Gnarly Gnu

You assumed correctly this time. Where you came unstuck was your understanding of the adjective gay. Perhaps blame your teachers?

Well that sounds the opposite to gay then right.... bit fiery some of those ones eh.

That's sad, my wife and I enjoy a gay marriage.

Of course. In Atheism there is no moral law or right and wrong, everything is relative and up to individual choice. For example it is impossible for you to prove that someone like Pol Pot was immoral or even wrong - he just did what seemed good to him and his opinion is just as valid as other atheists like you.

Yes, only an African jihadi shaped hole in the fuselage. Should patch up just fine.

He could at least claim a refund for the return? Well in death he did achieve something creative albeit in a piecemeal manner - ejection seats for airliners.

"The man who died after being sucked out of a Somali passenger jet in midair on Monday appears to have been the person who detonated the bomb... All other passengers survived the incident, meaning this ended up being closer to a Jackass stunt than a terror attack." Recall seeing a photo online of the remains a Moz suicide bomber with his genitals wrapped for protection... needless to say not suitable for posting here. They are so zealous and emphatic, imagine what could be achieved if their effort and creativity was towards doing good.

Interesting that this incident hasn't been such a big deal on the news. Twenty years ago it would have been global headlines and everyone would be shocked and mystified. Now we just shrug and "oh yeah, Moslems doing Moslem stuff again". The latest goss in the media is that the explosives may have been hidden by means of the terrorist pretending to be disabled in a wheelchair. BTW a martyr is someone who is put to death because of their faith, in Islam they try to apply this word to the exact opposite scenario. These are murderers and will be judged as such.

Every time I see one of these lists I find some new amazing aircraft I'd not heard of before. For aircraft design a very creative time indeed.

Car, plane and backyard.

Who is this addressed to, the writer? If you disagree with the article the logical thing is to explain where it is incorrect or falls short. Much of the article relates to the US however some aspects are certainly relevant here and the closure of smaller airfields and restrictions / limitations on primary airports is both relevant here and does affect us all. And often these restrictions are based on dubious 'environmental' reasons so yes it does have a political aspect and it seems likely he has a valid point.

"It will take drastic action to make air travel bearable again. This week, after three years, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals gave Kennedy International Airport permission to shoot some birds that fly around the runways threatening to cause plane crashes. This ruling — and the three years it took to appear — shed some light on a subject I’ve wondered about for a long time: Why is air travel so grotesquely unpleasant?" ..... "So why don’t we build more airports? Because airports need to be built near the cities they serve. The cities they serve are controlled by leftists who make construction a Sisyphean nightmare. Take our own New York City. JFK is the worst airport in the country. It would like to refurbish itself, improve and expand, but it’s surrounded on three sides by neighborhoods that wouldn’t tolerate the Concorde; that barely tolerate JFK as it is now and will brook no expansion. On its fourth side, JFK is bounded by federally protected wetlands, so that’s a non-starter too. New construction has to be on JFK’s existing footprint, and that new construction has to abide by New York’s absurdly onerous labor and environmental laws. Nonetheless, Governor Cuomo insists that JFK’s rebuilding will happen. According to Forbes, Cuomo’s plan for JFK will address New York’s passenger needs from 2050 forward. To put that in perspective, if the Wright Brothers’ first flight were this year, Cuomo would be talking about fixing JFK in time for the invention of the jet. Now imagine that JFK were being started from scratch." And an alternate opinion below: Who ruined air travel? The airlines, their union and their politicians.

Hahaha... a government department under-funded? In Australia too? Can we shift this to the laughter forum?

Los Angeles, Minneapolis... obviously Democrats grandalph. I was on an Air India flight once where a couple of passengers started fighting and ended up trying to strangle each other in the aisle. No staff to be seen either during or after the incident, some other passengers ended up dragging them apart. Pretty funny actually, no need for silly diversions etc.

"A Delta Air Lines flight from Los Angeles to Minneapolis had to make an unscheduled landing in Utah because two flight female flight attendants got into a fistfight at 37,000 feet." Feisty birds!

Not sure about an execution but could they at least be tarred and feathered?

OK so the vote for Hillary mob might be interested.

Is this viable compared to simply using the iS injected version which has all this sorted out?

Well it seems reasonable. No checks on those strolling over the southern border so why should airline arrivals be hassled? Same with visiting Europe, arriving commercially they want to see a passport, what a joke.

Correct Willedoo, I posted that just the other day! Good news too.

The perfect embodiment of Canberra no? Quite useless, rather ugly, unwanted, overpriced, hideously out of place.... and of course 100% paid for by and feeding off of taxpayers. (OK, OK only joking, Canberra actually isn't so bad!)

How about that I see in #32 Marty must be growing up, seeing the light and becoming an economic conservative... I like it! Not much gov money left for bail-outs (that's a silver lining), not too far off before we'll have to worry about bank bail-ins (which are far worse).

Haha have to ask did you off them some baksheesh? Or a nice write-up? Congrats of the RPL Papa!

He is a socialist green and a malthusian, so the opposite. Good outcome.

"The OV-10 Bronco was a flying and fighting do-all sport utility vehicle. It could loiter for hours, direct fire onto the enemy, pack paratroopers and cargo, or attack with its own weapons. Many think it was retired right when it could have become most useful and that it would have been the perfect light air support aircraft for Afghanistan and Iraq. The Bronco flew with three branches of the US Military, beginning service in Vietnam. It offered incredible maneuverability, a hardy airframe that could take fire, the ability to operate from tiny and rough airfields (including "Gator Navy" carrier decks and roadways), great visibility for its two-man crew, and most importantly, with its rear cargo hold it could be easily adapted to a crazy amount of missions." [Great video at the link, won't embed here]