157080-144000=13080

144000/13080=11.00917431

11/0.00917431=1199

1/(5-(5994/1199))=1199

root(pi) = x1, root(x1)=x2...
x22=1.000000273

1.000000273-1=2.7292488*10^7

273.15-272.92=23/100

((29/23)*(10/9))/((29/23)/(10/9))=1.234567901

Monday, 13th June 2022, 04:07 UTC, M3.43

Duration: 3913 minutes

39/13=3

343-122=221

On 8/06/2022 8:41 pm, Max wrote:
> On 8/06/2022 7:37 pm, Rod Speed wrote:

>>>>> and that is a UK culture.
>>>>  Wrong, as always. It never has been.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What about UK culture do we not have here?
>>
>> We aren't actually stupid enough to hand billions to some of the
>> most stinking rich drunks/parasites/inbred fools in the country.
>>
>> We aren't actually stupid enough to have an upper house
>> stuffed with senile old farts/bishops/failed politicians either.
>>
>> We aren't actually stupid enough to have footy
>> riots every time there is a major football event.
>>
>> We aren't actually stupid enough to have stupid fools camped
>> out around military airfields 'protesting' about nukes for decades.
>>
>> We aren't actually stupid enough to let fools
>> let down the tires of cars by the street load.
>>
>> We aren't actually stupid enough to have hordes of ours
>> show up in a foreign country and winge all the time.
>>
>> And that is all completely irrelevant to the terminal stupidity
>> of having some fuckwit pom be the head of state here.
>>
>
> No one cares about any of that thit.

"No one"?
>
> All people care about is being close to Europe instead of in the arse
> end of the world like Australia is.

"All people"???????? Yu really should stop makign claims on behalf of
others.
>
> Plus the fact that in Australia the common culture is being ripped out
> from underneath us.

Snore.....

Thank God for that. I remember Australia of the 1950s and it was a very
dull place.

On 9/06/2022 6:17 pm, Max wrote:

> No one would holiday in Australia instead of Europe.
>
> Europe has proper cultures and a proper history.

Now for a rollicking chorus sung to the tune of 3 blind mice:
A Trolling Max will go,
A trolling Max will go,
Hey Ho the dairy -oh a trolling Max will go......

On 8/06/2022 7:02 pm, Max wrote:
> On 7/06/2022 10:25 pm, Fran wrote:
>> On 7/06/2022 6:07 pm, Max wrote:
>>> On 6/06/2022 10:22 pm, Fran wrote:
>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:42 pm, Max wrote:
>>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:31 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>>>>>>> Ozix wrote
>>>>>>>> Max wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To be appointing a "Republic Assistant Minister" (to
>>>>>>>>> Thistlethwaite) is ridiculous, when the question of a republic
>>>>>>>>> needs to be decided by referendum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There should no ministers named as such until a referendum
>>>>>>>>> decides there should be a republic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  You've gone gaga over Liz Windsor's 70 year pompfest, haven't you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I voted Yes to a republic in 1999.  I would vote No because now I
>>>>>>> realise how dangerous it would be to have some Aussie fool being
>>>>>>> our head of state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you would rather have some pommy fuckwit that
>>>>>> was actually stupid enough to be conned into marrying
>>>>>> a stupid bimbo and kept on with his slut on the side ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, given that we were actually settled by England, and have the
>>>>> same system of government and laws,
>>>>
>>>> No, we do not have the same system of Government and laws.
>>>>
>>>> Our system is unique.
>>>
>>> There may be some slight differences, such as federalism, but most of
>>> what we have here is from England.
>>>
>>> Councils, the traditions of parliament, the way the public service
>>> operates. English law still still holds precedent in Australia, and
>>> the whole legal system is virtually the same.
>>>
>>> All of it is from England, except for the federal government and the
>>> existence of states, and that is just because of the spatially large
>>> nature of our continent.
>>
>>
>> 'English' law does not hold precedent in Australia.
>
> English cases do have precedent in Australia unless there has been a
> more recent Australian case that covers the same law.

Much better.

In fact it'd be better to put more effort in initially so you don't need
to do corrections when called on the crap you write.

On 8/06/2022 7:03 pm, Max wrote:
> On 7/06/2022 10:25 pm, Fran wrote:
>> On 7/06/2022 6:07 pm, Max wrote:
>>> On 6/06/2022 10:22 pm, Fran wrote:
>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:42 pm, Max wrote:
>>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:31 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>>>>>>> Ozix wrote
>>>>>>>> Max wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To be appointing a "Republic Assistant Minister" (to
>>>>>>>>> Thistlethwaite) is ridiculous, when the question of a republic
>>>>>>>>> needs to be decided by referendum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There should no ministers named as such until a referendum
>>>>>>>>> decides there should be a republic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  You've gone gaga over Liz Windsor's 70 year pompfest, haven't you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I voted Yes to a republic in 1999.  I would vote No because now I
>>>>>>> realise how dangerous it would be to have some Aussie fool being
>>>>>>> our head of state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you would rather have some pommy fuckwit that
>>>>>> was actually stupid enough to be conned into marrying
>>>>>> a stupid bimbo and kept on with his slut on the side ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, given that we were actually settled by England, and have the
>>>>> same system of government and laws,
>>>>
>>>> No, we do not have the same system of Government and laws.
>>>>
>>>> Our system is unique.
>>>
>>> There may be some slight differences, such as federalism, but most of
>>> what we have here is from England.
>>>
>>> Councils, the traditions of parliament, the way the public service
>>> operates. English law still still holds precedent in Australia, and
>>> the whole legal system is virtually the same.
>>>
>>> All of it is from England, except for the federal government and the
>>> existence of states, and that is just because of the spatially large
>>> nature of our continent.
>>
>>
>> 'English' law does not hold precedent in Australia. And apart from a
>> few similarities, such as Councils and the devolution of power
>> stemming from the Monarch, we're very different.  The Poms don't even
>> have a Cosntitution
>
> England does have a constitution.  It just isn't codified.  It is
> contained in case law

Glad you've managed to confirm that I was correct. The UK does NOT have
a Constitution.

On 8/06/2022 10:22 pm, Max wrote:
> On 8/06/2022 9:32 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 20:35:14 +1000, Max <max@val.morgan> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/06/2022 7:45 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 19:03:21 +1000, Max <max@val.morgan> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/06/2022 10:25 pm, Fran wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/06/2022 6:07 pm, Max wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/06/2022 10:22 pm, Fran wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:42 pm, Max wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:31 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> Ozix wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max wrote
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be appointing a "Republic Assistant Minister" (to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thistlethwaite) is ridiculous, when the question of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> republic needs to be decided by referendum.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There should no ministers named as such until a referendum
>>>>>>>>>>>>> decides there should be a republic.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  You've gone gaga over Liz Windsor's 70 year pompfest,
>>>>>>>>>>>> haven't you?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I voted Yes to a republic in 1999.  I would vote No because
>>>>>>>>>>> now I realise how dangerous it would be to have some Aussie
>>>>>>>>>>> fool being our head of state.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So you would rather have some pommy fuckwit that
>>>>>>>>>> was actually stupid enough to be conned into marrying
>>>>>>>>>> a stupid bimbo and kept on with his slut on the side ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, given that we were actually settled by England, and have
>>>>>>>>> the same system of government and laws,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, we do not have the same system of Government and laws.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Our system is unique.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There may be some slight differences, such as federalism, but
>>>>>>> most of what we have here is from England.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Councils, the traditions of parliament, the way the public
>>>>>>> service operates. English law still still holds precedent in
>>>>>>> Australia, and the whole legal system is virtually the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All of it is from England, except for the federal government and
>>>>>>> the existence of states, and that is just because of the
>>>>>>> spatially large nature of our continent.
>>>>>>   'English' law does not hold precedent in Australia. And apart
>>>>>> from a few similarities, such as Councils and the devolution of
>>>>>> power stemming from the Monarch, we're very different.  The Poms
>>>>>> don't even have a Cosntitution
>>>>
>>>>> England does have a constitution.
>>>>  Bullshit it does.
>>>>
>>
>>> It has no codified constitution in one document.
>>
>> It has no constitution.
>>
>>> But it does have a constitution in a range of laws, court decisions
>>> and conventions.
>>
>> That isn't a constitution, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>>>> It just isn't codified.  It is  contained in case law.
>>
>>>>  Thats common law, not a constitution, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>> Common law just means that law is contained in court decisions which
>>> form precedents.
>>
>> But isnt a CONSTITUTION, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>> The English consitution is contained in court decisions, plus
>>> legislation and unwritten conventions.
>>
>> None of that is a constitution, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>
> They don't need a single document constitution, but the courts recognise
> that there is a constitution.

Whether it's needed or not is not under discussion. What is beign
discussed is IF the UK has a Constituion. It doesn't.

It has lots of cute and curious things of cute things like 'unwritten
conventions and then a whole pile of other crud like
Acts and case law etc. It does not have a Constitution.

> A un-codified consitution has its advantages.  It means it can be
> modified without a referendum.

??????? That response is VERY Australia one.

Brits doing referenda is almost as common as phoenixs rising.

On 9/06/2022 6:16 pm, Max wrote:
> On 9/06/2022 5:44 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 22:22:06 +1000, Max <max@val.morgan> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/06/2022 9:32 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 20:35:14 +1000, Max <max@val.morgan> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 8/06/2022 7:45 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 19:03:21 +1000, Max <max@val.morgan> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/06/2022 10:25 pm, Fran wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7/06/2022 6:07 pm, Max wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/06/2022 10:22 pm, Fran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:42 pm, Max wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/06/2022 4:31 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ozix wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be appointing a "Republic Assistant Minister" (to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thistlethwaite) is ridiculous, when the question of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> republic needs to be decided by referendum.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There should no ministers named as such until a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> referendum decides there should be a republic.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  You've gone gaga over Liz Windsor's 70 year pompfest,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> haven't you?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I voted Yes to a republic in 1999.  I would vote No because
>>>>>>>>>>>>> now I realise how dangerous it would be to have some Aussie
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fool being our head of state.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So you would rather have some pommy fuckwit that
>>>>>>>>>>>> was actually stupid enough to be conned into marrying
>>>>>>>>>>>> a stupid bimbo and kept on with his slut on the side ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, given that we were actually settled by England, and have
>>>>>>>>>>> the same system of government and laws,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No, we do not have the same system of Government and laws.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Our system is unique.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There may be some slight differences, such as federalism, but
>>>>>>>>> most of what we have here is from England.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Councils, the traditions of parliament, the way the public
>>>>>>>>> service operates. English law still still holds precedent in
>>>>>>>>> Australia, and the whole legal system is virtually the same.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All of it is from England, except for the federal government
>>>>>>>>> and the existence of states, and that is just because of the
>>>>>>>>> spatially large nature of our continent.
>>>>>>>>   'English' law does not hold precedent in Australia. And apart
>>>>>>>> from a few similarities, such as Councils and the devolution of
>>>>>>>> power stemming from the Monarch, we're very different.  The Poms
>>>>>>>> don't even have a Cosntitution
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> England does have a constitution.
>>>>>>  Bullshit it does.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It has no codified constitution in one document.
>>
>>>>  It has no constitution.
>>
>>>>> But it does have a constitution in a range of laws, court decisions
>>>>> and conventions.
>>
>>>>  That isn't a constitution, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>>>>>> It just isn't codified.  It is  contained in case law.
>>
>>>>>>  Thats common law, not a constitution, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>>>> Common law just means that law is contained in court decisions
>>>>> which form precedents.
>>
>>>>  But isnt a CONSTITUTION, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>>>> The English consitution is contained in court decisions, plus
>>>>> legislation and unwritten conventions.
>>
>>>>  None of that is a constitution, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>> They don't need a single document constitution,
>>
>> They don't even have a multiple document constitution.
>>
>>> but the courts recognise  that there is a constitution.
>>
>> court decisions, plus legislation and unwritten conventions
>> arent a constitution, you pig ignorant clown.
>>
>>> A un-codified consitution has its advantages.
>>
>> Yes, but the UK doesn't have one.
>>
>>> It means it can be  modified without a referendum.
>>
>> If it can be modified by any govt that feels
>> like doing that, it isnt a constitution.
>>
>> And plenty of constitutions don't require a referendum to be modified.
>>
>
> Legislation or referendums are the only way constitutions can be modified.
>
> Either way, there is a constitution, and the UK has one.

You're either trolling or can't do basic homework before posting.
Either way, you're becoming boring.

On 11/06/2022 9:35 pm, Daniel65 wrote:
> Petzl wrote on 11/6/22 9:46 am:
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 22:36:34 +1000, Daniel65
>> <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>> Petzl wrote on 10/6/22 8:20 am:
>>>> On Thu, 9 Jun 2022 22:26:02 +1000, Daniel65
>>>> <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>>> Petzl wrote on 9/6/22 7:12 am:
>>>>>> On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 23:30:42 +1000, Daniel65
>>>>>> <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> History buff much of our constitution came from
>>>>>>>> Washington
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wacko!! But 'Washminster' didn't, it only came from your
>>>>>>> mind, Petzl!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Been around since 1901
>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_system#'Washminster'_system_of_Australia>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
> >>>>> https://tinyurl.com/29qs9dds
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry!! Did I miss where, in your reference, they stated that
>>>>> this style of Government was called 'Washminster' in 1901??
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure the STYLE might be a combination of British and U.S.A.
>>>>> style electoral systems from 1901 .... but it wasn't, THEN,
>>>>> *called* 'Washminster', Petzl!!
>>>>>
>>>> The 1890 debates show why Federation was termed Washminster I
>>>> have actually read through the framing of Australia's
>>>> constitution Away you go you will see how much influence the USA
>>>> had in creating our constitution.
>>>> <https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Records_of_the_Australasian_Federal_Conventions_of_the_1890s>
>>>>
>>>>
> >>> https://tinyurl.com/y753bnuc
>>>>
>>>> You can even keyword/s search https://tinyurl.com/2xmrjmbp
>>>>
>>> Except, I'm not interested in id the Australian Constitution was
>>> influenced by British or U.S. Constitutions,
>>>
>>> Content:America Content:Christian Date:01/01/1890 >> 01/01/1901
>>>
>>> Petzl, I'm interested in when the style of the Australian
>>> Constitution was first called "Washminister" sty;e, Petzl!!
>>>
>> It was "nicked" for as long as I remember not knew probably the
>> 1950's
>>
> Ah!! Well, we must, fortunately, move in different circles, then, Petzl,
> cause I've never hear of the term until you used it, Petzl!

Nor has anyone else.

On 10/06/2022 12:29 pm, Max wrote:
> On 10/06/2022 10:10 am, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 09:48:14 +1000, Arindam Banerjee

>>> There is political unity EVERYWHERE where the land is at peace.
>>
>> Nope, dope. We have peace in this country and have never had political
>> unity, fool.
>
> We do have political unity.  The majority of what happens in this
> country has bi-partisan support.

Bollocks. 'Bi partisan support' for policies has got little to do with
'peace'.

The last few years and a loss of 18 seats to the Libs proves just how
little peace we've had under Morisson's corrupt and venal govt.

On 9/06/2022 6:19 pm, Max wrote:
> On 9/06/2022 5:46 am, Rod Speed wrote:

>>> She died of a stroke after many illnesses.
>>
>> None of which were caused by smoking, they were due to her being a drunk.
>>
>
> Smoking is far more damaging than drinking.

Tsk, tsk Max. You keep making these gross generalisations. I know a
whole family that disintegrated after the husband 'drank' the family home.

Smokers often just die of cancer.

On 8/06/2022 8:23 pm, Max wrote:
> On 8/06/2022 7:41 pm, Rod Speed wrote:

>> Because that never works and they should have
>> noticed when the yanks kicked them out of theirs.
>>
>
> England could still have Australia if it wanted.  We would never had had
> a war with them.

FFS do try to get some basics right! "England" NEVER had, settled,
owned or took over Australia.

BRITAIN did! Basics! You are so darned sloppy
>
>
>>>> They were also stupid enough to get involved in
>>>> WW1 and had to be bailed out by the yanks, TWICE.
>>
>>>>  And they are STILL stupid enough let silly senile old farts,
>>>> bishops and failed politicians have any say on political issues
>>>> and are still stupid enough to had an immense amount of
>>>> money every fucking year to the richest people in the fucking
>>>> country and drunks  like Liz's mum.
>>
>>> Liz's Mum lived to 100 so she can't have been that much of a drunk.
>>
>> Wrong, as always. Why should the poms be paying for her grog when
>> she is part of one of the richest group of parasites in the country ?
>>
>> Its what killed Liz's sister very early on too.
>>
>
> She was actually a heavy smoker.  It is always smoking that kills rather
> than drinking.

Bullshit. Another ludicrous gross generalisation from you.

On 10/06/2022 7:02 pm, James Murdoch wrote:
> 8:00-8:25   Peta Credlin exposes Teal MPs as witches who will release
> demons into your house
> 8:25-8:30   Infomercial for Ivermectin
> 8:30-9:00   Craig Kelly reveals massive fraud in May 2022 elections.
> 9:00-9:30   Andrew Bolt castigates transgender beach volleyball players
> 9:30-9:35   Infomercial for Clean Coal(TM)
> 9:35-10:15  Alan Jones names McGowan as the Gollum hoarding gas and not
> giving any to eastern states
> 10:15-11:55 Paul Murray narrates documentary "Vlad Putin - The
> Misunderstood Gentle Giant"
> 11:55-12:00 Peter Dutton sings national anthem

LOL

That outline of the programming there seems about right

On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 10:10:15 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 09:48:14 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 04:42:55 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
> >> On Thu, 09 Jun 2022 20:34:18 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Thursday, 9 June 2022 at 14:22:19 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 09 Jun 2022 12:16:38 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Thursday, 9 June 2022 at 05:54:38 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
> >> >> >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 22:52:58 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
> >> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > On Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 21:40:12 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 20:40:51 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
> >> >> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > On Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 11:21:21 UTC+10, petzl wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 15:01:07 -0700 (PDT), Arindam Banerjee
> >> >> >> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >On Tuesday, 7 June 2022 at 17:12:52 UTC+10, petzl wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 07 Jun 2022 16:30:38 +1000, "Rod Speed"
> >> >> >> >> >> >> <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Max wrote
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> To be appointing a "Republic Assistant Minister" (to
> >> >> >> >> >> Thistlethwaite) is
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> ridiculous, when the question of a republic needs to
> >> be
> >> >> >> >> decided
> >> >> >> >> >> by
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> referendum.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Maybe he could answer why Australia needs to become a
> >> >> >> republic.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >It isnt about needs, its about what the majority of us
> >> >> want.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Lets make Arindam Banerjee, King Arindam Banerjee
> >> >> >> >> >> >> He can have King Malcolm's chair
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >And you can be the Aussie God Petzlcoatl.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://imgbb.com/x2QJfmw
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> There should no ministers named as such until a
> >> >> referendum
> >> >> >> >> >> decides there
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> should be a republic.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> There needs to be a debate before that. This position
> >> >> could
> >> >> >> >> help
> >> >> >> >> >> in that
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> debate, to bring forth new ideas one way or the other.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >There can't be new ideas with an issue like this.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> The Monarchy has kept Australia growng since King George
> >> >> III.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II have been
> >> instrumental.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> A continuation of Our Monarchy The UK's Parliament have
> >> nothing
> >> >> >> to do
> >> >> >> >> >> with the running of Australia our Monarchy does!
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Yes, there is that psychological factor, that unites.
> >> >> >> >> More of your mindless pig ignorant shit.No stupid royal ever
> >> >> unites
> >> >> >> >> anywhere.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Of course they do
> >> >>
> >> >> >> We aren't even united on whether to get rid of the monarchy, fool.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Irrelevant,
> >>
> >> >> You are pathetic.
> >> >> > The practical idea of royalty is to have political unity
> >>
> >> >> Not even possible, fool.
> >>
> >> > Has happened
> >> Nope, never has.
>
> > Wherever there is peace, that is from political unity.
> Nope, dope. We have peace in this country and have never had political
> unity, fool.

Ridiculous robot, we have peace here because we have political unity, under monarchy, so there are no civil wars, no sects fighting for their homeland, no corruptocrats promoting their own castes or creeds, etc. thus creating tensions by competitions. We are not US, where they can shoot one and all for they do not trust the Govt. and where to keep unity they must go creating wars and pollutions to keep their unity and economy going. Nor is it India, with its reservations policies and sectarian strife ensuring perpetual internal strife. Nor is Aus a bankrupt or banana republic, nor a small pipsqueak place.

How much a distant foreign monarch is responsible for the peace and prosperity, and the great opportunities offered here, is the question.

How can a republic be better?
The track record of republics is mixed.
What is not broken need not be fixed by breaking it up for what?
The chance for some stupid bad robot to lord it all?
Rod3po for Prez?
Will Aussies be that stupid?
Nah.

> >> > and happens even now
>
> >> Nope, nowhere. There is no political unity ANYWHERE.
>
> > There is political unity EVERYWHERE where the land is at peace.
> Nope, dope. We have peace in this country and have never had political
> unity, fool.

On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 21:20:34 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
<banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 10:10:15 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 09:48:14 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
>> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Friday, 10 June 2022 at 04:42:55 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 09 Jun 2022 20:34:18 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
>> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Thursday, 9 June 2022 at 14:22:19 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
>> >> >> On Thu, 09 Jun 2022 12:16:38 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
>> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > On Thursday, 9 June 2022 at 05:54:38 UTC+10, Rod Speed wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 22:52:58 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
>> >> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > On Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 21:40:12 UTC+10, Rod Speed
>> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 20:40:51 +1000, Arindam Banerjee
>> >> >> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> > On Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 11:21:21 UTC+10, petzl wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 15:01:07 -0700 (PDT), Arindam Banerjee
>> >> >> >> >> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >On Tuesday, 7 June 2022 at 17:12:52 UTC+10, petzl wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 07 Jun 2022 16:30:38 +1000, "Rod Speed"
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Max wrote
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> To be appointing a "Republic Assistant Minister"
>> (to
>> >> >> >> >> >> Thistlethwaite) is
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> ridiculous, when the question of a republic needs
>> to
>> >> be
>> >> >> >> >> decided
>> >> >> >> >> >> by
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> referendum.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Maybe he could answer why Australia needs to
>> become a
>> >> >> >> republic.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >It isnt about needs, its about what the majority of
>> us
>> >> >> want.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Lets make Arindam Banerjee, King Arindam Banerjee
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> He can have King Malcolm's chair
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >And you can be the Aussie God Petzlcoatl.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://imgbb.com/x2QJfmw
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> There should no ministers named as such until a
>> >> >> referendum
>> >> >> >> >> >> decides there
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> should be a republic.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> There needs to be a debate before that. This
>> position
>> >> >> could
>> >> >> >> >> help
>> >> >> >> >> >> in that
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> debate, to bring forth new ideas one way or the
>> other.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >There can't be new ideas with an issue like this.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> The Monarchy has kept Australia growng since King
>> George
>> >> >> III.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II have been
>> >> instrumental.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> A continuation of Our Monarchy The UK's Parliament have
>> >> nothing
>> >> >> >> to do
>> >> >> >> >> >> with the running of Australia our Monarchy does!
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> > Yes, there is that psychological factor, that unites.
>> >> >> >> >> More of your mindless pig ignorant shit.No stupid royal ever
>> >> >> unites
>> >> >> >> >> anywhere.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Of course they do
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> We aren't even united on whether to get rid of the monarchy,
>> fool.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Irrelevant,
>> >>
>> >> >> You are pathetic.
>> >> >> > The practical idea of royalty is to have political unity
>> >>
>> >> >> Not even possible, fool.
>> >>
>> >> > Has happened
>> >> Nope, never has.
>>
>> > Wherever there is peace, that is from political unity.

>> Nope, dope. We have peace in this country and have never had political
>> unity, fool.

> we have peace here because we have political unity,

Like hell we do. Even you should have noticed the recent federal election.

> under monarchy, so there are no civil wars,

Nothing whatever to do with any monarchy.

> no sects fighting for their homeland,

Nothing whatever to do with any monarchy.

> no corruptocrats promoting their own castes or creeds, etc.

More of your mindless pig ignorant bullshit.

Even a terminal fuckwith such as yourself should have
noticed that the British have always had plenty of that
and in fact made the roman catholics illegal UNDER
THEIR MONARCHY. In fact the church of england
was set up BY THEIR MONARCH when the current
pope wouldn't allow him to bin one of his wives
because she couldnt produce a suriving male child.

> thus creating tensions by competitions.

The political system has always had that, fool.

> We are not US,

You quite sure that you aren't actually one of those
rocket scientist stupid pig ignorant curry munchers ?

> where they can shoot one and all

Corse nothing like that happened during the partition of India, eh ?

Not shoot most of the time, just chop them up instead.

> for they do not trust the Govt.

Nothing to do with trusting the govt.

> and where to keep unity they must go creating wars and pollutions to
> keep their unity and economy going.

Corse India never ever did anything like that, eh ?

> Nor is it India, with its reservations policies and sectarian strife
> ensuring perpetual internal strife.

India always had that, DUE TO ITS ROYALS, fool.

So did Britain.

> Nor is Aus a bankrupt or banana republic, nor a small pipsqueak place.

Nothing to do with royalty, fool.

> How much a distant foreign monarch is responsible for the peace and
> prosperity, and the great opportunities offered here, is the question.

It clearly isnt, fool.

The evidence for that is the obscenity that the royals in Britain produced.

> How can a republic be better?

By not getting stuck with a complete dud like the little shit Edward,
that stupid cow Vicky who produced WW1 with stupid royals all
trying to rip each others throats out and forcing their 'subjects'
to get involved in that terminal stupidity.

Threats against Jacinda Ardern nearly triple amid rise in conspiracy groups
Prime minister has faced increasingly vociferous and explicit calls for
violence against her since start of pandemic

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/13/threats-against-jacinda-ardern-nearly-triple-new-zealand-conspiracy-theories

THREATS ARE BASICALLY POINTLESS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT AMOUNT
TO ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL

Citizens Of New Zealand Must Act Decisively Without Offering
Threats.

* Assassination Of Demon Satanists Must Be Done.

* Fire Bombing / Arson Of Prime Minister's Residence Must Be Done.

* Physically Assaulting Prime Minister At Events Must Be Done.

* Fellow M.P. Accomplices To The Heinous Labour Party Must
Also Suffer Same Fate At Prime Minister.

MAKING THREATS ARE BASICALLY POINTLESS,
UNLESS THEY ARE ACTED UPON.

EXPERIENCE / HISTORY TELLS US THAT THE BEST STRATEGY
IS TO ACT WITHOUT THREATS, AND THEN JUST ACCOMPLISH
WHAT IS NECESSARY.

METIRIA TUREI WAS CORRECT IN ONE THING:

NEW ZEALAND IS A "CAGE".

phi, 1.618033989

161803th triangular number, 13090186306
314159th triangular number, 49348095720

49348095720-13090186306=36257909414

36257909414/360=100716415

514617001-100716415=413900586

413900586/99=4180814

The future is your choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulphur-crested_cockatoo

Test

So they capped the wholesale price of electricity, and the generators
say eff orf, we ain't selling it that cheap, so AMEO has to force them
to supply the juice.
AMEO needs to enquire into the shutdowns of so many machines at the same
time. Sounds suspiciciously like what went down in Texas: company A goes
offline, and companies B and C get surge pricing. Then next season,
company B goes offline... A gets windfall that compensates for previous
downtime.