No. 7: I have a friend who keeps African Greys, a cockatiel, and dogs and cats (not to mention other birds outside.) The birds are perfectly capable of getting rid of any unwanted attention, feline or canine. It's pretty impressive. I've seen photgraphs of the parrots sitting on the cats. And if the cat in question is anything like our cat - her son - she's no slouch in the predating department, either.
I'm fascinated by the Improbable Research particle, but I can't help thinking that the authors must have been listening to the Velvet Underground a little too much lately.
PNH at #1: But is his sister called Rebecca?
"Caution: to prevent electric shock, do not remove cover. No user-servicable parts inside. Refer servicing to qualified service personnel."
#449-456. I agree with fidelio. This is shameless, or it would be if it was actual humans doing it.
#227-232. This is the second lot I've seen today. What is it about Thanksgiving?
Epacris at 327: The sausage-maker also says:
"I don't think any of our customers believe that we use dragon meat in our sausages. We use the word because the dragon is synonymous with Wales."
I'm taking this to mean that his sausages also don't contain whale. Personally, I'm glad we've got trading standards officers to make sure our Soylent Green really is people!
somebody wordy at 320: More on those Otakin here, as featured on Fandom_Wank a while back.
A.J. Luxton at number 53: I haven't seen those Mac/PC ads. I always assumed they were anthropomorphising and slashing the operating systems themselves. I did think that was a little odd, but, I thought, who knows what strangeness lurks in the heart of slashers?
Numbers 396-404. And weird spam it is too.
"But the night is Halloween, lady,
The morn is Hallowday . . .
Just at the mirk and midnight hour
The fairy folk will ride."
A bit of housekeeping: the link in the title of this now-closed thread needs disabling somehow. The page it originally linked to has been taken over by a gay porn site.
Xopher: I don't know John Clute at all, but I remember reading an interview with him in Interzone in which he railed against joyless religion of any kind, particularly Christianity, if I recall correctly, and specifically stated that he was an atheist. (My pile of Interzones is on the other side of the country, I'm afraid, so I can't cite or quote directly.) So I don't think he's the kind of person to think Christianity is "the only 'real' religion". In any case, I got the impression he was far too intelligent to say any such thing, though I admit I'm something of a naif and you shouldn't take my impression too seriously.
So why would he do this? I'm just guessing, but I think there's two possibilities. Either an interfering subeditor changed the line, or he specifically "dumbed down" his obituary on the grounds that either people would have read the novel and know what he meant, or they wouldn't have and so wouldn't notice the error. He only spends one sentence on it, after all.
They go around saying that they "have religion" and no one else does.
True, sadly. Theological tangent, as this is an open thread: Karl Barth argues that it's the opposite way round: that Christianity is the only religion that's not a religion, if you see what I mean. He does this by defining "Christianity" as "God revealing Himself to Humanity" and "religion" as "Humanity blindly groping after spiritual things, sometimes God, sometimes not". Religion, like Humanity, is thereby intrinsically flawed as spiritual endeavour; Christianity only so far as the individual humans are flawed. (That's something of a caricature, as it's not an area I know particularly much about; but I think it's basically right.) It's a useful way of explaining to Christians why Life of Brian isn't heretical.
Lisa Goldstein in 211:
The relevant sentence of Clute's obituary reads:
"The Dragon Waiting ... poignantly comments on the world that made us through its vision of an alternate medieval Europe without religion."
But The Dragon Waiting is currently on my to-read list, so I can't say what "without religion" means if the novel also has Mithraism in.
Makes you wonder who's doing the thinking.
No. 14 Graydon:
Forgive me my blinkered viewpoint. I assumed we were primarily discussing Islamic terrorism. So I agree with your points (especially about a response to perceived invasion) but I think the article implies that there aren't any "home-grown" Muslim terrorists.
No. 15 Steve Buchheit:
Sugar, actually most of our "home-grown terrorists" aren't muslims but racial extremists (on all sides of the issue).
Yes, entirely (see above.)
American culture has a great way of decompressing the political ideals of foreign terrorism followers when they've been here for some time.
If you say so; I've never been to the United States. If a (Muslim) terrorist cell can assemble in Leeds, I reasoned, why not in Lubbock? It hasn't, therefore there aren't any potential terrorists, or they're too disorganised to be any threat, and no foreign groups can "out-source" plots to them.
Maybe some restrictions on weapon ownership might be in order?
Sarcasm, I'm afraid, pure and simple. It's obviously impossible to outlaw anything that might be used as a weapon, but why be so free over weapons specifically designed to kill? However, I concede weapons controls wouldn't stop terrorism; to me, the United States simply seems more violent than England.
"How stupid of me not to have thought of that myself." Given that people inclined to kill and terrorise seem to be able to do so with minimal training and resources (Madrid planned and executed in six months; two teenagers were responsible for the Columbine massacre, and school shootings are done by children) this is obvious. Maybe some restrictions on weapon ownership might be in order?
Personally I think the reason terrorists have concentrated on transport so far is because there are a lot of people very close together, and the aftermath is so disruptive (pace the latest restrictions on flying.) The Bali bombings on nightclubs satisfy the first of these conditions, and are seen as intrinsically sinful places by Islamists; the 7/7 bombers considered blowing up the Ministry of Sound, IIRC.
Subject to a workable definition of terrorism, I am cautiously optimitic about Treating Them Like Pirates. Certainly I think a coalition of nations as seen in Paris, 1856, is plausible.
No. 2 Steve Buchheit: Granted, but why shouldn't home-grown cells attack America directly? According to Wikipedia there are over 500,000 Muslims in the United States; statistically, there must be some, though I admit that's a pretty small minority.
Tim May #276: Innocuous is the last word I'd use to describe Tesco. They're more of the local Wal-Mart; the statistic I've seen about them is that they take one pound in eight spent in the high street. A while back a journalist lived for a month solely on things bought from them (even including insurance and books) for a stunt. In short, a Tesco in every square mile is not just a likelihood - by 2012 it's a probability.
Stefan Jones #276: Alas, the Telegraph does not seem the web-archive the article headlined:
"Paramedics lasso pigs on motorway"
Sorry, this was back at the dawn of time when everyone wrote on paper, and I can't find anything by Googling "pubic hair" "greek statues". I don't remember too much about the coursework itself, but the illustrations were apparently quite something. IIRC, it was put on display one open evening, and never recovered.
"On a less elevated artistic level, imperial styles in hairdressing rapidly spread to the rest of the population and have become a useful method for dating statues."
Reminds me of a bloke I knew when I was taking A-level Classical Studies; he did his main coursework on the different styles of pubic hair seen on Greek statues.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2007 | 3 |
| 2006 | 23 |
Total: 26 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Sugar:
Show all comments by Sugar.