Posts by ScottY
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
How soon before the Protocols of the Elders of Zion get a mention?
Or before David Icke gets his own show on Fox News?
-
As for other meanings for "teabag". Just goes to show you who the perverts are. Normal people don't do that kind of crap and so don't know of the other meanings.
Fellow PAS perverts- we've been outed!
-
Banks spent much of the first part of his term telling us he had changed, and that we would see a kinder and gentler side to the man.
The supercity debate has shown that Banks hasn't changed one bit. Thankfully his disguise has melted in a very public manner.
I see a new rival emerging. Bob Harvey's playing a smart game, acting as mediator, and coming across as the good guy. He's fairly well liked out west where I live, and is the type of candidate that could unite rather than divide.
Of all the current mayors Harvey looks like the one who could win it. Banks would come close, but so many people dislike him that a strong alternative candidate might get a powerful "anyone but Banks" vote - just as Hubbard did once.
-
It's interesting, though, that the right is much better at civil disobedience than the left:
There are examples of effective action by the left.
The French left are pretty effective at getting their way through protest action - though some would say to the detriment of the country. They have a long and gloroius history of blockades and marches.
Also, I wonder how many wingnuts are on the US no-fly list? My guess would be zero, despite their proven tendency to terrorism.
Maybe if a few of them start tea-bagging on planes though...
-
There is something disturbingly familiar sounding about this alleged New World Order run by bankers.
Put the word "Jewish" before "bankers" and its the 1930s all over again.
-
The Supercity will happen. That is that. It was delivered with the clarity we have come to expect from Rodney Hide and the light touch we are coming to see as the John Key trademark. No horses were frightened. The reformation is the most natural, normal thing in the world. And we'll do it by next October.
Where does one begin to start with a statement like this?
Hide's clarity - there seems to be less clarity about who he consulted. But, to be fair to Holmes, Hide's economic and political policies have always been expressed clearly. They're still bonkers though.
Key's "trademark" light touch appears to have deserted him in this instance. He appears to be acting in haste to impose a solution on the people of Auckland without adequate consultation.
No horses were frightened - just most of the mayors, a large number of the populace, sections of the media, and much of Wellington.
Lord Mayor Holmes?
-
Mark, Simon, I agree that all of the sources have their weaknesses. But Tacitus is generally considered reliable on most topics. I don't see any reason why Christian scholars would have invented a passage that blamed them for the Great Fire.
Like most ancient hstorians whose works have survived, Tacitus relies on unknown sources. Most historians of the Greek and Roman era (with a few famous exceptions, such as Polybius and Herodotus) didn't travel much, and of course their works have to be read with caution. But we should be careful about dismissing these records completely.
I would like to read some of his "lost" books such as Lives of Famous Whores and Physical Defects of Mankind
He is without question the most entertaining historian of the time - the Kitty Kelley of Imperial Rome.
-
ScottY - Who's on first?
Note - one of the finest moments
-
The Daily Show and Colbert have been having a gleeful time over Mr Beck in recent weeks.
Beck's "I love my country" speech, where he completely loses the plot, is probably one of the finest moment in US comedy history.
-
The passages in Josephus are generally thought to be fake, inserted into the text later.
Rather than "fake", I think the consensus is "possibly altered". That doesn't mean all of the passages are fake, though.
Tacitus is the only one who is clearly speaking of a man.
Indeed, and Tacitus is generally one of the more reliable Roman historians.
No one peice of evidence is itself conclusive. But on balance it seems more probable than not that Jesus lived. That doesn't mean we have to accept the Jesus that lived did all the things described in the New Testament.