OT: Cartoon

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:32:08 +1300, Terry Given wrote:

Clarence wrote:

"Chuck Harris" <cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote in message
news:kcidnRNvwb5l2g_cRVn-oA@rcn.net...

Mark Fergerson wrote:

snip

Yet, inspite of Rich's twaddle, life is now mostly tolerable for
nonsmokers. It used to be a living hell when smokers would light
up in classrooms, halls, offices, theaters, restaurants, airplanes,
bathrooms, stores,... everywhere. Even the segration didn't work. The
smoke in the back of the plane always reached gag me levels in the
front, smoke from the bar/smoking sections of restaurants, always clouded
up the token nonsmoking section..

The funny part is smokers are so dumb that they think their smoke won't
be noticed by non smokers, if they just fan at it with their hands, or
suck on a mint, ... if they aren't *seen* smoking. Well, I've got news
for the smokers, we can smell you when you enter the room... and you reek!
Your attempts to cover the smoke with Glade air fresheners makes you homes
smell like cheap motels, or trailers. A cross between a urinal cake and
an ashtray.

Not that I mind smoking very much...
-Chuck Harris



When I was a pup, a neighbor took a bunch of kids to the city morgue, where you
could identify the smokers by the yellow-brown stained sheets. I never liked
the smell, and knowing how it permeated the entire body, I was never tempted to
try. That did not prevent me from becoming violently allergic to the smoke
which I encountered everywhere. I suffered a lot and could not even go out to
a restaurant till the current ban was put in place.

I was fortunate enough, at the ripe old age of 15, to smoke 3 cigarettes
one night whilst drunk. Man, was I sick, for 3 days. They were the first
and last cigarettes I ever smoked.


Yea!
Ban on smoking!!!
Not liking to retch,
I mind smoking very much...

I dont mind the smoking, its the smoke......

besides, most smokers are FILTHY PIGS WHO LITTER, and as I often go
barefoot, litter which is burning is an issue for me.

Every time I have a party, I stick a plethora of ashtrays outside for
the smokers, every one of which throws their butts on the ground. My
least favourite part of the next-day cleanup job :{

It's nice of you to accommodate, but you do need some backbone. I'm
obviously a smoker, but I don't litter, and I don't like litterers.
But, since it's your house, you have a right to order people not to
litter, and if they do it anyway, they're dissing you, and deserve
whatever punishment you deem appropriate. Litterers and disrespecters
really need to be corrected, whether the issue is smoking or ice cream.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Chuck Harris]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

like a friendly campfire. But I suppose you hate campfire smoke
too.

Well, you've almost got your wish - you've been very effective at
cramming your religion down everybody's throat, with your shame and
blame. When they have the gall to go for an outright ban, however,
they might find that they have a civil war on their hands. You think
the war on drugs is a mess? Hah! Just wait till they declare war on
smokers!

Good Luck!
Rich

Hi Rich,

Why is it me imposing my "religion" on smokers when I insist that they stop,
and not the smoker imposing his "religion" on us when he inflicts his
smoke on a whole room full of people? Just one smoker in a room makes everyone
in the room breath his smoke.

As to campfires, and your fondness for your parent's smoke, kids of smokers
are just as nicotine addicted as their parents, they just don't know it. You
felt a fondness for the smell of smoke because as you smelled it, you got your
regular nicotine fix, it gave you the same calm feeling that it gave the smoker.
Your body was already acclimated to smoking.

When a non smoker, who isn't regularly exposed to smoke, enters a smoky
room, his eyes will burn, he will get a shortness of breath, and a wicked
buzz. The shortness of breath has been proven to last many hours after the
smoke exposure. For me, a massive headache will come after I leave the
smoke, and come down off of the nicotine.

-Chuck Harris

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:38:19 -0500, Chuck Harris wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:16:53 -0500, Chuck Harris wrote:


Why is it me imposing my "religion" on smokers when I insist that they stop,
and not the smoker imposing his "religion" on us when he inflicts his
smoke on a whole room full of people?


It's a religion when you make rules compelling privately-owned
establishemnts to prohibit an activity that everyone who goes there
has done, freely and willingly, since before you were even born.

So, what you are saying is that if I am bothered by smoke, I have no right
to attend college, go to a restaurant, a ball game, work in an office,
shop in an electronics store, shop in a auto parts store.... I should just
go hide my head in shame while smokers are free to roam? Bah!

No, of course not! Are you constitutionally incapable of noticing the
all-or-nothing thinking involved here?

You don't like smoke.

That's OK.

But it is wrong to impose your preferences on _PLACES WHERE YOU WOULD
NEVER GO ANYWAY!!!!!!!!!!!_

_THAT_ is what demonstrates that antismokerism is nothing more than a
religion, and a pretty lame one at that. All your gods guarantee is
that when you die of old age, you won't have any cigarette smoke in
your lungs keeping the dust mite feces company.

And there is no amount of whooptedoo that can change the fact that
cancer is entirely self-inflicted. You can deny it all day long, but
that does not make it not true.

Blaming the victim? Maybe you'd be served to ask yourself, from whence
blame? What is the payoff from your victimhood?

But no, these are advanced concepts that require the participation of a
functional consciousness to grasp.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Clarence]

"Chuck Harris" <cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote in message
news:kcidnRNvwb5l2g_cRVn-oA@rcn.net...

Mark Fergerson wrote:
snip

Yet, inspite of Rich's twaddle, life is now mostly tolerable for
nonsmokers. It used to be a living hell when smokers would light
up in classrooms, halls, offices, theaters, restaurants, airplanes,
bathrooms, stores,... everywhere. Even the segration didn't work. The
smoke in the back of the plane always reached gag me levels in the
front, smoke from the bar/smoking sections of restaurants, always clouded
up the token nonsmoking section..

The funny part is smokers are so dumb that they think their smoke won't
be noticed by non smokers, if they just fan at it with their hands, or
suck on a mint, ... if they aren't *seen* smoking. Well, I've got news
for the smokers, we can smell you when you enter the room... and you reek!
Your attempts to cover the smoke with Glade air fresheners makes you homes
smell like cheap motels, or trailers. A cross between a urinal cake and
an ashtray.

Not that I mind smoking very much...
-Chuck Harris

When I was a pup, a neighbor took a bunch of kids to the city morgue, where you
could identify the smokers by the yellow-brown stained sheets. I never liked
the smell, and knowing how it permeated the entire body, I was never tempted to
try. That did not prevent me from becoming violently allergic to the smoke
which I encountered everywhere. I suffered a lot and could not even go out to
a restaurant till the current ban was put in place.

Yea!
Ban on smoking!!!
Not liking to retch,
I mind smoking very much...

 

[Terry Given]

Clarence wrote:

"Chuck Harris" <cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote in message
news:kcidnRNvwb5l2g_cRVn-oA@rcn.net...

Mark Fergerson wrote:

snip

Yet, inspite of Rich's twaddle, life is now mostly tolerable for
nonsmokers. It used to be a living hell when smokers would light
up in classrooms, halls, offices, theaters, restaurants, airplanes,
bathrooms, stores,... everywhere. Even the segration didn't work. The
smoke in the back of the plane always reached gag me levels in the
front, smoke from the bar/smoking sections of restaurants, always clouded
up the token nonsmoking section..

The funny part is smokers are so dumb that they think their smoke won't
be noticed by non smokers, if they just fan at it with their hands, or
suck on a mint, ... if they aren't *seen* smoking. Well, I've got news
for the smokers, we can smell you when you enter the room... and you reek!
Your attempts to cover the smoke with Glade air fresheners makes you homes
smell like cheap motels, or trailers. A cross between a urinal cake and
an ashtray.

Not that I mind smoking very much...
-Chuck Harris



When I was a pup, a neighbor took a bunch of kids to the city morgue, where you
could identify the smokers by the yellow-brown stained sheets. I never liked
the smell, and knowing how it permeated the entire body, I was never tempted to
try. That did not prevent me from becoming violently allergic to the smoke
which I encountered everywhere. I suffered a lot and could not even go out to
a restaurant till the current ban was put in place.

I was fortunate enough, at the ripe old age of 15, to smoke 3 cigarettes
one night whilst drunk. Man, was I sick, for 3 days. They were the first
and last cigarettes I ever smoked.

Yea!
Ban on smoking!!!
Not liking to retch,
I mind smoking very much...

I dont mind the smoking, its the smoke......

besides, most smokers are FILTHY PIGS WHO LITTER, and as I often go
barefoot, litter which is burning is an issue for me.

Every time I have a party, I stick a plethora of ashtrays outside for
the smokers, every one of which throws their butts on the ground. My
least favourite part of the next-day cleanup job :{

Cheers
Terry

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:54:22 +1300, Terry Given <my_name@ieee.org>
wrote:

Honest though, thats what the guy said. We didnt get on very well. Once
after I got caned (6 of the best) for being disruptive, as I walked back
in somebody asked if it hurt - nah, I said, and was promptly marched
back outside for 6 more. I kept my mouth shut when I came back in, it
was starting to hurt by then

Still, it could have been worse. One of the woodwork teachers used to
take you outside, and make you bend over with your head sticking thru
the doorway whilst being caned, so the whole class looked at your face.
Another would make you bend over and stick your head underneath a desk,
so when you got caned you also smacked your head on the underside of the
desk. One teacher in particular, Harrison Ngatai (we used to call him
Nasty Harry) was banned from caning after managing to draw blood on one
poor bastard - big arms, thin cane. And my buddy Diz(zy Gillespie) got
caned in the back of the head, when Stock missed his arse. A week later
Diz was writing "stock is a wanker" on the blackboard when, unbeknownst
to Diz, Mr Stock walked in, and whacked Diz in the back of the head,
breaking his nose on the blackboard. That was 3rd form french, a real
fun class. One earthquake drill, instead of getting under our desks
(which Stock did) we threw our desks ontop of his, burying him under a
large pile. He used to swear underhis breath at the students, and
eventually left to take up a job at the all-girls school down the road.
6 months later he had a nervous breakdown, apparently the girls made us
look like amateurs

If I was the father of any of these children, I'd have beaten the tar
out of any of these monsters, or would have at least attempted to. If
it's okay in a society to beat up children, I'd suspect a lawyer could
argue that I'd have that right with the ass, er, teachers as well.

The summer break between my 6th and 7th form years, the government
banned corporal punishment in schools. A shame i think - I certainly
learned consequences - do what you must, but pay the price

Corporal punishment for my child is MY right, and MY decision, not
that of anyone else.

Tom

Cheers
Terry

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 17:39:17 +0000, Tom MacIntyre wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 17:07:52 +1300, Terry Given <my_name@ieee.org
wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 12:09:28 +1300, Terry Given wrote:

Funny, I could have sworn I knew what I meant when I wrote that sentence.


ROFL!



As did I. Actually thats precisely why I did not take English as a
subject in 7th form (final year in high school). In 6th form we studied
a poem by NZ poet Sam Hunt. Like all of his poems, it was simple and
direct, but our teacher disagreed with the entire class as to what the
poem was about. That year Sam Hunt visited our school (he is a great
live show - hilarious, with a unique, captivating voice) and spent 1/4
an hour with our 6th form class. Naturally we asked about the poem, and
he duly agreed with us - much to our delight, and our teachers chagrin.
Nevertheless after Sam Hunt left, when we begin to take the teacher to
task, he let rip with something along the lines of:

"well thats what he might think he meant, but subconsciously...."

When the "new math" was introduced in our school, our principal stated
that Base 2 and binary weren't the same.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22tom+lehrer%22+%22new+math%22

which was greeted with hoots of derision, IIRC I got caned for saying
"fuck off" or words to that effect. But we wrote what the teacher wanted
to hear, and passed, and I concluded that it was all a load of bollocks
and concentrated on physics instead, leading me to a career of blowing
things up rather than that of a wordsmith.

Sounds like working for the government...say what they want to hear.

Yup.

;^j
Cheers!
Rich

 

[Tim Wescott]

Tim Wescott wrote:

Of course it can't possibly by that insanity runs in families, and
psychotic parents are much more to abuse their kids.

"likely to". Please insert it in the statement above where it makes the
most sense.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

 

[Tim Wescott]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

I was going to say something marginally similar, just more along the
lines of it's a correlation, which doesn't imply causation. They
could both be things that are caused by something else, like they're
symptoms of some underlying thing, or something.

But Smoking doesn't cause Cancer either, but almost everybody blames
it anyway.

I hope you're being sarcastic about the smoking comment.

Yes, it's a correlation with no causality indicated in the data
presented in the news report. Either the workers only found correlation
and just assumed a causal link, or there was more research than is being
reported.

Whenever you're dealing with humans it makes the double blind
experiments hard to get by the ethics panels.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 10:01:36 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:03:14 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com

It wouldn't take a quarter of our early air-burst nuclear tests to
turn Islam into a meaningless religion of a few impoverished bedouins.
We survived those pretty well.

-Steve

Collateral damage?

What's your point? We're talking about nuking Islam out of existence
here. If you want we can drop leaflets and ask
who wants to live in the American southwest and become
"Injuns"?

What I wonder is, what's wrong with just leaving the Ay-rabs
to their own devices, and buy the oil from whatever sultan
happens to be in power, and if his subjects want him overthrown,
let them do it?

Or are they paranoid that if they let the Ay-rabs live, that they'll
cut off the oil?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 10:03:21 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

That's not what's stopping them. What is stopping them is that they
wouldn't be able to get the oil for many years.

Notwithstanding the evil of mass murder on such an incomprehensible
scale.

The oil is away from population centers, no problem.

And I must admit, it's not inconceivable that the people waging
the "war" are trying to minimize collateral damage.

Are they evil, or just participating in somebody's karma?

;^j
Rich

 

[John Miller]

Product developer wrote:

Dipshit?!

Hobbiest hacker calling a brilliant, well respected, real scientist a
dipshit?

The beautiful irony is, people who stoop to name calling never seem to
realize just how deficient it makes them look.

--
John Miller

Lonely is a man without love.
                -Englebert Humperdinck