Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Program Announcements / The Elimination of Evil - al Qaeda first shooter demo

Author
Message
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 18th Jun 2003 21:05 Edited at: 18th Jun 2003 21:09
Link
Quote: "If it wasn't for the Scots and the Irish and the French the world would be a nicer place"

<sarcasm>Yes, of course it would.<hyperbole> You would all enjoy your world of riding about on horseback, waiting weeks to hear news from 100 miles away, speaking German (after having lost WW1 without Irish, Scottish and French help) worshipping Hitler's dictator heir and hiding from Stalin's secret police.</hyperbole></sarcasm>

If it wasn't for the Scots and the French America would be run by Spain (if it had even been discovered), democracy wouldn't exist and every country in the world would be oppressed by a monarchy or a totalitarian government.

Quote: "I spent a year in France and not one french man mentioned any anti-english crap or conflicts that took place in our past"

Why do you think that is?

France is liberated. They are not under English rule, they have had their revolution and they have no monarchy. When was the last time you heard the Americans moan about the English? They too have been liberated and they, like the French, live in a democratic society.

Scotland, on the other hand, live under the control of an aging old posh English woman who can easily do whatever the hell she wants. Let's face it, if she was to go insane there is nothing anyone could do to stop her firing nuclear bombs at her own palace. She has complete control over four counties, which just can't be justified in this modern age.

Quote: "Actually the Irish are ok"

What exactly is it you like about the world that was before modern technology? The Irish have invented nothing. They haven't even invented their own alcoholic drink for god's sake! Do you think everyone is okay if they don't do anything to change the world? Would you love to go back to the middle ages that much?

As for my earlier comments about losing WW1 without France and Scotland, I just know someone is going to butt in with something about how it was America who saved our asses in WW1, but without Scottish advances in technology that would never have happened as the Americans wouldn't even have heard about WW1 until 1916 and they would have taken a couple of decades to carry out all the negotiations that took place before they finally decided to do something.

Quote: "No sober man dances unless he happens to be mad"

If that is the case, what happens when a madman gets drunk?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Ian T
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 00:20
Link
'If it wasn't for the Scots and the Irish and the French the world would be a nicer place.'

If it wasn't for idiots who had nothing better to do than state the same points again and again and again on an internet forum and call each others' races 'idiots' and say that their country is superior, the world would be far nicer.

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
Back to top
Profile PM
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 01:13
Link
I take it then you are not talking to me as I have not called anyone an idiot on this topic, at least not over the last 50 posts I have not looked back further than that.

Quote: "No sober man dances unless he happens to be mad"

If that is the case, what happens when a madman gets drunk?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Arrow
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jan 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 03:15
Link
'If it wasn't for the Scots and the Irish and the French the world would be a nicer place.'

Accually, if there was no religon, the world would be a better place. The bloodest wars in history all stemmed from religous hatred.

Teenage Male Geek + Female Remotly Intersted in Common Geek Activities = Teenage Male Jackass
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ian T
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 04:23
Link
Wrong again, Arrow. Religion was used as an excuse. It's not religion that causes that. Besides, 'religion' will always exist, as something to justify people's actions if nothing else. Do you recall the excuse Hitler used for slaughtering thousands of jews? They were evolutionaly inferior. Science and progress are used as excuses for evil things every bit as much as religion is.

Witchbomer-- hell yeah, I was talking about you. No, you haven't used the term; don't split hairs. You have basically been talking trash about all other countries and saying ridiculous things-- what kind of stupid shit is this?

'If it wasn't for the Scots and the French America would be run by Spain (if it had even been discovered), democracy wouldn't exist and every country in the world would be oppressed by a monarchy or a totalitarian government.'

BS! You're working off the assumption that if the Scots hadn't been around, nobody would fill in their gap and do things they had happened to have stumbled upon.

Now the other side of the argument is being just as petty and stupid, so don't think that this just goes for you.

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
Back to top
Profile PM
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 04:38
Link
Excellant!!!!!

Lets get something straight. I dont hate the Scots and I meant by

Simple Scot as in the simple life of a...as oppose to the intelligence like Idiot Irish because in this day an age stopping murder and violence against each other could stop. As for scottish victories please dont exagerate. Surely the victory of at 5 -1 against you is enough( Bannockburn ). The English have also had spectacular victories. Even against the scots.

If Scotland is so bloody innocent how come in the none threatening 300 years of independance R the B won for you, you tried to invade us three times that I know of.

1 the reign of Henty VIII
2 during the English civil war
3 the Jacobite rebellion - Of which the English were blamed for but there were as many Scots in the Government army.

Why are you bleeting on about England should ally with Scotland then say that the union was an insult to everyone who died for freedom...?

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 04:41
Link
The Irish , Scots and the Welsh were all tribal (or clans) before the English arrived. Animosity between these tribes made it much simpler for the united English to suceed. Betrayal, in the celtic power system, was rife. Not our fault that fighting amongst yourselves would take precedance!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 04:48
Link
The Irish were nuetral during WW2 although many from the republic did join up and fight for Britain. In fact I believe the recruitmant rate was higher than any other exunified country.

Many fought against us as well though. And Ireland was the only country in the world to send Germany its condolences when Adolf Hitler shot himself.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 04:55
Link
France and England had strong ties through their monarchies. England also had rights to land in France which the French were trying to take off them. Before anyone mentions the Hundreds Years War again I suggest looking at fuedalism and claims to thrones. I mean you WITCHFINDER.

Even the pope supported the English claims.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 12:56 Edited at: 19th Jun 2003 13:00
Link
Quote: "the Jacobite rebellion...claims to thrones"

What the **** was the Jacobite rebellion about, if not the claim to the throne? James VII was the true King of Britain, certainly the King of Scotland, but again using religion as an excuse he was taken off the throne to be replaced by a protestant king (who was actually a catholic) who had no right to the throne of Britain, in fact he didn't even have the right to a ****ing British passport! It was all part of a political plot to rob Scotland of independence. The jacobite rebellion was in a time when England and Scotland were supposed to be united, there were English and Scots on both sides throughout all rebellions, the only ones who only fought on one side only were the french.

Now I find it very hard to believe you consider we just happened to stumble upon the inventions we are responsible for. If it worked that way the law of averages would suggest a country of 5 million would get only a tenth of the inventions of a country of 50 million, but are England ten times more responsible for modern technology - are they f**k!

Quote: "The Irish , Scots and the Welsh were all tribal (or clans) before the English arrived."

I'm going to resume my argument that if it was up to the English, we'd all be living in the dark ages.
How were the English all united? - By a monarch.
A monarchy is like a totalitarian government, they have absolute power, but no right to any power at all. Notice again religion being used - "Monarchs are given the right to rule by 'God'"
What is this modern democratic world like? - More like the tribal or clan system than like the monarchy.
What used to be tribes are now political parties - none of them have absolute power, they all have differing opinions and to stay in power they need a bigger following than all the others. One ruler cannot work as no country can consist of people who all have the exact same political views (unless they are all puritan religious people, in which case religion is being used politically to control them) so they need to be ruled by people who represent the views of the biggest proportion of the people. Only with a tribal system or a democratic party system can this be done. A monarchy can appear to unite an entire nation but there will always be a large proportion of the nation who disagree with the monarchy, it's only in nations full of spineless b****rds who are too fiert to complain that a monarchy can survive and unite a nation.

Quote: "Even the pope supported the English claims."

Aye, and how much did that cost you?

Quote: "No sober man dances unless he happens to be mad"

If that is the case, what happens when a madman gets drunk?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 17:38
Link
So you agree with me then. The English people themselves were also oppressed by a totalitarian government. The nobles worked hard to keep down the working class and that the reason many English fought the Scots was because they could be made homeless, executed etc due to their fuedal obligations. And it was not about being spineless, it was constantly preached by the church since childhood that their obligation to the king was a religious obligation. Even you just said that. Even the scottish felt the same about their monarchy. Their just seems to have been less stability in yours.

The English commoners and the Scottish commoners should hate the moanarchy. I never said I had any love for it!

By the way neither did I say you stumbled upon anything??? Neither have I said you still would be in the dark ages??? I merely stated that your own petty squabbles made you an easy target.

Since youve managed to form armies and have invaded England I can certainly assume the Scots would be no better if the power had been in your hands.


The jacobite rebellion was in a time when England and Scotland were supposed to be united, there were English and Scots on both sides throughout all rebellions

My point about Scottish infighting exactly! Surely English oppression should have united you against us. The Jacobean rebellion was about religion. Surely if their were ample Scots who didnt want a French Bore running their country what the hell makes you think the English wanted him!

How many Scots celebrated when Bonny prince Charlie legged it after Culloden? An awful lot because he was a teetotaller after all and would have banned drink.

Why do you think Scottish nobles agreed to the unity? As usual the nobles shafted the commoners and thought of themselves. Just like English nobles.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 19:23
Link
Quote: "Surely if their were ample Scots who didnt want a French Bore running their country what the hell makes you think the English wanted him!"

He wasn't a French bore, James VII was a Scotsman in exile in France.
Quote: "An awful lot because he was a teetotaller after all and would have banned drink."

Bonnie Prince Charlie wouldn't have been in power, James VII would have.

Quote: "By the way neither did I say you stumbled upon anything??? "

Sorry Mouse was the idiot in that case.

Quote: "Why do you think Scottish nobles agreed to the unity?"

Actually, the way it worked was there was no heir to the English throne so King James VI of Scotland was offered the throne of England. This was seen as a good thing for Scotland as it would end our wars with England and wouldn't leave us under English control.
The only flaw in the plan was that James VI was catholic and most of England (and much of South Scotland, including Edinburgh) was protestant. This then led to the civil war, then James VII going into exile to be replaced by a murdering German tyrant, which then led to several jacobite rebellions.

If you can't beat them, use a stick.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 19th Jun 2003 19:30
Link
Anyhoo, so many historical facts are uncertain and there is no point in arguing about how Scotland came to be in this horrific position, so let's discuss the present.

Over the last ten years the government has taken more money out of Scotland through taxation than it has put back in, there's reason number 1 why Scotland could survive as an independent nation.

In 20 odd years, Britain will be relying on natural energy resources such as hydro-electric and wind power. Scotland's landscape is the best in Britain for these things and already Scotland has enough wind farms and hydro-electric plants built or planned to power Scotland. Soon we will be powering England too! Because most of these power stations will be automated this will not create any jobs in Scotland. The jobs that will be created will be for the people installing the power cables to peoples homes, most of which will be in England. However, if Scotland was independent then we would be getting money for exporting this to England. There's reason number 2.

At the moment, loads of oil is being dug out of the North Sea and sold. We don't need to use this oil at the moment. It is only being sold so the English government can waste money on pointless wars. If we waited 20 years it would be worth about a hundred times as much as it is now. There is reason number 3.

If you can't beat them, use a stick.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Terabyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 21st Jun 2003 02:57
Link
yes it was. i had nothing better to do so i decided to read 414 posts and analyse them in depth ....o yes ......i did......wel.....you know.......not much depth.........well.....ok....at all........well.....erm.......i didnt analyse them.but i deid read them all!!......erm.....well...most.......some.....a few..........*looks down in shame*....i read the top one.....topic title...... but i still read it seeee...seee!!!!!!!

Reset
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 22nd Jun 2003 13:53
Link
I dont go to far into finances since Im no mathematical genius. I do know that you can twist the figures for your own means or viewpoint. That doesnt mean that you are wrong. For Example:

Over the last ten years the government has taken more money out of Scotland through taxation than it has put back in, there's reason number 1 why Scotland could survive as an independent nation.

I dont doubt it. I bet England and Wales could say the same! The only one I believe gets back more is NI but that is only second hand info and not reliable.

When Scotland becomes independant you will need diplomats, an armed force, customs and excise, civil list etc. All will cost and mean your new government will take off you more than you give in taxes. Its not cheap because you want geniuses not monkeys doing the job.

Wilst I'll bet your right about Scottish terrain etc being good for alternative power sources remember that so is Wales and the North of England. I dont recall scottish terrain being good for agriculture. Not that I knock it cause I love Haggis and porridge -seriously! (Whiskey makes me cry like a baby for no reason!). You know that there are many Scottish businesses in England and that the population in England is bigger than both Wales and Scotland. These businesses could suffer if a new formal border is created(taxes from both England and Scotland instead of from just Westminster).

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 22nd Jun 2003 14:02
Link
Of course a bigger English population does mean that Scottish, Welsh and Irish representation becomes a problem. Wilst I dont believe descrimination is deliberate I dont think it can be avoided if you use proportional representation of the different british nationals.

Secondly since England has a big population in relation to the others it makes it a better prospect for customer footfall etc and thus ditribution is sensibly placed in the most economic position a business can. Thus the relation of outlets, branches etc to Admin/Distribution becomes an important consideration.

I do totally understand the frustration the Celtic community feel. I think some kind of reform is needed to ensure fair play for all. I dont think complete independance is a good idea.

Of course if thats what each country wants they should have!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 22nd Jun 2003 14:04
Link
As for Bonnie Prince Charlie rumour has it he could not speak Gaelic or English, only French. He was French in all but place of birth!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 24th Jun 2003 00:08
Link
Quote: "He was French in all but place of birth!"

Totally agreed on that one, but I'm not sure, was he not actually born in France?
Fair enough, he was a right prick but he fought for a just cause.

If you can't beat them, use a stick.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 25th Jun 2003 03:08
Link
Jacobite or not! He left a lot of brave men to be slaughtered and murdered on the feild while he went back to luxurious exile.

I never understood why William Wallace is considered Scotlands greatest hero when Robert the Bruce's victory at Brannockburn was a far greater achievement. Was it because it was Scotlands first against cavalry? Or merely because he was one of the people?

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ian T
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 26th Jun 2003 05:43
Link
Without either of them Scotland would have been pretty much screwed there. They were both great heroes. (Not meaning to sound offensive to Scotland, all countries have had times where without certain people they would have been screwed)

--Mouse

Famous Fighting Furball
Back to top
Profile PM
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 26th Jun 2003 22:49
Link
Quote: "I never understood why William Wallace is considered Scotlands greatest hero when Robert the Bruce's victory at Brannockburn was a far greater achievement. Was it because it was Scotlands first against cavalry? Or merely because he was one of the people?"

I really have to disagree with you on that one.
Yes, it was because it was our first against cavalry and because he was a commoner, but there was more than that.
Bruce learned a lot of tricks from Wallace. In the Battle of Stirling Bridge, we only had a few hundred but we won against an army of thousands, because Wallace sabotaged the bridge. Bruce could never have won at Bannockburn without first setting up the battlefield to make it impossible for cavalry to cross. In some areas he dug small holes so the cavalry would trip, in others he scattered those wee spike things (I think they were called scalthrops) and these traps, while causing some cavalry to fall, forced the others into the bogs where they got stuck. Also, Bruce's greatest weapon in Bannockburn was his mobilised shiltron. Wallace invented the shiltron and, although he lost the Battle of Falkirk where it was introduced, Bruce could not have won Bannockburn so decisively without it.
And of course, it was Wallace that started those Wars of Independence, Bruce could never have even fought Bannockburn without him to start it all.

Mouse, you're dead right. Scotland would have been pretty much screwed without Bruce and Wallace, but in that case, so would America. Think about it.

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 26th Jun 2003 22:50
Link
On the other hand though, I was arguing for the sake of argument, I can't say I have any preference towards either Bruce or Wallace.

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
England 5 Germany 1
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: England
Posted: 28th Jun 2003 03:45
Link
I cant see why Scotland is always fighting for its independence - I woudldnt if I were in their position. Every year Scotland gets more and more from the British parliament while at the same time demands more and more control over their country. Eventually it'll end up as Scotland being an independent country entirely funded by the english taxpayer.
I'd like to see you attempt to become independent and see how long you lasted before the economy crashed without the high tech firms that Tony Blair puts in "Silicon Glen" simply to get enouigh Scottish seats to get into power again next election. Once the Scottish economy collapsed there'd be no alternative but to come back with the begging bowl to the English as happened a few hundred years ago when we bailed out Scotland's debts which they had made as an independent country whilst trying to set up a trading company in the South Americas.
Back to top
Profile PM
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 28th Jun 2003 13:38
Link
You really are a pish talker aren't you. I will rip your argument to shreds bit by bit.
Quote: "Every year Scotland gets more and more from the British parliament while at the same time demands more and more control over their country. Eventually it'll end up as Scotland being an independent country entirely funded by the english taxpayer."

Scottish taxpayers are funding Northern Ireland. English taxpayers are funding Northern Ireland. Welsh taxpayers are funding Northern Ireland. Everyone except Northern Ireland is losing billions out of being in the UK. Scottish taxpayers are putting more in than is being spent on Scotland. And your last sentence I quoted, that doesn't even make sense. If we were an independent country why would the English taxpayer fund us?
Quote: "I'd like to see you attempt to become independent and see how long you lasted before the economy crashed without the high tech firms that Tony Blair puts in "Silicon Glen""

Is it just me or is Tony Blair not the president of some electronics firm? Since when did Tony Blair put those companies there? Besides, our economy survived for thousands of years without electronics. The one thing that is, however, threatening our very existence is the loss of the fishing industry. Unless we get out of the EU this sector of our economy that has survived for thousands of years will be gone. And just before I get of this subject, the number of jobs in Scotland is going down every year under the Labour government.
Quote: "Once the Scottish economy collapsed there'd be no alternative but to come back with the begging bowl to the English as happened a few hundred years ago"

First of all, I've already told you the economy won't collapse so moving on...
When did we ever go back to the English with a "begging bowl"? What the hell are you talking about?
When Scotland and England were united in 1603 it was the English that were begging us to give them a king. The stupidest mistake we ever made was helping the ba****ds out.

I knew the English education system was s***e but I didn't realise it was that bad.

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
England 5 Germany 1
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: England
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 02:36
Link
I shall clearly have to justify some of my arguments:

"Since when did Tony Blair put those companies there?"

Since he granted permission to the Scottish Development Agency - yes thats right, an agency to devlop Scotland since its economy would not develop whilst unattended - to offer massive subsidies to transnational corporations if they set up in Scotland. This way the governemtn artificially stimlulated the Scottish economy by encouraging companies whose natural position would be near London to move to Scotland in return for tax breaks or subsidies.

"If we were an independent country why would the English taxpayer fund us?"

Independent simply refers to self government which, with the setting up of the Scottish parliament is starting to happen. Yet at the same time as devolution from Westminster occurs, the Scots are actually recieving more per capita than the English or Welsh. This extra money even has a fromula to work out how much more Scotland should recieve each year - Barnett's formula - which gives approximately £1.20 per Scottish head compared to £1.00 for every English head.

"the number of jobs in Scotland is going down every year under the Labour government."

Which can only indicate one thing (given the input of capital to encourage growth in Scotland) - a stagnant economy. Such unemployed people - in high concentration in the old ship building towns such as Glasgow - have to have their dole money paid somehow ... how about from the pocket of the affluent South of England with its thriving economy.

"When did we ever go back to the English with a "begging bowl"?"

When you faced economic ruin the following quote explains how you got into this mess:

"In England, the East-Indian Company had monopole and money. Hence, Scotland wanted the same: that is how the Company of Scotland was set up in 1695. Its full name was "Company of Scotland trading to Africa and the Indies". The East-Indian was not very happy and put pressure on English financiers who wanted to provide money to the capital of the Company of Scotland. The financiers finally withdrew and the Scots had to provide money themselves: multitude of people giving little money.

The Company of Scotland established a trading-post in America: Darien, in the Isthmus of Panama. 1698 saw the 1st expedition to Darien. It was a terrible failure for many people died during the journey and by fighting against the Spaniards already settled there. The 2nd expedition was also a failure and the people who had invested in the enterprise were ruined, just like the company. After that experience, the Scots thought the best thing would be a union with England (no more Navigation Acts and access to colonies trading)." - taken from http://www.skyminds.net/politics/scot_union.php

Scotland, follwing this vast loss of capital only had one possible way of getting itself out of debt: the English. Hence Scotland was in no position to bargain when England demanded the 1707 act of union:

"In May 1st 1707, the Act of Union was ratified between England and Scotland: the Scottish Parliament and the English Parliament were suspended. They created the British Parliament and formed the United Kingdom of England" - taken from http://www.skyminds.net/politics/scot_union.php

Scotland had no choice but to surrender its governence to an English parliament - it was too impovererished by the collapse of the Scottich traading company to resist.

"When Scotland and England were united in 1603 it was the English that were begging us to give them a king"

Quite so - we did need a king. However, this was not the most important act of union. The act of union in 1707 (see above) removed the Scottish rule of themselves in favour of a London based parliament.

"I knew the English education system was s***e but I didn't realise it was that bad"

I must admit that the English education system does leave much to be desired. However that is in part due to the fact that the Scottish education system has some nice subsidies from England to keep it going.
Back to top
Profile PM
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 02:59
Link
N I may be supplemented, I did say the information was second hand. However in NI the situation is one step down from war and as such is bound to be a strain on the purses.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 03:04
Link
Witch maker,

I am a northerner. I hate the 'Southern Fairies', I get sick of the impression that Great Britain is London and that most foreigners I met in London knew little about Britain outside the capital.

But I think independant parliements for all the regions is the most f**ked up idea on earth because it just means a 2nd bunch of rate types I gotta pay to fund them. I proud to be a Brit but think we would mount to nothing without each other.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 03:08
Link
The weird thing with America is that they hate the Brits so much in one sense yet its hero Goerge Washington was a Brit and I believe so was 3 other presidents, British born I mean!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
England 5 Germany 1
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: England
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 03:26
Link
I agree with architect that the United Kingdom is stronger as a whole than in its parts.

However, by having a Scottish elected MP to westminster who is minister for health in England yet unaccountable to his electorate since their healthcare is dealt with by the Scottish parliament, I feel that the present situation has become ridiculous. Whats wrong with having a single parliament with MPs from all parts of the United Kingdom?

Since Scotland and Wales already have a higher amount of MPs per capita in Westminster than England it would appear that the Westminster parliament benefits them greatly. As such why is it necessary to have Scottish and Welsh assembalies which serve only to further deepen the rift between the the countries making up the United Kingdom.

The E.U is already doing enough damage to this country - why further it by trying to dissolve some of Westminsters power into regional assembalies and parliaments - exactly what the E.U wants us to do in order for Britain to be more governable from Brussels , which could be furthered with the upcoming E.U constitution.
Back to top
Profile PM
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 15:35
Link
Quote: "But I think independant parliements for all the regions is the most f**ked up idea on earth"

How the f**k dare you say that you stupid ba**ard!!!
We are a nation, not a f**king region!

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 15:36
Link
Quote: "The E.U is already doing enough damage to this country"

Yeah, and when's the last time Tony Blair ever considered trying to get out of the EU? He wants to stay in the EU because he thinks he can become Prime Minister of Europe. At least there are parties in Scotland that actually care about getting out of Europe, instead of sucking up to them just to get a bit more power.
England can survive in Europe, they don't have the same reliance on the fishing industry, but Scotland needs to get out of it before it is too late. Do you realise that while the EU is encouraging the Irish to build more fishing boats they are at the same time "decommissioning" almost brand new boats in Scotland? This means not only are fishermen not allowed to use these boats, these boats have to be chopped up!!! Look what happens when a set of countries that were never meant to be together get into some kind of stupid alliance.

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 15:38
Link
Since Architect seems to like changing my name I thought I would change it into something better.

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
England 5 Germany 1
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: England
Posted: 29th Jun 2003 23:14
Link
With regards to your new user name I feel that 'Scotland 2 - Faroe Islands 2' reflects more truly upon the overall quality of current Scottish football talent.

However, I feel that were Britain to leave the E.U as you seem to feel necessary we would be left on the outside of the two organisations we trade mosy heavily with , NAFTA(North American Free Trade Association) and the EU. Since we would have just left the EU the only other group we could join would be NAFTA. Despite the E.Us shortcomings NAFTA would be far worse than the EU due to the massive imbalance of power caused by Americas presence in NAFTA. At least in the EU we still command at least some power.

The problem concerning your fishing fleets could be solved simply by removing the subsidy allocations of the EU. We are one of the largest losers out of the E.U in terms of contributions minus receipts. This money is not put back into Britain but into such things as the Irish fleets you mentioned and almost everything to do with those scrounging Spaniards - vineyards, fishing fleets, public buildings etc are all funded by the E.U. With the up and coming formal entry (or has it already happnened?) of these new Eastern European states there is going to be even less money for our own E.U subsidised workers.
Back to top
Profile PM
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 30th Jun 2003 02:11 Edited at: 30th Jun 2003 02:12
Link
How about 'Scotland 1 Germany 1' or would you prefer 'England 0 Scotland 1' - after all they're recent results - but you seem to mix up home and away, you see it was actually 'Faroe Islands 2 Scotland 2' and 'Germany 1 England 5'

Do we really need to trade with Europe and America?
We can produce our own basic food - beef, ham, lamb, bacon, corn, potatoes etc. Past that, any exotic fruits can come from Africa, Asia or Australia. It is the fact we trade so many goods in that we don't need that we have such high unemployment. The spaniards, who you mentioned earlier, fish our waters so they can sell our own fish back to us. We have survived for centuries without trade. Now, with improved technology and farming methods, surely there is absolutely no need for trade. And if we're outside of a trading organisation that just means it costs us more to trade, which means foreign products will be more expensive and become luxuries, which will encourage people to buy home-grown merchandise.

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
England 5 Germany 1
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: England
Posted: 1st Jul 2003 03:12
Link
Although I can agree that Britain could survive on its own in terms of food, it would be very hard to get the public to agree. People are too used to the cheap prices they pay for goods from America and Europe for mechanical items such as cars. Were Britain to produce these items it would be extremly expensive because we would have to ship in many of the raw materials from overseas since, for example, our own steel industry couldn't possibly produce enough steel for the whole country.
The only way to stop shops from stocking goods from Europe would be to ban it - a similar process that the communist party took in Russia on foriegn imports. Since it could not be stopped the public purchasing these would want them cheaper and would thus demand to reenter a trading block.
Due to our position as such a rich country in the E.U we have to sit back and watch ,as you say, our own fish being sold to us because Spain is poorer than us. Of course the Spanish argue that they in turn buy our industrial produce - though I dont think ive ever seen a Spaniard driving a TVR or an Aston Martin. Prehaps the best idea would be to get rid of some of the poorer members of the E.U rather than add more in as seems to be the current thinking.
Back to top
Profile PM
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 2nd Jul 2003 03:13
Link
I don't think people should complain about paying extra for luxury foreign items if it means they have a job. We will not be a rich country for long the way things are going, but we'll still have to watch our fish be sold back to us and our beautiful boats be brutally broken up in their prime.

If you can't beat him, use a stick;
If you still can't beat him, use a brick;
If you still can't beat him, don't call him a prick!
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Ole Sparky
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Dec 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 5th Jul 2003 21:21
Link
"The weird thing with America is that they hate the Brits so much in one sense yet its hero Goerge Washington was a Brit and I believe so was 3 other presidents, British born I mean!"

Oh, we love you British... you help us get oil from third-world countries.

#@&*(%$()!!!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
8truths
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 6th Jul 2003 00:27
Link
I see what you meant in the other post about this one . . . Geez . . . Take a breather folks.

None of this matters.

You either are a white male with money or you are not.

We can't stop here! This is bat country!
Back to top
Profile PM
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 6th Jul 2003 05:49
Link
Since we're quoting from about thirty posts ago I think I'll join in...

Quote: "The Scots are only capable of one thing after drinking more than three beers - they always resort to singing anti-english songs."

To whoever said this (I think it was Soyuz), I have two questions:

1. Have you ever been to a Scotland football match, or been near a group of drunk members of the tartan army?

2. Have you ever been to an England football match, or been around a bunch of drunk England fans?

I think if the answer to both these questions was yes, you'd know which country's people you'd rather be around when they're drunk.

Also, Scotsmen can hold a lot more than 3 beers. I don't know why Irishmen have such a reputation for drinking. Irish Whisky is basically just watered-down Scotch Whisky.

The leprechaun tells me to burn things
Back to top
Profile PM Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 8th Jul 2003 22:55
Link
But I think independant parliements for all the regions is the most f**ked up idea on earth

I was refering to a parliament in Northern England, a parliment in devonshire and cornwall, a parliment in the isle of wight etc. All these things will cost us taxpayers money and more jobs for the overpayed boyz!

How the f**k dare you say that you stupid ba**ard!!!
We are a nation, not a f**king region!

Since we are talking in your native lanquage - go f~~k yourself!!!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
LuciferX
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jul 2003 07:44
Link
uhhh... i think that was one of the longest posts ive seen.


too bad you are completly off base and wrong.
i think raven stated it better.

since you went on your little gi joe rant, i find it kindof a tough act to follow..here's all i could come up with...

Do or do not, there is no try. -Yoda
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
LuciferX
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th May 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 9th Jul 2003 07:52
Link
oops, he,he
sorry i didnt see this thread was 9 pages long :-s
that was actually my response to the guy at the end of page 1,

sooooo how about that new nafta stuff ea? bad stuff man

Do or do not, there is no try. -Yoda
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 9th Jul 2003 21:50
Link
Architect, sorry I didn't realise you were talking about that. I wonder how I could have missed that. It possibly had something to do with the fact no-one else had mentioned that in this whole thread.

The leprechaun tells me to burn things
Back to top
Profile PM Website
England 5 Germany 1
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Apr 2003
Location: England
Posted: 10th Jul 2003 02:16
Link
Its strange how people can dislike England considering that the language which everyone has used to attack it has been English. If you Scots/Welsh disliked England so much then why did you take up our language ratherthan keep speaking your versions of the gaelic language. Admittedly some Welsh people do speak Welsh but that doesnt count since without massive government funding from English speaking tax payers it would disappear very rapidly.

That applies to Americans who dislike England too - without England you'd end up speaking some inferior language that doesnt even make sense like french or spanish.
Back to top
Profile PM
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 10th Jul 2003 03:05
Link
Good point Witch bomber,

However regional parliments seem to feature on the news. As a Scot you should be relishing the break up of England as a unified country which is how I see. Since I did say 'regional' and not 'national' I assumed you would know what I meant. I know Scotland is a seperate country.
Im not a hypocrite. I only agree with a Scottish parliement because its whay you want. Im a northener but I dont want a parliment here as well as in Westminster. Its a waste of money. I would prefer Britain remains Britain, I sign my race as British not English (on b forms!), Im proud of some of the roles we played as a unified country (of some im ashamed) and I really believe we would all be nothing without each other.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 10th Jul 2003 03:08
Link
LuciferX ,

Welcome to the thread. Your life is over...unless you save yourself now!!!!!!!! Get out quick and dont come back.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
the architect
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 10th Jul 2003 03:11
Link
Ole sparky,

We need Oil too! Or did you think we still had cart horses and rag n bone men!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 11th Jul 2003 15:24
Link
The stupid thing about all our oil wars is, we've got plenty of oil in the North Sea. We're so worried about running out of oil, but we're selling this stuff just because it's high quality and the government wants to make a bit of profit.

The leprechaun tells me to burn things
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Witch Bomber
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 11th Jul 2003 15:28
Link
I have no problem with Britain still being all together as one as an allied block. I just think each country should have total control over their own affairs. If you say "The British Isles" that includes Ireland, even though they are independent. And lets face it, most of your arguments cancel each other out as even if our economy couldn't survive, wouldn't the EU just start to help us out like the Spanish and the Irish and all the rest of the poor countries. Possibly that's why the SNP still insists they want to stay part of the EU.

The leprechaun tells me to burn things
Back to top
Profile PM Website
RedNeckHippie
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Jul 2003
Location: Norway
Posted: 28th Jul 2003 12:19
Link
The Bin Laden people reminds me of the terrorists from Postal 2.

http://www.gopostal.com

Make yourself at home! Clean my kitchen.
Back to top
Profile PM
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-04-28 10:07:36
Your offset time is: 2024-04-28 10:07:36