Women…

Yes those ultimate cunts…with cunts.

What is it with them? Most on here know abaaaht me and my fondness for the ladies but they are proper cunts.

They act all nice when you meet them, plenty of dick sucking, put in loads of effort in the bedroom…they even get on top and then cook you a nice breakfast in the morning and clean the house without moaning.

Then they decide you are not worthy of their duties as a woman and start trying to turn you into a weak cunt, constantly criticising, never satisfied, and generally being a cunt, and some even turn into fat cunts and still act like demanding cunts when they have no right to after letting themselves go so much. They then get annoyed and watch you when a younger, better looking model is in the vicinity. They then wonder why men cheat on them.

The fact that they have cunts should act as the ultimate warning to any man finding his way in this sometimes cruel world.

They always get their own way it seems in court etc, Police will always take their side, and they can get away with being psychos.

Then you get the gold digging types who some sad, fat cunt thinks loves them…I suppose they deserve to be taken for all they have.

You then get the ones who want to be the man in the relationship and control everything from the finances to the sexual activities (if they allow sex that is)…and some sad/weak cunts put up with it.

Women are one of the ultimate puzzles in this life… beautiful, sexy, can make a man feel he’s the greatest man alive, the right one can make a man exceed his ability and realise ambitions he thought he could not, and yet can also drive a poor cunt to become a shadow of himself, strip a man’s wealth and make his life hell.

I don’t aim this cunting at any of the female cunters on here as they have proven their top woman credentials.

I have been thinking abaaaaht life and I sometimes think I was born in the wrong times, I should have been born as a great General with a wife who understood my need for a few mistresses as any great man would require.

Be careful who you select cunters and go fuck yourselves!

Nominated by: Black and White Cunt 

Charlie Stayt

Exactly who is this shit-faced cunt? There’s not a lot of internet detail about him probably because he’s not worth it!
Stayt started his career on a commercial radio station in his home town of Gloucester. Before moving into television he worked on radio in London, hosting Capital Radio’s news programme ‘The Way It Is’, and also reporting for LBC and BBC Radio 5 Live. He’s been a media man through and through, so much so that he doesn’t know anything else about the planet. He is a prime cunt.
Today he was claiming that the government should lock up people who are not doing as the govt tells them about covid19 – yes, he’s that arrogant – other comments by people about him include:
“He’s thick as shit”
“Charlie Stayt rudely interrupting, I want to hear the reply even if Mr Stayt doesn’t.”
“honestly your presenter has no clue. Matt Hancock was clear and your presenter was being ridiculously ignorant.”
“Charlie not listening once again… “
It’s about time this bloke was given a public outing.
(what sort of outing would that be then? – admin)

Nominated by: Lana Del Cunt

Michael Holding

It’s with a heavy heart that I make this nomination. I’ve always liked his commentary on the cricket. He hates T20 and just seems to like test cricket. A bit like myself. He’s always seemed a nice bloke and he’s very knowledgeable on the sport and his commentary is right up there with the best.

Why cunt him?

Well, he’s been close to getting one in recent times due to his constant support of BLM. He recently said during commentary something about not returning to a golf course he liked because he found out that Trump owned it. Of course, his female co commentator lapped it up.

He should be sticking to commentary not using his platform to criticize the POTUS. He kept refering to Chicken George Floyd as ‘ that poor gentleman’, and that he was murdered. FFS. Gentleman? Murdered? Fuck the trial then, eh?

But that’s not all. He’s now whinging that the cricketers have stopped taking the knee. The ECB are saying they’re going to support all groups and not just one to help stop racism. I think they know there’s a backlash now towards BLM due to some of their openly racist tweets and demands. They want to help stop racism but, quite rightly, don’t see BLM as a good group to support.

But old Mike isn’t happy. He wants the knee taking and fist salutes to go on. Forever, it seems. He’s saying it’s ‘not good enough’.

No Mike. What’s not good enough is you not listening or caring about facts.

The fact is that recently, BLM leaders have tweeted things about looking forward to enslaving all white people and not being happy until there are many more white people being murdered. That they want a Marxist takeover. That they want transsexuals put in charge of government. All MPs to be black.

Is that what’s not good enough? It seems you want this too; just spit it out. Now once the dust settles over all this, we can look forward to not accepting anti white racists like yourself on our screens.

Fuck off!

Nominated by: Cuntybollocks

Rebecca Front

Rebecca Front is, well, just a little bit of a cont, isn’t she ?
Making a big baby fuss over the fact that Laurence Fox has a different opinion on certain matters.
Of course ! Hit the “cancel” button. Yawn…

I used to quite like Front, but a recent repeat of Tennyson (with Stefanie Martinie as the younger version) had me foaming at the…

Nominated by: HBelindaHubbard

The Turin Shroud

Those Who Say The Turin Shroud Is A Medieval Forgery.

This is one of my ‘There is no conflict between Science and Religion’ kind of Noms. Only in this case it is almost as if the skeptics are believers, believers skeptics. Let me explain;

We all remember the famous photograph of the blackboard with the dates ‘1260 -1390’ written on it. That was result of the carbon dating. It was a medieval forgery. Science has proved it. End of story. Everyone went home.

Years passed.

‘But I want to know how that medieval guy did it’ Barrie Schwortz the Chief Documenting Photographer of the group of scientists that were allowed to study the Shroud , ‘What were we looking at’.

You see gentle reader the image on the Turin Shroud is a very mysterious thing. Firstly, paradoxically the faint image on the cloth is actually a negative. When it is developed as a negative (the famous image we see) it is clearer. So it is s positive negative.

Next it is not a painting or a rubbing or a scortch. It was done not by camera obscura. Schwortz has said – Even with all our modern technology we cannot come close to replicating it’. They can actually ‘lift’ the properties of it and you get a 3d effect. This is not a mere trick. If it was a painting or a rubbing the properties would degrade not lift.

So that’s the positive for me. Now the negative. Which is really a positive. The carbon dating. It is generally agreed now by most members of STURP (Turin Shroud Research Project) that the snippets taken from the Shroud to carbon date were poorly chosen. Poorly chosen because an order of nuns (the Poor Clares) had repaired the Shroud after it was burnt in a fire. It was a reweave (it took a lay housewife in America to notice this)..

More evidence that it is much older than Medieval-they have examined the flax and because some chemical or other is missing shows that it is between 1, 500 to 3, 000 years old. A time frame that could include the burial of Jesus.

The man in the Shroud looks like Jesus doesn’t he? That’s because the iconography of Jesus goes back a very long way.

It is anatomically correct and consistent with a Jesus’s. crucifixion. Firstly there are rivulets of (real) blood at his hairline indicative of the crown of thorns. His legs aren’t broken because remember there was no need as he had died. There are the wounds in the upper part of his palms which would hold his body. The marks of the wounds on his back are consistent with scourging.

We know from the historical record that when the Shroud first came to light in the Middle Ages the Pope of the time said it was a fake and that it should not be venerated. The Archbishop of Turin at the result if the carbon dating declared it to be a hoax. This present Pope insists on calling it an icon not a relic.

And you have the scientists like Schwortz and others of STURP who have been up close and (literally) personal with are the ones championing it as the burial cloth of Christ. Its a funny old world..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4210369.stm

https://www.raydowning.com/blog/2016/2/15/the-3d-information-on-the-shroud-of-turin

Nominated by: Miles Plastic