Well, that didn't go as planned.
https://twitter.com/redditships/stat...87482587430913
Printable View
Well, that didn't go as planned.
https://twitter.com/redditships/stat...87482587430913
Maybe not as planned, but certainly as expected. It'll be romantic fishing that out of her shit after the diamond rips her arsehole.
You gotta wonder how often it happens. Or how often someone gets a broken tooth. Not very romantic.
Just doesn't seem like a good idea given all that can go wrong.
Also a bit surprised that someone can swallow something as big as a ring without realising it. I guess chewing your food is optional for some people.
Bet these guys think twice about jaywalking.
https://twitter.com/delanightmares/s...45798673313792
Bunch of comments on the video that jaywalking should be legal and drivers should have to stop for anyone who decides to cross the street at any place. Fuck off, you'd be in permanent state of fear if you had to drive in a busy city with that rule in place.
Fun fact - you live in a country where jaywalking is legal and drivers have to stop for anyone who decides to cross the street at any place.
Well I'm not stupid enough to just step out on the street without looking, amazingly not that many people are. It's almost as if jaywalking is a silly thing to make illegal, it assumes a complete lack of common sense. Granted there are lots of people who lack common sense, but road sense is something drilled into British children at a young age. Stop, look and listen. I can even remember the catchphrase.
Still, from a legal pov, if someone walk out in front of you and you don't at least attempt to avoid collision, it's definitely your fault. If you literally didn't have time to even slow down, but you're slightly above the drink drive limit, it's your fault. If your brakes aren't up to the job, it's your fault. If you're going over the speed limit by 1mph and it can be proven, it's your fault. It's only the pedestrian's fault if there is no way the driver can be held legally responsible.
I have once caused a car to slam the brakes on. I crossed at a t-junction because the oncoming car wasn't indicating. I naturally assumed he didn't intend to turn, so made my move. He went to turn and was forced to stop abruptly. He honked and I shouted "fucking indicate". If he hit me, that was definitely his fault.
I love the comments. People are over this. It's pretty wild that it's considered normal for the majority of public spaces to be reserved for motorized vehicles and everyone else has to yield.
I like what they did with Brussels - entire city is a 30kph zone. I think that makes total sense. I have to drive a lot in the city and even from a cars perspective I think it makes sense because your average speed is less than that and it really doesn't make any difference how fast you go from one light to the next.
I've been binging JCS Criminal Psychology videos, which is a guy on YT who cuts together interrogation videos of convicted murderers and it is crack! It is so addictive watching people who are backed into a corner trying to talk their way out. The common theme is that they all think they're so crafty when in reality most of them would have probably walked if they would have just shut up.
https://youtu.be/8AzDJspfiZg
I've watched some of them on react channels. I am self conscious about it, but having a guy regularly pause the video to go "Bro, murderers are so dumb!" makes the experience objectively better.
Love those confession vids.
Here's an army colonel getting busted as a serial killer. Nice break down in the vid (there's longer analyses out there as well on youtube).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj7QRP37Wn0
There's also a show on Netflix called the Confession Tapes, which shows people giving false confessions and getting busted for things they didn't do.
Actually, this vid does a better job of showing the degree of his depravity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSkoGTrYiG0
It would be his fault but your knees would never work properly again.
This is kind of my point. It doesn't matter what the law says when the entire culture ignores it. I was actually surprised to learn pedestrians had the right of way to jaywalk here as I assumed from how people behaved that the only time peds had row was at a signed crossing.
This is different to Canada, where the law says the peds have row to cross the street at any intersection (unless there's lights), and that's how everyone behaves. If you're driving and someone is at a corner and looks like they want to cross the street, you stop. Here, you just keep going. So unless someone gets hit by a car, the law is kind of irrelevant.
It's also stupid to have a law that allows jaywalking because someone could literally run out in front of my car and if I nail them, it's my fault, even though no reasonable ped would do that.
There's other examples here of the law and culture being completely different when it comes to driving. For example, the law clearly states that you only ever flash your lights at someone to indicate to them that you're there. But that's not how everyone behaves. They use that to signal a thank you or to let the other person go before them. So again the law is pointless because no-one follows it. But, if someone flashed their lights to let you turn in front of them when they had row, and then plowed into you when you turned, you'd be legally at fault. Retarded.
It might be different in Europe because the roads are smaller and have more curves in them, but in Canada with wide roads and a grid system, I don't see why this is controversial. If you're a ped in Canada, cross the street at a corner. It's at most a couple hundred meters out of the way, and its safe because cars expect you to cross there. If you'd rather play frogger with your life to save a couple of minutes, and someone hits you, you're the twat, not them.
Well I guess my point is that despite pedestrians having right of way in almost all circumstances, people still tend to cross at sensible locations, like zebra crossings. We have a lot of thick people here, but fortunately people don't just blindly step out in front of cars. People do stop and look, and wait for cars to pass, even though, legally, they don't have to. That's because people understand that it's potentially dangerous to force cars to slow down.Quote:
This is kind of my point. It doesn't matter what the law says when the entire culture ignores it. I was actually surprised to learn pedestrians had the right of way to jaywalk here as I assumed from how people behaved that the only time peds had row was at a signed crossing.
True. My anecdote above refers to an incident when I was probably 20 years old. I was still somewhat naive, thinking drivers would indicate where pedestrians are present. I was wrong, and I stopped making that assumption right there. It annoys the fuck out of me that people don't indicate but I can't make them, so I now assume that a car that isn't indicating might still want to turn. Therefore I wait.Quote:
If you're driving and someone is at a corner and looks like they want to cross the street, you stop. Here, you just keep going.
This isn't quite true. You just have to ensure that you're driving within the limit, with a roadworthy car. If there's really nothing you can do about it, and nobody can prove otherwise, you're not going to be blamed for it. But the police will certainly investigate, checking tyre marks on the road and cctv/dashcam if available, and taking witness statements. They'll check your breath for alcohol. They'll check your vehicle documents to ensure you're licensed and insured and that your car has passed its MOT. If they can't prove you are at fault, you're not at fault.Quote:
It's also stupid to have a law that allows jaywalking because someone could literally run out in front of my car and if I nail them, it's my fault, even though no reasonable ped would do that.
idk about this. I don't drive, so I'm not familiar with the highway code. I obviously observe driver behaviour a lot though, and you're right that people flash for a variety of reasons, such as thanking a driver, alerting someone to a potential hazard, and letting them through when they don't have row. I don't know about this being technically illegal. Certainly people don't get punished for this though, just as people don't get punished for failing to indicate. Unless, of course, they cause an accident in doing so.Quote:
For example, the law clearly states that you only ever flash your lights at someone to indicate to them that you're there.
It's not about who's a twat. It's about codifying a respect for life that says just because someone else broke the law, that doesn't make it legal for you to murder them with your car.
lol what a stupid thing to say.
Where did I argue that if someone breaks the law it's ok to murder them?
I'm talking about someone running in front of your car so you can't escape hitting them, and then the law saying that's your fault because they had the row.
Obviously you try to avoid hitting anyone in your car ever.
Dunno. The law generally apportions blame in percentages. There may be cases where one person is 100% at fault and the other is 0%, but often the blame is split. If the letter of the law says peds have the row on any road at any time, then your duty as a driver is to avoid hitting them. I don't think going the speed limit is a valid defence in that case, since you at some point have to go under the speed limit to avoid hitting them, and you should arguably anticipate the possibility of having to do that every time you see a pedestrian on the pavement (sidewalk).
Sure, if someone runs out in front of your car, the law will say they were negligent too and so it won't blame you 100%. But I'm guessing it will still blame you >0%.
Take another example: A little kid chases his ball onto the street. I doubt it matters how fast you were going, if you hit that kid you're going to get the majority of the blame.
All just guesses though I admit.
This channel has some good interrogations too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLSNPkf8RCU
No. If you're going at or below the limit, you're not drunk, your car is roadworthy, and there's nothing else wrong, then you're likely in the clear. People don't go to prison or otherwise charged with a criminal offence for hitting pedestrians unless there's a very good reason for it. There's no % of blame. The pedestrian has right of way. The driver is either 100% to blame, or 0% to blame. Despite the drilling of road sense into kids at a young age, collisions happen frequently. It's inevitable, especially in residential areas. This is why we have 30mph speed limits, sometimes 20mph, because at these speeds you are much more likely to stop in time, and even if you don't, you should be going slow enough to avoid causing serious injury.
A driver must be driving with due care and attention. If the police can prove a driver failed in this duty, the driver is 100% to blame. If they can't prove it, then there's 0% blame.
With collisions between cars, it's maybe different, maybe then the blame is shared. That's generally for the insurance companies to sort out, rather than the cops. Depends if someone is seriously injured.
TIL that I am 10.1 bananas tall and 681 bananas heavy.
I suspected as much.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FJQw59sX...name=4096x4096
So if you want to lose weight, buy smaller bananas.
Yup. And if you want to know your banana mass index, divide weight in bananas by height in bananas. A bmi of 66-70 is about right.
Best interrogation ever. They got him to say "yes", "no", and "I don't know."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbpJbgBbyHk
He's fucking great, I went through a phase of watching these interrogations and he was my favourite.
Wait, no, my favourite was the little girl who tried to kill her friend. Let me know when you get to that one. She's quite endearing.
Yeah I don't want to be his friend, but this level of mental illness is kinda fascinating. This is possessed by a demon shit.
It seems like he just rolled low on a bunch of life stuff, looks, social skills, astygmatism, can't play sports, etc., and high rolled on psychotic. Feel kind of sorry for the guy. Not as sorry as I feel for the girl who hit a -100 on the creepy neighbor roll, but yeah it's sad.
Also, the amount of variance in the skill the cops in the different videos have is striking. Some are just expertly breaking their suspects down brick by brick until they break, and some like these guys seem like they have no idea what they're doing.
There's a healthy mix of feeling sorry for him and being glad he's locked up.
I have a brother who suffers from schizophrenia. It's not fun. He's nowhere near this level of batshit but it still causes me to have a great deal of sympathy for sufferers, even when they do dreadful things. My bro hasn't done anything dreadful, nor do I think he ever will, but he has delusions and to him they are totally real, to the point where if I attempt to make him realise they are just delusions, he accuses me of gaslighting him. I don't want to go into details about his delusions because it's private, personal and painful, but I understand that it's a very strange illness that causes sufferers to lose touch with reality.
Psychoactive drugs are likely a factor in both this guy's story and my bro's, probably childhood trauma too. It's kinda strange in my brother's case because he was never a heavy weed smoker like me, he stopped smoking that a long time before he went crazy. It wasn't even LSD. It was an obscure drug called aMt. I've taken it once, it's a very nice drug, but it's definitely not a drug one would take regularly. These kind of drugs are something I did rarely even when I was a bit of a party animal. I got a bit carried away with ecstasy for a few years but things like LSD, they're more dangerous than people think, and I knew it at the time. I liked knowing the difference between la la world and reality. I'm glad I took these drugs to experience them but I'm also glad I stopped taking them.
My bro long ago stopped taking psychoactive drugs, at least I think, but the damage is done. There's more to it than just drugs, obviously, but they often play a role, to start with possibly as a means for the sufferer to self medicate the early onset of schizophrenia. I suspect that's why my bro got into this drug, but while it helped him with the symptoms of his illness, it also made the illness itself worse. That's a very fast slide downhill.
That's rough, man. Sorry for you and your brother. I have an uncle who's bipolar, but never spent much time around him. Suffice to say though, he is different.
On a less serious topic, in my life I've encountered a number of asian people who've come to live in an English-speaking country, and adopt an English first name. I'm sure everyone's experienced this. And in general, I get the idea, they want to fit in or whatever.
My question is, who the fuck advises them on what English name to go by? They're always weird. Today I had a meeting with a student from HK who goes by "Kitty." I mean wtf makes her think that's a good name for an adult woman who isn't a pornstar? Other names I've come across are "Johnny" (again, juvenile), "Helen" (not bad, but not a name that really gets given to anyone anymore), and my favourite "Reece" (which is like some weird spelling of Reese, which is already an unusual name, but they've just make it even stranger).
Also, why is this a thing at all? People from India or wherever don't change their name when they come here, they just go "yeah I got a foreign name, deal with it."
And I wouldn't be bothered by it if they chose normal names, but they don't. Personally I'd much rather call someone "hoi" or "fung" or whatever than some of these stupid names. At least they should get some advice before they pick a name so they're not going around with a ridiculous name like "Kitty."
Also, does this happen in other countries as well. Say if an asian student goes to Germany, do they change their name "Fritz" or "Dachshund" or something silly?
I think you may fail to appreciate the amount of culture that the US exports in the form of movies and TV. Names in the US are more familiar to others than vice versa.
Also, a lot of Western names are biblical in origin, and the Bible is a thing in China, too.
Even my own name roots back to the Bible, though it's about 5 cultural steps removed, it is the name Mary named her son who would later be called Jesus. She named him Ishua, BTW. I'm not even Christian and I bet that little tidbit of info is more than most who call themselves Christian know. Lol.
As I was reading poop's post I immediately thought of my friend Kitty at college, before getting to the bit where he names the person he met. Made me laugh.
The self-given nickname "Rambo" is popular in Eastern Europe, apparently. I think US TV definitely has a lot to answer for. But I'm not sure why Kitty is a popular name for Hong Kong girls coming to England. Maybe they just like kitty cats and think it's a cute name. idk. If I moved somewhere else I'd still be Matt, it's easy enough for anyone to pronounce.
I used to hang out with a part Vietnamese guy called Chip. It took me years to find out his real name... Andrew. His surname was Vietnamese, but he was christened with an English name. Yet he still chose to have an unusual nickname.
There's four possibilities I can think of for where she came up with Kitty. This is my first guess:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...r_portrait.png
It's still lame for anyone over 12, but whatever. She likes cats is number two, like you said, and is almost forgivable, but "Cat" seems like a reasonable choice for a grownup in that case. Kit Kat chocolate bar and Ms. Kitty from Gunsmoke are the other two I can think of, but those both seem like longshots.
It's funny because it's such a dated name. When did Rambo come out, 40 years ago? Yeah ok buddy, you're Rambo and your mates are Scarface and Elvis.
Fuck these guys. If I ever move to Asia I'm going to call myself Genghis. See how they like it.
In fact, every time I go to a foreign country from now on I'm just going to adopt a stupid name that sounds like it belongs but is obviously lame and dated.
France, I'm going as Remy. Or Pepe LePeux.
Italy, I'm gonna be Pasta Man.
Australia, I'm going as Crocodile Dundee.
I mean I'm in this meeting with this student and I'm like "Ok Kitty, so what analysis are you going to use for your project data?" "Have you finished your methods section yet, Kitty?", etc., and every time I hear myself say her name I just want to stick my head in the oven and turn on the gas.
You get used to it. Kitty isn't all that strange to me since I was actually friends with a Kitty. It was only an odd name to begin with.
To break the "no poker in the commune" rule and talk for a minute about what this forum was actually made for, I just had that one-in-a-million dream scenario where some wild fish wants to have an all out minraise war with me when I'm holding the nuts. I knew he would click back every time so I obliged. We went up in 4p raises all the way to the dizzying heights of £1 before he was all in, and we flipped over our cards. I show Q9o (I raised) and I have the nut straight, he has a set of jacks and is actually drawing live, but bricks turn and river. Imagine him seeing my Q9o. He rage quite, obviously. Not a word, just gone.
I just remembered another lad I knew who called himself David, he was first generation Pakistani migrant. We hung out, played football and cricket together, and once I had to call his home to see if he was coming out. I knew his name was really Desraj so when his sister answered I thought I better show the family respect and use his real name. His sister shouted "David it's for you, and he called you Desraj". Seems like he even made his family call him David!
Dunno why he didn't just go for Des for Desmond.
I kinda recall Kitty being a more common name in the 40's and 50's? Wasn't one of the POTUS wives named Kitty?
Nope. Had to google it. I was thinking of Kitty Dukakis, wife of a POTUS candidate who did not win the race.
I've heard of a woman named Catherine going by Cat a couple times, but never met one in person.
I do believe the minimum time past the sell-by date for one of these names is 30 years, so that seems about right.
Imagine being so far removed from Western culture that you only have a vague idea who Michael Jackson is, and then being shown this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQSfTGFuvyE&t=424s
I'm glad they got the guys and gals in the JCS videos, but I can totally see how some of those techniques could get a false confession out of somebody. Not the bozo who interrogated the schizophrenic kid though... what a shit show. I'm surprised they got him to confess at all. He was so close to walking. Can't convict someone for bad vibes.
The lie detector lady who got a confession out of Chris Watts is a different story. He got played so hard. That seems to be the best one: spend about 4 hours to break their confidence and then offer them an easier confession that seems more palatable but ultimately makes no sense and leads to the real confession.
I can see how a frustrated and not so savvy person could break and offer some kind of innocent sounding confession just to please the interrogator that eventually lands him in prison for something they didn't do.
That's pretty much it. They basically just keep the person there for hours, beating on them psychologically, till they give up and "confess."
Then again, you have to wonder why so many of them don't just zip it and call a lawyer. I guess if you're innocent you don't think you should need one, but still...
IDK exactly what you're talking about, 'cause I haven't watched it, but if you are read your Miranda rights, that's pretty much a direct message to STFU and get a lawyer.
It's like they literally told you, "Look, you can keep talking and dig your own grave, but you have the right to not do that, you see?"
So anyone hearing they have the right to remain silent, and then still talking... is being an idiot.
Exercise your right. Talk to an attorney who knows the archaic rules of these situations and with whom you have confidentiality. Let them speak on your behalf.
Innocent people are wrongfully prosecuted all the damn time. Just because you're innocent doesn't mean you don't need a lawyer.
This has been a PSA.
Perhaps not surprisingly, a lot of the innocent people in those interrogations who give false confessions are pretty dim bulbs. They may naively feel there is no harm in talking to the police if they are innocent. You can call them stupid (and they are), but it's not that hard to understand where they're coming from, is it? They want to help, they're often not (at first at least) being directly accused, etc.. Sometimes they're already vulnerable because it was a loved one who's died.
Then fourteen hours later they're confessing to just get it over with.
If you have a chance to watch the show, I'd recommend it. It's easier to sympathesize with them when you see firsthand how badly they're being manipulated. I'd go as far as to call it a subtle form of mental torture really. They just break these poor fucks.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that making this mistake means you're stupid, but it is an idiot mistake to make.
Talking to the police is one thing. They don't have to read you your Miranda rights until and unless they start asking you "guilt seeking questions." So if they're talking to you and asking questions and haven't read you those rights, then they're in murky territory if it goes to trial. You can certainly just openly confess to something before they've sought that guilt, and no Miranda rights were needed in that case.
However, if you're talking to a police officer and suddenly they read you your Miranda rights, then the tone of their inquiry has shifted from simply gaining information from you to suspecting you as a criminal.
That reading of the Miranda rights signals that you are no longer helping them find someone else, but helping them convict YOU.
Ergo, if you are read your Miranda rights, you should STFU. They are actively trying to get you to confess to something. Don't do that. Get a lawyer.
I know the feeling of self-righteousness that says "I know I'm innocent and therefore the law will be on my side," but that's unicorn thinking. The world isn't that good and just.
Because all the guys in those videos got caught. My takeaway is that it is really hard to get a first degree murder conviction if they don't have a confession. You have to convince a jury that they're guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You have to convince them of intent and premeditation. Even if you're not smart enough to shut up and call a lawyer, as long as they're not confessing, they still have an out. Casey Anthony takes the price for dumbest murderer to ever walk free. Probably the only thing in the entire process that she did right was not confessing.
Yeah well the convo had moved on to false confessions, but I take your point in bold. The irony is that a confession is very compelling to a jury, but is much less reliable than actual physical evidence. People confess to shit they didn't do all the time, for a variety of reasons.
Same goes for eyewitness testimony. By all accounts it's as likely to be shit as to be accurate. Memory is really fallible. But get someone on the stand to point at the defendant and say "it was him," and the jury will almost always convict (unless the witness is obviously "unreliable," e.g., strung out on drugs, senile, or a sex worker).
None of those Asian name.changes are as strange as the name changes people legally make irl. I used to work in a data entry job and was provided with legal proof to change one account name to Bilbo Baggins and another to Iram Butts. Then a couple of Harry Potter changes.
We also had a Dr Phil Mycock and Dr Paul Mycock on the account database. I've no idea if they were jokes or not.
How much does it cost to legally change your name? It's great that these people are willing to pay to make fools of themselves. That shows real dedication.
It's relatively cheap in the UK, in the order of hundreds of pounds. I think, anyway. I have no intention of legally changing my name. If I did, it would also be something stupid that made no sense, like Ongratiio Bonga, and I'd only do it if I was wealthy, bored and drunk.
Dick and dicker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOInYwP8-Es
I could understand him refusing to get on the ground if he was wearing a suit.
It's not like on the X-Files where shouting "Federal agent!" is the top trump.
I'm glad the presenter called out the police for showing up with weapons drawn and shouting commands to a guy standing in front of a house holding some papers in one hand.
Granted, the ATF agent was a total dumbass thereafter, and perhaps before.
IDK. Maybe he touched a door knob. Not bothered since he didn't actually enter the house.
In the end, I guess I'm just glad no one was hurt despite the asshattery all around.
It's the kind of thing that makes you glad there's an internet where people can wave their dicks about without anyone getting shot.
Is Tiktok still a thing now, or have these people completely ruined it for everyone?
Warning: this video contains nuclear supernova levels of cringe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r7OmDuyY_U
that's rough.
TikTok is something for me to look at and go: I am completely out of touch with whatever generation this is. We're past Z now... What are they? Does anyone know? What comes after letters?
I'm so glad we didn't have easy access to cameras back when I was a teen. I can't imagine having an extensive public record of my cringe years online for everyone to see.
I don't do well with cringe. Some of those I can't even sit through the whole 15 seconds. So painful.
I'm more confused by a lot of it that cringeing at it. It's like "I must be missing something. Is this normal now?" Maybe it helps that I'm old enough to have mostly forgotten how stupid I was as a teenager. But some of it definitely makes you embarrassed for them.
And yeah, if there was a video of my ages 14-18 available online I'd probably never want to show my face in public again. Imagine these people when they get old enough to realise what absolute zeroes they look like.
Speaking of not normal, I've never heard of celebrating your mum for having to give birth to you and your siblings. Isn't that kind of part of what Mother's Day is for? Why does this woman need two Mother's Days, and one on her oldest son's birthday no less?
https://twitter.com/AITA_online/stat...49301065080833
Guess who didn't read the full story?Quote:
Why does this woman need two Mother's Days, and one on her oldest son's birthday no less?
This mother has FIVE Mother's Days, one actual Mother's Day and one for each of her four children. And this isn't her eldest son telling the story, it's her eldest daughter.
Anyway, this mother is a narcissist who cares more about gifts than her children. Not very Christian. This would be kinda sweet if she was happy with home made fudge, a family photo, a bottle of wine, a bunch of flowers, normal things that normal Moms appreciate, but when she wants a Macbook and a necklace, she's being greedy, and at the expense of her children. And the extended family all ganging up to "support" the greedy mother and run a massive guilt trip, this is not normal, healthy family relationships. These people are nasty people. I'd be more than happy to cut them out of my life, I imagine this woman has had 25 years of misery from her family.
Good analysis Sherlock. Maybe I didn't take time to read every word because I didn't need to read the whole story to see she's a cunt.
What I don't get is why someone would think there's a chance they might be the asshole in this scenario.
I disagree. It's sweet if she expects a kiss on the cheek, then makes the kid the center of attention for the rest of the birthday. She can be the star of the show on Mother's Day. Any more than that and it's somewhere between borderline and full-blown NPD.
Well in that case, the whole family is 'tarded.
I mean I get it, a child's birthday should be about the child, not the mother, and it seems incredibly narcissistic of the mother to demand to be centre of attention. But I can also kinda get the idea that the children should grow up to appreciate their mother, and to not allow birthdays to become days where the children only think of themselves. It's not how I'd go about parenting, I think it's fine for kids to have one day a year that's only about them, but I'm not critical of the idea. What I'm critical of is the expectation of expensive gifts, to the point it means the children get shitty presents, and the guilt trip associated with non compliance.Quote:
I disagree.
Probably because her parents are assholes who use guilt trips to control their children. If you have parents like this, chances are you'll question these situations which seem so clear cut from the outside.Quote:
What I don't get is why someone would think there's a chance they might be the asshole in this scenario.
Keep an eye on your neighbors, the suspicious fuckers.
https://twitter.com/bestofnextdoor/s...19554619576320
I've noticed that the attractive woman who lives opposite me has changed her shampoo. Not sure if she has dandruff, or if she's a terrorist. I'll continue to be vigilant and keep an eye on her.
Don't worry, I'm compiling evidence. Fortunately she leaves the window open when she bathes, so I've started filming her. I've also been collecting her laddered tights from her wheelie bin, and other potentially incriminating material.
Nah. On the countless occasions I've asked her what underwear she's wearing, she gives me a funny look and calls me a creep. She's blatantly not interested in me, so I'm pretty certain she's not stalking me.
So Putin's doing something in Ukraine, but unclear what. Some shelling, some incursions, picture pretty murky.
I think I'll go to my twitter source.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMXALC9W...g&name=900x900
Boris' response so far has been weakest of all Western powers. Blah blah blah, sanctions on three minor Russian oligarchs, and five Russian banks no-one has ever heard of. Guess it's tough to sanction the guys who are funding your party.
It's white supremacy ldo
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FMXU8sRX...jpg&name=small
She sounds like the black equivalent of Uncle Leo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYZBKqemQrU
lol "nukes" trending with "Gary Lineker". Imagine a former footballer thinking he's an expert on geopolitics.
Quote:
Trending in United Kingdom
Nukes
There have been no reports that nuclear weapons have been used in the unfolding situation in Ukraine
Trending with Gary Lineker