Chris B

Oops, wrong thread.

You're an absolute idiot.

He's Duayne?

Every time I try to load up a page of a thread that Carbomb has posted in, the posts only show up until his, then I can't scroll down any further. Been happening about a week.

Carbomb has just taken his ability at killing threads to a new level, that's all.

I loved the original Nexus shirt, it was so simple (just a black N on a yellow square) but, coupled with the armbands and the fact that yellow and black stands out and is quite a rare colour scheme on wrestling shirts as far as I can remember, it made the group look like a bunch you didn't want to mess with:

 

Here's the problem with that shirt.

On the basis that he'll probably be using it in the new series, I was trying to explain it without giving anything away about the routine.

I've heard he rips the piss out of Russell Howard in his stand-up - anyone know what the crack is with that?

 

It must be pretty soul-destroying for comedians who've spent decades perfecting their craft to see gimps like Howard filling arenas.

The last sentence is pretty much the basis of the routine. Starts off as mocking him for not doing enough for charity, pointing out how much Howard does for charity. It's not the best bit he's done, but it was okay. Vegetable Stew was decent, but probably the weakest of his shows I've seen so far.

His book is well worth a read, especially if you haven't seen too many of his shows. It's half autobiography, and half transcripts of his major shows, with copious notes. It's almost like a book version of a DVD commentary.

Tried to watch 'The Girl Next Door' last night, but inadvertently downloaded the wanky teen flick rather than the 2007 movie I was aiming for. Balls. Am planning a depress-o-thon tonight with Antichrist then A Serbian Film. Will post my thoughts after.

 

Antichrist is friggin' weird. Plus, I've yet to meet a man not wince at that scene.

 

A Serbian Film is just plain wrong. I wish i'd never have watched it. There's a particular scene involving a baby that has scarred me since I saw it. Bad news

 

I'm conflicted about 'A Serbian Film'. Firstly, I thought it was very very well made, cleverly put together, and it built the tension very well. The parts that earned it all the negative attention were absolutely horrific, the newborn scene particularly, obviously, but as this very good article clicksays, they do further the narrative, and force the audience to question themselves, rather than being there ONLY to shock. In that sense this is a cut above the usual tortureporn rubbish. I'm not so sure about the film as commentary on a war torn state however. There's plenty of nods to the political/economic/social situation in Serbia through the film, but it doesn't seem to have a direction in terms of the point it's trying to make in regards to this, beyond a very general comment on people being dehumanised by war.

 

All in all, I actually thought this was pretty good. There's far more nasty scenes in plenty of other films, but I think it's precisely because this is much better than most of them that it caused such a huge amount of controversy. Having said all that, I doubt I'll ever watch it again. It was interesting to see it and form an opinion, but certain scenes were very uncomfortable to sit through and I'll be honest, it took me a bit longer than normal to drop off to sleep last night.

 

The commentary point is about exploitation, and how it affects families, as much as about being dehumanised. It's been made by people who are very angry at the way they've been betrayed by their own government, and explaining that level of anger, and how it's made them feel, is very much the message of the movie.

 

Honestly, I thought it was brilliant. Unpleasant, dark, nasty and subversive, but I thought it was well written, well made, well acted, and I thought the point it was making was done well.

 

What was the point it was making then? That war is hell and people can be evil? I reckon you could get that across without simulating all that, indeed many famous films have done so.

Did you read the first paragraph of my post?

Tacitly dodging the religious issue. Kudos. You are a paranoid idiot condoning violence though.

 

I fail to see what living in Scotland has to do with it.

How did he condone violence?

Tried to watch 'The Girl Next Door' last night, but inadvertently downloaded the wanky teen flick rather than the 2007 movie I was aiming for. Balls. Am planning a depress-o-thon tonight with Antichrist then A Serbian Film. Will post my thoughts after.

 

Antichrist is friggin' weird. Plus, I've yet to meet a man not wince at that scene.

 

A Serbian Film is just plain wrong. I wish i'd never have watched it. There's a particular scene involving a baby that has scarred me since I saw it. Bad news

 

I'm conflicted about 'A Serbian Film'. Firstly, I thought it was very very well made, cleverly put together, and it built the tension very well. The parts that earned it all the negative attention were absolutely horrific, the newborn scene particularly, obviously, but as this very good article clicksays, they do further the narrative, and force the audience to question themselves, rather than being there ONLY to shock. In that sense this is a cut above the usual tortureporn rubbish. I'm not so sure about the film as commentary on a war torn state however. There's plenty of nods to the political/economic/social situation in Serbia through the film, but it doesn't seem to have a direction in terms of the point it's trying to make in regards to this, beyond a very general comment on people being dehumanised by war.

 

All in all, I actually thought this was pretty good. There's far more nasty scenes in plenty of other films, but I think it's precisely because this is much better than most of them that it caused such a huge amount of controversy. Having said all that, I doubt I'll ever watch it again. It was interesting to see it and form an opinion, but certain scenes were very uncomfortable to sit through and I'll be honest, it took me a bit longer than normal to drop off to sleep last night.

The commentary point is about exploitation, and how it affects families, as much as about being dehumanised. It's been made by people who are very angry at the way they've been betrayed by their own government, and explaining that level of anger, and how it's made them feel, is very much the message of the movie.

Honestly, I thought it was brilliant. Unpleasant, dark, nasty and subversive, but I thought it was well written, well made, well acted, and I thought the point it was making was done well.

This issue goes far beyond football, Loki. It's the very worst of the sectarian bigotry that is rife in this country.

 

If this was skin colour racism the entire footballing world, and most of the UK would be up in arms. Because it's religious bigotry, it's just taken as "ah well, that's what happens in Scotland" by a lot of people.

 

Something we can agree on. A horrible reverence for religion allows it a much freer reign in doling out the hatred. Football does have the worst fans.

 

Frankly, that's nonsense. I think it's more a complete lack of reverence for religion (and specifically Catholicism) that says "ach well, that's just how things go." Racism is actively opposed and would be challenged by most people who encountered it. Homophobia too. Misogyny is a little more of a grey area - you can still get away with some fairly awful anti-woman chat in plenty of places - but you'd still never get away with songs about being up to your knees in women's blood. But with religion, you're allowed to say almost anything and it's written off.

Oh, come on Kenny. It's not like Muslims aren't regularly made hate figures for exactly this kind of thing. It may be combining racism with religious elements, but imagine if this was likely done by Muslims rather than done by Protestants? I think a lot of people are unsure how to react because they don't know much about the situation. Shit, I didn't even know who Neil Lennon was - I don't know off the top of my head if this is a case of 'lone nutter', 'anti-catholic', or 'anti Glasgow Celtic'.

On a more general note, the story is obviously shocking, and disgraceful. It's honestly terrifying that something like this can be done. However, there is a slight difference to the link to the kind of 'terrorist cell stories' that this could be linked to in that nobody knows who's done it. 'Rangers fans' aren't exactly a terrorist cell, so it looks more likely to be a lone nutter.

Christ, you'd hope anyway, wouldn't you?

Or do you think this forum is representitive of public opinion? Actually, that would be the political threads, since the resident leftist fuckwits manage to run off and intimidate anyone that goes against their views from posting, as confirmed by the several PMs that I have recieved in the past few months.

My God, man. Several PMs over months? I had no idea it was so serious.

There's bound to be some counselling near you. Get in touch, please. This is some bad stuff going on.

Mmmmmmmm... Gail Tilsley

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v15/minge/gailtopless.jpg

 

Don't embed NWS images you bell.

Christ, it's like ET with tits.

A genuine UKFF conspiracy?

 

That's got to be the most pathetic thing I've seen.

At least you weren't at a show where UKFF members tried to start chants of their usernames to see if people knew who they were.

That's awesome. Absolutely awesome.

A genuine UKFF conspiracy?

 

That's got to be the most pathetic thing I've seen.

 

Even more pathetic then a member nominating his own posts for an award?

Easily. At least that's just one person acting pathetically rather than multiple.

Oh, I thought that 'rock bottom' meant different things to different people. I also thought that some people, when they hit their personal rock bottom, kill themselves.

But, no! Apparently, they all must have exactly the same rock bottom in order to get a moment of clarity and sort themselves out. Every time. Because it's always the same. Because you saw it on 'The Wire'.

Quite!

 

I do wonder what enjoyment can be got out of pretending to be fucking stupid, on an internet forum , week after week, month after month. Make a massive generalisation, have it disproved, ignore the response and move on to the next Daily Mail headline. Everybody can see what you're doing, Happ.

 

To then have the gall to behave like this in one area of the forum, and then whinge and moan when people treat you like an idiot in another part, is pretty sad.

 

I say again, I DID ask a different question, which Chris B saw fit to edit off his quote, before asking me to ask a different question.

 

I was talking about the original question. I was pointing out that you asked a question, it was answered, and you said 'but that's not the question'. I pointed out you have a tendency to do this, and then ask another question instead of responding.

You pointed out that I edited out a question you asked later.

Do you understand the concept of time?

It's far more pathetic than Neil's penis.

Shit.

A genuine UKFF conspiracy?

That's got to be the most pathetic thing I've seen.

Afaik First of the ex-Polytechnic's from 1992 set out their plans to charge the full 9k tuition fees here

 

9k for a Degree in Preston

 

Oh and indeed, dear, this is not going to end well

I wouldn't pay 9k for a house in Preston.

Then why didn't you ask a different question, you utter fucking troll? Every time in this thread, you do the same thing. You never respond to a point. You just change the goalposts and ask different, run-on questions.

I did ask a different question, right after the one you quoted. You edited it off your post.

You asked 'what benefits did they see'. Someone answered THAT EXACT QUESTION that you asked and, in response, you said 'that's not the question'. You then asked another question, which I edited off my post because it had nothing to do with the point I was making. Except in the sense that it was yet another example of you changing the goalposts and asking a different, run-on question.

Again.

What about people working for low wages in the private sector, that have to pay increasingly large council tax bills in order to fund the inordinately high wages and benefits of those in the public sector? How are they benefitting from Labour's increases in public sector spending?

It's not a question of whether Labour made the NHS better

Then why didn't you ask a different question, you utter fucking troll? Every time in this thread, you do the same thing. You never respond to a point. You just change the goalposts and ask different, run-on questions.

Every person trying to answer your questions ends up looking like they're talking to an inquisitive six year old, who has no attention span and yet keeps pretending that THIS is the question they want answered.

And what's pissing me off is that you're not even doing it because you lack any ability to focus on a conversation. You're doing it because you're blatantly trolling, which means you're fucking PRETENDING to be an idiot.

I have a weird (mostly) hatred of James Corden.

As a comedian, and as a personality, I can't fucking stand him. Overbearing and obnoxious twat.

However, as an actor? I actually think he's pretty good. Especially when he doesn't play comedy. Basically, any time he doesn't play himself, it's a huge step up. But all he has to do is turn up on a trailer for that idiotic sports show he fronts, and I want him to die.

There's 2200 posts in this thread. How many of them come complete with footnotes or other links to back up what is being said?

 

It's an opinon thread on a wrestling forum. I have a hunch that there is corruption within Amnesty International. My evidence is

If you have evidence, it's not a hunch. If it's a hunch, what you're basing it on is not evidence.

the fact that they have just paid off two of their chiefs with 4 year salary payments, they suspended an executive that complained the organisations links to a supporter of the Taliban

To the best of my understanding, this is to do with human rights abuse of prisoners at Guantanemo Bay. The very function of Amnesty International is to deal with human rights, and that includes those of prisoners, whether or not they are nice people.

, and the fact that the charity is very devious and truculent regarding the whole situation, added to the fact that the aims of the organisation seem very intangible,

They're very tangible. Read them on the report that was linked to earlier.

and more concerned with lobbying politicians (a notoriously dodgy business) than actually taking direct action against the regimes that regularly abuse the human rights of their citizens.

Lobbying politicians is a dodgy business when it is done for business reasons, because people are doing it in order to turn over a profit. With regards to human rights, lobbying politicians is perfectly acceptable.

Earlier, you were suggesting that advertising by AI was a bad thing. But since one of their points of existence is to raise awareness and educate people about human rights, advertising is surely acceptable?

I'll just say one thing. I've had 3 PMs in the last week or so from people that agree with me but won't come on the politics thread because of what a bear-pit it is, with anyone whose opinion differs substantially from the liberal hegemony being attacked from all sides, and not even in a constructive way, but with offensive ephicets thrown in for good measure.

Bullshit. Even if they feel like that, you appear to be incapable of involving yourself in any debate. I've tried, in this thread, repeatedly to try and engage you, and you generally refused.

As far as getting "ground into the floor" in on-topic discussion, when did this happen? The most common argument was whether WWE should turn Cena heel or stop pushing him, and I don't think that's in doubt anymore, turning him heel would have been an absolute disaster as he's been their cash-cow for the past 6 years or so and no-one else has been anywhere close in rivalling him for popularity. To have turned him heel at the time it was being argued would have been as bad a decision as turning Austin heel in 2001, which was by far the worst decision WWE ever made.

 

But that is not an argument for this thread.

Good, because it's bollocks as well. I'm not saying it was a GOOD decision (although I liked heel Austin), but they've made worse mistakes.

My opinion of AA stands. I do not think any amount of evidence would be enough to change some people's minds.

Some might. Frantically googling something and linking to things without reading them does not = evidence. Lister provided you with the Amnesty financial report and you refused to read it, instead drawing conclusions based on your own imagination.

Politics has become like religion or football where it is just tribal and no amount of reason or personal experience would convince a lot of people's mind. Their political views are so wrapped up in their self-image that they simply wouldn't be able to face the world if they were forced to admit they were once wrong. I voted Labour in 1997. I considered myself a liberal, believed mass immigration was a good thing, the whole kit & caboodle. Then I grew up and realised the reality of the world. Some people have a lot of growing up to do.