Sorry Boaz I must join with David, using a home made website to reinforce your argument is just too hilarious. You are right because somebody else shares your opinion? You could have saved us the page load time by refering to your other posts on the Forum. But thankyou for the good laugh.

David Latimer: "As far as I am concerned, anything you now post is suspect."

Yes, I made the exact same point a couple of weeks ago concerning Boaz's repeated mendacity in this forum [ http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=347#6318 ]. However, in this case, there seems to be a kernel of truth in the ham sandwich beat-up, although this in no way excuses Boaz's execrable exaggeration of the story.

I don't believe anything he writes unless he provides reliable corroborating evidence.

David BOAZ says that Hume Council banned Ham Sandwiches. I checked directly with Hume Council about their ban, and they replied they did not know of any such ban.

I was about to repost on that basis, but will triple-check. I want to follow up on a EVOC loose end to this issue, which may confirm your view. This may take several days.

Apology to BOAZ_David:

On Monday, 22 January 2007 4:20:47 PM, I compained about David BOAZ and the Ham Sandwich myth.

After checking again, further detail was given to me and there is a kernel of truth to this story from 2003. At one time, caterers were given instructions not to include pork at council functions, but the policy was very soon changed so that food was labelled and a variety of different foods are made available.

But this does mean I was wrong and I take back what I said about David BOAZ and apologise for posting it.

As WEST wrote:
"Religion is the problem and it is just as much the Moslems problem as it is everybody else’s problem. The distinction between Islam and other religions is no more the distinction between narcotics. The world can use this opportunity to route out all religion.
Spiritual belief has to be individual, Religious institutions have to go."

Great idea,let's forfeit all landholdings and buildings these religions own and disperse the funds (minus demolishion costs)between setting up of people owned laboratories to do some decent honest research on "people killing pharmaceuticals" and a fighting fund to distroy the chemical companies and sack all bludgers in canberra and grab all or most of paid out retirementfunds from ex-governmentees.
How's that for starters?
West what you are suggesting is very much in the "Globalist Agenda's"
view correct. Very dangerous for people!

ftfnc no I am saying a vulnerable mind believes in god. A god believer is superstitious and institutions ,( I include all types of preaching and advertising here and I include scriptures and religious books ) -institutions prey and manipulate superstitious sensibilities. I am saying that a person is who is superstitious can be left to explore their phantom world peacefully without aggressive input. The Bible , Quran , religious sects and texts including churches and mosques should all be banned. Im not suggesting internment camps or anything like that we have to address religion for waht it is like smoking or drink driving, a health campaign. We should start by making every new Bible and every church door show an photo of an oklahoma bombing victim on the cover and a terror victim on mosque doors with a warning of what religion does to a persons health and the health of others. Later we squeeze out religion through legistlation and taxes. If we want to live in a peaceful world where we can concentrate on important issues we have got to phase out religion. As long as there is somebody stirring up people threatening and motivating them with superstition our species wont survive and conflict will exist as long as we do.