🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2nng3bF2msf7U1@uni-berlin.de>, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Phred <ppnerkDELETETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote
>in message news:2nmtptF24erhU1@uni-berlin.de...
>> <telford@xenon.triode.net.au> wrote
>>> Phred <ppnerkDELETETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>  _ <_@_._> wrote:
>
>> >>>FTA section 17.9.14
>> >>>
>> >>>     Each Party shall endeavour to reduce differences in law and practice
>> >>>     between their respective systems, including in respect of
>> >
>> >> Fair enough.  But why does this mean we have to accept *their* system?
>> >> If ours is so much better, then why not insist *they* adopt ours?
>> >> Why do the Labor Party flunkies and fellow travellers have so little
>> >> faith in Australian talent and competence?
>> >
>> >Because they have lived under the thumb of John Howard for so long.
>> >
>> >Everything John Howard does is designed to generously donate
>> >Australian resources to the USA. He blindly followed the US into
>> >Iraq, he smugly looked the other way when prisoners were being tortured,
>> >and he offers a trade agreement that took less than one day to get better
>> >than a 90% majority as it passed through US Congress. You have to think
>> >that we could have asked for a bit more when it got through Congress so
>> >easily... would should have asked for a hell of a lot more.
>> >
>> >I have plenty of confidence in Australian talent and competence,
>> >but not much confidence in our present government showing any sign
>> >of acting in Australia's interest. Australia is desperately in need
>> >of a real leader.
>
>> Well, I have to agree with the last.
>
>I dont. Pollys are nowhere near as important as they 'think' they are.
>
>You can make a case of one of those in desperate situations,
>like say the great depression or a world war, but we dont need
>one in the current situation and there aint any available anyway.

Yeah, I wasn't really thinking of the "desperately" when I responded, 
more just the "real leader".  Mind you, even there our Johnny is the 
ace of spades compared with that bloke up with which the yanks have to 
put. ;-)  [Of course they might soon have a choice of 57 varieties.]

>And lets not forget that Churchill was widely regarded as an
>incompetant buffoon, for very good reasons, before the war.
>And the poms gave him the bums rush very unceremoniously
>indeed once the war had ended too.
>
>> But I don't see us getting one with Mark "Rusty" Latham -- he
>> sounds too much like a cross between a real estate agent and a
>> used car salesman for mine, with a bias  towards the car dealer.
>
>Yeah, just another fuckwit polly.
>
>Not that little johnny is all that much better on that.
>
>The main thing in Howards favour is that he did at least have
>the balls to put the GST to the vote. Unique, world wide. Tho
>that was mostly because he had painted himself into a corner
>and didnt have much choice on that after his 'never ever'
>
>> >>>     differences in determining the rights to an invention, the prior art
>> >>>     effect of applications for patents, and the division of an
>> >>>     application containing multiple inventions. In addition, each Party
>> >>>     shall endeavour to participate in international patent harmonisation
>> >>>     efforts, including the WIPO fora addressing reform and development
>> >>>     of the international patent system.
>> >
>> >> Anyway, any bureaucrat worth his textra pen knows that "shall
>> >> endeavour" means nothing need happen before the apocalypse.
>
>>> Nothing *need* happen, but if Howard gets back in, he *wants*
>>> nothing more than to hand our livelihoods over to US corporations.
>
>> Whatever faults Howard has, what you say there is crap.
>
>Yep, that fool 'telford' has always been a silly little fuckwit.

Cheers, Phred.

-- 
ppnerkDELETE@THISyahoo.com.INVALID