POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : London under siege, a reply Server Time
22 Dec 2024 23:03:24 EST (-0500)
  London under siege, a reply (Message 1 to 10 of 36)  
Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>
From: Stephen
Subject: London under siege, a reply
Date: 6 Jun 2017 15:41:54
Message: <59370582$1@news.povray.org>
I think John Oliver has got it right.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/john-oliver-late-show-tonight-london-terror-attack-london-bridge-response-a7772901.html


-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 6 Jun 2017 17:20:50
Message: <59371cb2$1@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 20:41:50 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> I think John Oliver has got it right.
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/john-oliver-
late-show-tonight-london-terror-attack-london-bridge-response-
a7772901.html

Yep, we were cheering him on.

We have good friends who live in Bucks, and one of them used to work in 
Richmond House.  We once asked them how they dealt with the constant 
threat of terror from the IRA, and they said "We live our lives.  We're 
not stupid about how we do that, but we also aren't going to let the IRA  
make us afraid to live our lives and enjoy them."

Wise words.

Jim
-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw


Post a reply to this message

From: Stephen
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 6 Jun 2017 17:47:11
Message: <593722df$1@news.povray.org>
On 6/6/2017 10:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 20:41:50 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> I think John Oliver has got it right.
>>
>> http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/john-oliver-
> late-show-tonight-london-terror-attack-london-bridge-response-
> a7772901.html
>
> Yep, we were cheering him on.
>
> We have good friends who live in Bucks, and one of them used to work in
> Richmond House.  We once asked them how they dealt with the constant
> threat of terror from the IRA, and they said "We live our lives.  We're
> not stupid about how we do that, but we also aren't going to let the IRA
> make us afraid to live our lives and enjoy them."
>
> Wise words.
>

It is the only way to do it. You've got more chance of winning the 
lottery...


-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 6 Jun 2017 18:08:26
Message: <593727da$1@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 22:47:07 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 6/6/2017 10:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 20:41:50 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> I think John Oliver has got it right.
>>>
>>> http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/john-oliver-
>> late-show-tonight-london-terror-attack-london-bridge-response-
>> a7772901.html
>>
>> Yep, we were cheering him on.
>>
>> We have good friends who live in Bucks, and one of them used to work in
>> Richmond House.  We once asked them how they dealt with the constant
>> threat of terror from the IRA, and they said "We live our lives.  We're
>> not stupid about how we do that, but we also aren't going to let the
>> IRA make us afraid to live our lives and enjoy them."
>>
>> Wise words.
>>
>>
> It is the only way to do it. You've got more chance of winning the
> lottery...

Yep.

Saying anything more than that on my part would get too political for me 
here. :)

-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw


Post a reply to this message

From: Stephen
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 7 Jun 2017 00:26:03
Message: <5937805b$1@news.povray.org>
On 6/6/2017 11:08 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 22:47:07 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 6/6/2017 10:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 06 Jun 2017 20:41:50 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think John Oliver has got it right.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/john-oliver-
>>> late-show-tonight-london-terror-attack-london-bridge-response-
>>> a7772901.html
>>>
>>> Yep, we were cheering him on.
>>>
>>> We have good friends who live in Bucks, and one of them used to work in
>>> Richmond House.  We once asked them how they dealt with the constant
>>> threat of terror from the IRA, and they said "We live our lives.  We're
>>> not stupid about how we do that, but we also aren't going to let the
>>> IRA make us afraid to live our lives and enjoy them."
>>>
>>> Wise words.
>>>
>>>
>> It is the only way to do it. You've got more chance of winning the
>> lottery...
>
> Yep.
>
> Saying anything more than that on my part would get too political for me
> here. :)
>

Understood.
But consider the carnage they could have caused if firearms were readily 
available here.
With that in mind. They weren't very effective. Considering they had the 
element of surprise.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 7 Jun 2017 11:56:17
Message: <59382221$1@news.povray.org>
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 05:25:58 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> Understood.
> But consider the carnage they could have caused if firearms were readily
> available here.
> With that in mind. They weren't very effective. Considering they had the
> element of surprise.

Absolutely.  But some here will say "see, they found a way in spite of 
the fact that there aren't firearms readily available" - and will ignore 
the fact that this was a largely ineffective attack.

Jim
-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw


Post a reply to this message

From: Stephen
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 7 Jun 2017 12:48:28
Message: <59382e5c@news.povray.org>
On 6/7/2017 4:56 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 05:25:58 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> Understood.
>> But consider the carnage they could have caused if firearms were readily
>> available here.
>> With that in mind. They weren't very effective. Considering they had the
>> element of surprise.
>
> Absolutely.  But some here will say "see, they found a way in spite of
> the fact that there aren't firearms readily available"

Naturally that is what people do. Whatever the issue.

> - and will ignore
> the fact that this was a largely ineffective attack.
>


I think it is a little bit taboo to bring that up. Either you don't want 
to admit it. Or, if you are on the other side (mine) it would be 
offensive to the victims and their families.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: dick balaska
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 7 Jun 2017 16:35:27
Message: <5938638f$1@news.povray.org>
Am 2017-06-06 17:47, also sprach Stephen:

> 
> It is the only way to do it. You've got more chance of winning the 
> lottery...
> 
> 

After Sandy Hook, we spent billions turning our schools into 
mini-prisons.  I pointed out that that was a total waste of money.
Concerned mom: "It keeps my snowflake safe."
Me: "Ok, so I'm a bad guy with a gun who is locked out of the school. 
I'll just sit on that hill across the street and pick off a couple of 
packed busloads of kids."

And I followed it up with my goto line.
"You are so concerned about something that is not going to happen, yet 
you ignore the 300 people that died on Connecticut's roads last year 
while you happily text and drive."

-- 
dik


Post a reply to this message

From: Stephen
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 7 Jun 2017 18:07:35
Message: <59387927$1@news.povray.org>
On 6/7/2017 9:35 PM, dick balaska wrote:
> Am 2017-06-06 17:47, also sprach Stephen:
>
>>
>> It is the only way to do it. You've got more chance of winning the
>> lottery...
>>
>>
>
> After Sandy Hook, we spent billions turning our schools into
> mini-prisons.  I pointed out that that was a total waste of money.

Not  total waste of money. It shows to the world/community that the 
authorities are doing something, however ineffectual. Throwing money at 
the wrong problem. Personally I believe the real problem is social 
inequality, at least it is in Britain. People get pissed off with their 
lives and crack or here in the UK get radicalised. But changing that 
seems to be too hard to admit. At least for politicians who want to get 
re-elected.
When we had a school massacre in Dunblane. Our politicians tightened up 
our gun laws. But I understand that would be political suicide in the 
states. So it won't be done unless the unthinkable happens.


> Concerned mom: "It keeps my snowflake safe."
> Me: "Ok, so I'm a bad guy with a gun who is locked out of the school.
> I'll just sit on that hill across the street and pick off a couple of
> packed busloads of kids."
>

Mr. Popularity at the PTA. ;)

> And I followed it up with my goto line.
> "You are so concerned about something that is not going to happen, yet
> you ignore the 300 people that died on Connecticut's roads last year
> while you happily text and drive."
>

Don't get me started on that one. I would jail anyone caught doing it. 
(Well I like to think I would. Threatening to take away their licences 
would probable be better.)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: London under siege, a reply
Date: 7 Jun 2017 18:19:07
Message: <59387bdb$1@news.povray.org>
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 23:07:30 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> When we had a school massacre in Dunblane. Our politicians tightened up
> our gun laws. But I understand that would be political suicide in the
> states. So it won't be done unless the unthinkable happens.

The unthinkable has happened here in the US.  Several times.  The answer 
is always "more guns".  Ridiculous.

But let it be an "Islamic Terrorist," and we're willing to give away ALL 
of our freedoms.  How much money did we waste over here on those damn 
backscatter X-Ray machines?  Billions.  Know what?  They replaced them 
recently - with dogs.  The dogs were shown to be more effective.  Last 
time I flew somewhere (last year), I had to put my shoes *BACK ON* and 
put my laptop back in my bag because the dogs were that much more 
effective.  I held up the line because I'd followed the old nonsensical 
procedures.

Seems we could've figured that shit out 15 years ago and saved a ton of 
money.

But hey, now it sounds like because of the threat of possible exploding 
laptops from certain countries, they'll probably have to be checked for 
most international flights.  Because in the hold is so much safer.  Along 
with a planeload of bored passengers because they don't have their 
laptops or tablets, and didn't think to bring a book or six.

And, of course, we have the privilege of paying the airlines to check our 
electronics now, too.  Hurray, capitalism. <grump>

Jim
-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw


Post a reply to this message

Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.