Personally I think all Military are Poofters.
I mean - take the 'Whitey' male.
Had to invent 'projectile weaponry' because he wasn't PHYSICALLY strong and tough enough to fight Zulus, Apaches, Aztecs, Maori and Aboriginals - no matter how 'primitive' they were. Engaging in hand-to-hand combat resulted in Whitey getting their butts whipped by superior size, numbers and stamina.
Even when Whitey's were going 'hand-to-hand' during the Greek to Viking ages - they just couldn't breed good enough and their ranks were filled with Poofs everywhere. They could only breed in Europe, while the Darkies bred everywhere around the whole world!

So chicken legs Whitey had to invent the gun so he could safely stay from harms way and kill others like a snake in the grass.

Even now - the Cold 'Default' War between USA and his Mommy 'USSR' threatened to destroy the whole world unless the Blacks coughed up Australia for the Whiteys. Such is 'blackmail'.
"Give us half the world, or we'll destroy it all!" said the whitey.

one of which - their 'Greatest' rules over the 'Brown' Lands of the Middle-East as 'Emperor'.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 7^th, 2019 at 8:23pm:


I don't understand how he has a BA with honors and a BA without. He even has the same majors on it.

Spatchcock wrote on Mar 7^th, 2019 at 10:36pm:


I have a Ba and a Ba(Hon) degree.  Everybody who does Honours does so after completing their Bachelor degree.   I was unique, I was awarded both at the same time, undertaking the last six units of my Bachelor's degree during my Honours year.   

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 7^th, 2019 at 10:40pm:


It was obvious you have no idea, the charge you are describing is prejudicial behaviour which has a couple of elements to it, and the second part of your incorrect preamble was to outline how incorrect range etiquette would sustain a charge of prejudicing the discipline or bringing into disrepute the Defence Force.

An RSM would be very very displeased if, for a breach of range etiquette you tried such a charge because you thought it was a catch-all when there are perfectly adequate and more appropriate charges available.  As a catch-all it would be listed amongst the list of alternative charges and without checking I am pretty sure it isn’t.    If the RSM allowed it to go ahead I am sure ALS as the reviewing authority would reject it. 

Range charges have to be the easiest things going, almost bread and butter and  never ever have I seen a charge of prejudicial behaviour used.  It’s a silly notion.

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 7^th, 2019 at 10:40pm:


You are a really bad representative of the military. Firstly, you use personal attacks and identify with the military. So you would have an argument and in that argument almost invoke quasi military representation whilst being a fool. This is not good for "hearts and minds". Second, when I tried to call out a sector of government as amoral, you tried to insist, on more than one occasion, that the whole military is inhumane. After I had already established I do not view the young men and women of the military as representative of the identified problem, you encouraged me to. You would have me view the entire thing negatively.

Everything you do brings the service in to disrepute. You are a really bad representative of it. Not only that, but you set yourself up for ridicule. You claim military service and then we find your service was as a blanket counter. So you deflate the sense of relevance or credibility military service has when we discover you counted blankets and drove forklifts instead of volunteering for a combat role.

Spatchcock wrote on Mar 8^th, 2019 at 1:43pm:




Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  I thought you weren't engaging with me any more?  Oh, well, off back to your little kiddies' playground where your antics are tolerated.  You are IMO a WOFTM.   

Spotted this old cartoon today and just had to post it here.