On 18/06/2021 in message <sahtmr$1j0l$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:

>More generally, that's the sort of reason I don't like that style of
>dramatised documentary, because important points of history get lost in
>people's perception of the drama, rather than concentration on the actual
>history. They tend to corrupt history in the same that war films do,
>though admittedly to a lesser extent.

Absolutely. I tried to watch a programme about Nelson a few days ago then
it started to say he was a slaver. In fact when they started to spit out
the details what they were saying was that he carried out the then
government's policy of keeping the shipping lanes open.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Have you ever noticed that all the instruments searching for intelligent
life are pointing away from Earth?

On 18/06/2021 in message <j3socgljqp2isn2knbihmodojdchha5m4b@4ax.com>
Roderick Stewart wrote:

>If I go out and about, anyone else I meet will be either already
>vaccinated themselves, or too young to need to worry (and probably
>attending school), or will have made their own choice about the risks
>they are prepared to take.

I accept people making decisions about the risks they are prepared to take
but they can't make decisions about the risks they force on me.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
There is absolutely no substitute for a genuine lack of preparation

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:52:15 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 10:20, MrSpook_g42aadw@wcjf.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:13:41 +0100
>> Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 18:31 17 Jun 2021, Java Jive said:
>>>> ... but the simple truth is that your political bigotry prevents you
>>>> seeing the truth, and so you have to bore the arse off everyone here
>>>> by raking it all over again. That horse has been flogged to death
>>>> already, and you're wrong, get used to it.
>>>
>>> Mr Spook evidently doesn't let facts get in the way of his beliefs.
>>>
>>> Covid deniers and anti-vaxxers badly needed a country which had
>>> miraculously avoided deaths from the virus by doing nothing and Sweden
>>> was force-fitted into this role.
>>
>> You only need 1 example to prove a theory - ie that lockdown and all the
>> other restrictions were and are pointless. But hey, inconvenient facts eh?
>
>"The earth is a habitable planet, therefore all other planets must be
>habitable also." I think not.

Thats a crap analogy even for you. A better example would be that supernovas
haven't destroyed any of the galaxies we can see therefor its pretty safe to
say they won't destroy any ones we can't.

>Your grasp of logic, even numeracy, let alone statistics, are all
>virtually non-existent.

Awww, its so sweet the way you put forward your snivelling pathetic fear as an
intellectual choice whereas in reality you're pissing your pants :)

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:00:14 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 11:24, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>> If I go out and about, anyone else I meet will be either already
>> vaccinated themselves, or too young to need to worry (and probably
>> attending school), or will have made their own choice about the risks
>> they are prepared to take.
>
>Yes, yes, we've heard these selfish arguments ad nauseam already, but

Selfish! cries the wetwipe who wants to lock down society forever because
he's scared :)

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:05:47 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 10:13, MrSpook_hsx@xlb9ds0j4zezapmmx3obln04.tv wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 17/06/2021 14:41, MrSpook_xphzu9V3d@16xcsz.edu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Anyone with any sense is anti lockdown and anti mask now. Its not 2020
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
>>
>> Go hide under the bed wearing your PPE wetwipe,
>
>Again abuse rather than rational argument.

Not abuse, accurate description.

>> And happens to be an entire country.
>
>An entire country that is very different in many important respects from
>this entire country, as you have been told countless times before.

Oh ok. How about some US states then? Or is ickle wickle diddums wetwipe going
to argue they're too different too? Oddly they're not a zombie apocalyse
either:

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/09/us/biden-mask-mandate-nationwide-trnd/index.h
tml

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:48:57 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 10:19, MrSpook_l5k_yp@khn7w6f4x3x_g.gov wrote:
>> In the intervening 600 years they'd have interbred with the white natives
>> and vanished as an ethnic group.
>
>Not necessarily.

LOL :) Yeah ok mate, whatever you say :) I guess thats why there are tribes
of syrians and cartheginians left over in the UK from the roman invasion!

>> Any suggestion there were any negros whatsoever
>> in the norman invasion, never mind as close staff of the king, is so beyond
>> absurd no sane person would countenance it.
>
>As above, not necessarily, AFAIAA there is no hard evidence either way.

I'm pretty sure it would have been mentioned in the histories given how
often Saracens get a walk on part in the middle ages and would almost certainly
appear somewhere in the Bayeaux tapestry.

>> https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=dan+snow+docudrama+1066
>
>Specifically to the point, I watched that when first broadcast, and in
>no way was I led to believe that most of the Norman invasion was black.

Straw man. Have another go.

>More generally, that's the sort of reason I don't like that style of
>dramatised documentary, because important points of history get lost in
>people's perception of the drama, rather than concentration on the
>actual history. They tend to corrupt history in the same that war films
>do, though admittedly to a lesser extent.

For once we can agree on something.

On 18/06/2021 12:37, MrSpook_3fg@trce17v4.ac.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:48:57 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 18/06/2021 10:19, MrSpook_l5k_yp@khn7w6f4x3x_g.gov wrote:
>>> In the intervening 600 years they'd have interbred with the white natives
>>> and vanished as an ethnic group.
>>
>> Not necessarily.
>
> LOL :) Yeah ok mate, whatever you say :) I guess thats why there are tribes
> of syrians and cartheginians left over in the UK from the roman invasion!

We're not talking about tribes, we're talking about small minorities of
people.

>>> Any suggestion there were any negros whatsoever
>>> in the norman invasion, never mind as close staff of the king, is so beyond
>>> absurd no sane person would countenance it.
>>
>> As above, not necessarily, AFAIAA there is no hard evidence either way.
>
> I'm pretty sure it would have been mentioned in the histories given how
> often Saracens get a walk on part in the middle ages and would almost certainly
> appear somewhere in the Bayeaux tapestry.

You're being pretty sure tells us nothing, because you think you're
pretty sure of a great deal of crap.

>>> https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=dan+snow+docudrama+1066
>>
>> Specifically to the point, I watched that when first broadcast, and in
>> no way was I led to believe that most of the Norman invasion was black.
>
> Straw man. Have another go.

I note that you've snipped the point made by MB to which I was replying,
which was ...

On 17/06/2021 19:29, MB wrote:
> Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
> army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
> most of the army was black.

.... to which you suggested with your link that it was Dan Snow's series
"1066 - A Year To Conquer England", but in no way can that series be
described as implying that most of the Norman invasion was black.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 12:26, MrSpook_lv6s@b5q3wo7.co.uk wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:52:15 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 18/06/2021 10:20, MrSpook_g42aadw@wcjf.net wrote:
>>>
>>> You only need 1 example to prove a theory - ie that lockdown and all the
>>> other restrictions were and are pointless. But hey, inconvenient facts eh?
>>
>> "The earth is a habitable planet, therefore all other planets must be
>> habitable also." I think not.
>
> Thats a crap analogy even for you.

In other words, it destroys your statement above to which it was a
reply, but you're not man enough to admit it.

> A better example would be that supernovas
> haven't destroyed any of the galaxies we can see therefor its pretty safe to
> say they won't destroy any ones we can't.

AFAIAA, we don't have statistics either way on that, so it's no analogy
at all.

>> Your grasp of logic, even numeracy, let alone statistics, are all
>> virtually non-existent.
>
> Awww, its so sweet the way you put forward your snivelling pathetic fear as an
> intellectual choice whereas in reality you're pissing your pants :)

Another attempt to cover up losing an argument by abuse.

Stay in after school and write out 1,000 times: "When I try to cover up
losing an argument by abuse, no-one is fooled!"

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 12:27, MrSpook_zr4@pi5zzjnfy.info wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:00:14 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 18/06/2021 11:24, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>>> If I go out and about, anyone else I meet will be either already
>>> vaccinated themselves, or too young to need to worry (and probably
>>> attending school), or will have made their own choice about the risks
>>> they are prepared to take.
>>
>> Yes, yes, we've heard these selfish arguments ad nauseam already, but
>
> Selfish! cries the wetwipe who wants to lock down society forever because
> he's scared :)

Another attempt to cover a lack of rational argument by abuse. It's you
who needs the wetwipe here.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 12:33, MrSpook_Xrj@c__8n6f.ac.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:05:47 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 18/06/2021 10:13, MrSpook_hsx@xlb9ds0j4zezapmmx3obln04.tv wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100
>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 17/06/2021 14:41, MrSpook_xphzu9V3d@16xcsz.edu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone with any sense is anti lockdown and anti mask now. Its not 2020
>>>> anymore.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
>>>
>>> Go hide under the bed wearing your PPE wetwipe,
>>
>> Again abuse rather than rational argument.
>
> Not abuse, accurate description.

If it's an accurate description, where is your evidence justifying it?
Of course, you have got any, because you have been installing
clandestine video cameras in my home, because you've been locked down
and unable to travel, so, as everyone can tell, it's just abuse, the
only style of argument that you know, and you're not very good even at that.

>>> And happens to be an entire country.
>>
>> An entire country that is very different in many important respects from
>> this entire country, as you have been told countless times before.
>
> Oh ok. How about some US states then? Or is ickle wickle diddums wetwipe going
> to argue they're too different too? Oddly they're not a zombie apocalyse
> either:
>
> https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/09/us/biden-mask-mandate-nationwide-trnd/index.h
> tml

What US states are doing this year as they judge - rightly or wrongly
remains to be seen - that the pandemic is slackening, is irrelevant to
a comparison with Sweden at the beginning of it when for a while that
country had the worst death rate in the world, and since has had overall
a far worse death rate than its closest neighbours who are closest to it
in societal and national character terms.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:49:23 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 12:37, MrSpook_3fg@trce17v4.ac.uk wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:48:57 +0100
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 18/06/2021 10:19, MrSpook_l5k_yp@khn7w6f4x3x_g.gov wrote:
>>>> In the intervening 600 years they'd have interbred with the white natives
>>>> and vanished as an ethnic group.
>>>
>>> Not necessarily.
>>
>> LOL :) Yeah ok mate, whatever you say :) I guess thats why there are tribes
>> of syrians and cartheginians left over in the UK from the roman invasion!
>
>We're not talking about tribes, we're talking about small minorities of
>people.

So you're asserting that tiny minority of black people would have remained
racially pure for 600 years in normandy are you? The evidence of london in
merely 60 says otherwise but clearly you're an expert anthropolist and know
better.

>I note that you've snipped the point made by MB to which I was replying,
>which was ...
>
>On 17/06/2021 19:29, MB wrote:
> > Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
> > army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
> > most of the army was black.
>
>.... to which you suggested with your link that it was Dan Snow's series
>"1066 - A Year To Conquer England", but in no way can that series be
>described as implying that most of the Norman invasion was black.

I was making a related point. Obviously something you can't comprehend.

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:53:00 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 12:26, MrSpook_lv6s@b5q3wo7.co.uk wrote:
>> A better example would be that supernovas
>> haven't destroyed any of the galaxies we can see therefor its pretty safe to
>> say they won't destroy any ones we can't.
>
>AFAIAA, we don't have statistics either way on that, so it's no analogy
>at all.

Yes we do. Supernovas are used as standard candles to measure distance in
astronomy for distances where parallax no longer works so they are studied
in fine detail. Stick to talking about things you have a clue about, which
admittedly is a pretty short list.

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:04:40 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 12:33, MrSpook_Xrj@c__8n6f.ac.uk wrote:
>> Not abuse, accurate description.
>
>If it's an accurate description, where is your evidence justifying it?

You can learn a lot about someone just from what they type.

>clandestine video cameras in my home, because you've been locked down
>and unable to travel,

Speak for yourself.

>> Oh ok. How about some US states then? Or is ickle wickle diddums wetwipe
>going
>> to argue they're too different too? Oddly they're not a zombie apocalyse
>> either:
>>
>>
>https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/09/us/biden-mask-mandate-nationwide-trnd/index.
>h
>> tml
>
>What US states are doing this year as they judge - rightly or wrongly
>remains to be seen - that the pandemic is slackening, is irrelevant to

Does it? Its been 6 months now.

>a comparison with Sweden at the beginning of it when for a while that
>country had the worst death rate in the world, and since has had overall
>a far worse death rate than its closest neighbours who are closest to it
>in societal and national character terms.

Why, because they speak a similar language and share a border?

On 18/06/2021 12:53 pm, Java Jive wrote:

> On 18/06/2021 12:26, MrSpook_lv6s@b5q3wo7.co.uk wrote:

[ ... ]

>> Awww, its so sweet the way you put forward your snivelling pathetic
>> fear as an intellectual choice whereas in reality you're pissing
>> your pants :)
>
> Another attempt to cover up losing an argument by abuse.

That's *your* job, isn't it?

> Stay in after school and write out 1,000 times:  "When I try to cover up
> losing an argument by abuse, no-one is fooled!"

On 18/06/2021 14:49, MrSpook_cchApv9@wamo2u3.org wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:49:23 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> We're not talking about tribes, we're talking about small minorities of
>> people.
>
> So you're asserting that tiny minority of black people would have remained
> racially pure for 600 years in normandy are you? The evidence of london in
> merely 60 says otherwise but clearly you're an expert anthropolist and know
> better.

Why do you think that genetic determination of ancestry works? It's
because until the 20thC most people didn't travel much if at all, and
those who did, didn't interbreed much with other groups along their way.
For example, take a look at the histories of:

+ The Travellers, aka gypsies, from the word 'Egyptians', who AFAICR
originated actually not from Egypt but from the area around north of
India and neighbouring countries, and wandered along Eurasia in two
great paths throughout Europe and north Africa, and who, by the time
they reached Britain and since their time here, have remained racially
pure enough to have kept a darker skin tone, hence the pejorative name
'darkies'.

+ The Jewish quarters in many European and Arabic cities;

+ The Christian quarters in many Arabic cities;

Etc, etc.

But the point at issue is that you're complaining about the use of a
black actor in a minor role of William I's page in a drama-doc, which,
while I have accepted from the outset was perhaps unlikely, is
undeniably possible, and you haven't got any facts and figures to prove
that it isn't. This is rather different from, say, hiring black actors
to play English lords and ladies in Shakespeare's historical dramas,
where in many cases we actually have surviving portraits of the real
people concerned, and they weren't black.

>> I note that you've snipped the point made by MB to which I was replying,
>> which was ...
>>
>> On 17/06/2021 19:29, MB wrote:
>>> Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
>>> army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
>>> most of the army was black.
>>
>> .... to which you suggested with your link that it was Dan Snow's series
>> "1066 - A Year To Conquer England", but in no way can that series be
>> described as implying that most of the Norman invasion was black.
>
> I was making a related point. Obviously something you can't comprehend.

Then you failed to make it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 15:10, JNugent wrote:
>
> On 18/06/2021 12:53 pm, Java Jive wrote:
>
>> On 18/06/2021 12:26, MrSpook_lv6s@b5q3wo7.co.uk wrote:
>>>
>>> Awww, its so sweet the way you put forward your snivelling pathetic
>>> fear as an intellectual choice whereas in reality you're pissing
>>> your pants :)
>>
>> Another attempt to cover up losing an argument by abuse.
>
> That's *your* job, isn't it?

No, his, and seemingly yours as well.

>> Stay in after school and write out 1,000 times:  "When I try to cover
>> up losing an argument by abuse, no-one is fooled!"

Applies to you too.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 14:51, MrSpook_epbp7gvl7v@q0bg261n_utdp7_.net wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:53:00 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 18/06/2021 12:26, MrSpook_lv6s@b5q3wo7.co.uk wrote:
>>> A better example would be that supernovas
>>> haven't destroyed any of the galaxies we can see therefor its pretty safe to
>>> say they won't destroy any ones we can't.
>>
>> AFAIAA, we don't have statistics either way on that, so it's no analogy
>> at all.
>
> Yes we do. Supernovas are used as standard candles to measure distance in
> astronomy for distances where parallax no longer works so they are studied
> in fine detail.

No, that's Cepheid variables and just type 1a supernovae, not all
supernovae in general.

https://lco.global/spacebook/distance/cepheid-variable-stars-supernovae-and-distance-measurement/

> Stick to talking about things you have a clue about, which
> admittedly is a pretty short list.

It appears that your learning list is even longer than mine.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:50:36 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 18/06/2021 14:49, MrSpook_cchApv9@wamo2u3.org wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:49:23 +0100
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> We're not talking about tribes, we're talking about small minorities of
>>> people.
>>
>> So you're asserting that tiny minority of black people would have remained
>> racially pure for 600 years in normandy are you? The evidence of london in
>> merely 60 says otherwise but clearly you're an expert anthropolist and know
>> better.
>
>Why do you think that genetic determination of ancestry works? It's

Sorry? Do you have a monkey typing random nonsensical shit for you bunging
in intellectual sounding phrases now and then?

>+ The Travellers, aka gypsies, from the word 'Egyptians', who AFAICR
>originated actually not from Egypt but from the area around north of
>India and neighbouring countries, and wandered along Eurasia in two
>great paths throughout Europe and north Africa, and who, by the time
>they reached Britain and since their time here, have remained racially
>pure enough to have kept a darker skin tone, hence the pejorative name
>'darkies'.

If you mean Roma they're originally from India and if you'd ever seen any in
the UK you'd know the ones who live here are anything but dark. The ones
from Bulgaria are a bit darker but not by much.

>+ The Jewish quarters in many European and Arabic cities;

Jews are nominally a semetic people and if they were a pure bloodline they'd
look very similar to the other peoples around there. Some do, but most of the
ones in europe look distinctly white. Now I wonder why that might be.

>But the point at issue is that you're complaining about the use of a
>black actor in a minor role of William I's page in a drama-doc, which,
>while I have accepted from the outset was perhaps unlikely, is

It was nothing other than woke box ticking by the production company just
like the recent BS with a black woman cast as Ann Boleyn. I wonder how the
wokerati would respond if a white guy played nelson mandela? I think we know
the answer.

On 18/06/2021 14:53, MrSpook_bnfb@ocn.info wrote:
>
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 13:04:40 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 18/06/2021 12:33, MrSpook_Xrj@c__8n6f.ac.uk wrote:
>>> Not abuse, accurate description.
>>
>> If it's an accurate description, where is your evidence justifying it?
>
> You can learn a lot about someone just from what they type.

Perhaps an intelligent person can, but that restriction precludes you.

>> clandestine video cameras in my home, because you've been locked down
>> and unable to travel,
>
> Speak for yourself.

I always have, isn't it about time you did the same, ie stop trying to
find means to insult people you disagree with and stick to rational
argument?

>>> Oh ok. How about some US states then? Or is ickle wickle diddums wetwipe
>> going
>>> to argue they're too different too? Oddly they're not a zombie apocalyse
>>> either:
>>>
>>>
>> https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/09/us/biden-mask-mandate-nationwide-trnd/index.
>> h
>>> tml
>>
>> What US states are doing this year as they judge - rightly or wrongly
>> remains to be seen - that the pandemic is slackening, is irrelevant to
>
> Does it? Its been 6 months now.
>
>> a comparison with Sweden at the beginning of it when for a while that
>> country had the worst death rate in the world, and since has had overall
>> a far worse death rate than its closest neighbours who are closest to it
>> in societal and national character terms.
>
> Why, because they speak a similar language and share a border?

What border and similarities of language does the US share with Sweden
exactly?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 04:52 pm, Java Jive wrote:
> On 18/06/2021 15:10, JNugent wrote:
>>
>> On 18/06/2021 12:53 pm, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/06/2021 12:26, MrSpook_lv6s@b5q3wo7.co.uk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Awww, its so sweet the way you put forward your snivelling pathetic
>>>> fear as an intellectual choice whereas in reality you're pissing
>>>> your pants :)
>>>
>>> Another attempt to cover up losing an argument by abuse.
>>
>> That's *your* job, isn't it?
>
> No, his, and seemingly yours as well.
>
>>> Stay in after school and write out 1,000 times:  "When I try to cover
>>> up losing an argument by abuse, no-one is fooled!"
>
> Applies to you too.

<sigh>

Irony passes you by... again...

On 18/06/2021 16:59, MrSpook_qft8jv@kkkodg4p9lor2z3jo8ji.org wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:50:36 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 18/06/2021 14:49, MrSpook_cchApv9@wamo2u3.org wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 12:49:23 +0100
>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We're not talking about tribes, we're talking about small minorities of
>>>> people.
>>>
>>> So you're asserting that tiny minority of black people would have remained
>>> racially pure for 600 years in normandy are you? The evidence of london in
>>> merely 60 says otherwise but clearly you're an expert anthropolist and know
>>> better.
>>
>> Why do you think that genetic determination of ancestry works? It's
>
> Sorry? Do you have a monkey typing random nonsensical shit for you bunging
> in intellectual sounding phrases now and then?

No, that's you for when you're losing an argument.

>> + The Travellers, aka gypsies, from the word 'Egyptians', who AFAICR
>> originated actually not from Egypt but from the area around north of
>> India and neighbouring countries, and wandered along Eurasia in two
>> great paths throughout Europe and north Africa, and who, by the time
>> they reached Britain and since their time here, have remained racially
>> pure enough to have kept a darker skin tone, hence the pejorative name
>> 'darkies'.
>
> If you mean Roma they're originally from India and if you'd ever seen any in
> the UK you'd know the ones who live here are anything but dark. The ones
> from Bulgaria are a bit darker but not by much.

But after many hundreds if not thousands of years, many are still darker
than most English folk, and that's the point.

>> + The Jewish quarters in many European and Arabic cities;
>
> Jews are nominally a semetic people and if they were a pure bloodline they'd
> look very similar to the other peoples around there. Some do, but most of the
> ones in europe look distinctly white. Now I wonder why that might be.

Because originally they were essentially white!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people

>> But the point at issue is that you're complaining about the use of a
>> black actor in a minor role of William I's page in a drama-doc, which,
>> while I have accepted from the outset was perhaps unlikely, is
>
> It was nothing other than woke box ticking by the production company

The point is that you can't disprove it.

> just
> like the recent BS with a black woman cast as Ann Boleyn. I wonder how the
> wokerati would respond if a white guy played nelson mandela? I think we know
> the answer.

And which programme was that?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 17:14, JNugent wrote:
>
> <sigh>
>
> Irony passes you by... again...

<sigh> From that, I don't think you know the meaning of irony.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 16:59, MrSpook_qft8jv@kkkodg4p9lor2z3jo8ji.org wrote:
> If you mean Roma they're originally from India and if you'd ever seen any in
> the UK you'd know the ones who live here are anything but dark. The ones
> from Bulgaria are a bit darker but not by much.

I believe most of the 'travellers' are from Ireland. I heard a
programme years about a family of true Romany gypsies. They hated the
'travellers' and made clear they were nothing to do with the true Romany
travellers.

On 10:20 18 Jun 2021, said:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:13:41 +0100
> Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On 18:31 17 Jun 2021, Java Jive said:
>>> ... but the simple truth is that your political bigotry prevents
>>> you seeing the truth, and so you have to bore the arse off
>>> everyone here by raking it all over again. That horse has been
>>> flogged to death already, and you're wrong, get used to it.
>>
>>Mr Spook evidently doesn't let facts get in the way of his beliefs.
>>
>>Covid deniers and anti-vaxxers badly needed a country which had
>>miraculously avoided deaths from the virus by doing nothing and
>>Sweden was force-fitted into this role.
>
> You only need 1 example to prove a theory -

You must mean "disprove".

> ie that lockdown and all the other restrictions were and are pointless.
> But hey, inconvenient facts eh?

You were given several facts to disprove Sweden's alleged success at
fighting Covid.

On 09:41 18 Jun 2021, Roderick Stewart said:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100, Java Jive
> <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look
>>at the stats, they all look exactly like the beginning of the second
>>wave, and suggest that we are now entering a third. Most
>>worryingly:
>> Nation R-Number
>> England 1.2-1.4
>> Scotland 1.2-1.4
>> NI 0.9-1.2
>> Wales 0.8-1.0 The only nation with an acceptable level
>
> I've yet to see a convincing explanation of where this magic "R"
> number comes from, or how anyone thinks it can be known with any
> accuracy. I understand that it's defined as the average number of
> people who become infected by any individual who is already infected
> (something like loop gain or secondary emission ratio, to translate
> it into electronic terms) but I also see a lot of doubt and
> confusion about how accurately we determine who is infected, who has
> been in contact with whom, and what people really died from. If the
> raw data is questionable, then the same can surely be said of
> anything derived or estimated from it.
>
> Rod.

Such is the skill of the mathematical modeller.