I've always been a fan of classic war films, especially - and I have no idea why this is - ones set on submarines.
My favourite bit was always when an enemy sub aimed a torpedo at the heroes and the captain called "Release countermeasures!"
The countermeasures in question was a substance referred to as "chaff", usually metal-coated glass fibres, which had the effect of blocking or confusing the enemy radar or the torpedo guidance system. It was, if you like, a great big distraction.
And that is precisely what this is:
|The orderlies wondered whether to tell Textusa that she was looking into the wrong end of the shotgun, but decided it would be more fun to wait|
Firstly, I should explain that I have redacted the name of the person Textusa has singled out, as I don't have their permission to use it. For the same reason, I have not copied over the post they wrote which rattled Textusa's cage
"Attack made against this blog" - seriously, does anyone have access to the world's smallest violin?
Here we witness the other tactic Textusa likes to employ - attack anyone who she decides has given tacit support to her "sworn enemies". I find it pathetic beyond words.
Oooh, little bit of a threat, there, as Textusa throws in a bit of "divide and conquer" just for good measure
It is probably because of all the lying
Probably my explanation of the "at least three, up to five" statistic
Excuse me? I was commenting on John Lowe's report. I wouldn't be arsed writing about what you have said unless it was to critique it, which wouldn't take long, seeing as what you know about genetics could be written on a sultana. With a marker pen.
What in the name of sanity are you on about? It's probably a good time to mention that I did actually study genetics at university and have extracted more DNA than you have had hot ketamine.
Well, I certainly wouldn't presume to answer for JB, but you lie as easily as most people draw breath, you demented fraud
Yadda, yadda, yadda.......
Who is she talking to now, you ask? Well, I think it's our redacted friend, but who the fuck knows - it could be the wallpaper, frankly.
And I no longer know who the ''other side'' is either. She could be hiding up a tree on a Japanese island, convinced the war is still on, for all I know
Thank you, professor
*points at temple, makes circular motions*
Like whether a table exists and the inadequateness of the esplanade, for example?
So basically, you want to decide what is and isn't true and reserve the right to karate chop the kidneys of anyone who doesn't believe. That's basically your position, isn't it?
Why - because you don't agree with them? They are at least as entitled to their opinion as you are entitled to your fuckwitted fantasy about them all shagging the neighbours, surely?
Because you don't agree with them?
Okay - well, I think your theories are the deranged rambles of a diseased mind. That's not being disrespectful, I'm just being reasonable. (Actually, I am, but that's beside the point)
*cue booing and hissing noises from the balcony*
This is so disrespectful, Textusa. You keep using this expression - "side with"
It is utterly juvenile and ignores entirely the fact that the people concerned might actually agree with each other.
And here is one of your lies. That is not what I said, I have already corrected you several times, yet you lack the manners to correct yourself
Oh do fuck off
And there we go again. Sides.
I'm sure they will be waiting with bated breath
So now I am going to point out what someone should have pointed out to you years ago.
You are a monstrous control freak. You actually think you can dictate to people what they should believe and who they are allowed to associate with. If they displease you in some way, you attack them. Anyone who doesn't fall for your fairy stories hook, line and sinker walks a constant tightrope with you. It is clearly killing you that you can't just bully everyone into agreeing with you.
You are a very sad person. Get some therapy