ellauri051.html on line 395: Ladies and cavaliers long dead--barons are in their castle halls--the ammoin kuolleet leidit ja miljonäärit -- rosvoparonit linnoissaan --
ellauri119.html on line 152: In the season three episode "Nora Clavicle and the Ladies' Crime Club," Batman, Robin, and Batgirl are forced to intertwine themselves into a giant human knot. Robin responds to this idea by referencing the instructions to basic stitch patterns.
ellauri140.html on line 172: Lechery (M) – The sin of lust. Mounted on a goat, Lechery does not appear to be attractive. He is described as an "unseemely man to please faire Ladies eye; / Yet he of Ladies oft was loved deare, / When fairer faces were bid standen by". This is when lechery is considered a sin. Eli lechery on syntiä naisilla ja homoilla.
ellauri140.html on line 340: A lovely Ladie° rode him faire beside Ihqu leidi ravasi sievänä sen vieressä,
ellauri140.html on line 428: Be well aware, quoth then that Ladie milde, Pidä varasi, sanoo lempee leidi sille,
ellauri140.html on line 434: Ah Ladie, (said he) shame were to revoke° Ei leidi (sanoi se), ei sovi pelätä
ellauri140.html on line 592: His Ladie seeing all that chaunst, from farre Sen leidi kazoi turvallisesti kauempaa
ellauri140.html on line 946: With bowres, and beds, and Ladies deare delight: Jossa oli perseitä ja petejä, ja kuumia kanoja;
ellauri155.html on line 1070: To Earl Russell } Ladies and
ellauri189.html on line 562: Some of the first recorded incidents to meet the modern definition of the Ponzi scheme were carried out from 1869 to 1872 by Adele Spitzeder in Germany and by Sarah Howe in the United States in the 1880s through the "Ladies' Deposit". Howe offered a solely female clientele an 8% monthly interest rate and then stole the money that the women had invested. She was eventually discovered and served three years in prison. The Ponzi scheme was also previously described in novels; Charles Dickens' 1844 novel Martin Chuzzlewit and his 1857 novel Little Dorrit both feature such a scheme.
ellauri264.html on line 492: Ladies and Gentlemen: There are five hundred reasons why I began to write for children, but to save time I will mention only ten of them. Number 1) Children read books, not reviews. They don’t give a hoot about the critics. Number 2) Children don’t read to find their identity. Number 3) They don’t read to free themselves of guilt, to quench the thirst for rebellion, or to get rid of alienation. Number 4) They have no use for psychology. Number 5) They detest sociology. Number 6) They don’t try to understand Kafka or Finnegans Wake. Number 7) They still believe in God, the family, angels, devils, witches, goblins, logic, clarity, punctuation, and other such obsolete stuff. Number 8) They love interesting stories, not commentary, guides, or footnotes. Number 9) When a book is boring, they yawn openly, without any shame or fear of authority. Number 10) They don’t expect their beloved writer to redeem humanity. Young as they are, they know that it is not in his power. Only the adults have such childish illusions.
ellauri328.html on line 448: Paljas totuus: Gender-ideologia ei ota huomioon seksin darwinistista alkuperää - nisäkkäiden lisääntymisstrategiaa, mukaan lukien ihmiset, jotka kyyryvät kuin raidaperäiset paviaanit. Liito-oravauroskin haistelee naarasta kolon äärellä. Seksi, genderhanhille, ei ole objektiivinen totuus miesten ja naisten liittämisestä yhteen keskikohdalta. Emme ole miehiä tai naisia ​​kehomme rakenteemme tai sen vuoksi, että kehomme on suunnattu kohti banaania tai viikunaa, siittiöiden tai munasolujen tuotannon ympärillä. Ihmiset ovat muka pohjimmiltaan psykologisia itsejä, joilla on sisäinen sukupuolitunnus - kuin ruumiittomia sukupuolisieluja. (Väärin! Raamattu sanoo, että taivaassa perseet tervataan.) Nämä "sukupuoli-identiteetit" ovat riippumattomia ja voivat olla ristiriidassa niiden kiimaisten elinten kanssa, jotka Jumala antoi meille ja jotka Raamattu alkoi yhdistää oviin "Ladies" ja "Gentlemen." Nämä "sexi"-kategoriat ovat pelkkää huijausta, sanoo gender-ideologi (en minä, Cod forbid, olen sexipoikia).
ellauri339.html on line 562: Julia osallistui 23. heinäkuuta 2022 Kiovassa pidettyyn First Ladies and Gentlemenin toiseen huippukokoukseen ja vaati maksimaalisia ponnisteluja kaikkien vankien palauttamiseksi kotiin.
ellauri339.html on line 563: The Second Summit of First Ladies and Gentlemen ( englanniksi: The Second Summit of First Ladies and Gentlemen ) on Ukrainan ensimmäisen naisen Olena Zelenskan aloite. Toisen huippukokouksen teema: "Ukraina ja maailma: tulevaisuus, jonka rakennamme (uudelleen) yhdessä. " Toinen huippukokous pidettiin 23. heinäkuuta 2022 "Sofia Kyivskan" suojelualueella, ja sen piti kiinnittää maailman huomio Ukrainan sotaan.
xxx/ellauri081.html on line 269: Robert F./Bob Death asks Gately if by any chance he’s heard the one about the fish. Glenn K. in his fucking robe overhears, and of course he’s got to put his own oar in, and breaks in and asks them all if they’ve heard the one What did the blind man say as he passed by the Quincy Market fish-stall, and without waiting says He goes “Evening, Ladies.” A couple male White Flaggers fall about, and Tamara N. slaps at the back of Glenn K.’s head’s pointy hood, but without real heat, as in like what are you going to do with this sick fuck?
xxx/ellauri179.html on line 830: The Ladies
xxx/ellauri179.html on line 833: The Ladies Leidit
xxx/ellauri193.html on line 591: Ladies and gentlemen, we have a tie! That’s probably not how they announced it back in October of 1974. A tie is not even the proper term for the rare occasions when the Nobel Prize in Literature’s gone to two people at once. Sharing the honor is the phrase that seems to crop up, and these shared honors look like political moves—when the prize is going to a country that the Nobel committee might not get back to in a while. (The novelist António Lobo Antunes, for example, was reportedly heartbroken when the Nobel went to José Saramago, because he knew they weren’t going to give it to Portugal again in his lifetime.) Still, there’s something about a shared prize that feels slighting, the A-minus of literary glory. I picture scenes like this:
xxx/ellauri193.html on line 659: And there you have it. It’s a crude way of evaluating literature, of course, but it doesn’t seem much cruder than the methodology used by the people who chose these two authors in the first place. And which author is better, you ask? Well, let’s see, seven plus five, another seven, carry the one—hey! Ladies and gentlemen, we have a tie!
19