Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 6/25/06 05:18 AM, spiked wrote:

At 6/24/06 09:33 PM, Mr_Blue_Sky wrote: I say where am I??

*falls down*

Old boy it appears you have stumbled into our magnificent club please hand your coat, hat and cane to Jeeves who would be more than happy to take it to the cloak room and please enjoy a glass of whiskey

I'm afraid it's more a case of deja vu old chap I think I was here along time ago however life events have forced my absesce for a period.

I say where am I??

*falls down*

What I would like to know is what your stance is on Europe, Blue Sky. I am against being a member state of Europe, since we seem to be constantly paying into the pot and not seeing a return on it.

Hmm I my self am a suppoter of free trade but wish to maintain complete British governmental soveriegnty im afraid Europe is a twin edeged sword can't govern with it can trade without out it. Though i think if we pull out of europe we'd still have free trade so well.... lets get Brussels of our back asap.

(ignore me im drunk atm)(

At 3/6/06 01:04 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

At 3/6/06 01:03 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote: If he were a traditional one he would have been in the Tory party as they are now the home to those who believe in classic Liberal ideology as those that disliekd the changes the liberals went through between 1906-14.

Ones brain is dead. That should read as

If he were a traditional one he would have been in the Tory party as they are now the home to those who believe in classic Liberal ideology as those that disliekd the changes the liberals went through between 1906-14 buggered off and left tojoin the Tories.

Actually the tories are home to the neo liberals or "new right" which started in earnest in the Thatcher years with Privitisation and a free market. If He was a traditional Liberal Or "classical" as they are called he could be in either party really but more likly the liberal democrats. The idea of regional government and devolutioj to weaken state power (currently on lib dem manifesto also was on labours) is a classical ideal for example.

You do know that at the heart of liberalist theory there is minimal state intervention. Liberals favour the free market therfore liberals support privitisation, so Ming would have been following his own ideology, assuming he is a liberal.

At 3/2/06 11:22 AM, Lord_Kensington wrote: yes, one hadn't quite thought that one through. A Target shoot is a corking idea, will you also consider the clay pigeon shoot?

I say, how about clay peasants? Cheap, sustainable and the boules green will stay in good shape for summer, what what.

At 2/16/06 11:03 AM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

Mixing the prophet mohammed up with a coat rack? I say sir! Just what exactly had you been drinking? How much of it was consumed? And where can I get some?

Good question all i know is the Spanish call it el diablo, one consumed far too much and a quick trip to outer mongolia would be the place to purchase it.

At 2/15/06 05:31 PM, Lord_Kensington wrote: *aims blunderbuss at the great unwashed outside*

I say! Clear off you blaggards!!!

*BOOM*

Whoops, I think the Trigger is a little sensitive. Hibbsworth, be a good fellow and fetch my 12 gauge, I think these ruffians havent quite got the message.

*smelling salts brings Mr Blue sky around*

Thank you old bean and thanks for the brandy. One hit a spot off bother when one confused the prophet mohammed with a coat rack, when one was slightly intoxicated but that's all i can tell you or i'd have to kill you all and that is not permitted in this fine establishment.

At 2/13/06 12:17 PM, Lord_Kensington wrote: My apologies for the double post, but did you see the Top Gear Winter Olypics special??? Who here wanted to do that? I know I did; the ski jump mini was pure brilliance!!!!

*A man in a tweed suit wearing a union jack safety helmet comes smashing through the window head first and lands on the floor, stands up and brushes the fragments of glass off himself*

Good evening gentlemen thought id drop in on you fellows

*removes helmet*

My goodness what a mess where'd all that glass come from somebody better clear that up, Jeeves get to it.

Glad to see you all again chaps can't tell you where i've been it's all a bit hush hush you see, On her majesty's secret service and all that what what. Any chance of a brady one has had a turbulent flight.

*collapses*

At 1/16/06 10:24 AM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote: hmmm it seems we've been invaded. Jeeves! Release the hounds!

Anyway chaps, one hope you have some cake to go around as it is ones birthday today and so far there has been no cake :-(

Let me be the first to say HAPPY BIRTHDAY old chap. Of course you know that we now have to paddle you silly.

Jeeves fetch a blindfold several paddles and a small aubergine. While your at it a cake fit for a king.

At 1/8/06 09:44 PM, TehBlueBullet wrote: *snivels* You lie. :( *covers his ears* It can't be true!

I know it's hard to come to terms with but you'll get through this.

At 1/8/06 09:20 PM, TehBlueBullet wrote:

At 1/8/06 09:14 PM, Mr_Blue_Sky wrote: No, but the kid means all immigrants.

Im almost positive he was talking about the illegal ones. It doesn't make sense that statement talking about all immigrants.

Please this is fenrus he's as prejudiced as they come. He hates all protestants and northen irish people for a start.

At 1/8/06 08:48 PM, TehBlueBullet wrote:

At 1/8/06 08:34 PM, Mr_Blue_Sky wrote: Just one problem your parents are immigrants.

Doesn't matter if his parents are immigrants. He mean't Illegal immigrants. Are his parents illegal?

No, but the kid means all immigrants.

I don't think Wikepdia is your friend.

A site which claims that there were "only" 25.000 victims in Dresden? Umm, nope, I guess not.

actualy it say 25,000-140,000 and if you read the higher figures banded around were tools of propaganda(and propaganda feeds off the fact that everyone believes what they read.) 25,000 was the figure derived from using official records so it's the most accurate your gonna get.

I have no sypathy about Dresden after all remember the "blitz" in London. As Bomber Harris said "they have sown the wind, and now they shall reap the whirlwind"

At 1/8/06 04:09 PM, fenrus1989 wrote: Good, finally something can be done about illegal immigrants. Get rid of the immigrants and the businesses that support them. Well don't get rid of the businesses, just fine them or something big.

Just one problem your parents are immigrants.

At 1/8/06 08:10 PM, Mr_Mega_Vol wrote: I'm interested in other peoples opions aslong as they have facts on which form of goverment is the best on PAPER not PRACTICE. I'm only onmterested in the theory.

I'm not going to state mine as i'm stuck between a few forms that on paper look great but in practice arn't so good, so hopefully after this i'll have some more info.

do you mean government(democratic/dictatorship) or ideology(communism/facism)?

At 1/6/06 02:43 PM, Tri-Nitro-Toluene wrote:

And if you don't mind me asking what course have you been accepted for?

4yr sandwich course in marketing(Ba) or business magement(ba) been accepted for both courses and ill choose closer to the time. If not that then swansea or hull and i got a few lame backup universitys as well

One has been given a conditional offer at Aston university and knowing some fellow gents here abide the second city, one would like to know the goods and Bads of Birmingham as one only visits annually for the german market.

Now then, we need something else to talk about... Beverages. What would everyone's favourite tipple be.

Nothing and I mean nothing beats a Gin and tonic made with Gordon's and Schwepps tonic water, with plenty of ice and a slice of lime (lemon is acceptable too.)

As for larger i'd have to say Carling (it seems one only drinks British drinks)

Heres one I had in a rather funky UV bar

At 12/30/05 12:28 AM, mjairlax wrote:

It is in my opinion biased so only the rich by american standards can get into the country.

Becasue the government want people who will help the US economy the most.

And illegal immigrants also have to do what is best for their family which is getting the best education.

By breaking the law in another country and then taking their free education?

And the consevatives who want to stop it have other motives behind thier decision.

Like saving money, lowering crime(not implying that immigrants are all criminals but a rise in population often lead to a proportionate increase in crime and immigrants wont be able to find jobs as easy so may turn to crime. )

:The best stragety is to improve the economic conditions in the other country.

Improve the economic conditions just to accomidate for illigal immigrants. Sounds probable to me.

Send them back, If they enter illigally then send them packing. They are committing a crime simple as that. If they go down the legal route of application then fine let them in by all means but not if thet break the law to get in.

At 12/28/05 06:01 PM, Evil_Alex37 wrote: www.nukeisrael.com

I've got to stop blindly following links on the forums, goodness knows how many different government agency's are watching me right now or are tracking my computer becasue of the weird websites I'm led to.

At 12/22/05 11:47 AM, ChairmanOfTheBored wrote:

At 12/21/05 08:51 PM, Mr_Blue_Sky wrote: If countries in poverty began to suceed then the world would balance out in terms of wealth and standard of living(we are of course talking in the long run and assuming ceterus paribus.)

I am sorry but I totally object at the assertion that the development of poorer countries is at the expense of developed states.

acknowleged

Those industries which are not competitive will naturally shift to less developed countries but you fail to realise that at the same time the more developed economies will then be exporting products and services from new emerging industries.

but does not make up home GDP as it is abroad. or if your talking about us exporting more capital goods to them well this will only happen in the short run.

I do not see developing countries competing in both the textile and biotechnology industries, do you?

short term no. But with time and investment (alot of time)

The balance of payments problem is therefore not a cetainty.

Id say so theres only so much biochemical goods that can be exported and textiles deal in much larger amounts of money.

and secondly deficits are not always bad.

In the short run no but as Africa will export large quantities in the long run yes it will be detrimental.

If you still disagree I suggest you look up the "Flying Geese Theory" of technology which was written by some Japanese who unfortunately his name escapes me at the moment.

I'll look it up. As i was saying it was just something that pooped into my head I strated writing about how throwing money at the problem doesnt work and ended up deletin that to write this.

In a way the better Africa does the worse it will be for the west. African nations increase productivity, as there cost are lower due to lower labour wages. western countries will import the cheap goods which could create a balance of payments deficit especially if demand for exports is decreased by African competition. Firms will take production abroad increasing unemployment in the western world as it is cheaper to manufacture over seas. GDP will fall in the west and tax revenue from corporation tax and income tax. It's a sad story but the sucess of the west is dependant on the existance of poverty. If countries in poverty began to suceed then the world would balance out in terms of wealth and standard of living(we are of course talking in the long run and assuming ceterus paribus.)

I was gonna talk about something totally different but this theory ^^^^^popped into my head.

present and accounted for if not a little drunk atm.

One totally forgot as of midnight 8 minutes ago I'm 18 years young so happy birthday to one.

At 12/8/05 03:58 AM, EnglishPhantom wrote:

At 12/7/05 06:04 PM, Mr_Blue_Sky wrote: Would you gentlemen be terribly annoyed if i told you I stopped another famous assination because Lee Harvey Oswald just fell out of the window. once is a mistake two is just plain bad luck.

Ah not to fear old bean, one has a good view from here on the grassy noll and one always carries a rifle with one. *Gets out rifle and takes aim.* And they said I was mad carrying this with me.

So that explains history I'll be down in a second to meet you. Lets hope coop know how to get us out of hear.

Would you gentlemen be terribly annoyed if i told you I stopped another famous assination because Lee Harvey Oswald just fell out of the window. once is a mistake two is just plain bad luck.

At 12/6/05 09:36 PM, vulcanus_1313 wrote:

At 12/6/05 08:51 PM, Mr_Blue_Sky wrote:

We have mandetory religious study in schools and every time it was ever a topic it was ridiculed and most found the though disgusting(most not all) circumsision just isn't common here. Even my muslim friend isn't circumsisied.

oh... ok so r most muslims over there not circumcised??!! why is it thought disgusting? and dam which is better???

Well put it another way, in Britain of the population are 92% white that leaves 8% ethnic minorities and a large amount are muslim. Yet only 0.41% of the population of the UK are circumsised. So that leads me to conclude it is not a common practice umongst UK muslims.

It is thought disgusting as you are cutting a part of your dick off enough said really. As for which is better that depends on culture. If you live in a sandy hot desert enviroment mad with diesese then sure better to cut it of than lose your dick completely. Seeing as I live In a county covered in grass everywhere that is cold and wet there is simply no reason other than religion to cut of my foreskin.

to Mr_Blue_Sky: so the topic of circumcision was arrosed and talked about and then laughed at in the u.k.? can you please tell me how it came up?

We have mandetory religious study in schools and every time it was ever a topic it was ridiculed and most found the though disgusting(most not all) circumsision just isn't common here. Even my muslim friend isn't circumsisied.