First Simon Jenkins article on the importance of doing nothing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monty92

There's an all-singing all-dancing restaurant on the ground floor which I am sure serves wine. Just buy a bottle from there and take it up to the food court.

Go with an appetite and get the funky sounding dishes first. I made the fatal mistake of ordering the pigs intestines in ejaculate soup at the very end, and was rather uncomfortably close to vomiting :-(

---

I'm kind of done with ordering the bizarre-sounding stuff. I've eaten oddness all over the world, from chicken feet and intestines to termites, ants and frogs and snake wine and snakeblood sauce and fried tarantula and locusts and crocodile and zzzzzzzz. Who can be ársed with all that nonsense now we're grown ups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by World's End Stella

Shame Gandhi and Einstein aren't around so that Charles could explain to them how stupid they are as well, eh?

Nothing suggests to me that someone is intellectually limited more than the assumption that there is no limit to the capabilities of man's intellect. That's you that is, Monty.

---

In fairness Gandhi was a fúcking moron and Einstein German, so they're not exactly what you'd call an admirable couple, are they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

In fairness Gandhi was a fúcking moron and Einstein German, so they're not exactly what you'd call an admirable couple, are they?

---

Admirable is debatable, the caliber of their intellect is not. Besides, you don't have to look very hard to find awfully intelligent people who hold a deep religious faith. I don't myself, you understand, but I would never belittle someone's intellect because they did.

That is the act of a moron. Or possibly someone who writes photo captions for a living.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

:-( You can't say dem fings, r.

---

You found that bloke not guilty, didn't you? That was pretty lefty of you, I'd say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by World's End Stella

Shame Gandhi and Einstein aren't around so that Charles could explain to them how stupid they are as well, eh?

Nothing suggests to me that someone is intellectually limited more than the assumption that there is no limit to the capabilities of man's intellect. That's you that is, Monty.

---

No, they believed in the spiritual (as do I) but at that time the concept did not have the western scientific backing to give it a name other than 'God'

I would merely add that for them, there is no downsides. For them, the war is against certain people,
rather than against certain ideas.

Or, to put it another way, the ideas held by certain people are to be considered wrong by definition. Ideas promulgated by those people are wrong, if only because it's those people promulgating them. Logic is redundant here and they understand this fully, whereas you may not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monty92

I may share a (theoretical) commitment to secularism with liberals, but unlike liberals I can see the downsides.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monty92

You can't go around saying you're undecided about the idea that there's a flying spaghetti monster and then get all huffy when people occasionally step in and tell you to stop being a spastic.

I didn't see any booze, but I did have a delightful chilled passion fruit bubble tea. Could that work for you guys?

---

Fùck right off, is it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monty92

No, they believed in the spiritual (as do I) but at that time the concept did not have the western scientific backing to give it a name other than 'God'

---

Oooooh, what's all this then?

Believe in the spiritual do we?

Crystals, is it?

Auras?

Dabble in a bit of .... astrology .... do we, sir?

Hmmm?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

461 Europeans have been murdered by Islamic terror since 2016. But we should just sit tight and not even put up barriers to protect ourselves because that's 'terrorising' our cities to his mind.

I really would love to kick that man squarely in the gonads.

---

In that article there is mention of terrorism and terror.

The word 'Terrorist' is never used. 'Killer' and 'Suspects', on the other hand, are.

Is he deliberately trying to avoid calling these terrorists, terrorists?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monty92

What, being illogical? Yes I do.

So stop being stupid and just tell people you don't believe in God ('atheist' being as redundant a term as 'agnostic')

---

Why this unreasonable insistence on the absolute? What the fùck business is it of yours if someone occasionally wavers between rationalism and faith? Why must we be one thing or the other?