-
Posts
-
@sunny wrote:
@ugo wrote:
@sunny wrote:
i carnt see whats diffrent mwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaTELL ME TELL ME NOW :evil:
sunny ya fick c000nt lol
Iv looked looked and looked agin ffs :evil:
Sunny,
It’s not the difference with the pictures it’s more about what’s wrong with the picture………Like a common sense issue, All the pictures are the same it’s just pasted from one frame to the next, I suggest you look at what the guys are doing (fitting bollards) Then I suggest you look at where they are fitting them, Lastly look at the vehicle they are using and it’s location in accordance to the bollards…….. :P
:oops: Yeah i new that :roll: :wink: Ok i didnt notice but yes yes iv got it lol
Took me a while, but I eventually fell in. :oops:
:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
I knew the answer honest I did 8-[ 8-[ ….. no really I did :- :- ……. im just ever so grateful that Sunny asked tho :lol: :lol: :lol:
Well between us all we did bl**dy sh/it!! :lol:
@Dibb’s wrote:
@fastcars wrote:
@Dibb’s wrote:
@fastcars wrote:
Ugo thinking he has got a mate in Dibbs… :?:
Is there anything wrong in that?
Are you asking for my advice?
Not at all. . . . :)
Such an interpretation seems so stifling in our social connections and contrary to natural discussion. Are we never to comment about another that has the least hint of criticism? To even try to follow this rule for any reasonable period in our lives would make conversation take on an air of unreality. Try conversing with someone about Stalin’s policy of executing his opponents or sending them to Siberia to die – all without any phrase critical of his personality or motivation being used; the resulting discussion would best be described as unrealistic or surreal. Taking this interpretation in a very strict sense would so limit ordinary conversation that surely we should examine not just this interpretation of this verse, but the whole subject of judging others from a personal perspective.
Would you not agree………………………
FFS Dibbs, its ur thread, why bring in boIIocks like what i have just highlighted? FFS what a load of codswalloping bullshyte ffs! OOOOOH some workmen cant get their van out! BOOOOOOOBEEDOOOO! Hang on,,,,, lets waffle about Stalin!
What a joke of a thread
@hermangrrrman! wrote:
@Dibb’s wrote:
@fastcars wrote:
@Dibb’s wrote:
@fastcars wrote:
Ugo thinking he has got a mate in Dibbs… :?:
Is there anything wrong in that?
Are you asking for my advice?
Not at all. . . . :)
Such an interpretation seems so stifling in our social connections and contrary to natural discussion. Are we never to comment about another that has the least hint of criticism? To even try to follow this rule for any reasonable period in our lives would make conversation take on an air of unreality. Try conversing with someone about Stalin’s policy of executing his opponents or sending them to Siberia to die – all without any phrase critical of his personality or motivation being used; the resulting discussion would best be described as unrealistic or surreal. Taking this interpretation in a very strict sense would so limit ordinary conversation that surely we should examine not just this interpretation of this verse, but the whole subject of judging others from a personal perspective.
Would you not agree………………………
FFS Dibbs, its ur thread, why bring in boIIocks like what i have just highlighted? FFS what a load of codswalloping bullshyte ffs! OOOOOH some workmen cant get their van out! BOOOOOOOBEEDOOOO! Hang on,,,,, lets waffle about Stalin!
What a joke of a thread
:shock: what flew up ur ar/se hermy???????? :lol:
i’m sure the vehichle can fit between those 2 ballards..
Why are the bollards there anyway?
They cant be there to stop traffic because there isnt a road nearby.
They cant be to withold pedestrains because they are far to wide apart.
Maybe the van is a get-away vehicle involved in a bank raid and the brickies aint half as stupid as we give them credit for…. :?:
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!