Jim, thank you for your voice of reason. I abhor the depraved, criminal behavior being advocated on this forum.
On Saturday 21 February 2004 10:30, Jim Elwell wrote: > I was told privately that Chimps Are Cute's previous post was a joke, but > now I'm starting to wonder if that is the case: > > At 21 02 04, 10:32 AM, Chimpsarecute wrote: > >Please be aware that as long as there is ARM (Active Resistance to > >Metrication) there should be ARI (Active Resistance to Imperial). I don't > >like the idea of destroying property that we the taxpayers have to pay > >for. But sometimes you have to take action against those who take action > >against you. Isn't this the new American policy of George Bush? > > Presuming you are serious, Euric, then there are so many fallacies in this > paragraph I hardly know where to start: > > (1) What does the international policy of George Bush (or Bill Clinton, or > Tony Blair, etc.) have to do with local metrication signs? Other than to > serve as a lame excuse for your law breaking? > > (2) Just because a sign is imperial does not mean any one has "taken action > against you." Presumably the signs long predate your concerns with them, > making you the intruder. > > (3) For such mundane things as signs, most people believe democracy is the > appropriate way of making decisions. Are the signs there in contravention > to democratically-chosen alternatives? > > >You might want to take note that the BWMA supports the actions of > >ARM. The only way to fight ARM is with ARI. > > Bovine scat. Analogously, if someone murders your mother, you are justified > in murdering that person? What b.s.! > > I stand by my previous post -- I don't know about where you live Euric, but > I guarantee you that if pro-metricationists start vandalizing colloquial > signage in the USA, it will generate GREATER resistance to metrication. > > Is that your goal? > > Jim Elwell
