The Christian Attitude Of The British

[dune]

*Please note this is a windup (although with what i may say later my gang of groupies will say no no no).

 

I saw an interview with the young lady whose father was shot in the head, by Bird (the basttard - this shows my attitude), and what she said was nothing short of amazing and completely christian. She said i feel no anger towards Bird as he was a sick man and i forgive him.

 

Now i know i've already said it, but i'll say it again - that is amazing - what a really nice lady.

 

So now for the WUM bit - as playing devils advocate does often get debates down to the nitty gritty (although sadly there are very few posters who can debate properly, i.e play the ball, but simpy attack the player, so zoom back to a point a poster called Stanley made - whose views are misinterpretted although he may have been a bit racist. The latter semtence is however utterly and completely irrelevent to debating because if someone is a bit racist they still have a view and there would be no debate nor democracy with one party comunism. I know for a fact i'll be attacked for the WUMMY point i will eventually suggest as a theory (not a fact as you cannot talk factually about suposition and theory) but that will be a shame. Not only for me, but for the point of the lounge which is or should be about conversation with a degree of adultness. I love knowledge and thrive on it, so if you believe i'm wrong i really would love to hear why you think as much. That said most of us are adults and as such have ingrined beliefs. ESB says leopards can never change their spots - ESB is partly right, but not completely because indisputeable fact is indisputeable fact.

 

So looking back to the remarkable lady in Cumbria do you think that Britain would be better or worse off in 2010 (not in the intervening years) if we'd sided with Hitler. The objective words are "do you think" and to be able to think you do need a grasp of historical knowledge. History shows that Britain did what Germany did on the continent and held not only an empire, but the greatest empire the world has ever seen and will ever see (as far as is humanly possible to forsee at present although that's a very uneducated view to take - therfore on second thoughts i retract that comment but cannot be arsed to delete it because it may well add something that i'm failing to see. I digress - would Britain be better if we'd sided with the nazis - and i've mention pur colonial heritage, but we did not have gas chambers. Well I would suggest that this is because zyclon b had not been invented because you'd have to be very optimistic not to believe that when putting down rebbelions and punishing tribes and groups that opposed us we wouldn't have wished and endeavered to erradicate them. It is a fact, not a well lnown fact because the victors of war the ruling classes control the national curriculum and the not so free press, but from 1950 - 1960 100,000 mau mau terrorists and rebels (or freedom fighters and patriots) were murdered through starvation, ill treatment, torture which was turned a blind eye to by those at the highest levels (they probably even discreatly encouraged it). And the nationb responsible was Britain, the perpetrators were the British Army, the political wing was the foreign office (called something else in those days) and the British general public (although obviously unaware of the extent of the attrocities) would, i'd wager, think the acts not nice, but they (and when i say they i mean most Brits) would have had the attitude that the preservation of what was rightfully ous(again a common view then and still a view held by some still - cue abuse but again that's boring and water off a ducks back) was to be defended. Sp to go back yet again to the wummy point in the thread the similarities because ours and germanys actions are .... er.... starkly similar. That is without going into the similarities between us and the Germans (note none of that ayrian crap because an ayran in this day and age is as feasible an finding a member of the Jewish race (which died out at the time of tutankhamun give or take a few thousand years ha ha (covers me from the smartsres). As Northern Europeans we are very more more alike not only in our accents and languages, but in our attitides and this is why the British and the Dutch were so good at empire building. So were the europeans so that point is actually utter ********, but we built our sucess on land that wasn't so ripe dor civilisation to flourish so what we did was more remarkable. Yes Britain is a green and pleasant land, but before the days of mechanisation they had it easier and in places such as spain desertification hadn't began in those days. It was our stoic and resilient ingrained attitude (enforced by the ruling elite) and the French threat, and farmer geroge and others, that fuelled the need for the industrial revoltion. It can be argued that Germany/Prussia has always been more militaristic in the attitudes of it's people, but being continental that was as necessary as our naval defence. At waterloo Wellington only defeated Boneparte because by chance the Prussian army found the battle site and provided reinforcements and were it not for the Germans/Prussians we would all speaking French but that doesn't mean that we'd have public guilloting at the Bargate to watch while shopping, just like Me Whippy wouldn't have his ice cream dispenser loaded with zyclon b and a quick release hatch to net the children with big noses pr ginger hair.

 

Therefore I put to everyone that had we sided with the nazis britain today wouldn't necessarily be any worse than it is today and it could quite possibly (although i'm by no means suggesting possibly means positively) be better.

[Matthew Le God]

*Please note this is a windup (although with what i may say later my gang of groupies will say no no no).

 

Blah Blah Blah etc etc

 

Therefore I put to everyone that had we sided with the nazis britain today wouldn't necessarily be any worse than it is today and it could quite possibly be better.

 

I may have misunderstood you point but if it is as I believe, you are insane!

Edited 12 June, 2010 by Matthew Le God

[dune]

What planet do you live on?

 

Disapointing, but i was foolish to expect otherwise.

[Matthew Le God]

Can you make the middle chunk more concise and summarise your point rather than a massive paragraph of ramblings?

[suewhistle]

Can you also tell us what you were on? A bit coked up is my guess...

[dune]

Can you make the middle chunk more concise and summarise your point rather than a massive paragraph of ramblings?

 

Steve Grant has already had a woed with you and he was dead right. MLG i've nothing against you, but I have asked that this thread is kpt sensible and you are more than capable of debatingm so please do that mate because I am genuinely interested if you have a point to make.

[dune]

Can you also tell us what you were on? A bit coked up is my guess...

 

Hi Sue:)

[Matthew Le God]

Steve Grant has already had a woed with you and he was dead right. MLG i've nothing against you, but I have asked that this thread is kpt sensible and you are more than capable of debatingm so please do that mate because I am genuinely interested if you have a point to make.

 

Ok, I'll debate. But please could you briefly summarise your idea, as I'm a little unsure of what you are trying to get across in the opening post.

[dune]

Ok, I'll debate. But please could you briefly summarise your idea, as I'm a little unsure of what you are trying to get across in the opening post.

#

 

No I can't. Stop acting like a little kid. Are you a little kid?

[benjii]

MLG

 

He's saying that there is a nice lady in Cumbria that embodies the best, in Dune's opinion presumably, Christian virtues. Because of this, he is asking if it would have been beter if we had sided with the Nazis.

 

I'm not sure I quite follow his flow myself.

[dune]

MLG

 

He's saying that there is a nice lady in Cumbria that embodies the best, in Dune's opinion presumably, Christian virtues. Because of this, he is asking if it would have been beter if we had sided with the Nazis.

 

I'm not sure I quite follow his flow myself.

 

To be perfectly honest neither can I come to think of it, but I think there was wgen i started typing, but i'll be buggered if i xan think of one now. Therefore this can be a thread about two separate topics which saves on banswidth which save on electricity whicg helps [rptect the rain forests which has bugger all effect on global warming becayse it's a load of ********

[Matthew Le God]

#

 

No I can't. Stop acting like a little kid. Are you a little kid?

 

You said you wanted to debate. I asked if you could summarise as the opening posts lacks paragraph and is far from concise. So you call me a "little kid". I thought it was a resonable request.

 

I take you are against democracy if you think it is better to side with the Nazi's?

 

I take you are against freedom of speech?

 

I take it you are...

 

etc etc

 

The list is inexhaustible.

[Draino76]

1) Lay off the coke.

2) Use a spell-check.

[dune]

You said you wanted to debate. I asked if you could summarise as the opening posts lacks paragraph and is far from concise. So you call me a "little kid". I thought it was a resonable request.

 

I take you are against democracy if you think it is better to side with the Nazi's?

 

I take you are against freedom of speech?

 

I take it you are...

 

etc etc

 

The list is inexhaustible.

 

Questions questions question, whether they relate to the answer i'm about to give i couldn't give a toss. You are being deliberately choldish. I have read through the OP and although not perfect, it is completely readable. So tell me I should give you the benefit of the doubt given that you are doing what you have a reputation for doing?

[dune]

1) Lay off the coke.

2) Use a spell-check.

 

I don't know what you're talking about, i don't know how to use the spell checker, i don't want to know how to use the spell cjecker as it may change a wprd to an american spelling and that would annoy me immensely

[Matthew Le God]

How do you picture this alternate reality where we sided with the Nazi's?

 

What would this Britain be like? Describe which aspects you think would be better?

[rocknrollman no2]

Dune,if the Nazis had won the war,this country like the rest of Europe would have been a satelite state of Germany and as such we would have been expected to supply the Nazi state with slave workers and economic help.

Germany would have done what ever she wanted with the British Empire.

America would have had a policy of isolationism,because without Britain,they could not have won the war.So Great Britain would be left to her fate.All of the government and royal family would have been transported to the USA before the invasion of the British Isles happened.

So in answer to your question,i think Britain would have a lot worse off if we had lost the war.

[Draino76]

Ok, thats cool.

 

Just hopping over to the 'Pompey takeover saga' fred to cheer me up a bit.

 

Ta ta.

[Matthew Le God]

Dune,if the Nazis had won the war,this country like the rest of Europe would have been a satelite state of Germany and as such we would have been expected to supply the Nazi state with slave workers and economic help.

Germany would have done what ever she wanted with the British Empire.

America would have had a policy of isolationism,because without Britain,they could not have won the war.So Great Britain would be left to her fate.All of the government and royal family would have been transported to the USA before the invasion of the British Isles happened.

So in answer to your question,i think Britain would have a lot worse off if we had lost the war.

 

Basically the plot of Robert Harris' "Fatherland"

 

An awesome read and the TV movie is quite good aswell.

[rocknrollman no2]

Basically the plot of Robert Harris' "Fatherland"

 

An awesome read and the TV movie is quite good aswell.

You got me sussed Matthew Le God!!!!

[dune]

Dune,if the Nazis had won the war,this country like the rest of Europe would have been a satelite state of Germany and as such we would have been expected to supply the Nazi state with slave workers and economic help.

Germany would have done what ever she wanted with the British Empire.

America would have had a policy of isolationism,because without Britain,they could not have won the war.So Great Britain would be left to her fate.All of the government and royal family would have been transported to the USA before the invasion of the British Isles happened.

So in answer to your question,i think Britain would have a lot worse off if we had lost the war.

 

Cheers, good post mate.

 

There is a theory (no doubt on historical documentation) that Hitler wanted mainland Europe and wanted us as an ally comtrol most of the rest. However alliances with nutters (as Hitler was) would be fragile to say the least. It can be argued that Churchill hated the Comunists more than the fascist and what is a fascist at the end of the day? As far as i'm aware it's sytem that looks after a [artucular group of people based on who they are - therefore not any differen to the Conservatives versus Labour because it's tantamount to apartheid to benefit one part of a given population deliberately especially when the Conservatives do it because that's unfair. Thankfully under Dave Cam we have a normal guy that calls people "mate" - if you're reading this Dave please stop it - it isn't appropriate and makes you look like a posh man trying too hard.

[dune]

Ok, thats cool.

 

Just hopping over to the 'Pompey takeover saga' fred to cheer me up a bit.

 

Ta ta.

 

Can I come too?

[Matthew Le God]

You got me sussed Matthew Le God!!!!

 

Yep.

 

Dune,

 

Buy online/a bookshop or goto a library and read this...

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fatherland-Robert-Harris/dp/0099263815/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276381760&sr=8-2

[dune]

Yep.

 

Dune,

 

Buy online/a bookshop or goto a library and read this...

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fatherland-Robert-Harris/dp/0099263815/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276381760&sr=8-2

 

What is the slant, are Americans major characters over the English, does it have american spelling? I have certain stanfards which when compromised lead to the book reading not getting past chapter 1

[Matthew Le God]

Main character is actually a german policeman.

 

It is set in 1964 in the run up to Hitler's 75th birthday.

[dune]

My fav books/films are pirate films (not unfunny yank humour ones), and crusader stuff, and stuff with elves and dwarfs and **** (not tackled these types of books for years as they are a marathon anf sometimes 7,8,9 + thick novels in one go. I;m a slow reader because I like to really picture the schenes and haven't felt like the series for a bit cos they take over your life when theres **** like lawns to mow.

[dune]

Main character is actually a german policeman.

 

It is set in 1964 in the run up to Hitler's 75th birthday.

 

What the brief gib.

[dune]

I recomend PIRATE LATTITUDES by Michael Crichton. There are some american spellimg and the author is a yank, and he had to make a key character a yank, but ultimately is about the English colony of Port Royal - Jamaica and touchs on piracy and privateering and the good old spanish main. Just what a pirate book should be,

 

EDIT: When i say it touches on privateering thats not strictly true - it's all about it.

[Matthew Le God]

I have the book somewhere. Haven't read it recently. I also really liked the TV movie starring Miranda Richardson (Queeny in Blackadder) and Rutger Hauer. I have never been able to find a DVD or video of it. I knew there was a short clip on youttube.

 

I just looked again tonight because of this thread and someone has relatively recently put the entire film on youtube!

 

I'm going to watch it now. I recommend it, let me know what you think...

 

Part One

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reeiGt_PP6k

Edited 12 June, 2010 by Matthew Le God

[dune]

Describe which aspects you think would be better?

 

I cannot say what I think would better, but I can try to make some suggestions that I think could be plausible. This is so tricky because the first question is would Hitler have left us to it, and would we be an equal ally - i think not - because by the very fact we sought an alliance (we were the colonial power) would mean that the top dog in the pact would have been the germans. It is reasonable to assume that we would have had to have adopted their race policies (to an extent or to their entirity) but you have to remember that in the 1940's Britain was essentially anglo saxon and our main immigration had come from Ireland and Protestant Huegenots from France. Discount the norman conquest and all that mixing of race because it was/is so mixed it is who we all are.

[Matthew Le God]

I cannot say what I think would better, but I can try to make some suggestions that I think could be plausible. This is so tricky because the first question is would Hitler have left us to it, and would we be an equal ally - i think not - because by the very fact we sought an alliance (we were the colonial power) would mean that the top dog in the pact would have been the germans. It is reasonable to assume that we would have had to have adopted their race policies (to an extent or to their entirity) but you have to remember that in the 1940's Britain was essentially anglo saxon and our main immigration had come from Ireland and Protestant Huegenots from France. Discount the norman conquest and all that mixing of race because it was/is so mixed it is who we all are.

 

Why is migration a bad thing? If migrants bring skills into the country it is for the benefit of society and the economy. Of course the other extreme with floods of poorly skilled migrants isn't good.

 

Have you seen the post above? It is a good watch and very relevant to this discussion.

[Scudamore]

I find getting drunk a lot more rewarding when done with friends...

[dune]

I find getting drunk a lot more rewarding when done with friends...

 

I don't find it rewarding at all really. Anyways since what nickh said I really don't want to fall out with you because I like Nick and if he vouchs for you thats good enough for me.

[Scudamore]

I don't find it rewarding at all really. Anyways since what nickh said I really don't want to fall out with you because I like Nick and if he vouchs for you thats good enough for me.

 

I'm very nice really...

 

My dad has a theory that we should have stayed out of the war as the Russians would have seen to them. What would the world be like if that were the case? We shall never know.

 

Anyway i shall bow out of this one...sounds like the sort of conversation one should be having whilst being veh, veh drunk.

[TopGun]

Oh dear Dune...

[dune]

Oh dear Dune...

 

ha ha ha, i'm starting to think this. Oh well.

[tedmaul]

"I cannot say what I think would better, but I can try to make some suggestions that I think could be plausible. This is so tricky because the first question is would Hitler have left us to it, and would we be an equal ally - i think not - because by the very fact we sought an alliance (we were the colonial power) would mean that the top dog in the pact would have been the germans. It is reasonable to assume that we would have had to have adopted their race policies (to an extent or to their entirity) but you have to remember that in the 1940's Britain was essentially anglo saxon and our main immigration had come from Ireland and Protestant Huegenots from France. Discount the norman conquest and all that mixing of race because it was/is so mixed it is who we all are."

 

Are you serious? I really hope not. I'm really hoping you haven't thought, I'll write a rationale of Nazism, in a way that others will think hang on maybe they had a point. I really hope that wasn't your mindset.

[Big John]

Taking the question as it was written (hypothetically) and not provocatively, I can think of a couple of positives in the WWII score being reversed.

 

1 - We would be able to laugh at ourselves much better than we currently do. For example, we are renowned for our sense of humour and the Germans are renowned for their silly leather shorts, a great combo imho.

 

2 - We would not only have a great match to look forward to in the World Cup, we would be rightly confident of winning the damned thing.

 

World Cup Final 2010 - The United Sates of America vs The United Sates of Germany.

[lenwilkins]

It amuses me that National Front supporters are so illiterate.

 

I bet he can spell Muslim.

[Sheaf Saint]

At the risk of being a bit controversial, the one positive I can think of that would have come out of us siding with the Nazis is that we wouldn't have the problems in the middle east we have now, because the state of Israel would never have been created. However, I'm not for one second advocating that the extermination of an entire race in order to prevent this conflict would have been right.

[bridge too far]

What is the slant, are Americans major characters over the English, does it have american spelling? I have certain stanfards which when compromised lead to the book reading not getting past chapter 1

 

That obviously don't stretch as far as according Christians some respect by spelling the name of their sect properly?

[SFKA South Woodford]

Of course the answer to the original question is 'no', as there would be no freedom of speech or expression in this country. Hitler would have insisted that this country cut the level of our armed forces under any agreement, thus making it easier for him to invade at will, providing of course he hadn't lready insisted that we become a protectorate of the german state. Which would of meant that his hordes marched into our country without a shot having been fired. We would also have been guilty of turning a blind eye to the death camps and genocide, making us all equally to blame.

 

The question I have in response though is this: Is it right to side with one mass murderer to stop another? Especially when history now shows that the one we backed, had millions more people killed than the other one did, including a lot of people from nations which were their allies incuding ours.

[South City Si]

Any so called positives that would have come about with an alliance with Nazi Germany would have been compltely and utterly negated by the atrocities that would occur as an agreement to that alliance.

Dune, you said that the majoirty of people were 'Anglo-saxon', fine, the 'majority' maybe, but thta is not an overwelming majority, what about the Celts? Hitler described the Celts as a slave race. We would have had to subjegate at least a third of our population to a life of servitude. As I am half Welsh, I would have to say no Dune.

Also, Britain had in it's past been relatively tolerant to Jews (comnpared to rest of Europe), we would, with certainty, have to have handed them over to the Nazi's or have to creat concentration camps for them in our own lands. This would also have included Romany's and other travellers groups as well, which UK also has a fairly large group of.

 

Our 'Empire' would have also have been re-used as a big slave route and re-creation of indention system that we hadn't long got rid of in the Carribean and and Asia.

 

So for all the above, to have the positives we would have to weigh them against the above to allow them to happen. If any agree to above, go hang yourself.

[EastleighSoulBoy]

It amuses me that National Front supporters are so illiterate.

 

I bet he can spell Muslim.

 

One of the nine other countries a fascist might hate. If you get my drift

[EastleighSoulBoy]

Any so called positives that would have come about with an alliance with Nazi Germany would have been compltely and utterly negated by the atrocities that would occur as an agreement to that alliance.

Dune, you said that the majoirty of people were 'Anglo-saxon', fine, the 'majority' maybe, but thta is not an overwelming majority, what about the Celts? Hitler described the Celts as a slave race. We would have had to subjegate at least a third of our population to a life of servitude. As I am half Welsh, I would have to say no Dune.

Also, Britain had in it's past been relatively tolerant to Jews (comnpared to rest of Europe), we would, with certainty, have to have handed them over to the Nazi's or have to creat concentration camps for them in our own lands. This would also have included Romany's and other travellers groups as well, which UK also has a fairly large group of.

 

Our 'Empire' would have also have been re-used as a big slave route and re-creation of indention system that we hadn't long got rid of in the Carribean and and Asia.

 

So for all the above, to have the positives we would have to weigh them against the above to allow them to happen. If any agree to above, go hang yourself.

 

Pointed and true. Churchill could not let that happen, he was on the money with the then German Government.

[Hamilton Saint]

You ask whether Britain would be better off if we'd sided with Hitler. [Obviously not, BTW - if you know anything about the nazi regime.]

 

And then you title your thread "The Christian Attitude of the British".

 

 

Explain to me how Christians could support Hitler. Perhaps you should read some history; and then read some theology.

Edited 13 June, 2010 by Hamilton Saint

[Jonnyboy]

*Please note this is a windup (although with what i may say later my gang of groupies will say no no no).

 

I saw an interview with the young lady whose father was shot in the head, by Bird (the basttard - this shows my attitude), and what she said was nothing short of amazing and completely christian. She said i feel no anger towards Bird as he was a sick man and i forgive him.

 

Now i know i've already said it, but i'll say it again - that is amazing - what a really nice lady.

 

So now for the WUM bit - as playing devils advocate does often get debates down to the nitty gritty (although sadly there are very few posters who can debate properly, i.e play the ball, but simpy attack the player, so zoom back to a point a poster called Stanley made - whose views are misinterpretted although he may have been a bit racist. The latter semtence is however utterly and completely irrelevent to debating because if someone is a bit racist they still have a view and there would be no debate nor democracy with one party comunism. I know for a fact i'll be attacked for the WUMMY point i will eventually suggest as a theory (not a fact as you cannot talk factually about suposition and theory) but that will be a shame. Not only for me, but for the point of the lounge which is or should be about conversation with a degree of adultness. I love knowledge and thrive on it, so if you believe i'm wrong i really would love to hear why you think as much. That said most of us are adults and as such have ingrined beliefs. ESB says leopards can never change their spots - ESB is partly right, but not completely because indisputeable fact is indisputeable fact.

 

So looking back to the remarkable lady in Cumbria do you think that Britain would be better or worse off in 2010 (not in the intervening years) if we'd sided with Hitler. The objective words are "do you think" and to be able to think you do need a grasp of historical knowledge. History shows that Britain did what Germany did on the continent and held not only an empire, but the greatest empire the world has ever seen and will ever see (as far as is humanly possible to forsee at present although that's a very uneducated view to take - therfore on second thoughts i retract that comment but cannot be arsed to delete it because it may well add something that i'm failing to see. I digress - would Britain be better if we'd sided with the nazis - and i've mention pur colonial heritage, but we did not have gas chambers. Well I would suggest that this is because zyclon b had not been invented because you'd have to be very optimistic not to believe that when putting down rebbelions and punishing tribes and groups that opposed us we wouldn't have wished and endeavered to erradicate them. It is a fact, not a well lnown fact because the victors of war the ruling classes control the national curriculum and the not so free press, but from 1950 - 1960 100,000 mau mau terrorists and rebels (or freedom fighters and patriots) were murdered through starvation, ill treatment, torture which was turned a blind eye to by those at the highest levels (they probably even discreatly encouraged it). And the nationb responsible was Britain, the perpetrators were the British Army, the political wing was the foreign office (called something else in those days) and the British general public (although obviously unaware of the extent of the attrocities) would, i'd wager, think the acts not nice, but they (and when i say they i mean most Brits) would have had the attitude that the preservation of what was rightfully ous(again a common view then and still a view held by some still - cue abuse but again that's boring and water off a ducks back) was to be defended. Sp to go back yet again to the wummy point in the thread the similarities because ours and germanys actions are .... er.... starkly similar. That is without going into the similarities between us and the Germans (note none of that ayrian crap because an ayran in this day and age is as feasible an finding a member of the Jewish race (which died out at the time of tutankhamun give or take a few thousand years ha ha (covers me from the smartsres). As Northern Europeans we are very more more alike not only in our accents and languages, but in our attitides and this is why the British and the Dutch were so good at empire building. So were the europeans so that point is actually utter ********, but we built our sucess on land that wasn't so ripe dor civilisation to flourish so what we did was more remarkable. Yes Britain is a green and pleasant land, but before the days of mechanisation they had it easier and in places such as spain desertification hadn't began in those days. It was our stoic and resilient ingrained attitude (enforced by the ruling elite) and the French threat, and farmer geroge and others, that fuelled the need for the industrial revoltion. It can be argued that Germany/Prussia has always been more militaristic in the attitudes of it's people, but being continental that was as necessary as our naval defence. At waterloo Wellington only defeated Boneparte because by chance the Prussian army found the battle site and provided reinforcements and were it not for the Germans/Prussians we would all speaking French but that doesn't mean that we'd have public guilloting at the Bargate to watch while shopping, just like Me Whippy wouldn't have his ice cream dispenser loaded with zyclon b and a quick release hatch to net the children with big noses pr ginger hair.

 

Therefore I put to everyone that had we sided with the nazis britain today wouldn't necessarily be any worse than it is today and it could quite possibly (although i'm by no means suggesting possibly means positively) be better.

 

You mustve been on someything when you garbled this stream of consciousness

[Hamilton Saint]

You mustve been on someything when you garbled this stream of consciousness

 

Stream of unconsciousness more like it.

 

[JustMike]

o..k and the award for the worst thread on the new forum goes to.... ;-)