President Jacques Chirac of France stormed out of a European Union summit last night after a French employers' leader said that English was "the language of European business."
The walk-out, seen by Tony Blair, prompted a sheepish exit by the French foreign, finance and Europe ministers and threatened to derail the summit before it had begun.
The officials were meeting to resolve growing concerns regarding several EU countries erecting trade barriers to inhibit cross-border competition.
As I recall, not too long ago the French passed some sort of resolution which outlawed the term "email" in Internet communications because it was English. Chirac's display yesterday is consistent with the email resolution and indicative of French arrogant nationalism and rejection of homogeneity, diversity and integration.
"I have to say I was profoundly shocked to see a Frenchman express himself in English at the (EU) Council table. That's why the French delegation and myself walked out rather than listen to that," Chirac told reporters.
So, it comes down to profound shock that a Frenchman spoke English at an EU meeting. I'd guess Spanish and Arabic would also have been out of the question. Or, maybe not. It could be that he only has a boner for the English language.
1
I'm just trying to remember the last time the French actually did anything constructive for the EU or the world in general ?
Childish arrogance along with constant bitchin and moaning seem to be the norm with the frogs.
Posted by: Mike at March 24, 2006 12:29 PM (g7eZx)
3
Maybe Chirac was just trying to distract attention away from the riots back home....
Posted by: WM at March 24, 2006 12:55 PM (3aCNQ)
4
This story and Olbermann story got me suspicious people are warming up for April 1.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at March 24, 2006 01:34 PM (ffPYG)
5
Caption:
Forgot to put in my teeth this morning and who put that banana in front this mic?
Posted by: Dan at March 24, 2006 01:46 PM (Z2OsI)
6
Chiraq looks like a jerk and stupid as ever why dont they just vote to remove that idiot he is a jerk
Posted by: sandpiper at March 24, 2006 08:58 PM (162Hn)
7
That picture looks like the Simpson episode where the French are gloating about showing the world that they are not a bunch of frogs and then laughing like frogs with their necks bulging.
HON-HON-HON!
Posted by: Apesnake at March 24, 2006 09:56 PM (scKzN)
8
Hi, Chirac did not walked away because M.Seilliere spoke english (Chirac is fluent in english and has certainly no problem with the language!), but because M.Seilliere, who started his speech in french, suddendly turned to english because he said "english is the language for business". English is no more the language of business than french is the language of poetry, or italian the language of arts. Any speech can be given in any language, in other words, a language is not used according to the content of a speech but according to your audience. In this case, the audience was the european council and as far as I know, the very vast majority of attendants don't have english as their mother tongue. All speeches are translated anyway and english was absolutely not necessary. M. Chirac was right to point out this anomaly, but wrong to walk out, he should have said to the audience "Et maintenant, mesdames et messieurs, we are going to hear M.Seilliere speech". That would have had much more impact...
Posted by: Patrick EMIN at March 25, 2006 04:17 AM (BBrfi)
9
Well, I for one like hearing about Chuck "THE HAMMER" Martel. Still seems petty what happened.
Posted by: REMF at March 25, 2006 05:55 AM (7RMSi)
10
I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that more Europeans use English as a second language than other languages. And I think that is the point Seilliere was making. The truth is Chirac has a particular disdain for that very fact. Chirac's behavior implies he is concerned with his own country losing its French identity by adopting idioms not French in origin (as demonstrated with his displeasure over the term "email"), but he must understand that some things are beyond his control. If English does become more widely used as a universal business language anywhere, it's not due to some evil machinations by the US, the Brits or the Aussies. It just simply happened that way. If Seilliere stood up and claimed that German was the language of business, Cirac would have been just as upset.
I would venture to guess that Chirac's "nationalist mood" stems from the same problem we have ourselves here in the US with the wave of Hispanics who don't learn English which threatens our own identity. France is being overrun with the Muslim culture, as well as others, and the lack of assimilation of these into the French culture is what has him riled up. I agree with Patrick that if he's upset over Seilliere's statement that's fine, I don't blame him for wanting to preserve the French identity, but walking out was just another of his tantrums. I think he's even more angry because it was a fellow Frenchman that said it. I don't think Cirac knows what to do about the problems facing his own country culturally and he's just lashing out.
And I just love that picture of him.
Posted by: Oyster at March 25, 2006 06:24 AM (YudAC)
11
"Any speech can be given in any language"
You don't really mean you can talk about decent food in English?
Posted by: Luke at March 25, 2006 06:54 AM (cRuHr)
12
Not just in Europe Oyster, but all over the world, English is generally the de facto language of business among those who do not understand each others' first languages, except in backward places that are still trying to get camel caravans past bandits in the mountains.
In every nation on this planet, someone who speaks English can be found, and this cannot be said of any other language, so English wins. Patrick is just trying to be a multiculti apologist.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 25, 2006 07:10 AM (0yYS2)
13
Such a childish attitude. Not surprising for a 'leader' that pays much more attention to words than to actions....
Posted by: Filou at March 25, 2006 01:16 PM (iO7Nv)
14
"email" isn't the only technical term the French won't use. I used to build systems and do limited Tech Support at a neighbor's computer business that built network systems for neurosurgeons.
One of our customers had just come over from France and could speak english, but he absolutely refused to use 'english' terms that everyone else in the world uses for computer equipment. I can't remember any terms specifically...it's been 8 or so years. I don't know what was worse though, him assuming everyone should use the 'superior' French terms or listening to him whining about how long it took to get anything done.
I think they're just mentally stuck in the 1700's, when french was the equivalent for business and politics as english is today.
Posted by: Ranba Ral at March 25, 2006 01:54 PM (GyNTD)
15
Language is communication. Duh!!! As times and needs change, the sign of a healthy society is one that allows its language to flow with those changes. The french have earned their reputation for being behind the times and impotent in world concerns. (Did anyone else learn in world history class how they lost the homeland to germany during WWII because they cemented their guns into turrets facing the border? Problem was, the germans snuck up from behind! The gunners couldn't defend their position because they couldn't pivot the guns to cover their own backs! And who had to fight and die to liberate them? Well, let's just say, it was a joint effort by people who mostly spoke english. Cemented in! Their brilliance is blinding!!) Their continuing refusal to allow the french vocabulary to expand, even when it means having a stronger position in the world market, is just one more example of their national genius. Maybe the french language will finally lie down and die, living on in other, stronger languages in countries that have maintained enough sense of selfworth to adopt "foreign" phrases into their verbage. Latin anyone?
Posted by: SaphFire at March 26, 2006 10:04 AM (/7O4c)
16
Ha! That picture is practically a fisk in itself.
Don't know why you're complaining, Jack. Arabic will be the official language of Paristine before long. I give it 10 years.
Posted by: MegaTroopX at March 26, 2006 11:53 AM (yT/Rw)
17
Posted by: Oyster at March 25, 2006 06:24 AM
"Any speech can be given in any language"
You don't really mean you can talk about decent food in English?
-----
Whatever the language I'd rather talk about the food in england than the obesity statistics in other places
Posted by: rob at March 26, 2006 03:53 PM (jaQRE)
18
Chrirac would never walk out if the speech was in Arabic, the crazy jihadists will be waiting outside for him with sharpened blades and heavy jackets.
Posted by: MathewK at March 26, 2006 05:55 PM (pVHqF)
19
Chirac would never walk out if the speech was in Arabic, the crazy jihadists will be waiting outside for him with sharpened blades and heavy jackets.
Posted by: MathewK at March 26, 2006 05:55 PM (pVHqF)
20
Chirac is just lose, france is the biggest money money spender in EU. If they want to quit from EU many people will be very happy..
South Park vs. Mission Impossible vs. the Catholic Church
First, Tom Cruise threatened not to promote his new Mission Impossible movie unless Comedy Central (which is owned by Viacom, a sister company to Paramount, which produced Mission Impossible III) agreed not to rerun a South Park episode mocking Scientology.
more...
1
This week's south park spoofs the whole Isaac Hayes/South Park/Scientology controversy.
Posted by: h0mi at March 24, 2006 09:49 AM (YQFEd)
2
I 2nd your "Shenanigans" and raise you a "JewBillie".
I watch South Park on a hit and miss basis. Some episodes are completely stupid, some are offensive, but there are others that are Jewels.
Mecha-Striesand, Rosie O'Donell(sp) and Starvin' Marvin are good examples.
Posted by: Joatmoaf at March 24, 2006 10:15 AM (Vlk3K)
3
Oh NO!
You mean that Tom Cruise won't promote another crappy Hollywood sequel that will never come close to the fantastic workings of the original? Whatever shall we do?! Hollywood might not benefit from its cheap methods of money making, and learn that they have to *gasp* come up with new ideas?
Sure South Park bashed on Scientology, but what religion hasn't it mocked? Matt and Trey have made it clear that they don't oppose any single religion or belief, they just want to harass them all. And the more Scientologists are outraged, the happier Matt and Trey will be, and scientology will find more mockery in store for them.
Posted by: Lee Witt at March 24, 2006 02:01 PM (cWv1e)
4
By refusing to promote his own film, which cost the studio millions, Cruise has put a gun in his mouth and is threatening to pull the trigger. No studio should ever hire him again for such a stupendously stupid act.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 25, 2006 07:17 AM (0yYS2)
5
"No studio should ever hire him again for such a stupendously stupid act."
One can only hope...
Posted by: Darth Chef at March 25, 2006 01:14 PM (uedbm)
6
DANG YOU MAVRIC YOU HAVE BECOME ABSOLUTLY IMPOSSIBLE SINCE YOU GOT YOURSELF INVOLVED WITH THOSE SCIENTOLOGY FREAKS AND JESTERS GOING TO GROUND YOU SUCKER
Posted by: sandpiper at March 25, 2006 02:31 PM (zj1n9)
7
I am Catholic and my brother is a Catholic Priest and we both watch the show with a grain of salt. People like tom cruise is just a person with influence and he wields it very recklessly. Remember mr. cruise what goes around comes around....
Posted by: Paul Labbe at March 25, 2006 03:06 PM (LA1N6)
Winter storm warning now in effect until 6 am cst Tuesday.
The winter storm warning is now in effect until 6 am cst Tuesday.
Expect a mixture of sleet and snow this evening, but changing to all snow after midnight. Early this evening, patchy rain may also occur across extreme southeast nebraska. Snow will continue Monday and Monday night before tapering to flurries early Tuesday. Additional snowfall will range from 8 to 14 inches during this time. The omaha metro area will likely see an additional 8 to 11 inches of snow while the lincoln metro area may receive an additional 10 to 13 inches of accumulation. Northeast winds will also increase to 20 to 30 mph which may produce areas of blowing snow.
A winter storm warning means significant amounts of snow, sleet, and ice are expected or occurring. Strong winds are also possible. This will make travel very hazardous or impossible.
Would one of you kind people please e-mail God and tell him that THE FIRST DAY OF SPRING IS TOMORROW!!!
I'm a little verklempt right now, I may say something I'll regret and end up roasting marshmallows with Mohammed.
1
I am totally upset. Tomorrow is the vernal equinox and my birthday to boot. Grrr!
Posted by: miriam at March 19, 2006 06:57 PM (kHqLn)
2
Here in South-central PA, we are scheduled to get just under an inch of snow on Tuesday. Normally, our temps are about 55 degrees this time of year.
Where is my global warming, Mr. Gore???
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at March 19, 2006 08:30 PM (WOQ34)
3
Don't worry fellas, eventually global warming will take care of snow....
Posted by: Fred Fry at March 19, 2006 09:06 PM (HJnrm)
4
Just returned from walking the pooch, wearing a t-shirt, shorts, and flip flops. Summer has arrived! NA NA NA NA NA NA!
/Damn dog has taken to carrying a rubber chicken in his mouth on his potty walks. I'm so embarrassed. :/
6
I suppose the wild fires will be on hold for a few months now with all this snow, and rain. I am worried about my garden.
Posted by: Leatherneck at March 19, 2006 11:59 PM (UC6hS)
7
I've been running the air conditioning for almost a month now.
Posted by: Oyster at March 20, 2006 05:43 AM (YudAC)
8
Damn, it must suck to not be lucky enough to live in the South. It's a little cool today, but I've spent most of the last couple weeks in a T-shirt. American by birth, Southern by the Grace of God.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 20, 2006 05:50 AM (0yYS2)
9
Aw. Its about 68F right now, should be in the 80s by noon. I'll be thinking about ya Vin.
Posted by: LindaSoG at March 20, 2006 06:13 AM (FKfry)
10
I was too quick to gloat; it snowed and sleeted a bit this morning, and has been raining all day, but should be almost 60 by tomorrow.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 20, 2006 02:28 PM (0yYS2)
Google Sued for Downgrading Website's Search Ranking
(San Jose, California) In the 21st Century equivalent to the smoky back room, Google evaluates websites and assigns a page rank which determines the order of Internet search results. I believe this lawsuit seeks to open the doors to the back room and clear the smoke.
Google has mysteriously downgraded the search ranking of a Web site geared to help parents care for young children, causing a "cataclysmic fall" in advertising revenue and the number of monthly page views, according to a class-action lawsuit filed Friday.
The civil suit by KinderStart.com of Norwalk seeks financial damages and more information about Google's secret method for ranking sites. The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in San Jose, seeks class-action status for other sites that have seen their rankings drop without warning or explanation from the Mountain View search giant.
A Google spokesman told the Associated Press that the company hadn't seen the suit and had no immediate comment.
Since it launched in May 2000, KinderStart.com had built up its traffic to more than 10 million page views a month, the suit says, with much of the traffic coming from Google search users. But in March 2005, page views plunged 70 percent and advertising revenue fell 80 percent and hasn't recovered. KinderStart.com suspects that Google erected invisible barriers that divert consumers elsewhere when they type in a search but says Google will not explain what happened.
The drop-off was so sudden that the Web site suspects Google has a flawed method or blocks sites subjectively despite Google's pledge to provide objective search results.
It will be interesting to see how this case develops. I'd suspect that Google will act to prevent class-action status.
1
There is no basis for this lawsuit. Google can do whatever they want with their servers.
Posted by: tt@tt.com at March 19, 2006 08:47 AM (YiOKT)
2
Google is a publicly traded company and is bound by the laws of the SEC and is liable for any changes they make that aren't made known to their customers. They can't just 'do whatever they want' without being subjected to scrutiny by shareholders as well as their customers. This is what happens when a far-left company tries to establish itself in the corporate world that they despise.
Posted by: slug at March 19, 2006 10:29 AM (USunv)
3
Google's not the only fishy company. See this for technorati weirdness.
Posted by: rightwingprof at March 19, 2006 11:09 AM (hj1Wx)
4
Google indexes web site without any fee, so web sites in google index are NOT CUSTOMERS. If they index for a fee then you can assert that they have customers.
Posted by: phreaseology at March 19, 2006 12:07 PM (adiYH)
5
Whoa, there! What you are talking about is contract rights. A company (or person) that provides a service for some consideration creates implied contract rights. Obviously, there is no specific contract between Google and KinderStart, or the latter would be alleging actual contract violation. But to say that there is an implied contract — that KinderStart has some kind of right or privilege to the way that they are listed on Google's web site — is to say that Google obtained some consideration in exchange for that listing. Otherwise, there is no cause that would support the suit. From what I can see, this should be thrown out without proceeding to trial.
Posted by: Jeff Medcalf at March 20, 2006 09:10 PM (4pYF5)
6
Search engines arbitrarily outright censor (completely suppress) access by their users to web sites they don't like. This is not a “ranking” issue. They also refuse to provide any explanation or describe how a particular “offending” site can be reinstated. Search engine arguments regarding their need for secrecy are largely spurious and allow them to conceal the real reasons behind their censoring of any particular site.
Legally, the issue is whether a search engine is a “publisher” or a “common carrier”. Currently they enjoy the advantages of both and the responsibilities of neither.
See much more extensive discussion of these issues at: http://www.searchenginehonesty.com/
Cock Praises Allah (Audio)
A rooster in the former Soviet republic of Kyrgistan has begun crying out the name of Allah. No doubt a St. Patty's day miracle on par with the latest sighting of the Holy Mother in a tortilla and the oil stain on my driveway in the shape of St. Christopher. This avian miracle is proof that there is no God but Allah, and Muhammed is his Prophet.
1
WTF? sounds like someone is choking his chicken.
Posted by: Howie at March 17, 2006 08:52 AM (D3+20)
2
Time to wring its neck and make chicken soup WE,LL KILL THE OLD RED ROOSTER WHEN SHE COMES
Posted by: sandpiper at March 17, 2006 09:43 AM (D9h75)
3
Does that mean suicide bombers will now come in chicken flavor rather than just the usual pork?
Posted by: Ernie Oporto at March 17, 2006 09:47 AM (/lpvu)
4
And you all wondered what the connection was between chicken shit and Allah. Now you know.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 17, 2006 09:58 AM (rUyw4)
5
Kyrgistan is the home of Bridenapping... No wonder in that country it takes a COCK to praise ALLAH.
Posted by: Steve Sharon at March 17, 2006 10:42 AM (u59WG)
6
Rusty had posted about the Satanic worship of Mulock.
Did you know that our leaders go to Bohemian Grove in California to devil worship?
http://www.infowars.com/video/previews/grove/ood7min_qt.htm
Posted by: Greg at March 17, 2006 12:06 PM (q5wwn)
7
What is the bet, that the rooster will now be treated, and respected better than any women living in their community?
Posted by: davec at March 17, 2006 01:13 PM (CcXvt)
8
Give me a break! And give the rooster a break too. Sounds to me like the rooster is being tortured and those are crys of distress. I heard the rooster call out for Allah, God, Jesus, Krishna or whoever will listen! Poor rooster. Typical, the Muslim scum are compelled to torture something!
Posted by: Hailus at March 17, 2006 01:22 PM (Y2ILH)
9
My cat made the same sounds while coughing up a hairball.
Posted by: CUS at March 17, 2006 01:29 PM (bbXZq)
10
Let me know when a pig starts squealing about Allah. I'd want front frow seats to THAT crisis of faith.
Posted by: Graeme at March 17, 2006 01:49 PM (vmNuO)
11
Let me know when a pig starts squealing about Allah. I'd want front row seats to THAT crisis of faith.
Posted by: Graeme at March 17, 2006 02:08 PM (vmNuO)
12
I always said Mohammed was a cock sucker. *drum roll*
/Oh, Allah! Oh Allah! Oh Allah!
Posted by: Oyster at March 17, 2006 02:28 PM (g9UJq)
14
*tee hee* KILL THE OLD RED ROOSTER WHEN SHE COMES
Oh, that's sick! Ofcourse they don't chop the clitoris off their live stock, like their women, so it is possible. I guess.
A resolution honoring Fonda's volunteer work cruised through yesterday. But many senators failed to realize it was part of a stack of non-controversial efforts all approved with a single vote.
The chairman of the chamber's veterans affairs committee objected, setting up a reconsideration of the honor for the Atlanta resident this morning.
Senator Steen Miles of Decatur says the resolution was one of several Women's History Month measures she has introduced to honor Georgia women. The resolution cites Fonda's work as founder of the Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention, donations to Atlanta-area universities and charities and role as goodwill ambassador with the United Nations.
1
So uh, if someone did something you disagree with politically 40 years ago, that negates the value of their community service in the past decade?
Seems like a rather unamerican standard to appply.
Posted by: Outlandish Josh at March 16, 2006 01:05 PM (iy7v+)
2
Treason isn't politics. perhaps we should have let Tookie pen some more children's books to Josh, eh?
Posted by: davec at March 16, 2006 01:20 PM (CcXvt)
3
Wonder who quietly submitted her name in the state senate?
Posted by: hondo at March 16, 2006 01:58 PM (9pQ6D)
4
Outlandish Josh:
You say:
...if someone did something you disagree with politically 40 years ago, that negates the value of their community service in the past decade?
I say:
Today's community service does not erase yesterday's treasonous acts. Only a child could think like that. I'll bet you don't even know what she did, do you?? I'm right, aren't I? You have no idea what you're talking about...
Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at March 16, 2006 04:47 PM (aH6Zf)
5
That's right, Hondo. Tried to sneak it in? Someone actually tried to slide that one by like pork in the budget. If anyone thought that Fonda had widespread support, then why was it "slipped in"? If Jane Fonda had atoned for what she did or had actually apologized, it might be different. But the only thing she ever apologized for was having her picture taken with the enemy. She was sorry that there was enduring evidence, thats all.
We, as a people, are quite forgiving. People get second chances all the time. We are a country full of second chances, but they have to be sorry first.
Posted by: Oyster at March 16, 2006 08:46 PM (YudAC)
6
No honors for traitors no honors for HANOI JANE the one who sponsored the bill should be censured
Posted by: sandpiper at March 17, 2006 09:57 AM (D9h75)
V for Vendetta Reviewed
Imperial Minister of Pop-Culture, Flea, gets a sneak preview of V for Vendetta after performing certain umentionable acts upon a high-ranking British official to get the ticket. The gist is that Flea may have overlooked the pro-terror plotline if his London neighborhood hadn't been bombed by the ROP, a phone-booth outside a bar he frequents hadn't been bombed by the IRA, and if Natalie Portman would have revealed a little more skin. A million sins forgiven for nude Natalie Portman is our motto du jour.
1
Let's play a little game. How bout instead of paying for V, we all buy tickets to "She's the Man" (the new Amanda Bynes movie) so that gets a better opening weekend than V! You can still walk into V and watch it if you like. But why give them your money.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 16, 2006 11:58 AM (8e/V4)
2
I'm thinking this "V" thing is going to get the moonbats going bigtime. They'll see it as their call to arms to overthrow the "Bush Regime". It also might give terror apologists more ammo. It's going to be a real pain in the ass.
Posted by: Richard at March 16, 2006 12:50 PM (7KF8r)
3
The moonbats think leaving the toothpaste cap off, is a call to arms to overthrow Bush, luckily for us their 'arms' consist of saggy hag breasts, badly spelt signs, inflated testicles and crudely constructed Bush effigies.
Posted by: davec at March 16, 2006 12:55 PM (CcXvt)
4
I should have made clear that Natalie Portman made the whole experience worthwhile despite any pesky disagreements about the future of civilization. Though I still think she should never have started calling herself "Portman". Natalie Hershlag is so much hotter.
Posted by: Flea at March 16, 2006 01:10 PM (euhBr)
5
davec,
don't forget their pink tanks!
http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/.Pictures/pink-tank-london.jpg
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 16, 2006 01:31 PM (8e/V4)
Inside the Mind of an Evil Blogger--"Blog", the movie
I'd say Joseph Duncan qualifies as 'evil' under even the most narrow of definitions. In addition to being a convicted child molester who advocated for the rights of sex-offenders, Joseph Duncan was a blogger who recorded his fight with what he believed were demonic powers online. Duncan would eventually become a mass-murderer.
I wonder what the socially useful value of the movie is? After learning what Joseph Duncan did to Shasta Groene and others, there is only one conclusion to draw about him: he is evil.
Evil does not need to be understood, only disposed of. Call me up when the sequel comes out: Blog II: Joseph Duncan Execution Video. I'd pay to see that.
So, the first movie about bloggers turns out to be about this piece of human filth? Maybe someone should crank out a treatment for Army of Davids as a reply.....
1
I would watch it. People are horrified and I am
surprised that vile scum like duncan (it) are around and that we don,t deal with them. the justice system is a joke that is evil itself.
Posted by: ronn armstrong at March 16, 2006 11:14 AM (PPmlF)
2
Based on the trailer, this will be an indy movie for the masses. The director is from Fargo!
Rock ON!
Posted by: Insight at March 18, 2006 12:02 AM (+dKon)
1
damn rusty I got websensed for Nudity. Is Buzz nekkid in this one.
Posted by: Howie at March 13, 2006 01:33 PM (D3+20)
2
Talk about a sucker punch, in more ways than one. Good Lord, I'm laughing my butt off here! Hooray for Buzz!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 13, 2006 01:43 PM (rUyw4)
3
That was stunningly beautiful. That's what happens when you hang around in the basement reading conspiracy websites for a long time and then walk out into the world with a skewed sense of reality. This kid will undoubtedly sue and Buzz will walk proudly into a courtroom among cheers and pats on the back while the snot-nosed brat scowls next to his weasel lawyer.
Posted by: Oyster at March 13, 2006 01:43 PM (g9UJq)
Posted by: Howie at March 13, 2006 01:44 PM (D3+20)
5
Oh that was awesome! The Eagle landed alright.....hard!
Posted by: Graeme at March 13, 2006 01:47 PM (7Jsmx)
6
That's old. It's from 2002. Buzz Aldrin originally faced charges for punching that man. Thankfully, the charges were eventually dismissed.
Posted by: Derek Falkan at March 13, 2006 01:53 PM (CnDtU)
7
I was going to say, if that didn't meet the interpretation of 'fighting words' I don't know what would.
Posted by: davec at March 13, 2006 01:55 PM (CcXvt)
8
Sorry I made a mistake. It's been four years since the incident. The police decided not to press charges after conducting an investigation. Which is good since Buzz was defending himself.
Posted by: Derek Falkan at March 13, 2006 01:56 PM (CnDtU)
9
No man will punch Cindy Sheehan. Buzz would consider it ungentleman like. My parents have also told me never hit a lady. Buzz would however punch Al Franken.
Posted by: Derek Falkan at March 13, 2006 01:58 PM (CnDtU)
10
Perfect form, strait ahead punch. I note the immediate silence. Cool to be fair Buzz did warn him. The old man packs quite a punch, still. Remind me never to call a former test pilot a coward to his face.
Thanks Graeme.
Posted by: Howie at March 13, 2006 02:00 PM (D3+20)
Posted by: Derek Falkan at March 13, 2006 02:16 PM (CnDtU)
15
Derek, I didn't know it was that old, but it goes to prove - some things are timeless!
Posted by: Oyster at March 13, 2006 02:39 PM (g9UJq)
16
HA! It looked like Buzz got a roll of quarters out of his pocket or something; and I loved the way the little punk's last word was shoved back in his mouth.
Wah wah wah travis, go tell mommy to make you some hot coco you little bitch.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 13, 2006 05:57 PM (0yYS2)
17I expect less from a group racist, homophobic, just plain fuck nuts dumb, group of Star"
shorter Travis: waaaaaaa! waaaaaa!!!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 13, 2006 06:10 PM (8e/V4)
18
Maybe Travis needs a trip to the shed with Buzz? His mother must be proud.
Posted by: Oyster at March 13, 2006 06:28 PM (YudAC)
19
So, according to Travis it's lame to be discussing something that's four years old. Well Travis, do you know what topic happens to be more than FIVE years old? Bush trouncing Gore for the Presidency.
Posted by: Graeme at March 13, 2006 06:31 PM (KeWDX)
20do you know what topic happens to be more than FIVE years old? Bush trouncing Gore for the Presidency.
lol!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 13, 2006 06:39 PM (8e/V4)
21
Even after four years, Travis just hates to see his friend get clocked. As far as I'm concerned, the defeat of ignorance is timeless. So Travis, here's one for you. Cram it!
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 13, 2006 08:06 PM (rUyw4)
Students of a secondary school in Singapore, who were recently found to be wearing coloured bras to school, were forced to go braless, reported China Press.
According to the daily, the school only allowed students to wear white, beige and light grey bras.
The daily said most of the affected students were caught wearing coloured bras during a Physical Education class
They were forced to remove the bras in the bathroom, which were then confiscated.
It appears that all the Singaporean schools have confronted the colored bra issue, but other schools handle the "problem" differently. Examples are: one school sells new bras and one school sends the girls home to get a new bra.
I'm at a loss to understand why colored bras are prohibited, however, school officials must feel strongly about the issue. Nonetheless, I do believe that a classroom full of braless high school girls would probably be a greater distraction than a room full of girls wearing colored bras. And, naturally, the whole subject makes one wonder if there are restrictions on other undergarments.
1
Sorry Mike - guess no one's interested in braless asian teen schoolgirls. I suggest your re-post this on a Japanese blog - should get oh say 350000 comments - at least!
Posted by: hondo at March 07, 2006 03:34 AM (fyKFC)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 07, 2006 05:10 AM (0yYS2)
3
Hondo - Are you saying that I should delete the post?
Posted by: Mike at March 07, 2006 06:41 AM (8BTfn)
4
The reason they have a problem with colored bra's is that a lot of girls, here in the west, once they get a decent set of juggs on them start to hilight those juggs by wearing brightly colored bra's under white T's which draws additional attention to the TT's because the brightly colored bra can be made out faintly through the white T.
Posted by: wickedpinto at March 07, 2006 08:33 AM (QTv8u)
5
As an official 'bra inspector', I would suggest I go look into this situation and report back first hand.
Posted by: Rusty at March 07, 2006 08:38 AM (JQjhA)
6
Rusty, how does one get to be an "official" bra inspector? Because I am never too old to learn.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 07, 2006 10:11 AM (rUyw4)
7
Those poor Muslim men being driven so wild with lust by these wily young women that they simply can't be held responsible for their own actions. It's all the fault of these devil women. Let's pray that once they are forced to go braless that the men don't crank up the air-conditioning!
Posted by: Oyster at March 07, 2006 10:20 AM (n/nt4)
Posted by: Steve Sharon at March 08, 2006 10:13 AM (A2m8s)
11
http://news18.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/news4plus/1143608374/
>>Hondo
I guess your opinion, but this news is getting only 263 comments at 2-channel news headlines(the most biggest news-headline BBS in Japan) now.
Could not you think all of Japanese love braless asian teen schoolgirls please?
Posted by: 2-channeler at March 30, 2006 04:19 AM (OGhuC)
How To Defeat Global Warming And Islamofascism At The Same Time
This comment on this post has all the answers:
It would have been wonderful if the car had stopped and they had dragged the poor misguided youth and beaten the crap out of the SUV with his head till it was crushed. But hey, my son was only there 15 minutes before, so perhaps I'm a tad biased against the mooslem that hates my son.
Biased? Not at all, Mr. Walsh. You have unwittingly swerved into a solution to a couple of our most vexing problems!
Instead of remanding terrorist captives to some remote CIA-run Caribbean resort, take them to the nearest automobile dealership, grab them by the ankles, and use their heads to smash every pollution spewing, death dealing SUV in sight.
4
ohh yes we can do it hand in hand.we shall shut all industries in america and draw same cartoons on christianity on jesus.
Posted by: fenne at March 07, 2006 02:50 AM (g9Amy)
5
Why has the head of Homeland Security not put out a directive telling all Americans to start doing this. Is he again sleeping at the switch? Maybe he saw Larry King say not to rush to judgement and call this terrorism. What do you call it? And if this is not terrorism what is?
Posted by: Rod Stanton at March 07, 2006 04:19 AM (+RcwV)
6
Too bad we stopped raising Men in this country some time ago, and now just produce a generic, feminized variety of bitch-boy, because if there were any Men at the scence, they would have stomped this muslim scum's guts out.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 07, 2006 05:13 AM (0yYS2)
7
I would hate to see the innocent punished.
So you better make sure the SUVÂ’s do not run on bio-diesel or E85.
Posted by: Cindy not sheehan at March 07, 2006 06:06 AM (piu+6)
8
How to fight global warming put duct tape over the mouths of all the envromentalist wackos and liberal politicians like AL GORE and all memebers of GREENPEACE then you will contain all that HOT AIR and as for the TELEBAN how about quit buying all those rotten left-wing news papers and quit listening to the liars on TV and the RADIO
Posted by: sandpiper at March 07, 2006 09:41 AM (QtdTZ)
9
WE MUST DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO CUT DOWN ON GLOBAL WARMING. SUV ARE ONE OF THE MAIN CAUSES. BUT I LOVE SUV BUT THEY ARE KILLING US ALL
Posted by: zee at March 07, 2006 02:56 PM (sIyL5)
10
Uh, IM, remember where they were. UNC-Chapel Hill is possibly the most liberal university in the South. All the guys there are probably trying to get in touch with their feminine side.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 07, 2006 03:39 PM (rUyw4)
11
Oh, please. My SUV ain't killin' anyone. My emissions are less than most cars. But my neighbor's 1989 rattle-trap, smoke-billowing Grand Am is choking the whole neighborhood. And the guy down the street with the gas efficient Civic is spewing all kinds crap.
Posted by: Oyster at March 07, 2006 03:40 PM (rf0W8)
12
Oyster, you're SUV, a Tahoe, isn't it, gets better gas milage than my GMC Sierra, so don't worry about it. If you can afford the gas, and you keep your vehicle tuned up, then what you choose to drive should be up to you. You know a hell of a lot better than anyone else.
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 07, 2006 04:42 PM (rUyw4)
13
I regularly try to get in touch with my feminine side; she's my better half of thirteen years as of last Friday.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 07, 2006 07:40 PM (0yYS2)
14
How alarming to stumble accross this website while searchig for some worthwhile comment. Saddly the posts that I have read here only serve to reinforce my pesimistic understanding of American world outlook. Racism, sexism and macho bravado used to express what I can only assume is a total lack of understading about Islam and the envronmental problems facing our planet. If you guys are scared because you don't understand whats going on in the world why not go and read some books or endever to acctually disscuss whats goig on here.
Posted by: ewan at March 20, 2006 06:44 AM (8u9Am)
Smiling Bob Enzyte(Kansas City, MO) Cincinnati entrepreneur Steve Warshak, the brains behind the "natural male enhancement" product Enzyte, has agreed to stop making unsupportable health claims and to refund money to thousands of customers who believe they were defrauded.
The primary complaint was that customers only agreed to a "free" 30-day trial of pills but were automatically billed for additional shipments. Customers also had great difficulty canceling shipments and getting refunds.
Warshak's companies include Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals, Lifekey Inc., Boland Naturals Inc., Warner Health Care and Wagner Nutraceuticals.
Posted by: Oyster at March 06, 2006 07:38 AM (YudAC)
3
If guys believed that a little pill could give them each a bigger wang in 30 days and hence improve their lives in magical ways, they deserved to get ripped off. We all know that the only way to get a bigger wang is to eat one boiled tiger paw, two pig testicles and a shot of cobra blood.
Posted by: Graeme at March 06, 2006 08:34 AM (XeUJr)
4
LOL, Graeme! Oh, by the way, do you have any tiger paws lying around?
Posted by: jesusland joe at March 06, 2006 09:04 AM (rUyw4)
5
Bob dives into the swimming pool and leave his swimming trunks in the pool whoops
Posted by: sandpiper at March 06, 2006 09:40 AM (UwJcR)
6
You go Bob! Ever since I started using your product my typing speed has improved! Just bangin' away on that keyboard!
A paid testimonial
Posted by: hondo at March 06, 2006 12:38 PM (fyKFC)
7
Yeah, Hondo, but what are you bangin' on the keyboard with?
Posted by: Oyster at March 06, 2006 02:46 PM (n/nt4)
Posted by: hondo at March 06, 2006 10:26 PM (fyKFC)
9
Everyone knows that the only way you can get "enhancement" is by responding to an e-mail. You can also MAKE MONEY and LOSE WEIGHT while you ENLARGE YOUR BREASTS while browsing FREE PORN.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 07, 2006 05:22 AM (0yYS2)
Posted by: Rusty at March 03, 2006 05:51 PM (JQjhA)
5
Of course you were being ironical, because you didn't want to reveal the truth that you'd really like to see Scott Baio take it up the wazoo with a Jane Fonda strap-on.
Or is that Filthy? I get confused sometimes.
Posted by: Vinnie at March 03, 2006 06:23 PM (f289O)
6
Having James Earl Jones do voice work would probably do wonders for the tape. For instance, just before Ted gets assaulted with Jane's mail order manhood, Jones could say in that deep voice of his: "This is Ted Turner's bunghole".
Posted by: Graeme at March 03, 2006 06:55 PM (cjDPX)
7
Ah Graeme, you certainly know how to lend a touch of class.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 05, 2006 06:39 AM (0yYS2)
Today is International High-Five a Muslim Day (Video Banned in Australia, Receives Fatwa)
Today is the International High-Five a Muslim Day. The video explaining this is below, but feel free to use the banner on the right to participate. Who am I to not follow the example of my personal Lord and Savior in offering the up-high to my Muslim brothers?
Because there has to be a way to say, "Hey, Muslims, we're totally down with you. It's nothing personal, we really think you're cool. It's just the whole 'behead the infidels' and 'stone the adulterers' thing we're not down with." And a nod just isn't enough and a hug is, well, just too much.
Deeming it offensive, Network 10 chose to censor the sketch rather than air it during the regular broacast of The Ronnie Johns Half Hour.
Censor the video? Like Flea, I find nothing sacreligious about it. I guess after the Muhammed cartoon row, some in Australia have decided to show how "fair" they are by censoring this video depicting Jesus. Because we all know those Christians react to offensive material exactly like Muslims, right?
It turns out that Ronnie Johns, who made the video, was issued a fatwa (fatwa via Aussia Miasma). A real live freakin fatwa for his depiction of Jesus. But the fatwa is that the video is good. See how that works? Show Muhammed: death. Show Jesus: thumbs up!
Watch the video below by clicking the little play arrow thingy on the pic below, or go here or here.
Update: Unknown to me, Tian and SondraK were already celebrating!
more...
1
A video depicting Jesus? Ohhh, I'm soooo angry. I think I'm gonna have to burn some flags and destroy some fast food restaurants now.
Posted by: reverse_vampyr at February 28, 2006 01:40 PM (Ns5kk)
2
STart with Kentucky Fried Chicken. The Colonel with his beady little eyes and secret ingredient which makes you crave it fortnightly.........
Posted by: Rusty at February 28, 2006 02:10 PM (JQjhA)
3
Issue a fatwa against Austrial's government for restricting free speech aslo.
priorities priorities people
Posted by: Natasha at February 28, 2006 02:23 PM (i6py+)
4
We must rename it Kabul Fatwa Chicken and remove the infidel Colonel's image and replace it with The Prophet's. (PBUH) Oh crap, now I have to behead myself for thinking that...
Posted by: reverse_vampyr at February 28, 2006 03:58 PM (Ns5kk)
5
Natasha, this was self censorship--the network pulled the segment, not the government.
Even so, it sucks.
Posted by: Rusty at February 28, 2006 04:46 PM (JQjhA)
Posted by: rightwingprof at February 28, 2006 05:11 PM (hj1Wx)
7
Natasha, the network pulled the segment because they were scared of Islamists. Scared! Now what does that tell you about Islam? Or about the network that censored the segment?
Posted by: jesusland joe at February 28, 2006 07:17 PM (rUyw4)
8
So my birthday is "high five a muslim day" too? Weird.
Posted by: Ben at February 28, 2006 09:39 PM (lE+P8)
9
I linked to this page but I don't know how to make it show a trackback. Sorry. :-(
Posted by: Synova at February 28, 2006 11:53 PM (A3xrD)
Posted by: Oyster at March 01, 2006 09:32 AM (zCI3+)
12
I totally and completely support this holiday though i myself am cathlic i think that all muslums should get a high five on february 28th and i agree with that rusty kid the kfc plan kicks major ass who muslums need to be introduced to colonel sanders delicious delacasy!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Abul at March 08, 2006 06:35 AM (R1agc)
13
I can't believe it, my co-worker just bought a car for $18121. Isn't that crazy!
Posted by: Betsy Markum at May 18, 2006 09:24 PM (GBcLA)
1
Damn, you scored 2 points ahead of me. Guess I'm a wussy leftwinger then...
Posted by: Chad at February 26, 2006 09:10 PM (E2GpM)
2
I don't get it...
I only rated as 50%!
I know I'm much more evil than that.
Posted by: BC at February 26, 2006 10:50 PM (/UAJE)
3
Only 42%, I guess the not doing drugs thing threw me off.
Posted by: Dave at February 26, 2006 11:14 PM (9j+Tc)
4
I'm only 34% Evil and here's how the quiz describes me:
"A bit of evil lurks in your heart, but you hide it well. In some ways, you are the most dangerous kind of evil."
I think I like that...
Posted by: SheriJo at February 27, 2006 12:23 AM (KH6Dc)
5
***You Are 52% Evil***
You are evil, but you haven't yet mastered the dark side.
Fear not though - you are on your way to world domination.
Posted by: Howie at February 27, 2006 08:28 AM (D3+20)
6
Hahaa, 84% evil... But there is no "evil", just a matter of opinion. I bet they're logging the answers, so don't tick anything you'll regret. My percentage was honest for a Monday, bet I'd score a 40% by Friday.
Posted by: A Finn at February 27, 2006 09:10 AM (lGolT)
7
Holy shit... I scored an 8% when I went "probably wouldn't", "who can guarantee that?", "define 'extremely'/'disturbing'/'dark'/'racist'/'sexist'", "1'000'000 dollars? euros, dangit", "100'000 of whose lives?".
Posted by: An angel, apparently at February 27, 2006 09:25 AM (lGolT)
8
I need some training or something. I'm only 38% evil. I need to print the list off and start doing some of them.
Posted by: Hulka at February 27, 2006 09:53 AM (9Uy/l)
Posted by: hondo at February 27, 2006 10:52 AM (fyKFC)
10
Why is "firing a gun" indicative of evil?
At least, it seems to be.
And maybe I had a too-sheltered childhood. Blast it, going to a home-school means it's a little harder to get into the really bad stuff in high school.
Posted by: karrde at February 27, 2006 11:22 AM (6dXj+)
11
You Are 78% Evil
You are very evil. And you're too evil to care.
Those who love you probably also fear you. A lot.
I think I like the sound of that...........>;-)
Posted by: Sly2017 at February 27, 2006 01:41 PM (UADHi)
12
I'm evil light, the Diet Coke of evil, not evil enough!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at February 28, 2006 11:16 AM (8e/V4)
13
The devil is a card carrying memeber of the ACLU
Posted by: sandpiper at February 28, 2006 02:15 PM (162Hn)
I'll Never Look At Her The Same
Sitting here wondering why my 4 year old daughter stubbornly refuses to pick up in her room when my 8 year old son has done it happily since he was 2.
Then it hit me.
ZIONIST CONSPIRATORS HAVE GOTTEN TO MY DAUGHTER!!!
Sacre bleu!
(Atlanta, Georgia) The Georgia State Senate took up the issue of honoring Jane Fonda. 
(Kansas City, MO) Cincinnati entrepreneur Steve Warshak, the brains behind the "natural male enhancement" product Enzyte, has agreed to stop making unsupportable health claims and to refund money to thousands of customers who believe they were defrauded. 
