On Sun, 22 May 2005 04:30:44 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:
Mary Fisher wrote:
I was far more inflamed about the invasion of Iraq. I can be passionate.
Must be true I guess.... you are a mother several times over I believe ;-)
That doesn't follow at all. Thousands of Victorian wives, perhaps
millions, suffered in silence as hubby prodded and poked, wheezed and
groaned. It does, after all, only take a second or two, and I expect
the well-behaved men of the time, unlike the brutes we are today,
wanted to make the experience as quick as possible. If we are
embarrassed today to talk about sex, imagine what it must have been
like a hundred and fifty years ago, when even piano legs had skirts. I
have often thought that the mammalian sexual act designed for
procreation of the species is rather a ridiculous affair, like a
third-rate provincial play staged by obvious amateurs, and I predict
that in future years procreation (as opposed to having 'fun') will be
carried out purely in the laboratory, using state-of-the-art test tube
technology (TTTŪ) and designer robowombs. (Let's have a pink one,
dear, if we decide on a girl.) Also, the term 'making love' is one of
the most risible euphemisms known to man. It is usually very
strenuous, can be unintentionally violent and painful, and nowadays is
often accompanied by a film crew, especially as the recession begins
to bite and mortgages have to be paid.
However, I am not sure how exactly this diversion into spelling helps
further the discussion on national ID registers....
It doesn't. But it seems to me that nothing I've read on this thread helps
further that discussion. I'm enjoying it but haven't learned anything yet.
Perhaps I am assuming too much too much background knowledge here? I
understand IT systems, and have specialist knowledge in some of the
technology that would be required to underpin a project of this type. As
a result I find it very easy to spot the many occasions where the
talking heads have glossed over a critical details or major
inconsistencies and conflicts of interest within the proposals that are
absolutely fundamental to it being able to function at all, let alone
deliver any of the various advantages the proponents have claimed. In
many cases it is obvious they have fallen for a line fed to them by
technology sales people.
The term 'talking heads' is a bit of a misnomer, as the use of the
word 'head' implies a brain might not be far away. But in the case of
our politicians, I would just stop at the word 'talking' and then add
'********'. Heads don't come into it, but they certainly have the
balls to come out with utter nonsense most of the time, especially the
one with the dawg, but also not forgetting the one who looks like he's
escaped from a Noddy adventure in Toytown.
(there, I even spell checked that one for you)
Thank you. It's not difficult to do it for every post to avoid
misunderstandings.
Generally I do, however I credit you with more that sufficient intellect
to be able to deduce my meaning in spite of the occasional spelling
mistake or typo.
John, I did understand every word, and Stevan admirably equipped those
with less of a grasp of the modern world with his excellent expansion
of your exposition. However, I, too, worked 'in computing' for many
years, so to me it's language learned at my mother's knee, so to
speak.
MM
|