teresa may pictures and video clips here

[Baldinger]

Peacock,
well spotted with the Mr Mockle website - great selection and free too. No matter what the others say, i still think she's better than some of the girls of today

[Officer Dibble]

Christ Baldinger, she's better than all of them! - She's got that vital, but nowadays rare, porn/glamour star ingredient - sex appeal, you might actually feel like shagging her!

Teresa looks great in the furs; they complement her look/image, i.e. expensive, exotic, and erotic. Although I abhor harming furry little critters for the sake of it I don't feel particularly affected with a pretentious urge to denounce fur lovers/wearers. I mean, Gordon Bennett, any one of those who sneer, had they been living 15,000 years ago in the ice age, would have killed their granny for one of Teresa's furs!

I reckon what Teresa needs now is a starring role in one of my movies, to help bolster her career...now, where did I put her phone number...


Dibble.

[magoo]

It seems the Officer has forgotten to mention Guardian reading, public sector handwringers in his post like he normally does. Dear me Dibble your standards are slipping. Teresa is OK I agree but I wouldnt go as far as to say shes better than all the others. She might be better than 99% of the current crop but not all of them.

Yes prehistoric man had a need to wear fur. We do not. There was no Top Shop or Burtons for Captain Caveman to pop into and get himself togged up in a nice casual suit. Its much cheaper to buy fake fur and it looks the same. Also prehistoric geezers would have eaten the creature therefor its completely different to breeding animals just for fur then skinning the poor little fuckers and throwing the body away. A lot of cats and dogs get kidnapped for the fur trade, its true, I saw a documentary on it.

Dibble, dont let your dislike of wishy washy liberals and do gooders colour your view on this unnecessary and morally indefencable trade.

[Ace]

The ONLY fur a woman should have is the patch inside their pants, I know its really hair, but you get the picture, right?

[Baldinger]

Get off your soap box, magoo.

[woodgnome]

if you've got nothing to say, try saying just that.

[Officer Dibble]

I don't have very strong views either way on these 'animal issues' and feel that maybe a centre course is the most appropriate. The rabid anti fur and anti hunt brigade are indeed the pretentious Guardian reading tossers that you allude to. What annoys me is that they take the stance that they do just because it's fashionable amongst their peer group. Unconsciously they want to feel part of the group, they get a buzz from being in a fashionable little club or clique, so they launch into their adopted cause it with all the irrational zeal of the zealot. Oh, of course they convince themselves that they are right and justify themselves by laying claim to the moral high ground and they then launch into their cause with a dogged and committed single-mindedness that only the middle classes seem to be able to muster.

But, at the end of the day their full of shite, they're not liberal in anyway, because they want to utilise the power of the state to make you do or stop you doing what they deem to be right or wrong. They don't feel any guilt or discomfort about this; after all, only they are right, only they hold the moral high ground.

If any of the causes they champion and views they espouse are definitely right why have they only just realized this? What were they thinking of in the past 2000 years. Don't you think middleclass tossers of the past laid claim to the absolute truth in their time? Slavery, The Inquisition, the burning of 'witches' was all justified with the same fervour and certainty of the present day Guardian reading, hand wringing public sector loving tosser. The reason I take issue with them so often is that they are very dangerous, particularly if you are interested or keen on something they disapprove of (like porn or even glamour.) They wish to restrict your freedom of choice and possibly throw you into jail - because they are right, they are the moral minority and all dissenters are heretics who deserve to suffer in the flames of purgatory.

Officer Dibble

[magoo]

I agree with some of what you say Dibble. (but only a bit)

Animal rights activists include some nasty radicals who are violent morons who dress in combat clothing etc. I have no time for them as they are often very similar to fascists in thier beliefs and are often fairly stupid people who will jump on any bandwagon in order to indulge in "subversive" activities such as the anti capitalist demos etc. I doubt many of them even understand the issues involved but its a good excuse to throw bricks through McDonalds windows and wallop a few coppers(the latter being a perfectly acceptable hobby in my book:.)). I very much doubt they read The Guardian though, its too moderate, its readers are not the people who get wound up about these things. And many extremists on both sides of the political spectrum dont actually read anything as they are too thick. I wonder if your fear of these people extends itself to the far right who are on the increase due to the Daily Mails innacurate asylum seeker scare storys. You only seem concerned with what a threat lefties are, you never mention the far right. I think you will find that if that lot were in power your freedoms would be very much under threat. The far left and far right have many similarities and either would be a disaster if they ever had power. Your mates in the Conservative Party are not renowned for being libertarians are they? Nor are Blairs bunch either. Do you think if Ian Duncan Smith was PM we would all be free? I dont remember porn laws being liberalised during Thatchers era, quite the opposite in fact.

Having said all that lots of decent, normal, hardworking people dont like the fur trade. You dont need to be an unemployable, new age traveller or Newberry Bypass campaigner to have strong views on this. It doesnt stop me enjoying a nice rare steak with chips and onion rings but I draw the line at killing animals for the sake of some vane bimbo who wants to wear fur. And before anyone brings up the issue of leather well thats a by-product of the meat industry so its OK.

[magoo]

At least I am capable of arguing baldinger. I argue with Dibble because he is clearly a bright bloke.

I would never waste my time arguing with you though. That would be like flogging a dead horse.

[magoo]

Actually argueing with Dibble is like flogging a dead horse too but at least hes capable of putting together a good reply even if its all the same old thatcherite rhetoric.