PureBasic Forums - English

Psychophanta wrote: It is in fact another adult entertainment matter

2038 views in 1 month.
Higher score than most technical topics.

einander: but, that isn't the best thing, thus far no one as degenorated into name calling, or flame wars, since this sort of topic very often than not ends if flame wars, thus far it hasn't really.

Weldone people

Inner wrote:here is an interesting read;
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41368

LOL. Quote from the article:

article wrote: Sexual slavery is no longer confined to the Far East, Australia and other exotic locales.

(My italics and bold)

We've been sprung!

* Quick Cap'n, jettison cargo! *

Inner, you Kiwis will do anything to make your trans-tasman (and superior) cousins look bad ... is losing at rugby that hurtful? (j/k)

The fundemental concept of the European Court Of Human Rights is that every life is of equal value irrespective of gender, race, religion or sexual orientation.

I suddenly feel very European, which is just wierd...

Dare2: well, 1. I'm british not a New Zealander I just live here, 2. I didn't write the artical in question, 3. however if I had to list a country as being most sexually amoral, Australia would be in the top 3.

I mean come on, Steve Erwin trying to feed his baby to a crocodile? and what reprocusions does he face because of it? absolutely none.

well, if the crocodile would have eaten that kid, it would have received a medal for improving the genepool...

hmmm as all these bush vs. kerry disputes appear to be related to terrorism, the middle east, extremists and holy ground, i 'd rather suggest you all go and visit:

http://dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/dnrc/ ... ter58.html

The wise King Solomon probably would have advised people to help themselves to as much holy dirt as they wanted. He might have gone so far as to suggest that people put holy dirt in their socks so they can enjoy walking on it wherever they go. But first he would have invented socks and patented the idea, because in addition to being wise, he had a good head for business.

and if you're wondering why i have some troubles taking some people and / or nationalities serious...

I was dining with a friend at our favorite Thai restaurant when one of the owners came by to show us photos of her new baby boy. Afterward, my friend remarked that she was surprised that the baby looked "so Chinese." I said, "Well, he does look Asian, since both parents are from Thailand, but what did you expect?" She said, "Yeah, I know, but I expected him to look more American since they've been living in the U.S. for 15 years."

you see, the general problem with dilbert is: it's way too close to the truth to be comfortable...

Inner wrote:Dare2: well, 1. I'm british not a New Zealander I just live here, 2. I didn't write the artical in question, 3. however if I had to list a country as being most sexually amoral, Australia would be in the top 3.

I mean come on, Steve Erwin trying to feed his baby to a crocodile? and what reprocusions does he face because of it? absolutely none.

hehe.

Re 1 and 2 - Well, I guess I have achieved the same order of accuracy - and therefore credibility - as the article.

Re 3 - In Australia, as in USA, the Christian/Morality interest groups carried the election. Backlash, you reckon?

But I don't see how that equates to Sexual Slave Trade - sexual promiscuity is one thing, what the article suggests is another altogether.

Re Irwin - I don't see how that illustrates Australian Sexual Amorality. It does illustrate how cravings for fame and fortune can go to an idiot's head.

Also Re Irwin: The statement "feed his baby .." is an emotive and cheap misrepresentation. It has the same order of accuracy - and therefore credibility - as my calling you a Kiwi, and as the article.

If he had tried to feed his baby to the croc, he would be in jail.

So now you, I and the article all lack credibility for one reason or another.



@blueznl - spot on.

Dare2: there is no if about it , I wasn't attempting to show sexual amorality but 'amorality', I mean what kind of nut ball takes there baby in to a croc inclosure anyway!.

who cares about feeding crocs to babies, or the other way around... can't we just get the sexual trade back?

Inner wrote:.. I mean what kind of nut ball takes there baby in to a croc inclosure anyway!.

Steve Irwin.

It looks a little crazy, but perhaps Steve Irwin knows a little more about crocs than I do. Perhaps he is better qualified to assess the risks involved?

true but still a nut ball...

but then again...

so is bush...

and probably kerry...

and they didn't have to feed babies to the crocs to have a go at presidency

GedB: perhaps, but then Steve is always going on about how "unpredictable they are" and how "dangerious it is" etc.

Actually, that caused a stink here and so they released some other shots of the same scene. Different camera angle - side on - and Showman Steve is revealed to be some distance away from the croc.

Blew his game a bit.)

But he was still too close.

Those things kill and maim people fairly regularly here, and you have to ask yourself if it is any better than, say, taking your baby skydiving with you. Good as you may be, things can happen.

and back to the original topic ...

heard a great saying today :

I don't mind a little Bush, as long as it doesn't come with a dick !