Posts by Rich Lock
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I am putting my money into scones
I recommend spreading your investments across a rather more mixed portfolio.
Doughnuts and lammingtons may not be a safe bet any more. Focus on core products such as custard and caramel slices.
-
Please learn how to spel.
Arse. I fail. Note to self: drink coffee before posting.
-
Paulsen has handled things pretty well. With the shareholders in Bear Stearns and Lehman completely screwed and those of Merrill Lynch mostly screwed whilst freddiefannie assets/liabilities have been protected so the average homeowner is protected this kind of makes a mockery of the capitalise the profits and socialise the losses meme.
Sage, I've been reading your posts for a while trying to see if you are actually making some valid points, but all I'm getting is a rather irritating background static, like someone mumbling into their beer behind you while you're trying to have a conversation with someone else.
Can you:
1) please learn how to use puntuation.
2) actually make an argument rather than drop what you condier to be a few key words into a sentence and expect us all to immediately go 'wow, never thought of that. He's so totally right!'.
-
Wild Bills Steakhouse. A classy venue where they will happily serve the laydeez both types of wine (red and white). I imagine they'd mix them in the same bucket, oops I mean glass, if you asked nicely, too.
-
@Simon.
Good article. However, I don't think that negates the point. AQ influence in Iraq was effectively zero before the US invasion/occupation/police action in 2003. It then rose to a peak in around 2006 before dropping away again to the apparent current low-level background threat.
So i was incorrect to sugges tthere is current significant influence/presence, but there certainly was until very recently.
I've read other analysis that suggests Iraq is effectively becoming divided along 'robber-bandit' lines. Various groups control different territories, and charge 'taxes' on people moving through, or doing business in, those territories. Most of the fighting and violence in Iraq is factional in-fighting over control of those territories, in much the same way that drug gangs feud over turf.
Fanatics are bad for business and so get 'dealt with'. The official government is effectively a dead letter.
-
I think, from what I've read over the years, that the link exists only in the name and the Iraqi operation used it more as a flag waving exercise than to denote any operational tie at any level.
Got to agree with Giovanni here. They almost certainly were't there when Bush et al started their little adventure. They almost certainly are now, five years on.
-
I don't know of any Brits who think of themselves as British. They are English,Scottish, Welsh or Ulstermen. In any case, if Brit is an insult, it is a pretty lame one.
Precisely my point. If asked 'what nationality are you?' the answer would be 'English', 'Welsh', Scottish', or whatever.
If pressed (and possibly given a hint by pointing at their passport), one might eventually get 'oh yeah. British' as an answer. But it would be a poor second.
On the other hand, my xenophopic fellow countrymen (for I am, alas, a filthy 'Brit' ;) ) have absolutely no difficulty coming up with ethnic slurs for every nationality outside the borders of the UK, and everyone inside it who lives further than one street away, as well.
-
My tutorial students were surprised to find that I don't regard 'Kiwi' as insulting, and nor do any NZers, so far as I know.
Makes you wonder what 'bad' things they associate with 'Kiwi' for them to assume that it's an insult.
S'funny, cos I don't actually know any Brits who would regard 'Brit' as an insult, either.
But the proud and noble residents of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland tend to refer to themselves by sub-nationality anyway: 'English', 'Scottish', 'Welsh', 'Londoner', 'Northerner', and so on.
-
And he can legitimately run with the the Ollie North defence ("I have no recollection of that incident").
-
<quote>Well, I guess we're all supposed to be media junkies...</ quote>
If the original article was published in the FT (or online equivalent), I guess that's actually a reasonably fair call (although it's still not entirely clear to me where the stuff sage quoted came from). Most FT readers would recognise those references, I would guess.
However, I would consider myself fairly media-savvy, and I didn't.