In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?

http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg



--

http://www.culinarytip.com

Samantha F. McKenzie
21 Haslemere Road
BRISTOL
BS9 0HE

Samantha F. McKenzie wrote in message
...
>
> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?

Remind me not to come to dinner at your house.


KK

On 17/06/2009 12:36, Samantha F. McKenzie wrote:
> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?

Who are you asking?
uk.food+drink.misc?
rec.food.cooking?
uk.media.tv.misc?
uk.tech.digital-tv?
uk.d-i-y?
or uk.people.silversurfers?

Answers on a postcard to and


FollowUps set to alt.testgroup

--
wtwjgc (Joe)

"Samantha F. McKenzie" wrote

>
> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>
> http://www.culinarytip.com
>
> Samantha F. McKenzie
> 21 Haslemere Road
> BRISTOL
> BS9 0HE

That's the wrong kind of "tasty bird" for that sort of carry on!

On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:36:08 +0000 (UTC), "Samantha F. McKenzie"
> wrote:

>
>In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
>http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg

Did you mean masterbaste?

I note not much basting going to occur while the master baster is
wearing one of those rubber johnny things
--
Cheers

Peter

On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:07:23 +0100, "Kaptain Kremin"
> wrote:

>Samantha F. McKenzie wrote in message
...
>>
>> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
>Remind me not to come to dinner at your house.
>
>
>KK
>

What makes you think the invite would be for dinner ???? LOL





--------------
Any posting using my name and/or e-mail address
but other than by newsindividual.net is not being posted by me and should be disregarded .
Remove NOSPAM to reply by e-mail

Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Part 5, Section 63

It's illegal to possess images of:

"(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or
oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),"

No mention is made as to whether cooking is a mitagating factor.
I am not joking, clear your web cache.
--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

"Graham." wrote

>
> Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Part 5, Section 63
>
> It's illegal to possess images of:
>
> "(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or
> oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),"
>
> No mention is made as to whether cooking is a mitagating factor.
> I am not joking, clear your web cache.
> --
> Graham.
>
Good point Graham
But surely it must be a mitigating factor that the image has been posted to
a group where such images do not usually arise.
Also there is no indication within the post or in the filename as to what
the image contained.
I would suspect that the majority of readers will have accessed this image
in all innocence, seeing how this group is not known for images of this
nature. The DIY element justifying this post is tenuous, being based on
inuendo rather than genuine relevant content!

"Graham." > wrote in message
...
>
> Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Part 5, Section 63
>
> It's illegal to possess images of:
>
> "(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or
> oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),"
>
> No mention is made as to whether cooking is a mitagating factor.
> I am not joking, clear your web cache.

Cleared!!

On the other hand, there's no evidence that this was a real chicken, and not
an imitation one! I suppose imitations are covered by the act from the
choice of the word "appearing"? If so that counts out lots of photos
containing rabbits!

"TheScullster" > wrote in message
. uk...
>
> "Graham." wrote
>
>>
>> Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Part 5, Section 63
>>
>> It's illegal to possess images of:
>>
>> "(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or
>> oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),"
>>
>> No mention is made as to whether cooking is a mitagating factor.
>> I am not joking, clear your web cache.
>> --
>> Graham.
>>
> Good point Graham
> But surely it must be a mitigating factor that the image has been posted
> to a group where such images do not usually arise.
> Also there is no indication within the post or in the filename as to what
> the image contained.
> I would suspect that the majority of readers will have accessed this image
> in all innocence, seeing how this group is not known for images of this
> nature. The DIY element justifying this post is tenuous, being based on
> inuendo rather than genuine relevant content!


That's why you must delete it in a "reasonable time" (undefined)

65 Defences: general

<Cut>

(c) that the person-
(i) was sent the image concerned without any prior request having been made
by or on behalf of the person, and
(ii) did not keep it for an unreasonable time.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

"Fredxx" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Graham." > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Part 5, Section 63
>>
>> It's illegal to possess images of:
>>
>> "(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or
>> oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),"
>>
>> No mention is made as to whether cooking is a mitagating factor.
>> I am not joking, clear your web cache.
>
> Cleared!!
>
> On the other hand, there's no evidence that this was a real chicken, and
> not an imitation one! I suppose imitations are covered by the act from
> the choice of the word "appearing"? If so that counts out lots of photos
> containing rabbits!

The act has a lot to say about "pseudo images" (cartoon drawings etc.)
but in relation to a different catogry of offence.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

At least you know, indeed we all know where her house is. I don't think I'd
put my mail address in a news post.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Kaptain Kremin" > wrote in message
...
> Samantha F. McKenzie wrote in message ...
>>
>> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
> Remind me not to come to dinner at your house.
>
>
> KK
>

On 17 June, 12:36, "Samantha F. McKenzie"
> wrote:
> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>
> --
>
> http://www.culinarytip.com
>
> Samantha F. McKenzie
> 21 Haslemere Road
> BRISTOL
> BS9 0HE

No need..
http://www.seriouseats.com/2009/04/w...aste-test.html

"TheScullster" > wrote in message
. uk...
>
> "Samantha F. McKenzie" wrote
>
>>
>> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>>
>> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>>
>> http://www.culinarytip.com
>>
>> Samantha F. McKenzie
>> 21 Haslemere Road
>> BRISTOL
>> BS9 0HE
>
> That's the wrong kind of "tasty bird" for that sort of carry on!


Why use the condom?

1. It is dead and cannot get pregnant
2. It is a chicken and a male human cannot get it pregnant
3. It takes away the feeling

Adam

"Samantha F. McKenzie" > wrote in message
...
>
> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>
>
>
> --
>
> http://www.culinarytip.com
>
> Samantha F. McKenzie
> 21 Haslemere Road
> BRISTOL
> BS9 0HE
>

I hate fukin chicken..........

On Jun 17, 1:41*pm, "Tom E" > wrote:
> "Samantha F. McKenzie" > wrote in ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
> >http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>
> > --
>
> >http://www.culinarytip.com
>
> > Samantha F. McKenzie
> > 21 Haslemere Road
> > BRISTOL
> > BS9 0HE
>
> I hate fukin chicken..........- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Well then....STOP!!

Graham. wrote:
> Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Part 5, Section 63
>
> It's illegal to possess images of:
>
> "(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or
> oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),"
>
> No mention is made as to whether cooking is a mitagating factor.
> I am not joking, clear your web cache.

I'm sure your advice is sensible Graham, but we've sunk to Beijing-levels of
censorship.

Steve Walker wrote:
> Graham. wrote:
>> Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, Part 5, Section 63
>>
>> It's illegal to possess images of:
>>
>> "(d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or
>> oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),"
>>
>> No mention is made as to whether cooking is a mitagating factor.
>> I am not joking, clear your web cache.
>
> I'm sure your advice is sensible Graham, but we've sunk to Beijing-levels of
> censorship.
>
>


Now why should you mention that? The fowl is evidently constipated -
a ruse to increase the weight. It's a case for Trading Standards.
Sam

"Samantha F. McKenzie" wrote:
>
> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>
> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg

The first thing you should do is check that chicken-basting is legal in
your jurisdiction.

--
Narouz began to feel the tuggings of the Underworld, the five wild dogs
of the sense pulling ever more heavily upon the leash. He opposed to
them the forces of his mighty will, playing for time, waiting for the
only human revelation he could expect--voice and odour of a girl who
had become embalmed by his senses, entombed like some precious image.

"Frederick Williams" > wrote in message
...
> "Samantha F. McKenzie" wrote:
>>
>> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>>
>> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>
> The first thing you should do is check that chicken-basting is legal in
> your jurisdiction.
>
> --
> Narouz began to feel the tuggings of the Underworld, the five wild dogs
> of the sense pulling ever more heavily upon the leash. He opposed to
> them the forces of his mighty will, playing for time, waiting for the
> only human revelation he could expect--voice and odour of a girl who
> had become embalmed by his senses, entombed like some precious image.
>

I think he meant chicken beasting..........

In message >, Frederick Williams
> writes
>"Samantha F. McKenzie" wrote:
>>
>> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>>
>> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>
>The first thing you should do is check that chicken-basting is legal in
>your jurisdiction.

The law of England will change in exactly the same way that the law was
changed on ******* births [1] and homosexuality. The process used then
was a softening up of social standards. Fifty years ago giving birth to
illegitimate sprogs was frowned on and all manner of legal hurdles were
imposed to ensure that *******s like me had few rights -- particularly
over inheritance matters.

Aided by the music hall and one or two bold acts on Workers' Playtime,
the laws were gradually softened up until today, the fecundity of
England's hordes of willing for a shilling slappers is a matter of
national pride. Today a bimbo getting herself banged up is making a
sensible career move that'll get her well up the social ladder with
benefits galore and social housing thrown. If she goes into serious baby
production she's feted and glorified.

About three decades ago the softening up of social attitudes towards the
strange behaviour of queers began in Earnest and the importance of. The
jokes started on the music halls (I recall Max Miller's patter at the
Kingston Empire -- "I had this salesman asking me if I wanted to wake up
in the morning feeling a new man..."). John Inman had the nation rolling
with his 'will you walk this way please?' In a TV sitcom. Larry Grayson
even established his dubious queerdom creditials on mass audience Sunday
night TV programs.

The social softening process was total, helped by a government with an
implacable hatred of Christianity and Christian values so that those
expressing concern about the direction society was moving in, such as
Lyn Burrows, had Inspector Knacker on her doorstep inviting her to
attend a reorientation induction course. Expressing disquiet is ruled to
amount to hatred and is either illegal or off-message. The whole creaky
wagon was helped by a programme of rallies and demonstrations.

Chipping away at the morays governing sexual relations with animals
(Adam's first wife, lillith, wasn't outspoken enough on the subject) has
already started.

OWEN: Market first thing in the morning. Early as possible.

GERALDINE: Why?

OWEN: Some choice ewes coming up. I don't want an ugly one.

Or:

OWEN: Don't want the bull to see me when I'm checking to
ensure that a calf's properly engaged. They can get jealous.

Laughter: a wonderful tool to prepare the way for social revolution.

We live in interesting times.

[1] I learned about my ******* credentials around 1950 when I came
across my birth certificate. ******* was a word that had me discovering
all about dictionaries. My heart swelled with pride when I discovered
the meaning of the word. It was something that set me apart from my
contemporaries.

Years later I decided to send for my full birth certificate so that I
could enlarge it to poster size and have it mounted as evidence of the
absolute truthfulness of rumours put about by friend and foe that I was
indeed a real *******. The short certificate was just so boring!

My hopes were dashed because the magic word was not on the full birth
certificate. A BDM official explained that the magic word had been
deinvented many years before and was no longer used.

--
James Follett. Novelist. (G1LXP) http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk
A wise and all-knowing Providence gave us an abundance of losers to endure
all the suffering and to do most of the work.

"james" > wrote in message
...
> In message >, Frederick Williams
> > writes
>>"Samantha F. McKenzie" wrote:
>>>
>>> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>>>
>>> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>>
>>The first thing you should do is check that chicken-basting is legal in
>>your jurisdiction.
>
> The law of England will change in exactly the same way that the law was
> changed on ******* births [1] and homosexuality. The process used then was
> a softening up of social standards. Fifty years ago giving birth to
> illegitimate sprogs was frowned on and all manner of legal hurdles were
> imposed to ensure that *******s like me had few rights -- particularly
> over inheritance matters.
>
Age Concern now have a series of leaflets for older Homosexuals, *******s
and Bisexuals:-)
http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/index.cfm

> Aided by the music hall and one or two bold acts on Workers' Playtime, the
> laws were gradually softened up until today, the fecundity of England's
> hordes of willing for a shilling slappers is a matter of national pride.
> Today a bimbo getting herself banged up is making a sensible career move
> that'll get her well up the social ladder with benefits galore and social
> housing thrown. If she goes into serious baby production she's feted and
> glorified.
>
> About three decades ago the softening up of social attitudes towards the
> strange behaviour of queers began in Earnest and the importance of. The
> jokes started on the music halls (I recall Max Miller's patter at the
> Kingston Empire -- "I had this salesman asking me if I wanted to wake up
> in the morning feeling a new man..."). John Inman had the nation rolling
> with his 'will you walk this way please?' In a TV sitcom. Larry Grayson
> even established his dubious queerdom creditials on mass audience Sunday
> night TV programs.
>
> The social softening process was total, helped by a government with an
> implacable hatred of Christianity and Christian values so that those
> expressing concern about the direction society was moving in, such as Lyn
> Burrows, had Inspector Knacker on her doorstep inviting her to attend a
> reorientation induction course. Expressing disquiet is ruled to amount to
> hatred and is either illegal or off-message. The whole creaky wagon was
> helped by a programme of rallies and demonstrations.
>
> Chipping away at the morays governing sexual relations with animals
> (Adam's first wife, lillith, wasn't outspoken enough on the subject) has
> already started.
>
> OWEN: Market first thing in the morning. Early as possible.
>
> GERALDINE: Why?
>
> OWEN: Some choice ewes coming up. I don't want an ugly one.
>
> Or:
>
> OWEN: Don't want the bull to see me when I'm checking to ensure
> that a calf's properly engaged. They can get jealous.
>
> Laughter: a wonderful tool to prepare the way for social revolution.
>
> We live in interesting times.
>
> [1] I learned about my ******* credentials around 1950 when I came across
> my birth certificate. ******* was a word that had me discovering all about
> dictionaries. My heart swelled with pride when I discovered the meaning of
> the word. It was something that set me apart from my contemporaries.
>
> Years later I decided to send for my full birth certificate so that I
> could enlarge it to poster size and have it mounted as evidence of the
> absolute truthfulness of rumours put about by friend and foe that I was
> indeed a real *******. The short certificate was just so boring!
>
> My hopes were dashed because the magic word was not on the full birth
> certificate. A BDM official explained that the magic word had been
> deinvented many years before and was no longer used.

As my surname starts with Fitz I must be of Norman ******* descent:-)
When I was at school several boys lived with their 'Aunties' or Grannies. We
always assumed those kids to be illigitemate.
Derek.

james wrote:
> Frederick Williams writes
>
>> "Samantha F. McKenzie" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In your opinion, is this the best way to baste a chicken?
>>>
>>> http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-05...3442652795.jpg
>>
>>
>> The first thing you should do is check that chicken-basting is legal in
>> your jurisdiction.
>

Fer gawd's sake be discrete! you don't want to get a reputation as a
'Masterbaster"

>
> [1] I learned about my ******* credentials around 1950 when I came
> across my birth certificate. ******* was a word that had me discovering
> all about dictionaries. My heart swelled with pride when I discovered
> the meaning of the word. It was something that set me apart from my
> contemporaries.
>
> Years later I decided to send for my full birth certificate so that I
> could enlarge it to poster size and have it mounted as evidence of the
> absolute truthfulness of rumours put about by friend and foe that I was
> indeed a real *******. The short certificate was just so boring!
>
> My hopes were dashed because the magic word was not on the full birth
> certificate. A BDM official explained that the magic word had been
> deinvented many years before and was no longer used.
>

Since you have some sense of pride in it i don't mind saying you are one
bourgeoisie *******, but for all that you do write well.

Princess Diana's marriage certificate listed her as a 'spinster' and
Charles as a "Peer of the Realm".

Once, when the Duchess of Windsor saw her husband the Duke and some
other men heading off to a clump of shrubbery at a party at one of the
grand mansions they were routinely invited to, and the hostess
complained to her about the men using the bushes when she had perfectly
fine and plenty of them, bathrooms for the purpose, the Duchess remarked
to her hostess "yes, and there goes the biggest Peer-er of the realm of
them all."
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.

Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://www.dancingmice.net/Karn%20Evil%209.mp3

In message >, Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
> writes

>> [1] I learned about my ******* credentials around 1950 when I came
>>across my birth certificate.

>Since you have some sense of pride in it i don't mind saying you are
>one bourgeoisie *******, but for all that you do write well.

One bourgeoisie *******? ONE! There's enough of me for at least two.

>Princess Diana's marriage certificate listed her as a 'spinster' and
>Charles as a "Peer of the Realm".

When our banns were nailed to the mast my wife was described as a
spinster. Why? Has PC now done its deadly work on that venerable term?


--
James Follett. Novelist. (G1LXP) http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk
http://www.pbase.com/jamesfollett

james wrote:
> In message >, Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
> > writes
>
>>> [1] I learned about my ******* credentials around 1950 when I came
>>> across my birth certificate.
>>
>
>> Since you have some sense of pride in it i don't mind saying you are
>> one bourgeoisie *******, but for all that you do write well.
>
>
> One bourgeoisie *******? ONE! There's enough of me for at least two.
>
>> Princess Diana's marriage certificate listed her as a 'spinster' and
>> Charles as a "Peer of the Realm".
>
>
> When our banns were nailed to the mast my wife was described as a
> spinster. Why? Has PC now done its deadly work on that venerable term?
>
>


*shrug* i should have written "pee - er" of the realm.
--
Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.

Domine, dirige nos.
Let the games begin!
http://www.dancingmice.net/Karn%20Evil%209.mp3

In message >, Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
> writes
>
>
>james wrote:
>> In message >, Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
> writes
>>
>>>> [1] I learned about my ******* credentials around 1950 when I came
>>>>across my birth certificate.
>>>
>>
>>> Since you have some sense of pride in it i don't mind saying you are
>>>one bourgeoisie *******, but for all that you do write well.
>> One bourgeoisie *******? ONE! There's enough of me for at least
>>two.
>>
>>> Princess Diana's marriage certificate listed her as a 'spinster' and
>>>Charles as a "Peer of the Realm".

>> When our banns were nailed to the mast my wife was described as a
>>spinster. Why? Has PC now done its deadly work on that venerable term?
>>
>
>
>*shrug* i should have written "pee - er" of the realm.

But that wouldn't explain your reference to the term 'spinster'. And
what does your curious stage direction 'shrug' signify? Indifference? If
so, indifference to what?

--
James Follett. Novelist. (G1LXP) http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk
http://www.pbase.com/jamesfollett

On 2009-06-20 23:46:17 +0100, james > said:

> In message >, Mr. Joseph Littleshoes Esq.
> > writes
>
>>> [1] I learned about my ******* credentials around 1950 when I came
>>> across my birth certificate.
>
>> Since you have some sense of pride in it i don't mind saying you are
>> one bourgeoisie *******, but for all that you do write well.
>
> One bourgeoisie *******? ONE! There's enough of me for at least two.
>
>> Princess Diana's marriage certificate listed her as a 'spinster' and
>> Charles as a "Peer of the Realm".
>
> When our banns were nailed to the mast my wife was described as a
> spinster. Why? Has PC now done its deadly work on that venerable term?

Was it in Sense & Sensibility that the ditzy sister, Marianne, had a
fit at the thought of being described as being a Spinster when the
banns were called?!
--
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.com
Shrubs & perennials. Tender & exotics.
South Devon

On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 19:01:23 GMT, Derek F commented

> When I was at school several boys lived with their 'Aunties' or
> Grannies. We always assumed those kids to be illigitemate.

My dad (and his brother and sister and father) lived with his granny when
he was at school. Not illegitimate, his mother died, a common enough
occurance.

--
Ali
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/my.web.pages/ Don't go there.
UPS/FUNTO May stats: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/my.web.pages/stats/
Over six years' statistics now available.