain, but the matter itself is the 
same.

We had for 14 years a dog named "Fifi" and she provided the basic manifests 
of self-awarenesing. When you did observe her closely, you saw there a fully 
fledged entity, which is limited in it's behavior only by capacity of it's 
brain, but it's senses were fully functionable.

For example chimpanzee has 95% similarity to the human genetical 
information. Chimpanzee's brain can learn a simple communication language 
and it cannot speak only due to shape of it's mouth/neck/vocal chords.

B

-- 
"Whenever you observe an animal closely, you
 feel as if a human being sitting inside were
 making fun of you." - Elias Canetti 

Self awareness is easy to test for. Can the creature recognise itself
in a mirror. Cats can't. Primates can.

On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:

> For example chimpanzee has 95% similarity to the human genetical 
> information.

This is no guide to anything, we have 25% of our DNA in common with
every single multicellular organism on the planet, including carrots.
We have only twice the genetic information that a fly has.  Chimp DNA
has not been fully sequenced yet so the 90%-99% figures given for the
"similarity" are just guesses.  Chicken DNA has been fully sequenced,
and we share 60% of it.

> Chimpanzee's brain can learn a simple communication language 
> and it cannot speak only due to shape of it's mouth/neck/vocal chords.

There's a whole shedload more to it than that.  Have a look into the
complexities of intelligence, I'd recommend that much more than
worrying about philosophy, find out more about how we think, rather
than how we can waste such a talent on mind games.  Chimps so far have
shown little language ability, although quite a lot for an animal.

Even looking into how sight works and how we can tell how far away an
object is from us is fascinating.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On 2006-07-29, cheveron@gmail.com <cheveron@gmail.com> wrote:

> Self awareness is easy to test for. Can the creature recognise itself
> in a mirror. Cats can't. Primates can.

Any animal that hunts in a pack too, which IIRC in the cat family only
lions do, although I won't be holding mirrors up to lions any time
soon!  Dogs (apart from little shitty yappy shitehead dogs) can
recognise themselves in mirrors, at least mine could.

Pack hunting requires a knowledge of group purpose, the individual's
role in the group, the other group member's roles, the likely
behaviour of the prey, the ability to pick out a particular prey
animal after assessing the prey from afar and so on.  Makes a nonsense
of the cat lover's chant that cats are cleverer than dogs.

Dogs can also grasp the fact that cars travel on roads, which is quite
advanced, deer run along in front of a car on the road because they
just don't understand that the car won't follow them through the
forest, after all what's special about roads and cars to a deer?  The
last two dogs I had would wait by the side of the road until the cars
had passed, knowing full well that the car would stay *on* the road.
That's smart stuff for an animal, recognising a link between the road
surface, the car and the car's behaviour.  The last cat I had on the
other hand got squished.  Dead cats are quite common on the side of
the road, much more so than dogs.  Survival of the smartest!

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Ian Rawlings" <news05@tarcus.org.uk> nap�sal
> Even looking into how sight works and how we can tell how far away an
> object is from us is fascinating.

Just "by the way" : to distinguish a distance is well manageabilited 
function with which are familiar many primitive animals, so I don't know 
what is so fascinating on that....

B 

Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> writes:

> "me" that I feel and that defines me
> is in fact "me" of the materia of which is complexed my brain.

And the brain consists of various neuron cells and fat. On their
own, they don't form a personality, just as little as silicon on
its own functions like a CPU.

But it is a bit interesting. Earlier today I was thinking about
that I can live without "you", but I can't live without myself.
Or rather, maybe I can isolate myself from my body, becoming a
human robot, but somewhere deep down there still ought to be a
"me", mentally badly scarred which puts me in a mental home.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

Ian Rawlings <news05@tarcus.org.uk> writes:

> The last two dogs I had would wait by the side of the road until
> the cars had passed, knowing full well that the car would stay *on*
> the road.

It is said that you can never own a cat, it owns you by putting
itself on top of the hierarchy, doing whatever comes its way. If
it is true, maybe it is the reason why a cat would not fear cars
and expect them to promptly stop when the grandios cat walks past?

-- 
Anders Carlsson

"Anders Carlsson" <anders.carlsson@sfks.se> nap�sal

> But it is a bit interesting. Earlier today I was thinking about
> that I can live without "you", but I can't live without myself.
> Or rather, maybe I can isolate myself from my body, becoming a
> human robot, but somewhere deep down there still ought to be a
> "me", mentally badly scarred which puts me in a mental home.

Okay, I will branch it a bit .

Just two thoughts :

1st : If somebody cuts off a little piece of my brain, where will remain my 
"me" ? In the bigger remained part of brain. But if somebody divides my 
brain into two pieces of same size, where will remain my "me" ?

2nd : That, my body was born, doesn't implicitly mean that I musted be born. 
It couldn't regard to me the same way as it doesn't regard to me if there 
was born anybody else. If somebody takes one cell from my hand and clones 
from it new human, it will be person with identical body to mine, identical 
brain with identical genetical information, but he would have his own "me" 
which wouldn't have anything to do with my "me" . It would be an other 
person in the same body. So I don't know where did appear my "me" and why 
does exist my "me" at all.

And please do not let me go to a psychiatrist.....:)

B 

On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:

> Just "by the way" : to distinguish a distance is well manageabilited 
> function with which are familiar many primitive animals, so I don't know 
> what is so fascinating on that....

It's not unique to us, but it's fascinating to see what's involved.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Ian Rawlings" wrote...
> Makes a nonsense of the cat lover's chant
> that cats are cleverer than dogs.

I'm sure anyone who's visited my house and witnessed the cat running rings 
round the dog (both physically and mentally)  would disagree with you. I 
think cat mentality is just more alien and harder to comprehend to people 
than dogs.

It's quite entertaining to see a 50lb boxer crawl up its own arse whenever 
pebbles, the lickle puddy cat appears.


MikeW

On 2006-07-29, Mike Wynne <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I'm sure anyone who's visited my house and witnessed the cat running rings 
> round the dog (both physically and mentally)  would disagree with you. I 
> think cat mentality is just more alien and harder to comprehend to people 
> than dogs.

No, cats are known to be dumb, there are fairly well-defined means of
measuring the intelligence of animals and dogs are a fair old whack
higher up than cats.  It's just that people tend to anthropomorphise a
tad too much and think that the aloof nature of cats somehow
represents a higher intelligence.

Dogs can handle quite complicated things and can even perform tasks
like being shown four items, three of which they know the names of,
and a fourth.  When told to fetch the name of the one they don't know,
they correctly figure out that you want them to get the new object.
It sounds simple to us, but it's advanced stuff on the scale of
intelligence.  Of course, if you point at something, they'll still
look at the end of your finger rather than what you're pointing at!
Cats on the other hand rarely even know when you're trying to tell
them something or not, they just sit there licking their arses.

> It's quite entertaining to see a 50lb boxer crawl up its own arse
> whenever pebbles, the lickle puddy cat appears.

Cats are undoubtedly, weight for weight, the more physically capable,
dogs are smart but their nature makes them appear a tad daft as
they're always trying to figure out how to please you.  Hardly a sign
of stupidity though, it's just what dogs are, heirarchical pack
animals.

Dogs are very trainable indeed, hence guide dogs and helper dogs.
Helper dogs are trained to act as a helping hand for physically
disabled people and can load/unload washing machines, open doors, can
tell the difference between a mobile and land-line ring and fetch the
right phone, can post letters and fetch orders from the local shops,
and are even trained to take the owner's mobile and drop it next to
their heads if they fall then go and fetch help.

Cats on the other hand sit there and lick their own arses.  My last
cat would eat the shit of a dog that crapped on my carpet, useful but
hardly smart.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Ian Rawlings" wrote...
> No, cats are known to be dumb, there are fairly well-defined means
> of measuring the intelligence of animals and dogs are a fair old
> whack higher up than cats.  It's just that people tend to
> anthropomorphise a tad too much and think that the aloof nature of
> cats somehow represents a higher intelligence.

Hmmm.  So why can the cat judge perfectly height/distance/size.  She can 
perfectly judge leaping from branch to branch of a tree.  She knows exactly 
what size hole she can fit through.  The dog by comparison, gets rather 
confused wondering why when his head fits through a hole, the rest of his 
body doesn't.  Self awareness obviously doesn't include realising how big 
you are.

The cat realised very soon that if I throw a ball and she finds it, the game 
doesn't last very long.  By bringing it back to me the game continues.  The 
dog by comparison had to be taught to fetch.

> Cats on the other hand sit there and lick their own arses.  My last
> cat would eat the shit of a dog that crapped on my carpet, useful but
> hardly smart.

Funny that.  Pebbles (our cat) will always go out into the garden and dig a 
neat little hole.  She'll then do her business before covering it up. 
Finally, Barny (the boxer) will sniff it out, dig it up and eat it...

He also enjoys sitting there licking his knob (Hell, I wish I could too)...

MikeW

Ian Rawlings <news05@tarcus.org.uk> wrote:
>
>I wouldn't worry too much about philosophy Bohus, it's not something
>that can ever be "right", being entirely subjective.  It's an
>interesting hobby on occasion, thought provoking but ultimately
>largely pointless.  I wasted a lot of time in university bars with
>philosophy students arguing about things that aren't real and have no
>practical value.
>

I hope she was pretty!

dom.

"Mike Wynne" <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> writes:

> Self awareness obviously doesn't include realising how big you are.

"Does my butt look big in this?" :-)

-- 
Anders Carlsson

Ian Rawlings <news05@tarcus.org.uk> writes:

> Helper dogs [..] can load/unload washing machines,

I wonder if one can train them to sort the dirty clothes into white
and colours, run the centrifuge, drier and perhaps even iron the shirts
afterwards? If all that is possible, I might consider to get a such dog.

> [..] post letters and fetch orders from the local shops,

Furthermore, if they can pack stuff into boxes, carry them to the post
office and perhaps get a discount on the postage(1), I'd really be
interested. Tell me that dogs like to vacuum and do the dishes, and
I'll get in touch with the nearest suitable kennel on Monday.

(1) Maybe the sullen lady at the post would lighten up if a dog came
    to send the package? 

-- 
Anders Carlsson

Dominic <news@eriador.demon.co.uk> writes:

> Ian Rawlings <news05@tarcus.org.uk> wrote:
>> I wasted a lot of time in university bars with philosophy students
>> arguing about things that aren't real and have no practical value.
> I hope she was pretty!

I wonder if the "things" that weren't real were part of her? ;-)

Hmm, how about this title for a thesis?
"Boob jobs - from a strictly philosophic point of view"

-- 
Anders Carlsson

Anders Carlsson wrote:
> Dominic <news@eriador.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> > Ian Rawlings <news05@tarcus.org.uk> wrote:
> >> I wasted a lot of time in university bars with philosophy students
> >> arguing about things that aren't real and have no practical value.
> > I hope she was pretty!
>
> I wonder if the "things" that weren't real were part of her? ;-)
>
> Hmm, how about this title for a thesis?
> "Boob jobs - from a strictly philosophic point of view"

If they were a part of her, and she wasn't grotesque, then they
weren't pointless, and most definately had value. And perhaps,
even if she were grotesque.

Better: "Keeping Abreast of Trends in Philosophy"
Understanding the thesis would require hands-on laboratory
work.

Boob-bye,
          Tarkin

> The US is a country where flag-waving patriotism and religion are
> taken much further than most western countries, e.g. most of europe,

Really? And exactly how much time have you spent in the US?
Outside of newsgroups, how many Americans have you spoken to?
Turn your T.V. set off. What comes through the tube is not reality.
The map is most definitely not the territory here.

Not everyone in the US attends Church. Even amongst those that
do, they still drink and quarrel and give each other the finger on the
freeway.

I'm sorry if you have no love for your homeland, if the sight of your
flag does nothing for you. A pity. If you're a citizien of Britain,
than
I probably have more pride in the Union Jack and the proud
accomplishments
of this still-mighty nation. There was a time when the sun never set on
the
British flag, and the sight of her Naval vessels made any reasonable
sea-captains blood run colder than the North Atalantic. Some of the
most
clever inventions were wrought in Britain during the Industrial
Revolution.
Britain gave the world Earl Grey tea and the Beatles, Doctor Who,
Sherlock Holmes, and of course, Sir Clive.

I think Japanese and Mung cultures run very much closer to what you
think of the US, as far as collectivism is concerned. People over here
will shoot one another over a percieved injustice on the open road-
a condition known as 'road-rage'. People here have an almost
overwhelmingly
selfish, 'f*ck-you', 'me first', 'I'm more important than you'
attitude. The
only time partiotism is evinced is when we are attacked. Then we unite.
It the basis of civilization as we know it. When the village is
attacked,
the village unites to defeat that threat. When threat is gone, we go
back
to comitting adultery, gossip, and browsing the internet for porn.

> given that neither are traits that encourage individualism I'd
> disagree with your "especially" above.

Everbody is given a chance to absorb a certain core set of values.
People here are different. There are large conclaves of people who
tend to think, act, speak, and dress alike. But they're not always
Churches and gated, suburban communities- hippy fests and
Goth bars and rock concerts are essentially the some thing.
"I wanna be different-just like everybody else".

A case in point: I am 32. Which make me a 'gen-Xer'. But I have no
tattoos, no piercings. I actually stick out in some places I frequent.
By not trying to be different, I *am* different.

People here by and large will *not* be told what to think, except from
people of their own choosing. Some choose a pastor. Some choose
Goth bands. Some choose rappers. Choice is prized here over anything.
Freedom with responsibility = choice. You can choose to own a weapon
over here; you are responsible for what you do with it. It's up to you
to make the appropriate choices.

> > Assimiliation consists of denying and subverting individuality, and
> > dedicating an individual's existence to serving the needs of the
> > 'collective', a hive-mind.

> The above are traits of patriotism and religion.  I'm not having a dig
> at the U.S. BTW, despite that being in vogue at the moment!  Just
> trying to point out that the hive mind is closer than you might think ;-)

The hive mind is closer than *you* think Go back through some
of the css old posts, especially those that go off on a tangent-
like one about various flavors of 'crisps'- everybody that 'got it'
had to have lived in the Greater UK area. No average yank
would even know what the hell you were talking about.
Culture, if you reflect on it, is kind of hive-ish. People from the
same culture can exchange tracts-worth of inforamtion about the
pheneomena of human exisitence as it pertains to them with a
few well chosen phrases.

The only way way that the US extracts and demands anything
from it's citizens is via taxes. One the Gov has it's hands on that,
it's up to our elected officaials to see that it is allocated according

to  the wishes of the people they represent. People are not forced
to do anything patriotic. Patriotism is never beaten into anyone,
nor can it or should it be. Patriotism is a choice. You can either
choose to love where you live, or move. The nation of my birth
put people on the moon and invented the laser and atomic weapons.
I rather like that. I say the pledge of allegiance because I want
to, not because it is expected of me. There is no Political Officer
assuring that I am a good comrade. I can piss on the flag and
burn it in my own yard if I want to. But I don't, and tend to think
rather less of those that do.

I have lots of good memories of decent people
showing me a good time at carnivals amd picnics and such.
Good treats, good rides, enjoyable music. When I lived in Bavaria
for four years, the clothes were a little different, tha language was a
little different, the music was a little different, but the same
kinship,
love for children, and joy of living was apparent. People that I met
were proud to be Germans, and loved their country. There was certainly
a lot less litter there than I see here today. The Oktoberfests and
Fasching
and Christmas were very festive and communal. Quaint mountain resorts,
informative salt mine tours, and roaming the countryside formed
a lasting, warm impression on me.

But I wax nostalgic. I know you were not 'digging' at the US per se,
but it's sad to see that patriotism is dying out, and/or viewed as
crazy or cultish.   Belive me, most of the would-be thugs I see driving
around like crazy people with their backward baseball caps and idiot
'music'
have not the slightest regard for anything close to patriotism. The
average
bimbette who spends her husbands or boyfriends money at the pricey,
upscale
mall gives not sh*t one about the flag, unless it accessorizes her
outfit.
And don't get me started on the useless, depraved, ranting morons that
pass
for Professors in today's colleges. If we were truly a powermad,
hive-minded
religiously-zealous nation of Fundementalists, these sorry sacks would
be executed publicly and daily.

Enough! I also wanted to point out the differences between faith and
religon, 
but this post has gone on long enough.

TTFN,
        Tarkin

Please explain me this two sentences I am very often hearing in American 
movies :

1st : "Go ahead, this is land of freedom, you can do here anything you want 
!"
2nd : "This is fantastic ! I love this country ! This is land of 
possibilities !"

I hope, that this is just a propaganda that somehow flew into american 
movies to attract strangers to arrive to USA.

I believe, that americans do not think, that meaning of this two sentences 
cannot be used in any other country outside of USA. If you don't think so, 
then the clearly explanation is that, you (americans) really do not 
understand other cultures and thus it is wasting of words to try to explain 
that hearing of such sentences makes us laugh and we are already getting 
sick of it.

B 

Tarkin wrote:

> You can either choose to love where you live, or move.

Do you think that everybody who doesn't like where they live moves, 
and/or has the resources to do so?

Eq.

On 2006-07-29, Mike Wynne <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hmmm.  So why can the cat judge perfectly height/distance/size.  She can 
> perfectly judge leaping from branch to branch of a tree.  She knows exactly 
> what size hole she can fit through.  The dog by comparison, gets rather 
> confused wondering why when his head fits through a hole, the rest of his 
> body doesn't.

This is all linked to physical prowess, not intelligence, that's why
people make the mistake that they think the cat is smarter, the cat
has its brain wired up to do incredible physical feats and judge jumps
and leaps with great accuracy, dogs don't.

It's true that dogs don't tend to act very smart, but the big
difference between them is that dogs can learn much more than cats,
and can make leaps of reasoning that cats can't.  It's not all breeds
though, labradors, german shepherds and collies are particularly
clever, which is why they're most often chosen as working dogs.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On 2006-07-30, Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@sfks.se> wrote:

> I wonder if one can train them to sort the dirty clothes into white
> and colours,

Why bother, all your clothes tend to move towards a single colour,
removing the problem.

> run the centrifuge, drier and perhaps even iron the shirts
> afterwards?

*what* the shirts?  What is this "iron" thing?

> Furthermore, if they can pack stuff into boxes, carry them to the post
> office and perhaps get a discount on the postage(1), I'd really be
> interested. Tell me that dogs like to vacuum and do the dishes, and
> I'll get in touch with the nearest suitable kennel on Monday.

I've met a fair few dogs who would do the above provided I gave them a
credit card account of their own, but I could never put up with the
mother-in-laws.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

On 2006-07-30, Tarkin <Tarkin000@gmail.com> wrote:

> Really? And exactly how much time have you spent in the US?
> Outside of newsgroups, how many Americans have you spoken to?
> Turn your T.V. set off. What comes through the tube is not reality.
> The map is most definitely not the territory here.

Hehe, you are proving my point quite admirably, thanks for that ;-)

Even thought I pointed out that I wasn't having a dig at the US, you
go into a long rant defending the place at the slightest provocation.
As I said, the hive mind is closer than you think!

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Ian Rawlings" <news05@tarcus.org.uk> nap�sal

> though, labradors, german shepherds and collies are particularly
> clever, which is why they're most often chosen as working dogs.

Here the most useful dogs are german shepherds (or german wolf-hound as we 
say). They are used mostly for patroling of some objects, in police and as 
lead-dogs for blind people.

B 

"Paul E Collins" <find_my_real_address@CL4.org> wrote in message 
news:SJ6dnbuUgobTsFHZRVny2g@bt.com...
> Tarkin wrote:
>
>> You can either choose to love where you live, or move.
>
> Do you think that everybody who doesn't like where they live moves, and/or 
> has the resources to do so?

If they did, the population of Cumbernauld would be reduced to 1.

Steve 

Steve Farrell wrote:

> If they did, the population of Cumbernauld would be reduced to 1.

That many?

On 2006-07-30, Calum <com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam> wrote:

> That many?

Did he state they had to be living?

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

Bohus Kr=E1l wrote:
> Please explain me this two sentences I am very often hearing in American
> movies :
>
> 1st : "Go ahead, this is land of freedom, you can do here anything you wa=
nt
> !"

Do what you want. It means what it means. The unspoken
condition is that you are fully prepared to be held accountable
for your actions. No good deed goes unpunished.

> 2nd : "This is fantastic ! I love this country ! This is land of
> possibilities !"

Very few people born here feel that way. We rather take it for granted.
Unless you sneak across one of the borders or are smuggled in,
entry/citizenship to the US costs quite a bit of money. Once you've
paid,
however, you can start a business and be exempt from taxes for a number
of years. Truly, for those who can afford it, 'a land of possibilities'
..

Another example would be dynasty-building. Hard laborores will come
from other countries (Asians tend to do rather well in this arena),
work
hard, long hours, earning enough money to support their family and
put their children through college. These children then go on to earn
an even better living, without the mind-numbing drudgery of manual
labor or the service industries (waiter, bellhop, hairstylist, etc).
These children tend to accomplish two things: they provide for their
parents, and raise children to go further than they did. A possiblity
unheard of in, say, Communist North Korea, without substantial
political influence.

> I hope, that this is just a propaganda that somehow flew into american
> movies to attract strangers to arrive to USA.

The map is not the territory. I do not base my opnion of other
countries on James Bond movies, or Trainspotting (which detailed
the plight of a group of Scottish junkies [heroin addicts, not
haggis fiends]). I do not judge England by Mr. Bean. Or
France by Poirot.

> I believe, that americans do not think, that meaning of this two sentences
> cannot be used in any other country outside of USA. If you don't think so,
> then the clearly explanation is that, you (americans) really do not
> understand other cultures and thus it is wasting of words to try to expla=
in
> that hearing of such sentences makes us laugh and we are already getting
> sick of it.

Do you remember your discourse with Mr. Mandic?
from "OT: blah blah blah" :

> Welcome to Slovakia, the country where it doesn't matter if you're
> overweight with psychiatric problems, or a hot chick with new won
> self confidence. *You won't get a job anyway.* After a while she
> might get depressed, take pills and put on a lot of weight again.
(Bohus) (emphasis mine)

>So I think living on Social, even with 4000 Krons, is much better than
>dying with nothing.
>*Working is probably also no fun. Weak salaries etc.*
(Daniel) (emphasis mine)

> that hearing of such sentences makes us laugh

ditto. Well put!

What conclusions am I supposed to draw from your
and Daniels exchange? And that's no movie. They're your
words. Apparently, Slovakia is depressing.

>then the clearly explanation is that, you (americans) really
> do not understand other cultures

As I detailed in a previous post, as I child I lived in Germany for
four years. My parents took the opportunity to take me to
Berlin, and Checkpoint Charlie. At the age or seven or eight, I
saw the pictures and exhibits in the museum there. The level
of desperation that it takes to pack oneself into the hidden
compartment of a small Eastern European automobile was
absolutely alien to me. I saw pictures of corpes dangling from
the barbed-wire fences. I saw the images of woolen-coated
Stasi patrolling with dogs and automatic weapons. Truly,
for a child of my optimistic disposition, heart-wrenching.

As a young man, living on my own, I made friends with
a  restaurant owner, a woman from England. She had
lived in London during WWII, and had pictures of the
shelter where she lived. She was separated from her
parents, and still vividly remebers air-raid sirens
and the sounds of explosions. Her little restaurant
in the US was nothing fancy, but it provided for
her and her daughter, whom had graduated
college, and worked, I believe, in the hospital
industry. An utterly fascinating and compelling
woman, more than happy to be here.

I draw my conclusions from people I meet, not
works of fiction.
that meaning of this two sentences

> cannot be used in any other country outside of USA

No; at least, I don't think that or that way. But from
posts that I read from other people 'round the
world, it is possible to draw that conclusion. I'm
no professor, but I've travelled a bit and read some history.
Driven individuals will excel wherever they are.

>and we are already getting sick of it.

If you are sick of hearing it, turn you're set off. TV, radio, or
Internet. Read a book. I recommend Fritjof Capra.
or Jules Verne. Or get out of the CIA-run re-education
camp that you're living in, where you are force-fed
American propoganda, A Clockwork Orange style.

Cheers,
          Tarkin

> Hehe, you are proving my point quite admirably, thanks for that ;-)

And you have proven that you can judge a book by
it's table of contents, or it's preface, without all the
bother of actually even skimming the rest, let alone
attempting to understand it.

> Even thought I pointed out that I wasn't having a dig at the US,

Which I acknowleged further along in the post

>you go into a long rant defending the place

No, not the place itself, merely it's perception as
some sort of Fundementalist Dictatorship
with some mad priest as Godhead of State.
A conclusion which is entirely apropos of some the
Papist European regimes of the late feudal era.

I also do not presume to speak for other Americans. I
love my homeland for my own reasons. Other Americans
are more than willing to dismiss me as a crackpot,
an eccentric, a nerd, etc.

Perhaps I should learn to summarize better. I should
think my posts would be rather shorter, were I able to
write them in Chinese Traditional.

Cheers,
         Tarkin

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> writes:

>> Welcome to Slovakia, the country where it doesn't matter if you're
>> overweight with psychiatric problems, or a hot chick with new won
>> self confidence. *You won't get a job anyway.* After a while she
>> might get depressed, take pills and put on a lot of weight again.
> (Bohus) (emphasis mine)

No, that was me trying to interpret Bohus' message about the ugly,
heavy medicated girl who got cured and good-looking by stop taking
the pills, but still couldn't support herself economically. It was
written with a bit of irony to it.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

On 2006-07-30, Tarkin <Tarkin000@gmail.com> wrote:

> And you have proven that you can judge a book by it's table of
> contents, or it's preface, without all the bother of actually even
> skimming the rest, let alone attempting to understand it.

*sigh*

I'd suggest you look at your own posts rather than reading what you
want into those of others, you'll find far more of what you rant about
in there.  Especially the bits where you make assumptions about me,
unjustified ones as it happens with no foundation.

The point I was trying to get across is that patriotism can be taken
excessively, and your long rants in response to imagined insults
illustrated that well enough the first time, no need to go on, you've
done your job admirably, thanks ;-)

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> nap�sal

> Do you remember your discourse with Mr. Mandic?
> from "OT: blah blah blah" :

>> Welcome to Slovakia, the country where it doesn't matter if you're
>> overweight with psychiatric problems, or a hot chick with new won
>> self confidence. *You won't get a job anyway.* After a while she
>> might get depressed, take pills and put on a lot of weight again.
> (Bohus) (emphasis mine)

>>So I think living on Social, even with 4000 Krons, is much better than
>>dying with nothing.
>>*Working is probably also no fun. Weak salaries etc.*
> (Daniel) (emphasis mine)

>> that hearing of such sentences makes us laugh

> ditto. Well put!

> What conclusions am I supposed to draw from your
> and Daniels exchange? And that's no movie. They're your
> words. Apparently, Slovakia is depressing.

>>then the clearly explanation is that, you (americans) really
>> do not understand other cultures

> As I detailed in a previous post, as I child I lived in Germany for
> four years. My parents took the opportunity to take me to
> Berlin, and Checkpoint Charlie. At the age or seven or eight, I
> saw the pictures and exhibits in the museum there. The level
> of desperation that it takes to pack oneself into the hidden
> compartment of a small Eastern European automobile was
> absolutely alien to me. I saw pictures of corpes dangling from
> the barbed-wire fences. I saw the images of woolen-coated
> Stasi patrolling with dogs and automatic weapons. Truly,
> for a child of my optimistic disposition, heart-wrenching.

What I've understood, you was born in Eastern Germany.
Well , on one hand I can understand you , on the other there is still valid 
this :
>>then the clearly explanation is that, you (americans) really
>> do not understand other cultures

It all depends only on your point of view.. I was talking about person which 
is living on half-lowered disability benefit. In other words it means, that 
the doctors say that she is able to work and if she doesn't have a job, it's 
just her deal..

If you would grow up in Eastern Germany, you would much more agree with me. 
You would have different point of view.

if you say this :
> What conclusions am I supposed to draw from your
> and Daniels exchange? And that's no movie. They're your
> words. Apparently, Slovakia is depressing.

it is just approving my words. Well, if you are strongly concerned on money, 
then SVK isn't your dreamed land, but I've already met an English speaking 
people who had moved in here. Why ? Just ask them.

Slovakia is full of happy and free people which are not worried about money. 
Why though, they have not them.

What I've meant by asking you to explain me that two sentences is that,. 
here it is nonsense to tell a such sentence, because you would look like a 
dork. The meaning of such sentences is here completly valid and to pronounce 
such things is pointless. Even if it is not valid, it is in general 
pointless to pronounce such things. You can do here what you want and if you 
are happy or not , it depends just on you. Are you unhappy you have not a 
Mercedess car ? Get a girlfriend that  has it.  etc etc  It is all just a 
point of view. That girl I was talking about hasn't money, but she is 
smoking Marlboro cigarettess(her boyfriend).

I suppose, the only slovakian you know is me. Well, maybe I am a dork, I am 
not representating Slovakian nation in here. Here around me there are many 
much more successful people than me, I have been diagnosed schizofrenia in 
1995, so do not take me as a typical slovak person.

What I do not like on americans is , that they are bustling to enforce their 
style of life to other cultures. Just one example : Iraq war. etc etc

B 

> What I've understood, you was born in Eastern Germany.

No, only *visited*. (Sorry, I forget sometimes you are
still practicing English). It left a lasting impression.

> Well , on one hand I can understand you , on the other there is still valid
> this :
> >>then the clearly explanation is that, you (americans) really
> >> do not understand other cultures

Yes, on average, most Americans cannot walk a meter in someone
else's shoes. They consider visiting Canada a trip to a 'foreign'
country.

> It all depends only on your point of view.. I was talking about person which
> is living on half-lowered disability benefit. In other words it means, that
> the doctors say that she is able to work and if she doesn't have a job, it's
> just her deal..

I'm sorry, it does appear that I took those entirely out of context.

> If you would grow up in Eastern Germany, you would much more agree with me.
> You would have different point of view.

Your very likely right. As it is, I didn't.

> if you say this :
> > What conclusions am I supposed to draw from your
> > and Daniels exchange? And that's no movie. They're your
> > words. Apparently, Slovakia is depressing.

> it is just approving my words. Well, if you are strongly concerned on money,
> then SVK isn't your dreamed land, but I've already met an English speaking
> people who had moved in here. Why ? Just ask them.

English speaking does not equal American. If they were American, they
are probably part of a computer software business. Certain Eastern
European
and Baltic nations are now what India once was for the business; a
bustling
source of competent IT workers who will accept lower wages for quality
work.

> Slovakia is full of happy and free people which are not worried about money.
> Why though, they have not them.

We have them here, too. CNN, MSNBC, Al Jeezera, and the BBC have no
interest in them, because it would contradict what they wnat the rest
of the
world to see and think.

> What I've meant by asking you to explain me that two sentences is that,.
> here it is nonsense to tell a such sentence, because you would look like a
> dork.

I believe you said that movies were the source of such sentences.
And it is dorky. Those movies are dorky. What you see in the movies
is not reality. People don't wander around in America, congratulating
each other on what a fabulously wealthy and opportunity-filled
country we have. Most of the time, we're just downright rude and
ill-disposed toward one another.

>The meaning of such sentences is here completly valid and to pronounce
> such things is pointless.

Correct. It is put in movies to sell tickets to 'cowboys' and
'mavericks'
and 'tough guys' and 'conservatives', or at least people who proclaim
themselves as such. It is like in a radio program, when an actor
says loudly, 'look out, he's got a gun!'. Anyone with eyes could
see he has a gun, but you have to tell the audience, because not
everyone
knows what a gun sounds like (before its fired, of course)
..
>Even if it is not valid, it is in general
> pointless to pronounce such things. You can do here what you want and if you
> are happy or not , it depends just on you. Are you unhappy you have not a
> Mercedess car ? Get a girlfriend that  has it.  etc etc  It is all just a
> point of view. That girl I was talking about hasn't money, but she is
> smoking Marlboro cigarettess(her boyfriend).

I have know idea what to make of that. If I want a Mercedes, I'll work
for it.
If I want a woman, I'll court her. I want a woman for her womanhood,
not a car.

> I suppose, the only slovakian you know is me. Well, maybe I am a dork, I am
> not representating Slovakian nation in here. Here around me there are many
> much more successful people than me, I have been diagnosed schizofrenia in
> 1995, so do not take me as a typical slovak person.

I don't define success materially. I collect many machines. I do not
own a car, that ultimate status symbol (in the US). I define success
by how much I learn.

> What I do not like on americans is , that they are bustling to enforce their
> style of life to other cultures. Just one example : Iraq war. etc etc

I will not even discuss the issue of the Iraq war. It is pointless and
useless.
Since it is double plus ungood to contradict Big Brother media on what
is
happening there, what the circumstances were that led to it, and what
will be it's ultimate result, it is a chasing after the wind.

However, I will say this: the wisest military decision ever made by
Slovakia
was the one to join NATO *before* joining the EU.

I guess my whole point is this: my main method of assesing other
cultures is try try and find as many a) citizens of that culture and b)
different sources of information on that culture. Movies are, at best,
a marginal and indirect source of information.

Guten Abend,
                Tarkin

> I'd suggest you look at your own posts rather than reading what you
> want into those of others, you'll find far more of what you rant about
> in there.  Especially the bits where you make assumptions about me,
> unjustified ones as it happens with no foundation.

What assumptions? That you are unpatriototic? I merely stated that
it would be a pity *IF* you felt no love for your flag. With no
foundation?
It's hard not to conclude that you value your individualtiy so much so
that
you would disavow any personal faith or patriotic leanings to maintain
it. Still, I don't draw that conclusion. But you are absolutely
talking out of your arse about the US. It'd be like me trying to
tell you about the tube or Trafalgar Square.

> The point I was trying to get across is that patriotism can be taken
> excessively, and your long rants in response to imagined insults
> illustrated that well enough the first time, no need to go on, you've
> done your job admirably, thanks ;-)

You cannot dodge your words here: you have tried to detach
the religious connotations from your statements. I have reprinted what
you wrote. You still cite no references, no basis for your opinions.
And your point about religion is just plain wrong. The Founding
Fathers left Britain because of brutal religious oppression by the
State-sanctioned religous authorites.

I don't feel insulted: *I am telling you that you are wrong.*
Flag-waving patriotism and religion are not the rampant, all-prevasive
force in this country that you think it is. I'll say it again: you are
*wrong*. You don't live here, and don't appear to know a fair cross
section of any number of citizens here, and cite no other references
for what you base your opinion on. Catholicism, Socialism, Communism,
and other -isms are the killers of individuality, me droogies (even
Coroporate Capitalism, a far more pervasive force in this country).
It's the 'ees' that foster individuality (itself an 'ee' word!!) :
Democracy,
Libertie, Eqalitie, Fraternitie....

{re-inserted in full}

>> Western culture tends to focus on idividuality, especially
>> here in the good old USA.
(mine)
>The US is a country where flag-waving patriotism and religion are
>taken much further than most western countries, e.g. most of europe,
>given that neither are traits that encourage individualism I'd
>disagree with your "especially" above.
(Ian)
> Assimiliation consists of denying and subverting individuality, and
> dedicating an individual's existence to serving the needs of the
> 'collective', a hive-mind.
(mine)
>The above are traits of patriotism and religion.  I'm not having a dig
>at the U.S. BTW, despite that being in vogue at the moment!  Just
>trying to point out that the hive mind is closer than you might think ;-)
(Ian)

It is in vogue at the moment. But history will be kind to us, for
we intend to write it.

Cheers,
         Tarkin

On 2006-07-31, Tarkin <Tarkin000@gmail.com> wrote:

> You cannot dodge your words here: you have tried to detach
> the religious connotations from your statements. I have reprinted what
> you wrote. You still cite no references, no basis for your opinions.

35 years of life, including meeting with, working with, talking to,
writing to and listening to Americans has shown me that they are more
religious and more patriotic than most other nations, not all but
certainly most.  They are simliar to the Northern Irish in the
religious respect but not as bad as the Lebanese I've met (who were
fairly liberal by Lebanese standards).

> I don't feel insulted: *I am telling you that you are wrong.*
> Flag-waving patriotism and religion are not the rampant, all-prevasive
> force in this country that you think it is.

It's not rampant and all-pervasive, I certainly don't remember saying
that.  I said they are more evident in the US than most european
countries.  That's hardly a claim that they are rampant and
all-pervasive.

You do also need to bear in mind that you won't think something's
excessive if you are part of it and have lived with it for so long.
I've spent considerable time in Northern Ireland for example, the
people there don't think that they take religion excessively but to an
englishman like myself, the heightened attention to religion is
evident even on the ride from the airport to hotel.  The point I'm
trying to make here is that it's hard to see it from the inside, but
very easy to see it from the outside.

> It is in vogue at the moment. But history will be kind to us, for
> we intend to write it.

We all have a crack at writing history, there have been many empires
and superpowers, but they all tend to pass with time to be replaced by
the next.  They all get sniped at even when they're being very useful.

Now the whole point of me getting involved in all of this was to point
out that individualism isn't as strong as you might think, and your
original use of the words "particularly in the US" prompted me to
point out two forces of hive-mind-ism that are strong in the US.  As
I've said, I reckon that's been shown.  I'm sure we both have better
things to be doing with our days now.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> nap�sal

> However, I will say this: the wisest military decision ever made by
> Slovakia
> was the one to join NATO *before* joining the EU.

This was only because they have offered us to join NATO earlier than to join 
EU.


> I guess my whole point is this: my main method of assesing other
> cultures is try try and find as many a) citizens of that culture and b)
> different sources of information on that culture. Movies are, at best,
> a marginal and indirect source of information.

You are right. I've never been in USA, I've only met some americans 
(tourists, english teachers) in here an I must say, that if they wouldn't 
say anything, I wouldn't even know they are strangers. One American english 
teacher said, that 1000USD is not for him the same as 1000SKK for us. He had 
his salary in USA in USD aproximately equal to what we had here in SKK. But 
he said : 1000USD still remains for me a 1000USD, it cannot be anyhow 
comparable to what is 1000SKK for us. Till now I do not understand him.....

B 

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:35:38 +0100, cheveron@gmail.com  
<cheveron@gmail.com> wrote:

> Self awareness is easy to test for. Can the creature recognise itself
> in a mirror. Cats can't. Primates can.
>

Thought that had been discredited, for example for a dog smell is the  
dominant sense, so a mirror wouldn't be a good test for self awareness in  
a dog.

Rob.

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

But still : I can recognize american film at the first time of listening the 
dialogues. I don't know whom are supposed to such films, to what kind of 
audience. The dialogues are so cutted off the reality, that sometimes we are 
laughing and sometimes scarying what land is that America.  The films are so 
unreal, that it probably represents some dream or what. I don't know if 
americans speak such kind like in that films and if american audience is 
already addicted to such dialogues and wants it from creators of films.

also series : Baywatch, Bill Cosby, Frasier, Friends, Married with children.

it is developed to absurdity which is funny and which is probably goaled by 
the creators.

B 

> it is developed to absurdity which is funny and which is probably goaled by
> the creators.

Tak Tochno.

Oddly enough, in stramge, surrealist way, Married With Children is
closest mentally to the average American mentality. Exaggerated and
caricatured to be sure, but closer than many of us would care to admit.

TTFN,
       Tarkin

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> nap�sal
> Tak Tochno.

:-)

You speak Russian ? In Russian it means "so exactly" or "that's it".

B 

> You speak Russian ? In Russian it means "so exactly" or "that's it".

Only a few choice phrases.

"Snemi bash odyezhdu", "Da", and "Nyet" round out my Russian.

I have been fortunate enough to meet a broad variety of people from
around
the world. I wish I had enough time to learn much more Russian,
Japanese,
Hebrew....

"Strave" and "Cacksi" (spelling horribly wrong) was the only Bulgarian
I remember. I learned that from a waitress I worked with. She was a
study in underused resources. A fully (Bulgarian) qualified High-School
mathematics instructor, she used to give myself and a friend math brain

teasers. Sadly, her qualifications were not enough in our pathetically
over-administrated educational system. So she waited tables.

TTFN,
      Tarkin

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> writes:

> A fully (Bulgarian) qualified High-School mathematics instructor,
> [..] her qualifications were not enough in our pathetically
> over-administrated educational system. So she waited tables.

It is not specific for the US, it happens in almost all countries.
Well, to the point there is an emergency shortage of people in one
field (e.g. doctors, dentists and nurses), and then have to go
abroad and actively search for such willing to work in your country.

Maybe I've posted it before, but about 10 years ago I read about a
guy from somewhere in the Middle East - could be Iran - that had an
examina in agronomy when he immigrated to Sweden. It was not "good"
enough to get a qualified job, so he went to the university and took
a new, Swedish examina in the same field, despite still learning the
language. Did he get a job after getting the same examina twice, in
two different countries? Nope, when I read about him he sold hot dogs.

Another of my friends had a Spanish girlfriend who had studied English
as secondary language on her home university for a few years. She was
an exchange student and decided to stay a bit more to finish her
studies. When the Swedish university evaluated her previous studies,
they gave credits equal to a 10 week course in English, even though
she had studied for two or three years in Spain. Maybe it was fair,
and the Spanish university had a really low level on their linguistic
department, but to an outsider it sounded more like the Swedes were
not able to estimate what her previous studies were worth.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

Calum <com.gmail@scottishwildcat.nospam> did eloquently scribble:
> Steve Farrell wrote:

>> If they did, the population of Cumbernauld would be reduced to 1.

> That many?

It might be a nice place once all the people had left.
:)
-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste!         |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|  I can SMELL!!!  KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and    |
|            in            |  get out the puncture repair kit!"              |
|     Computer Science     |     Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf              |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tarkin <Tarkin000@gmail.com> did eloquently scribble:
>> I'd suggest you look at your own posts rather than reading what you
>> want into those of others, you'll find far more of what you rant about
>> in there.  Especially the bits where you make assumptions about me,
>> unjustified ones as it happens with no foundation.

> What assumptions? That you are unpatriototic? I merely stated that
> it would be a pity *IF* you felt no love for your flag. With no
> foundation?

Why should someone love a flag?
It's just a meaningless piece of cloth.
The only use flags had was to identify one side from another on a
battlefield. Held by the standard bearers. So big deal, they can be used to
identify countries, but it's just cloth. 

I've always found the way people react to flag burning rather amusing.


> It's hard not to conclude that you value your individualtiy so much so
> that you would disavow any personal faith or patriotic leanings to
> maintain it. 

Um... patriotism IS a form of hive mindedness!
I'll give you an example...
10 years ago, someone over on this side of the pond snuffed it in a car
crash. For the following week, most of the sheeple were brainwashed into
constantly saying how LOVERLY she was and how much they miss her and how
brilliant she was and how ever will they live without the sun shining out of
her backside.

Some of us never liked the sponging cow and thought it might be good if the
rest of her extended family went into the same tunnel for a little
automotive carnage, but if anyone were to SAY anything bad about her during
that week you got VERY hostile stares (if you were lucky)

The TV was rolling 24 hour news saying nothing more than "And now the news,
princess diana is still dead. And now her life story again." until finally
the funeral was over and done with. Almost the entire output of terrestrial
TV was nothing but diana diana diana. Only channel 4 kept its head and
offered an alternative at the time, and they were condmned for it by the
moron classes and the media.

THAT is the same thing as patriotism. 
It's just mindless "I love my country so much". There's no thought behind
it. If there was, you'd look around you and notice it's not the land of the
free anymore as your governments have been whittling away at your civil
rights for the past decade. (or more)

>> The point I was trying to get across is that patriotism can be taken
>> excessively, and your long rants in response to imagined insults
>> illustrated that well enough the first time, no need to go on, you've
>> done your job admirably, thanks ;-)

> You cannot dodge your words here: you have tried to detach
> the religious connotations from your statements. I have reprinted what
> you wrote. You still cite no references, no basis for your opinions.
> And your point about religion is just plain wrong. The Founding
> Fathers left Britain because of brutal religious oppression by the
> State-sanctioned religous authorites.

And what has 17th century politics to do with today? We're a far more
cynical lot now about religion. We can't help but snigger behind our hands
when we hear news of "creationism" or "intelligent design" being taught in
science classes over there. There's a place for that nonsense and it's
called "religious education". (Mythology would be a better name for it)

You have entire cities full of religious nutters over there.
I don't think it's anything to do with america itself... Probably more to do
with the southern states suffering from some malady whereby people go
outside too often in the sun without a hat.

It seems to be far more... normal the further north you go. (but I haven't
been over there so DO only have tv and film to go off)

> I don't feel insulted: *I am telling you that you are wrong.*
> Flag-waving patriotism and religion are not the rampant, all-prevasive
> force in this country that you think it is. 

I don't think he ever said it was in the entire country.
Just large chunks of it.

-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?"   |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|                                                 |
|            in            | "I think so brain, but this time, you control   |
|     Computer Science     |  the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..."  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chris Young <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com> did eloquently scribble:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 09:04:21 +0100 da kidz on comp.sys.sinclair were rappin'
> to MC Ian Rawlings:

>> On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:
>> 
>> > So thus all materia has it's "me" even if some of it isn't able to feel it 
>> > or realise it and this is fascinating thing.
>> 
>> Look out, Bohus's pencils are talking to him again!
>> 
>> Mine have learned to do it only when I'm not around, or they'll get
>> sharpened.

> They let you have pencils?  I only get crayons, nurse says I'm not
> allowed any sharp objects.

crayons? they say I'll get them stuck in my throat.
I'm only allowed finger paint (non-toxic poster paint type)
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |   Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a    |
|                          | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally  coded for a 4 bit |
|            in            |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|     Computer Science     |        can't stand 1 bit of competition.       |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tarkin <Tarkin000@gmail.com> did eloquently scribble:
>> What I've understood, you was born in Eastern Germany.

> No, only *visited*. (Sorry, I forget sometimes you are
> still practicing English). It left a lasting impression.

>> Well , on one hand I can understand you , on the other there is still valid
>> this :
>> >>then the clearly explanation is that, you (americans) really
>> >> do not understand other cultures

> Yes, on average, most Americans cannot walk a meter in someone
> else's shoes. They consider visiting Canada a trip to a 'foreign'
> country.

A trip for an english person to wales is probably more "foreign" than a trip
to (most of) canada for an american.

(excluding the french bit, cos they too have a foreign language)

> I believe you said that movies were the source of such sentences.
> And it is dorky. Those movies are dorky. What you see in the movies
> is not reality. People don't wander around in America, congratulating
> each other on what a fabulously wealthy and opportunity-filled
> country we have. Most of the time, we're just downright rude and
> ill-disposed toward one another.

Just like the rest of the world (apart from japan who're obsessively polite)
then.

> I guess my whole point is this: my main method of assesing other
> cultures is try try and find as many a) citizens of that culture and b)
> different sources of information on that culture. Movies are, at best,
> a marginal and indirect source of information.

Or just plain wrong...
It's a running gag here in the uk that "America won WWII. Brad pit did it
single handed, against that evil sir winston hitler". (How many films have
they done now that rewrote history with them as the heroes? The submarine
film was the most glaring bit of cheek. Enigma was it?)

That quote was from clarkson on Top Gear, btw.
Another good source of american film piss takes was Monkey Dust where they
did a series of very similar jokes. The crusades, with the americans as the
knights templar and the brits as the evil muslems, for example.
-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste!         |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|  I can SMELL!!!  KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and    |
|            in            |  get out the puncture repair kit!"              |
|     Computer Science     |     Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf              |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> did eloquently scribble:
> Where did come from my "me" ?

> I've discovered strange thing : "me" that I feel and that defines me is in 
> fact "me" of the materia of which is complexed my brain. That materia had 
> it's "me" even before I was born, but it realises it's "me" just when it 
> gained a counsciousness.

> So thus all materia has it's "me" even if some of it isn't able to feel it 
> or realise it and this is fascinating thing.


Daniel mandic! You MASTER OF DISGUISE!
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |   Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a    |
|                          | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally  coded for a 4 bit |
|            in            |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|     Computer Science     |        can't stand 1 bit of competition.       |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> did eloquently scribble:

> "Mike Wynne" <mikeywyn@hotmail.com> nap�sal

>> No.
>>
>> You're not "me", I'm me.

> Everybody feels the same "me".

No we don't. I'm not feeling your "me" with a 10 foot bargepole.

-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |                                                 |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
|            in            |  suck is probably the day they start making     |
|     Computer science     |  vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge            |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> did eloquently scribble:
> 1st : If somebody cuts off a little piece of my brain, where will remain my 
> "me" ? In the bigger remained part of brain. But if somebody divides my 
> brain into two pieces of same size, where will remain my "me" ?

"We are nothing but the sums of our memories".
There are some people who have HAD the operation which seperates the two
hemispheres of their brain (very bad epileptics).

They need to pay close attention to what they're doing because they might
find their left hand REALLY doesn't know what the right hand is doing.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |   Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a    |
|                          | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally  coded for a 4 bit |
|            in            |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|     Computer Science     |        can't stand 1 bit of competition.       |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> It's a running gag here in the uk that "America won WWII. Brad pit did it
> single handed, against that evil sir winston hitler". (How many films have
> they done now that rewrote history with them as the heroes? The submarine
> film was the most glaring bit of cheek. Enigma was it?)

I am howling! 'Evil Sir Winston Hitler'. What's sad is that some kids
over here,
if that were on a multiple-choice exam, would select it.

> That quote was from clarkson on Top Gear, btw.
> Another good source of american film piss takes was Monkey Dust where they
> did a series of very similar jokes. The crusades, with the americans as the
> knights templar and the brits as the evil muslems, for example.

Brits *aren't* evil muslems? <g>

What's really funny is I happen to know quite a few *real* religous
nutters.
(J-C types). When presented with the dirty, brutal, and unchristian
tactics
by which the natives here had their land grabbed, they shrug it off and
say, "oh well. They've got casinos now." Apparently, Christ will
forgive
avarice and greed in the name of manifest destiny, but the deepest pits
of hell are reserved for buggerers and Hindus.

Another funny slice of idiot pie: I smoke unfiltered cigarrettes, many
a day. One
of these missionary-church-elder types let's fly that it's a sin. I
perked up, and
told him I had always thought of it as a 'weight', more than a sin. He
launches
into a discourse on the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, and we
are therefore
Charged by God to maintain as it best we are able....he slowly trails
off, realizing
that this is quite possibly the worst thing to (for him) say, as he has
only been out
of the hospital for a month, having had a sextuple (yes!! SIX) bypass,
due to
years of overeating and lack of regular exercise.

In short: They (relig nutters), make an impression on the rest of the
world
because they have a self-sustaining micro-ecology. Their ministries
tend to
attract rich whackos, to perpetuate the schemes of other rich whackos.
Since our media is fond of any horrorshow, they get quite a bit of
coverage.

They are not the people you meet in the street, on the bus, in the bar,
at
a hotel lounge, or next to you on a domestic airline flight. They are
like
elephants in India: large, noticible, and an obstacle to progress when
they
interfere with the populace, but hardly overrruning the place.

The Churches, even the Papal Monstrosity, cannot hope to compete with
the porn industry. Porn here is far more prevalent and influential than
'Charismatic Christianity'.

Laters,
        Tarkin

<spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:u036q3-v09.ln1@ridcully.ntlworld.com...
> Tarkin <Tarkin000@gmail.com> did eloquently scribble:
> It's a running gag here in the uk that "America won WWII. Brad pit did it
> single handed, against that evil sir winston hitler".

Impeach Churchill!

Steve 

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> nap�sal

> Another funny slice of idiot pie: I smoke unfiltered cigarrettes, many
> a day. One
> of these missionary-church-elder types let's fly that it's a sin. I
> perked up, and
> told him I had always thought of it as a 'weight', more than a sin. He
> launches
> into a discourse on the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, and we
> are therefore
> Charged by God to maintain as it best we are able....he slowly trails
> off, realizing
> that this is quite possibly the worst thing to (for him) say, as he has
> only been out
> of the hospital for a month, having had a sextuple (yes!! SIX) bypass,
> due to
> years of overeating and lack of regular exercise.

off topic to off topic :

I smoke up to 40 filtered cigarettes a day. They are lights(blend) the 
amount of nicotine is about 0.5mg per cigarette.
Some people say, that smoke from cigarette stinks to them and they cannot 
stand it when they are near me. But they stay next to bonfire for hours and 
breed that sharp smoke and say nothing as if that smoke was less stinky. 
They are contradicting to themselves.

B

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 08:41:34 GMT da kidz on comp.sys.sinclair were rappin'
to MC :

> Or just plain wrong...
> It's a running gag here in the uk that "America won WWII. Brad pit did it
> single handed, against that evil sir winston hitler". (How many films have
> they done now that rewrote history with them as the heroes? The submarine
> film was the most glaring bit of cheek. Enigma was it?)

U-571 or something.

> That quote was from clarkson on Top Gear, btw.
> Another good source of american film piss takes was Monkey Dust where they
> did a series of very similar jokes. The crusades, with the americans as the
> knights templar and the brits as the evil muslems, for example.

And thus we come full-circle and an off-topic thread becomes at least
vaguely related to the Spectrum.

Also, Armstrong and Miller did a good sketch or two featuring Kip and
Tam as two Americans that didn't know anything about European history.

Chris


-- 
+-------------------------------------------+
| Unsatisfactory Software - "because it is" |
|  http://www.unsatisfactorysoftware.co.uk  |
| Your Sinclair: A Celebration              |
+- http://www.yoursinclair.co.uk -----------+

DISCLAIMER: I may be making all this stuff up again.

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> writes:

> "oh well. They've got casinos now."

Maybe one day, there will be casinos in Bagdad too, run by W@W L@@K
genuine Iraqis.

> They are like elephants in India:

Are religious nutters like e.g. $cientologists also generally good
at sprouting water with their trunks? I mean, wouldn't it be cute
to see a paparazzi picture of how Tom Cruise gives his daughter(*)
a mouthful shower?

(*) If she exists/lives at all. I think less than a handful people
    have yet confirmed to have seen her.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 08:41:34 GMT, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

>Chris Young <chris.usenet@mail-filter.com> did eloquently scribble:
>> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 09:04:21 +0100 da kidz on comp.sys.sinclair were rappin'
>> to MC Ian Rawlings:
>
>>> On 2006-07-29, Bohus Kr�l <bohusk@host.sk> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > So thus all materia has it's "me" even if some of it isn't able to feel it 
>>> > or realise it and this is fascinating thing.
>>> 
>>> Look out, Bohus's pencils are talking to him again!
>>> 
>>> Mine have learned to do it only when I'm not around, or they'll get
>>> sharpened.
>
>> They let you have pencils?  I only get crayons, nurse says I'm not
>> allowed any sharp objects.
>
>crayons? they say I'll get them stuck in my throat.
>I'm only allowed finger paint (non-toxic poster paint type)


Finger paint?  Pah, I used to have to drink a lot of water then write
my name in the snow

> I smoke up to 40 filtered cigarettes a day. They are lights(blend) the
> amount of nicotine is about 0.5mg per cigarette.
> Some people say, that smoke from cigarette stinks to them and they cannot
> stand it when they are near me. But they stay next to bonfire for hours and
> breed that sharp smoke and say nothing as if that smoke was less stinky.
> They are contradicting to themselves.

They will then, after compaining that 'you are poisoning them', go
and jog down the side of the road, inhaling gobs of C02 and C0-
inhaling much more of these gasses by virtue of their increased
respiratory rate!!

Another American cultural standby: outdoor grilling. A poorly
cleaned outdoor grill will burn grease, releasing a thick, toxic,
eye-watering cloud of burnt lipids. Still, a non-smoker will subject
himself to that respiratory treat, and then bitch that 'cigarrettes
stink' and are poisoning their children.

People are funny. The way I see it, if they really are inhaling 50% of
my cigarrette, they owe me for half a pack a day.

And how did they start that bonfire? Kerosene? Naptha or napthalene?
Gasoline? MMMMMM......that smells good.

TTFN,
    Tarkin

Lister <fache@spamclara.net> did eloquently scribble:
>>crayons? they say I'll get them stuck in my throat.
>>I'm only allowed finger paint (non-toxic poster paint type)

> Finger paint?  Pah, I used to have to drink a lot of water then write
> my name in the snow

They let you out?!
To get frostbite?!
-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |                                                 |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
|            in            |  suck is probably the day they start making     |
|     Computer science     |  vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge            |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Bohus Kr�l" <bohusk@host.sk> wrote in message 
news:44d0d3ad$0$15790$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
> I smoke up to 40 filtered cigarettes a day. They are lights(blend) the 
> amount of nicotine is about 0.5mg per cigarette.
> Some people say, that smoke from cigarette stinks to them and they cannot 
> stand it when they are near me. But they stay next to bonfire for hours 
> and breed that sharp smoke and say nothing as if that smoke was less 
> stinky. They are contradicting to themselves.

Bonfire smoke contains mostly carbon, from the wood that's being burned. It 
basically smells exactly like burning wood.

Cigarette smoke contains more chemicals than the periodic table, many of 
them known poisons, such as arsenic, and the smell - which is a disgusting, 
sickly-sweet sulphurous smell - reflects that.

Steve 

On 2006-08-02, spike1@freenet.co.uk <spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote:

> They let you out?!
> To get frostbite?!

When I were a lad, I used to *dream* of frostbite, it would numb the
pain from the cheesegrater and salt on my toes that I'd get as a
reward after living in a box in the middle of the road, getting up
before I went to bed, being beaten with glass bottles etc etc etc etc
etc

You know the rest.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

"Tarkin" <Tarkin000@gmail.com> nap�sal

> People are funny. The way I see it, if they really are inhaling 50% of
> my cigarrette, they owe me for half a pack a day.

This is impressive :-) It hasn't came to my mind yet. But do not expect from 
them a money if they say it is disgusting to them. Anyway , might be when 
they inhall something from your smoke, they might have a smoking effect 
without having an aware of it.

B 

"Steve Farrell" <idonotneed@mypenisenlargedthankyou.org> nap�sal

> Cigarette smoke contains more chemicals than the periodic table, many of 
> them known poisons, such as arsenic, and the smell - which is a 
> disgusting, sickly-sweet sulphurous smell - reflects that.

I assume, tobacoo blend was developing for centuries to achieve tasty, soft 
smelling smoke. Do not think, that smokers are masochists and they smoke any 
crap that provides any disgusting smoke just to burn and breed some filth.

I think, breeding of naturally generated smoke from wood or straw or leaps 
is more harmful than to smoke specially cultivated and selected tobacoo 
blend which in my case I can qualify as tasty.

B 

"Bohus Kr�l" <bohusk@host.sk> wrote in message 
news:44d123f1$0$15790$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
>
> "Steve Farrell" <idonotneed@mypenisenlargedthankyou.org> nap�sal
>
>> Cigarette smoke contains more chemicals than the periodic table, many of 
>> them known poisons, such as arsenic, and the smell - which is a 
>> disgusting, sickly-sweet sulphurous smell - reflects that.
>
> I assume, tobacoo blend was developing for centuries to achieve tasty, 
> soft smelling smoke. Do not think, that smokers are masochists and they 
> smoke any crap that provides any disgusting smoke just to burn and breed 
> some filth.
>
> I think, breeding of naturally generated smoke from wood or straw or leaps 
> is more harmful than to smoke specially cultivated and selected tobacoo 
> blend which in my case I can qualify as tasty.

But it's 'naturally generated', meaning it occurs in nature, there's no 
added chemicals. It's harmful, of course, everyone knows that smoke 
inhalation can kill, and that fire can burn and leave you disfigured, but 
it's still got a LOT less crap in it than cigarettes.

Have you ever seen a list of the chemicals that are in tobacco? Many of 
them, as I said, are toxins. A lot of them, in their normal forms, will 
easily kill a person. Every time you smoke a cigarette, you're ingesting 
things like formaldehyde (embalming fluid), ammonia (toilet cleaner), carbon 
monoxide (prolonged exposure to which chemical can kill) and cyanide - yes, 
cyanide. Does that make them desirable? Would you drink petrol or bleach? Of 
course not. So why inhale some of the most harmful chemicals known to man 
forty times a day? Seriously, why?

Steve 

Steve Farrell <idonotneed@mypenisenlargedthankyou.org> did eloquently scribble:
> Have you ever seen a list of the chemicals that are in tobacco? Many of 
> them, as I said, are toxins. A lot of them, in their normal forms, will 
> easily kill a person. Every time you smoke a cigarette, you're ingesting 
> things like formaldehyde (embalming fluid), ammonia (toilet cleaner), carbon 
> monoxide (prolonged exposure to which chemical can kill) and cyanide - yes, 
> cyanide. Does that make them desirable? Would you drink petrol or bleach? Of 
> course not. So why inhale some of the most harmful chemicals known to man 
> forty times a day? Seriously, why?

Yes, there are harmful chemicals
There are also addictive ones.
But there are almost as many harmful chemicals in ANY smoke.
OK, nicotine isn't in them all, that's one of the things about tobacco.
But smoke itself as a byproduct of burning plant matter is pretty much the
same no matter if it comes from a tree or a tobacco plant.

And of course, wood burned on a bonfire may often be treated with varnish,
creosote or paint which also give off various additional nasties.
-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   |                                                 |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
|            in            |  suck is probably the day they start making     |
|     Computer science     |  vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge            |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In news:y6lAg.15936$Ca.13855@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk,
Steve Farrell <idonotneed@mypenisenlargedthankyou.org> typed:

> Have you ever seen a list of the chemicals that are in tobacco? Many
> of them, as I said, are toxins. A lot of them, in their normal forms,
> will easily kill a person. Every time you smoke a cigarette, you're
> ingesting things like formaldehyde (embalming fluid), ammonia (toilet
> cleaner), carbon monoxide (prolonged exposure to which chemical can
> kill) and cyanide - yes, cyanide. Does that make them desirable?

Yes, it does :-)

I'm sure you understand what people mean when they use the word "addiction". 
Besides, when ingested in small quantities, cyanide is quite a powerful 
recreational drug.

D.

"Steve Farrell" <idonotneed@mypenisenlargedthankyou.org> nap�sal
> So why inhale some of the most harmful chemicals known to man forty times 
> a day? Seriously, why?

It's hard to explain to a nonsmoker. I just have a good feeling of it. But 
again, I smoke 40 per day, but these are very lights, they produce very soft 
smoke not so toxic as strong cigarettes.

B 

Bohus Kr�l wrote:

> I smoke 40 per day, but these are very lights, they produce
> very soft smoke not so toxic as strong cigarettes.

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/light-cigarettes#q3

Eq.

Paul E Collins <find_my_real_address@cl4.org> did eloquently scribble:
> Bohus Kr?l wrote:

>> I smoke 40 per day, but these are very lights, they produce
>> very soft smoke not so toxic as strong cigarettes.

> http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/light-cigarettes#q3

Indeed, the old "light ciggies are less harmfull" thing is a bit of tobacco
company propoganda.

I smoke though, but I do have some self control.
I limit myself to 10 a day.
:)
-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste!         |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|  I can SMELL!!!  KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and    |
|            in            |  get out the puncture repair kit!"              |
|     Computer Science     |     Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf              |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 2006-08-03, spike1@freenet.co.uk <spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote:

> I smoke though, but I do have some self control.
> I limit myself to 10 a day.

I smoke a pipe, that's pretty self-limiting because at the tender age
of 35 I'm too embarrased to be seen with it in public!

I used to smoke cigars, when I could get them cheap for a good one, I
was getting them at �2 for each cigar for cigars that would normally
cost �10 each, when the cheap supply ran out I had to stop that habit
pretty damned quickly I can tell you...

Cigarettes though, nasty things, smoked them for 6 years.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

Ian Rawlings <news05@tarcus.org.uk> writes:

> I smoke a pipe, that's pretty self-limiting because at the tender
> age of 35 I'm too embarrased to be seen with it in public!

People probably think you're some sort of intellectual.

-- 
Anders Carlsson

On 2006-08-04, Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@sfks.se> wrote:

> People probably think you're some sort of intellectual.

I doubt it, they probably think I'm either bonkers or smoking crack!

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

Ian Rawlings <news05@tarcus.org.uk> did eloquently scribble:
> On 2006-08-04, Anders Carlsson <anders.carlsson@sfks.se> wrote:

>> People probably think you're some sort of intellectual.

> I doubt it, they probably think I'm either bonkers or smoking crack!

All the more reason to do it in public then (f'nar)
Aqcuire an air of... defiant self importance...
Smoke the pipe and glare down your nose at anyone who gives you a funny
look.
:)
-- 
|                          |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
|  spike1@freenet.co.uk    |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
|                          |can't move, with no hope of rescue.             |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been   |
|           in             |good to you so far...                           |
|    Computer Science      |   -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|

<spike1@freenet.co.uk> nap�sal

> All the more reason to do it in public then (f'nar)
> Aqcuire an air of... defiant self importance...
> Smoke the pipe and glare down your nose at anyone who gives you a funny
> look.

I hate smoking on the street. When smoking on a public, then in some pubs or 
restaurants, but smoking when going down the street is in my opinion just 
voyerism.

B 

"Bohus Kr�l" <bohusk@host.sk> nap�sal

> when going down the street is in my opinion just voyerism.
^^^^^^^^^^
It should be exhibicionism.

B 

Sorry for my quoting, that OE is crap.

B

On 2006-08-04, spike1@freenet.co.uk <spike1@freenet.co.uk> wrote:

> All the more reason to do it in public then (f'nar)
> Aqcuire an air of... defiant self importance...
> Smoke the pipe and glare down your nose at anyone who gives you a funny
> look.

The only times I've smoked it in public is either at vintage car
events, where you get looked at funny if you *don't* smoke a pipe, or
while driving around off-road courses in a 33-year-old 6-wheeled army
truck, in which case you get funny looks anyway!

Cigarette smoking is pretty horrible though, something you only get a
decent perspective on once you've done it and then stopped.

-- 
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!