"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 15 May 2017 21:32:31 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 14 May 2017 20:36:29 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Sat, 13 May 2017 21:16:51 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Sat, 13 May 2017 04:24:05 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Thu, 11 May 2017 21:13:12 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news "In Western Australia, the rate of births resulting in FASD is
0.02
per
1000 births for non-Indigenous Australians, however among
indigenous
births the rate is 2.76 per 1000 births"

So, between 0.002% and 0.276%. Not common then.

It's a lot higher than that in the worst of the indigenous camps.

But nobody cares about the Abbos.

Those that end up paying to keep them in jail do.

So do those who pay for their benefits.

Then remove the benefits

Not even possible.

No reason it can't be done.

Corse there is, not enough voters want that,
so any govt stupid enough to to that would
get the bums rush at the ballot box, and they
know it, so even the torys who would like to
do that arent actually stupid enough to
commit political suicide like that.

Most people not on benefits don't want them.

Most people do get the child benefits.

But rich folk don't need the child benefits, they're **** all compared to
their wages.

Rich people don't get wages.

However they don't want their taxes paying for the council estate scum to
have 50 kids for free.

Sure, but there are FAR more voters who
arent rich and the rich only ever vote Tory
anyway if they actually bother to vote at all.

It saps money from their taxes.

Yes, but most who get child benefits are too stupid to
realise that society as a whole would be better with child
benefits only for the kids that would starve without them.

There should be none at all. Let them starve.

**** all of the voters are psychopaths like you.

If the parents can't afford to feed them, they shouldn't have had them.

Yes, but it's a bit hard on the kids with such ****wit parents.

and introduce the death sentence.

Not enough support a death sentence for shoplifting.

Use the three strikes rule like the USA.

Not enough support a death penalty for shoplifting
or drug use to be able to get that up even after the
third time they get caught doing it.

Anyway, what has jail to do with illness?

Its those with fetal alcohol spectrum
disorder that do most of the crime.

You're making assumptions.

Nope, it's a trivially provable fact. Its so easy to see if an
individual has that problem that its easy to see if there is
an excess of those in prison. That even affects how you look.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_...y_with_FAS.jpg

Nobody knows how dangerous it is.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...-safe-research

Irrelevant to the fact that its drinking alcohol in very
large amounts during pregnancy is what produces FAS.

As I said, depends which article you believe.

Nope, what matters is the rigour science, not belief.

Money tends to make people do things.

Wouldn't make me wipe little kids arses all day.

Or me. Then again women don't seem to hate things like
that,
otherwise
nobody would ever have children.

Its more tolerated because you don't have to do it for
long.

Then explain those who have many children.

They make the other children wipe the arses of the latest
ones.

Never happened with me.

Your parents didn't have many children.

Two.

Notning even remotely like enough to see that done,
if only because they are so close together in age.

5 years apart.

Nothing like old enough to wipe a little kids arse.
They can't even wipe their own arse at that age.

At some point one will be able to for 5 years when the other
cannot.

Nope, while they can eventually wipe their own arses, by the
time they are big enough to wipe someone else's arse, that
younger one can wipe its own arse with a 5 year difference.

Wiping your own arse and wiping another arse is the same technique.

Even more pig ignorant than you usually manage.

In fact wiping someone else's is easier, as you can see what you're
doing.

Even more pig ignorant than you usually manage.

At least try to make a counter argument.

Everyone can see that I did.

You have not made an argument against the fact that it's easier to do
something when it 's in front of you so you can see it.

There is a lot more to it than just seeing. Little kids that that have
only just worked out how to wipe their own arses don't have the
strength to wipe the arse of another little kid sitting on a dunny.

They don't need any strength to wipe their own arse.

How on earth would it take more strength to wipe a different arse?

You have to move the other kid into a position where you can wipe its arse.

At least you don't say "ass".

Donkeys don't get their arses wiped.

Americans can't tell the difference between donkey and arse. Or
tourist
and terrorist. Or mirror and myrrh.

Not one of them, eh ?

Bound to be a few that can speak properly, probably born in the UK.

Even you should be able to manage better than that. Obviously not.

Americans speak wrong, end of story.

Even you should be able do better than that pathetic excuse for a troll.
Obviously not.

You need god bothering stupids to do that ****.

That's the whole point of religion, tell the most
stupid that they end up hell if they don't do that
sort of ****, so they keep doing that **** so they
don't end up in hell.

Nah, they do **** work to get paid.

Nope, they put their hand out to the state for
benefits.

Then remove them.

Not legal to do that.

Then change the law.

Not possible, the stupid god botherers outnumber us.

They must be exterminated.

Not even possible when there are only 5% of us.

I do not believe 95% believe in god.

They do anyway.

Stats show otherwise.

Like hell they do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogr...United_Kingdom
9% but its much lower in the US.

39%.

The other 30% are actually stupid enough to believe that there
might
be
some god.

And you lot are rather more irreligious than most of the first
and
second world.

That's because we're more intelligent than for example the
Americans.

Nope. It appears to be because quite a few of the
earliest that moved to yankeeland from england
particularly did so because of the religious
persecution they got in england so its hardly
surprising that that did produce more stupid
believers in america eventually.

In England back in those days there was more religion, so surely it
would be the atheists that would run away?

Nope, they just shut up and carried on regardless.

Much harder to keep quiet about your non CoE religion.

You lot even make Catholicism illegal and had a full civil war too.

And that that time were quite literally burning each other at the
stake
too.

That's the Irish that are that stupid.

Nope, plenty of english too. And scots too.

Not nowadays. The Irish still are though.

Nope.

Look up IRA, catholics and protestants killing each other.

They aint doing that anymore.

The Irish are stupid enough to kill themselves. Intelligent people blow
up OTHER countries.

How odd that you lot had a full civil war.

We've never been that stupid.