JohnnyFartPants

This is very wrong but I must admit I have just laughed very loudly.

A lot of interesting points on this thread, with some light hearted jokes along the way. It makes me think that maybe The Lounge and Muppet area should be blended into one. To cross the divide to discuss things with the same people that you were previously being a lounger or muppet with seems nothing more than a waste of time. Less rules and more debating please. Just my opinion.

I could not agree with you less. The BBC is a very good service, but why should it be paid for by a license which is nothing short of a tax. Based purely on us being British and wanting the now common commodity of a TV this iconic company believes it can hold us all to ransom to pay for a service even if we say we don't watch it. What makes them so unique that they cannot trade on their own success in the same way that commercial TV has to? I detest the arrogance of the people in charge of the BBC who assume this is acceptable. It is archaic and will someday soon seem as wrong as the idea of being able to smoke in the company of strangers in pubs and inflict your disease ridden habit upon them.

They are mentally ill, surely?

Number 18 seems to be the only one that forgot to remember to obscure her nipple with her hand. Blonde dinlo!

Yeah, yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah, and I do get your point, but not to forget that our boys put their necks on the line to defend the British people living there. Yes, they may have been "used" by the government to do a job but they did it very well and for that I am proud of them. Having been there I think the locals are head mental to be living in that hell hole, but that's another story.

It was a very interesting point. I think Durley may have met more people from the site than anyone else. It might be worth you starting a thread, perhaps entitled, "Who has met Durley" that I could then contribute to?

I have and can concur.

Ta muchly!!

Why not? We didn't start the conflict. We gave plenty of warnings and when it came to it, with a much smaller army and navy, we kicked arse. I am well proud of them.

You couldn't rephrase this could you!!

Not sure I have mentioned any laws concerning kiddy fiddlers. I have been talking purely about murderers. Of the murderers, I have also said that only the really nasty ones should be put down. I did suggest that nut job serial killers are ill and so should be given the chance to take their own life in much the same way as a person with cancer etc. Although our society does not endorse that, we are beginning to turn a blind eye to it. You did pick up on the fact that cancer resulting in ultimate death was different from having a bonkers in the nut illness that wouldn't mean death to the patient/prisoner, but very recently a man flew to Switzerland to end his life as he was paralysed from the chest down. He could have gone on to live for years but chose not to. There is no difference between the two. They are both ill and do not like the life that has now been offered them because of the illness they have.

Thanks, but what's your point?

I totally agree.

Excellent idea!!

Okay, then non stop torture before death after one year?

Stop moaning!!

Stephen Fry said something on TV once that hit home to me. He said we now have a generation of people that grew up knowing the law couldn't touch them and that have never been spanked in school or had a clout around the back of their heads by their parents. On top of this we also have a rising of Chav culture. Coincidence?

If someone kills a loved one of mine I will not give a flying **** if that person, incarcerated for the next 40 years or until death, is now feeling ready to recognise that they were naughty. The victim had his rights taken away from him, he's dead. So if you are more than willing to match these rights for the offender, then I fully endorse your u-turn. Also, it may not be meant to be a soft option, but we know it is.

Michael Jackson simply offers you the full service. He will give you Jesus Juice, let you smoke then turn you over and **** the **** out of you. You can't get there on the national health.

Just what makes you think and feel we are Great. Maybe you could feel great from exterminating scum from our streets by way of lethal injection? Not just any old criminals, mainly for dropping litter and other serious stuff.

I didn't quite mean it that way. I am asking you to consider that what makes a person kill repeatedly is an illness, in the same way that terminal disease is also an illness. There seems to be a growing understanding among civilisation to "allow" (not sentence) a person with an illness to die in dignity. I am asking why you feel that a mass murderer should not also be afforded this way out from his turmoil.

So you are saying that if they are mentally ill, we have places to cater to their needs, but if they are just very bad people, then we have places to drive them mad so that maybe one day we can put them in the places that cater for the mentally ill? And you say we mustn't be barbaric monsters by ending their days quickly? It also sounds as if you are catering more for the victims by throwing them in prison than you are for the patient who has a nasty illness which drives him to do these things.

I wouldn't worry about Beckham. He is a flash in the pan bit part player and will be gone as quickly as he has arrived.

When was it? I say it was The Falklands Conflict.