TheChipPrince
|
 |
« Reply #390 on: March 19, 2009, 09:19:37 PM » |
|
I've just had to Google Millennium to see whose album that was - I've never heard of it.
This Either we have a googler or the worlds biggest Back Street Boys fan on the forum. Which is it? 
|
|
|
Logged
|
The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.
RIP- TheChipPrince - $17,165
|
|
|
Claw75
|
 |
« Reply #391 on: March 19, 2009, 09:19:51 PM » |
|
Malta appears to be correct from that map too
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon....no matter how good you are the bird is going to shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway"
|
|
|
amcgrath1uk
|
 |
« Reply #392 on: March 19, 2009, 09:20:30 PM » |
|
Canada accepted. 2 points to sharplea and GlasgowBandit
Are you sure? Because this says that Canada as Canada was created in 1867 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_empireAnd that was as a dominion - so not technically part of direct rule by the Empire??? Do I need a seconder to object to an objection? To clarify, a dominion is basically what Canada was until the 1980's, so if you say it's part of the Empire then it was part of the Empire until about 20 years ago. +2 to JonMW for attempting to overrule an overruled decision
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Robert HM
|
 |
« Reply #393 on: March 19, 2009, 09:20:34 PM » |
|
Objection!!! Southern Rhodesia is the legal name, Rhodesia was a shortened version!!
Rob, already there for you bro. thanks kin and nak. take it as an objection to the Rhodesia answers as well looking for link
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ItsMrAlex2u
|
 |
« Reply #394 on: March 19, 2009, 09:20:36 PM » |
|
i object the country of ipswich has now been taken over by the maurading english and was a member of the british empire
just because its no longer a country and wasnt a country at the time of the british empire and wasnt called ipswich when it was a country means nothing
ffs remember hippo hilton and falklands
all of which were fails !!
|
|
|
Logged
|
Best QM ever
FACT !
|
|
|
pokerfan
|
 |
« Reply #395 on: March 19, 2009, 09:20:48 PM » |
|
Main article: American Revolution During the 1760s and 1770s, relations between the Thirteen Colonies and Britain became increasingly strained, primarily because of resentment of the British Parliament's attempts to govern and tax American colonists without their consent,[41] summarised at the time by the slogan "No taxation without representation". Disagreement over the American colonists' guaranteed Rights as Englishmen turned to violence and, in 1775, the American War of Independence began. The following year, the colonists declared the independence of the United States and, with assistance from France, Spain and the Netherlands would go on to win the war in 1783.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ironside
|
 |
« Reply #396 on: March 19, 2009, 09:20:52 PM » |
|
somebody help me
|
|
|
Logged
|
I am the master of my fate I am the captain of my soul.
|
|
|
kinboshi
|
 |
« Reply #397 on: March 19, 2009, 09:21:11 PM » |
|
South Rhodesia?
|
|
|
Logged
|
'The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.'
|
|
|
KarmaDope
|
 |
« Reply #398 on: March 19, 2009, 09:21:16 PM » |
|
Canada accepted. 2 points to sharplea and GlasgowBandit
Are you sure? Because this says that Canada as Canada was created in 1867 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_empireAnd that was as a dominion - so not technically part of direct rule by the Empire??? Do I need a seconder to object to an objection? To clarify, a dominion is basically what Canada was until the 1980's, so if you say it's part of the Empire then it was part of the Empire until about 20 years ago. +2 to JonMW for attempting to overrule an overruled decision Added. Can you update the results and check the fail score? Number of successful objections means I think its changed!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ItsMrAlex2u
|
 |
« Reply #399 on: March 19, 2009, 09:21:23 PM » |
|
I've just had to Google Millennium to see whose album that was - I've never heard of it.
This Either we have a googler or the worlds biggest Back Street Boys fan on the forum. Which is it?  Loool F Y L !!
|
|
|
Logged
|
Best QM ever
FACT !
|
|
|
Claw75
|
 |
« Reply #400 on: March 19, 2009, 09:21:41 PM » |
|
somebody help me
you could use some help tbh
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon....no matter how good you are the bird is going to shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway"
|
|
|
amcgrath1uk
|
 |
« Reply #401 on: March 19, 2009, 09:21:50 PM » |
|
Objection!!! Southern Rhodesia is the legal name, Rhodesia was a shortened version!!
Rob, already there for you bro. thanks kin and nak. take it as an objection to the Rhodesia answers as well looking for link Southern Rhodesia accepted. Rhodesia is now a fail.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ironside
|
 |
« Reply #402 on: March 19, 2009, 09:22:15 PM » |
|
i object the country of ipswich has now been taken over by the maurading english and was a member of the british empire
just because its no longer a country and wasnt a country at the time of the british empire and wasnt called ipswich when it was a country means nothing
ffs remember hippo hilton and falklands
all of which were fails !! but were given as correct andy t for an ace for hippo ffs and jonmw said that if it looks like a war and smells like a war then it is a war he should see the wars down the local high street at a weekend
|
|
|
Logged
|
I am the master of my fate I am the captain of my soul.
|
|
|
Robert HM
|
 |
« Reply #403 on: March 19, 2009, 09:22:59 PM » |
|
Rhodesia was the name adopted when the formerly British colony of Southern Rhodesia declared itself independent (Unilateral Declaration of Independence) on 11 November 1965. The name was also used with the establishment of Zimbabwe Rhodesia in 1979. After a brief return to colonial status as Southern Rhodesia from 1979 to 1980, the country became the independent nation of Zimbabwe in April 1980. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RhodesiaTherefore Rhodesia WRONG, Southern Rhodesia RIGHT
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
GlasgowBandit
|
 |
« Reply #404 on: March 19, 2009, 09:23:29 PM » |
|
I object to John MW's existence and think he should be expelled from future quizes.
RobertHM has already seconded this by PM.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|