Making the news today....

[matelot]

11 hours ago, TIMON said:

 

That’s right. I get to choose. Thankfully I’m not subjected to what the kardashians are doing either.

 

I never understand the fascination in the Kardasians... Kim K looks like she is deformed below the waist... 

Edited September 30, 2017 by matelot

[Mick Dempsey]

 

Morrisey eat your heart out!

[tree-fancier123]

lol - a curvy womans best side and a singing dog, no one seems interested in discussing the rape and murder news items

[Mesterh]

5 hours ago, TIMON said:

Richard Dawkins never had the time or inclination.....really?
Hmmm...
he has devoted the best part of his life’s work to refuting the claims of the bible.
Not wanting to derail this thread away from what is “making the news”
Here’s an interesting article from The Guardian, not really known for being a pro-Christian publication and while I don’t believe for one second that this will change your mind, it will at least serve to give the subject a wider perspective.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died
 

Nope, vespian says he didn't exist so I think we can take that as gospel people.

 

Although an atheist I do believe that there is no reason to deny that a bloke called Jesus probably did knock about back in the olden times. 

 

Only thing I saw on the news today is that Kim Jung-in is moving some ballistic missiles about. I know not many people seem to bothered about what is happening over there but im betting that there is a chance that something big could go off all because someone is going to make some mistake and cock things up.

 

Will have to study that ass on Kim K and do some comparisons to her professional pics.

 

 

 

 

[Mesterh]

On Sun Sep 24 2017 at 17:53, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

 

 

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying I disagree with you.  

 

I disagree that expressing legitimate concern over uncontrolled immigration and the overt islamification of Europe should be labelled as racist by those that can't see it for what it is and, because they don't see it, they seek to demonise those that do with distasteful labels.  

 

The German election is underway today (https://ig.ft.com/germany-poll-tracker/?&segmentId=9ce01cde-b50a-e27b-c45a-1af2175e42ce&gclid=Cj0KCQjwr53OBRCDARIsAL0vKrPCiFbOHiDCZ7VVB1Cdl-kbAeld63t6x9H8XeL8gY9-pWCc30nr_WoaAl3QEALw_wcB) Despite having made what will probably be viewed as the single biggest miscalculation by any Western political leader in this century, Merkel will, almost inevitably be returned for a fourth term.  

 

Maybe that proves that the majority of Germans are not concerned about the immigration issue?  

 

Conversely, maybe Merkel's reversal of her atrocious open doors policy and the significant stiffening of immigration regulations in Germany demonstrates that she has (although falling well short of publicly acknowledging and apologising for it) decided that her political survival is more important than her political ideology?  

 

Maybe the weight of influence of the AfD (in a similar way that UKIP's influence led to Cameron delivering the Brexit referendum) has brought a dose of reality to Merkel which has caused her to veer away from her previous path.

 

I agree with the statement (in a peculiar sense) that "...whoever wins the vote in Germany has nothing to do with the rise in the racist community in the UK..." 

 

But I'd ask, what do you base the presumption of a rise in the racist community in the UK on?

What happens in the UK has a fairly limited ability to effect domestic politics in Germany (Brexit aside)

I expect there will be racists within the AfD (similarly in the UK, the anti-Semitic members of the Labour party, the fruit cakes of UKIP and the old landed gentry of the Tory party....  Racists all of 'em.  Dam, they're everywhere!) But expressing views on immigration is not (of itself) a qualifying criteria for that club. 

 

My counter point to your declaration that "...you people and your way of thinking will never come to power as thankfully you are in the minority..." is that there are clear, obvious and measurable contradictions to your assumption which can been seen and drawn from consideration of the bigger picture issues associated with a raft of recent political events such as the rise in popular support for the National Front in France, AfD in Germany, UKIP in the UK, Trump in the US, the Freedom Party of Austria etc.  With the exception of Trump, the others didn't break through the glass ceiling to become fully established as 'in power' political parties.  

 

What they did do however, was deliver significant political effect by giving the mainstream parties a 'loud & clear' message that people - the masses - were becoming increasingly intolerant of their policies which resulted in notable deviations from preferred courses. 

 

In that respect, I disagree with you that "...you people and your way of thinking will never come to power as thankfully you are in the minority..." because, although not in what might be the traditional sense of "power" i.e. the majority ruling party, it is perfectly clear that the "power" to directly influence the mainstream is already well established. 

 

The digging a hole thing - well, that was my attempt at a humorous reflection on what I'd interpreted as a switch from the half-baked, failed attempt to bandy around the racist label, to your similarly half baked and poorly thought through religious argument.  Where are we going next?  Vivisection? Legalisation of drugs? The ethics of combining human and animal DNA? 

   

Sorry but you waffle on too much , and I got bored, reading that,. You should try to not pad your posts out imo. But, I think there is a good chance you are seriously misjudgeding me. I don't call people who are concerned with immigration racists, I call people who use every excuse under the sun to point the finger at foreigners racist scrum.

 

 

[Vespasian]

16 hours ago, TIMON said:

Richard Dawkins never had the time or inclination.....really?
Hmmm...
he has devoted the best part of his life’s work to refuting the claims of the bible.
Not wanting to derail this thread away from what is “making the news”
Here’s an interesting article from The Guardian, not really known for being a pro-Christian publication and while I don’t believe for one second that this will change your mind, it will at least serve to give the subject a wider perspective.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died
 

As  a scientists I doubt Richard Dawkins has had any need to research the bible for clues to how it evolved.. He would just assume it to be ancient myths written by dotards who didn't know any better.. 

 

In some regards I can't blame him.. still, its an interest I've had and like any interest that catches my attention I want to figure were all the pieces fall into place.

 

moving on a little..

 

Kim Kardashian wants to do somethin about that big fat arse of hers, its disgusting..

 

[Stubby]

2 minutes ago, Vespasian said:

As  a scientists I doubt Richard Dawkins has had any need to research the bible for clues to how it evolved.. He would just assume it to be ancient myths written by dotards who didn't know any better.. 

 

In some regards I can't blame him.. still, its an interest I've had and like any interest that catches my attention I want to figure were all the pieces fall into place.

 

moving on a little..

 

Kim Kardashian wants to do somethin about that big fat arse of hers, its disgusting..

 

You " doubt "  and " assume "  quite a bit .

[Vespasian]

1 minute ago, Stubby said:

You " doubt "  and " assume "  quite a bit .

Well its obvious Richard Dawkins has read some of the bible, he might of read it all for all I know.  but I suspect he's not wasted any time on researching it in any meaningful way..

 

He's a scientist after all, not a biblical scholar or ancient historian..

 

In that regards I feel I'm on safe grounds assuming some facts that might or might not be factual..

 

[Stubby]

Just now, Vespasian said:

Well its obvious Richard Dawkins has read some of the bible, he might of read it all for all I know.  but I suspect he's not wasted any time on researching it in any meaningful way..

 

He's a scientist after all, not a biblical scholar or ancient historian..

 

In that regards I feel I'm on safe grounds assuming some facts that might or might not be factual..

 

And now you " suspect " .....

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

10 hours ago, Mesterh said:

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying I disagree with you.  

I was making a herculean effort to be polite.....  In reality, I consider much of what you write (in the political sense) to be cretinous drivel. 

10 hours ago, Mesterh said:

Sorry but you waffle on too much , and I got bored, reading that,. You should try to not pad your posts out imo. But, I think there is a good chance you are seriously misjudgeding me. I don't call people who are concerned with immigration racists, I call people who use every excuse under the sun to point the finger at foreigners racist scrum.

 

 

Misjudging you....?  Oh, OK....

 

What, you mean you DON'T have a self declared limited attention span, you're NOT regurgitating sound bites, attempting to insult and suppress opinions that differ from your own by labelling others as 'racist', and you ARE receptive to quality data that exposes your current, apparent, stance as poorly conceived, infantile, white guilt? 

 

(just thinking back to that statement you made in a response to one of Matelot's posts, something like "...people like you will never gain power..." which resulted in my offering some links to illustrate that there IS a measurable increase in support and demonstrable examples that 'power' IS being exercised, and mindful that you found it too detailed for consumption...)  This might be a useful read for you - there are even some pictures!  

 

Enjoy 

 

  

Edited October 1, 2017 by kevinjohnsonmbe