honez

Egad! I can't believe Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen didn't make it into the 2005 DeathList. It's a conspiracy I tell ya

and the headline when he goes? "Tupac caput"

Don't worry Yeti, you're not missing anything. She sure does love to Boogie though.

...and don't forget flick and rub

you may or may not wish to try show us your t*ts and show us depending on where you are, what you are and exactly what kind of thing you were expecting to see.

He gets my nod on the famousness test from the Antipodes. So if he lasts more than a fortnight, I reckon he should be in the 2005 list for definite.

Thanks for that kirsty. I think your keyboard's exclamation point is stuck, by the way. Also, I think your second show should have been spelled shoe, otherwise the whole sentence just doesn't make any sense. Unless, of course, it was your plan to sound silly in the first place. In which case, it was a good plan and worked beautifully. The extra exclamation points add to the effect too. Well done.

She's got dem dentures :-B

What? A forum called Deathlist--What else did you expect? Although, sometimes we point out grammar mistakes too. But in you're [sic] case I can't be bothered.

Oh, no. What a shame it would be if Americans had their balls drop without any Dick there.

The Luxembourg PM gives us the nod on who's going to be next to leave the DeathList 50... Come in number 27 your time is up. Sorry Charles, the PM says you've gotta go.

More like Peter, Paul and Jabba, judging by the photo.

I fail to see how someone who flew flew as a pilot for the allies during the war, fighting against Nazi Germany could be described as a Nazi.

It's not for me to understand God's great plan, but it looks to me like it might go something like this: * I know! Let's give her cancer! Yay!! * That'll scare the crap out of her when she finds out, * It'll make her spend lots of her riches to buy very expensive treatment, * Hehe... Then I'll make it go away, * Then she'll have to pay lots more money for an expensive doctor just to tell her that it's all been for nothing: She's cured! Hurrah! * She'll spend the rest of her life worrying whether it's going to come back or not, * Then, right at the end, after it's taunted her for many years, I'll kill her off some other way. I think the doc's smile reveals just how astute he really is

...so was he known as Java Man?

Someone had better ask the Prime Minister of Luxembourg what the odds are for PB outlasting 2005.

Well that sure showed me. You are, of course, absolutley right: If someone objects to anything on the web at all, we should all immediately desist and submit ourselves to self-censorship. Oh, hang on, it's not self-censorship; it's Cyprus-censorship. Self-appointed-censor-of-the-internet that you are, why stop with deathlist? Why not create a Cyprus-censored portal to the 'net that everyone must go through. That way you can block any links or subversive and sick web-sites that don't meet your (and soon-to-everyone-else's) lofty standards. If that's too much of an undertaking, I suppose you could make a start by doing what you suggested in your post--trawl through the net looking for sites that certain people would find objectional and send them the link spam-style. That sounds like a very good idea to me, because like I said, after all, you are absolutely right. No-one should be allowed to have web sites that someone (read: you) might not like. But then again, where's the fun in that? Maybe there is something in this free-speech thing that's worth giving it a try for a little while longer. The Yanks seem pretty keen on it, so it just has to be right, doesn't it? There doesn't seem to be anything else to be gained by me disagreeing with you any further on this, so I'll adopt some self-censorship on this subject, but I will pipe up on other "sick" topics on this "sick" site if I've got something to say.

I speak two languages and I can spell in both of them. "The issue" you seem to think is being deflected is you believing that this forum pokes fun at famous people who are approaching the end of their life. The issue is not being deflected at all. Your spelling and grammar are not good. Q.E.D. As far as your issue goes, being famous means that the people in question have been talked about, photographed, written about and generally been in peoples' thoughts for much of their adult lives. They earned their living hoping that this would be the case. That is what being famous means. That is the price they pay. For you to argue that when they are old or diagnosed with some illness, that they should shrink away from public life and be quietly forgotten, strikes me as absurd. Death is a fact of life, and to sweep it under the carpet, ignore it and hope that no-one notices as a celeb fades into oblivion is probably the worst kind of death a celeb could get.

No, [allegedly] this is him... Which sort of explains why everyone was seeking his opinion earlier in the piece.

If you look closely enough you'll see that he's seated next to a horse-headed mascot with a big thumb for hitchhiking. It look like some sort of evil omen that he's about to hitch a ride with one of the four horses of the apocalyspe to me. I never thought he'd turn out to be one of the ghost-rider harbingers of doom, just goes to show you can't trust anyone these days. Do you think that's why he was known as "crazy horse?"

If the quotes really are genuine, it's really quite sad that there are people out there in Internetland that are so gullible. No wonder the 'net is rife with scams if these people are anything to go by. Maybe IE should come with Skeptics Society as one of the favourites.

Are you breaking in a new pair of underpants?

This isn't directed at anyone in particular, it's just a general gripe I've got. [RANT] * Correct spelling versus incorrect spelling. * Correct grammar versus poor, or non-existent grammar. * Coherent content versus poorly-formed, badly worded, expletive and basically incoherent content. Deathlist is an Internet forum, conducted and administered in written English. I think it's completely fair that posts constructed using the latter of the techniques listed above should be treated with the same respect that the posters' used when creating them. Posts riddled with spelling and grammatical errors, scattered with expletives and merely rant for ranting's sake achieve absolutely nothing. If you disagree with or are offended by this forum or the views of its posters, then an intelligent, well-written rebuke will be far more effective than a foul-mouthed tirade that appears to have been written by a nine-year-old. Simply posting "YOU AINT NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF [insert chosen expletive here] YOUR GONNA ROTTEN HELL YOU SHOULDNT OF SAID THAT" [sic] or some other equally thought-provoking argument, will only leave the reader wondering which zoo's simian enclosure has internet access. So please, if you disagree, dislike or just can't stomach this forum, then at least articulate your thoughts in coherent written English. Many valid arguments and good points look foolish because the poster can't be bothered. If the poster can't, then why should the reader? [/RANT]

Cyprus, your seat-to-keyboard-interface looks like it's operating well past its capacity and is overheating, judging by its appalling spelling. I suggest you switch it off for a while, or at least upgrade it to something with more than 64K before it blows a valve.

Nice rant, Mr Ron (A Captain Scarlet fan?) Shame about your spelling though, which lessened your message's impact. Shame really. Ten points for effort nevertheless.