"Oh, dear. The journalists are lying and the politicians are setting the record straight." is a great line

Hey CNN, thanks for not including the picture in question or even linking to it. It's not like the internet can be use to get information. Or that the job of a news company is to provide information.

I see no photo of a styrofoam crocodile on the beach

abhorrent1: I see no photo of a styrofoam crocodile on the beach

Link (new window)
now you can

Sounds like a croc of shiat.

Awesome. Talk about global trolling. Would like a few to place in & around the lake on my property.

"Load of croc"?

Is that even a thing? It's like saying "things of stuff" or "dude who's a guy".

Just kiss the ass of my butt.

Approves... And is listening.

/hot

Considering that this is the blurb they're complaining about, the crocodile doesn't seem to be that high on the list of reasons to go to a beach somewhere else:

The seas surrounding Fraser Island, to the south-east of Queensland, are a no-go zone. That is unless you mind swimming with sharks and jellyfish, while battling strong rip currents. Head inland and you're likely to bump into some of the world's deadliest spiders, the odd saltwater crocodile, as well as dingoes, which are known to occasionally attack humans.

From 2006... (new window)

/Long time brewing
//Couldn't find a pic

Link (new window) oops

What said croc might look like:






Now then, newsmonsters - was that so f*^king hard?

gunther_bumpass: What said croc might look like:

[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]
[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]
[i975.photobucket.com image 245x167]
[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]

Now then, newsmonsters - was that so f*^king hard?

thanks. pretty dumb that neighter the linked article nor the article linked in the link showed any of said pictures.

Moosecakes: gunther_bumpass: What said croc might look like:

[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]
[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]
[i975.photobucket.com image 245x167]
[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]

Now then, newsmonsters - was that so f*^king hard?

thanks. pretty dumb that neighter the linked article nor the article linked in the link showed any of said pictures.

i tried gang.

olapbill:

i tried gang.



gang what?

gunther_bumpass: olapbill:

i tried gang.



gang what?

um gly?
rene?
busters?
sters?


I suck at these finish the word games. Sorry.

Having been to Fraser Island, I find this... etc.

Lovely area, just don't go swimming in the ocean - tiger shark breeding grounds and all.

olapbill: Moosecakes: gunther_bumpass: What said croc might look like:

[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]
[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]
[i975.photobucket.com image 245x167]
[i975.photobucket.com image 395x222]

Now then, newsmonsters - was that so f*^king hard?

thanks. pretty dumb that neighter the linked article nor the article linked in the link showed any of said pictures.

i tried gang.

That's ok,
I was referring to the article writerers... not the submissioner.
I mean seriously - the whole reason this is news in the first place is
because of the photograph. This being the internet in 20-farking-11
you'd think the sponge-brained dumbiciles writing this stuff (from beneath,
no doubt, their framed journalism degree) would take the extra sixty
seconds to either A) find the photograph that spawned the news event,
or B) at the very least, link to the motherfarker. I don't even have the fancy
book-learnin' and I knows this and such as.