Be a Supporter!
Response to: United in "grief" Posted September 11th, 2003 in Politics

$2001, yours for $19.99 (plus P&P) - limited to one per person. Why does that sound stupid? Then again, why does it sound expected?

United in "grief" Posted September 10th, 2003 in Politics

http://shop.colonialmint.com/911bushbill/911bushbill3b.gif

Nice to see that what really matters is being taken care of...

And, no, I didn't knock this up on Photoshop - it was in my Inbox this morning.

Response to: War on Terror Posted September 10th, 2003 in Politics

The War On Terror - wasn't it The War Against Terrorism until they realised what that spelt out?

Anyway, just to show that We, The People will not be overrun, they're making a film about the Bali bombing. Something like Bali - Destruction of Paradise. Dear Lord...

And I thought that programme on how fucking dumb New Yorkers were being about new building on the WTC site was depressing. Screaming and shouting that they must build identical towers, or bigger if possible, and how bin-Laden shouldn't have a zoning permit for South Manhattan. Give them an inch, and they'll whine for an hour. Still, anyone know how Silverburg, the guy that owns the site, sleeps at night? Dremanding the new building has 11,000ft of office space, as that's what the WTC had, and the new design (by Daniel Liebskind) has to be altered as the 1776ft tower shouldn't be symmetrical with the Statue of Liberty as the designs stated, but moved so it is more commercially viable?

It's not political, it's not emotional - commerce has won out in New York after all. A sad statment on the US Condition, really.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted September 9th, 2003 in Politics

We're making up for the Sween Slack...

Response to: Illegal Immigrants Posted September 9th, 2003 in Politics

Just to get the UK perspective on it.

According to our Right Wing press, as well as any Government minister trying to avert attention from something (ie, lying to the public over the threat posed by Iraq, being responsible for the death of an internationally respected weapons inspector/scientist, being low in the opinion polls, doubling Income Tax since getting into power by always keeping it ahead of the tax rate etc.), these damn dirty foreigners are coming into our blessed country with it's majestic green, sweeping fields (yes, it is the same England you've heard about...), bringing with them AIDS, TB, taking our jobs, getting benefits for nothing, not integrating with our society, clogging up hospital waiting lists, and anything else zingoistic/xenophobic/bigoted/racist/ill-informed you care to sling at them.

OK, let's tick them off:
Bringing AIDS: No massive increase in the disease - in fact a decrease - in the last five years. And, besides, we had the disease before. We do have things like drug addicts, homosexuals, people that forget to wear a condom on a trip to Bangkok, you know.
TB: No increase spotted yet.
Jobs: Eastern Europeans are the new Australians or South Africans. They work behind bars, and that's about it. They don't take lawyer jobs, executive spots, or much in any way. Just like the US, they're minimum wage slaves for eternity.
Benefits: What are those? Anybody, and I mean anybody, in the UK on benefit (many of them White Working Class - apparently immigrants want to work for a living and try very hard indeed) are wiped out with every stealth tax TB (that's Tony Blair, not Tuberculosis) slaps on them.
Not integrating: Just like most British ex-pats abroad do, although at least immigrants have an basic understanding of English, and are willing to learn the language. Go to the Costa Del Sol in Spain, spot the difference. British tourists don't help much - look at the carnage we cause in Falikari and Ibeza every year in the TOURIST resorts. In the case of Ibeza, the tourists stay on the tourist resorts on the west end of the island (the club end), and seldom see the east end with all the culture etc on offer.
Hospitals: We have huge waiting lists because hospitals have no funding, few beds, and nurses are minimum wage cripples working 14 hour shifts. It was that way years ago, and has gotten worse. The idea of medical tourism doesn't stand up at all.

Thinking about it, on TV Nation, didn't Cuba come above the US and Canada in their healthcare system test (although the broadcast was changed so Canada won - hooray for Democracy!), so isn't it realistic for Americans to cross into Canada, or swim to Cuba, for some good affordable healthcare, with no waits? Hey, us Brits should be flying to France and Germany, or time injuries to coincide with the FA Cup final, or a major England match. I've done it, and got through A&E with a broken arm within 90 minutes, and a busted foot in under 40. The lesson? Sport heals.

Response to: War on Terror Posted September 9th, 2003 in Politics

You missed the himarity on Sunday morning in London.

A terrorism simulation, just to see how well prepared our emergency services are for a staged exercise, in this case a gas attack on the Tube (which is so 1997...and Japanese), just like my parents had to do in the 50's to prepare for The Inevitable Nuclear Strike on our country. So, any terrorist with a brain will now be thinking that we'll be prepared for a gas attack on the Tube, so ditchthat plan and aim a 747 at Canary Wharf...wait, something with meaning.

On that subject, hear the 9/11 tapes? Police incompetence at it's finest, and proof once more that they are not effectual in any way during a disaster.

The police way is to restore order, keeping everything controlled. So they said not to evacuate the second tower, and everyone would be fine. Just think, a little lateral thinking could've saved a few hundred lives...

Response to: Illegal Immigrants Posted September 8th, 2003 in Politics

At 9/7/03 02:03 PM, Sole_Influence wrote: Anyone know why they are given free cars, free houses, and given money to go to theme parks?

Because you're a fucking idiot that believes that shit?

Response to: Marvel scraps "Di" job Posted September 6th, 2003 in Politics

At 9/5/03 06:07 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:
I believe the Mirror once ran a front-page articla about a hampster.

No, it was Freddie Starr eating said hamster. And The Sun.

Response to: Marvel scraps "Di" job Posted September 5th, 2003 in Politics

Wasn't this story, like, two months ago?

Still, they had a valid point that Princess Died was famous as an image, and gave nothing to the people she allegedly cared for (once she was divorced, she ditched most of the charities she was the patron for out of spite, and after her death they were picked up by the rest of the Royal Family), yet the truth slips through the cracks so fast most people can't see it. In essence, she's the Anti-Myra Hindley.

OK, I just wanted to use that phrase...

Response to: Which Causes More Wars? Posted September 5th, 2003 in Politics

In the past, it was religious governments (because the other one was just, you know, WRONG by worshipping the wrong religion), but now the lines have blurred so one Government can be capitalist, imperialist and military in different levels, and it depends on the man in charge as to what they do - sit tight, or throw their weight around.

After all, Thatcher and Blair had gung-ho wars for no reason apart from personal gain (especially Thatcher - it got her re-elected after being trounced in the polls), while Ted Heath and John Major weren't rattling sabres all the time - although Major was involved in Gulf War I, but at least that had a legitimate reason.

Response to: 23 cents worth of gas please? Posted September 3rd, 2003 in Politics

By the way, isn't it convenient that in about April, petrol started becoming that little bit cheaper and, after that refinery in Northern Iraq got blowed up, the prices have started to creep up again?

I haven't heard anything about this from Tony, but he's too busy right now with getting his ass burned in pucblic with the Hutton Enquiry, but it is providing him with an excellent smokescreen to sneak things through.

Response to: mi-6 killing brits? Posted September 2nd, 2003 in Politics

At 9/1/03 09:24 AM, GridLock wrote:
Be original, what's with the two letters and one number in all these "covert" groups?

MI-5 are police based, similar to the FBI, and based in the UK and matters directly involved (such as some cockney gangster buggering off to Spain). MI-6 are the international branch, and if you'd been taking notesd in ANY Bond film, you'd get the hint. Just they don't have cool gadgets and an inexhaustable amount of cars to gear up and promptly trash.

Response to: France Sucks!!! Posted September 2nd, 2003 in Politics

Yes, France sucks. Their leader cut off funding for the UK-based charity for Palestinian refugees, Interpal, after accusing them of having links to Hamas, and on the same day, cut off funding to African AIDS charities as he didn't like one of the five groups involved, just two months after visiting and saying he would join them in the fight to end this disease.

Oh, wait a minute, that wasn't a French President...

Response to: mi-6 killing brits? Posted September 1st, 2003 in Politics

At 8/31/03 04:19 PM, RugbyMacDaddy wrote: is it just me or does it seem too coincedental that the british guy who talked to the bbs about iraqs wmd died afew days later in the woods? or perhaps did mi-6 play a role

Remind me how unappreciated I am for my coverage of the Hutton Enquiry...

Response to: Why does everyone hate america? Posted August 30th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/30/03 12:31 AM, mrpopenfresh wrote: Im gonna agree with my fellow canadian EVO here, except for that jealous of their army part. I remember driving through the United States down to Washington and the surrounding area. On the drive through the country, almost every house had a flagpole with the american flag on it! Even worse, in the big citys theres a flag every couple metres!

I can top that: I was in San Diego this time last year, and suffered 9/11: One Year On (yawn). It was bad enough that it was plastered on every channel, and there wasn't any escape on MTV either, but the way appearences had to be kept up in that way all Americans do - wearing dumbass ribbons - practically forcing it upon others to join in or get kicked to death was just plain bad.

On top of that, all the way down Rosecrans Avenue there were flags every five feet, flapping along with traffic. And I have to say, when I got hit 'round the head by one wile waiting to cross the road, I thought it was rather apt.

Now in Canada, the only place your'e gonna see a canadian flag is on government buildings and the occasionnal proud canadian, not that where not proud, but the prouder people. Im sure that ethnic flags rival the total number of canadian flags. Heck, even in Quebec there more Acadian flags than Canadian ones!

Over here it's on top of any Royal residences for the Union Jack, and footie matches for the St. George's Cross...or painted on car bonnets for the World Cup. Yeesh...

Response to: The Dark Side of Tony Blair Posted August 30th, 2003 in Politics

OK, it's getting fun now!!!

On Thursday was Tony's time to shine, and the first point he made? "The BBC report is an attack on my integrity." OK, when he griped the exact same thing three months ago, we all laughed, but this time the entire British population simultaniously shouted "Oh fuck off!!!" at their TV sets at the mere thought that hre's more concerned with this mythic integrity he has, as opposed to the blood on his hands over Iraq, Kelly, and the metaphorical blood from misleading the British public. However, he followed this up by saying that, if he lied in the dossier, he would have to resign from his PMship. However, we all knew he wouldn't, since he doesn't live up to promises; never has, never will.

But Friday brought a bright spot - Alastair Cambpell walked out, as he had taken his role as far as he could (ie, Spin Doctor in Chief), nothing to do with all the hard evidence not pointing at Geoff Hoon as the culprit, but Campbell himself, and it appears as if Hoon wasn't invited to key meetings at all, while Blair, John Scarlett (MI6 chief), Campbell et al were fully aware of. Nice when the workings of "Government" are exposed, huh?

Anyway, look it up if you want:
http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/

However, the statment that "This is the first time a Proime Minister has been on trial since John Major over Arms To Iraq" is just dumb. That was 11 years ago, so is that supposed to mean all our PMs are lying bastards that live to mislead the public to preserve themselves, regardless of the cost?

Wait, am I being naieve?

Response to: Movies cause violence Posted August 28th, 2003 in Politics

The BBC showing 13 year old episodes of The Simpsons for the 86,0003rd time, rather than more recent ones to avoid having to hand over the rights to Channel 4 (the BBC have up to Season 11, then it's C4 - the Beeb stopped at 9 thus far), THAT causes violence. Gimme my 12 gauge...

Response to: Michael Moore is the man Posted August 27th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/26/03 12:07 AM, crackerjax wrote: ohh, wow two web sites

So, that would be two more than you're using to base all your "argument" (read: pathetic bitching) around?

Response to: The Dark Side of Tony Blair Posted August 27th, 2003 in Politics

The latest update: Itt seems they're setting up Hume for the fall (especially Campbell and several of Tony's Inner Circle), and he's supposed to take the rap and have a good carrer out of the spotlight in about six months. The problem is, he didn't read the script, and is passing it straight on to Downing Street, where the actual hard evidence is pointing with neon lights. It's great when self preservation seems so damn pointless, isn't it?

Meanwhile, Blair is so innocent in the matters (the exposing & death of Kelly, and generally misleading the British public), he spent the weekend with his Government lawyers going over every last detail he's going to say in court. Not that he's actually said an off the cuff remark since 1994.

Response to: Why don't WE have suicide bomber??? Posted August 27th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/22/03 12:53 PM, adrshepard wrote:
We do. It's called the military. But if we can do it without killing ourselves, why not? And since when are you the official lord of false promises. Theres more to being in the army than just being brave. A lot more.

No, the military are a bunch of people with state of the art weaponary and a huge amount of numbers,as well as tactical air strikes clearing the way, whoare willing to kill other people for the cause, as they didn't do too well in their SATs.

How can you claim dropping bombs on somebody from 30,000ft is remotely brave, without a hint of irony, while claiming suicide bombers are cowards?

Response to: arnie for govenor Posted August 22nd, 2003 in Politics

At 8/21/03 10:35 AM, The_Patriot wrote: shut up i kno his policies

List them, please, as well as how they will be put into action.

u suck

No, Terminator 3 sucks - as does voting for people on name alone. How many more qualified people are in the running for the post, yet get no attention for not having media savvy (ie, they were in a bunch of films)?

i also kno hes better than the neglectant govenor at the moment

On what grounds? It isn't like they let all the candidates take charge for a week to prove this fact, and you have to just plain guess.

Response to: Why don't WE have suicide bomber??? Posted August 22nd, 2003 in Politics

To be blunt, how many Americans have the balls to actually be willing to kill themselves for a cause they believe in so passionatly? It's like all the BBS users that said they were signing up for the Army during That Thing In Iraq, and kept posting for weeks after it had finished. Talk is one thing, actions are quite another.

Response to: arnie for govenor Posted August 21st, 2003 in Politics

At 8/21/03 07:06 AM, The_Patriot wrote: im british and i want arnie 4 govenor or better president!!

The Rules state he can't be President (wasn't born in the US, so piss off), and as for being State Governor - do you even know his policies? For all you know, he could be running to have people bite the heads off puppies on the first Tuesday of every month. Well, he is a Republican...

Response to: The Dark Side of Tony Blair Posted August 21st, 2003 in Politics

Another update: On Monday, Campbell said he was not involved at any stage in exposing Kelly as the informant, so stop bugging him, since he's great. Then along comes one of Blair's advisors (one from a seemingly limitless bunch) and says, oh yeah, Campbell was the one that pitched the idea, we told him it was a bad idea, but that didn't count as he's Alastair Campbell, and I'm fired when the dust settles.

It's gfreat when large segments of a whole Government get impeached. And remind me to find the time to type up the communicated e-mails/damning evidence between Campbell and Dossier Central (and decypher the censored bits - I'm getting there) sometime, it's great!

Response to: Michael Moore is the man Posted August 20th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/18/03 08:04 PM, Raptorman wrote:
A Michael Moore is an entertainer.

So are: Ronald Reagan, Charlton Heston, Arnold Schwarzenegger (among others) - hasn't caused them any problems, has it? As for other people...

1 We all like to be entertained.

Not all - how many self-appointed watchdogs out there like to be not entertained, and prefer to be offended so they can complain and feel mighty?

Personal pet peeve of mine...

B Micheal Moore is not a 'hard information' source.

Go to the nearest bookshop, and grab Downsize This and Stupid White Men, or check his website. Quite a selection available there...

1 He plays fast and loose with the facts.

Wait until the dust settles over the Hutton Enquiry. If the question remains about WMD or the ability to launch them in 45 minutes, we'll have a few more examples of people who do this. By the way, examples.

2 He will never enter an open debate because any competant debater would shred him in minutes.

Says you.

C Micheal Moore is not a person to base your worldviews off of.

And who is? Bush?!?

1 Nor is Limbaugh, Coulter, Frankin, or even O'roarke.

As above.

2 Ulimately, every person should figure things out for themselves by thinking not from soomeone else's thoughts.

By the way, why are you so offended by Michael Moore, and who told you to do so?

3 Many people spend their entire lives without doing this.

More people don't - it's called RELIGION.

Response to: I don't support the troops! Posted August 20th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/19/03 12:25 PM, adrshepard wrote:
1. Roybatty hates Christianity and believes we live in a wholly Christian society.

33% of the world's population is Christian, far more than any other religion (Islam, in second, clocks up 22%) - and they're endemic in the most powerful nations on the planet, especially the US. Large portions of Europe are also Christian/Catholic,and they carry more power than most other nations floating around.

2. He thinks that Osama is an agent of Bush to make an excuse to invade other countries.

I'm still sure it's Art Malik in disguise.

3. Who knows what other things about the US bother him.

People saying "If you don't like it, LEAVE", I assume.

And also, there are several foreigners that do like our country. Why else would they try to smuggle themselves inside crates and boats?

Just like people smuggle themselves into England in their droves, right? Yes, I bet they like it that when theyarrive, they're accused of stealing the NHS, bringing AIDS and TB into the country at a level never seen before (as we had neither), stealing jobs and houses, blah blah blah. It's the myth of The Land Of Opportunity, and nothing more - which it is as soon as they live there and suffer existences on Minimum Wage and persecution from the dominant ideology.

Response to: Michael Moore Sucks Ass Posted August 20th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/19/03 11:45 PM, JGal21189 wrote: Alright, whatever, I'm not arguing anymore. Not because you have convinced me not to hate Michael Moore but because you won't listen to reason, that and I don't care to argue about this either.

Ironic statment #5007.

Response to: I don't support the troops! Posted August 19th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/18/03 11:57 PM, adrshepard wrote: I was thinking Roy, why don't you move somewhere else in the world? You seem to believe that the US, its people, and its leaders are the scum of the earth, so why don't you move away. As a CEO, I'm sure you can afford it, so what is it that makes you stay in this accursed democracy?

Nearly two years of jacked up patriotic, moronic bullshit, and you STILL haven't thought of a better argument? And bitching about typos is so jimsween....

Here's the flipside: As a proud member of the Union of Americans, why not become an Ambassador for your nation and all its values, and tour the globe to show them what they're missing out on. You wouldn't get out of most nations in one piece for trying to put that over, for a variety of reasons and, believe me, it isn't because they're jealous of your country.

Response to: - The Regulars Lounge Thread - Posted August 19th, 2003 in Politics

At 8/19/03 03:29 AM, bumcheekcity wrote: Has anyone got any ideas for alternative topics, that aren't about Bush, gays or Michael Moore?

Hey, I'm keeping up with the Hutton Enquiry with a vengeance at the moment, and the eventual outcome - they can order Blair, Campbell, Hoon et al to perform Hari Kiri, after apologising to the entire UK population on TV, right?

I thought of Pepparazi: Should they be allowed to Hassle Celebrities, and also 'Should we block out juvenile offenders faces when they have committed a crime and are under 18?

The Former: Double edged sword. They use the press for their own ends when it suits them, so why should they change the rules to the game? After all, Diana was an expert media manipulator (not much else, mind), but died because she couldn't give a wave to the paperazzi that gave her so much for the little effort she ever gave. Meanwhile, Blair says he wants to keep his family out of the spotlight...and brings the whole coven out when it suits him. He also plays the game, but is too conniving to let vice versa happen, as he's surrounded by dozens to keep the heat off, deflect attention, and he has Jordan on the payroll.

The Latter: Nope - if they're convicted, their liberty goes south for a stretch, and there's no difference between them and a 40 year old convicted of the same crime. Besides, with Blunkett in charge, the uniform will change to sackcloth and ashes by the next bunch of reforms.