Prev: Speeding - a few questions
Next: Smartcom 12s relay?
From: Brimstone on 19 Aug 2006 16:27 Ivor Jones wrote: > "Tony Raven" <junk(a)raven-family.com> wrote in message > news:4kp8fsFd7htcU1(a)individual.net >> Ivor Jones wrote on 19/08/2006 20:21 +0100: >>> "Tony Raven" <junk(a)raven-family.com> wrote in message >>> news:4kp56sFd3p9vU1(a)individual.net >>>> >>>> OED: European n. >>>> >>>> B. 1. A native of Europe. >>>> >>>> Ergo you are a European and saying otherwise will not >>>> change the fact. >>> >>> I'm not a native of Europe, there is no such country. I >>> can only be a native of a country, not a continent. >>> >> >> Since a native is "A person born in a specified place, >> region, or country, whether subsequently resident there >> or not " you can be a native of a continent. > > You can if you want, I am not. How do you work that out? You claim to have been born in England, of which you are a native. England is a part of the British Isles which are a part of Europe, therefore you must be a native of Europe. To believe anything else smacks of Little Englanderism. >> Did you know that British soldiers sent to India under >> British rule were officially designated "European" to >> distinguish them from the native troops, not British or >> English? > > So what..? So if the British soldiers were not Europeans then the Government of the says was wrong. > >>>> You still haven't said whether you recognise the terms >>>> American, Asian, African or Australian. >>> >>> That's not relevant. >>> >> >> Well surely if you deny the existence of Europeans you >> must logically deny the existence of these other >> designations. > > They're not relevant. Why not?
From: Ivor Jones on 19 Aug 2006 16:27 "Tony Raven" <junk(a)raven-family.com> wrote in message news:4kpae9FdacebU2(a)individual.net > Ivor Jones wrote on 19/08/2006 21:09 +0100: > > > > I am not a European. > > > > Are, are, are! ;-) Yawn. > Anyway, what do you have against being European? Nothing, because I can't be what I'm not. Ivor
From: Ivor Jones on 19 Aug 2006 16:29 "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:v5qdnZ-vQubz6XrZRVnyiw(a)bt.com > Ivor Jones wrote: [snip] > > I am not a European. > > Oh yes you are! Wrong. Ivor
From: Tony Raven on 19 Aug 2006 16:30 Ivor Jones wrote on 19/08/2006 21:27 +0100: > "Tony Raven" <junk(a)raven-family.com> wrote in message > >> Anyway, what do you have against being European? > > Nothing, because I can't be what I'm not. > It seems to be more don't want to be what you are. -- Tony "Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using his intelligence; he is just using his memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
From: Ivor Jones on 19 Aug 2006 16:31
"Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:o-ednRoFiJuw6XrZnZ2dnUVZ8tydnZ2d(a)bt.com [snip] > How do you work that out? You claim to have been born in > England, of which you are a native. England is a part of > the British Isles which are a part of Europe, therefore > you must be a native of Europe. To believe anything else > smacks of Little Englanderism. It can smack of a kipper in the face it you like, I am still not a European. > > > Did you know that British soldiers sent to India under > > > British rule were officially designated "European" to > > > distinguish them from the native troops, not British > > > or English? > > > > So what..? > > So if the British soldiers were not Europeans then the > Government of the says was wrong. Well now, it wouldn't be the first time a government was wrong, would it..?! > > > > > You still haven't said whether you recognise the > > > > > terms American, Asian, African or Australian. > > > > > > > > That's not relevant. > > > > > > > > > > Well surely if you deny the existence of Europeans you > > > must logically deny the existence of these other > > > designations. > > > > They're not relevant. > > Why not? Because they're not Europeans either. Ivor |