Renton

I really don't fancy our chances very much at Reading...they're on a great run, the form team of the division. And they're beating Villa 2-0 at HT in the cup D'Oh! Collectively Toontastic predictions are shit!

Hooray Fuck off. thought you objected to swearing ? Just the one particular word. swearing is swearing. Okay dad. just pointing out your hypocrisy dear. What hypocrisy? Catmag has never objected to swearing, just the C word, you know, the one you keep throwing at me and 'left wing do gooders'? Sums you up like, everything to you is black and white, you can't appreciate that swearing is in fact a scale ranging from laughably quaint (damn you sir you are a scoundrel) to outright offensive (you are a f**king c**t). Was thinking lately lately you weren't so bad Renton. Let her stand her own corner on this eh ? I said "swearing is swearing", who decides what words are swearing and which words aren't ? You, me, Cath ?? I think not. Cunt is the same as twat, Fuck, cock, knobend, arsewipe and a host of other words. Swearing is swearing. In my opinion of course. An intelligent bloke like you should realise this. Cath has only ever objected to the word 'cunt' though, not generic swearing. She (and me as it happens) obviously don't hold all swear words as equal - personally I'd say it was the worst swear word in fact. So, she is not being a hypocrite by saying 'fuck' or 'fucking'. By the way, I personally think you, and Stevie for that matter, would benefit from not swearing so much. Serious question - do you use that language normally in real life? P.S. Believe me, Cath can stand her own corner on stuff like this - as you know, I guess at the moment she has better things to do though rather than be on here though. So who decides what is swearing and what isn't. Cath ? I think not. In answer to your question, I probably swear just like any other bloke when I am with blokes but I don't swear if women are around. In this forum, we have almost free reign to say what we like. Part of its attraction probably. But you're the one that bought up Catmag for being a hypocite, when she wasn't. If she had called you a cunt she would have been right though. Agree with your last sentence. Got to confess I get swearier after a drink as well.

Hooray Fuck off. thought you objected to swearing ? Just the one particular word. swearing is swearing. Okay dad. just pointing out your hypocrisy dear. What hypocrisy? Catmag has never objected to swearing, just the C word, you know, the one you keep throwing at me and 'left wing do gooders'? Sums you up like, everything to you is black and white, you can't appreciate that swearing is in fact a scale ranging from laughably quaint (damn you sir you are a scoundrel) to outright offensive (you are a f**king c**t). Was thinking lately lately you weren't so bad Renton. Let her stand her own corner on this eh ? I said "swearing is swearing", who decides what words are swearing and which words aren't ? You, me, Cath ?? I think not. Cunt is the same as twat, Fuck, cock, knobend, arsewipe and a host of other words. Swearing is swearing. In my opinion of course. An intelligent bloke like you should realise this. Cath has only ever objected to the word 'cunt' though, not generic swearing. She (and me as it happens) obviously don't hold all swear words as equal - personally I'd say it was the worst swear word in fact. So, she is not being a hypocrite by saying 'fuck' or 'fucking'. By the way, I personally think you, and Stevie for that matter, would benefit from not swearing so much. Serious question - do you use that language normally in real life? P.S. Believe me, Cath can stand her own corner on stuff like this - as you know, I guess at the moment she has better things to do though rather than be on here though.

Crikey, that post is just a mirror image of The Mail. People slag off The Mail (quite rightly) for their one-sided, slagging rhetoric, but your post is just exaclty the same, albeit from a different corner. I'm always open for debate, regardless of where it comes from, but why must folk resort to needless, infantile insults? Argue your corner, Parky, just leave out the unnecessary vitriol. IMO This is from a frustrated commie, btw. Aye, but there's a massive difference to posting on a messageboard and publishing in a mainstream 'newspaper' like the Mail, aimed at the mass market (sheeple [\Parky]), isn't there? Anyway I agree with him so I'll let him off.

Hooray Fuck off. thought you objected to swearing ? Just the one particular word. swearing is swearing. Okay dad. just pointing out your hypocrisy dear. What hypocrisy? Catmag has never objected to swearing, just the C word, you know, the one you keep throwing at me and 'left wing do gooders'? Sums you up like, everything to you is black and white, you can't appreciate that swearing is in fact a scale ranging from laughably quaint (damn you sir you are a scoundrel) to outright offensive (you are a f**king c**t).

?? not sure what your getting at. quite frankly the end of the empire was pretty much settled after the 1st world war as we could no longer afford imperialism. and tbh, i'd rather be at the beck and call of the yanks than soviet russia. not saying i'm happy with that fact that we are. dont think ive ever said that are you saying we shouldnt have fought WW2 and let germany have a free reign over western europe? that would have been a properly scary situation. with no resistance from the western allies germany would have probably overthrown the soviets and that would have been quite frankly terrifying as they could of then disposed of britain at their whim. biggest mistake germany ever made was not disposing of us (the UK) in 1940 (either by invasion or treaty) as in reality we turned into a huge drop off point for america after that and the 2 front war was more than german infrastructure could take due to the bombing campaign of the western allies. the same western allies that would of been out of the war or at least been severly curtailed by the fact that 'airstrip 1' wasnt off the coast of their controlled teritory. I'm not talking about the war, I'm referring to your constant digs at the proud tradition of fair play and inclusiveness that pervades the British left. Of course it began with that witch Thatcher (Is she still alive she must be drinking the blood of virgins?) She bought into the whole neo-conservative thesis of perpetual conflict and bolshiness and the expansion of a dracula like private sector. Working claw in glove with the dumbest man alive at that time Reagan (a puppet of the Jewish banking cartels like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs/Bear Stearns (since defunct) they took profit and value out of the system and away from people driven projects. Of course this has been continued by Blair ( a very unsound man and a genetic liar with an ugly posh vindictive wife) and the the 2nd most cluesless president after Reagan - vis a vie Bush Jnr. None of these people and their supporters give a flying fuck about the likes of me and you and keep gumbies like you distracted with perpetual stories of fear and disaster. Nice post. I agree entirely except for the needless anti-semitic remark. Still, getting 30 years worth of western history into one paragraph is quite impressive.

Was Accadacca right then? In truth, he has been more right than wrong.

Mmmmmm. Database pie.

Looking at those photos actually gives me strange 'electrical pains' shooting down my body. Anybody else experience this?

Boredom. You cunt.

I was thinking about that when his latest injury was announced. Owen cares more about his horses now than football, didn't he say as much recently in a Talk Sport interview? Hard not to despise him tbh.

How have I defended N-O at all today you tool? I was trying to get some decent banter out of Stevie but it appears that only seems to make an appearance (well it's still shit but you know) when he is drunk. I think getting decent banter out of anyone in a conversation in which half of the participants is you is always going to be difficult That's actually canny funny.

Hi Guys, what's happening on this thread? iirc

Always nice to have your worthwhile contribution Renton. You're welcome. Seriously though, why be bothered about posting on a place you don't like? Just stick to here. I've not been banned from N-O but I don't post there for some of the reasons you mention.

This is the gayest thread ever. Grown men, whinging on a messageboard about being banned on another messageboard, and at the same time stating how shit the said messageboard is.

I went the day after the FA cup semifinal. It was utterly gash. I think the French premier at the time had it spot on - 'But what ees it for???' It's better now. Anyway the French PM saying that, bit of irony there. Maybe someone should ask him the same question regarding the whole of France. One of the obstacles of the dome I think is it's not the most accessible place on earth, especially if you're not familar with London. If it was in Central London it would've made more money without a doubt. The main obstacle to the Dome (i.e. millenium exhibition) was that it was gash though. A huge vanity statement for New Labour - all style and no substance. Did you actually go to it? I can't even describe how bad it was, Meenzer came close in an earlier post.

I was alive in the 70s and 80s and US withdrawal was never on the agenda from what I remember. There's much more to 'strategic importance' than being in artillery range of the enemy. Had the Russians taken Europe, they would by far be the most powerful nation on the planet. The US could never allow that.

I went the day after the FA cup semifinal. It was utterly gash. I think the French premier at the time had it spot on - 'But what ees it for???'

Height of arrogance. Ignoring the French's nuclear deterrent, Western Europe (not just us) is of huge strategical and political importance to the US, especially compared to places like Korea and Vietnam, which they wasted 1000s of lives on. Face it, had we disarmed, we would not have been speaking Russian now, guaranteed.

As appeasers and loony lefties go, I suppose he was Appeaser? I think not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Foot He was also a founder member of CND, if thats what Toonpack is on about. He wanted a world without nuclear weapons, a bit naiive perhaps, but he had principles and was prepared to stick to them for better or worse. Can anybody tell me what David Cameron's principles are?.... Mid 30's outspoken against re-armament, war breaks out, oooh that Hitler was a cunt all along and me gaffer's just become head of aircraft production !! The consumate politician, and that's not a good thing And as for CND, thought they were stupid cunts at the time, nothing since has changed my mind. Once the genie's out the bottle you can't get it back in. At the time the USSR would have walked all over western europe given a sniff of a chance, nuclear weapons stopped that. That said Foot's politics probably would have got him the governer-ship of the USSRUK Doubt the American's would have allowed that to be honest. In fact in the grand scheme of things, if the UK had underwent unilateral disarmanent it might have speeded up the cold war a bit and saved us a few quid. I'd rather not have taken the chance like and support a continued deterrent. Hard to say, they could have gone all isolationist, they had polaris so didn't really need Europe as a launch platform, although giving up the foothold would have been strategically disasterous I reckon. All supposition though, if you've got your own deterrent you're not second guessing anyone's position. There's always been a question over how independent our deterent really is, maybe we should have built our own (which we had the capability to) rather than buy from the US. But howay man, as members of NATO etc, no way in a million years would the Americans have let Russia over run Western Europe. That's not a matter of supposition.

As appeasers and loony lefties go, I suppose he was Appeaser? I think not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Foot He was also a founder member of CND, if thats what Toonpack is on about. He wanted a world without nuclear weapons, a bit naiive perhaps, but he had principles and was prepared to stick to them for better or worse. Can anybody tell me what David Cameron's principles are?.... Mid 30's outspoken against re-armament, war breaks out, oooh that Hitler was a cunt all along and me gaffer's just become head of aircraft production !! The consumate politician, and that's not a good thing And as for CND, thought they were stupid cunts at the time, nothing since has changed my mind. Once the genie's out the bottle you can't get it back in. At the time the USSR would have walked all over western europe given a sniff of a chance, nuclear weapons stopped that. That said Foot's politics probably would have got him the governer-ship of the USSRUK Doubt the American's would have allowed that to be honest. In fact in the grand scheme of things, if the UK had underwent unilateral disarmanent it might have speeded up the cold war a bit and saved us a few quid. I'd rather not have taken the chance like and support a continued deterrent.

You've got to pity Gemmill and other sufferers of micropenis though. He'll be holidaying in the UK from now on.

show me where I have ever mentioned "darker skin". Most atrocities seem to be committed by such, but I'm sure you will say it's just a co-incidence. Your words not mine. I'm sure you know the UK has suffered far more from 'white' terrorism than 'dark skinned'. past tense. Personal freedoms weren't eroded on the same scale at the height of that terrorist campaign, despite the attacks being much more frequent. Al Qaeda are no greater threat now than the IRA were then. ouch. not a bump as such.............. but wondered if this thread could hit the magic 1000 Here's something that might help. Tough shit to them I say. Mind, if this comes into regular use I'm not going through myself if its cold.

I thought it was because Thatcher's popularity was at a record low. By the end it was at a record high. I'd say that makes me a cynic, but then, Leazes would say it makes me naive. No I wouldn't. Her popularity had sank from when she had been elected a few years earlier [which govt doesn't, not many] but she also had no opposition - I think Michael Foot may have been Labour Leader, who was nothing but a tramp and a lunatic. Yes, the Falklands propelled her in the popularity stakes. I think the majority of people realised the Falklands had to be done, apart from the idealistic anti-war mongs. There is no way Argentina would have negotiated over the Falklands, they wanted them back and the only way it would be done was by military means. He was in the wrong age (ie media etc) to ever have a chance of being PM but he had more intelligence and principles in his little toe than you could ever dream of. such as ? He looked a fuckin tramp at the Cenotaph man. That's it - one inappropriate choice of coat in an age when image is all that counts and a man is dismissed. Pathetic. Since its topical today, and to defend his honour, does Foot really look that scruffy in this photograph? I thought it was supposed ot be a Donkey Jacket as well?

I agree with the sentiment, but how are you going to write their 'crimes' into statute though? I just don't think its possible. It's also relevant to a lot of lower grade crime committed by kids.