Washington Times

[wiltsman]

Today, I came across the Washington Times online website. The home page was headlined, 'Special Report on the Paris Terror Attack'.

What I then found weird was the inclusion of the following two articles:

The first was, 'Bang for your Buck - Best Hand Guns under 500 dollars'.

The second one was headed, 'Top 10 Hand Guns in the U.S.'

Don't you think to include such articles at a time like this is rather insensitive?

What would readers of any UK journal think if they saw similar articles in their newspaper, at any time of the year?

[mikey4444]

Your inability of any occasion of me supporting Muslim terrorism I will take as you are not able to find one Talbot. I shall ignore any more accusations of this kind in the future.

[ToraToraTora]

mikey, talbot accused me of supporting Hitler the other day because I had an avatar that he failed to comprehend. There ain't much up top there so make allowances eh.

[mikey4444]

lol TTT !

[-Talbot-]

I didn't TTT. I asked a valid question if you think Napoleon is good enough for an avatar then why not Hitler ... After all they are one of the same.but I am not surprised you didn't know that.

[ToraToraTora]

see what I mean?

[Gromit]

// We would never see similar adverts over here, as we have a much more common sense attitude to guns. //

It is not about common sense, it is about Automated Systems. There was an article in the Metro about jailed TV weatherman Fred Talbot teaching Ian Brown of the Dtone Roses, how to masturbate. The accompanying Google advert was for a Stone Roses single, 'The hardest thing in the world' :-)

[wiltsman]

Thank you Gromit - At last we're back on track, referring to my original question.