Happy Face

This seems to be funny, but I can't see it at work.. anyone care to help a brother out? The pall-barers are moonwalking. "I'll moonwalk all over your ass"

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/a162217...e-unlikely.html

I had Moonwalker for the master system (I think). Quality game.

Fop never said anything of the sort, What does that matter? You definitely want to kill as many innocent civilians as you possibly can....mostly brown ones because you're racialist. Of course you'll deny it, partly because you've never said it, but mostly because you want to dig yourself out of the hawkish, bloodthirsty, murderous hole you've dug for yourself. Poor Chris, guess your fascist hole really did get to you. Now answer the question please. What do you do when you've followed him? http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/0...an_worried.html So are you saying you'd use spy's and then have him killed with a "laser-guided missile fired from a pilotless U.S. Predator plane" as stated in that article? No, I'm saying it's possible to spy on them. You suggested that was an impossibility. Now for the umpteenth time.... WHAT WOULD YOU DO FOP!!! FOR GOD'S SAKE! WHAT WOULD YOU DO?? THE CLOCK IS TICKING!! I know you won't say, but that's ok petal. I couldn't give a fuck. Calm down, it's just a question. Spying on then is a very different things to "following" them. Spying (or getting tip offs from paid informers) is par for the course, following is very difficult indeed in those circumstances. But again what Fop is asking is what do you do when you've followed him or got his location or whatever? Judging by that article you posted you seem to suggest killing him with missiles fires from a drone? Is that the case? I'll come back to this later, when it's quiet. Let's aim for at least another 6 pages of circular arguments around my view which has been clear from page one. Other posters and lurkers love it.

Fop never said anything of the sort, What does that matter? You definitely want to kill as many innocent civilians as you possibly can....mostly brown ones because you're racialist. Of course you'll deny it, partly because you've never said it, but mostly because you want to dig yourself out of the hawkish, bloodthirsty, murderous hole you've dug for yourself. Poor Chris, guess your fascist hole really did get to you. Now answer the question please. What do you do when you've followed him? http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/0...an_worried.html So are you saying you'd use spy's and then have him killed with a "laser-guided missile fired from a pilotless U.S. Predator plane" as stated in that article? No, I'm saying it's possible to spy on them. You suggested that was an impossibility. Now for the umpteenth time.... WHAT WOULD YOU DO FOP!!! FOR GOD'S SAKE! WHAT WOULD YOU DO?? THE CLOCK IS TICKING!! I know you won't say, but that's ok petal. I couldn't give a fuck.

Could his estate sue if anyone made any more extreme claims? Can't really see the BBC saying "he got off with it but we all know he was a fiddler!" I'm not sure if you can really Libel a dead man. I'm sure he was found innocent wasn't he? Truthful and obscene is a bit harsh imo In a show trial. Did you think OJ was innocent? Come off it. The evidence against OJ was FAR more compelling. I asked someone else earlier....if your kids had been molested by someone, would you accept their money so they could go free? I don't doubt he's fucked up and should have spent less time 'playing' with kids. Whether kids were ever in danger in his care is another matter.

Fop never said anything of the sort, What does that matter? You definitely want to kill as many innocent civilians as you possibly can....mostly brown ones because you're racialist. Of course you'll deny it, partly because you've never said it, but mostly because you want to dig yourself out of the hawkish, bloodthirsty, murderous hole you've dug for yourself. Poor Chris, guess your fascist hole really did get to you. Now answer the question please. What do you do when you've followed him? http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/0...an_worried.html

Fop never said anything of the sort, What does that matter? You definitely want to kill as many innocent civilians as you possibly can....mostly brown ones because you're racialist. Of course you'll deny it, partly because you've never said it, but mostly because you want to dig yourself out of the hawkish, bloodthirsty, murderous hole you've dug for yourself.

Could his estate sue if anyone made any more extreme claims? Can't really see the BBC saying "he got off with it but we all know he was a fiddler!"

It's a very vague question, but I think I'd probably have him followed. Howabout your good self? You'd have him "followed"? Assuming that they didn't notice the bespectacled guy in the false beard as they trailed him through small villages where everyone knows everyone else and the middle of nowhere (where there is no one else)........... what would you do then? Follow him a bit more? It's not a vague question at all. It's a hard question, yes, but then it would be. Oh dear. You are simple. The US "Black" budget is $50bn+ (equal to the UKs entire defence budget -which is the second biggest in the world). That's on top of the standard $490bn US military budget. They can stretch past a beard and glasses mate. The 3 rockets they ploughed into the funeral cost $3m. Glad to see you advocate the bombing of 50-80 civilians to kill one man who hasn't had a trial. Kind of contradicts your doveish attitude elsewhere. What does money have to do with it? You can follow someone in a city, it's easy. But in villages and and mountainous countryside it's not the same thing, in villages and small towns strangers stick out like a sore thumb, in other areas the people you are following will know the area and how to spot/follow people in it much better than you? So how do you think they will do it? Long distance surveillance is good at watching AN area (for someone you have intelligence will appear), but following someone over a period of hours or days? No not really. And you've still not answered the question: What do you do when you've followed him? Aks yourself this Fop...how do they know unequivically that this bloke is there in the first place? Keep banging the "bomb innocent civilians" drum though, it's brilliant you prefer killing people who've done nothing wrong to arresting them, giving them a beating and releasing them.

The Michael Jackson South Park is possibly the funniest 20 minutes of TV ever.

You mean Off The Wall? Sorry, yes Off the Wall with Quincy Jones and those bedevelling guitar counter riffs. I was banging on about Bad in the MTV context. Mind I loved Speed Demon. When he danced with that Rabbit in Moonwalker. Cool as Who would have thought it would come down to me and you to make a last stand for old Jacko. tbf there's only a couple of people saying they never liked him. Generally the guitar headed muso's. you'd have thought they'd love Give in To Me.

You mean Off The Wall? Sorry, yes Off the Wall with Quincy Jones and those bedevelling guitar counter riffs. I was banging on about Bad in the MTV context. Mind I loved Speed Demon. When he danced with that Rabbit in Moonwalker. Cool as

Why didn't you get the adult size?

You mean Off The Wall?

John Lennon released some absolute gash like He did indeed. I think the difference between the two is outlined by Renton though in that you got the feeling there was no way Jackson would ever do anything decent ever again (plenty evidence to back that up as well). He died 10 years earlier than Wacko though...most people would agree that your forties on isn't really going to be peak of anyone's pop powers. Some artists buck the trend. Van Morrison, Tom Waits to name two. Muddy Waters, John Lee Hooker, Leadbelly, BB.King, Lightnin' Hopkins, Johnny Cash and a few more all peaked very late. I don't think many of those had an international number one BEFORE they were forty, let alone after. Either way, it's not even about quality which is subjective, it's about transcending music. It might be that you don't like Michael Jackson. But he's been the most prominent pop culture icon for 30 year, whatever his output. True. His influence on pop culture is lasting, that's unarguable. And his music will endure far longer than his reputation as a child molesting jelly faced madman too imo. Well the earlier stuff anyway. If someone molested your kids would you take money from the molester to let them off?

I don't think having a number one really matters. I'm not sure Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin ever had a number one single but they shifted plenty of records. ...and you won't get a hoo hah on this scale when Dave Gilmour or Jimmy Page pops his clogs....as you didn't when Syd Barret did either.

John Lennon released some absolute gash like He did indeed. I think the difference between the two is outlined by Renton though in that you got the feeling there was no way Jackson would ever do anything decent ever again (plenty evidence to back that up as well). He died 10 years earlier than Wacko though...most people would agree that your forties on isn't really going to be peak of anyone's pop powers. Some artists buck the trend. Van Morrison, Tom Waits to name two. Muddy Waters, John Lee Hooker, Leadbelly, BB.King, Lightnin' Hopkins, Johnny Cash and a few more all peaked very late. I don't think many of those had an international number one BEFORE they were forty, let alone after. Either way, it's not even about quality which is subjective, it's about transcending music. It might be that you don't like Michael Jackson. But he's been the most prominent pop culture icon for 30 year, whatever his output.

A rendition of "I'm forever blowing bubbles" on the ipod too? BTW - what the fuck is Parky's problem? Was Jacko blowing him too? It's Elvis....Hendrix....Lennon It's only happened once before in my lifetime I think, with Cobain.

John Lennon released some absolute gash like I know. ....and was a right twat to his wife(s) and kids I don't think engaging the legacies of Lennon and Jackson in a moral off is really a good idea, do you? I was refuting the "incredibly special all round" tag. Everyone has flaws.

John Lennon released some absolute gash like He did indeed. I think the difference between the two is outlined by Renton though in that you got the feeling there was no way Jackson would ever do anything decent ever again (plenty evidence to back that up as well). He died 10 years earlier than Wacko though...most people would agree that your forties on isn't really going to be peak of anyone's pop powers.

John Lennon released some absolute gash like I know. ....and was a right twat to his wife(s) and kids

John Lennon released some absolute gash like

30 years of musical excellence doesn't cut the mustard if you release 2 bum albums. I loved Scream, Earth Song, Will You Be There, They don't Care About Us and that but haven't listened to owt since around those.

I sent mine back. Didn't like it in the flesh.