INTENSITY²
Politics, Mature and taboo => Political Pundits => Topic started by: odeon on August 25, 2016, 12:20:59 AM
-
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/24/europe/woman-burkini-nice-beach-incident-trnd/index.html
WTF?
-
Its a stupid law but no more stupid than some of the laws in other countries.
If women did NOT wear hijab in Saudi Arabia, they may be similarly targeted.
Both are stupid laws.
So that said. I saw this. Do you think Denmark will overtake you guys as the rape Capital of the world?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html
-
Personally I don't think they have any room to bitch.
The burka is inherently associated with the wearer's intent to be 'modest'. That is the entire reason they go round dressed like ninjas, whilst everything about the (western) bikini is pretty much the opposite in intent, purpose and practice. To get the kit off as much as possible, let as much of the body out to play as is considered not to be indecent exposure (by us white western folk, that is to say), so a so-called 'burkini', is essentially them emulating that which they claim to despise and be disgusted by. They bitch about us being 'immodest' by their primitive, backwards world-view and then go and DO exactly what they are whining and kvetching about.
Its the height of hypocrisy if nothing else. That, and fucking ugly as sin. But most of all, that is some ugly fucking hypocrisy and double standards. If they are prepared to bitch us out, only to do that which they claim to hate. Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em diagonally right in the ass with a pointy stick. Fucking slimy hypocrites.
-
Are Mean burkinis banned also or only nice ones :zoinks:
-
Mean?
-
Mean?
Parts is riffing on the title, "Nice burkini ban." It took me awhile to get it myself, because I've been
drinking coffee with half the caffeine, which I somehow carelessly bought at the store. Yikes. :headhurts:
-
Ah. Well I've not got any caffeine or other stimulants in me either. And the gas tank is running on fumes so to speak, where opioids are concerned. Although that, is soon to be remedied.
-
Its a stupid law but no more stupid than some of the laws in other countries.
If women did NOT wear hijab in Saudi Arabia, they may be similarly targeted.
Both are stupid laws.
So that said. I saw this. Do you think Denmark will overtake you guys as the rape Capital of the world?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html
Are you still abducting your young?
-
Are Mean burkinis banned also or only nice ones :zoinks:
Just the Nice ones. :zoinks:
-
Personally I don't think they have any room to bitch.
The burka is inherently associated with the wearer's intent to be 'modest'. That is the entire reason they go round dressed like ninjas, whilst everything about the (western) bikini is pretty much the opposite in intent, purpose and practice. To get the kit off as much as possible, let as much of the body out to play as is considered not to be indecent exposure (by us white western folk, that is to say), so a so-called 'burkini', is essentially them emulating that which they claim to despise and be disgusted by. They bitch about us being 'immodest' by their primitive, backwards world-view and then go and DO exactly what they are whining and kvetching about.
Its the height of hypocrisy if nothing else. That, and fucking ugly as sin. But most of all, that is some ugly fucking hypocrisy and double standards. If they are prepared to bitch us out, only to do that which they claim to hate. Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em diagonally right in the ass with a pointy stick. Fucking slimy hypocrites.
Who?
Why ban a piece of clothing? Personally I think burkinis are ridiculous but what is a ban supposed to achieve?
-
I could see a ban on any garment that hides the face, since identity can be an issue, but then again, I'm in favor of banning the burka in all civilized countries.
If mud people want to wear burkas, then they can go to the dirty middle east where that kind of perversion is tolerated.
-
Pondering the point of a skin tight burka.
-
As an emetic?
-
A message from the Pea!
"All hail the dark lord Iblis for being the continual scourge of the poor, little Muslims worldwide. Maybe they would think twice before they rape and murder lesbians, promiscuous women, non-believers, trannies and gays.
They don't embrace diversity and freedom unless it's on THEIR greedy terms."
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
Sure. Lets start with all of that and see where we end up, right?
-
Its a stupid law but no more stupid than some of the laws in other countries.
If women did NOT wear hijab in Saudi Arabia, they may be similarly targeted.
Both are stupid laws.
So that said. I saw this. Do you think Denmark will overtake you guys as the rape Capital of the world?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html
Are you still abducting your young?
Well Azaria Chamberlain was over 30 years ago and the stolen generation was 40.
Ancient history. Cultures CAN change. I mean take the Vikings for example. A culture who had a reputation for high level of rape committed by Scandinavian men against women.
So do you think Denmark (A Scandinavian culture) will overtake Sweden (a Scandinavian culture) as the rape capital of the world?
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
A totally out there concept, I know BUT maybe if any individual is coming to a host country, not being tolerant, trading the country with respect and adhering to social norms, maybe it is not up to the country to try them with respect and tolerance?
-
Not if they obnoxiously demand that which they are prepared to giveth not.
And if they act up, start getting all obnoxious, gobby, start stirring shit and playing the race card and the ''bawwww! poor helpless, innocent [my chocolate mother fucking starfish} picked on, oversensitive little babykins is in twouble' card and using political correctness as a tool to accomplish their demands and weaken our society, and as a weapon when poor ikkle muslimkins is not given what it wants promptly enough by the nasty kuffar.
They demand shit like this, and yet, if they were in say, iran, saudi, iraq, syria, afghanistan or any other festering excrement-filled stinking ruptured sewer of a 'country' filled with their kind, blighting the face of this planet, they would most certainly not be able to do what they are currently demanding,
If they WERE to fuck off back home to any such fecal stain, depending on the septic, pus-filled haemorrhoid in particular that they might go to the reception they would receive would most certainly not be tolerance and hugs with open arms. It would be at the mildest, disgrace, and at the most severe, probably taken to be tied to a post and shot, or lynched. And if a white lady went (bloody hell if I know why) to such an abominable diseased scabby little sore of a cuntry and started getting her kit off, even in a 'burkini' she'd probably be raped, tortured and murdererd. And thats by the bloody pigs there, or religion-pork.
Shit, the pigs there, conventional or religious filth, probably don't even get to be donut munching cuntsniffing inbreeds. Just cunt-sniffing inbreeds, because donuts are probably 'unislamic' because they are a delicious treat, not something dull, grey, and stripped of anything that could possibly distract someone from their allahsturbation.
Unless they have those really small mini-donuts, so they could fit their pencil-dicks in the holes so they can get to scribing their korans in a trail of dribbling piss.
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
Why are you vicariously questioning/engaging Peaguy in conversation, rather than letting him back in?
-
A reply from Pea.
"Funny how selective exclusion is used to countermand our concerns because our society is selective already with rapists, paedophiles, bigamists and whatnot. We have rules and boundaries for this reason. Statistically, however, our selective process is more humane and compassionate than the likes of, say, how Bangladesh run their internal affairs with its citizens."
-
As an emetic?
:laugh: Seriously, though, didn't think the purpose of the burka was to simply cover skin. Maybe just don't know enough about it.
-
Whats wrong with excluding rapists, nonces, muslims, killers, and wifebeaters etc.
That kind of creature NEEDS to be excluded.
-
Well, you folks have been bitchin' and complainin' about the lack of drama here...so if Pea wants to respond.....I feel that there is no harm done by posting his comments as he requests me to do! I have set certain limits on what I will repost.....but, I will leave that for you folks to guess at. LOL
-
LOL, more from the Pea! :mischief:
"Tell Jack it's because I'm dark and evil that I had to be banned. My return to this quaint commune would be calamitous. It's like emancipating Hitler for his crimes against humanity. Don't be blasphemous now."
-
Well, you folks have been bitchin' and complainin' about the lack of drama here...
Who has done that?
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
A totally out there concept, I know BUT maybe if any individual is coming to a host country, not being tolerant, trading the country with respect and adhering to social norms, maybe it is not up to the country to try them with respect and tolerance?
I know that your views differ--you'd rather ban some groups from entering in the first place--but the whole idea of respect and tolerance is a two-way street if you aspire to any degree of democracy, religious freedom and all that bullshit.
A fairly basic idea here (but again, it may not be where you are) is that our law enforcement should not force a woman to remove some arbitrarily selected pieces of clothing under threat of violence and fines.
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
Why are you vicariously questioning/engaging Peaguy in conversation, rather than letting him back in?
I am not. I am not addressing him at all, just as I'm not addressing any other person who is not a member here.
-
Whats wrong with excluding rapists, nonces, muslims, killers, and wifebeaters etc.
That kind of creature NEEDS to be excluded.
Muslims are people who follow the religion of Islam. If we aspire to religious freedom, they should enjoy the same rights as the followers of any other religion.
A follower of ANY religion, as well as a follower of none, may break against the law, however, and should then be dealt with according to the relevant legislation in place.
-
A reply.
"Funny. I initially posted that because Peter McKenzie thought I wouldn't have the bollocks to, seeing as he was vain and neurotic on this board. I don't really care about the nudes - it's a cock and two balls. I'm crazy, I know
Gopher's probably entranced by the tangerine wang."
"You know what happens to the young asians who no longer want to follow Islam? Don't deny that they leave the cult on amicable terms: that isn't the reality of many apostates.
Who in their right mind want religious freedom? If you want to believe in dieties, be a deist. We don't need state-funded reliigous schools and shrines paid for by non-believing taxpayers, thanks.
I'm for scientific progression. Religion represents humanity's regression."
-
Gopher's probably entranced by the tangerine wang."
Who wouldn't be :green:
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
Why are you vicariously questioning/engaging Peaguy in conversation, rather than letting him back in?
I am not. I am not addressing him at all, just as I'm not addressing any other person who is not a member here.
Okay, just looked like responding to him and asking him questions about what he said.
-
IntensitySquared Burkini Topic ResponsesIntensitySquared Burkini Topic Responses
Post this in the bikini thread. I'm off for a stroll. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9ljAugEs0I&feature=youtu.be
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
A totally out there concept, I know BUT maybe if any individual is coming to a host country, not being tolerant, trading the country with respect and adhering to social norms, maybe it is not up to the country to try them with respect and tolerance?
I know that your views differ--you'd rather ban some groups from entering in the first place--but the whole idea of respect and tolerance is a two-way street if you aspire to any degree of democracy, religious freedom and all that bullshit.
A fairly basic idea here (but again, it may not be where you are) is that our law enforcement should not force a woman to remove some arbitrarily selected pieces of clothing under threat of violence and fines.
What a ridiculous reply. Nothing you raised related to anything.
Firstly, yes I thinking banning radical Muslim immigrants is something every rational person wants. I also support America doing a moratorium on Muslim immigration until they can improve a flawed vetting system so that they can improve their chances of having Muslim come to America that are not radical Muslim extremists and at risk of doing them harm. Its a sensible idea.
What has that got to do with whether France decides to have a Burkini ban? Not a fucking lot.
Now do I find Burkinis offensive? Not in the slightest. Do I think we should ban them here? I don't think anyone would care too much. But that is not the point at all. It is not whether i personally have an issue with it. It is whether the French do. IF they decide for whatever reason that the Burkini is no good and there is a law against it, fine. There are a lot of laws I think are strange or extreme. Try graffiting in Singapore. You get the rattan. Having a joint in Netherlands is fine and in Thailand a year in jail if caught. Women NOT covering up and wearing a hijab in Saudi Arabia is punishable and in France women wearing a Burkini is punishable. Different laws for different places. Different standards and different expectations. I think that is fine. If you go to another country, they are going to have different laws and cultures and expectations, YOU have to fit in with them NOT they to you. I do not begrudge them having their own laws and enforcing said laws.
But I DO think it is stupid that people feel like it is wrong for the French to enforce their rules and laws. Like when that American kid got caught doing graffiti in Singapore and the American government threatened Singapore when Singapore said they were going to use the rattan on him. It was barbaric and the kid was a poor thing and too young and everything else. Nope they gave him the rattan and sent him back home. I say fair enough. It was their law, he infringed on their law. If Western Women go to Saudi Arabia and decide that the hijab is not for them and decide to buck the law and take it off and then get punished for it, too bad, they broke the law. If people in France decide to break the law too bad. It is hypocritical for someone who is from a culture that has cultural restrictions on clothing to then find themselves objecting to a different culture placing different values on clothing.
So well done Odeon, you made precisely no point, again.
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
A totally out there concept, I know BUT maybe if any individual is coming to a host country, not being tolerant, trading the country with respect and adhering to social norms, maybe it is not up to the country to try them with respect and tolerance?
I know that your views differ--you'd rather ban some groups from entering in the first place--but the whole idea of respect and tolerance is a two-way street if you aspire to any degree of democracy, religious freedom and all that bullshit.
A fairly basic idea here (but again, it may not be where you are) is that our law enforcement should not force a woman to remove some arbitrarily selected pieces of clothing under threat of violence and fines.
Bla bla blah bla
I knew you wouldn't understand.
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
A totally out there concept, I know BUT maybe if any individual is coming to a host country, not being tolerant, trading the country with respect and adhering to social norms, maybe it is not up to the country to try them with respect and tolerance?
I know that your views differ--you'd rather ban some groups from entering in the first place--but the whole idea of respect and tolerance is a two-way street if you aspire to any degree of democracy, religious freedom and all that bullshit.
A fairly basic idea here (but again, it may not be where you are) is that our law enforcement should not force a woman to remove some arbitrarily selected pieces of clothing under threat of violence and fines.
Bla bla blah bla
I knew you wouldn't understand.
Right back at you. If France wants to adopt ridiculous laws that's fine. If you are living or visiting you ought to obey them. If you do the wrong thing the enforcement of laws will punish you. It is a pretty simple metric.
I find it hypocritical to those that have hijabs and burkhas forced into their cultural laws to restrict how a woman can dress to find a different culture being restrictive on how a woman can dress. I don't see what the outrage is about.
Again what this has to do with immigration bans, tight border security or anything else is anyone's guess? You probably did not even know.
-
"Butters, you would avoid because you like your gingers with axe wounds.
Incidentally, have you broken out of your shell and been a bit of a player with the continental women these days? You seem different compared to my interactions with you in 2011."
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
A totally out there concept, I know BUT maybe if any individual is coming to a host country, not being tolerant, trading the country with respect and adhering to social norms, maybe it is not up to the country to try them with respect and tolerance?
I know that your views differ--you'd rather ban some groups from entering in the first place--but the whole idea of respect and tolerance is a two-way street if you aspire to any degree of democracy, religious freedom and all that bullshit.
A fairly basic idea here (but again, it may not be where you are) is that our law enforcement should not force a woman to remove some arbitrarily selected pieces of clothing under threat of violence and fines.
Bla bla blah bla
I knew you wouldn't understand.
Right back at you. If France wants to adopt ridiculous laws that's fine. If you are living or visiting you ought to obey them. If you do the wrong thing the enforcement of laws will punish you. It is a pretty simple metric.
I find it hypocritical to those that have hijabs and burkhas forced into their cultural laws to restrict how a woman can dress to find a different culture being restrictive on how a woman can dress. I don't see what the outrage is about.
Again what this has to do with immigration bans, tight border security or anything else is anyone's guess? You probably did not even know.
You're pissed off at me so you force yourself into a stance you have trouble defending. This is not about forcing anything into anyone's cultural laws, it's simply about a continued right to wear whatever clothing you want. It's something that a higher French court seems to recognise, though, even if you don't.
Oh, and based on the above, I assume that you will silently accept any new legislation in your country, no matter how stupid it is.
-
So because they don't embrace diversity and freedom, we don't need to either? Or we can selectively exclude things we don't like or understand or agree with?
A totally out there concept, I know BUT maybe if any individual is coming to a host country, not being tolerant, trading the country with respect and adhering to social norms, maybe it is not up to the country to try them with respect and tolerance?
I know that your views differ--you'd rather ban some groups from entering in the first place--but the whole idea of respect and tolerance is a two-way street if you aspire to any degree of democracy, religious freedom and all that bullshit.
A fairly basic idea here (but again, it may not be where you are) is that our law enforcement should not force a woman to remove some arbitrarily selected pieces of clothing under threat of violence and fines.
Bla bla blah bla
I knew you wouldn't understand.
Right back at you. If France wants to adopt ridiculous laws that's fine. If you are living or visiting you ought to obey them. If you do the wrong thing the enforcement of laws will punish you. It is a pretty simple metric.
I find it hypocritical to those that have hijabs and burkhas forced into their cultural laws to restrict how a woman can dress to find a different culture being restrictive on how a woman can dress. I don't see what the outrage is about.
Again what this has to do with immigration bans, tight border security or anything else is anyone's guess? You probably did not even know.
You're pissed off at me so you force yourself into a stance you have trouble defending. This is not about forcing anything into anyone's cultural laws, it's simply about a continued right to wear whatever clothing you want. It's something that a higher French court seems to recognise, though, even if you don't.
Oh, and based on the above, I assume that you will silently accept any new legislation in your country, no matter how stupid it is.
I am a citizen of Australia, therefore I have to follow laws in my own country even if I do not like them. However as it is my country I am happy to join in with petitions of laws to try and affect change, during that time I will not break the law.
If I go to other countries as a visitor I am very aware different rules apply and different standard of punishment. I accept this without arguing the point as to whether the laws are more unfair or different or bad. I expect they will be different.
Now what position you imagine I can't defend, I don't know. Again, I don't think you know yourself. What I believe has happened is that you have thought I believed or suggested something I didn't and now my answers to what I do actually think don't follow this bogus narrative you created.
That would probably be my best reading. Hard to know given your propensity to make random and seemingly unconnected suggestions and claims. Ones that YOU do not defend nor explain when I question them.
I have no issue in sharing my actual beliefs or thoughts. It's damn easy.
-
Yeah, right. That's exactly the kind of person you are.
-
Yeah, right. That's exactly the kind of person you are.
Very easy to say what I think. I am very opinionated. You can presume my views on whatever you like but if you want to know or ask questions my view on things I will tell you. If you talk about what,how, why I think what I think, I will correct you about 100% of the time
-
Basically you are full of shit, end of, and the picture you like to paint of yourself is a hypocritical lie. But sure, whatever floats your boat and all that.
-
Basically you are full of shit, end of, and the picture you like to paint of yourself is a hypocritical lie. But sure, whatever floats your boat and all that.
Care to back that? What exactly in what I said is hypocritical? Looks to me like projection. Finding faults in me that you cannot back. Faults you can't actually explain. It's projection or faulty reasoning
You are full of shit, Open.
-
Basically you are full of shit, end of, and the picture you like to paint of yourself is a hypocritical lie. But sure, whatever floats your boat and all that.
Care to back that? What exactly in what I said is hypocritical? Looks to me like projection. Finding faults in me that you cannot back. Faults you can't actually explain. It's projection or faulty reasoning
You are full of shit, Open.
No, I am not interested in quoting your posts back at you. You wouldn't accept any of it anyway since you are incapable of introspection. It's always someone else's fault.
Me, I can readily admit when I'm wrong. For example, I was wrong about you and DFG--I now think that you did tiptoe around her.
Go hide under that bridge. Miserable troll.
-
Basically you are full of shit, end of, and the picture you like to paint of yourself is a hypocritical lie. But sure, whatever floats your boat and all that.
Care to back that? What exactly in what I said is hypocritical? Looks to me like projection. Finding faults in me that you cannot back. Faults you can't actually explain. It's projection or faulty reasoning
You are full of shit, Open.
No, I am not interested in quoting your posts back at you. You wouldn't accept any of it anyway since you are incapable of introspection. It's always someone else's fault.
Me, I can readily admit when I'm wrong. For example, I was wrong about you and DFG--I now think that you did tiptoe around her.
Go hide under that bridge. Miserable troll.
I think I was right. All projection.
You are unable to back yourself. Posting my words back at me does not make a case or back a claim. I know what I said because I said it.
Now if you have misread what I said or misinterpreted intent, because you were pissed off with me and wanted to view everything through a hateful and nasty filter, then that is COMPLETELY on you.
Trolling your own board Odeon?
-
Think what you like. I stand by what I have said but have no interest in explaining myself to you again. This is better since I'm pretty sure you will go to bed while still angry. Maybe you'll hit the bourbon on the way first. Hell, maybe you already are.
Enjoy.
-
Think what you like. I stand by what I have said but have no interest in explaining myself to you again. This is better since I'm pretty sure you will go to bed while still angry. Maybe you'll hit the bourbon on the way first. Hell, maybe you already are.
Enjoy.
Weak troll attempt. It is 8:51 am on a Monday. Going to bed?
Drinking bourbon on Friday night and it is Monday morning?
Mind you as idiotic as it is, it is far more sensible and rational than some of the ship you said in the last 6 or so months, so go you.
-
With a cold, and drinking bourbon for supper no wonder your bitchy come morning:P
Less of a hangover if you drink vodka, or gin, less higher alcohol congeners (although isolated, tertiary pentanol is pretty good and DOESN'T produce any hangover, as tertiary alcohols cannot be easily oxidized to nasty ass aldehyde or less vile but less than nice ketones (secondary alcohols generally get biologically transformed in the liver to ketones, such as isopropyl is metabolized in humans to acetone, and reputedly whilst not toxic as such produces one thundering hangover, never tried it, don't plan to. Once did get a mouthful reaching into the fridge for a drink at night, grabbed an iPA extract in a beaker of fly agaric mushrooms. Immediately realized what I'd done on the taste and feel of it, stuck my fingers down my throat and purged myself seconds after. Lucky I did not suffer ill effect. Slight stomach ache from barfing, and some minor isoxazole-type intoxication, but nothing I would ascribe to the propan-2-ol. Lucky again as iPA reputedly is highly potent, being active at a ml or two. And I'd just swallowed something like a couple of hundred TIMES as much. Wasn't any nicer coming back up than it was going down. Disgusting. Concentrated lab alcohol flavored with concentrated umami from the glutamatergic effects upon taste receptors as produced by MSG only more potently. I LOVE fly agaric as a flavoring and I was making a tincture to use in cooking, where the iPA would simply evaporate when used in long-cooked stews and chillies. But got the entire fucking lot. Slept like a baby that night though IIRC.
-
With a cold, and drinking bourbon for supper no wonder your bitchy come morning:P
Less of a hangover if you drink vodka, or gin, less higher alcohol congeners (although isolated, tertiary pentanol is pretty good and DOESN'T produce any hangover, as tertiary alcohols cannot be easily oxidized to nasty ass aldehyde or less vile but less than nice ketones (secondary alcohols generally get biologically transformed in the liver to ketones, such as isopropyl is metabolized in humans to acetone, and reputedly whilst not toxic as such produces one thundering hangover, never tried it, don't plan to. Once did get a mouthful reaching into the fridge for a drink at night, grabbed an iPA extract in a beaker of fly agaric mushrooms. Immediately realized what I'd done on the taste and feel of it, stuck my fingers down my throat and purged myself seconds after. Lucky I did not suffer ill effect. Slight stomach ache from barfing, and some minor isoxazole-type intoxication, but nothing I would ascribe to the propan-2-ol. Lucky again as iPA reputedly is highly potent, being active at a ml or two. And I'd just swallowed something like a couple of hundred TIMES as much. Wasn't any nicer coming back up than it was going down. Disgusting. Concentrated lab alcohol flavored with concentrated umami from the glutamatergic effects upon taste receptors as produced by MSG only more potently. I LOVE fly agaric as a flavoring and I was making a tincture to use in cooking, where the iPA would simply evaporate when used in long-cooked stews and chillies. But got the entire fucking lot. Slept like a baby that night though IIRC.
No I only drink on Friday night. It is Monday. I mean it is no secret this has been my pattern for many years. Every Friday is Friday night bourbon night. Why he may have thought I would be drinking and/or going for a nap at 8:51am is beyond me. Mind you he doesn't make a lot of sense generally. Especially not lately
-
Going to back this yet?
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,23862.msg1126154.html#msg1126154
-
With a cold, and drinking bourbon for supper no wonder your bitchy come morning:P
Less of a hangover if you drink vodka, or gin, less higher alcohol congeners (although isolated, tertiary pentanol is pretty good and DOESN'T produce any hangover, as tertiary alcohols cannot be easily oxidized to nasty ass aldehyde or less vile but less than nice ketones (secondary alcohols generally get biologically transformed in the liver to ketones, such as isopropyl is metabolized in humans to acetone, and reputedly whilst not toxic as such produces one thundering hangover, never tried it, don't plan to. Once did get a mouthful reaching into the fridge for a drink at night, grabbed an iPA extract in a beaker of fly agaric mushrooms. Immediately realized what I'd done on the taste and feel of it, stuck my fingers down my throat and purged myself seconds after. Lucky I did not suffer ill effect. Slight stomach ache from barfing, and some minor isoxazole-type intoxication, but nothing I would ascribe to the propan-2-ol. Lucky again as iPA reputedly is highly potent, being active at a ml or two. And I'd just swallowed something like a couple of hundred TIMES as much. Wasn't any nicer coming back up than it was going down. Disgusting. Concentrated lab alcohol flavored with concentrated umami from the glutamatergic effects upon taste receptors as produced by MSG only more potently. I LOVE fly agaric as a flavoring and I was making a tincture to use in cooking, where the iPA would simply evaporate when used in long-cooked stews and chillies. But got the entire fucking lot. Slept like a baby that night though IIRC.
No I only drink on Friday night. It is Monday. I mean it is no secret this has been my pattern for many years. Every Friday is Friday night bourbon night. Why he may have thought I would be drinking and/or going for a nap at 8:51am is beyond me. Mind you he doesn't make a lot of sense generally. Especially not lately
I forget the time zone differences too, especially with regard to Australia. :dunno:
-
I was thinking you might have had a thundering hangover. And was unaware you ONLY drink on friday nights. For all I knew that was when you first had some, and could have drank through the weekend some. Leading at some point to a vicious hangover.
Hell, I've had a few hangovers that lasted several days and nights before. Not that many of them, but some. After the last one (caused by a bottle of absinthe, hadn't realized the alcohol content as strong stuff like the US 'everclear' is not sold here, or very seldom. And it did not burn much, its been over a decade since I'd had absinthe and hadn't realized that the reason it was not burning on the way down, at least after the first shot, was because it numbed the tongue and throat. Alcohol content, I realized, after about two days and nights of non-stop spewing every five minutes or so, and THE WORST, most vicious, horrendous, abysmal hangover imaginable, was just a tad under 75%. Took until very recently for me to be able to drink anything stronger than 15-20% liqueurs such as tia maria, schnapps and the like at all, and even then I had to fight the gag reflex.
I am now capable of drinking spirits again though but it sure took its time. And gutrot vodka still makes me gag. Suppose its as good a reason as any to spend the money on russian standard, or better.
-
I was thinking you might have had a thundering hangover. And was unaware you ONLY drink on friday nights. For all I knew that was when you first had some, and could have drank through the weekend some. Leading at some point to a vicious hangover.
Hell, I've had a few hangovers that lasted several days and nights before. Not that many of them, but some. After the last one (caused by a bottle of absinthe, hadn't realized the alcohol content as strong stuff like the US 'everclear' is not sold here, or very seldom. And it did not burn much, its been over a decade since I'd had absinthe and hadn't realized that the reason it was not burning on the way down, at least after the first shot, was because it numbed the tongue and throat. Alcohol content, I realized, after about two days and nights of non-stop spewing every five minutes or so, and THE WORST, most vicious, horrendous, abysmal hangover imaginable, was just a tad under 75%. Took until very recently for me to be able to drink anything stronger than 15-20% liqueurs such as tia maria, schnapps and the like at all, and even then I had to fight the gag reflex.
I am now capable of drinking spirits again though but it sure took its time. And gutrot vodka still makes me gag. Suppose its as good a reason as any to spend the money on russian standard, or better.
Dear God no. I am an old man. One night is all I can manage. A six pack each Friday night. $21 treat.
What Odeon was on about is anyone's guess? He probably has no idea what he was saying.