How patriotic are you?

[ahinton]

Yes I spent three months in Porlock Weir near Bristle a couple years ago,

Porlock Weir's quite a way from Bristol (at least by UK standards) - some 60 miles, I'd guess (without actually looking it up) - but I do know it - it's near Minehead on the north Somerset coast, yes? What brought you to that rather remote place for so long, just out of interest? I note that you've grasped the "Bristle" bit well! Bristolian seems to me to be a language all its own (and I hear a fair amount of it, living and working as I do on the east side of Bath, only about 15 miles from the centre of Bristol).

and a month in London a couple years before that.  I liked the Indian food but not much else.  The Bombay Brosserie was where i ended up eating like... half of the days I was there ^^

You mean Brasserie - and it's a very nice place indeed. The thing about eating out over here is that the variation between good and bad places of all kinds remains so great, although the general trend in recent years has been upwards rather than downwards. Fortunately, Bath and its environs are especially well endowed with decent eateries of various kinds, from top end English pubs to Thai, Italian, Nepalese to fine British / French places, although there remain quite a few places well worth avoiding.

Oh, and what in the HELL is "seafood sauce"?  I ordered a shrimp salad and it had some mysterious pinkish, gloopy stuff on it called "seafood sauce" and it just tasted like a mixture of ketchup and mayonnaise.  I thought I was going to throw up.

That's about what it can be, I fear; its proper name is "sauce Marie Rose", though quite what Marie Rose ever did to deserve the kind of rubbish served in her name - which sadly you describe with painful and nauseating accuracy - I have less than no idea. This, however, is a throwback (if not also the throw-up that you mention!) to an earlier era when some people over here used to think that a great meal out comprised a "prawn cocktail", a steak and some Black Forest Gâteau all washed down with Niersteiner Gutes Domtal at best and Blue Nun at worst. Just to explain to those fortunate enough to be uninitiated into the "delights" of a certain level of 1970s British "cuisine", a "prawn cocktail" usually comprised emaciated looking small bits of not readily identifiable shellfish taken straight from the freezer, thawed out and dropped onto some limp, semi-stale boring lettuce leaves and some of this "marie Rose" concoction slopped over the top, the steak would also be cooked straight from the freezer, would sometimes be somewhat flavourless and invariably grossly overdone and served with chips taken from the freezer and cooked in stale and overly recycled vegetable oil, together with the almost equally ubiquitous onion rings and the most tasteless mushrooms that could be found anywhere - and the less said about the Black Forest Gâteau the better - and as for the "wines", it took little imagination to realise that this was the kind of stuff foisted on the unsuspecting over here by the Germans who, not unnaturally, kept most of their decent wines for their own consumption. OK, now I admit that this sounds utterly ghastly - and it usually was - yet the kinds of establisment that dished up this kind of stuff were mainly pubs that had almost no previous record of serving much food at all. Almost all of that kind of rot has gone now in UK, the wine-consciousness of the nation has increased by leaps and bounds and there are many more discerning diners around who would sooner starve than put up with that kind of thing. OK, we still have our shoddy eateries, of course, there's sadly no shortage of McDonalds, Burger Kings and other like chains and one the most consistently bad places to eat is motorway service stations (though even a few of these are trying now to improve). It's very odd how these worst aspects of eating out in Britain have survived even to the extent that they have, let alone held such sway 30-odd years ago, especially since the brilliant English writer Elizabeth David almost single-handedly lifted the British consciousness out of that dreadful malaise that was the aftermath of post-WWII rationing. Nowadays, people are getting far more conscious of the values, virtues and delights of good farming practices, locally produced and fresh food, organic production and, of course, decent cooking.

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

the us being only slightly over 200 years old and israel since 1967. 

I belive Israel was founded in 1948, and not 1967.

[pianistimo]

the full state of israel after the arab-israeli war.  but, that was because the UN resolution 181 which was delivered in 1948 (which partitioned the territory of the british mandate of 1917 for palestine into two states for jews and palestinian arabs) never came to fruition.  here's the reason that i read why:  palestinians refused to recognize the state of israel and on the spot declared war.

golda meir, in an address to the UN assemby on october 10, 1960, challenged the arab leaders to meet with prime minister david ben-gurion to negotiate a peace settlement.  nassar answered on october 15 saying that israel was trying to deceive the world and reiterated that his country would never recognize the jewish state.

the PLO, established after the 1964 meeting of palestinian congress, allowed fatah to dominate (under yassar arafat) and called for israel's destruction.  most of the attacks were from guerilla infiltrators from jordan, the gaza strip, and lebanon.  the syrian army used the golan heights  (much like jordan used the temple mount as a military base before the six-day war) as a base to attack kibbutz forcing them to use bomb shelters.

when israel became a state, it should have been able to use it's partitioned parts of jerusalem - but in may of 1948 - the arab legion overran the eastern part of jerusalem and occupied the old city and holy places.  jews were barred from the old city and denied access to the western wall.  would you call this a TRUE division of Palestine - and equal states for jews and palestinians.  it seems that palestine gets back twice what it gives.  now, they are complaining.  why?  because things are unfair.  that is because they don't understand fairness and always complain AFTER they've done their own dastardly deeds. 

you can see that this is a very complex situation and yet - if the UN decides to step in and divide israel again - what is to stop this from happening in ANY country.  to just randomly step in and divide it?  although, the palestinians - if they were to accept the idea of the state of israel - might have a better chance to have a state of their own.

[pianistimo]

as i understand it - the golan heights are necessary to secure israel from attack.

this may seem biased, as well, to you - but the quran itself speaks of moses and the promised land in two places:  sura 5:22-23 and sura 17:104.  if we take the idea of biblical references as well, we see that there is an assigning of this part of of the world to israel by God himself.  of course, we also have the idea that the prophet muhammad supposedly ascended pretty much on the temple mount area.  now, why that exact area?  well, the fight goes back millenia.  a sort of yanking of the blanket back and forth.

now, we have the very real problem - as you say - of displaced palestianians who need a state and need jobs, food, medical care -  but, also to be taught to live in peace with others and not attempt to get everything by terrorism.  they were supplied with weaponry by syria who supports what they do - but does not want to share their parts of lebanon so much either with the palestinians.  why?  it is only fair.  if israel shares some - syria should, too.

if only it could go back to the way it was before 'the wall.'  but, the wall is a very real deterrent to terrorism.  it basically allows people only to enter after showing their papers.  much like the fence we have.  but, the thing is -- i don't think this particularly helps the economies of either israel or palestine.  just as with immigration tightening in america.  of course, things would be better economically if we didn't tighten immigration - but terrorism would be rampant, too - because not all immigrants are true immigrants.  some can be infiltrators.

[pianistimo]

btw, who took the arab side of the british mandate?  transjordan!  so - in all fairness - jordanians (who also have been seeking peace) should share in this land sharing as well.  it is only fair.

as i see it - a connected section of land (not golan heights) of israel, jordan, syria - would make a fairly equitable state for palestine wouldn't it?  why should all the burden fall to israel?  and, especially considering that there was WAYYY more land before israel took their half of the british mandate.

part of the reason jordan doesn't want to is the same reason that israel has mentioned.  terrorism.  in 1970, king hussein kicked out the palestinians out of jordan because they were causing uprising and trouble.  'black september.'  since then, arafat caused 100,000 of his OWN peoples (both muslim and christian) in lebanon to be killed in a 12 year civil war.  why - they spent their supposed 'government' money on munitions instead of food and caring for civilians - with the entire goal being the destruction of israel.

[mephisto]

Pianistimo I am very sad for you. You try to hard yet you fail misserably each time.

The native people of Palestine, like the native people of every other country in the Arab world, Asia, Africa, American and Europe, refused to divide the land with a setller community. 

Let us look at the fact Susan. Heavy flow of new zionists ment that by the year 1947 zionists made up 33% of  Palestine and the indiginous population made up the rest (66%). The Palestinians owned 90% of the land and the zionists owned around 8-10% of the land.

When the UN deicded to partiotion the land the Zionists got 55% and the Palestinians got 45% of the land. Why is this fair? Why should the majority get the smallest part?

About Palestinians not wanting to talk with Ben Gurion let us just read what Ben Gurion himself said about the issue:

'I don't understand your optimism. Why should the Arabs make peace? If I were an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us(Ben Gurion and the early zionazis were athiests BTW), but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?

-David Ben-Gurion, In conversation with Nahum Goldmann, in 1956; as quoted in The Jewish Paradox: A personal memoir (1978) by Nahum Goldmann

Why don't you feel with the christian Palestinians, Susan?

Please let us return to the topic.

How Patriotic are you?

[pianistimo]

mephisto - i see your points - but israelis were forced to immigrate to only one location.  how do you think that made them feel?  they were forced to immigrate only to palestine right before hitler took poland.  the document that forced them was called something like 'the white paper.' 

i see your points and have read them carefully.  for the average palestinian - yes - they need a homeland that is safe.  could they ever trust their own governments?  no.  they have allowed terrorists to run their operations.  trust is something that is built over time.  they do not and never wanted trust with israel.  they do not want israel to exist.  and, yet - after the holocaust and many other troubles - israel still does!  why?  because of God.  that is my patriotism right there.  i believe God is fair.  even when humans are not.  God gave israel the land of israel.  it is named israel after the 'man' israel - jacob.

his son joseph had twelve sons (as you know) and each became a 'prince' of israel - much like the princes of ishmael.  they were said to become 'nations.'  sure enough - even the tribe of judah (or jews) became a nation.  the nation of israel.  it was promised in the bible - and is true.  it could not be true if God had not allowed it.  therefore - if you fight God - you have a powerful voice from the holy bible itself that tells the exact lands that God gave to the jews (judah) - and ultimately in the millenium to israel (which would extend far beyond where it is now).  i realize this is religious garbledegook to most people - but very real for orthodox jews isn't it?

it's interesting that even back in deuteronomy2:19 that moab, seir, and ammon (jordan) was exempt from any sort of take-over of the israelites for the land that God was to give them.  'and when you come opposite the sons of ammon, do not harass them nor provoke them, for i will not give you any of the land of the sons of ammon as a possession - because i have given it to the sons of lot as a possession.'  i believe also, that abraham had fairly given lot the first choice of land - and he took what he wanted.

deut. 2: 4 about seir 'do not provoke them, for i will not give you any of their land, even as little as a footstep because i have given mt. seir to esau as a possession. vs. 9 'do not harass moab, nor provoke them to war, for i will not give you any of their land as a possession, because i have given ar to the sons of lot as a possession.'

and, muslims - who believe muhammad would refer to the quran for references to ownership of the holy sites, too, wouldn't they?  the thing is - the basic difference here is which 'prophet' was also God.  muhammad was never called god - he was called 'the prophet' wasn't he?

[ahinton]

Susan - don't you think that a lot of the problems here stem from the very real fact of certain people's notion that certain land and rights are somehow "God-given" and therefore inalienable and immutable? This kind of "thinking" surely leads - and, I suspect, can only ever lead - to conflicts of interest between human politics on the one hand and human appropriation of such "rights" on the other. For a government of a country to be influenced in its lawmaking by certain tenets of religious thought is one thing; for it to appropriate such religious "tradition" as a means to justify "God-given" rights to land, property or anything else is surely far more inherently dangerous?

Now - BACK TO THE SUBJECT!

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

joshua 15 explains the lot for the sons of judah:  'the border of edom, southward to the wilderness of zin at the extreme south. and their south border was from the lower end of the salt sea, from the bay that turns to the south.  then it proceeded southward to the ascent of akrabbim and continued to zin, then went up by the south of kadesh-barnea and continued to hezron, and went up to addar and turned about the karka.  and it continued to azmon and proceeded to the brook of egypt; and the border ended at the sea.  this shall be your south border.  and the east border was the salt sea, as far as the mouth of the jordan.  and the border of the north side was from the bay of the sea at the mouth of the jordan.  then the border went up to beth-hoglah, and continued on the north of beth-arabah, and the border went up to the stone of bohan (the son of reuben).  and the border went up to debir from the valley of achor, and turned northward toward gilgal which is opposite the ascent of adummim, which is on the south of the valley; and the border continued to the waters of en-shemesh, and it ended at en-rogel.  then the border went up the valley of ben-hinnom to the slope of the jebusite on the south (that IS JERUSALEM) ; and the border went up to the top of the mountain which is before the valley of hinnom to the west, which is at the end of the valley of rephaim toward the north.  and from the top of the  mountain the border curved to the spring of the waters of nephtoah and proceeded to the cities of mt phron, then the border curved to baalah (that is, kiriathjearim) and the border turned about from baalah westward to mount seir, and continued to the slope of mt jearim on the north (that is chesalon), and went down tobeth-shemesh and continued through timnah - and the border proceeded to the side of ekron northward.  then the border curved to shikkeron and continued to mt baalah and proceeded to jabneel, and the border ended at the sea.  and the west border was at the great sea, even its coastline.  this is the border around the sons of judah according to their families.' 

the bible uses the phrase 'forever' literally.  so yes, alistair - i think this is a cause for tension because people don't take God literally or seriously.

btw, king david was of the tribe of benjamin, wasn't he?  so in terms of those peoples that descended from the benjamite tribe - that land would encompass also jerusalem - as witnessed by the findings of the palace of king david by dr. mazar recently.https://www.aish.com/jewishissues/jerusalem/Reclaiming_Biblical_Jerusalem.asp  i realize that ancient history doesn't seem to matter to most - but, if one is religious it does.  that is the reason for most of the tension, isn't it?  i mean- the 'holy sites!'

even christians today still believe Jesus Christ will return, as he said, to the mt. of olives.  this is near jerusalem and probably indicates his return close to the temple - as he says 'i will suddenly return to my temple....'  now, if king david was only second to Jesus Christ and will be at his right hand - his temple holds great significance.

[thalbergmad]

If anyone can develop a programme to shut this idiot up, i will leave them my house in my will.

Thal

[soliloquy]

Porlock Weir's quite a way from Bristol (at least by UK standards) - some 60 miles, I'd guess (without actually looking it up) - but I do know it - it's near Minehead on the north Somerset coast, yes? What brought you to that rather remote place for so long, just out of interest? I note that you've grasped the "Bristle" bit well! Bristolian seems to me to be a language all its own (and I hear a fair amount of it, living and working as I do on the east side of Bath, only about 15 miles from the centre of Bristol).
You mean Brasserie - and it's a very nice place indeed. The thing about eating out over here is that the variation between good and bad places of all kinds remains so great, although the general trend in recent years has been upwards rather than downwards. Fortunately, Bath and its environs are especially well endowed with decent eateries of various kinds, from top end English pubs to Thai, Italian, Nepalese to fine British / French places, although there remain quite a few places well worth avoiding.
That's about what it can be, I fear; its proper name is "sauce Marie Rose", though quite what Marie Rose ever did to deserve the kind of rubbish served in her name - which sadly you describe with painful and nauseating accuracy - I have less than no idea. This, however, is a throwback (if not also the throw-up that you mention!) to an earlier era when some people over here used to think that a great meal out comprised a "prawn cocktail", a steak and some Black Forest Gâteau all washed down with Niersteiner Gutes Domtal at best and Blue Nun at worst. Just to explain to those fortunate enough to be uninitiated into the "delights" of a certain level of 1970s British "cuisine", a "prawn cocktail" usually comprised emaciated looking small bits of not readily identifiable shellfish taken straight from the freezer, thawed out and dropped onto some limp, semi-stale boring lettuce leaves and some of this "marie Rose" concoction slopped over the top, the steak would also be cooked straight from the freezer, would sometimes be somewhat flavourless and invariably grossly overdone and served with chips taken from the freezer and cooked in stale and overly recycled vegetable oil, together with the almost equally ubiquitous onion rings and the most tasteless mushrooms that could be found anywhere - and the less said about the Black Forest Gâteau the better - and as for the "wines", it took little imagination to realise that this was the kind of stuff foisted on the unsuspecting over here by the Germans who, not unnaturally, kept most of their decent wines for their own consumption. OK, now I admit that this sounds utterly ghastly - and it usually was - yet the kinds of establisment that dished up this kind of stuff were mainly pubs that had almost no previous record of serving much food at all. Almost all of that kind of rot has gone now in UK, the wine-consciousness of the nation has increased by leaps and bounds and there are many more discerning diners around who would sooner starve than put up with that kind of thing. OK, we still have our shoddy eateries, of course, there's sadly no shortage of McDonalds, Burger Kings and other like chains and one the most consistently bad places to eat is motorway service stations (though even a few of these are trying now to improve). It's very odd how these worst aspects of eating out in Britain have survived even to the extent that they have, let alone held such sway 30-odd years ago, especially since the brilliant English writer Elizabeth David almost single-handedly lifted the British consciousness out of that dreadful malaise that was the aftermath of post-WWII rationing. Nowadays, people are getting far more conscious of the values, virtues and delights of good farming practices, locally produced and fresh food, organic production and, of course, decent cooking.

Best,

Alistair

Ah I guess bristol is sort of far away, but I didn't know Minehead was a big enough town for you to know where I meant XP  There really wasn't much around there; just a lot of farms and old people in huge houses with fancy names and freezing-cold ocean =/   I was staying at the Clifford Estate (I forget what they named their house, those smug bastards) visiting with my mother and stepfather who is from England and worked with Rollo Clifford, although he's since moved to America.  But yeah, you guys have a good diversity of ethnic foods; usually restaurants like that would be considered "specialty" here, but England definitely needs to learn to cook chinese!  I did not come across a single good chinese restaurant the whole time I was there.  Or good pizza =/  Or Italian, although I think I just went to a really horrible restaurant.  I don't even remember the name of it, although it's like on the other end of a street from the Bombay Brasserie and sort of adjacent to an American-themed restaurant in London.  Tiny place, horrid food.  I could not even eat it.  Also, what's with boiling the meat?  That is simply not the best way to get flavor and tenderness!  Boiled turkey, boiled beef... I know that the beef and pork quality isn't the very best but seriously, there must be a better way!  Oh by the way, what are those little like, bread cup type things that you fill with gravy and meat?  Those were good XP


I will look out for Marie Rose though.  If I see her I will give her a good slap.

[ahinton]

even christians today still believe Jesus Christ will return, as he said, to the mt. of olives.

Those that you know in you particular circle of particular kinds of Christian may perhaps do so; personally, I'll be more than happy just to take the olives, thanks...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

If anyone can develop a programme to shut this idiot up, i will leave them my house in my will.

Thal

I think that you are inviting people here to devise some kind of pianistimacro.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

England definitely needs to learn to cook chinese!  I did not come across a single good chinese restaurant the whole time I was there.  Or good pizza =/  Or Italian,

That's a real shame, for all of these are around to be found - one just has to know which are which, it seems.

Also, what's with boiling the meat?  That is simply not the best way to get flavor and tenderness!  Boiled turkey, boiled beef... I know that the beef and pork quality isn't the very best but seriously, there must be a better way!

I don't know where you went to eat overr here, but it seems as though you must have stumbled from time to time upon some real retro places of the worst kind. I have also to say that we can produce some of the finest beef and pork in this country (although it is far from universal in its production quality); Raymond Blanc himself has upset many of his countryfolk by claiming that some of the very finest beef in Europe is the organically reared Aberdeen Angus from the Duke of Buccleuch's Estate and that not only this but the best organic beef from Herefordshire is better than anything produced in his own country. As to pork, the Berkshire and Gloucester Old Spot breeds are very good but the star of the show is almost certainly Middle White. The point of all this, as another expert on the subject once told me, is that good meat is eminently capable of being ruined at absolutely every stage of the process, from birth to rearing to diet to pastoral care to timing of slaughter to hanging time to butchery to transportation to quick sale to preparation and cooking; get just one wrong and compromise immediately sets in.

Oh by the way, what are those little like, bread cup type things that you fill with gravy and meat?  Those were good XP

Not quite sure what you mean by these, lest it be a steak pie of some kind made from stewing steak, etc. - maybe you could elaborate...

I will look out for Marie Rose though.  If I see her I will give her a good slap.

Please don't do any such thing! It ain't her fault!...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Not quite sure what you mean by these

Could be yorkshire puddings hinty.

Thal

[ahinton]

Could be yorkshire puddings hinty.

Although I have less than no idea what a "yorkshire pudding hinty" might be, I rather doubt (as far as I am able) that this concoction is quite what "soliloquy" had in mind when writing of "those little like, bread cup type things that you fill with gravy and meat" but, since I have already indicated that I am unsure what it is he is referring to here, no doubt he will tell us one way or the other in due course.

That said, when someone once asked me what might constitute an approprite main dish for a dinner following a European conflict resolution seminar, I suggested Lancashire Hotpot topped with Yorkshire Pudding with a deep red rose in between the two...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Best,

Alistair

Best,

Alistair

Been on the wine again?

[ahinton]

Been on the wine again?

Well, I've certainly not been on the Yorkshire Pudding - it's probably passed its Selby date anyway...

Less than my best (or so it would seem),

Alistair

[soliloquy]

Yes it is Yorkshire Pudding

Arg now I want Indian Food =/  There is a decent indian restaurant in birmingham (birmingham USA) but the chef there I liked quit a few months ago.  He used to do me a Phaal that was just painfully hot, but now if I go in there, which is becoming less and less frequently, if I try to order a Phaal the waiter never knows what that means, and when I ask for just "the hottest lamb curry you can make" the waiter always gives me some long, annoying bullshit schpeel about how "i don't want that" and then I tell them I do and I get it and it's not even particularly hot.  I think I have to go back to london or up to new york to get a really hot curry now   *checks on expedia*

[m]

At the heart of many peoples idea of patriotism is a sense of one's own land, and one's own people being more important and 'better' than others.

I've asked myself some interesting questions.

If I were in a situation where I could only save one person, and 2 people - one from my own country, and the other - a foreigner/member of another race...without knowing either, who would I be inclined to save?

I don't know what it is, I don't like to think of my own land and people as superior, but I have a feeling of real love for my environment, being born here and feeling connected to the soil I stand upon.

I guess I am not a patriot as I am afraid I have no sense of my own land.

To be honest, I don't see anything what makes those questions "interesting".

If (hypothetically) there was a situation where I could save only one out of 2 persons, I hardly doubt it was the one from my own country, or at least, the coutry of belonging would be the last thing to consider.


Best, M

[thalbergmad]

Yes it is Yorkshire Pudding

AGHHHH, its nice to be right.

Thal

[pianistimo]

enjoy your brief interlude.  btw, yorkshire pudding looks a might  - well, unappetizing.

[ahinton]

enjoy your brief interlude.  btw, yorkshire pudding looks a might  - well, unappetizing.

It doesn't have to look quite as revolting as that and, for the record, the "gravy" bit is not a vital part of it but something pound on afterwards only as a matter of choice; that said, it's hardly the most obvious calling card for English gastronomy...

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

you mean there's something better?  (i'm just kidding.  we have a great english restaurant that serves high tea - and i'm all for high tea!)  scones are 'it' for me - but i'm sure i haven't gone through the entirety of the true english menu.  tea sounds good though. 

[thalbergmad]

Being a Scot, he would not appreciate how essential the yorkshire pudding is to that most wonderful of English dishes - The Roast.

Thal

[ahinton]

Being a Scot, he would not appreciate how essential the yorkshire pudding is to that most wonderful of English dishes - The Roast.

Thal

Whatever makes you think that, being a Scot, I would not appreciate the splendour of a really good roast? Let us not forget that "the roast beef of old England" is only a poor substitute for the roast beef of my Scotland (although some English beef is of undeniably high quality these days). In any case, even the English would only have a Yorkshire pudding with roast beef, rather than with any other roast meat. The Yorkshire pudding, even at its best, is far from as "essential" accompaniment to fine roast beef in any case - and one does not have to be a Scot to appreciate that!

It is well known that the French have traditionally used the term "rosbif" as a derogatory one for English people whose food appreciation extends little or nowhere beyond roast beef; this is not only very short-sighted of the French (especially nowadays) but rather amusing at the same time when one realises that roasting beef is not exactly something that the French would never do.

But to return to the subject - I find no problem with people extolling the virtues of their country (if they feel that it has any to extol); it's only when it's done in an accusatory manner from a position of assumed superiority that it becomes potentially or actually offensive and untenable.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

In any case, even the English would only have a Yorkshire pudding with roast beef, rather than with any other roast meat.

Not in my house mate.

Get yorkshire puds with all meat.

Thal

[ahinton]

Not in my house mate.

Get yorkshire puds with all meat.

Thal

Why? How disgusting! And what an insult to Yorshire puddings at their very best. Would you seriously add one to a boeuf bourguignon, a lamb pasanda, a stir-fried dish with duck or (since you speak of roast dishes) a plain roasted brace of wonderful Devon pheasant in season?

If ever you do me the kindness to invite me to a meaty lunch (cooked by you personally, I'd assume) at your Fin-des-graves home, I would have to tell you that you'd get a double portion of Yorkshire pudding (i.e. yours and mine)...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Why? How disgusting! And what an insult to Yorshire puddings at their very best. Would you seriously add one to a boeuf bourguignon, a lamb pasanda, a stir-fried dish with duck or (since you speak of roast dishes) a plain roasted brace of wonderful Devon pheasant in season?

If ever you do me the kindness to invite me to a meaty lunch (cooked by you personally, I'd assume) at your Fin-des-graves home, I would have to tell you that you'd get a double portion of Yorkshire pudding (i.e. yours and mine)...

Best,

Alistair

I meant all roasts.

However, I feel the other dishes you mention might be enhanced by the addition of some "Yorkshire".

Might even try it with Haggis and tatties.

Thal

[ahinton]

I meant all roasts.

However, I feel the other dishes you mention might be enhanced by the addition of some "Yorkshire".

And you are either a total gastronomic disgrace or you are seeking to wind me (and others) up...

Might even try it with Haggis and tatties.

Thal

Which I suppose you'd choose to wash down with a mixture of horrid English warm beer, cheap drinking chocolate and "sex on the beach"; mon Dieu! - what is the mater with you, Thal? Haggis and tatties need only some neeps and some fine malt whisky. Mind you, I suppose that it would not entirely surprise me to discover that Heston Blumenthal (no relation to either, methinks) had worked up a Yorkshre pudding ice cream or that Ferran Adriŕ had devised some kind of Yorkshire pudding and haggis soufflé...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

You have encapsulated yourself again

[ahinton]

You have encapsulated yourself again

And your point (if you actually have one here) is...?

Time for you to get that plane to PA, methinks - before the American economy collapses and brings ours and everyone else's down with it, that is...

Best,

Alistair

[soliloquy]

Ah don't worry about it it's just a reverse fluctuation from the earlier upward spike in the stock market.  You should be more worried about Monsanto coming after your crops

[pianistimo]

yeah.  soliloquy is right.  besides you're more overinflated than we are.  might stand a two week vacation over here and check out the beer distillery (is that the name?) in phoenixville.  i suppose it will taste probably a bit different than fine english beer - but hey, we actually have a distillery there where you can walk around (or attempt to) and look at it.  for whatever that is worth.  i take their word for how they say they process it.  who knows the real secrets behind it.  perhaps they just have the beer delivered at midnight and keep the distillery for looks.

[ahinton]

Ah don't worry about it it's just a reverse fluctuation from the earlier upward spike in the stock market.  You should be more worried about Monsanto coming after your crops

I don't personally have any crops for Monsanto to come after, although i do take your point in principle.

On the subject you mention here, I wrote the following elsewhere earlier today and hope that I don't unduly try your patience or anyone else's here by reproducing it in extenso, as follows:

If these events can be contained within the areas specifically affected by what might be regarded as dodgy mortgage lending and unwise and unscrupulous buying and selling of mortgage loans, then the international stock and money markets might indeed be able to withstand the effects, albeit not without the immense cost of vast cash injections from international banks in a desperate effort to contain it. The problem seems, however, to be twofold. Firstly, if too many of these banks try too hard for too long to prop matters up by means of such cash injections, they may risk weakening themselves to the point of possible collapse (and, of course, some of these banks have themsleves been implicated directly as well as indirectly in the dodgy mortgage market). Secondly - and potentially far more seriously - if this eventually spirals to accommodate similar problems associated with other personal debt, then corporate debt and finally national and international government debt, there is a very real risk that there may be no likelihood of recovery or escape from it at all, for few if any nations today are other than gravely indebted to one another. If this second scenario arises, the differences between the present woes and those of 1929 will soon become far more uncomfortably apparent than the similarities; at the same time, there will almost certainly be currency and equity speculators at the ready to make a killing out of it all when it finally hits rock bottom, just as has always been and no doubt always will be the case. The old chestnut "as safe as the Bank of England" - never one realistically to encompass watertight and unassailable credibility at any time - is now looking ever-increasingly as dodgy as the international sub-prime mortgage market itself.

I just wonder now how soon it may be before it becomes possible (and then maybe even almost compulsory!) to purchase and retail dodgy mortgage deals - and eventually even the lenders themselves - by the crateload on eBay...

Best,

Alistair

[soliloquy]

I gotta say, Sam Adams is better than any of the UK or german imports atm IMO  I have some friends in Cardiff that tried it and don't drink anything else now.

And @ alistair, I'm no economist so it's probable that I'm speaking out of my ass, but do you really think that a certain percentage (a low percentage I might add) of mortgage deals, which each can hardly be considered any part of macroeconomics, will really have such an effect on exchange rates and other items that could effect the international economy of the USA?  If so, could you maybe elaborate a bit more as to how these "cash injections" from various banks are going to cause them to crash?  Or was the emphasis of your post more on "if this eventually spirals to accommodate similar problems associated with other personal debt, then corporate debt and finally national and international government debt"?

Oh and you're not gonna come to chat? 

[pianistimo]

interesting, alistair. truly.  i believe the same.  houses have been languishing here because banks have made getting loans here harder for the average first-time homebuyer.  the interest rates are awful for anyone with moderate to poor credit.  it's a shame that we can't have any sort of trust between bank and consumer - but you are right...debt is the problem.  i don't pretend to understand what the banks do with these dodgy deals (but i believe you) - and perhaps our homes are now owned by foreign investors.  perhaps they are waiting to just move in?  strange to think of.

[ahinton]

And @ alistair, I'm no economist so it's probable that I'm speaking out of my ass, but do you really think that a certain percentage (a low percentage I might add) of mortgage deals, which each can hardly be considered any part of macroeconomics, will really have such an effect on exchange rates and other items that could effect the international economy of the USA?

Improbable as such a thing might seem (and it might have seemed at least as improbable to me as to almost anyone else until very recently), what's called the "trailer-trash mortgage market" over here, whilst not necessarily of such great significance in its own right, has now assumed an importance grossly disproportionate to what it should have, purely because of the manner and extent of arrangements where financial institutions have bought and sold such deals en bloc to the point where they are now exposing themselves to risk that might in some cases be too great to exonerate them from the possibility of Chapter 11 and, when enough cases of that occur, the effect on deals between them and foreign institutions will serve only to exacerbate the situation still further. Debt and the buying and selling of debt (from individual personal loans to massive international governmental borrowings) is a big industry worldwide and, when things get parlous in one place on a not especially large scale, much else that is directly or even indirectly connected therewith risks getting drawn in to the point at which the rapid knock-on effect can very soon become wholly disproportionate to the realtively small-scale events that spark it off.

If so, could you maybe elaborate a bit more as to how these "cash injections" from various banks are going to cause them to crash?

I didn't say that it necessarily would, in any or all cases, but the risk is nevertheless increasingly great for several reasons. If banks throw massive tranches of money at this problem in the hope that this will make the problem go away, their own ability to lend money (an activity on which every bank depends for its survival in the good times) will thereby be severely compromised, thus increaing the risk that more and more lenders may want - or find themsleves forced - to call in their loans in case they otherwise go bust. Also, if such banks make themselves ever shorter of ready cash so that they have less to lend, industries that depend on their lending will suffer, thereby causing higher unemployment as a consequence of enforced lay-offs of labour and this will in turn reduce both their ability to produce (thus denting their export market revenues) and their means to buy imports (thus denting the economies of the countries from which they would otherwise import).

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

victory gardens.  the way to go.  eat tomato sandwiches and survive the next crunch. whatever multitudinous directions it happens to go all at once.  remember your grandparents.  they used to save money in jars and bury near the old tree in the backyard.  save stamps.  eat hay.  i don't know.  they just made due and didn't buy so much stuff. perhaps that is part of the problem. we expect too much.

although, just buying the basics can put a person under.  our refrigerator and stove decided to lose parts recently and ended up being $300.  our van $700. and now - THE DISHWASHER. i could scream.

[cmg]

although, just buying the basics can put a person under.  our refrigerator and stove decided to lose parts recently and ended up being $300.  our van $700. and now - THE DISHWASHER. i could scream.

You have someone coming into your home three times a day just to wash dishes?  Really, pianistimo, that's so decadent!  How much do you pay this person? 

[pianistimo]

cmg, if i needed a third person here - i'd have to be a quadraplegic.

[ahinton]

victory gardens.  the way to go.  eat tomato sandwiches and survive the next crunch. whatever multitudinous directions it happens to go all at once.

Five gold stars to anyone here that can succeed in extricating as much as a millilitre of sense out of any of that...

remember your grandparents.

What's this to do with anything?

they used to save money in jars and bury near the old tree in the backyard.

Really! The good people of PA are indeed a strange lot if this is to be believed.

save stamps.

And the relevance of philately here is...?

eat hay.

Try finding any of that stuff in UK after our exceedingly wet summer...

i don't know.

AH! SENSE AT LAST!!!

they just made due and didn't buy so much stuff. perhaps that is part of the problem. we expect too much.

All I expect of you, Susan, is that you make sense in English - or rather that is what I hope for rather than expect...

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

alistair, i rather doubt you've ever met any woman in your life that made 'sense' to you.

[ahinton]

alistair, i rather doubt you've ever met any woman in your life that made 'sense' to you.

Why do you doubt that? - that is to say, based upon what evidence? We have not yet met and I'm pretty much 100% certain that you have never met any woman that I have ever known (put your Bible away, Susan, lest YOU risk misconstruing MY intended meaning of "known" here!). Anyway, to simplify matters and give you an honest and correct answer, you are quite wrong, for I have indeed met many that do.

That said, I cannot perceive what this has to do with anyone's level of patriotism; can you?

Best,

Alistair