FukDatShhh.CoM

A police officer came upon a terrible wreck where the driver and passenger had been killed. As he looked upon the wreckage a little monkey came out of the brush and hopped around the crashed car.

The officer looked down at the monkey and said “I wish you could talk.”

The monkey looked up at the officer and shook his head up and down. “You can understand what I’m saying?” asked the officer.

Again, the monkey shook his head up and down. “Well, did you see this?”

“Yes,” motioned the monkey.

“What happened?”

The monkey pretended to have a can in his hand and turned it up by his mouth.

“They were drinking?” asked the officer.

The monkey shakes his head “Yes.”

“What else?” The monkey pinched his fingers together and held them to his mouth.

“They were smoking marijuana?”

The monkey shakes his head “Yes.”

“What else?” The monkey motioned “kissing.”

“They were kissing, too?” asked the astounded officer.

The monkey shakes his head “Yes.”

“Now wait, you’re saying your owners were drinking, smoking and kissing before they wrecked.”

The monkey shakes his head “Yes.”

“What were you doing during all this?”

“Driving” motioned the monkey.

• A right-lane construction closure is just a game to see how many people can cut in line by passing you on the right as you sit in the left lane waiting for the same drivers to squeeze their way back in before hitting the orange construction barrels.
• Turn signals will give away your next move. A real driver never uses them.
• Under no circumstances should you leave a safe distance between you and the car in front of you, or the space will be filled in by somebody else putting you in an even more dangerous situation.
• Crossing two or more lanes in a single lane-change is considered ‘going with the flow.’
• The faster you drive through a red light, the smaller the chance you have of getting hit.
• Never get in the way of an older car that needs extensive bodywork.
• Braking is to be done as hard and late as possible to ensure that your ABS kicks in, giving a nice, relaxing foot massage as the brake pedal pulsates. For those of you without ABS, it’s a chance to stretch your legs.

The Court of King George III
London, England

July 10, 1776

Mr. Thomas Jefferson
c/o The Continental Congress
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Dear Mr. Jefferson:

We have read your “Declaration of Independence” with great interest. Certainly, it represents a considerable undertaking, and many of your statements do merit serious consideration. Unfortunately, the Declaration as a whole fails to meet recently adopted specifications for proposals to the Crown, so we must return the document to you for further refinement. The questions which follow might assist you in your process of revision:

1. In your opening paragraph you use the phrase “the Laws of Nature and Nature`s God.” What are these laws? In what way are they the criteria on which you base your central arguments? Please document with citations from the recent literature.
2. In the same paragraph you refer to the “opinions of mankind.” Whose polling data are you using? Without specific evidence, it seems to us the “opinions of mankind” are a matter of opinion.
3. You hold certain truths to be “self-evident.” Could you please elaborate. If they are as evident as you claim then it should not be difficult for you to locate the appropriate supporting statistics.
4. “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” seem to be the goals of your proposal. These are not measurable goals. If you were to say that “among these is the ability to sustain an average life expectancy in six of the 13 colonies of at last 55 years, and to enable newspapers in the colonies to print news without outside interference, and to raise the average income of the colonists by 10 percent in the next 10 years,” these could be measurable goals. Please clarify.
5. You state that “Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government….” Have you weighed this assertion against all the alternatives? What are the trade-off considerations?
6. Your description of the existing situation is quite extensive. Such a long list of grievances should precede the statement of goals, not follow it. Your problem statement needs improvement.
7. Your strategy for achieving your goal is not developed at all. You state that the colonies “ought to be Free and Independent States,” and that they are “Absolved from All Allegiance to the British Crown.” Who or what must change to achieve this objective? In what way must they change? What specific steps will you take to overcome the resistance? How long will it take? We have found that a little foresight in these areas helps to prevent careless errors later on. How cost-effective are your strategies?
8. Who among the list of signatories will be responsible for implementing your strategy? Who conceived it? Who provided the theoretical research? Who will constitute the advisory committee? Please submit an organization chart and vitas of the principal investigators.
9. You must include an evaluation design. We have been requiring this since Queen Anne`s War.
10. What impact will your problem have? Your failure to include any assessment of this inspires little confidence in the long-range prospects of your undertaking.
11. Please submit a PERT diagram, an activity chart, itemized budget, and manpower utilization matrix.

We hope that these comments prove useful in revising your “Declaration of Independence.” We welcome the submission of your revised proposal. Our due date for unsolicited proposals is July 31, 1776. Ten copies with original signatures will be required.

Sincerely,

Management Analyst to the British Crown

TAUNTON, England (UPI) – British police say they have posted recordings of several unusual emergency calls on the Internet to deter people from making unnecessary reports.

Officials at the Avon and Somerset Constabulary said they are using the modern Internet networking approach to reduce the number of unneeded emergency calls they receive, The Daily Telegraph reported Wednesday.

One call posted by officials on the Internet video-sharing Web site, YouTube, was from a woman who said she couldn’t find her glasses to prepare her lunch.

Another call exposes the plight of a man who was upset his wife didn’t leave him a proper meal.

Phony callers can be fined as much as $10,000 and jailed for six months if caught, the newspaper said.

“Wasting the time of the emergency services could cost lives because the emergency services might not be available to respond to real emergencies if they are attending hoax calls,” Chief Superintendent Dave Hayler said.

Copyright 2008 by United Press International

A man walks up to the bar with an ostrich behind him, and as he sits, the bartender asks for their order.

The man says, “I’ll have a beer” and turns to the ostrich. “What’s yours?”

“I’ll have a beer too” says the ostrich.

The bartender pours the beer and says “That will be $3.40 please,” and the man reaches into his pocket and pays with the exact change for payment.

The next day, the man and the ostrich come again, and the man says “I’ll have a beer,”

The ostrich says “I’ll have the same.”

Once again the man reaches into his pocket and pays with exact change.

This became a routine until late one evening, the two enter again. “The usual?” asks the bartender.

“Well, it’s close to last orders, so I’ll have a large Scotch” says the man.

“Same for me” says the ostrich.

“That will be $7.20″ says the bartender.

Once again the man pulls exact change out of his pocket and places it on the bar.

The bartender can’t hold back his curiosity any longer. “Excuse me, sir. How do you manage to always come up with the exact change out of your pocket every time?”

“Well,” says the man, “several years ago I was cleaning the attic and I found this old lamp. When I rubbed it a Genie appeared and offered me two wishes. My first wish was that if I ever needed to pay for anything, I just put my hand in my pocket and the right amount of money will be there.”

“That’s brilliant!” says the bartender. “Most people would wish for a million dollars or something, but you’ll always be as rich as you want for as long as you live!”

“That’s right! Whether it’s a gallon of milk, or a Rolls Royce, the exact money is always there,” says the man.

“That’s fantastic!” says the bartender. “You are a genius! Oh, one other thing sir, what’s with the ostrich?”

The man replies, “Oh, my second wish was for a chick with long legs.”

DAD – Son, come in here, we need to talk.

SON – What’s up, Dad?

DAD – There’s a scratch down the side of the car. Did you do it?

SON – I don’t believe; if I understand the definition of “scratch the car”; that I can say, truthfully,that I scratched the car.

DAD – Well, it wasn’t there yesterday, and you drove the car last night, and no one else has driven it since. How can you explain the scratch?

SON – Well, as I’ve said before, I have no recollection of scratching the car. While it is true that I did take the car out last night, I did not scratch it.

DAD – But your sister has told me she saw you back the car against the mailbox at the end of the driveway, heard a loud scraping sound, saw you get out to examine the car, and then drive away. So again I’ll ask you, yes or no, did you scratch the car?

SON – Oh, you mean you think you have evidence to prove I scratched it. Well, you see, I understood you to mean did “I” scratch the car. I stand by my earlier statement, that I did not scratch the car.

DAD – Are you trying to tell me you didn’t drive the car into the mailbox?

SON – Well, you see sir, I was trying to drive the car into the street. I mishandled the steering of the car, and it resulted in direct contact with the mailbox, though that was clearly not my intent.

DAD – So you are then saying that you did hit the mailbox?

SON – No sir, that’s not my statement. I’ll refer you back to my original statement that I did not scratch the car.

DAD – But the car did hit the mailbox, and the car did get scratched as a result of this contact?

SON – Well, yes, I suppose you could look at it that way.

DAD – So you lied to me when you said you did not scratch the car?

SON – No. No, that’s not correct. Your question was “Did I scratch the car?” From a strict legal definition, as I understood the meaning of that sentence, I did not scratch the car… the mailbox did… I was merely present when the scratching occurred. So my answer of “No” when you asked “Did I scratch the car” was legally correct, although I did not volunteer information.

DAD – Where in the heck did you learn to be such a liar?

SON – From The President of the United States.

SILVER SPRINGS SHORES, Fla. (UPI) — A Florida man says he discovered he was making payments for several months to a man who rented him a home the purported landlord did not own.

Carl Kopsho of Silver Springs Shores said he began paying $800 per month to the man who rented him the home in February, only to be told by Marion County Sheriff’s deputies Wednesday the man did not own the house, the Ocala (Fla.) Star-Banner reported.

Kopsho said he met the man, who used the name Tyrone Grain, at a gas station in January while talking to a friend about his search for a new home. He said Grain told him he was in the process of a divorce and was seeking to rent out the house.

However, the house actually belongs to Sebastian Wagner, a man who lives in New York.

Authorities have yet to track down Grain, who Kopsho said had only accepted his rent payments in cash.

Kopsho said he is hoping Wagner will allow him to continue to rent the home, as he has already painted the walls and made plans to install new cabinets.

Copyright 2008 by United Press International