So I decided I couldn't be fucked. I mean, if Mark suggests that evidential bases for an act are lacking... and David counters this by suggesting that at least 90% of evidence in the mode of analysis is subjective bollocks anyway, we're a bit buggered either way, aren't we?
Maybe I should just mention Hitler and be done with it?
Cheerio,
Stu.
*which sadly has nothing to do with teals
Powered by hypermail