 | | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) Nope, not me. American, was he? (...) Personally, I think this one does some good. There's serious discussion about this in the UK now, to replace the firearms of our armed police units. So long as this is still the exception rather than (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) 45 seconds of Googling gave: (URL) in the UK, went to Eton and Oxford. Wrote BNW in 1931. Moved to the US in 1937. So, no, sorry, not American. BNW is no longer required reading in English schools? It's still a fresh and interesting read (and (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
Cool. While utterly disagreeing with me, you inadvertantly proved a point that I really had no idea how to make... ...foreigners ought to stay out of other nation's buisness unless they happen to be experts. I whole-heartedly agree that I have no (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) Hmm. We all send 'peace keeping' forces around the world, but they usually have some degree of domestic interest involved. I was impressed with Clinton's involvement in the middle east, and his involvement in Northern Ireland (though not to (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) He didn't appear to have any particularly heartfelt national allegiance from that bio. Now, I'm fairly sure I know what you mean by 'Googling', but somehow the expression still worries me. :-)* (...) I might well do. There wasn't much (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) It does. I find it amusing when people react that way. (...) I think it depends on what you mean by 'well.' Our conservatives have become much more concerned with the domestic agenda than in the recent past. Bush mirrors that concern. I think (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) uh...that's not what I meant. Though reading my post again, I see how you were mislead (unless of course you knew what I really and decided to simply play with me a bit). Let's see...actually, never mind. I was sort of trying to make a point (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) I'm willing to go with "really funny". But since I've had the "privilege" of riding in a taxi driven by a Cockney I know that for the accent to be even close to correct it has to be completely unintelligible to an American. (...) It's a (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) Well I agree that we ought not to single out Cuba for special treatment (perhaps Nike should try to set up some factories there so that they can get the same deal China does???) but I'm not so sure I'm convinced that things are "happily (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) True, but then again I'd like to see how it fared if all the trade embargoes were lifted. It's not like Cuba has any effect on US oil production or anything. Just think, you'd all be able to get those big chunky cigars cheaper, without having (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) And up until then, you assumed this trait was limited to cabbies in NYC? (Hey - I'm only taking the line I've been fed here). P.S. to everyone else - not everyone in the UK has a cockney accent either. (...) Oh, right. We group geography and (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) Via Canada, but ya. I won't smoke them, though, too iffy on how they were made and whose pockets get lined from the sales. (23 years ago, 24-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
