tooner

agreed, i don't mean stuck with blinders on...talking about the "good ol' days", i think it happens to everyone at some point though when times have changed enough that a younger person's point of view is far enough askew from our own that the urge to "tell 'im like it really is" kicks in

yeah late 20's, but i think a lot of it has to do with the age of the person you are telling to pipe down. i would say it could be any age if the person you are talking to is 5-10 years your junior, we just start realising in our late 20's

Maybe it did break then, but if that's the sound of it, then it continues to happen all the way down including when he's back in mid-air, so probably not. Sounds like McConkey died from the other big thing (beside hitting the cliff with your parachute deployed) failing to deploy in time. mcConkeys ski fouled the parachute as he deployed it, so it tangled his 'chute

on the first impact, is that the sound of his leg cracking? fucking hell if so.......although "Noooooooooo, wump 'CRACK'..." did make me giggle base jumping is dangerous business, sadly Shane McConkey died this winter doing a stunt this year in a ski film, skies off a cliff and the skiis are supposed to eject and he base jumps to the ground........nope, one ski failed to fully eject and ended up fucking the parachute up........dead ski star.

slumdog mill-onaire.......damn danny boyle is an awesome director

i am in utter shock at writing this but i'd have to agree with.........D....a......nn...y......B on this, most of the postings (with the exception of the one about beheading) listed were not terribly offensive and didn't use any slurs, you could tack c**t onto the end of anything french german english canadian. thing with censorship is once you start you have to continue for everyone then, and if that happens where do you stop? just my 2 cents, and i know it's your board and i don't envy the position of being a mod. Don't think it's censorship in the slightest, it looks to me that Stevie has been asked to tone it down (unbeknown to the rest of us) for quite some time and a bloke of Stevie's age and intelligence ought to have taken the hint. From where I sit the situation is this: Stevie is one of the more entertaining posters, but who also has a dark side , but then again it is the 'dark' side that makes him worthwhile. Tricky one. i was commenting on the fact that they were running stevie through an extra filter. not about whether his ban was justified, not for me to say. if you are going to warn him then i say let him post whatever he wants if it is deemed unacceptable then see ya later

i am in utter shock at writing this but i'd have to agree with.........D....a......nn...y......B on this, most of the postings (with the exception of the one about beheading) listed were not terribly offensive and didn't use any slurs, you could tack c**t onto the end of anything french german english canadian. thing with censorship is once you start you have to continue for everyone then, and if that happens where do you stop? just my 2 cents, and i know it's your board and i don't envy the position of being a mod.

Oops have I upset you by picking on your friend? Diddums. Shut up you soft shite, He's loving it, aye aal lasses love it up 'em! hahaha clearly this "is soccermom really soccerdad" issue is getting to you.........no offense intended just having a laugh

soccermom trying to pass off pic of herself as Wacky?

i worked on a transit project as a student where the buses where outfitted with a strobe on top that would activate the same switches that police and ambulances use to change lights in their favour. the electrical engineer on the project said he could make me one if i bought the gear, hahaha can't imagine the 5-0 would like it too much though. i wonder if there is anything online, like blueprints for such a thing?....hmmmm

It's a tricky issue though. Look at that guy the USA had in Guantanamo, because they were sure he was a major leader of the Taliban forces in the border regions. They couldn't make much stand up legally and didn't know what to do with him, so they sent him to back to Afghanistan and they then released him. He's now the leader of Taliban forces attacking (and killing) British troops in Helmand province. Although this will undoubtedly incense some of the usual suspects, law does often fail to punish the guilty and/or protect the innocent..... but that is how it has to be (although it'd stand a better chance without muppets in charge that don't understand the concept of a briefcase or a folder). Don't even think that bloke complaining about UK intelligence being complicit in his torture was remotely 'innocent' either fwiw. Not saying that makes torture alright or whatever btw. More than 10% of people released from there have gone back into active terrorism/combat roles, probably a much, much higher percentage were in terrorism/combat roles even if it couldn't be legally upheld. Having said that there's been a lot shocking issues with genuinely innocent people there too. But that's why I think Obama is going to have the same issues eventually, unless he can keep the media off the massive new Afghan US prisons he's building to replace Guantanamo (which he has done so far). We (the west) cannot detain people indefinetly, torture them to get "confessions" and then feign surprise when they are released and they turn to terrorist organizations. FFS if anyone had been contemplating joining a terrorist organisation because of percieved injustices/immoralities of western culture, and that person was then apprehended and incarcerated indefinetly while being tortured and de-humanized. I would surmise that any humming and hawing about whether to join Osama and the boys would be thrown out the fucking window. Any sort of cloak and dagger tactics used by the west only weakens our view that we have the 'model democracies' nations should follow as a proper society. IMO a civil society must ALWAYS take the high ground and treat those (especially the ones that act out terrorist attacks) as we would want to be treated, a fair and timely trial as per the rules we have set out for our own citizenry, and if found guilty lock them away. Anything different would be hypocritical. Except it's not that, it's (in that 10%) people going back to what they were doing before. (much like the fella leading the Taliban in Hellmand - he wasn't some grocer wrongly accused that suddenly and utterly inexplicably got command of 1/3 of the Taliban when he was released because he was a bit pissed off ). The fact is a lot of the people in there are very dangerous, but can never be (successfully) prosecuted in a court of law (which takes nothing away from the people that were innocent - and there were plenty). Which leaves a bit of a no win situation. The big irony is that Obama is following the same course as Bush (he'll be doing it in Afghanistan not Cuba and hoping no one catches on, plus he has arguably more legal deniability there). Fair enough, I would suspect that they have given the taliban and al Qaeda even more willing fodder for the fight against the infidels. The prison in Afghanistan had already been operating throughout the conflict, so i don't know if you can place the blame on Obama here, although i guess he would have to close the prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan to totally absolve himself of any hypocrisy, which isn't probable or feasible

It's a tricky issue though. Look at that guy the USA had in Guantanamo, because they were sure he was a major leader of the Taliban forces in the border regions. They couldn't make much stand up legally and didn't know what to do with him, so they sent him to back to Afghanistan and they then released him. He's now the leader of Taliban forces attacking (and killing) British troops in Helmand province. Although this will undoubtedly incense some of the usual suspects, law does often fail to punish the guilty and/or protect the innocent..... but that is how it has to be (although it'd stand a better chance without muppets in charge that don't understand the concept of a briefcase or a folder). Don't even think that bloke complaining about UK intelligence being complicit in his torture was remotely 'innocent' either fwiw. Not saying that makes torture alright or whatever btw. More than 10% of people released from there have gone back into active terrorism/combat roles, probably a much, much higher percentage were in terrorism/combat roles even if it couldn't be legally upheld. Having said that there's been a lot shocking issues with genuinely innocent people there too. But that's why I think Obama is going to have the same issues eventually, unless he can keep the media off the massive new Afghan US prisons he's building to replace Guantanamo (which he has done so far). We (the west) cannot detain people indefinetly, torture them to get "confessions" and then feign surprise when they are released and they turn to terrorist organizations. FFS if anyone had been contemplating joining a terrorist organisation because of percieved injustices/immoralities of western culture, and that person was then apprehended and incarcerated indefinetly while being tortured and de-humanized. I would surmise that any humming and hawing about whether to join Osama and the boys would be thrown out the fucking window. Any sort of cloak and dagger tactics used by the west only weakens our view that we have the 'model democracies' nations should follow as a proper society. IMO a civil society must ALWAYS take the high ground and treat those (especially the ones that act out terrorist attacks) as we would want to be treated, a fair and timely trial as per the rules we have set out for our own citizenry, and if found guilty lock them away. Anything different would be hypocritical.

they will once the oil is all gone well, the oil and the weapons of mass destruction, right... right? you watch too much CNN if it was only WMD's we'd have never gone in the first place (well Iraq anyway), as for Afghanistan it was a knee jerk reaction to Osama and the boys.....sort of like Clinton blowing up the pharmaceutical factory in Kenya or Tansania or where-ever. my point is that exporting democracy (or at the very least the freedom to choose your legislative body) is one thing but to export western ideals is quite another. (again I DO NOT support the proposed law, i DO support the right to make up their own minds about it)

they will once the oil is all gone

damning evidence to be sure

uhhhhhhh!!!!!????? I thought this was the FUNNY pictures thread?

It's his career. I don't think he actually gives a fuck about any of his "causes", they are just a means to $$$'s for him. That's pure bollocks Fopper and you have nowt to back it up. Nothing except Portugal. ok alright I'll bite........what happened in Portugal?

The whole issue was nothing of the kind. We need to get out, the country is ungovernable. Was the issue not to get the Taliban out and reinstate something which more resembled the old (pre-soviet invasion) Afghan leadership....only with democracy? Agreed we should get out, it's obvious we (the west) are NOT on the same page as the afghanies

Rape law hurting efforts to sell NATO role in Afghanistan: NATO chief Last Updated: Saturday, April 4, 2009 | 12:17 AM ET Comments18Recommend8CBC News A controversial law in Afghanistan that includes a provision making it illegal for a Shia Muslim woman to refuse to have sex with her husband is making it more difficult to boost NATO troop levels in Afghanistan, the secretary general of the alliance says. "How can I defend — or how can the British government defend, the Canadian government, the Dutch government — that our boys and girls are dying there in the defence of universal values," Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said at the NATO summit at Strasbourg, France. "And you see a law almost coming into effect… that fundamentally violates women's rights and general human rights, then I have a problem." U.S. President Barack Obama wants to beef up the alliance's role in the conflict. But NATO allies have been reluctant to commit significant new ground troops to the war effort. Afghan Ambassador Omar Samad has said the Afghan government is studying the law, which has sparked international outrage, to determine its status, and has pleaded for patience and understanding. Canada and other nations have expressed strong concerns about the legislation, which would also make it illegal for a woman to leave the house without her husband's permission, or have custody of children. "This is extremely alarming and it's troublesome for a lot of the allies," Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon said. But Cannon questioned whether any such Afghan law "was adopted in the legitimate way and manner" of Afghanistan's national assembly. Cannon said two of Karzai's ministers pleaded ignorance this week, and the ambassador to Canada has been called in for an explanation Ok, so the question I have is......do we have a right to be questioning the democratic legislation of laws that reflect different cultural values than our own? The whole issue was to institute a democratic state back into Afghanistan, we assumed (hahaha) that the result would be a mirrored image of western democracies, but what we failed to recognize is that the people voting and running for office have a different set of core values than our own. What do you think?

giant brass balls on ol' George http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/04/03/...e-galloway.html

i think the impetus behind the subtitles was that they (the writers) were afraid of losing some viewers because of the writers strike. made it much easier to follow, not sure if they are still doing as I haven't been able to see the hour before for the last couple of weeks.

Body of Lies......nothing special.

Depends on the circumstances!! How about you get off here, go sit next to her, put your arm around her, hand on her knee, interject with your own stories about things you've done together, throw in a story about your wedding. ffs piss on her leg if you have to. Get your message across to both of them. tell her to pop the kettle on and when she leaves the room be as frosty as fuck with the cheeky twat til he feels so uncomfortable he has to leave. hAHAHAHA........ ........that'll get her attention for sure.

question for those in the UK/europe....... are the networks televising two episodes every night? they have been playing the last weeks episodes with the "Lost for Dummies" subtitles explaining the relevance of the scene. Then when that one is over they play the current episode.