Grim Up North

Wow! Who would have thought drawing an innocuous card like 7 of clubs could be so beneficial.

Teller Report says it was

A bunch but not everyone.... Surely she will QO - I think a film about her life is due out shortly - but did she die naturally?

Haha - and to think I’d actually started going through the process to answer Wee Jum.

As she had already been dead for at least a week surely this has to have a claim for the worst DL prediction of all time?

Since Charles Lane died in July 2007 the number 4 slot on the Death List has been a very safe place to be, at least for the next twelve months, with not a single hit. Prince Phil currently keeping the sequence going. For a place so high up on the list that is quite surprising however it is not the safest place to find yourself. That would be at number 32 where no-one has died whilst holding the slot since Lionel Hampton on 30th August 2002. This year (and last year) Valery Giscard D'Estaing has responsibility of keeping the sequence going.

No of course it is totally genuine. He was competing with Kirk Douglas and Vera Lynn on yesterday's episode but he was the only one to manage to actually kick the bucket. The other two had a few swings at it but couldn't get the leverage from their wheelchairs to get a good contact. They also showed a special repeat show from September 17th where Leah Bracknell surprised everybody by beating Jacques Chirac and Ginger Baker after a slow motion action replay because in real time it looked like both Chirac and Baker had kicked the bucket before her.

I know what you mean but the leg extension into Parker does look like he meant to take the player out and the ball was hardly in shot on the Charles one if you watch he is never even lined up with the ball, only the player. Seems that it is. Or at least 'she was fat and ugly so I gave her a snog to cheer her up' is a defence which implies the same.

No article with a date of death, no points. The rules are clear. I would suggest combining an article with a BMD record is outside the rules. Seems very straightforward to me.

Yeah - sadly that was his second red card offence in that game (and he never even got booked for either) - the kick in the chest following through on Parker was a shocker and had he received the red card he deserved then maybe history and current reality might be different (not sure though he was always a bit hyper). EDIT: Ahh you've edited in the Parker tackle - total shocker and totally blatant - how did he not even get booked?

Actually per his defence (which has been accepted by the jury) he didn't call the woman 'fat and ugly', someone else did - he just slobbered all over her face after someone else called her fat and ugly to try and make her feel better. Other than that I agree with your points - it can't be acceptable to go around kissing fat girls on the premise it will lift their mental state (in fact I'm laughing as I write this it is such a ridiculous idea!). PS *you're drunk

Cleared of all charges Also the woman with him not Bianca but Katie Davies his personal manager.

There is a play of some political beauty heading our way later this afternoon or this evening. The EU will announce that they feel this is the best deal that can ever be achieved with the UK and therefore for the sake of the other important EU business they have decided that it is either this deal or no deal and no extension will be allowed (this can be a hollow threat because the UK Govt have to vote on 19th and EU have until 31st to change their mind). The beautiful bit is that this then gives the UK Parliament a vote between This Deal or No Deal. Parliament has already voted 328 - 301 in favour of rejecting No Deal as a catastrophic result and so they will be left in a position to either vote for This Deal or vote for No Deal (that they have already voted against due to it being catastrophic in their words). Hence a vote against This Deal is a vote for a 'catastrophic' No Deal. On that basis the Deal should get through but with lots of gnashing of teeth.

So it is wrong because the minstrels involved blacking up and that was synonymous with racial oppression? I find it easy to accept that it is wrong to black up to look like the B&W minstrels or the gollywog off the jam jars but I still query if your fancy dress intention is to look like Mr T and you are not black then some artificial tanning lotion is required and I don't understand why that offends because it is just a colour like blue and surely if we can get to the point where there is no racism that is where we need to get to - black, blue, yellow, brown, white, purple are all just colours and have no deeper meaning? Otherwise when do we ever move the issue forward? PS Kinnock - welcome back!

Yeah I thought using Trudeau as my example was probably a bad call for the discussion. Why is blacking up to look like a black person offensive when bluing up to look like a blue character is not offensive?