[QUOTE]Who mentioned The Goodies!
It were me!!!
[QUOTE]Who mentioned The Goodies!
It were me!!!
The Banana Splits
Rainbow 🙂
Battle of the Planets 🙂
Streethawk
Tales of the Golden Monkey
Bring ’em Back Alive
Tales of the Unexpected
Armchair Thriller
The Twighlight Zone
Outer Limits
THE GOODIES!!! 🙂
Micheal Bentines Potty Time (who else remembers this one???) 😉
Mr. Rossi (or this one)
Kung – Fu
Monkey
POLICE SQUAD (IN COLOR) 🙂
The Banana Splits
Rainbow 🙂
Battle of the Planets 🙂
Streethawk
Tales of the Golden Monkey
Bring ’em Back Alive
Tales of the Unexpected
Armchair Thriller
The Twighlight Zone
Outer Limits
THE GOODIES!!! 🙂
Micheal Bentines Potty Time (who else remembers this one???) 😉
Mr. Rossi (or this one)
Kung – Fu
Monkey
POLICE SQUAD (IN COLOR) 🙂
Why not???
Also, 59?? F-117’s have been built. In time of increased tension, would not more have been made??
The A-7, A-10, Buccanneer, Su-25 and even Nimrod can carry air – air missiles for self defence. Does not make them fighters, does it.
Yep, the F-111B was supposed to be a fighter. However performance was fair to bloody awful.
The Buccaneer and A-6 also had fixed refueling probes…as do most big probe equipped transports and bombers. Think VC-10, various C-130’s, Nimrod, Tu-95 etc.
And yet still an ‘animal rights’ spokespaerson on Rado 5 Live last week, when asked whether he would use a drug tested on ani,als his reply was “yes, because all drugs have been tested on animals at some point”….
One could argue that if ‘animal rights’ were such an important issue to this spokesperson, then he should refuse ALL drugs regardless of the pain and discomfort…???
And yet still an ‘animal rights’ spokespaerson on Rado 5 Live last week, when asked whether he would use a drug tested on ani,als his reply was “yes, because all drugs have been tested on animals at some point”….
One could argue that if ‘animal rights’ were such an important issue to this spokesperson, then he should refuse ALL drugs regardless of the pain and discomfort…???
Well I did point out not being fully sure about the latter part of point d)…:-)
That said, I did read in AFm a number of years a go about a Lancer which LOST an engine during a routine traing flight….!!! Must have vibrated itself loose or something. The crew were described as being “suprised” when the bomber landed….I bet they were!!!!!!
Fair points. The same thing should happen with rape. If a victim is the subject of rape, then s/he shpuld be kept annymous. So should the alleged perpetrator. He may well be innocent. If found guilty, then by all means reveal his identity.
Fair points. The same thing should happen with rape. If a victim is the subject of rape, then s/he shpuld be kept annymous. So should the alleged perpetrator. He may well be innocent. If found guilty, then by all means reveal his identity.
The reason no B-1B’s were flying over Baghdad in ’91 was more due to:
a) The B-52G had taken over from the B-52D in the 1980s as Americas convrntional “big stick”.
b) The B-52H was the main stand off nuclear weapons carrier, armrmed with ALCM’s
c) The B-1B was therefore America’s main nuclear “penetrator” designed to plough through heavy Soviet defences using a certain amount of stealth aided by powerful ECM.
d) The B-1B’s ECM and avionics proved troublesome in its early years. I think the fleet was grounded for a time..????? (aoplogies if untrue)
e) The B-1B was nor fitted for conventional weapons and the crewas were not trained in convrntional weapons delivery in 1990 – 91. Nuke only.
f) The B-1B was destined to have a faily short life as a penetration weapon. The ATB or B-2A was designed to perform this nuclear role…or at least that was the original idea……..
Update: 15 counts of making indecent images of children……