Lighthouse

Pretty interesting stuff. Obviously every crash is different so it's hard to make definitive conclusions. In a way it's a shame they used a 727 and not an old 737 which is much similar to modern aircraft design wise. In some ways the 727 was safer. Having the engines at the back protects them from impact in most crash scenarios. They also require a stronger fuselance to cope with the extra weight on the tail, as well as a stronger wing spar. They did this before with an old Boeing 720 and created a massive fireball, they aluded to it briefly in this documentary.

Historically maybe but I went to a local comprehensive and the school rugby team was just as popular as the football team. Half of them were common as muck and lived in council houses. The older rugby fans are probably more middle class but it's not exactly Eton vs Harrow.

Stoned to death, probably none. Stabbed, shot, beatten to death... probably thousands. I'm not saying Islam doesn't have a problem but I think the OP was wrong to desribe it as being 'a religion which condones' murdering a teenage girl. This is more a problem with the Pakistani government, which is one of the more aggresive Islam states. I'm not aware of women's rights being abused in Indonesia, Turkey, Morrocco or the Balkans but I admit I know very little about those countries.

Whereas in the bible belt of American there are thousands of people who would happily see gay people stoned to death because it's 'against God'. I agree that Islam has more than a heathly number of nutters who follow but it's hardly exclusive to them.

Jaidi has apparently been complaning that his hotel room is haunted. That's a new one. https://twitter.com/RadhijaidiOff/status/255408282599038977/photo/1

I think Andi Osho pretty much tops the list of unfunny female comedians. Everything she says is just predictable and lazy, there's not wit to it at all.

She'd get my vote (and a few other things). Made Attack of The Clones sort of watchable.

So will be remortgaging your house and putting the whole lot on a Wham win then...............................................obviously.

Bad form - Guaranteed to go on indefinitely. If you draw a game you should probably have won, you will definitely lose the next one. Every defeat is guaranteed to be followed by another defeat in the next game. Good form - Will always come to an end in the next game. When you do lose a game, this is proof you have f**ked up your good form. We have a 2 week break to do our homework and get keey players like Morgan, Gaston and Clyne fit. No reason we can't get a result here, if we can stop them playing it into Diame and Carroll we have a chance. West Ham haven't been anything special yet this year. There is no reason we should be more scared of Carroll and Diame than they are of Lambert, Gaston, Puncheon and Lallana.

Wasn't at the game today but from what I've seen so far he is something we can all be pretty possitive about. A definite improvement on Kelvin on current form.

Disappointing not to win that but let's not over react. We were missing 3 of out best players in Clyne, Cork and Gaston. I doubt Morgan was 100% at his best either. It was only the 7th game of the season and we have a steep learning curve. If you are busy moaning about the lack of Premier League signings, look at QPR and how well they're doing. We have the tallent and will improve. Rodriguez - He clearly has the ability but he was always a long term signing. It's a big step up for him and it will take time (a lot more than 7 games) to see the best of him. If nothing else take comfort in the knowlege that at least 5 teams are probably as bad as us at the moment and they haven't played the fixture list of death.

I know they're at Stamford Bridge and this is probably akin to our trip to the Emirates but Norwich really do look bad on MOTD. Terrible possitioning, defenders losing their man and ball watching. Hopefully the wheels are coming off West Ham too.

I'd pay to watch a fight to the death between Russell Brand and Ed Milliband. The latter isn't anything political I just think he is a massive kn*b.

Maybe it will be part of Saints Village, built on the current cement works between the 30 storey Wetherspoons and the petting zoo.

I never quite understand why they never build these things on an actual hill rather than building a structure 500ft up in the air.

I'd love you to be right, honnestly. It would be great if everyone in Britain was mature and confident enough to walk around naked without any hint of sexual harassment or awkwardness. Sadly that's just not going to happen. Your theory hinges on every teenage boy in the country being completely in control of his hormones, that's just not the case. We already have people saying stuff along the lines of, "she's clearly up for it, wearing such a short skirt/low cut top etc." If women were walking around naked I'm sure a lot of men would take this as some kind of invitation.

So you're saying punishments shouldn't be applied if they cost a lot for the tax payer?

For as long as he keeps doing it he should keep facing the consequences. It's his own choice, all he has to do is put some clothes on. If he would rather go to prison than wear clothes that's his choice.

What you're basically doing there is saying one person should be exempt from the law because he personally isn't doing any harm. Laws apply to everyone or noone. You can't let everyone walk around naked, so you shouldn't allow 1 person to walk around naked.

It will though. If everyone walked around naked the borderlines between nudity and sexual harassment would be squashed and blurred together completely. A 16 kid sat on a bus naked. A 23 year old woman with huge knockers gets on and sits next to him, what do you think's going to happen? He get's wood, she's stood there screaming, "Pervert!!" It would happen all the time. Then there's the people who actually are sex pest, they could just walk onto a crowded tube train touching whatever they want and claiming it's accident and they're just squashed together in the crowd. If everyone was allowed to walk around naked in public it would be pretty much be impossible to police.

If he wants to walk around his own property with his wedding veg swining around that's not a problem but in public that's another matter. A lot of people would consider it indecent, especially parents with younger children. In the same way that you probably wouldn't let your 5 year old kid read Nuts and Zoo magazine, many children would probably find this confusing and disturbing. TBH I think I would question this blokes mental health to some extent. I'm all for people campaigning for human rights but this bloke seems to be chasing a bit of a pointless cause. He knows his nudity is likely to get him in trouble with the law and does it for no actual reason other than to cause an argument. He's like a real life internet troll.

Thought that was pretty good overall. Hardly a classic episode but definitely watchable. Not the same without Norman Lovett though (male Holly).

Giving it a watch, hopefully it's better than the Back to Earth special they did.

Yeah but it's a fish. Not a human. They're completely different, you might as well compare it to a cabbage being locked up in a cage.

Have you seen the gnashers on a killer whale? It's like a ferkin' T-Rex. Make sure you get one with a friendly demeanour.