Suspect Device
-
Posts
6,546 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Suspect Device
-
-
I don't find them degrading or anything i just don't see the point in having topless models in page 3 anymore its pretty 90's
If i want to see tits i just hop online or walk in on my gf when she's in the shower
It's more 70's but I guess that most on here weren't around then. Can no-one confirm if the Record did have page 3 girls?
As for the point, it's actually known as a nipple.
0 -
Don't see why they still have a nudey on page 3 on the sun anymore should be done away with and not be on view in the supermarkets for our children to view
Don't get rid of the newspaper altogether though
My child has seen breasts before. They hold no fear for her.
Nicola Sturgeon on the other hand makes her run away greeting.
0 -
They'll slap a tax on things like it, which wouldn't kill scud mags, but would kill the 10p Sun.
Is it only 10p?
Still overpriced IMO.
0 -
Compared to the other pages of the Sun the third one is spiritually uplifting, intellectually enriching, morally enhancing and a shining paragon of honesty
I'd have to disagree with the honesty part. Do the models not get a bit of surgical enhancement and airbrushing. Hardly honest is it?
I like my tits as nature intended.
0 -
The Sun should be banned.
Not page 3 though. The only reason to buy that shiterag is the tits in it.
Edit: Am I going mental in my old age but did the Record not have a page 3 girl in the distant past??
Bring back the lager can ladeeeez as well.
0 -
I had to move to support my local team.
Made sure I wasn't any closer to Culter FC.
0 -
The worst reason for legalizing but unfortunately the one most likely to cause it's legalization.
From Moneyweek
It’s hard to imagine that Bob Marley would have had much time for the private equity industry.
He wouldn’t have thought much of spreadsheets and pie charts, and the only options he was interested in involved having a good
time. But that hasn’t stopped the private equity boys taking an interest in the greatest of all reggae singers.
This month we learned that the Marley estate has teamed up with Privateer Holdings, an American buy-out firm, to launch Marley Natural, which it aims to turn into the first global cannabis company. The power of the Marley name – he was, after all, virtually synonymous with the weed, and campaigned for its legalisation – will, they believe, resonate powerfully with smokers everywhere. The deal reflects the way that the movement to legalise cannabis is steadily progressing in the US. So far, it has been legalised in Washington and Colorado, and other states now permit it for medicinal purposes (which can, of course, be fairly widely interpreted, especially late on a Friday night).
What used to be an entirely underground, illegal industry is starting to go mainstream, with plenty of legal cannabis companies being set up to supply the market. Marley Natural aims to be the first global brand, with big money behind it, but no doubt it will be joined by many others in time. Buy British for your bong That raises a question for the UK. The debate on the drug is usually framed in medical or ethical terms, and those are important issues. But there is also an implication for industrial policy: if there are going to be global cannabis companies, wouldn’t it be better if they were British? After all, there is no question this is going to be big business, whether you approve of it or not. The UN estimates the global cannabis market, both legal and illegal, to be worth about $150bn a year. In the US, Privateer sees it as ultimately being worth in the region of $50bn a year.
The figures are not terribly accurate at this stage – the dealers and consumers are not yet very keen on filling in forms or reporting output statistics. But any way you look at it, it is going to be a lot of money. Whether cannabis is eventually legalised everywhere remains to be seen. But trends that start in the US usually go global. What we view as acceptable or not can change a lot over time. Fifty years ago, homosexuality was illegal, but it was fine to drink a bottle of wine and then drive home. Now we have gay marriage, but drink driving is unacceptable. So there is no particular reason why attitudes to the drug shouldn’t continue to change radically as well. If they do, the industry is completely up for grabs. The companies that have been set up are tiny. Many of them don’t even have bank accounts, because while US law allows you to sell the drug in some states, it doesn’t always allow you to bank the profits. But over a few years, legal cannabis will probably evolve into a standard consumer goods industry, with a few global giants establishing dominant brands, in the way Budweiser or Heineken have in beer, or Marlboro in tobacco. That will take time, money and expertise, but it will certainly be rewarding for the people who get it right. Britain likes to think of itself as at the forefront of growing industries, and this is the kind of thing we are good at. From Diageo in spirits to BAT in tobacco, the UK has a record of building global consumer-goods giants in products that are often addictive and not especially good for you. And it’s not as if we are exactly short on singers of our own. If the Marley brand can go global, how about the Pink Floyd brand? Or the Keith Richards brand? Either would seem just as powerful. From ethics to economics What that would require, of course, is for the drug to be legalised in the UK. So long as it is banned, legitimate companies can’t be started. Right now, whether it should be allowed or not is viewed as simply an ethical or medical issue, which is fair enough. But as it gradually becomes legal elsewhere, then it becomes an economic question as well.
After all, the government gives plenty of support to industries that are morally questionable. The arms exporters, in which the UK is a leading player, are not obviously superior to cannabis distributors. Neither are alcohol or tobacco manufacturers. It is hard to argue that our bankers have really made the world a better place, but the government gives them plenty of support. Even if you disapprove of pot personally, that is no reason why the UK should not be a player in the industry. Legal cannabis could generate lots of jobs, and plenty of wealth for shareholders, as well as taxes. Colorado just gave its citizens a tax rebate because it was collecting so much money from the industry. David Cameron has already promised tax cuts in this country without having much idea of how to pay for them – this might well be the solution. But having the first mover’s advantage will be crucial. If the UK got in early, it could create some major companies.
If it doesn’t, the US and other countries will. Do we want to miss that opportunity?
0 -
I had this strange dream that I went for a loaf of bread, bought it then came straight home.
Edit: I've also had this strange dream that I have posted this before.
0 -
Falling from a great height.
It's not the fall that kills you apparently. It's the sudden stop at the end.
I'd like to kill myself ironically, suffocated by a bag for life.
(That's the 2nd time I've used that line in a matter of days.)
Or I could go for a shite in Oscar Pistorius' house.
0 -
You can never be too careful. For all the home office know they could just be midget asylum seekers.
Probably.
0 -
Not sure if this has been mentioned but it's interesting that GCHQ have been working on software to manipulate online polls.
Operation Underpass.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-28306819
A document that appears to list a wide variety of GCHQ's cyber-spy tools and techniques has been leaked online.
It indicates the agency worked on ways to alter the outcome of online polls, find private Facebook photos, and send spoof emails that appeared to be from Blackberry users, among other things.
Actually if the governement could, do you think they would alter the result of the referendum itself?
I know labour were quite prone to try it in Birmingham (among others), surely the government would be a wee bit better at it.
Or do you trust those in power to be upstanding and honest in their pursuit of democracy?
Tin hat time. (And I realise that most polls are not online)
0 -
Doubt anyone would be too gutted if McGinn left, in all honesty.
I'd be unhappy but not exactly gutted. I can't think of s player leaving that I'd be gutted about. Assuming we get in enough money as a fee.
As for Goodwillie, I'd have preferred if we hadn't signed him on various levels but mostly football ones. I won't be boycotting my club because of it though. On the other hand I won't be getting his name on the back of my replica shirt. (Not just because I don't buy them and it would cost a fortune for all those letters)
0 -
I'll be included in the next Ipsos/Mori poll (or maybe not because I'm voting Yes so it will depend who commissioned the poll)
I got a phone call tonight. 15 minutes of questions regarding how I'm voting and how I see things going after a vote either way.
0 -
Oh ffs. Not happy with that but he can't be as bad as Zola.
0 -
"The early bird cut off (for season tickets) was last Friday and at the moment we are at just over 8,000 season tickets sold. Within that number there are 800 new season ticket holders - people who have never bought before. We still have about 2,200 season ticket holders from last year who have not renewed yet so we are seriously hoping to get up to the 10,000 mark by the start of the SPFL season."
From Yule's interview on RedTV. Very promising.Possibly like me the 2200 were waiting until after the early bird was over so that more money goes to the club.
Can't be 2,200 folk giving up after we've just won the diddy cup last season.
0 -
You are a fanny if you think they UAF are commies, they are a bunch of liberal lefties.
Unite against fascism are not liberal.
0 -
Jamaica looks to be giving it the green light soon.
LIghting the green surely.
Peter Tosh would be happy.
0 -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25566863
Colorado legalization comes into law today.
I would love to think that ours will be only a matter of time but I doubt it with our fuckwit politicians.
0 -
7/10.
I'm a great guesser.
Edit: I only actually knew or thought I knew about 5.
0 -
I assume that someone has posted up the email that was sent around with '100 reasons the McCann's are guilty'
Some of it was interesting (if true) but most was utter pish.
0 -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23516966
Uruguay show the way to make demand for weed fall. Nationalise it.
Still can't see our country following their weed lead.
0 -
I'm getting to the age where everything and everybody annoys the f**k out of me.
Folk putting their feet up on bus seats, anybody dropping litter, fat people eating a mars bar in public.
And people typing LOL in every text they send. I don't for one minute think that they actually laugh out loud after every sentence so why try and pretend that they do.
And fat people, did I mention fat people?
0 -
We took our 2 year old last year to Phuket with us for a family wedding. (They live in Oz and reckoned that Thailand was 1/2 way - it isn't)
No problem on any of the 6 flights apart from the descents to Phuket and Aberdeen. This was only because we didn't wake her up in time to give her Calpol.
Calpol, a tablet with plenty movies on it, loads of colouring books and night flights are the answer to taking kids on long haul in my (limited) experience.
0 -
I'm glad I'm on Satan's side unwittingly.
He's got the best tunes apparently.
This is a very interesting if sometimes mental read.
0
Pregnancy And Parenting
in The General Nonsense Forum
Posted
Any tips for getting a 4 year old to crap more than once a week?
Not more fruit, water, lactulose or califig because we've tried all these.
Any other suggestions? She's got a bit of a phobia about going (still - I thought she'd grow out of it) so tends to try and keep it in.
Explaining that it'll be really sore doesn't work either.