LEaving for OZ

LancelotSA said:
It is often not spelt but said so spelling is something only done infrequently. Even then it is not going to be found in a dictionary so the user would spell it as he thinks. Ask an Aussie to spell the original word and see how they spell it.

Have you lived in the UK with a house full of Aussie house mates? Believe they are under no illusions where it comes from and what it means.
Click to expand...

Do you make this stuff up as you go along? Your housemates were obviously pulling your leg :D
 
You would. Your entire reasoning is based on something Boodles said and that is very vague and does not make sense as discussed in my post earlier and ignored by you...
 
LancelotSA said:
You would. Your entire reasoning is based on something Boodles said and that is very vague and does not make sense as discussed in my post earlier and ignored by you...
Click to expand...

You still cannot provide any proof. The explanation provided by Boodles makes perfect sense. It is common sense. Saffer. Like often in cricket SAF is the abbreviation for South Africa so you just add to it ! Duh!
 
milano said:
You still cannot provide any proof. The explanation provided by Boodles makes perfect sense. It is common sense. Saffer. Like often in cricket SAF is the abbreviation for South Africa so you just add to it ! Duh!
Click to expand...

Duh! And then as asked why not Saffie, or Safs, these are shorter and more in keeping with Aussie dialect?

You are so innocent and naive.
 
LancelotSA said:
Duh! And then as asked why not Saffie, or Safs, these are shorter and more in keeping with Aussie dialect?

You are so innocent and naive.
Click to expand...

LOFL. Cos if it was Saffie you would have said, 'why not Saffer'? It is the same length, count the letters, DUH!
 
SA's in UK are also refered to as saffers...Do they now have to comply with Aussie dialect? You are just TRYING to make it a race issue.
 
marine1 said:
Sorry but do you even live in South africa? Do you have any idea what is actually going on here on a daily basis?
Click to expand...

Yes, but unless I'm missing something, we're not at war. And to say more than 50% of us will be killed in the next couple of years is a bit far fetched.
 
Retro said:
Yes, but unless I'm missing something, we're not at war. And to say more than 50% of us will be killed in the next couple of years is a bit far fetched.
Click to expand...

Yep, doubt it will be 50% of whites.

But more whites will be probably be murdered in the next 10 years than the total number of death in many war zones.
 
Retro said:
Yes, but unless I'm missing something, we're not at war. And to say more than 50% of us will be killed in the next couple of years is a bit far fetched.
Click to expand...

I'm also hoping we don't get killed.:)
There were lots of predictions made pre 1994 as well...
 
Retro said:
Yes, but unless I'm missing something, we're not at war. And to say more than 50% of us will be killed in the next couple of years is a bit far fetched.
Click to expand...

The most sane comment I've found in this thread so far...
 
alf101 said:
I'm also hoping we don't get killed.:)
There were lots of predictions made pre 1994 as well...
Click to expand...

Exactly, and most of those predictions never happened. Crime is REALLY bad at the moment, but it's not necessary to try and make it sound worse than it is with a bunch of silly predictions.
 
Retro said:
Exactly, and most of those predictions never happened. Crime is REALLY bad at the moment, but it's not necessary to try and make it sound worse than it is with a bunch of silly predictions.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking of all the predictions when Nelson got let out of jail in 1990, was still doing National service.
Civil war, yada yada.

18 years ago that was...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X