Dhimmitude: denoting an attitude of concession, surrender and appeasement towards Islamic demands. What that has to do with this article or my comment is anybody's guess, wpdunn71901. Anti-gun, yes, but pro-religion of any kind? The evidence suggests otherwise :)
36 hours to make one. It's 'ultimate' in the 'final' sense of the word - after all the hassle of making it you'll really what a waste of your time it was so will never make another.
Ultimate food is when you're blind drunk and ravenously hungry, and comes in the form of 'anything I can cram into my mouth'. This is why donner kebabs are the UK meal of choice after the pubs shut :)
I buy a LOT of bananas, so when I stock up I try to buy a mix of green and yellow ones - yellow for eating soon, green for later. No point in buying all one colour because they'll all become edible on the same day! They will ripen MUCH quicker if you leave them in a plastic bag where the gas they give off is trapped around them. Trying to keep them fresh in the fridge has, er, mixed results - it sort of works but the skins go black and the fruit is really only good for pulping into smoothies and shakes or, my favourite, mashed banana sandwiches :)
I don't cycle, I only drive, but I know that cyclists have a RIGHT to be on the road, and I take extra care when I approach one. From the comments here it seems that the 'holier-than-thou' people (to use the article's language) are the ones expressing their intolerant attitude towards cyclists. So how many SECONDS does it add to your journey to take care when you're overtaking a cyclist?
Frau, you describe the kind of car driver who shouldn't be on the road AT ALL - someone who 'can't take it anymore' and pulls out on a blind corner, swerves because he sees an oncoming car (really? hence the no overtaking lines!) and hits a cyclist... and Frau has the nerve to attach blame to the cyclist 'because the bicyclist felt that they have the same rights to be on the road.'
Newsflash: they DO have the same rights to be on the road, and like it or not you have to live with that and adapt your driving to compensate for it. And don't forget that whoever makes a mistake, it will almost certainly end up worse for the cyclist than the car driver, so a little extra consideration (and patience) might not be out of place.
I'm pretty sure the supervisors will take as much care with the knitting needles as they do with knives in the kitchens or dangerous tools in the wood/metal shops. If anything, I'd expect metal needles to be less of a risk, given that you can use a metal detector to find them, whereas a sharp piece of plastic could only be discovered by a physical search.
One little niggle: as it's on glass the cup has a reflection but the saucer doesn't, but it's a clever idea. At least they were sensible enough to Photoshop the steam - you really wouldn't want to put something that hot on your exorbitantly-priced fondleslab.
@EdwardSanc: all kinds of dead animals are put on display - ever heard of taxidermy? Similarly all kinds of animals are killed. It's a fairly important step in the production of meat.
As for humans, look up Gunther von Hagens and plastination. While no humans are killed specifically to be put on display, he uses real dead people in his art. Most cultures in the world are fascinated with life, and are often just as fascinated with death. It's why art like this exists.
Fish are caught and killed in their millions, and the people who do it make money, and their profits and taxes do 'lots and lots of good'. My point? A shark is a fish. It's a big one, yes, but still a species of fish. Why should we give a big fish any more (or less) respect than a small one? Why do we eat cows but not dogs or dolphins? There simply is no good reason. Presumably dogs are tasty (I wouldn't know), but we all choose to be 'speciesist' to some degree, and rather than scorn it the majority (every non-veggie in the world) accepts that certain animals are treated differently.
Next time you use an insect spray, be sure to think about your speciesism against insects. Don't they have a right to life too? Or if you think it's okay to kill them, do you also eat insects as part of your daily diet?
I think my rant is over, but the words 'double standards' spring to mind, or even 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones'.
By all means make it illegal if you have access to housing yet refuse to live in it, but if you have no house what choice do you have? Surely putting people in prison is far more expensive than providing them with basic housing. Perhaps the point of the law is not to persuade homeless people to change, but instead to give the police a legal basis on which to harrass them.
Bridges can be basic, functional things in unremarkable locations, but someone decided that this one was going to different, just because, and so a small part of the world becomes just that little bit more interesting. Neat!
One of the many paths to becoming xenophobic, separatist, even racist, is refusing to embrace parts of other people's cultures or, in this case, refusing to accept those 'outsiders' who wish to do so. By all means keep historical records of the origins of clothing, fabric, particular patterns, etc, but why be annoyed if someone look at it, likes it, adds his/her own design spin to it, then sells it on?
That's how the world has always worked. It's how the art world works, it's how music, literature and yes, it's how fashion works. You see/hear something and are inspired to create your own, different, personal version. Cultures don't exist in a vacuum, they evolve and adapt as new influences come in and out of view. If they didn't we'd all be wearing animals skins because someone slapped an injunction on the us - apparently linen and cotton 'belonged' to them and nobody else.
I see the point if you're trying to pass off your goods as 'genuine native American products', because that would be untrue, but 'native inspired'? How is claiming to be inspired by anything cause for alarm? As for who gets to profit - it's a commercial world, and the ones who profit are the ones who come up with the best ideas and do the best marketing job. And there are no restrictions on who is or is not allowed to do that.
Currently not feeling at all guilty about eating a *Chicago* style pizza in my UK home!
@Edward, a few ideas You are not exceptional, you are absolutely average You are insignificant - stop trying to change the world Ambitions are time-consuming - embrace mediocrity If you have less than others, settle for less Stop reading other people's manifestos - switch on the TV instead
Ultimate food is when you're blind drunk and ravenously hungry, and comes in the form of 'anything I can cram into my mouth'. This is why donner kebabs are the UK meal of choice after the pubs shut :)
Frau, you describe the kind of car driver who shouldn't be on the road AT ALL - someone who 'can't take it anymore' and pulls out on a blind corner, swerves because he sees an oncoming car (really? hence the no overtaking lines!) and hits a cyclist... and Frau has the nerve to attach blame to the cyclist 'because the bicyclist felt that they have the same rights to be on the road.'
Newsflash: they DO have the same rights to be on the road, and like it or not you have to live with that and adapt your driving to compensate for it. And don't forget that whoever makes a mistake, it will almost certainly end up worse for the cyclist than the car driver, so a little extra consideration (and patience) might not be out of place.
As for humans, look up Gunther von Hagens and plastination. While no humans are killed specifically to be put on display, he uses real dead people in his art. Most cultures in the world are fascinated with life, and are often just as fascinated with death. It's why art like this exists.
Fish are caught and killed in their millions, and the people who do it make money, and their profits and taxes do 'lots and lots of good'. My point? A shark is a fish. It's a big one, yes, but still a species of fish. Why should we give a big fish any more (or less) respect than a small one? Why do we eat cows but not dogs or dolphins? There simply is no good reason. Presumably dogs are tasty (I wouldn't know), but we all choose to be 'speciesist' to some degree, and rather than scorn it the majority (every non-veggie in the world) accepts that certain animals are treated differently.
Next time you use an insect spray, be sure to think about your speciesism against insects. Don't they have a right to life too? Or if you think it's okay to kill them, do you also eat insects as part of your daily diet?
I think my rant is over, but the words 'double standards' spring to mind, or even 'people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones'.
That's how the world has always worked. It's how the art world works, it's how music, literature and yes, it's how fashion works. You see/hear something and are inspired to create your own, different, personal version. Cultures don't exist in a vacuum, they evolve and adapt as new influences come in and out of view. If they didn't we'd all be wearing animals skins because someone slapped an injunction on the us - apparently linen and cotton 'belonged' to them and nobody else.
I see the point if you're trying to pass off your goods as 'genuine native American products', because that would be untrue, but 'native inspired'? How is claiming to be inspired by anything cause for alarm? As for who gets to profit - it's a commercial world, and the ones who profit are the ones who come up with the best ideas and do the best marketing job. And there are no restrictions on who is or is not allowed to do that.
Currently not feeling at all guilty about eating a *Chicago* style pizza in my UK home!
You are not exceptional, you are absolutely average
You are insignificant - stop trying to change the world
Ambitions are time-consuming - embrace mediocrity
If you have less than others, settle for less
Stop reading other people's manifestos - switch on the TV instead