tooner

True but the yanks are a very, very distant third in all of that. So far distant that you'd need a train to reach where they are. Russia and Britain won the war. Agreed us and the Russians took the brunt of it, while American war profiteering was rampant. The American people didn't even want to come into the war which says all you need to know about their commitment. Some Americans didn't. Have you two forgot the Americans had to deal with the Japanese ffs? They weren't a distant third by any margin, and we are endebted to them as much as the French are to us. You are a nob. That's all I need to say. Cheers. That reminds me, did you ever find any evidence that the Japanese could have taken the entire Western seaboard and mid-West of America if they had wanted to? Also if this is true, then the Americans did quite well in their war against them, didn't they? I'm sure you can find a link to the Russian Doomsday weapon while you're at it. You've got less evidence to back up your ridiculous opinions than Parky has man. And when you can't, its the usual childish insult routine with you. We owe the Americans as much as the French owe us?????? You are a disgrace, a clueless pseudo-intellectual. I'll reply properly later. Your letting your irrational dislike of virtually all other nationalities get the better of you as usual. What do you think would have happened to the UK had the American's stayed truly neutral - i.e. not supplied us and the Russians with arms etc (albeit at a price). We'd have been fucked. Then they lost thousands in Normandy and beyond fighting a war that wasn't even directly involving their continent - and helped liberate France amonst others. Do you not think they deserve a bit more respect for that? Because I do. As for this pseudointellectual jibe - what complete bollocks. I'm no historian but I know enough to know when you talk shite like this. You got the last bit right I'll give you that. We gave them all of the tools to win the war in the fuckin first place, for free, absolutely fuck all it cost them. You can't definitively say we wouldn't have won the war on our side without their rag tag army coming over anyway. Who's to say we wouldn't have mobilised people from other parts of the empire. America had the industrial might to arm us, and we were still fucking paying for it 50 years later. They are a disgrace of a nation, had we joined forces with Hitler we'd have taken America without doubt in my mind. We and our stance in world war two was utterly and convincingly pivotal in to which way the world went, and you your bollocks can say what you like, read balanced books on world war 2 and you'll see. I've always been interested in the second world war. Your viewpoint is utterly contrary to everything I've seen or read on it though, and there's a prevailing element of xenophobia in it. Tell you what though, direct me to some 'balanced' books and I'll take a look. Btw, none of this takes away anything that the British did which was simply amazing. We had to pay a heavy price though - the loss of our empire, and the Americans naturally loved this. But in a way they were right, the age of empires had ended - we just have found it hard to accept it - some more than others. As yours is to mine. 30m I've read yank troop numbers who joined the western front as numbering between 1.5m and 3m. Sizeable but no more than us. It doesn't take 28.5m to make a nuke as well. The American Army have suffered more defeats and embarrassments on their own than Sunderland AFC in 05/06. i knew you'd contest that....... .......let me see if i can dig it up. World War II (1941-1945) Total Servicemembers (Worldwide).............16,112,566 Battle Deaths................................................291,557 Other Deaths in Service (Non-Theater).............113,842 Non-mortal Woundings..................................671,846 Living Veterans (note 5)................................2,498,000 source.... http://www.veteranshour.com/facts_of_the_matter.htm Ok, so I was a bit high, maybe they meant after the war as well to garrison all the places they now had bases....anyway Stevie...errr...Barrack, you never answered my question...who else from the Commonwealth could have responded to a call to arms?

pardon my ignorance, but what the heck is an allotment? you need permission to grow veg? An allotment is an "allotment" of land alloted to the working man. The land is usually owned by the local council or the church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotment_(gardening) gotcha! cheers, a public garden.

True but the yanks are a very, very distant third in all of that. So far distant that you'd need a train to reach where they are. Russia and Britain won the war. Agreed us and the Russians took the brunt of it, while American war profiteering was rampant. The American people didn't even want to come into the war which says all you need to know about their commitment. Some Americans didn't. Have you two forgot the Americans had to deal with the Japanese ffs? They weren't a distant third by any margin, and we are endebted to them as much as the French are to us. You are a nob. That's all I need to say. Cheers. That reminds me, did you ever find any evidence that the Japanese could have taken the entire Western seaboard and mid-West of America if they had wanted to? Also if this is true, then the Americans did quite well in their war against them, didn't they? I'm sure you can find a link to the Russian Doomsday weapon while you're at it. You've got less evidence to back up your ridiculous opinions than Parky has man. And when you can't, its the usual childish insult routine with you. We owe the Americans as much as the French owe us?????? You are a disgrace, a clueless pseudo-intellectual. I'll reply properly later. Your letting your irrational dislike of virtually all other nationalities get the better of you as usual. What do you think would have happened to the UK had the American's stayed truly neutral - i.e. not supplied us and the Russians with arms etc (albeit at a price). We'd have been fucked. Then they lost thousands in Normandy and beyond fighting a war that wasn't even directly involving their continent - and helped liberate France amonst others. Do you not think they deserve a bit more respect for that? Because I do. As for this pseudointellectual jibe - what complete bollocks. I'm no historian but I know enough to know when you talk shite like this. You got the last bit right I'll give you that. We gave them all of the tools to win the war in the fuckin first place, for free, absolutely fuck all it cost them. You can't definitively say we wouldn't have won the war on our side without their rag tag army coming over anyway. Who's to say we wouldn't have mobilised people from other parts of the empire. America had the industrial might to arm us, and we were still fucking paying for it 50 years later. They are a disgrace of a nation, had we joined forces with Hitler we'd have taken America without doubt in my mind. We and our stance in world war two was utterly and convincingly pivotal in to which way the world went, and you your bollocks can say what you like, read balanced books on world war 2 and you'll see. serious question, who else was there by the time the americans joined, the canadians were in the aussies were in, the colonials from africa where in....who's left? I recently saw something on tv which stated that by the end of the war the americans had mobilized 30 million troops, shirley they helped beat hitler.....no?

pardon my ignorance, but what the heck is an allotment? you need permission to grow veg?

not sure if anyone on here has ever heard of these guys....The Hip (the tragically hip) are equivalent to maple syrup or hockey in Canada anyway this is a "rant" that Gord "the Gord father" Downie did regarding a killer whale tank...worth a listen........hehehehe".......unbeknown to me, I can't hear a GOD DAMN thing under water".......classic

yep nothing works for it as it doesn't let you run any executable files......had to back up the hard-drive and start fresh.

I notice how its a "right wing rag" but a "left wing publication". that pretty much demonstrates your political 'objectivity' to me. and pardon me 'for trawling the internet' as you say but i do believe that this is a thread about the BNP and how they are winning votes? Imo, this is relevant piece which states the cause of many peoples disatisfaction with the mainstream parties. thats your brainwashed geek students for you Of course. AA picks up on a pedantic point and you just have to back him up because it was aimed at me, you big bairn. Par for the course, just like when Fop, the most tedious fucker in the history of the internet, became your champion. You've already embarrassed yourself on another thread today by making it clear to everyone on here you don't have the first clue what a University education entails, mind you've been doing that for years (Learning? From books?! ). I'd quit while you're behind if I were you. the most tedious fucker on here is you. FOP tied you in knots you daft cunt. How do you know I don't know what a university education entails ? I do know, they give certificates out for virtually nothing these days. The standard of education is abysmal in comparison to a few decades ago, whereby everybody "passes". It used to be "O" levels or nothing, now a GCSE grade 3 or 4 is a "pass". If the likes of you is an example of what uni churns out ie a do gooder brainwashed geek, it sort of proves my point. I know because of the Falklands thread man. It's they're for everyone to see, you haven't got a fucking clue about what further education entails. Fop tied me in knots? Righto. By the way, it may interest you to know that I am old enough to have taken 'O' levels, not GCSEs, you sad bitter bairn. haha, I got O Levels Renton, quite a few in fact, and was happy with it, I've had a good career lad. However I don't close my mind when I look around and see how the country is changing like an "i'm alright Jack" sort of guy does. Nowt wrong with that, you should do the same. Edit. By the way, how many more times are you going to flounce off and say "I'm not talking to you Leazes" I'd rather not talk to you but at the same time its pretty hard to post on here and not defend myself from your incessant abuse. If you find me so tedious, why do you seek me out and mention me as a third party in so many of your posts? Something I have only done once (to my deep regret now). I'm happy for you that you did well with your 'O' levels and have had a good career (whereby you have gained so much life experience). I did well with my O levels too, went to Uni (to study medicine and science), and now have a great job thanks. It begs the question though, why would a man who has such a content life end up so bitter as you come across here? Not just about immigrants, for instance you've also shown you're bitter against students in this thread as well. Glad I'm not like that. P.S. You're behaviour with Dave from N-O is amongst the saddest things I have ever seen on a message board. Seriously man, you should be embarassed at your age. If you don't want to "talk" to me, don't. Stay with your conviction instead of backing down like a bairn. As for NO, it's a shame that good posters get banned on there, in my case for posting comments which were ultimately proved correct. I asked them to discuss it like an adult but it was actually rather childish that he would not respond IMO. So I created 2 new logins. It's a bit like you really, you won't or can't admit that you were wrong. Like an adult. ........kettle...black much?

Typical old generation crap - a man can do anything as long as he wears a nice tie - I'd rather care about what he says and does. The Queen should just be shot along with the rest of her family - I don't care what she wears to be honest. it's standards mate. Standards. Discipline of life, the same as you can't go around saying what you like and hide behind "freedom of speech" when heckling British soldiers doing what they signed up to do for instance, because nobody has 100% freedom of speech, you have to show respect and courtesy to others and rules in life. It's you who is stuck in a time warp, you should have thrown away this teenage mentality [i can go to work in flip flops so long as I do my job etc] years ago. Do YOU wear what you want to work ie dress slovenly, or stick to your companies established dress code [assuming they have one] when will you stop ......it's been proven you have no idea what the actual rules for freedom of speech are...let it go

sitting/standing in a classroom and lecturing is experiencing the real thing ie human nature ? Not what I said or meant as you well know. I was simply pointing out that you have a go at people for commenting about things they haven't experienced yet you seem to think you're qualified in someway to comment on what goes on at university. Not difficult to see the flaw in that logic. OK I can accept your point of view. But what I say is based on what they say, logically it tells you that university is teaching them idealogical bullshit, politically speaking. I did Engineering at University and didn't attend a single political meeting or event. How does that fit into your "knowledge"? me as well.....all of my political views are based on internet porn.. FYP.

sitting/standing in a classroom and lecturing is experiencing the real thing ie human nature ? Not what I said or meant as you well know. I was simply pointing out that you have a go at people for commenting about things they haven't experienced yet you seem to think you're qualified in someway to comment on what goes on at university. Not difficult to see the flaw in that logic. OK I can accept your point of view. But what I say is based on what they say, logically it tells you that university is teaching them idealogical bullshit, politically speaking. I did Engineering at University and didn't attend a single political meeting or event. How does that fit into your "knowledge"? me as well.....all of my political views are based on life experience..

sitting/standing in a classroom and lecturing is experiencing the real thing ie human nature ? Not what I said or meant as you well know. I was simply pointing out that you have a go at people for commenting about things they haven't experienced yet you seem to think you're qualified in someway to comment on what goes on at university. Not difficult to see the flaw in that logic. OK I can accept your point of view. But what I say is based on what they say, logically it tells you that university is teaching them idealogical bullshit, politically speaking. you do know that not all studies at university have to do with ideologies/philosophy right?

I don't think its nice - I just think its a waste of time , effort and money for this country tryiing to sort out the shit. you gotta defend yourself from the bad guys, its just human nature. You don't understand this do you. So what did Korea, Suez, Vietnam, Malaysia, Kenya and Iraq (Twice) have to do with defending us from the bad guys? So you think we should just let them do as they like ? LIke Cuba, which you missed out. Iraq has been discussed, I still can't believe people think we should have allowed Iraq to carry on as they were going under Saddam. I listed those which specifically involved the UK which were a waste of time. Saddam was okay when he was invading Iran. Whatever, maybe that is the case. Its a changing world, and the defence industry is just like any other. People manufacture and sell weapons to countries prepared to use them. Some wish to use them aggressively, others for a deterrent and to try and keep order. You obviously think the middle eastern countries are the good guys. ....are they....bad?

I don't think its nice - I just think its a waste of time , effort and money for this country tryiing to sort out the shit. you gotta defend yourself from the bad guys, its just human nature. You don't understand this do you. So what did Korea, Suez, Vietnam, Malaysia, Kenya and Iraq (Twice) have to do with defending us from the bad guys? So you think we should just let them do as they like ? LIke Cuba, which you missed out. Iraq has been discussed, I still can't believe people think we should have allowed Iraq to carry on as they were going under Saddam. I listed those which specifically involved the UK which were a waste of time. Saddam was okay when he was invading Iran. This is what is really wrong with military backed foreign policy. While I would agree that a big stick is necessary to ward off those that would do harm to domestic interests, it's the tinkering and tampering with struggles that seem to be aligned (at least temporarily) with international interests that start trouble. (see afghanistan and Iraq)

Interesting you put so much on perception of being British counting for so much - does that apply to Muslims as well then? I've said before that all the military campaigns since WWII have been bollocks - sorry for not being blinded by the flag. .....stop me if you've heard this one before......

yawn. Leazes you're such a tool......better quit reading altogether then eh? Just ignore him. He'll bump the thread five or six times looking for attention but he'll give up eventually. fair enough....cheers

yawn. Leazes you're such a tool......better quit reading altogether then eh?

this thread reminded me of an essay of Malcolm Gladwell's I just read called "The Newboy Network" which talks about how people make snap judgements about those they've just met, ala-job-interview......anyway here is the relevent bit although the whole essay was quite good. Some years ago, an experimental psychologist at Harvard University, Nalini Ambady, together with Robert Rosenthal, set out to examine the nonverbal aspects of good teaching. As the basis of her research, she used videotapes of teaching fellows which had been made during a training program at Harvard. Her plan was to have outside observers look at the tapes with the sound off and rate the effectiveness of the teachers by their expressions and physical cues. Ambady wanted to have at least a minute of film to work with. When she looked at the tapes, though, there was really only about ten seconds when the teachers were shown apart from the students. "I didn't want students in the frame, because obviously it would bias the ratings," Ambady says. "So I went to my adviser, and I said, 'This isn't going to work.'" But it did. The observers, presented with a ten-second silent video clip, had no difficulty rating the teachers on a fifteen- item checklist of personality traits. In fact, when Ambady cut the clips back to five seconds, the ratings were the same. They were even the same when she showed her raters just two seconds of videotape. That sounds unbelievable unless you actually watch Ambady's teacher clips, as I did, and realize that the eight seconds that distinguish the longest clips from the shortest are superfluous: anything beyond the first flash of insight is unnecessary. When we make a snap judgment, it is made in a snap. It's also, very clearly, a judgment:we get a feeling that we have no difficulty articulating. ....etc etc, the book "What the dog saw...and other adventures" is worth a read.

Didn't the last Ice Age (and others before) drastically change the landscape though? That would render a lot of this supposed knowledge useless anyway. Surely a more likely explanation is people (who have seemingly explored throughout their history) rediscovered lands that were now hospitable again as a matter of course rather than because they knew where to go. Yeah my take is that the re-population of land freed from the ice was a natural one especially given it was still largely a hunter-gatherer lifestyle anyway. You also have to consider that there were other Hominids descended from Homo Erectus who had populated the same areas a couple of hundred thousand years before that by the same natural migration. Let's not get into this evolution bollocks. We did nothing but eat our own shit in caves for about 400,000 years. wasn't until we started eating what 'grew' on the cow-shit that things got interesting.... Aye. Mycelium and all FYP

Didn't the last Ice Age (and others before) drastically change the landscape though? That would render a lot of this supposed knowledge useless anyway. Surely a more likely explanation is people (who have seemingly explored throughout their history) rediscovered lands that were now hospitable again as a matter of course rather than because they knew where to go. Yeah my take is that the re-population of land freed from the ice was a natural one especially given it was still largely a hunter-gatherer lifestyle anyway. You also have to consider that there were other Hominids descended from Homo Erectus who had populated the same areas a couple of hundred thousand years before that by the same natural migration. Let's not get into this evolution bollocks. We did nothing but eat our own shit in caves for about 400,000 years. wasn't until we started eating what 'grew' on the cow-shit that things got interesting....

That would be the Western governments who needed a new bogeyman - you really need to watch The Power of Nightmares. So the "bogeymen" who commited Lockerbie, 9/11, 7/7 and the failed exploding undercrackers are figments of my government fuelled imagination, ah ok thing is it wasn't the fundamentalist clerics that deported him/them.......it was his/their own government But who created the climate in which, such a deportation was possible, that'll be the government I reckon you'll say grasping at straws tbh...

That would be the Western governments who needed a new bogeyman - you really need to watch The Power of Nightmares. So the "bogeymen" who commited Lockerbie, 9/11, 7/7 and the failed exploding undercrackers are figments of my government fuelled imagination, ah ok thing is it wasn't the fundamentalist clerics that deported him/them.......it was his/their own government

the government wrongly deported him/them contrary to the governments laws......who bears the responsibility if not the government? had a couple of these happen in Canada where the "deport now ask questions later" came back to bite gov't in the ass to the tune of several million dollars. as for why he thinks it'll be worth it, probably a combination of someone telling him to get on the gravy train and the fact he was betrayed by his own government. at least you understand something. so does the bolded bit trump the fact he/they were deported illeagally in your eyes? I never said anything about the "legality", I'm saying we are a bunch of soft cunts for putting up with it and for those defending such idiocy to our own cost. putting up with being illeagally deported? ..... if it had been a person/persons of a non-identfiable minorty (angry-football forum- anglo-saxon- blue collar worker.... ) that had been deported would you feel the same way?

the government wrongly deported him/them contrary to the governments laws......who bears the responsibility if not the government? had a couple of these happen in Canada where the "deport now ask questions later" came back to bite gov't in the ass to the tune of several million dollars. as for why he thinks it'll be worth it, probably a combination of someone telling him to get on the gravy train and the fact he was betrayed by his own government. at least you understand something. so does the bolded bit trump the fact he/they were deported illeagally in your eyes?

the government wrongly deported him/them contrary to the governments laws......who bears the responsibility if not the government? had a couple of these happen in Canada where the "deport now ask questions later" came back to bite gov't in the ass to the tune of several million dollars. as for why he thinks it'll be worth it, probably a combination of someone telling him to get on the gravy train and the fact he was betrayed by his own government.

In a very convoluted and unjust sort of way. His solution is to make sure the government cannot be placed on such charges to ensure they get away with it, rather than holding them to account and punishing their misdeeds to put off future governments from repeating and worsening the offences. For someone so opposed to the USSR and their style of government/justice/disappearances in the night it's a confuzzled point of view. get away with what ? Other countries torture him, he thinks he can sue us, and you agree with it ? What planet do you live on If that were the case, he wouldn't have a case and would be told to fuck off. But the facts are.... "MI5 was fully aware of the brutal treatment he received, and" not only "provided information and questions to be asked by his torturers" but also "helped 'interrogate' Mohamed in Pakistan in 2002" "The courts have concluded that British officers were, indeed, deeply enmeshed in the abuse" "MI5 kept files relating to the treatment of Mohamed from the ISC" "It is a crime to commit ‘an act which constitutes complicity in torture." you should go back and read Toonpacks post about the good guys and the bad guys HF. There are a lot of bad guys out there and its about time you recognised who they are and ask yourself again, why WE should foot the bill and others are quite happy to see us do it. We owe him nothing. He will claim from us, because we are the only ones daft enought to contemplate it. who are they exactly? good-guys muslim immigrants unjustly deported bad guys muslim immigrants justly deported fill out the other players as you see fit Leazes Yawn ...no idea then eh? I'm basically not interested. You don't need to tell me about security, and things like this. Especially being a yank. ......i would say you are basic, remedial even