The Coffee table

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi all,
I thought this section called the coffee table could well be a place for general chat as some of us do so at coffee in our daily lives.
Warm regards
Derek

Ps Brendan..can this be moved into the correct folder please..I do not seem to be able to do it properly.

Subject: Re: The Coffee table Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:51 am

Hi Derek,

I created a new folder for it and placed in this Personal Interest category. If it's not where you want it, will you let me know?

Regards,
Brendan.

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Brendan,
It is just a fine place to put it!
Thanks
Derek

brendan wrote:: Hi Derek,

I created a new folder for it and placed in this Personal Interest category. If it's not where you want it, will you let me know?

Regards,
Brendan.

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi guys,
In many way, although many of us all speak the same language there is apparently huge cultural differences between us.

There are these stereotypes we have, Re: Brits being guarded and making under statements.

The Irish; a happy extrovert social people readily passing the time of day with strangers.
Brendan recently told me this was not the case...another illusion shattered! Smile

What do you guys think?

I know the Scots are very different to we English, however the highland Scot, the Shetlander and the lowland Scot, are very different to each other as well.
Regards
Derek

Subject: Re: The Coffee table Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:46 pm

Hi Derek,

I think you may have hit on the core issue when you mentioned the dreaded word ‘homogenisation’. If anyone fears the dreaded word means we will all be forced to become gay, I’m sorry to say it is far worse than that. Different sexual orientation, if we can give it no other credit, at least adds to the diversity of human life. Homogenisation will make us all the same.

I think the process is a mixture of globalisation and political correctness. When I came home to Ireland in 1998 and saw the impact of the multinationals on Irish life and culture, I wondered why I had bothered returning to a country where the only difference left was which side of the road we drove on.

For me, the process of political correctness didn’t start in ordinary life. I worked and socialised with people who had eccentricities and idiosyncrasies that nobody ever considered should be worked out of their systems. It was the colour of human life. It might be that certain something, hard to define, that visitors to Ireland really enjoyed. I went from that kind of social life straight into the social life of the JWs, which was a contradiction in terms, really. This was where I learned that people reckoned that there was more value in silence than conversation. Congregational life was very political in nature, and everyone, especially the career Witnesses, learned more about the art of political correctness than they ever learned about honesty or genuine communication.

That was in the mid-80’s. Over time, I learned that this correctness was extending to every part of society like a virus that couldn’t be stopped. To make it worse, small-minded people loved its promise of high return for low investment.

Now we have the likes of songwriters writing laments for the days when ‘you could go to a pub where people talk’. It’s from a song by Pierce Turner called ‘More’ where he records the loss of so many of the simple things of life. That was an old Ireland, becoming mythical not just because of its legendary friendliness but also, like many myths, because it isn’t really true. Much of that Irish charm was part and parcel of an alcohol-fuelled society that happily hid the trail of woe it left in its wake.

I think real communication involves risk. It is the giving of yourself to other people and hoping that they will reciprocate rather than abuse. I was ashamed of people over the years who firmly believed that knowledge was power and the purpose of conversation was to draw far more knowledge from people than they were willing to impart in the hope of improving their station in their own little social circles. Some perfected this to an art in the congregations, and it of course rampant nowadays.

This is a bit heavy for a conversation over a cup of e-coffee so I apologise for that. I’m off to the pub for a few pints so that I can become the stereotypical happy Irish man! But will anyone talk there or will they just stare into their pints?

Regards,
Brendan.

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Brendan,
Your appraisal of the situation is also true of society in the UK.

People are no longer fat, and no one is blind and there are no prostitutes...only female sex trade workers.

Like you, I refuse to be put in homogenized mold.
I am a 'chimera'...to plagiarizer your prayer to Willa! Smile

I have the feet of a big foot and I'm rapidly growing the skin of a pachyderm. Smile

There are situations where we may have to conform...for example in the workplace... it is sometimes necessary to knuckle under as a wage slave or else we may face censure. To quote certain scriptures now, to the wrong person, or in the wrong context, can cause us to face the wrath of the law.

But perish the thought, in our daily life, of having to fit our speech into someone other than our own conscientiously predetermined norms, for the sake of political correctness, or because someone who held a position of 'jumped up' authority, didn't like others disagreeing with them.

I see your point about 'teachers'!
Those who feel they are the mouthpiece of God, when they merely are expressing their personal opinions.

Freedom is precious and not to be given up lightly.
Christ set us free we should stop being slaves of men.

Of course we should have considerable empathy for the weak and oppressed and hone our speech to the situation and act in love.

Regards
Derek

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

To your point, Derek, the workplace has become a minefield for many. Im fortunate enough to live in a small conservative marketplace, a big corporation yet in a small business atmosphere along way from the home office. My boss-lady is a 60 year old Quaker, my office assistants are 55 year old evangelical women, all good christian people. A few live and let live agnostics, and one non-practicing Catholic 35 yr old Hispanic--fantstic guy. Then there's me, the ex-cultist, and general encyclopaedic smart ass.

The "rub" comes when any one of us are sent out of our "cozy" small market existence and into a large corporate biz meeting out of town, where gays, transgenders, and every possible type of political/religious affiliation comes to the fore, even in the most "professional" of communicative environments.

It pays dividends to play it 'close to the vest' at large biz gatherings with many unknowns.

As far as the day to day multiculturalistic rabble, Im totaly live and let live, up to and until some one waves a penis or vagina in my face, and then they are going to have some problems with me, fairly quickly. Ive met and done business with many gay people and I simply have never had any issues at all, and I think the "in your face" radical-nut-jobs really are extremely very rare, and in my experience have confined themselves to x-jw discussion boards called "Shelter". Thank heaven.

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Matt,
At times, circumspection is the order of the day.

Why does it seem to us on this side of the Pond, that conspiracy theorists abound in the States?
Is it just a perception from the net and not really the case?

PC seemed rife with the guys.
Regards
Derek

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

Derek wrote:: Hi Matt,
At times, circumspection is the order of the day.

Why does it seem to us on this side of the Pond, that conspiracy theorists abound in the States?
Is it just a perception from the net and not really the case?

PC seemed rife with the guys.
Regards
Derek

I think its important to draw a distinction and define what is meant by "conspiracy theorists". The term is merely used as a pejorative in most cases, adn this is done usually to discount and marginalize what may otherwise be valid points.

For example, you have these folks that believe David Icke almost word for word (note; Mr. Icke displays the spirit of Anti-Christ by biblical definition, as he denies Christ came in the flesh.), and also believe many of the incessant monkey-mind ramblings of a guy named Steve Quayle.

On the other hand you have the Alex Jones types (a bit different from Icke, imo), who have lately been claiming everything (and I do mean everything) is staged by the Govt.

While I dont believe the majority of the conclusions of these people, although they have at times brought forth some interesting research. While interesting, fact it does not necissarily make. (As regards the PC guys and all that "SLave SPecies of God" garbage....nutters is what I say to that non-sense.)

However, I can honestly sit here and tell you that as regards 9/11, I have yet to see a 757 that crashed at the pentagon. I challenge and defy you, and anyone else to show us the 757 crashed at the pentagon. On this note, its not a "conspiracy theory" if a valid point is brought forth and the factual evidence----not the conclusion without evidence, the evidence itself, shows that the "official story" has a major problem with it. Such points also abound in many prominent assasinations of key Civil Rights persons on the 1960's. These "theories" have abounded before the net was even concieved, and in fact, a special session of congress was conviened in the late 70's regarding the JFK murder (they found that the "official story" had a major flaw in it....more bullets were fired).

I will also say, as regards the distinction you drew between 'those in the states'; people in the US do not trust their govt to do what is the right thing" for them. Those in Europe, and mainly Britian, are far more trusting of their 'Big Brother'. An entire generation of US persons saw 10 years of the most pointless and wasteful war (Vietnam) take place, in which 60,000 US men needlessly lost their lives ( as did millions of Asians), all the while the US 'Big Brother' was lying their backside off to the entire country in order to get the populace to support the war. Its a well known FACT that the incident used to start the war was completely trumprd up and lied about by the US Govt (the Gulf of Tonkin incident). It was a phoney and a lie.

I'll also add in the entire justification for the Iraq war in 2003 followed the same pattern; totally trumped up, aften factually BOGUS charges by the US government to get support for a war that in retrospect, virtaully NONE of the "evidence" for WMD's ever really existed or was valid. SO, is it a "conspiracy theory" by "conspiracy theorists" to point these FACTS out?

SO, by your definition, does this make those who believe this "conspiracy theorists"? That is to say, those who recognize this as the historical, declassified fact it is, and are therefore much less willing to go along with the next "party line"?

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/index.htm

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Matt,
Just a quick one, I have to go.

I was thinking of the 'black queen's' chem-trails and gogh's, it wasn't the planes that brought down the twin towers, they were blown up.

We have the Dr David Kelly conspiracy over here, that could have some substance.

Another one is the ridiculous assertion there was no moon landings or from a twisted guy... Princess Di was murdered by our royal family.
Derek

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

Derek wrote:: Hi Matt,
Just a quick one, I have to go.

I was thinking of the 'black queen's' chem-trails and gogh's, it wasn't the planes that brought down the twin towers, they were blown up.

We have the Dr David Kelly conspiracy over here, that could have some substance.

Another one is the ridiculous assertion there was no moon landings or from a twisted guy... Princess Di was murdered by our royal family.
Derek

As far as chem-trails, something is getting sprayed up there, but I dont know what. There are too many pics out there that show this. Now----is the govt trying to kill us? No, I have no evidence of that with chem-trails. Most likely it is attempts at subtle weather modification, which is well documented.

As far as the WTC towers, there is evidence to suggest that there were explosions in and near the basement, but as far as a controlled floor by floor demolition, I really cant make that stretch at this point.

Kelly looked like he was likely murdered, but I havnt seen enough on that one to know.

I have no real compelling evidence that says the US didnt land on the moon. I believe they did. Too many people would have to have kept their mouth shut for too long for me to believe otherwise. What NASA DID DO, was "touch-up" a few pics taken on the moon, which has given those with an overactive imagination allot of material to work with. There is also a nut named Richard C. Hoagaland who is just about the worst with the moon conspiracy junk.

Princess DI? Beats me, but I will say It seems to me that it was simpy a whacky car accident. I thinnk that if the royal family really wanted to off someone, they could do it allot better than that.

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Matt and all,
The evidence of the plane crash into the Pentagon on the net seems incontrovertible to me.
How did the people on the ground and on the flight, die on that day, if not at the Pentagon?

Here a little something to change the subject..is it another con?..you bet...this was sent to me by someone who actually believed it. As some were ready to believe the BBC April fool the other year about the flying penguin colony proving creation?

http://www.slideshare.net/meisterjoker/burma-amazing-picture
Regards
Derek

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

Derek wrote:: Hi Matt and all,
The evidence of the plane crash into the Pentagon on the net seems incontrovertible to me.
How did the people on the ground and on the flight, die on that day, if not at the Pentagon?

Mr Derek---

Lets not put the cart before the horse....('...people on a plane had to go somewhere...')

Was there, or was there NOT a plane that hit the pentagon. Lets start on that one first.

http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/06-14-04/discussion.cgi.51.html

The pics:

From the DOD, on the day it happened:
The Coffee table Pentagon_200

From Sept 14:
The Coffee table Pentagon-aerial

Projection---
The Coffee table Pentagonwhat_the_govt_said_happened_at_the_pentagon_that_day

Now I ask you....DID a plane hit the pentagon, and if so, Where is the plane?

Feel free to google all the pics you want......

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Matt,
Strange things happen with impacts. I was on a transmitting station when a phantom jet hit one of the main stays of the 1000' plus mast with the end of it wing.

To my eye there is a diagonal hole 'punched' through the buildings as suggested. The facade of the building is removed by the fire it is quite possible the wings would have been sheared on impact and folded and were probably mainly consumed in the fire. I saw a picture of the flight recorder that was said to be recovered.

The plane, or what's left of it, was in the guts of the building, just as in the twin towers the planes went right in and didn't stick out!

In the twin towers, much of the building was glass and steel so before they went down the punched hole and 'slots' were visible.

We cannot see the marks the plane left on the front of the Pentagon because of the fire and the building front buttress that was less wide than the wing span of the plane. The buttress projects forward in front of the rest of the structure and took the impact. The site obviously has had much of the ground debris tidied up before the photograph was taken.

I really cannot see why they should want to cover up what really happened in this simultaneous attack with the twin towers? To what purpose? The families of those about to die got phones calls from those ones in the back of the plane before it crashed.
Regards
Derek

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

Derek wrote:: Hi Matt,
Strange things happen with impacts. I was on a transmitting station when a phantom jet hit one of the main stays of 1000' plus mast with the end of it wing.

To my eye there is a diagonal hole 'punched' through the buildings as suggested. The facade of the building is removed the wings could have been sheared on impact and folded and were probably mainly consumed in the fire. I saw a picture of the flight recorder that was said to be recovered.

The plane, or what's left of it, is in the guts of the building just as in the twin towers the planes went right in and didn't stick out!

In the twin towers much of the building was glass and steel so before they went down the punch hole was visible. We cannot see the marks the plane left on the front of the building because of the fire.

I really cannot see why they should want to cover up what really happened in this simultaneous attack with the twin towers? To what purpose? The families of those about to die got phones calls from those ones in the back of the plane before it crashed.
Regards
Derek

There are no "wing marks" on the building, as well as the fact that the engines would have made a visible entry impact on the building, which they clearly didnt. Even on the twin towers, the engine and wings made a VISIBLE penetration upon entry; no such thing here. Also, the entry point at first outer 'ring' of the pentagon isnt consistent with a plane this large, at the angle of entry indicated----look at it.

SImply put, the hole is too small for a 757 in its totality. Too small.

Large plane crashes are simply not this tidy. I challenge you to look up incidences where planes of this size have crashed; its an unholy mess with several dozens of tons of material strewn over a wide area. Even in a building like this, the sheer heighth of the plane and its even taller rear assembly would have provided a much different 'after the fact' picture; the idea that "everything just got sucked into the building and magically vaporized" stretched the bounds of credulity to the point on breaking.

I just dont think you are thinking about what actually seeing, and instead, like everyone else, jumping ahead to a "but, but...the people HAD to go 'somewhere'..." thought, as well as "...but...WHY would they cover it up?...". Look at what you are seeing----not the propaganda the world has been fed for almost 10 years, ad infinitum.

DO you realize how truly LARGE a 757 is, as compared to this 'hole'? DO you understand the dimensions of this aircraft relative to the building and 'hole' you are seeing?

There are several other points on this matter that are inconsistent with a Boeing 757 crash. I would encourage you to look at this further at some of the sites that talk about this.

http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm

EDIT: [this post was written in much haste due to time, so my appologies for all the typos and acusatory "you's"; no offense intended. flower

]

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Matt,
Don't worry about the tone of your post, I've a thick skin! Smile

Perhaps we should start at the beginning with the eye witness accounts, Matt?

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77w.htm
atb
Derek

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

Yes, perhaps we should:

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/sgydk.html

Note how these are described:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html#witnesses

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Matt,
Observers vary as to the accuracy of their accounts.

What is your bottom line on this one.
Your surely not suggesting it was a cruise missile hit the Pentagon? Smile

Regards
Derek

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

WHen time permits, Ill track down the links and pics, but I do believe it was a plane, just not a 757. I recall seeing pics of certain parts laying on the ground matched with parts from a smaller jet (not a "fighter", but one with a military application).

If one looks at the face of the pentagon building there are no impact marks, or even scratches where the wings of a Boeing 757 SHOULD HAVE hit.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77.htm

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Matt,
Perhaps the plane folded its wings like a Gannet!? Smile

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCg-uaPSNiY

User Posts : 339 Join date : 2010-05-12

Derek wrote:: Hi Matt,
Perhaps the plane folded its wings like a Gannet!?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCg-uaPSNiY

Hahahaha....that was perfect Mr.D----you just made my day!

peace
flower

m

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi All,
Last November I had a cataract operation on my left eye because my vision was getting 'milky', and after two months of settling down, I got new glasses and could read a car number plate at twice the normal legal distance. However, since then, my left eye has progressively worsened, until it was worse than before I had my cataract operation done.

I found out two months ago that the capsule wall between the inserted new lens and the vitreous humour had regenerated a thickened layer of cells that obstructed my vision and made the image on the retina diffuse.

Laser treatment was the solution...so today after waiting for some time with my sight getting worse, I had the treatment with a laser for a few minutes. Apart from the drops to dilate my pupils for the op causing discomfort, the results were amazing and immediate, by lunch time I could see with my left eye with pin sharp vision again.

Like the boy who burns the paper with a magnifying glass by focusing the sun on it. The laser is focused only on the new cell growth and defocused on the retina so the retina is not damaged.

Thanks be to God for the faculty of sight and modern medicine that can restore aging sight to that of our youth.
And thanks also for our understanding of physics and the science of God that makes such 'miracles' possible.
Regards
Derek

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi all,
When I get a chance I'll post some pictures I took on holiday...they are not happy snaps though...one is not too photogenic at 71!! Smile

WCL
Derek

PS. If any of you guys have some interesting picts from life it would be very much appreciated if you could post them because they are worth a thousand words.

Subject: Re: The Coffee table Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:53 pm

Hi Derek,

I hope you'll share the photos with us.

My hobby at the moment is the choir. We have finished learning 'The Prayer' and are singing it at every event. Now we are working on 'My Life, My Love, My All'. I think these are beautiful songs. The real crowd-pleasers, though, are 'Lean On Me' and 'Higher and Higher'.

Regards,
Brendan.

User Posts : 364 Join date : 2010-05-02

Hi Brendan,
I am pleased you are enjoying your singing with others it is very rewarding hobby you have chosen.
It is very satisfying hearing the different parts of a choir come together and harmonise, all the practice is hard work, but the result is a living, although temporary, (if not recorded) work of art.
When Marjorie and I sang in the churches together choir in the spring we wished we had been able to sing from being young. Being brought up associated with the witnesses and being' locked in' for years, robs ones of things that NT Wright would no doubt say were part of the fullness of human nature.

God help us if we ever cramp the spirit of our children so they cannot appreciate life's experience in all its diversity.
Regards
Derek

brendan wrote:: Hi Derek,

I hope you'll share the photos with us.

My hobby at the moment is the choir. We have finished learning 'The Prayer' and are singing it at every event. Now we are working on 'My Life, My Love, My All'. I think these are beautiful songs. The real crowd-pleasers, though, are 'Lean On Me' and 'Higher and Higher'.

Regards,
Brendan.