There. That's better. That was bugging me.

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.ideal-hosting.co.uk/~go-quick/pics/run.jpg

Good.

― mark grout (mark grout), Monday, 1 December 2003 17:06 (twenty-one years ago)

Are they in the process of tearing it's arms off?

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Monday, 1 December 2003 17:10 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.ideal-hosting.co.uk/~go-quick/pics/run.jpg

Sorry folks. Wrong picture,.

― mark grout (mark grout), Monday, 1 December 2003 17:10 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.ideal-hosting.co.uk/~go-quick/pics/let.jpg

Ever wish you hadn't bothered?

― mark grout (mark grout), Monday, 1 December 2003 17:11 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm deeply confused.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 1 December 2003 17:11 (twenty-one years ago)

The original cover of LIB...N consisted of unsightly photo negatives. It was like the cover of Bleach, but uglier.

― nate detritus (natedetritus), Monday, 1 December 2003 18:00 (twenty-one years ago)

How did it happen twice?

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Monday, 1 December 2003 18:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Ummmmmm ....

― Jazzbo (jmcgaw), Monday, 1 December 2003 19:11 (twenty-one years ago)

That kid pic really should have been the album cover.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 1 December 2003 19:28 (twenty-one years ago)

how surreal.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 1 December 2003 19:33 (twenty-one years ago)

That picture is the most lovely thing on this website.

― Pete S, Monday, 1 December 2003 19:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Not with this caption:

Are they in the process of tearing it's arms off?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 1 December 2003 19:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Just highlights the contrast.

― Pete S, Monday, 1 December 2003 19:42 (twenty-one years ago)

You're a bunch of sweethearts you guys.

Them's me kids. Amber and Alice.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 10:43 (twenty-one years ago)

OK, so.... are Amber and Alice in the process of tearing it's arms off?

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 10:55 (twenty-one years ago)

its. its its. dammit.

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 11:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Actually they are teaching "baby annabel" to walk. South Shields prom.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 11:04 (twenty-one years ago)

its. it's its. dammit.

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 11:34 (twenty-one years ago)

if it had an it, it would be it's it.

If it had more than one it, we would talk about it's its.

la la la la .

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 11:37 (twenty-one years ago)

sorry mark - it's all about its it(s)

― minna (minna), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 11:44 (twenty-one years ago)

mia? Minna?

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 11:55 (twenty-one years ago)

― minna (minna), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 12:49 (twenty-one years ago)

(an obscure badly drawn boy reference)

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 12:52 (twenty-one years ago)

OK, It's fans!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3256388.stm

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 15:40 (twenty-one years ago)

If I were writing an article about a book on punctuation, I would like to think that I'd take time to proof-read it carefully enough prior to publication to ensure that I hadn't made any glaring errors in my own use of punctuation within that article - such as putting commas before prepositions on two separate occasions.

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 16:37 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.