I know perfectly well there is absolutely no excuse for this. There is no mitigation. Baboon isn’t good to eat, unless you’re a leopard. The feeble argument of culling.. a veil for naughty fun....I wanted to get a sense of what it might be like to kill someone..." The virgin birth of Jesus Christ... there is no way to prove it; it is so unscientific. The concept of God as a trinity: God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost... and this "holy ghost" made the poor girl Mary, Jesus' mother, pregnant - without any license - and still he is holy? Then what is unholy? And in this trinity there is no place for any woman? I don’t dine out much so I don’t usually take much notice of restaurant critics. As a result I didn’t read A A Gill’s (Adrian Anthony, or should that be I A for Inadequate Arsehole?) review of the Luxe Restaurant in East London in the last issue of the Sunday Times. Personally I feel nothing but contempt for the man. What was the point? Machismo? Self Esteem? Even if it was simple curiosity, Gill must be a particularly pathetic creature to need to shoot a living being to sate those needs.

On the other hand FW Gill could have found out what it was like to kill a person bu pointing the gun into the roof of his mouth and pulling the trigger... You can find Buddhism in the teachings of Gautam Buddha; he was the founder. You can find in the teachings of Mahavira that he was the founder of Jainism. You can find in the teachings of Lao Tzu that he was the founder of Taoism. But it is a very strange thing about Christianity: the founder had no idea at all, was not interested in creating a new religion, he was simply telling the Jews, "I am your last prophet." and doubtlessly the hat made S T Gill make him think he was Ernest Hemmingway in big game hunter modeBrowne, Thomas (1711). "A Sober Slip in the Dark". The Works. Vol.II. Briscoe. p.182 . Retrieved 11 July 2020. Fowler, Rowena (Summer 1998). "Robert Browning in the Oxford English Dictionary: A New Approach" (PDF). Studies in Philology. 95 (3): 342 . Retrieved 11 July 2020.

Browning's error posed a dilemma for many pre-1960s lexicographers, who excluded words deemed obscene but aspired to include all words used by major writers like Browning. The 1890 Century Dictionary included the correct definition, labelled "vulgar", and noted Browning's "supposition" of its meaning. [18] In 1934 Webster's Second New International Dictionary 's entry for twat read: "Some part of a nun's garb. Erron. Browning". [19] The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) included many taboo words, albeit often with circumscribed definition and quotations, [20] and twat was duly included in the relevant OED fascicle, published in 1916. The entry labelled it "low" and obsolete and noted Browning's "erroneous" use. [21] There was no direct definition, but rather "See quot. 1727", a reference to the latest of the entry's five historical citations, namely the definition in the 1727 Universal Etymological English Dictionary, which was in Neo-Latin: pudendum muliebre ("female private part"). [21] [22] Two of the other OED citations included quotes: Vanity of Vanities and a c.1704 bawdy verse with a variant spelling: "At last, as groping thro' a dang'rous Street, / Where Stones and Twaits in frosty Winters meet". [21] [23] This is the way the whole of humanity has been deceived for thousands of years: Religiousness is something so extraordinary, it happens only to special people, prophets,messiahs, saviors, incarnations of God. You were thinking that RELIGIOUSNESS is something extraordinary, very special, is attained by very special people.Siddique, Haroon (29 July 2009). "David Cameron says sorry for 'twat' comment during radio interview". The Guardian . Retrieved 11 July 2020. For the purposes of film certification, usage of the word is not considered as serious as many other swear words. It is listed by the British Board of Film Classification as an example of "moderate language" for the 12 certificate. [39] However, the film Kes originally released in 1969 and given a 'U' certificate by the then British Board of Film Censors, denoting suitable for children, has in later years been re-certified PG in the United Kingdom, meaning: "All ages admitted, but certain scenes may be unsuitable for young children. Should not disturb children aged 8 years or over", despite more than one instance of the word. [40] The word also appears in writing in an episode of Fawlty Towers (the letters on the sign have been rearranged to say "Flowery Twats"). The episode has a 12 certificate. [41]