Has Churchill said something like this?

I said that when the Puritans were in power they banned Football, Dancing, Christmas and the Theatre. So I wasn't actually talking about the civil war, but the period after it. Do you see how that works?

I can see why you so distracted though, it can't be easy what with Liz's beef curtains and all that.

What do you mean sneers? I've been extremely complimentary. I, said

'You need to be congratulated for your meticulous research. Well done you! '
and
'I'm so humbled by your close attention to detail, and your powerful intellect.'

Surely you don't doubt my sincerity? That's the second time you've made me cry today you beastly rotter.

Of course i doubt your alleged sincerity. After all, someone obsessed with the sexual organs of an elderly woman must surely be several bricks short of a load.

Oh, and by the way, even there you'd be wrong, as the act to ban Christmas celebrations was passed by the Long Parliament in 1644, before even the first civil war had ended.

I'll bet you think the Puritans were the most important segment of society in that period, huh?

I'm obsessed? Wow! You've got me there. What do you think Freud would have to say about all this then? I admit I was wrong Finn is spelt with two ns. You're such a clever man. I'm sure the act of banning Christmas had absolutely nothing to do with the Puritans, they were such a jolly bunch of chaps. You should know, because I get the feeling I'm talking to Malvolio. Make sure your stockings are cross gartered. You don't want to miss that biffer.

So your definition of democracy would include Mexico in 1846, Paraguay, Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay in 1864, Great Britain in 1912 and a slave owning United States of America. Obviously someone who gets confused with such terms might need a little extra help putting one's feet in one's trousers in the morning. Don't worry, I get different items of clothing confused too. I'm sure it's a really common problem.

The bell rings! The kid comes out with a flurry of punches!! Set is reeling!! Rope-a-Dope!!

Will Set recover?

Welcome to a2k kid

Cheers ducky!

Dang! Another Limey!!

I'm not sure if this helps but Stalin died in 1953.
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-us/our-history/historical-publications/research-projects/churchill-stalin/



Wouldn't everything need to have been in past tense?

Notice the quotation marks, Tsars. They denote that this was/is a speech, real or not.

Nice grab tsar. I had a lot of preconceived notions that were just plain wrong.

Did a quick scan of thumbs, and declare Set the points leader at the end of round 1.

Mao hated Stalin for when Mao went to Moscow Stalin snubbed him..

Blimey them Limeys sure are scrappy li'l buggers, ain't they?


I mark them ahead on points.

Aah, the Limeys mustn't got nuff support, t,thumbs say Set's out-scorin the scrappy buggers.
No doubt they be a fine match fer im though.

I did not state or imply that the Puritans had not banned Christmas celebrations. It was represented that the issue of civil wars was not relevant as that member was speaking of what happened after the civil wars--i pointed out that Christmas celebrations were banned in 1644, which was not only before the civil wars ended, but was early in the first civil war, when it wasn't certain that Parliament would win.

Yes, i consider all the nations mentioned to have been democracies. That a democracy fails to live up to someone's expectations, or that is less than efficient is not evidence that it is not a democracy--the only functional definition is in how the government is chosen. In 1845, Mexico still ostensibly operated under the constitution of 1824. At no time did i mention England in 1912.

The people here who are attempting to argue these points (one, apparently just because he is English and seems to want to keep up the side, and not out of any particular knowledge) are resorting to straw man arguments and personal reflections. Somehow, these days, it dosen't surprise me that the Wabbit thinks those are cogent points to argue.

You've done what you do best, jump on a typo. You leave the kid alone, it's pretty clear he meant 1812 not 1912, that little war you're so proud of. It's really just a footnote in history though. What people over here are more concerned about is the Napoleonic campaign. That's why we have Waterloo Station and Trafalgar Square.

Interesting that you have a problem seeing Britain in 1912 as a democracy but not Mexico in 1846. Your definition of democracy seems to be that if a country calls itself a democracy it is a democracy. So The German Democratic Republic must have been a democracy by your definition.

You seem to know a great deal about history, unfortunately you don't seem to understand any of it. All you've succeeded in doing is make yourself look even more ridiculous, (if that were possible). Not only that you've gained another nickname. I would never have thought to call you Malvolio had it not been for your bizarre attachment to Puritanism, and your ridiculous strutting and prancing.

And now just like Malvolio you're plunged into darkness, seemingly insane, with only the comments of a 'clown,' to break the tedium. I'm quite happy to accept the label you have thrown my way. I'll be Feste to your Malvolio. There's not much more of this farce left to play out, all that's left for you to do is petulantly shout 'I'll be reveng'd on the whole pack of you!' and storm off in a huff. You need to keep your eye on the ball not the Captain's pie.

Tara for now.

You have no reason to assume that i am either proud of or ashamed of the War of 1812. You have no reason to assume that i have a problem seeing England in 1912 as a democracy. You have no idea upon what basis i consider a nation to be a democracy. As seems to be always the case with you, you make a set of assumptions, but for which you can provide no evidence.

It's pretty clear that you don't understand history, which is why i asked you what group you considered the most important in the 17th century civil wars in England. I note that you've not responded.

And, of course, you end with nasty personal reflections, the closest thing to an argument in your arsenal, apparently.

What 'nice' about the grab, Pan. It seems Tsars shares at least one of those notions that were just plain wrong.