M61A1

The reality is that the water is probably ok, but lawyers are involved, so don't expect a realistic outcome. What the "victims" (and I use the term very loosely) don't seem to get is that the law companies are not there the help people, despite their claims. It's all about getting a dollar from someone with deep pockets. I would love to see results of tests looking for the types of chemicals the farmers have been flooding the ground with around here, results might be surprising, but they don't have deep pockets.

A little bit of hysteria goes a long way...

Actually, it would be more to do with the hysteria promoted by the greens.

Well, it WAS on the ABC site....all I did was answer the questions asked honestly, and it came up with a result. So then, I've just done a bit of research and come to the conclusion that the correct answer to your question is "no".

Might be wrong, but I thought is was you (perhaps in another thread) that suggested that I was extreme right. Yes, I agree, as to your definition of "progressive", which is why I don't think it could possibly be applied to the Greens.

Yes, what about it? Is that what you'd like, or are you suggesting that's my ideal?

It might also be that Assange knows he crossed some very serious boundaries and doesn't want the consequences.

How about you spell it out for me 'cause I'm not getting what you're getting at.

It's not just the reports in the Australian though, I've been hearing about it in other media for some 12 or so months now. I think it comes down to what I was saying before: someone makes some well intentioned piece of legislation, someone else in an institution somewhere misinterprets (deliberately or not) it and someone else suffers. There's always a lawyer out there trying to set a precedent and make a name for themselves and some dollars. I agree that it's not just universities, but some employers. It's quite hypocritical, their level of intolerance of the 'diversity" they preach. Just wondering (using your example)....what if it's fact and I could actually get a cabbage to work harder?

I get the point, but if the examples quoted are correct, and I have reason to believe they are, how can this be considered supportive of free speech? I have seen/heard quite a bit about the 'dumbing down' of universities. They are supposed to be places where opinions and ideas are debated freely, instead they are becoming places where the students(and teachers) are forced to shut up for fear of reprisal. Essentially being bullied by people claiming to be anti-bullying. On a lighter note....just for Marty, using his very own hallowed ABC's "vote compass", here's where I stand.... (see image) It defies all logic to refer to the Greens as "progressive", regressive would have to be a far more appropriate term. [ATTACH]47908._xfImport[/ATTACH]

I don't know enough about the IPA to say right or wrong, but the examples that they have quoted, I have heard before, and worse. If there is any truth in it all, it is very concerning.

On that subject, an article in the Australian this morning talks of an audit of Australian universities by the Institute of Public Affairs reckon that 79% of our universities have strong restrictions on free speech. Apparently Murdoch University has a $50 fine for members who use insulting language. UQ list sarcasm as a form of bullying. Pretty poor form for institutions that should embody free speech and open debate.

Can't really argue with that. I have a lot of trouble though, trusting those who enforce such laws to actually carry out the intent of the law. It can take deep pockets to prove your innocence these days.

Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act makes it unlawful for someone to do an act that is reasonably likely to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” someone because of their race or ethnicity. That little gem (cut and paste from HRC) right there would be a reasonable start.....having the term "offend is waaaay to vague and leaves the door open for a world of hurt.

And only boil it when you need it.....I've known people who boil it several times, then finally make a cuppa, then yell at kids who left a light on for 5 minutes..

One thing no-one seems to mention.....everyone worries about light bulbs using power, but no-one thinks twice about boiling the kettle several times. Do the math, 100W light bulb vs 2200W kettle.....3 minutes of kettle is worth over an hour of lightbulb. Now, which is going to save you money?

What's the shekel exchange rate these days?.....could work out expensive.

Yes, there was a Mike Hunt Car sales at Loganholme too.

Give Mr Putin some money and look the other way....all fixed.

Yes, I am aware of that, didn't stop the Aussie from calling it otherwise. I believe that the correct pronunciation is more like "Koontz". In regard to the other, I am aware of a kid of German heritage who's surname was Fuchs, and teachers wouldn't pronounce it correctly.

Not sure what creative means, but here it is....it's real. I've driven down it many times. [ATTACH]48568._xfImport[/ATTACH]

Hickam AFB in Hawaii has "Kuntz Ave"

If heaven is going to be full of the sort of people who believe they're going there when they die, it's not a place I would like.

I will not repent......this is a false god. Harley Davidson: turning fuel into noise without the harmful effects of horsepower since 1903.

I think I've posted this before, but relevant here.... [ATTACH]47855._xfImport[/ATTACH]