"M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
news:r26lfv8re8db3942435pl8edl4ihc00kus@no-spam
> On 26 Jun 2003 04:29:17 GMT, Vicki Whyte
> <vickiwhyteusenet@no-spam> wrote:
>
> The haves should tell Big Broher to fuck off and to stick the task up
> his arse.
> It is un Australian to make people suffer.
> What ever happened to all for one and one for all?
un Australian...
Did you do any history at school? Australia was founded on making people
suffer...
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:22:27 +0800, "Craig Taylor"
<cujo@no-spam> wrote:
>
>"M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
>news:r26lfv8re8db3942435pl8edl4ihc00kus@no-spam
>> On 26 Jun 2003 04:29:17 GMT, Vicki Whyte
>> <vickiwhyteusenet@no-spam> wrote:
>>
>> The haves should tell Big Broher to fuck off and to stick the task up
>> his arse.
>> It is un Australian to make people suffer.
>> What ever happened to all for one and one for all?
>
>un Australian...
>
>Did you do any history at school? Australia was founded on making people
>suffer...
>
Not in my state
"M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote
> The haves should tell Big Broher to fuck off and to stick the task up
> his arse.
This would be pretty awesome, revealing of actual character etc. tho' it might
also be kinda boring, since BB'd probably just respond by starving the
housemates, Survivor-style.
> It is un Australian to make people suffer.
Please don't say "unAustralian". It makes you sound like a jackass.
> What ever happened to all for one and one for all?
John-fucking-Howard.
amit.
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:09:00 GMT, "Trevor Gensch"
<trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote:
>> >
>> >Did you do any history at school? Australia was founded on making people
>> >suffer...
>>
>> Not in my state
>
>Your closed mind certainly has an incredibly strong spring on the door.
South Australia was settled with free people.
Unlike QLD and NSW
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 09:30:18 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
regurgitated:
>Not in my state
Big Brother isn't taking place in your state.
--
zaphy
"M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
news:c94nfvkf6mt08aq1q5g93tbuloc6hgnr9l@no-spam
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:09:00 GMT, "Trevor Gensch"
> <trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote:
>
> >> >
> >> >Did you do any history at school? Australia was founded on making
people
> >> >suffer...
> >>
> >> Not in my state
> >
> >Your closed mind certainly has an incredibly strong spring on the door.
>
> South Australia was settled with free people.
> Unlike QLD and NSW
Wrong. NSW and Qld had plenty of free settlers - they were just sharing
their land with convicts.
And the OP said Australia, not SA.
--
Trev.
"Procrastinate Now"
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:39:18 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 09:30:18 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
>regurgitated:
>
>>Not in my state
>
>Big Brother isn't taking place in your state.
Irrelevant to my answer.
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:55:17 GMT, "Trevor Gensch"
<trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote:
>Wrong. NSW and Qld had plenty of free settlers - they were just sharing
>their land with convicts.
Bah.
Still had convicts.
>
>And the OP said Australia, not SA.
Well, the statement is still wrong.
It was only " parts" of australia.
In article <3efaf39e$0$20745@no-spam>, Craig Taylor
<cujo@no-spam> wrote:
> "M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
> news:r26lfv8re8db3942435pl8edl4ihc00kus@no-spam
> > On 26 Jun 2003 04:29:17 GMT, Vicki Whyte
> > <vickiwhyteusenet@no-spam> wrote:
> >
> > The haves should tell Big Broher to fuck off and to stick the task up
> > his arse.
> > It is un Australian to make people suffer.
> > What ever happened to all for one and one for all?
>
> un Australian...
>
> Did you do any history at school? Australia was founded on making people
> suffer...
>
>
Not for entertainment purposes!
"M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
news:1n6nfvkjnr6rngrkl4c96gllq3t7851srb@no-spam
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:55:17 GMT, "Trevor Gensch"
> <trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote:
>
> >Wrong. NSW and Qld had plenty of free settlers - they were just sharing
> >their land with convicts.
> Bah.
> Still had convicts.
Yes, so that still invalidates your statement.
>
> >
> >And the OP said Australia, not SA.
>
> Well, the statement is still wrong.
> It was only " parts" of australia.
Australia, as a country was founded on convicts.
--
Trev.
"Procrastinate Now"
"Craig Taylor" <cujo@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3efaf39e$0$20745@no-spam
>
> "M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
> news:r26lfv8re8db3942435pl8edl4ihc00kus@no-spam
> > On 26 Jun 2003 04:29:17 GMT, Vicki Whyte
> > <vickiwhyteusenet@no-spam> wrote:
> >
> > The haves should tell Big Broher to fuck off and to stick the task up
> > his arse.
> > It is un Australian to make people suffer.
> > What ever happened to all for one and one for all?
>
> un Australian...
>
> Did you do any history at school? Australia was founded on making people
> suffer...
>
>
And we still have the same mentality today !
Boc
the original intention was to chuck convicts onto australia. and sure they
killed a damned lot of aborigines. but the attitudes and mateship that
developed through the next two centuries is far removed from one of
enforcing power. jsut becuase a country was founded a certain way doesnt
mean its going to remain the same way over several hundred years. seems like
your spring is stronger than matthews.
"Trevor Gensch" <trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote in message
news:Q5NKa.41$bW.2349@no-spam
>
> "M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
> news:1n6nfvkjnr6rngrkl4c96gllq3t7851srb@no-spam
> > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:55:17 GMT, "Trevor Gensch"
> > <trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote:
> >
> > >Wrong. NSW and Qld had plenty of free settlers - they were just
sharing
> > >their land with convicts.
> > Bah.
> > Still had convicts.
>
> Yes, so that still invalidates your statement.
>
> >
> > >
> > >And the OP said Australia, not SA.
> >
> > Well, the statement is still wrong.
> > It was only " parts" of australia.
>
> Australia, as a country was founded on convicts.
>
>
>
> --
> Trev.
>
> "Procrastinate Now"
>
>
i disagree. only someone who has never been out of a capital city would
think unaustralian is a meaningless word.
"amit" <pparp316@no-spam> wrote in message
news:bdg0j0$smbvf$1@no-spam
> "M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote
>
> > The haves should tell Big Broher to fuck off and to stick the task up
> > his arse.
>
> This would be pretty awesome, revealing of actual character etc. tho' it
might
> also be kinda boring, since BB'd probably just respond by starving the
> housemates, Survivor-style.
>
> > It is un Australian to make people suffer.
>
> Please don't say "unAustralian". It makes you sound like a jackass.
>
> > What ever happened to all for one and one for all?
>
> John-fucking-Howard.
>
> amit.
>
>
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:12:26 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
regurgitated:
>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:39:18 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 09:30:18 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
>>regurgitated:
>>
>>>Not in my state
>>
>>Big Brother isn't taking place in your state.
>
>Irrelevant to my answer.
No it isn't. You brought the issue of SA into the debate, and Big
Brother isn't set in SA.
--
zaphy
"reg-john" <crikey@no-spam> wrote
> i disagree. only someone who has never been out of a capital city would
> think unaustralian is a meaningless word.
Huh? It's an ugly-ass word, that implicitly defines "Australian-ness" as
something purely exclusionary, much as you seem to be doing now.
And look at the sort of company the word "unAustralian" puts us in: Stalinist
Russa, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy etc. It seems only Australia and the US still
use the word in political and cultural discourse, which makes me more than a
little suspicious of it.
amit.
"augette" <marm@no-spam> wrote
> ugly-arse, unless you are referring to an unattractive donkey.
I prefer 'ass'. I also wear my hat backwards, eat only at McDonald's, listen to
rap, skate, abuse cops, denigrate my elders, drink Dr Pepper, watch MTV etc. Kids
today, huh?
amit.
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:28:48 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
regurgitated:
>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:43:39 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
>wrote:
>
>>>Irrelevant to my answer.
>>
>>No it isn't. You brought the issue of SA into the debate, and Big
>>Brother isn't set in SA.
>
>Dickhead.
>Read what my original reply was to.
You said it was un-Australian to make people suffer (referring to BB)
Craig replied that the country was founded on the same idea.
You replied with "not in my state"
So I pointed out that Big Brother doesn't take place in your state -
it's irrelevant to the original point you made.
Dickhead.
--
zaphy
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:58:23 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:28:48 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
>regurgitated:
>
>>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:43:39 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>Irrelevant to my answer.
>>>
>>>No it isn't. You brought the issue of SA into the debate, and Big
>>>Brother isn't set in SA.
>>
>>Dickhead.
>>Read what my original reply was to.
>
>You said it was un-Australian to make people suffer (referring to BB)
>Craig replied that the country was founded on the same idea.
>You replied with "not in my state"
>So I pointed out that Big Brother doesn't take place in your state -
>it's irrelevant to the original point you made.
>
Wrong.
I didnt mention BB
Now go slit your wrists.
Ugly fuck you are.
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:59:40 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
regurgitated:
>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:58:23 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:28:48 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
>>regurgitated:
>>
>>>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:43:39 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Irrelevant to my answer.
>>>>
>>>>No it isn't. You brought the issue of SA into the debate, and Big
>>>>Brother isn't set in SA.
>>>
>>>Dickhead.
>>>Read what my original reply was to.
>>
>>You said it was un-Australian to make people suffer (referring to BB)
>>Craig replied that the country was founded on the same idea.
>>You replied with "not in my state"
>>So I pointed out that Big Brother doesn't take place in your state -
>>it's irrelevant to the original point you made.
>>
>
>Wrong.
>I didnt mention BB.
So what's your fucking point then? The discussion wasn't about SA, it
was about Big Brother.
--
zaphy
"Trevor Gensch" <trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote in message =
news:Q5NKa.41$bW.2349@no-spam
:=20
: "M.a.H.TT.E.w" <bloomsbury> wrote in message
: news:1n6nfvkjnr6rngrkl4c96gllq3t7851srb@no-spam
: > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:55:17 GMT, "Trevor Gensch"
: > <trevorgensch@no-spam> wrote:
: >
: > >Wrong. NSW and Qld had plenty of free settlers - they were just =
sharing
: > >their land with convicts.
: > Bah.
: > Still had convicts.
:=20
: Yes, so that still invalidates your statement.
:=20
: >
: > >
: > >And the OP said Australia, not SA.
: >
: > Well, the statement is still wrong.
: > It was only " parts" of australia.
:=20
: Australia, as a country was founded on convicts.
:=20
:=20
:=20
No wonder he's so sore about the subject...he feels left out cause his =
family was already here as Abo's.
> Vicki Whyte wrote:
>
>> Just catching a glimpse of the live feeds.
<snip>
>> Vincent says that the Haves are acting like they have to treat them
>> like servants. Vincent also said that to him this is just like they
>> have two different tasks to do - they aren't suddenly not as good,
>> they just have to do different tasks. That's a *really* good way to
>> look at it. He and Chrissie agree on this while no-brain Pat just
>> strums on his guitar (badly).
Just because Pat's not out there flapping his gums 24/7 doesn't mean he's
stupid !
I think it is very poor for you to label him a no-brain unless you can back
it up.
>> Almost every time I drop in on the live feeds they are separated
>> into the Haves and Have Nots. Sure, they have different things to
>> do, but that doens't mean that they have to live totally separate
>> lives! There are a lot of hours in the day that they're not eating
>> meals (which they can't do together) or watching movies (which they
>> can't do together) or cleaning the house (which they can't do
>> together). But they aren't socialising even when they aren't doing
>> a task required of them by the Have/Have Not task.
to do so might make them lose the task inadvertently.
leee@no-spam :
|| Just because Pat's not out there flapping his gums 24/7 doesn't mean he's
|| stupid !
|| I think it is very poor for you to label him a no-brain unless you can back
|| it up
I quite like Patrick, a take me as I am kinda guy.
"zaphy" <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam> wrote in message
news:hi1ofvsr26t6ukehqdn0puknc2n0hqppee@no-spam
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:28:48 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
> regurgitated:
>
> >On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:43:39 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>>Irrelevant to my answer.
> >>
> >>No it isn't. You brought the issue of SA into the debate, and Big
> >>Brother isn't set in SA.
> >
> >Dickhead.
> >Read what my original reply was to.
*Whoooooossshh* Fraudster.
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 19:37:43 +1000, "The Charmed One [Aka: Nat]"
<nat2sim@no-spam> wrote:
>
>"zaphy" <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam> wrote in message
>news:hi1ofvsr26t6ukehqdn0puknc2n0hqppee@no-spam
>> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:28:48 +1000, M.a.H.TT.E.w <bloomsbury>
>> regurgitated:
>>
>> >On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 17:43:39 +1000, zaphy <zaphy79spamoff@no-spam>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>>Irrelevant to my answer.
>> >>
>> >>No it isn't. You brought the issue of SA into the debate, and Big
>> >>Brother isn't set in SA.
>> >
>> >Dickhead.
>> >Read what my original reply was to.
>
>
>*Whoooooossshh* Fraudster.
>
You're calling Zaphy a fraudster?
Man, i think the dude is a bit of a wanker at times..but to accuse the
bloke of that is kinda low.