Happy Face

how much? £220 Nintendo Wii Console (Black) with Wii Sports Resort Motion Plus Controller Wii Nunchuck Wii Sports Wii controller Bundle £139 + Free Delivery @ Woolworths (Starts 5th December whilst stocks last) http://www.hotukdeals.com/item/545993/nint...-black-with-wii

Love Hank me like.

bit touchy this morning are we? tbf switzerlands population is only 7.8 million (according to wiki). if we had the same process here (petitions) then the number of signatories would have to be proportionally higher i would guess. maybe 1 million? hypothetical question i know. apparently Italy's right wing parties are trying to get in on the act as well. not much of a shock really. More people than that vote on the x-factor. Do you want Jedward able to influence policy?

Very gay, but those harmonies are incredible. the Beach Boys would be impressed.

A statement by Iran's Revolutionary Guard said: "After carrying out an investigation and interrogation of the five British sailors, it became clear that their illegal entry was a mistake." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8389946.stm Obviously they don't have the good torture techniques we have to extract a "confession".

UV over on N-O kindly mocked up the hat... ..and one for Moat too...

I only see one question.... "What lesson does the Swiss ban on minarets hold for Britain?" None whatsoever. It's fucking idiotic to force a referendum if more than 100,000 people ask for it. The Daily Mail would grind the nation to a halt on BBC related referendi alone.

"You will of course be fully aware of the plans to sell the naming rights of the stadium and I would like to take this opportunity to explain our thoughts on this in order to appreciate and understand that it makes undoubted economic sense for the club. "Firstly, to allay fears regarding the name of the ground, we will never lose the St.James' name. That is part of our history and heritage, a name that is known throughout world football. "What we are doing, and Chelsea are following suit as I'm sure a number of other major clubs will do too, is bringing in more money to the Club which will go entirely towards the strengthening of the team - and that must surely be of benefit to everyone who supports Newcastle United. "On Sky Sports recently, you may have heard local businessman and recent prospective buyer Barry Moat, endorsing the idea that naming rights need to be explored by saying 'if it gets the right players on the pitch and gives you the right entertainment on a Saturday, then where do I sign?' He understands that football is big business these days and I'd like to thank Barry for all his support." I'm glad Derek took the time to explain that to us all. His big business brain is clearly working on another level to ours. We all presumed he was just doing it to wind up the fans, but it seems we couldn't grasp the real reason...he's doing it for money. Now that the complicated economics have been explained to me I feel quite the fool for having missed it. In fact it gave me another idea. Why doesn't Mike Ashley promise to wear a hat with "cunt" written on it at the next game if the fans can raise £200,000? If every one of us who was at the game on Saturday had chipped in a fiver each, he could have been in the papers wearing that hat the very next day. To allay fears regarding the name of the owner, we will never lose the Mike Ashley name. That is part of his twattery and incompetence, a name that is known throughout world football and associated with abject failure. What we'd be doing is bringing more money to the Club which could go nowhere near the strengthening of the team - but would cover some of Mike's losses and that would surely be of benefit to everyone who supports Newcastle United because he'll then be able to leave sooner. "As you know, Mike made it clear after the end of last season that he was trying to sell the club and although there were a number of interested parties, none of them were able to match the £100million asking price." Contradicts what Derek himself said in July "There have been more than two bids at £100m," "As a result, Mike decided that the best course of action, one that would put the welfare of the club at the top of the agenda, would be to remove the club from the market and concentrate solely on the aim that everyone connected with the club passionately desires - promotion straight back to the Premier League." The club was taken off the market on October 28th, only days after Mike insulted every one of his 'customers' with the false claim that "I spend more than every other fan put together puts into the club each year." If Mike has the best interests of the club at heart, he really should stop slagging off it's main source of income.....and start making that "cunt" hat. "His commitment is unwavering and the additional large sums of money he has recently pumped into the club amply demonstrate that." Which large sums of money? Was there a fee involved with Marlon harewood i didn't hear about? Was the £25m of transfer income earned over the summer handed to an agent to ensure the best talent once we're promoted, like magic beans on the never never? "I would urge all supporters of this truly great football club to come together, get behind the team" 42,000 fans did exactly that on Saturday, and have done all season. There's no need whatsoever to urge it. "Whatever grievances you may or may not have, put them to one side for the benefit of seeing Newcastle United regain their position in the elite of English football." "When this stadium is packed and in full voice, there is nowhere quite like it, and if we can stay positive and get right behind Chris [Hughton] and the players, then hopefully we can stay at the top of the Championship and win promotion at the first attempt." "Mike and myself are here to do our absolute best for Newcastle United and with you on board, we fervently believe we can deliver a successful football club for you to take pride and joy in." Why would we need to put grievances to one side? We support the team fantastically, they're playing well, we're 8 points clear of the play offs, we take pride in our performance on the stands and the players take pride in their performance on the pitch. The players hate Mike Ashley as much as the fans do and would join in with "fat cockney bastard" if they weren't concentrating on the game. http://nufc-ashlies.blogspot.com/2009/12/h...nomics-and.html

Where can I read these programme notes. ...and don't say buy a program. I'm boycoutting all non alcoholic club products

Obama escalation in Afghanistan = Bush Escalation in Iraq "We've always been at war with Eastasia"

Link Link

If you're out of work you could do worse than this... http://hr.leeds.ac.uk/jobs/ViewJob.aspx?m=all&JId=785

Spoon - Written in Reverse NEW SPOON!!!

Another one bites the dust.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8388396.stm

He's not likely to be a recidivist like. Course jails aren't only there to keep the streets safe. But i can see both sides. Strange that America would send him to his trial 70 years after the event while Washington insists Bush and his lot shouldn't be investigated because Iraq is history now.

Did you not see Junior Soprano putting on the same act when he was looking at jail time?

More I make that less than 5 hours per victim. I know he'll be dead soon enough anyway. Just seemed low.

I believe, but am no expert, that you would be prevented from doing so. I think you would have to prove that it comes under 'health and safety' regulations to be able to sidestep it. Actually, you could easily do that given that's how they are banning gambling in some places, so you would be able to. But should you have to jump through loop-holes? HF - I know you're smart enough to see that that's dangerous thinking, I'm not sure I want to get into the gritty details though. That's the problem of having fun in these threads, real danger of serious conversation. AMEN to that!! Yeah, but if you keep it going Leazes and Stevie won't be able to help themself and then the fun will start.

As long as it abides by building regulations and noise pollution regulations i don't see what other objections could be raised. The church bells go on for an hour after every wedding. They can get oultlawed along with the call to prayer as far as I'm concerned. And the townhall clock at the bottom of my road that does a big ben impression every 15 minutes. I'd hate money to be wasted on a nationwide vote against any of them like.

When did you decide this? Chomsky doesn't agree with you, I know he's popular with your lot. As an aside, many Swiss cantons have concealed carry laws and quite easy access to AK47s and the like. One for you lib'ruls to think about. Yay politics threads! I didn't decide it. It can and does come in many forms. I think the UK is democratic though, which Axeman doesn't. I prefer to elect intelligent people to make hard decisions. If we didn't then capital punishment would still be on the go.

Basically a group of men discussing a fashion accessory like a bunch of tarts. Gay as fuck. You're llatantly jealous of them ogling each others big clocks.

thats only the new testament isnt it? the old testament is way older (hence the name) but im not certain anyone knows the true date of origin for christianity. i was under the impression that Islam as a faith came into being in the 7/8th century? Not sure what that's got to do with the persecution of muslims in Switzerland today though. Even if Islam did spread around christian countries 15 centuries ago, do you think the spread of christianity to those countries had been any less violent previously? You sound like Nick Griffin when you start selectively choosing the point in history from when you want the line drawn in the sand. Why not put a ban in place to stop the growth of christianity so we can remain the pagans we originally were? Ironic to hear people bemoan the intolerance of muslims while not tolerating muslim churches. whoooah big lad, high horse stop!!! wtf?? why am i being compared to Nick Griffin? the comparison of religion was not the original topic of this post. in fact, you're the one who originally cast the christians as invaders in muslim countries. my answer was simply a retort to that obviouslly religiouslly motivated statement. please point out where i have 'bemoaned the intolerance of muslims'? Because Nick Griffin made a tit of himself on Question Time harking back to the exact point in time when Britain became white and dismissing any history prior to that. I only cast the christians as invaders to redress the balance after you cast them as unfortunate victims of the spread of Islam across the middle East. As you say, all of that gets away from the point of the original post. Which when you said "at least there's one functioning democracy left", i assumed meant you want a vote on banning a specific religion. If you have no problem with it, why do you want a referendum? I didnt cast Christians or Muslims as anything. i didnt write the original article, its copied and pasted off the BBC website. I wasn't referring to the article. I listed the Christian proportions of predominantly muslim countries and you said "how many of those countries were Christian before the Islam faith came into being?" Democracy is electing a party who broadly represent your views to enact specific legislature as they see fit. It's not electing a party who won't make a decision but will have an expensive referendum on matters as apolitical as this.

thats only the new testament isnt it? the old testament is way older (hence the name) but im not certain anyone knows the true date of origin for christianity. i was under the impression that Islam as a faith came into being in the 7/8th century? Not sure what that's got to do with the persecution of muslims in Switzerland today though. Even if Islam did spread around christian countries 15 centuries ago, do you think the spread of christianity to those countries had been any less violent previously? You sound like Nick Griffin when you start selectively choosing the point in history from when you want the line drawn in the sand. Why not put a ban in place to stop the growth of christianity so we can remain the pagans we originally were? Ironic to hear people bemoan the intolerance of muslims while not tolerating muslim churches. whoooah big lad, high horse stop!!! wtf?? why am i being compared to Nick Griffin? the comparison of religion was not the original topic of this post. in fact, you're the one who originally cast the christians as invaders in muslim countries. my answer was simply a retort to that obviouslly religiouslly motivated statement. please point out where i have 'bemoaned the intolerance of muslims'? Because Nick Griffin made a tit of himself on Question Time harking back to the exact point in time when Britain became white and dismissing any history prior to that. I only cast the christians as invaders to redress the balance after you cast them as unfortunate victims of the spread of Islam across the middle East. As you say, all of that gets away from the point of the original post. Which when you said "at least there's one functioning democracy left", i assumed meant you want a vote on banning a specific religion. If you have no problem with it, why do you want a referendum?

thats only the new testament isnt it? the old testament is way older (hence the name) but im not certain anyone knows the true date of origin for christianity. i was under the impression that Islam as a faith came into being in the 7/8th century? Not sure what that's got to do with the persecution of muslims in Switzerland today though. Even if Islam did spread around christian countries 15 centuries ago, do you think the spread of christianity to those countries had been any less violent previously? You sound like Nick Griffin when you start selectively choosing the point in history from when you want the line drawn in the sand. Why not put a ban in place to stop the growth of christianity so we can remain the pagans we originally were? Ironic to hear people bemoan the intolerance of muslims while not tolerating muslim churches.