I found this:
The economically underdeveloped countries of Asia, Africa, Oceania, and Latin America, considered as an entity with common characteristics, such as poverty, high birthrates, and economic dependence on the advanced countries. The French demographer Alfred Sauvy coined the expression ("tiers monde" in French) in 1952 by analogy with the "third estate," the commoners of France before and during the French Revolution-as opposed to priests and nobles, comprising the first and second estates respectively. Like the third estate, wrote Sauvy, the third world is nothing, and it "wants to be something." The term therefore implies that the third world is exploited, much as the third estate was exploited, and that, like the third estate its destiny is a revolutionary one. It conveys as well a second idea, also discussed by Sauvy, that of non-alignment, for the third world belongs neither to the industrialized capitalist world nor to the industrialized Communist bloc. The expression third world was used at the 1955 conference of Afro-Asian countries held in Bandung, Indonesia. In 1956 a group of social scientists associated with Sauvy's National Institute of Demographic Studies, in Paris, published a book called Le Tiers-Monde. Three years later, the French economist Francois Perroux launched a new journal, on problems of underdevelopment, with the same title. By the end of the 1950's the term was frequently employed in the French media to refer to the underdeveloped countries of Asia, Africa, Oceania, and Latin America.
Too tired to pose a question tonight get back to you in the morning
A man is walking down the street, sees a bar, enters, and asks the bartender for a glass of water. The bartender pulls out a gun and points it at the man. The man says "thank you', and leaves the bar. What happened?
A man is walking down the street, sees a bar, enters, and asks the bartender for a glass of water. The bartender pulls out a gun and points it at the man. The man says "thank you', and leaves the bar. What happened?
No brainer The man had the hiccups. He asked the bartender for a glass of water to cure the hiccups. However, the bartender instead scared the hiccups out of the man by pointing a gun at him. Since the bartender cured his hiccups, the man thanked him and left.
That was a way to EZ one just for sput. Here's one, how important does a person have to be before they are considered assasinated instead of just murdered?
Don't think importance is really the difference, it's more why you kill a person. If you kill someone because, let's say; this guy is too darned smart in a particular off topic forum and it's getting on your nerves, that would be murder.
Now if you kill someone you know only by reputation, no direct involvement with said individual, that would be assassination Like a hit on someone 'cause he just plain has to go
P.S. If some ham fisted no neck barrel chested 5'9", 300 lb swarthy guy in a $2000 suit shows up at your house saying he's my uncle, you may want to have a Jesus moment and say sayonara bye bye, adios muchachos, to you significant other(s).
My question will always be, why on earth would any normal person lay claim to having a 2 ton Boricua Burgher as a significant other; and she "did" that obese Chastity Cher lookalike to boot....dayum!
Oh man, you're in for a treat....the men in Djibouti just love pink and plump Western basement dwellers; standby Afars, your dreams are about to come true.
Then Djibouti here I come! Getting ready as we speak
Well folks, unfortunately this is obviously gonna be the end of THIS story............
So when I'm done, I certainly will be in dire need of early afternoon cocktails to loosen me up enough to post another conundrum and finally get this thread back on topic