Posts by recordari
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
That was Megan, for the record.
Whoops. My bad.
-
Deborah, Jolisa, Megan and Kowhai (and Shacha) thank you for a page of 'warmth' and erudition.
Well, right up until the Mc Hammer reference.
But, further to Jolisa's comment;
But, now it is probably time to go and focus on something that's not frivolous and fun.
the other post on The Hand Mirror ACC's new approach to sensitive claims not working qualifies. There was a discussion on bFM's The Wire yesterday which I hope will be posted soon. 90 percent of ACC claims by victims of Sexual Violence seeking help are rejected. The criteria for acceptance are so ridiculous I find it hard to think humans were involved, let alone intelligent ones.
-
Really, I couldn't see anywhere that anyone was making statements about Muslims in general.
This was my point. That is, up until Steve made his statement. Although I clearly need practice in being a bit more full frontal, and a little less lobotomy.
Craig seems to be a willing tutor. Do you run night classes?
And when I said Sorry Emma above I hope it was clear that it was for all the trouble this seems to have caused. Also wondered a little bit if the responses on this thread might have fuelled the negative reaction. Hopefully not.
-
Sorry Emma...
-
It can be tricky. I like taking photos of bands and concerts. So far I have only 'published' them amongst friends, but given the way this works, anyone of them could end up on a website without my knowledge or control. Would that bother me? Not too much, if it's credited, but if I was making a living out of photography, then yes it would become a different matter.
The other side of this is, do the artists have a say in how photos of them are used? Julia Deans was here recently and when I said I might have some reasonable photos she said 'just post them on my FaceBook page'. Umm, Ok, maybe, but I wasn't looking to leverage off your fame, to be honest.
Interesting times.
-
If you use Firefox, you can try SafeHistory to guard against it.
Could not be installed as not compatible with FF 3.6.4. Does that mean I'm more up to date than Stanford University? Well since the last update was in 2007, then yes, I think it does... ;-)
Would 'BetterPrivacy' do anything?
My Panopticlick score;
Your browser fingerprint appears to be unique among the 812,972 tested so far.
Currently, we estimate that your browser has a fingerprint that conveys at least 19.63 bits of identifying information.
Is that good, or bad? See if I can change a few settings and get the number down.
-
Even though taking the piss out of te Muslims seems to be de-rigour
Only one that I'm aware of. That cleric guy. What was his name? Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi. I think most here try not to conflate the stupid actions or statements of one person with an entire nation and its people. Just sayin'. Otherwise we'd be pretty much doomed ourselves.
'The Dream is Over' ring any bells?
-
Que? No. Of course not.
Sorry, I misread 'capacity to oppose' as inferring they shouldn't have opposed it. When in fact you meant they didn't, but should have. Or something. I'm confusing.
-
and their capacity to oppose war or measures like the Patriot Act.
You support them? When necessary and justifiable maybe, but I struggle to see how Iraq or Afghanistan are either of these things, perhaps with the benefit of hindsight. The cynicism around 9/11 stems partly from the fact it was exploited so liberally for political, and military gain, at the expense of civil liberties.
AI says: Denial of Rights: Amend the USA PATRIOT Act Now!
American Muslim has multiple articles: CIVIL RIGHTS AND THE PATRIOT ACT .Anyway, maybe I should read that book. It is a veritable minefield, and boobquake suddenly seems decidedly safer.
-
On both sides? Which sides would those be?
Pendant. All sides? Who came out of this clean? According to the review of Farmer's book, and most other reports, not many, if any.