Whacking Permalink Archive
25 July 2005
In this thread at aus.politics, I took a brief swipe at Cuba under Castro, causing one Castroid to explode with rage.
Read and titter at the shrieking of one 'Prof. Jonez'. I especially liked this bit:
Must be a Michael Moore fan.
always-interesting blogger A.E. Brain gets more
interesting by the day.
We've been treated to the mass-murder by Islamist loons in London, so what is the Green Left Weekly talking about? The poor oppressed Islamists of course...
Yes, can't imagine why the muslim community is getting criticised.....
Oh, and they're showing us their deep understanding of middle-east politics:
would that be the war of extermination started by the Arabs?
I never post about cricket, even though I am a fan. I leave that to the real fanatics.
However, I did enjoy the clobbering the aussies gave the poms at Lords last night. So much for the pre-series hype. Still, there's a long way to go, and I still think England will win at least one test.
The destructive performance of Glenn McGrath got me thinking about the great fast bowlers in cricket history. For my money, this bloke is still the king:
376 test wickets at an average of 20.94
I have a highlights tape of the 1984/5 Aus v. WI series in Australia. Marshall was simply amazing to watch, even next to Michael Holding and Joel Garner.
That short, odd runup, the lighting-quick whipping arm action - Marshall was just so blindingly fast, and as superb a tactician as any bowler the world has seen.
I remember one dismissal in particular: Marshall was bowling to Allan Border at the Adelaide Oval. Marshall blasted the ball at the stumps with such awsome speed, that Border was unable to get either bat or pad to the ball, and he was out for 5. Marshall was later named Man of the Series.
Remarkably, as his body aged and was no longer able to deliver such thunderbolts, he became a great fast-medium bowler, able to swing the ball at will.
Sadly, we lost Marshall in 1998 to cancer, aged 41.
Chuck S. sends in a theologically-inspired answer to my tax question:
Well, I'm an atheist, so I couldn't care less what the bible says about anything. Even if I did, I still don't see how these three quotations are a defence of taxation, and I'm especially baffled by this conclusion:
"He says to pay what the government says you owe, not what you think you ought to pay."
So, would Jesus defend land seizures? Because that's the implication here. If Robert Mugabe thinks that's what whitey owes him, aren't they morally obliged to hand it over?
An obligation to pay
tithing, yes. But "what the government thinks I owe"? I think
Support Brave Multinationals!!!