RickH wrote:

On Apr 28, 10:35 am, Eeyore
wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Graham

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

1/2, 1/4, 1/16, 1/32 of an AMP? VOLT?

Not in electronics. We use the metric system all day every day.

By not using the metric system we hasten our decline in the 21st
century.

Well, at least we have Liberia and Myanmar to keep us company.

JAM

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:46:24 -0700 (PDT), in alt.home.repair, harry k
wrote:

And perhaps you overlook that if we were all metric, the
instructions, containers, etc. would be tailored to the metric
system. But never expect a person trying to make an illogical point
to see the obvious.

What logic? People exposed to metric all their lives see imperial as
inferior, vice versa for those raised with imperial. Just a matter of what
you know best. Me, I grew up in the US right as they were trying to
metrify. I learned both systems and can use either easily.

Spambait, did you need a calculator to come up with 9.73:0.27 L? Was that
easier/better/more intuitive than computing 312:9 oz?

Both systems have their weak points, and share some. I still contend that
they're both lousy when it comes to dividing the measurement space into
fractions. C'mon, anybody got any love for base-60 scales? I use one every
day myself.

In article 49f7875f.174107914@localhost, (Scott) wrote:
Spambait, did you need a calculator to come up with 9.73:0.27 L?

Nope, did it in my head. The calculation is trivial.

Was that
easier/better/more intuitive than computing 312:9 oz?

Definitely better: I got the right answer. You didn't.

HeyBub wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Roger Blake wrote:

The metric system sucks ass. We don't want it, and furthermore we
don't give a rat's ass what bunch of effete Eurotrash may have to
say about it.

You must have your head well buried if you think you can ignore 'the
metric system'. Whether you want it or not it's here.

And used by 96% of the world's population.

We don't ignore it. We're ****ed that pop comes in liters as a way of
fooling us into thinking it's a quart, so we don't mind paying more per
bottle. It would be only slightly less false if they called it a "metric
quart."

Trust me, you get used to it faster than you might think. And I can still buy
a pint ( 568 ml over here - yours is smaller ) in a pub, or drive a mile down
a road ( special exemptions for tradition ). I wouldn't calculate in pints or
miles though.

We also finally got rid of BTUs too Thank God, so heating systems are now
rated in kW, so it's easy to compare electric with hot water based.


And 96% of the world's population gets by on less than $30,000 per person
per year.

Don't think the USA has the highest per capita income. Those are found in
Europe mostly and some Far East countries. In fact the CIA Factbook rates the
USA as #8.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita

Graham

"RickH" wrote in message


Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

****************************************

Our products would be more welcomed overseas if they were metric. Yes, I
know of sales lost becuase some items could not be made in metric
dimensions.

RickH wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

harry k wrote:

We don't ignore it. We're ****ed that pop comes in liters as a way of
fooling us into thinking it's a quart, so we don't mind paying more
per bottle. It would be only slightly less false if they called it a
"metric quart."


snip

You do realize that a liter contains more than a quart?

Harry K

See what I mean! They're doing all this **** just to CONFUSE us, so they can
rip us off. Eventually.

On Apr 28, 4:05*pm, (Scott) wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:46:24 -0700 (PDT), in alt.home.repair, harry k

wrote:
And perhaps you overlook *that if we were all metric, the
instructions, containers, etc. would be tailored to the metric
system. *But never expect a person trying to make an illogical point
to see the obvious.

What logic? *People exposed to metric all their lives see imperial as
inferior, vice versa for those raised with imperial. *Just a matter of what
you know best. *Me, I grew up in the US right as they were trying to
metrify. *I learned both systems and can use either easily.

Spambait, did you need a calculator to come up with 9.73:0.27 L? *Was that
easier/better/more intuitive than computing 312:9 oz?

Both systems have their weak points, and share some. *I still contend that
they're both lousy when it comes to dividing the measurement space into
fractions. *C'mon, anybody got any love for base-60 scales? *I use one every
day myself.

And just what IS the need to divide into fractions. Decimals work
just as well, better even as they are simpler.

Harry K

harry k wrote:

And just what IS the need to divide into fractions. Decimals work
just as well, better even as they are simpler.


Negotiation. Did you ever see the movie "Wheeler Dealers" with James Garner?

"I'll take a point five interest on your point three-seven-five over-ride on
those squiggly ones and a point oh-six-five bit of those blue things if you
throw in a point six-two-five on the reddish ones!"

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:44:06 GMT, in alt.home.repair,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

Nope, did it in my head. The calculation is trivial.

Apparently not.

Definitely better: I got the right answer.

No, you didn't. 9.73/0.27 36. 1/36 cannot be represented exactly in
decimal, nor sesquidecimal for that matter, which is (surprise) why I picked
it as a counterexample. You also rounded your answer incorrectly.

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:15:40 -0700 (PDT), in alt.home.repair, harry k
wrote:

And just what IS the need to divide into fractions. Decimals work
just as well, better even as they are simpler.

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand fractions. Okay, divide ten
liters of beer fairly between yourself and two of your mates.

Of course we cannot accept the obvious answer, which is to have three apiece
and hide the last one to drink later by yourself.

On Apr 29, 6:20*am, (Scott) wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:15:40 -0700 (PDT), in alt.home.repair, harry k

wrote:
And just what IS the need to divide into fractions. *Decimals work
just as well, better even as they are simpler.

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand fractions. *Okay, divide ten
liters of beer fairly between yourself and two of your mates.

Of course we cannot accept the obvious answer, which is to have three apiece
and hide the last one to drink later by yourself.

..333L per person and measure it with a common laboratory beaker. Now
divide 1 gallon into 3 without doing a conversion into ounces first.

No matter how you play with odd fractions, measures or amounts the
metric will always be simpler and faster. In the case of your 1:36.
had it been expressed in metric, the math would have been one dividing
operation. In out screwed up system, you would have to do a couple
of conversions after you had your division to have a meaningful
answer.

As for dividing a board in thirds, you can do that with nothing but a
piece of string or using a tape without even having to do any math in
either system.

Harry K

Harry K

In article 49f84fcc.225424262@localhost, (Scott) wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:44:06 GMT, in alt.home.repair,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

Nope, did it in my head. The calculation is trivial.

Apparently not.

It's trivial for those who understand how to do it. The answer you came
up with shows you're not in that category.

Definitely better: I got the right answer.

No, you didn't. 9.73/0.27 36. 1/36 cannot be represented exactly in
decimal, nor sesquidecimal for that matter, which is (surprise) why I picked
it as a counterexample. You also rounded your answer incorrectly.

9.73/0.27 = 36.037, which is pretty darn close to 36.

Your answer of 312:9, OTOH, (a) doesn't add up to the correct total, and (b)
isn't particularly close to the correct ratio either.

312+9 = 321, not 320.
312/9 = 34.667, not 36.

The *correct* answer, in imperial units, is 9 qt 1 pt 7 oz 2 tsp : 8 oz 1
Tbsp 1 tsp; I'll let you work out the ratio on your own, since you seem to
need some practice with this sort of calculations.

Do you honestly think that's an improvement over 9 L 730 ml : 270 ml ?

In article 49f852d7.226203455@localhost, (Scott) wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:15:40 -0700 (PDT), in alt.home.repair, harry k
wrote:

And just what IS the need to divide into fractions. Decimals work
just as well, better even as they are simpler.

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand fractions. Okay, divide ten
liters of beer fairly between yourself and two of your mates.

Simple enough: 3 L 333 ml each.

Now let's divide ten quarts evenly between three people...

3 qt 1 cup 2 oz 1 Tbsp 1 tsp.

Yeah, that was easier, wasn't it?

Now I get to contrive an example:

Divide eight liters of beer fairly between yourself and *four* buddies. Easy
and obvious: 1600 ml apiece.

Now divide eight quarts...

You all are confusing exact and required precision.
(apart from mistakes, which are soooo much easier to make using the US
measurements systems.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Eeyore wrote:

RickH wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

Yep, my "American made truck" is all metric. Except for the lug nuts!

JAM

Doug Miller wrote:
In article 49f852d7.226203455@localhost,
(Scott) wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:15:40 -0700 (PDT), in alt.home.repair, harry k
wrote:

And just what IS the need to divide into fractions. Decimals work
just as well, better even as they are simpler.

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand fractions. Okay, divide
ten liters of beer fairly between yourself and two of your mates.

Simple enough: 3 L 333 ml each.

Now let's divide ten quarts evenly between three people...

3 qt 1 cup 2 oz 1 Tbsp 1 tsp.

Yeah, that was easier, wasn't it?

Now I get to contrive an example:

Divide eight liters of beer fairly between yourself and *four*
buddies. Easy and obvious: 1600 ml apiece.

First, you'll have to find five 1600 ml beer steins...


Now divide eight quarts...

Why would I want to do that? If I've got eight beers, I don't have four
buddies.

I have eight beers!

On Apr 28, 8:32*pm, Eeyore
wrote:
RickH wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. *He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.

The last 1 L beer I had was on the Place du Tertre, quite a while ago. My
wife still recalls ...

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

RickH wrote:
On Apr 28, 8:32 pm, Eeyore
wrote:
RickH wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe
and all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.

Regarding the water aspect, that's been the case here in the UK for
decades - and will continue to be!

Frank Galikanokus wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
RickH wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

Yep, my "American made truck" is all metric. Except for the lug nuts!

Funnily enough, I actually prefer some US threads to metric ones which are too
fine IMHO for routine applications like screwing lids on. 4-40 and 6-32 UNC ?
come to mind. Plus M3 is a bit small for that on larger equipment and M4 is
too big. There is an M3.5 but try finding them !

Graham

RickH wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
RickH wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.

It was like that here too. Now we have 25, 19 and 12 mm. They seem to be
compatible.

Graham

Eeyore wrote:

HeyBub wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Roger Blake wrote:

The metric system sucks ass. We don't want it, and furthermore we
don't give a rat's ass what bunch of effete Eurotrash may have to
say about it.
You must have your head well buried if you think you can ignore 'the
metric system'. Whether you want it or not it's here.
And used by 96% of the world's population.
We don't ignore it. We're ****ed that pop comes in liters as a way of
fooling us into thinking it's a quart, so we don't mind paying more per
bottle. It would be only slightly less false if they called it a "metric
quart."

Trust me, you get used to it faster than you might think. And I can still buy
a pint ( 568 ml over here - yours is smaller ) in a pub, or drive a mile down
a road ( special exemptions for tradition ). I wouldn't calculate in pints or
miles though.

We also finally got rid of BTUs too Thank God, so heating systems are now
rated in kW, so it's easy to compare electric with hot water based.


And 96% of the world's population gets by on less than $30,000 per person
per year.

Don't think the USA has the highest per capita income. Those are found in
Europe mostly and some Far East countries. In fact the CIA Factbook rates the
USA as #8.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita

Graham


Per capita is pretty meaningless with a small population. A few hundred
uber-rich can skew the numbers, even if most of the population is living
in mud huts.

--
aem sends...

aemeijers wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Roger Blake wrote:

The metric system sucks ass. We don't want it, and furthermore we
don't give a rat's ass what bunch of effete Eurotrash may have to
say about it.
You must have your head well buried if you think you can ignore 'the
metric system'. Whether you want it or not it's here.
And used by 96% of the world's population.
We don't ignore it. We're ****ed that pop comes in liters as a way of
fooling us into thinking it's a quart, so we don't mind paying more per
bottle. It would be only slightly less false if they called it a "metric
quart."

Trust me, you get used to it faster than you might think. And I can still buy
a pint ( 568 ml over here - yours is smaller ) in a pub, or drive a mile down
a road ( special exemptions for tradition ). I wouldn't calculate in pints or
miles though.

We also finally got rid of BTUs too Thank God, so heating systems are now
rated in kW, so it's easy to compare electric with hot water based.


And 96% of the world's population gets by on less than $30,000 per person
per year.

Don't think the USA has the highest per capita income. Those are found in
Europe mostly and some Far East countries. In fact the CIA Factbook rates the
USA as #8.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita

Per capita is pretty meaningless with a small population. A few hundred
uber-rich can skew the numbers, even if most of the population is living
in mud huts.

Singapore and Norway - population ~ 5 million. Hardly small.
Even Qatar has 1.5 million.

Graham

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:38:31 -0500, in alt.home.repair, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Divide eight liters of beer fairly between yourself and *four*
buddies. Easy and obvious: 1600 ml apiece.

First, you'll have to find five 1600 ml beer steins...

You could use 2-quart pitchers....

Why would I want to do that? If I've got eight beers, I don't have four
buddies.

I have eight beers!

Hah! I like the way this man thinks!

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:21:59 GMT, in alt.home.repair,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand fractions. Okay, divide ten
liters of beer fairly between yourself and two of your mates.

Simple enough: 3 L 333 ml each.

Wastrel.

Now let's divide ten quarts evenly between three people...

3 qt 1 cup 2 oz 1 Tbsp 1 tsp.

Yeah, that was easier, wasn't it?

For anyone who knows US measures, yes! Also, it's exact.

Divide eight liters of beer fairly between yourself and *four* buddies. Easy
and obvious: 1600 ml apiece.

Now divide eight quarts...

A quart and a heavy (or short, depending on where you are) pint apiece.

(Who mentioned required precision?)

In article 49f909d1.273052867@localhost, (Scott) wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:21:59 GMT, in alt.home.repair,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand fractions. Okay, divide ten
liters of beer fairly between yourself and two of your mates.

Simple enough: 3 L 333 ml each.

Wastrel.

Jerk. You're quibbling over 1 ml out of 10 L = 0.01 %.

Now let's divide ten quarts evenly between three people...

3 qt 1 cup 2 oz 1 Tbsp 1 tsp.

Yeah, that was easier, wasn't it?

For anyone who knows US measures, yes!

You're really grasping at straws here. How is that "easier" than 10 L / 3 =
10,000 ml / 3 = 3,333 ml ?

Also, it's exact.

Yes, 100.0% correct, vs. "only" 99.99%. If you think you can measure to that
degree of precision without laboratory equipment and procedures, you're
dreaming.


Divide eight liters of beer fairly between yourself and *four* buddies. Easy
and obvious: 1600 ml apiece.

Now divide eight quarts...

A quart and a heavy (or short, depending on where you are) pint apiece.

(Who mentioned required precision?)

A moment ago, you were complaining that my division of 10 liters between three
people wasted 1 ml (one percent of one percent of the total). Now you don't
care about precision.

Make up your mind.

In article 49f84fcc.225424262@localhost, (Scott) wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:44:06 GMT, in alt.home.repair,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

Nope, did it in my head. The calculation is trivial.

Apparently not.

Definitely better: I got the right answer.

No, you didn't. 9.73/0.27 36. 1/36 cannot be represented exactly in
decimal, nor sesquidecimal for that matter, which is (surprise) why I picked
it as a counterexample. You also rounded your answer incorrectly.

It would appear that your difficulties in obtaining the correct answer
yourself, in understanding why my answer is correct, and in understanding why
your answer is not, stem from your initial misconception that the fraction
1/36 has anything _at_all_ to do with computing the proportions required to
obtain a 1:36 ratio in a given volume.

If a solution has the proportions 1 part solute to 36 parts solvent, the
solute is one thirty-*seventh* of the total volume. Not one thirty-sixth.

In article 49f90c9e.273769838@localhost, (Scott) wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:38:31 -0500, in alt.home.repair, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Divide eight liters of beer fairly between yourself and *four*
buddies. Easy and obvious: 1600 ml apiece.

First, you'll have to find five 1600 ml beer steins...

You could use 2-quart pitchers....

2 qt = 1892 ml, not 1600 ml.

On Apr 29, 12:43*pm, RickH wrote:
On Apr 28, 8:32*pm, Eeyore
wrote:

RickH wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. *He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. *I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.

And the longer the conversion is put off, the more problems such as
that there will be. We should have done it back when it was tried. It
was the troglodytes that short stopped it.

Harry K

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Roger Blake wrote:
The metric system sucks ass. We don't want it, and furthermore we don't
give a rat's ass what bunch of effete Eurotrash may have to say about
it.

You must have your head well buried if you think you can ignore 'the
metric system'. Whether you want it or not it's here.

So What! We just use BOTH anyway!
If we cared so much about what Europeans thought, we might have sympathized
with the Nazis TOO!

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:58:19 -0400, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

RickH wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

Yep, my "American made truck" is all metric. Except for the lug nuts!

....and almost certainly the seat belt mounts.


--

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.

It was like that here too. Now we have 25, 19 and 12 mm. They seem to be
compatible.

Copper tube equivalents to 1, 3/4 and 1/2in are 28, 22 and 15mm. And are
compatible from any maker. Plastic tends to vary outside diameter wise so
tend to need fittings from the same maker.

--
*A day without sunshine is like... night.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

JB wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
Roger Blake wrote:
The metric system sucks ass. We don't want it, and furthermore we don't
give a rat's ass what bunch of effete Eurotrash may have to say about
it.

You must have your head well buried if you think you can ignore 'the
metric system'. Whether you want it or not it's here.

So What! We just use BOTH anyway!
If we cared so much about what Europeans thought, we might have sympathized
with the Nazis TOO!

The metric system's not 'European', it's WORLDWIDE, except for a slab of N
America and 2 backward states in Africa and Asia.

Graham

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.

It was like that here too. Now we have 25, 19 and 12 mm. They seem to be
compatible.

Copper tube equivalents to 1, 3/4 and 1/2in are 28, 22 and 15mm.

Oops, got them wrong. Isn't it o/d vs i/d ?

Graham

harry k wrote:

And the longer the conversion is put off, the more problems such as
that there will be. We should have done it back when it was tried. It
was the troglodytes that short stopped it.

No. "If you wait until the last minute, then the project will only take a
minute."

If we delay metrication until all the manufacturing jobs move to Bangladesh,
then we'll have that much fewer machines and such to convert.

Think of the savings.

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:02:32 GMT, in alt.home.repair,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

Make up your mind.

On Usenet? Surely you jest.

RickH writes:

On Apr 28, 8:32*pm, Eeyore
wrote:
RickH wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

And used by 96% of the world's population.

Shhhh, dont let Obama know that, or we'll have to retool all our
factories. *He's got this fixation with making us more like Europe and
all.

You probably use metric already more than you realise.

Graham

The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.


Pipe fittings are the same old 1/2", 3/4", 1", but they are called
R15, R20, R25 in the metric world.

CU pipes have real metric sizes though, 12mm, 15mm, 22mm etc, and
thesee are the actual outer diameter.

Eeyore writes:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
The water pipe and electrical conduit in my house is 1 inch, 1/2 inch,
3/4 inch. I think any transition will still require stores to stock
fittings in both metric and inch for generations to come.

It was like that here too. Now we have 25, 19 and 12 mm. They seem to be
compatible.

Copper tube equivalents to 1, 3/4 and 1/2in are 28, 22 and 15mm.

Oops, got them wrong. Isn't it o/d vs i/d ?

Graham


CU pipes are o/d, steel pipes are i/d.

JB wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Roger Blake wrote:
The metric system sucks ass. We don't want it, and furthermore we don't
give a rat's ass what bunch of effete Eurotrash may have to say about
it.
You must have your head well buried if you think you can ignore 'the
metric system'. Whether you want it or not it's here.

So What! We just use BOTH anyway!
If we cared so much about what Europeans thought, we might have sympathized
with the Nazis TOO!

Grow up.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------