Pantyboy,
You still haven't answered my question yet despite that I've put it to
you on numerous occasions. You claim that you BTY's are free'r than the
rest of us. Would you mind elaborating on that. Tell me how you
are...what freedoms you have that the rest of the free world doesn't
have? Come on the...shouldn't take too long!
WH
.
|
|
| User: "R. Foreman" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? |
17 Dec 2004 09:03:45 PM |
|
|
"WH" <bollogs@hotmail.com> Spat the Words
Pantyboy,
You still haven't answered my question yet despite that I've put it to
you on numerous occasions. You claim that you BTY's are free'r than the
rest of us. Would you mind elaborating on that. Tell me how you
are...what freedoms you have that the rest of the free world doesn't
have? Come on the...shouldn't take too long!
WH
Freedom to enact more restrictive laws, erect more signs
which restrict movement. We have more of these. It makes
the conservatives feel safe you know. The neocons have a
need for sameness and maintenance of status quo.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? |
17 Dec 2004 04:17:18 PM |
|
|
In America we have national Football leagues, national Soccer Leagues,
national basketball leagues, national baseball leagues, national
everything sports.
You have ***** ;)
We have the freedom to partake in various sports and we have choices.
But in Sweden you have limited Freedom to do ***** in regards to choice
of sports.
Well there is one ;) But there is many and this was posted to Tony, eh
tard?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tadapope" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? |
17 Dec 2004 10:23:51 PM |
|
|
All boys have the freedom to wear pantyhose.
Tangents are infinite in all of nature in
all universes constantly and at random.
* D OUOSVAVV M *
*PUBLIUS ENIGMA*
Oh Joy!
Tom
The Psychedelic Pope
Patron Saint of the Internet
http://www.apple2.org.za/gswv/me/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Su Zanadu" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? |
17 Dec 2004 10:55:11 PM |
|
|
Tadapope wrote:
All boys have the freedom to wear
pantyhose.
I saw a teenaged white boy in the grocery store who had them on his
head.
I said to him "Son...does your momma know you have her pantyhose on your
head"?
SuZanne
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Aidan" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? (way OT) |
18 Dec 2004 12:22:11 AM |
|
|
Michael Johnathan McDonald wrote:
In America we have national Football leagues, national Soccer Leagues,
national basketball leagues, national baseball leagues, national
everything sports.
You have ***** ;)
We have the freedom to partake in various sports and we have choices.
But in Sweden you have limited Freedom to do ***** in regards to choice
of sports.
Well there is one ;) But there is many and this was posted to Tony, eh
tard?
Apart from athletics and swimming, is America part of any
*international* sporting leagues? The rest of the world has a multitude
of choice in this respect... what do you have? (ok, I'll grant you
basket ball...)
Why is it that when playing most any other country at these
'international' sports (soccer, rugby, cricket, to name a few), America
consistently gets their ***** handed to them on a platter? LOL!
I'm sorry, but I just can't work that one out... you guys obviously have
the facilities (i.e. money) and talent to churn out world beating teams,
but for whatever reason, you guys just get owned when you try to compete
against other countries... What's up with that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? (way OT) |
18 Dec 2004 12:01:44 PM |
|
|
Aidan wrote:
Michael Johnathan McDonald wrote:
In America we have national Football leagues, national Soccer
Leagues,
national basketball leagues, national baseball leagues, national
everything sports.
You have ***** ;)
We have the freedom to partake in various sports and we have
choices.
But in Sweden you have limited Freedom to do ***** in regards to
choice
of sports.
Well there is one ;) But there is many and this was posted to Tony,
eh
tard?
Apart from athletics and swimming, is America part of any
*international* sporting leagues? The rest of the world has a
multitude
of choice in this respect... what do you have? (ok, I'll grant you
basket ball...)
Why is it that when playing most any other country at these
'international' sports (soccer, rugby, cricket, to name a few),
America
consistently gets their ***** handed to them on a platter? LOL!
Do girls count? I think they would. American girls Soccer Team won the
Women's World Cup. I guess to you "consistently gets their ***** handed
to them on a platter" is a good observation, in that regards, eh? But,
Steven is correct. We care less about Cricket, Rugby and some of the
other international league stuff.
As far as the world not caring; I ask you why there is represented
every countries announcers at the World Series, or the Super Bowl? Is
it because they are theie to practice their translation skills, or
because people in these other countries actually want to listen to what
is happening?
I'm sorry, but I just can't work that one out...
Well maybe you need a brain transplant? The one you got ain't working
;)
you guys obviously have
the facilities (i.e. money) and talent to churn out world beating
teams,
I think we do well in the Olympics.
but for whatever reason, you guys just get owned when you try to
compete
against other countries...
Again, I think we do well in the Olympics and, again you need a brain
transplant. Who has been winning the French Bicycle Tournament in the
last decade? I think a America has *owned* that eh?
What's up with that?
As for Soccer, give the Americans some time and will excel ;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Aidan" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? (way OT) |
20 Dec 2004 10:05:40 PM |
|
|
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1103589738.894510.32560@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
....
Yes they do... but one title doesn't change my mind...
No one is here to change your mind since you do not have one. ;)
gawd, here we go... starts off with an unrelated personal insult.. noted
But why? Gridiron is just a pussied down version of Rugby...
Maybe so, but at least you need a mind to play the game. I have nothing
against Rugby, but the intellectual stimulation is little null compared
to American Football ( To be politically correct).
LOL! No, the *same* amount of intellect is required... only in Rugby (since
it's the best comparison to gridiron), it's a more Zen like intellect, in
that you have the same objective (get the ball over the line at the other
end of the field), but you don't get to sit down and have a cup of tea while
thinking about what kind of play you're going to try next... It's all done
*on the fly*, whole team scramble style, thus I could argue that you need a
*quicker* mind to be good at rugby compared to gridiron.
Gridiron players need not even think about what they need to do next to gain
an advantage, they get told... yeah, real intellectual...
In Rugby,
there is no 'offensive' team and 'defensive' team, it's 2 groups of
15 guys,
So each player plays for himself and against all other players?
You know what I meant...
a Rugby team generally has a total of 19 players, 15 on the field at any
given time... those 15 guys are responsible for offence, defense and stategy
during play. They are allowed a set number of substitutions per half.
a Gridiron typically has 3 specialized units: offensive, defensive, and
'special', who can be interchanged an unlimited number of times. These
substitutions give *every player* a chance to catch their breath.
Additionally, each unit is responsible only for it's task... a defensive
player need not even know how to catch the ball alot of the time... and thus
if your a defensive player, and your team is in possession, you get even
more time to catch your breath.
who run around *non-stop* for 80 or so minutes.
I would tie this into soccer as well. Very demanding endurance sport,
but so is Basketball.
And yes, it does tie into Soccer and Basketball... though, like most
American sports, Basketball has unlimited interchange and unlimited
time-outs... meaning that unlike the games played by the rest of the world,
Basketball players spend alot of time sitting around catching their breath
in the name of time-outs.
While the postions are
somewhat broken up into different offensive skill sets, every man on
the
team has a nearly identical role to play in defence. How many
'offensive'
(or defensive for that matter) gridiron players could run around
*non-stop*
(excepting half time) for 80 minutes, both taking hits and making
them?
Not with all that equipment on. Football players hit each other harder
and more often.
Even without it, they would be unable to match the physical fitness of a
Rugby player, due to the fact they simply have not trained to be able to
exert themselves 100% for 80 minutes... they are trained for short bursts of
activity, since that's how the game is played...
start/stop/start/stop/timeout/start/stop/start/timeout/etc
The claim they they hit each other more often and harder is also suspect, as
most of the time, they';re sitting around deciding who they are going to hit
next... do you think the Rugb y players *aren't* trying to hit the opposing
players as hard as they possibly can? You can be assured that there's
little difference in the intensity of hits either type of play takes... the
difference lies in the fact that Gridiron allows for very dangerous types of
tackles (head high, pile drivers), where Rugby, instead of fixing the
problem by throwing armour at it, simply outlawed those types of tackles...
If Rugby would play at the same intensity and exertion
as AF, I sense that after a Rugby game each player would not have a
career anymore, and most would be in the hospital - but the savior of
course is the protection, in which you call pussied. BTW, when knights
and field infantry wore armor in battle against insane idiots who
didn't in battle - would the armor bearers be accused by you of
pussied?
Alot of guys do end up getting heavily injured after each game... what makes
you think they aren't?
The armour in gridiron was introduced because players started dying.
Players used to die in Rugby, before the dangerous tackle types were
outlawed... so you can see the different approches taken by each sport:
Gridiron: introduced extra equipment to prevent critical injuries
Rugby: introduced extra rules to prevent critical injuries from occuring in
the first place
As far as you question above primitive war: It's a matter of perspective.
One could say that those who aren't wearing armour are more courageous than
those who are, because they're more likely to be rushing to their death than
someone who is wearing armour... but most of the time, I'm sure they would
have liked to be wearing armour to, it's just that they didn't have any.
What's this got to do with anything anyway...?
Same can be said for AFL.... and you don't even know what that is do
you?
Australian Football League, Correct?
Indeed, but have you ever seen a game? Why not? There are American
commentators, surely you must have been listening to them... I mean, they're
there, so people must be paying attention!
Just because there are announcers, doesn't mean that anyone listens
A little dishonest are you? Announcers just like to hear themselves
talk and cooperations just like to run commercials at heavy loses
because no one is listening to the announcers. Lol ;)
I certainly have never watched an entire game of Gridiron because:
a) it's very rarely on TV... maybe a 4-5 games *per-year* on sports channel.
b) I find it incredibly boring, with the stop/start nature of the game...
the final 5 minutes of a game can take over an hour to play... ***** that
*****
The reason it's commentated in so many languages is that the NFL wants
itself to be popular on a world-wide scale, and so they *invest* money in
commentating in other languages in the hope of picking up more fans, and
selling more merchandise. It's a case that corporations taking heavy loses
in the hope of extending the sport's popularity beyond America's borders...
it's a form of corporate gambling in my eyes... Same thing with AFL.
I can assure you, people care *MUCH* less about gridiron or baseball
(if at all) than they do about the sports that compete amoungst multiple
nations.
I agree, but if we take the original argument and say American's
have more choice than the EU ( At the moment) then that was my point.
International is international and is outside of the EU argument.
Ummm, that's a stupid argument.... Anyone, anywhere, either in the USA or
EU, can play whatever sport takes their fancy... it's not like America has
these magical games that no-one else can play, even if they want to, its
just that no-one *cares* to play them... vice versa...
Just couldn't keep it civil could you, ***** sucker?
I do not think 'brain transplant' is as offensive as '*****
sucker' - but I understand why you brought this up. You
subliminally wanted to bring into the conversation, your friends
favorite bedroom sport and try to make it into the American/EU freedom
thread ;) lol.
Nice try ;)
LOL! you crack me up Micky... no, I was taking a stab at you directly, since
my post was in no way insulting, yet you deemed it nessessary (in true
American fashion) to return fire where there was none...
Indeed, if only by sheer power of numbers... if you look at medals
per head of population, you didn't fair so well (either did China,
but that's another issue..
More diluted thinking on your part. If you are playing percentage like
you just did, If Luxembourg would field about 5-7- gold medallists in
one Olympic cycle they would be rated number one. No?
Yes. Though, if you look at both medal tally and medals per head of
population together, you get a pretty good idea of the countries who have
populations with above average athletic ability.
I believe Basketball and Hockey are the only sports that are aloud
that. You can correct me if there are more - I haven't been
following the O procedures on laws in the last few years.
Nope, at least not in Australia... for example, swimmers get lots of
endorsment contracts.
I'm not denying that... I granted that you guys kicked ***** in the
athletics.. you nearly always do.
Why is this taking on a good verses bad aspect? I was talking about
choices in part of big-sports on TV at the national level, and taking
into account EU as one nation. International is a chumped up argument.
It wins every time - by sheer numbers.
It's stupid to argue such things... I can play badminton in the Australian
league, be on TV, and still have to work a day-job. Just because a sport is
on TV, playing in a national competition, doesn't mean it being there
magically increases my level of freedom... thats a fucking bizzarre line to
take...
You mean 'Tour de France'?
Yes ;)
Ø No, hardly owned that..
Bull *****. More dishonesty ;)
Ø just done well. In any event,
I thought so ;)
Huh? You disagree that that you don't "own" the TdF, then agree that you
only "did well"? Maybe you're not getting that "owned" means you have been
pretty much unchallenged for title... America has hardly been untouchable...
that event (IMO it falls under athletics)...
but if you want to bring it to the Olympics, Australia *owned* the
vellodrome at Athens...
How must did they purchase it for ;) Was it expensive ;)
jeez you're banal sometimes...
Well, I've formulated a theory:
Watch, If America goes un intellectual and gets on the soccer
bandwagon, we will field teams that are some of the best. Possibly that
corporate sponsorship - just need the publics interest.
The "unintellectual" label you've imposed on Soccer loving nations it quite
an insult... is that what you were aiming for? To insult nearly the entire
population of planet earth?
Though I agree, if public interest in America rises in these sports, you'll
be nigh on impossible to stop... and this is my whole point:
It would seem natural to want to prove national superiority at sports.
America could easily do this, within a matter of years I would estimate...
yet you all sit there, playing insular games with yourselves, calling them
"world series" and such, and yet never come close to the rest of the human
race at the sports we're good at... why?
IMO, Rugby and Soccer are mindless games whereas the complicated
strategies of Baseball and Football win out in interesting viewing.
Well, IMO they lack action, which IMO is what sport is all about... fast
action, quick thinking... not the drawn-out, low intensity plays that make
up gridiron (I say low intensity, because IMO none of the players really
ever get a chance to be thoroughly tired-out... after each play, they all
get to sit down again)
Again, IMO. Yes, Soccer is more athletic in basic physical forms ( and
Rugby), but the in-depth thinking is not as advanced as it is with two
of the National Sorts of America.
See the second paragraph of my reply...
Soccer was a third world mindless
game invented because all that could be afforded was a ball. Cricket,
is an elitist game, made for the rich who wanted something to do in
leisure time. I do not think it was originally for the masses.
Umm, no Soccer has it's roots in ancient history... many variations have of
the game have been played for hundreds, maybe thousands, of years. It was
not the invention of third-world nations who had no other equipment with
which to formulate a game...
These sport, that the rest of the world has embraced, don't fit the
American TV format.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha
Most of the world was Third World according to American standards. Lol.
LOL! you just can't help but alienate yourself from the rest of the world,
can ya Micky?
What I meant was... well you know what I meant, by reading your next
paragraph... you just wanted to act like a douche-bag as usual.
With Gridiron and Baseball, you have unlimited timeouts in which
to run commercials...
Consumerism, and strategy time-outs.
Exactly... those sports are popular in America because they get the most TV
time... this is due to the fact they are 'commercial friendly' in their
overall layout, and TV stations can make much more money off them than they
would if say, Rugby was popular... they get 3 hours of broken up, disjointed
play, where they can pop ads in all over the place, as opposed to around an
hour and a half of near non-stop action, where it's prohibitive to pump out
an add between tackles...
Again, I win the argument on the
intelligence of two of our giant national sports American Football and
Baseball, to mindless soccer and rugby.
LOL! Declaring yourself the winner already? Who's to say I was trying to
'win' anything in the first place...
Again, see my second paragraph...
Sure there is some
intelligence, don't get me wrong, but the sheer strategy involvement is
like Einstein for America compared to Joe street sweeper.
That might be a good argument, if it weren't for the constant stopage and
direction by coaches... Rugby players are required to know the best approach
to use in any given situation, and need to know it within a quater of a
second...
Rugby requires all the strategy of gridiron, it's just condensed into a much
shorter timeframe... Rugby teams practice plays all the time, the only
difference is the implementation: they don't get to start from a set play,
they have to try to position their players for the play *while still
playing* (wow, I said play alot just now...)
Is that a
little to condescending? Good ;)
It was a nice attempt at least... LOL!
To uplift your spirits, America is
catching on to Soccer, and quite possibly Rugby later on - that is
when our minds meld with yours and we all become mindless dolts ;)
Since you claim gridiron is so much 'harder' than Rugby, shouldn't your
observation point to the possibility that it's you guys who would be
mindless dolts, due to massive head trauma? Oh thats right, you never even
feel the hits, cuz you're covered in padding...
But, until that time Merry Christmas ;)
You too ;-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? (way OT) |
18 Dec 2004 01:06:36 AM |
|
|
Aidan wrote:
Michael Johnathan McDonald wrote:
In America we have national Football leagues, national Soccer
Leagues,
national basketball leagues, national baseball leagues, national
everything sports.
You have ***** ;)
We have the freedom to partake in various sports and we have
choices.
But in Sweden you have limited Freedom to do ***** in regards to
choice
of sports.
Well there is one ;) But there is many and this was posted to Tony,
eh
tard?
Apart from athletics and swimming, is America part of any
*international* sporting leagues? The rest of the world has a
multitude
of choice in this respect... what do you have? (ok, I'll grant you
basket ball...)
Look at the list Michael wrote in the post you reponded to. We have the
highest calibur of professional sporting events in the world. The
National Football League's Super Bowl is watched by millions of fans in
countries all around the world. Same with Major League Baseball's World
Series.
Why is it that when playing most any other country at these
'international' sports (soccer, rugby, cricket, to name a few),
America
consistently gets their ***** handed to them on a platter? LOL!
There is virtually NO interest in soccer, rugby or cricket in the US --
well, there is a group of teams that call themselves Major League
Soccer, but they have a very limited fan base.
I'm sorry, but I just can't work that one out... you guys obviously
have
the facilities (i.e. money) and talent to churn out world beating
teams,
but for whatever reason, you guys just get owned when you try to
compete
against other countries... What's up with that?
Zero interest in soccer, rugby, cricket ... zzzz ... snore ... good
night.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "WH" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? |
18 Dec 2004 12:38:06 PM |
|
|
WH wrote:
Pantyboy,
You still haven't answered my question yet despite that I've put it
to
you on numerous occasions. You claim that you BTY's are free'r than
the
rest of us. Would you mind elaborating on that. Tell me how you
are...what freedoms you have that the rest of the free world doesn't
have? Come on the...shouldn't take too long!
WH
Where's pantyboy? This was posted to pantyboy and I get that fuckin'
idiot macdonald talking about sports. Talk about being a *****!
Pantyboy was around today but he avoided answering this.
I s'pose he was only jesting when he claimed that the BTY's have more
freedoms than the rest of us.
C'mon pantyboy...write us a list of the freedoms that you have that I
don't.
WH
.
|
|
|
| User: "Doc" |
|
| Title: Re: What about those freedoms pantyboy? |
18 Dec 2004 03:57:01 PM |
|
|
"WH" <bollogs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1103395086.252436.247870@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
WH wrote:
Pantyboy,
You still haven't answered my question yet despite that I've put it
to
you on numerous occasions. You claim that you BTY's are free'r than
the
rest of us. Would you mind elaborating on that. Tell me how you
are...what freedoms you have that the rest of the free world doesn't
have? Come on the...shouldn't take too long!
WH
Where's pantyboy? This was posted to pantyboy and I get that fuckin'
idiot macdonald talking about sports. Talk about being a *****!
Pantyboy was around today but he avoided answering this.
I s'pose he was only jesting when he claimed that the BTY's have more
freedoms than the rest of us.
C'mon pantyboy...write us a list of the freedoms that you have that I
don't.
WH
You must understand, WH, that mikey equates dominance in the sports arena
with geopolitical dominance, not to mention the fact that any kind of
nationalistic victory gives his micro-sized ***** a hard-on.
LOL...;Doc
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
