Sebrof Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 He probably wont...............lol, lol Keyborer, there is more to emulating your hero, Keyboarder (imitation being the sincerest form of flattery), than simply adding a brace of "LOL"s to the end of a post. Things like wit, insight, and a willingness to challenge the notions of the herd. You have a long way to go, and I suspect you lack the necessary equipment for the journey. S I'd have thought you'd see through this one Sebrof - has to be one of Slim's sockpuppets (see budget/clarkson thread etc) - Slim you're rubbish, that's two now I've seen through. I had my suspicions, but I didn't want to accuse somebody of being Slim if he wasn't. That would be too cruel. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
When Skies Are Grey Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 when did 'protectionism' become a dirty word? I think you'll find it became a dirty word after the 1930s when protectionism shut down world trade and caused the world economy to contract by about 25%. So is banking a dirty word now? Only if you are doing it right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 I agree with Brown - and since when did 'protectionism' become a dirty word? Oh, let me think - since it became a threat to the' big boys' controlling the global economy? Protectionism is a dirty word because it is nothing but political populism like those fools in England currently striking for 'British jobs for British workers'. They seem to forget that half of the retailling, most of the manufacturing and most of the financial jobs in the UK are thanks to foreign firms. Millions of Britons take advantage of the ability to own a home in other countries, work elsewhere in the EU and buy things online or otherwise from elsewhere in the world. The UK will find it difficult to survive this recession but it will be nearly impossible if it reverts to protectionism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyborer Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I had my suspicions, but I didn't want to accuse somebody of being Slim if he wasn't. That would be too cruel. S Are you accusing me of being Slim then? lol,lol K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I had my suspicions, but I didn't want to accuse somebody of being Slim if he wasn't. That would be too cruel. S Are you accusing me of being Slim then? lol,lol K I thought you were Keyboarder's doppelganger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 I'd have thought you'd see through this one Sebrof - has to be one of Slim's sockpuppets (see budget/clarkson thread etc) - Slim you're rubbish, that's two now I've seen through. Not me. I've only ever had one, AI Droid, which was a work/daytime account and not a sock puppet as such. Check the post times if your bothered, used to post AI Droid daytime, Slim in the evenings. Not sure I'd pat myself on the back for discovering it, most people who know me, knew they were both my nicks. AI Droid's me old Quake 2 name. Not read this thread, so don't know if it's been mentioned, but this is a far more positive article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/4681344/I...cial-storm.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 Not read this thread, so don't know if it's been mentioned, but this is a far more positive article:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/4681344/I...cial-storm.html That picture of Cullercoates again ! Someone should send the Telegraph a picture of a storm on the IOM to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonnyrotten Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 It's quite worrying that a supposed bastion of respectability, probity and truthfulness such as the Torygraph purports to be would be so willing to illustrate an Isle of Man story with a picture which any internet-literate teenager can discover is actually of somewhere completely different. Either they were too lazy to check, or more likely just asked the Press Association for the type of picture they wanted, since it tracks with all that "safe haven in stormy times" drivel. Worrying, because if they're quite happy to perpetrate a photographic untruth in the cause of giving their story more impact, what kind of journalistic untruths are they also happy to commit with the same aim in mind? They've taken the trouble to credit the PA in the picture caption, but haven't bothered to mention that the picture is merely illustrative of stormy waters generally and not representative of the Isle of Man. presumably in case we wonder what else is illustrative and not representative. Even were they too lazy to check, does that mean they're too lazy to check the rest of their facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 It's quite worrying that a supposed bastion of respectability, probity and truthfulness such as the Torygraph purports to be would be so willing to illustrate an Isle of Man story with a picture which any internet-literate teenager can discover is actually of somewhere completely different. Either they were too lazy to check, or more likely just asked the Press Association for the type of picture they wanted, since it tracks with all that "safe haven in stormy times" drivel. Worrying, because if they're quite happy to perpetrate a photographic untruth in the cause of giving their story more impact, what kind of journalistic untruths are they also happy to commit with the same aim in mind? They've taken the trouble to credit the PA in the picture caption, but haven't bothered to mention that the picture is merely illustrative of stormy waters generally and not representative of the Isle of Man. presumably in case we wonder what else is illustrative and not representative. Even were they too lazy to check, does that mean they're too lazy to check the rest of their facts? It's not really that worrying on the grand scale of things which are worrying. IMO. Also - as was pointed out in the other thread - the image is basically being used as a shorthand metaphor for 'storm' which is in the item title. Because the item is about 'weathering storms'. Granted - most people reading the item would probably assume that it was an image of a storm on the IOM. But it doesn't really. The picture does not create a damaging false impression. If they published a picture of dead bodies littering the streets and smoke rising from the remains of bombed out buildings - and captioned it 'Laxey' - then that would probably be worrying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted February 21, 2009 Share Posted February 21, 2009 It's quite worrying that a supposed bastion of respectability, probity and truthfulness such as the Torygraph purports to be would be so willing to illustrate an Isle of Man story with a picture which any internet-literate teenager can discover is actually of somewhere completely different. Either they were too lazy to check, or more likely just asked the Press Association for the type of picture they wanted, since it tracks with all that "safe haven in stormy times" drivel. Worrying, because if they're quite happy to perpetrate a photographic untruth in the cause of giving their story more impact, what kind of journalistic untruths are they also happy to commit with the same aim in mind? They've taken the trouble to credit the PA in the picture caption, but haven't bothered to mention that the picture is merely illustrative of stormy waters generally and not representative of the Isle of Man. presumably in case we wonder what else is illustrative and not representative. Even were they too lazy to check, does that mean they're too lazy to check the rest of their facts? I suspect they asked the picture agency for a photo of stormy seas around the IOM, and the agency, not having one, took a flier. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Not me. I've only ever had one, AI Droid, which was a work/daytime account and not a sock puppet as such. Check the post times if your bothered, used to post AI Droid daytime, Slim in the evenings. Not sure I'd pat myself on the back for discovering it, most people who know me, knew they were both my nicks. AI Droid's me old Quake 2 name. "Most people that know me know who I am?" Well duh!!! I'm not patting myself on the back, but if your bothered why did you deny AI Droid was your sock puppet when I asked way back knowing others knew who you were - doesn't that just make you a little bit fucking weird? Anyway off thread soz peeps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 "Most people that know me know who I am?" Well duh!!! I'm not patting myself on the back, but if your bothered why did you deny AI Droid was your sock puppet when I asked way back knowing others knew who you were - doesn't that just make you a little bit fucking weird? Anyway off thread soz peeps. Multiple IDs on Manx Forums is fucking weird? How long you been on here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Multiple IDs on Manx Forums is fucking weird? How long you been on here? It's that common?! Very surprised to find you are AI Droid. Would never have guessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragmatopian Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Protectionism is a dirty word because it is nothing but political populism like those fools in England currently striking for 'British jobs for British workers'. They seem to forget that half of the retailling, most of the manufacturing and most of the financial jobs in the UK are thanks to foreign firms. Millions of Britons take advantage of the ability to own a home in other countries, work elsewhere in the EU and buy things online or otherwise from elsewhere in the world. The UK will find it difficult to survive this recession but it will be nearly impossible if it reverts to protectionism. Agreed, and likewise if other substantial trading partners were to revert to protectionism: something over which the UK has less control. In Europe it would appear that France is most likely to crack at the moment. I'm a bit concerned at the 'Buy American' clause in the US stimulus package: Obama's been making various soothing noises about not taking a protectionist stance but what's to say that it's not just rhetoric? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 'Buy British' or 'Buy American' only works if there is something British or American to actually buy. Try finding a British made TV, computer, stereo system, can of good lager, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.