That’s me dead, four times over.
These two paragraphs in the guardian describing, who?
Last year, the British Labour shadow Transportation Secretary even called out XXXXXX for its lack of females, saying that the franchise setting a bad example for girl wannabe train engineers everywhere.
At first blush, XXXXXX and his friends seem rather placid and mild. And there are certainly a lot worse shows in terms of in-your-face violence, sexism, racism and classism. But looks can be deceiving: the constant bent of messages about friendship, work, class, gender and race sends my kid the absolute wrong message.
FFS. Some stupid woman is railing(sic) against the childrens’ programme, “Thomas the Tank Engine”.
I especially loved this comment after the article.
Go and read the drivel HERE.
I really should stop posting “Downfall” vids, but this one says it all about the war against smokers and vapers.
If it just makes readers of this blog realise how they are being duped by the fake charities and public health quangoes, then it’s worth posting these vids.
It makes me despair how many people I know, don’t bother to check the truth in what they’re told. The word “Sheeple” springs to mind.
It would appear that Malaysian airlines flight MH17 may have been shot down by pro Russian separatists. And reportedly admitting it.
Igor Strelkov, the military commander of pro-Russian rebels Donetsky People’s Army, has reportedly admitted that he ordered the missile strike against the Malaysian jet, according to the Kyiv Post.
Obviously he hasn’t bothered to read up on the Geneva convention.
Before 1949 the Geneva Conventions protected wounded, sick, shipwrecked and captured combatants. The “civilians’ convention” recognized the changing nature of warfare and established legal protection for any person not belonging to armed forces or armed groups. The protection also included civilian property. Such protection was later reinforced with the adoption of the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Convention in 1977.
Bastard should be strung up if that’s true.
Anyone able to translate the above into English?
There is a medical distinction in anatomy. We've all heard about people having guts or balls, but do you really know the difference between them?
In an effort to keep you informed, the definitions are listed below:
GUTS - Is arriving home late after a night out with the guys, being met by your wife with a broom, and having the guts to ask: 'Are you still cleaning, or are you flying somewhere?'
BALLS - Is coming home late after a night out with the guys, smelling of perfume and beer, lipstick on your collar, slapping your wife on the bum and having the balls to say, "You're next, Chubby."
I hope this clears up any confusion on the definitions.
Medically speaking there is no difference in the outcome. Both result in death.
We keep hearing from the BBC that the evil Israelis are indiscriminately killing Palestinians en masse.
The video below shows that the Beebs view is sadly biased. As you will see in the video, the Israelis give ample warning that they are going in for the kill.
Where houses have been turned into military targets, the IDF has provided advance warnings to Palestinian residents (so called roof knocking) to leave their houses prior to an attack. This is designed to minimise civilian casualties, rather than maximise them. In any case, targeting civilians would be futile. It would achieve nothing in military terms and hand a massive propaganda victory to Hamas.
Hamas' spokesmen have openly admitted to placing civilians on the rooftops of houses in order to thwart Israeli strikes. Extensive video evidence also shows that rockets have also been fired from heavily built up civilian areas, and command and control centres are located close to residential neighbourhoods. Using civilians as a human shield is a blatant war crime.
It would seem to me that the BBC needs to seriously question Hamas’s claim’s and go about doing some real reporting. Not just rebrand a Hamas press release.
They do not seem to realise that the internet reveals all.
In my last post, Ban it, ban it, I wrote about the abuse of telemarketing on the old and vulnerable.
I also have issues with the various charities that deluge the old and vulnerable with requests for small amounts of money (Why is it always £3?). Of course after they have donated they are then submitted to numerous telephone calls entreating them to up their subscription.
I myself subscribe to a few charities and I have informed them at length that I will cancel my subscriptions if I’m pestered in future.
If they’re that hard up for money then I suggest that they sack their call centre staff and sell the building they’re housed in.