This entry was posted on
Tuesday, November 25th, 2008 at
5:20 pm and is filed
under Old Media.
(Primarily 18.104.22.168 by the looks of things, and you can browse from the most recent edit backwards starting here if you feel like taking a slightly different path; I’m sure there’s plenty more to be found, especially among the more recent edits.)
I strayed upon someone who has read one of my favourite books.
I spotted a dangerous leftist lurking in the bowels of their organisation.
I chanced upon distaste for “self-promoting articles in national newspapers”.
Where is real proof in the tiger actually showing homosexual behaivour? Personally I believe tigers would only be prone to show anti-homosexual behaivour, is it because of this people believe they might actually be closet homosexuals? –22.214.171.124 14:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I can get past the spelling, but:
– Note the immediate switch from a demand for proof to a reliance on belief.
– Note the fear that the very idea that a tiger could be homosexual might be enough to ‘turn’ people (or at least make them a little bit curious).
– Note above all the deep-set affection for tigers that has been sadly absent from our newspapers since the retirement of Bill Watterson.
Tigers are nimble, and light on their toes. My RE-spect for tigers continually grows!
UPDATE – Meanwhile… Hey, everyone! Andrew’s back!