Paul Richardson wrote:
>
> "Jim Larson" <larsonjmR.E.M.O.V.E.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A79B69D363953v234oiwofui3284af93@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Weirdwolf wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Larson <larsonjmR.E.M.O.V.E.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>> news:Xns9A79B33BC18C03v234oiwofui3284af93@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>> Weirdwolf wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Paul Richardson" <paulszoo.ARMADILLO@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>>> news:1iyKj.54554$833.42884@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "John Iwaniszek" <not@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:Xns9A78620F85DCFjoiwhnanri@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>> Paul Richardson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Tyler Trafford" <ttrafford+usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:65qnmeF2h18a4U1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>>> Jim Larson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Tyler Trafford wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> John Iwaniszek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Weirdwolf wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Need a giggle?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go to IMDB.com and enter "wanker" into the search box.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How is that possible?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Either the god of the Internet is British, or "wanker" is a
>>>>>>>>>>> common misspelling of "walker".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why does typing in "walker" produce no reference to the Chimp
>>>>>>>>>> in Chief?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.imdb.com/find?q=walker;more=nm
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It does for partial match.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Interesting to see how far up the list Shrub comes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting to see how deep the geek runs here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bottomless geek
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah explains why people keep telling me I am full of ****!
>>>>> Oh by the way did you enjoy the Olympic torch thingy? Nice to see
>>>>> that
>>>>> although our government might be spineless the population can still
>>>>> bugger things up.
>>>>> I am rather looking forward to the London Olympics now,running the
>>>>> marathon around Kings Cross and Brixton should be good for a laugh
>>>>
> Well it depends on what services you are looking for. Kings Cross for a
> leg over & Brixton for a bit of ganja. Could make the race interesting
> 8-)
>
>>>> Just as long as they restrict the shenanigans to the torch relay, the
>>>> opening ceremonies and crap like that. I'm no big fan of the olympics
>>>> (I watched essentially none of it in 2004), but I think the
>>>> althletes deserve to be left alone. The vast majority of them have
>>>> worked hard for years in relative or total obscurity to get to this
>>>> point. They don't need to be upstaged by something that won't
>>>> accomplish anything anyway.
>>>>
>>>> (On that subject, have any of you folks talked to any Chinese ex-pats
>>>> about the whole Tibetan autonomy issue? It was an interesting
>>>> exercise in the two cases in which I tried it.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Erm, no. I've tried to skirt the issue with my Chinese friends. I did
>>> notice that my emails to China were being bounced and taking a long
>>> time to get there.
>>> My teacher has a map she uses in her lessons,it includes Tibet as
>>> part of
>>> China and I imagine because this is how it has been traditionally been
>>> taught and seen that is how it would be viewed.
>>> How did it go with your friends?
>>
>> One is a friend and the other more of a casual acquaintance/colleague.
>> Both
>> have been in the US for a long time (20+ years for the shorter of the
>> two) and are American citizens, both remember the cultural revolution
>> in vivid personal terms, and neither has the least bit of love for the
>> Chinese government. Both had the same opinion, independent of each
>> other, that the Chinese incursion into Tibet is (a) the best thing
>> that's ever happened to the place, (b) a matter of protest for only a
>> tiny fraction of the Tibetan population, namely the religious sorts,
>> and (c) being wildly distorted by the
>> Western media and celebrities who like to hobnob with the Dalai Lama.
>> Are they just gullible and falling prey to Chinese propaganda? Maybe. I
>> have no
>> idea. I just thought the contrast with the usual viewpoint we see was
>> kind of
>> interesting.
>>
>> Oh, one of the two has actually been to Tibet (as a tourist) this past
>> year.
>>
> Well apparently Tibet only became a country after some fiddling about by
> the Foreign & Colonial Office so it's an interesting problem. The time
> to protest was when the Chinese invaded. If only there were oil in them
> thar hills eh?
>
Oil makes everything so much clearer...also if the Chinese didn't have
nukes
and a standing army the size of Rhode Island. That would be good too.
--
Jim
|
