Weebl

John Berger - novelist and art critic, b. 1926 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Berger Eric Brown - world record holding pilot, b. 1919 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Brown_%28pilot%29 Either of these names ever been mentioned on here before?

Something like that. At the end of the day, there's more support amongst the public for left wing policies than there is for right wing ones. Look at Jeremy Corbyn for example, he got voted Labour leader and lots of people love him Well, you know how it is.We do love a well to do middle class lentil eating cunt, who has barely worked a single day in his life, leading the country ahead of an old Etonian, eh. Funny how the Labour party started as the party of working people (i.e. labour, as in work) and ended up being the party of choice for benefits scroungers (i.e. those who don't work). The irony which party would you vote for? I wouldn't even bother. Complete waste of time.

Something like that. At the end of the day, there's more support amongst the public for left wing policies than there is for right wing ones. Look at Jeremy Corbyn for example, he got voted Labour leader and lots of people love him Well, you know how it is. We do love a well to do middle class lentil eating cunt, who has barely worked a single day in his life, leading the country ahead of an old Etonian, eh. Funny how the Labour party started as the party of working people (i.e. labour, as in work) and ended up being the party of choice for benefits scroungers (i.e. those who don't work). The irony

Or look at the SNP in Scotland. Totally left wing there and there's no appetite in Scotland for any right-wing policies at all. So left wing socialists will be all lovey dovey towards Halibuts and immigrants, and as soon as anyone decides to grow a pair and suggests some masculine, nationalistic ideas, they basically get called a fascist and told to fuck off. The West is doomed because its politicians are a bunch of complete pussies. Masculine men aren't even represented in politics.

Something like that. At the end of the day, there's more support amongst the public for left wing policies than there is for right wing ones. Look at Jeremy Corbyn for example, he got voted Labour leader and lots of people love him

Remember you do have a finite number of nutters. Just a question about size. It may feel like an infinite number but each and every one of us is an individual who has the sum number of beliefs. Now you pose the idea of having a racist state that excludes all Halibuts? I ask you. Would it not be easier, to allow for fundermentalists to be allowed a "state" of their own that excludes all those who do not believe in such nonsense, so that they can do whatever they want and not be allowed to trouble everyone else? Round them up, put them in a (field) high walled, half distroyed city in Syria, and... If they don't behave... (Bomb the bastards) It wouldn't work in practice... The bleeding heart liberals have basically fucked up everything in the West. As soon as you suggest tackling the source of a problem like this, you get called a racist. So there's no point in even engaging with the cunts

You can't really solve the problem of terrorism when you have an effectively infinite supply of these nutters willing to blow themselves up for the cause. You can't ban an idea. The only way to really solve Islamic terrorism in the West would be to have a racist state that excluded all Halibuts. But no one's really willing to do that because multiculturalism is a sacred cow. People die because of the effects of multiculturalism, yet it's not socially acceptable to suggest that letting millions of Halibuts and other third worlders into the West might not have been a good idea. Anyway, the world would definitely be a better place not just without Islam, not just without the Abrahamic religions, but without religion in general.

I guess that's good news for him and his family. All of the interviewees in the report seem quite optimistic (perhaps overly optimistic) about his prognosis, so we can be reasonably sure that he'll at least make the starting line in 2016 (and he's not a dead cert next year either).But despite all the optimism, an inoperable cancer in the brain usually presents significant challenges for the oncologists (due to the importance and sensitivity of the brain and the blood-brain barrier), so he could still be considered for the main list. At his age, and being such a high-profile figure, he shouldn't be considered for the list, he IS on next year's list, and likely at #1 position. Well, I do agree that he should be put on the list. But since I'm a polite guy, I formulated my position as a suggestion rather than as a demand. After all, it lies with the honourable DeathList committee to decide who should and shouldn't be on the list. I was just a little worried that they might be dissuaded from including him by the prognoses of the (renowned but likely cautiously optimistic) cancer specialists in the article. E. g. Basically, what she's implying is while his condition is likely incurable, he might still have a life expectancy of one to two years (as opposed to just months). The operative word being 'might'.

Pretty obscure little band right there...

I guess that's good news for him and his family. All of the interviewees in the report seem quite optimistic (perhaps overly optimistic) about his prognosis, so we can be reasonably sure that he'll at least make the starting line in 2016 (and he's not a dead cert next year either). But despite all the optimism, an inoperable cancer in the brain usually presents significant challenges for the oncologists (due to the importance and sensitivity of the brain and the blood-brain barrier), so he could still be considered for the main list. At his age, and being such a high-profile figure, he shouldn't be considered for the list, he IS on next year's list, and likely at #1 position.

Delors would be a good choice for the 2016 list

I'm going to go for Zsa Zsa this time. Because if the DL can break records (15+ deaths this year is a distinct possibility and indeed likely), then it's time for change. She has to die someday, and as I was saying in her thread, it's truly amazing how long she's lasted. Let's see if she can bring us into a new era.

Zsa Zsa really is an enigma. Will she ever die? Did the posters who created this thread back in 2005 really think she'd still be alive as of November 2015? She really is one for defying mortality itself...

Don't take him off next year's list. He'll be 95 next year and he has to go sometime. That being said he does seem in pretty good shape for his age, but at that age they can just drop dead any time pretty much, even if they appear healthy

There wasn't that much made of his death in the media, despite his work with big name musicians like Bob Dylan and Johnny Cash. Shame... Anyway, how is Bob Dylan's health doing? He's 75 next year, does anyone have a clue?

I sincerely doubt it! I think the chances of him making it to 2016, on the other hand, are good. In which case, he should be very high on the DL 2016, but of course he will be anyway unless he dies before then, which is a distinct possibility.

My guess: 20 April 2016

There are many worthy names on that list, and it's a good list, but maybe there are too many American people on it and not enough from elsewhere

I already suggested Michael of Romania in the ideas and possibilities thread but I was told he was too obscure a figure...

Good spotting for I.M. Pei! An obviously notable person born in 1917 should definitely be on next year's list, without doubt. It was bad enough not having Sir Nicholas Winton on this year's list - what a stupid miss that was

Whereas all of our lives are enriched for having the Pornogrind thread you started. Unless you're trying to be ironic, that's a bit rich coming from you. Thanks DevonDeathTrip. I've had a look at the other thread. Some prog-type musicians are mentioned, but one of the biggest prog deaths of 2015, Chris Squire, is not mentioned at all in that thread. So people are saying we already have a thread for prog musicians, but it isn't being used to discuss some of the most important deaths relating to the subject? Crazy. I've lurked on DeathList since 2006. I'm not really that new to this site at all.

Thanks for the replies. I'm thinking if this thread does get kept, the title should definitely be changed to "Close To The End" - much more appropriate! Would any mod/admin be able to do that? Thanks.

Point taken. Lock / merge / delete this thread if we already have a thread on the subject...

I've lurked here for a long time but assumed that thread was only for Pink Floyd members, without ever really reading right through it

If it's unnecessary, then which other threads that already exist cover the subject matter appropriately?