http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

On 10/1/2014 12:54 PM, Ian Field wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

"This video has been removed by the user."


Why is that ?

Were there just to many lies in it ?

Inquiring minds want to know.

"hamilton" wrote in message
...
On 10/1/2014 12:54 PM, Ian Field wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

"This video has been removed by the user."


Why is that ?

Were there just to many lies in it ?

Spot on - it was David Conman speaking, Tories lie like some people just
like the sound of their own voice.

Apparently the link I posted has been removed by the user.

This link hadn't been censored at the time of posting;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...-the-poor.html

Even the Torygraph take off their rose tinted spectacles occasionally,
trying to cling to a shred of credibility.

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

"John Larkin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

The Tory flagship policy is to eliminate high paid highly skilled jobs in
favour of competing with the "bowl of rice" economies.

On 10/3/2014 10:47 AM, Ian Field wrote:


"John Larkin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

The Tory flagship policy is to eliminate high paid highly skilled jobs
in favour of competing with the "bowl of rice" economies.

Sounds about the same here. (usa)

"hamilton" wrote in message
...
On 10/3/2014 10:47 AM, Ian Field wrote:


"John Larkin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

The Tory flagship policy is to eliminate high paid highly skilled jobs
in favour of competing with the "bowl of rice" economies.

Sounds about the same here. (usa)

There's a lot of people who consider themselves to be Tory, who're in for a
*VERY* nasty shock if the Toraidhe get another 5 years!

You can tell an election looms - suddenly there's loads of workmen fixing
the roads the Toraidhe have let crumble for the last 5 years.

Ian Field wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY
"Removed by user"

Ian Field wrote:
Apparently the link I posted has been removed by the user.

This link hadn't been censored at the time of posting;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...-the-poor.html


Even the Torygraph take off their rose tinted spectacles occasionally,
trying to cling to a shred of credibility.
I say,good chap, do not resent the poor even tho you steal from them;
there is an almost unlimited number of the poor,so the profits become
unlimited.

John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.


Absolutely; join the Seattle economy where everyone demands $15 per hour.

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:43:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

---
They're only nasty because their survival threatens you and you
don't have the guts to do anything but name-call.

What makes you think that "good jobs" are where the poor would be
trapped into kow-towing to your system, and shutting the **** up is
what they'd want, and that what they _should_ want is to work to
lessen your self-serving interests?

John Fields

On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:00:14 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:43:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

---
They're only nasty because their survival threatens you and you
don't have the guts to do anything but name-call.

What makes you think that "good jobs" are where the poor would be
trapped into kow-towing to your system, and shutting the **** up is
what they'd want, and that what they _should_ want is to work to
lessen your self-serving interests?

John Fields

As time goes on, you make less and less sense.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:43:31 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:00:14 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:43:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

---
They're only nasty because their survival threatens you and you
don't have the guts to do anything but name-call.

What makes you think that "good jobs" are where the poor would be
trapped into kow-towing to your system, and shutting the **** up is
what they'd want, and that what they _should_ want is to work to
lessen your self-serving interests?

John Fields

As time goes on, you make less and less sense.

---
A different take on it, reductio ad absurdum, may clear it up for
you. Perhaps:

If you resent the poor, then you'd rather not have them around, and
eliminating most of them would be possible with the good jobs held
by your own SS.

Get it now?

John Fields

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 15:10:32 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:43:31 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:00:14 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:43:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

---
They're only nasty because their survival threatens you and you
don't have the guts to do anything but name-call.

What makes you think that "good jobs" are where the poor would be
trapped into kow-towing to your system, and shutting the **** up is
what they'd want, and that what they _should_ want is to work to
lessen your self-serving interests?

John Fields

As time goes on, you make less and less sense.

---
A different take on it, reductio ad absurdum, may clear it up for
you. Perhaps:

If you resent the poor, then you'd rather not have them around, and
eliminating most of them would be possible with the good jobs held
by your own SS.

Get it now?

John Fields

I was wrong. You now make absolutely no sense.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:05:39 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 15:10:32 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:43:31 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:00:14 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:43:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

---
They're only nasty because their survival threatens you and you
don't have the guts to do anything but name-call.

What makes you think that "good jobs" are where the poor would be
trapped into kow-towing to your system, and shutting the **** up is
what they'd want, and that what they _should_ want is to work to
lessen your self-serving interests?

John Fields

As time goes on, you make less and less sense.

---
A different take on it, reductio ad absurdum, may clear it up for
you. Perhaps:

If you resent the poor, then you'd rather not have them around, and
eliminating most of them would be possible with the good jobs held
by your own SS.

Get it now?

John Fields

I was wrong. You now make absolutely no sense.

---
Y'know, John, being of diminutive stature and realizing that a
physical fight would reduce you to meat leads you to think that an
intellectual confrontation would be more to your liking.

So far, you haven't showed a lot of aptitude in that arena either.

On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 18:27:40 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:05:39 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 15:10:32 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:43:31 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:00:14 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:43:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

---
They're only nasty because their survival threatens you and you
don't have the guts to do anything but name-call.

What makes you think that "good jobs" are where the poor would be
trapped into kow-towing to your system, and shutting the **** up is
what they'd want, and that what they _should_ want is to work to
lessen your self-serving interests?

John Fields

As time goes on, you make less and less sense.

---
A different take on it, reductio ad absurdum, may clear it up for
you. Perhaps:

If you resent the poor, then you'd rather not have them around, and
eliminating most of them would be possible with the good jobs held
by your own SS.

Get it now?

John Fields

I was wrong. You now make absolutely no sense.

---
Y'know, John, being of diminutive stature and realizing that a
physical fight would reduce you to meat leads you to think that an
intellectual confrontation would be more to your liking.

So far, you haven't showed a lot of aptitude in that arena either.

Design any good electronics lately? Thought not.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 17:26:01 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 18:27:40 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:05:39 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 15:10:32 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 11:43:31 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 17:00:14 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:43:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:54:04 +0100, "Ian Field"
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB0_47XUDvY

I resent the poor. If we had more good jobs, we could eliminate most
of those nasty poor people.

---
They're only nasty because their survival threatens you and you
don't have the guts to do anything but name-call.

What makes you think that "good jobs" are where the poor would be
trapped into kow-towing to your system, and shutting the **** up is
what they'd want, and that what they _should_ want is to work to
lessen your self-serving interests?

John Fields

As time goes on, you make less and less sense.

---
A different take on it, reductio ad absurdum, may clear it up for
you. Perhaps:

If you resent the poor, then you'd rather not have them around, and
eliminating most of them would be possible with the good jobs held
by your own SS.

Get it now?

John Fields

I was wrong. You now make absolutely no sense.

---
Y'know, John, being of diminutive stature and realizing that a
physical fight would reduce you to meat leads you to think that an
intellectual confrontation would be more to your liking.

So far, you haven't showed a lot of aptitude in that arena either.

Design any good electronics lately? Thought not.

---
Well, then, you thought wrong.

But that's no surprise, is it?

John Fields