Otta

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Otta, I have lights, My bad, I thought you'd said you didn't.

LD I am reassured that your helmet cam would capture the gormless look on my face as you hit me when I stepped out in front of you because I didn't see you coming on a dark night. It doesn't actually matter how good a cyclist or aware you are.

I was about to say this thread is unbelievable, but it's actually classic EDF and I can no longer tell whonis winding who up. But for what it's worth, if you ride a bike at night with no lights you're a feckin moron. I'm a pedestrian that has shit eyesight, why shouldn't you have to have lights on your bone breaking machine so I can see you coming when I'm crossing a road? Or should I just stay indoors after dark?

Are the outraged really outraged or just taking the piss? I really hope they're taking the piss, else my faith in people will slip that bit further.

I like some of it too. Not the black walls though, that hasn't been a cool idea in my head since I was 14.

Says the complete hypocrite who will be giving his daughter THAT dress on her birthday tomorrow. I hate myself so much right now.

And that's the problem with the term "feminist", way too many opinions (all valid) using the same umbrella term. The arse wiggle and sexy dress thing was pointed outt to me by someone that would most def describe herself as a feminist. Foe me personally I just think the age range of the target audience makes it more worrying. Of course we should encourage girls to be what they want to be, we just don't necessarily have to tell them at that age that their heroes are nearly all dress wearing slim princesses.

Saffron Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'll be curious to see if her family take any > opportunity to use this tragedy to promote > awareness about addiction and addiction support. I'm not sure I'd want to really dwell on it if I was them. It's not like her dad hasn't done his bit for altruistic awareness / money raising.

Send your mrs and she can earn a few quid whilst you cook dinner. Sorted.

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I first posted the following on the "Tiny Little > Things That Cause You Irrational Rage". However, > it was suggested that this was neither a "Tiny > Little Thing" nor was it "irrational". So here it > is on a new thread: > > People who feel that it's right to share on > Facebook etc horrific photos of people in war > zones such as Gaza with their faces blown off or > lying in bits and pieces. I've had to "unfriend" > someone who did this the other day. > > This is insulting to the relatives and friends of > the victim who probably didn't give permission for > this and who will probably be horrified to have > the photo spread throughout social media. It is > also insulting to compassionate and adult people > who will probably agree with the poster that the > conflict that led to the photo is awful but who > are savvy enough to know that, unlike in a > computer game, a body that is hit by a bomb > doesn't just fall over and lie there but is likely > to be blown to pieces. We can use our imagination > and have got past the stage of accepting that when > Jerry the Mouse flattens Tom with a frying pan, > Tom will re-emerge totally unscathed in the next > scene. > > In fact I would go further and call it atrocity > porn. I see your point, but I wonder if we're a bit sensitive here. I was leafing through a Fremch magazine on a flight last year and there were koads of graphic photos like you describe, and others of women hanged by extremists and stuff. I don't know, bit I suspect these magazines don't seek permission to use the images. There is also the argument that the harsh reality of it on social media will force the world to take notice of of what is going on (especially Americans). I don't like to see them but I'm not sure where I stand on it.

I see Liverpool's bid for Remy has collapsed, apparently due to issues with his medical. That's a real shame (as well as a worry for him!). We'd best get a striker in ASAP!

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Drogba will be back up for Costa. He won't play > every match or do many 90mins stints, but he'll > get Chelsea a dozen or so goals which is more than > their strikers managed last season...the reason > why they didn't win the league. On current > standing I'd have them as favs to win the > league... This! No one thinks Drogba has been brought in to be number one. And next summer I expect them to bring another striker in.

I reckon Lukaku will go to Everton and Drogba is a stop gap will Jose looks for a new front man. Pretty surprised Torres isn't leaving.

I don't want to be the drunk girl's dad! (although I know that's on the cards down the line)

I miss having drunk girls in my life.

Drogba back at Chelsea is interesting. Think he'll do well again.

Made me think of the attached.

I must admit I felt a little bit weird giving my wife a bottle with another woman's name on the other day. But I figured better that than just teling her she had to go without.

I've recently read these books and after the first one struggling with flow at times, I have loved them more and more, and now can't wait for the next installment due out in November http://www.the-folly.com/books/ I have both read and been told by a copper friend that they are very accurate on police procedure. They tell you loads of stuff about London, and they're full of magic. Bloody great! But I know of a couple of people that gave up on book one, and I considered it at one point, but VERY glad I got through it (and it had a satisfying ending in it's own right, just dragged in the middle).

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > " So what exactly do you want to hear? Seriously." > = " come up with your solution then " tactic . > > I'm interested in hearing about and discussing > issues that relate to the bid for a new secondary > school in the area . > > And yes I'm serious ,can't think what gave you the > impression that I was joking ? > > But I'm not interested in entering into an > argument solely to justify my right to post on > this thread . Just to clarify, when I said "seriously" I wasn't suggesting that you were in some way joking, I was saying that my question was a serious/genuine one, not trying to wind you up. I just don't know what you and others expect to get from this thread with regards the fraud issue. I've got no probalem with people talking about it, it's interesting to me too. But some people seem to be demanding answers, and I wonder who they expect to give these answers?

Great post NewtwoED. And great quote Loz, reminds me of the old classic "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

So what exactly do you want to hear? Seriously.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Are you having a laugh or what At your posts, yes. > how hard it must be to comprehend chldren are involved here, Yes, they tend to be when we're talking about a school, but you suggesting that the poor victims suffered because this money was meant for them is a nonsense.

Yep, all of Penge is like that, honest guv.

TE44 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dont you mean Gaza situation, but lets not mix up > threads here that have no relation to Habs. Unless I've missed something there is no official name and being as you knew what I was talking about Im happy with my previous description for. the purpose of the post it was part of. And loving the whole "will somebody just think of the children" tactic, but very much doubt any child missed out on anything because of the fraud.