NJS

Not a big tome as there are only 12 eps so far and I've only seen 6 but I'm really enjoying Nurse Jackie - its on BBC2/BBC4.

So the real life Jethro Gibbs is a government stooge - what a pisser.

Okay this is about concepts and ground rules more than anything. The first ground rule is that any piss-taking will be taking in good grace. The second is that any request for pics will be fucked off. Background: I haven't been out with anyone for quite a while. Criminal shyness means I was never any good at the cold sell situation of bars/clubs and have only went out in the past with people I've worked with or met through mutual friends. Over the past couple of years I've become a bit lonely and also started to have a sad sense of time running out so I decided that in a bit of a cliched fashion as a new decade was starting I'd try something new and I signed up for an online dating site. Situation: I've now reached the free email exchange with 3 lasses and I went out with one last Saturday and had a really great time and we plan to repeat it either this week or next. I have a good feeling about her and can see at least a decent opening phase. The thing is I'm not sure about "stringing along" the other two. In fact one has hinted about meeting this weekend which I don't mind in theory but what is completely new to me is this "dating more than one person at once" thing. My gut instinct is that its a bit dishonest and I should let the first "relationship" run its course but at the back of mind is the idea that if it say lasts just a month or two could I in good grace call one of the others off the subs bench in any kind of honest way? If I did feel okay about dating two at once should I be honest with the lasses themselves? To be clear there is no way I would start a sexual relationship with more than one at once but that presents its own problem - does the relationship that proceeds naturally to sex first become the automatic "winner"? What if at the back of my mind I liked one of them more but the other one was eager to progress further therefore crossing the line? Does anyone have any thoughts, advice, experiences or just plain mockery? I should also mention that I already have mates who would take the SMO/Wacky approach of telling me to shag them all behind each others backs and not give a shit - not going to happen.

This just shows how stupid you are, the bloke was a strong socialist so he must have either admired or even worked for the Soviets - FFS man - do you realise how wrong that is. Its a classic Daily Mail argument - anyone slightly left wing is a Soviet Commie - as others have said Benn was/is a democratic socialist who believes strongly in franchisement - the fact you know nothing about the bloke but almost call him a traitor sums you up.

Acceptable in what sense? Do I think they should be banned? - no. Do I think they should be arrested? - if non-violent then no. Do I think they are arseholes for doing it - emphatically yes. I have a much bigger problem with the countryside alliance protesting against the ban on fox hunting and would have been happy to see a machine gun response - but that doesn't mean I don't respect their right to actually protest in the first place.

So you think 1m+ protestors were all Iraqis?

I am not suggesting anything. I started off by saying those who abuse and demonstrate against British troops on British soil ought to be chucked out of the country or banged up until they agree to leave. I also said if their sympathies lie with the other country in question, then they should fuck off and fight for them, openly, in uniform unlike the cowardly fucks that they are supporting. There is nothing wrong with that, it is spot on in my view. To date, nobody, including you, has gave me any reason to say differently nor have you gave any reason why they should not do this because they certainly don't belong on the streets of the UK Spot on imo. Thin edge of a wedge - if you say troops are off limits for protests then next you add the royal family - maybe the pope when he comes this year, then maybe its the government that sends the troops - a very slippery slope. I understand theres a gut reaction to protesting troops but that doesn't mean a ban imo as others have said,

Dangerous in what way? As someone who walked through London in July 2005 and who works in the prime target for these "dangerous" people I have to say I don't give the possibilty of any danger a second thought. If you spend your life worrying about shit like that you may as well give up. I'd also ask - if all Muslims were kicked out of the UK tomorrow how would anyone be "safer"?

The right to peaceful protest is enshrined in any decent democracy - do you agree? Is it just that it was soldiers they protested against or the war? - if its the latter then there was a protest involing more than 1m from all "races" at the height of the war - would you bang those up as well?

I still think "corrupting" young Muslims with Western values is our best bet - the only pisser is any clampdowns and attititudes like LM's just encourages them to look inwards and turn more fundamental. aye, sure. If not for people like me they would be happy to integrate into the British community, speak the language and tolerate the customs and not abuse British soldiers on British soil when they return home from a tour of duty. What a load of bollocks. I'm sitting 2 yards from a Turkish lad who drinks (and is now a UK citizen btw) - I've met other Muslims who are bigger fanny rats than I would ever dream of being - the point is about generalisations. You think a few idiots who protest taint an entire community - that's why you're an idiot imo.

The thing is Stevie I've made it clear on here that I abhor organised religion and a lot of the so called morals that go with it - that doesn't mean I judge all Muslims/Christians/Jews as cunts who "don't belong here" which is what LM suggests.

I still think "corrupting" young Muslims with Western values is our best bet - the only pisser is any clampdowns and attititudes like LM's just encourages them to look inwards and turn more fundamental.

Quite old, not bad, but nowhere near the sickest ever. "I used to be a necrophiliiac......" is sicker for starters.

Yep - education is "brainwashing" and "life experience" triumphs over any evidence like all of the examples of civilian casualties or the Snopes thing which proves all the shit about birthrates is utter bollocks but what does that matter. By the way LM enjoyed any good curries lately?

I see what you're saying but maybe Colchester don't play the type of football to suit him? Of course I'm not saying we do, but I think Hughton is flexible enough to use footballers correctly.

Something else I'm behind on - watched the first 2 days but the rest are stacked up.

Obviously a give and take between wanting to do a short term deal and NR knowing that it's a good deal if we do go up so trying to get longer/cheaper.

Better footballer than any of the current squad - would be worth it just to get him to try and teach our "wingers" to cross.

I have some pride in British history and also believe in a community of people sharing common needs and values - that sense of community easily travels over borders though - that's why I'm not blind to some of the shit that Britain has done to other people. I'd also argue that before you say "Muslims don't share British values" that they top polls for lack of crime and respect for law and order and overall are more respectful of authority thatn a shit load of british people - including me. To me, misguided and misled people who are so desperate that they commit acts of terror, though thoroughly and completely wrong, aren't as bad as training people to be experts in covert murder, sending them on missions with no regard to civilians despite what you say, and then building said killers up as heroes who should be admired and looked up to and whose crimes are excused under the guise of patriotism. I see murderers - I don't care whether they are called "Patel" or are wearing a badge with "Who dares Wins" on it.

Just about sums you up - knowledge of any kind, especially of the wider world is mistrusted and abused.

Contradiction in terms in bold.

There was always some stuff about him having some kind of condition which meant he was destined to suffer hamstring problems. I've always been in two minds about him - could/should/sometimes was a very good player but missed too much. I don't think he was helped by the off the field shit of course.

You do get the impression sometimes that the last 2 or 3 centuries have been a worlds biggest cunts competition between the "top 10" or so countries - sadly I still think the UK is the winner overall.

I'd also add that it was either him of Falwell who did say that Katrina was definitely God's wrath for New Orleans' immorality.

Yes but the fuckers love tragedy because it gives them a chance to "do good" and feel good about themselves as well as run a recruitment drive.