Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

aabbccddeeffgghhii    

Rank #1372 on Comments
aabbccddeeffgghhii Avatar Level 265 Comments: Pure Win
Offline
Send mail to aabbccddeeffgghhii Block aabbccddeeffgghhii Invite aabbccddeeffgghhii to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:6/20/2012
Last Login:10/31/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#8395
Comment Ranking:#1372
Highest Content Rank:#6855
Highest Comment Rank:#481
Content Thumbs: 192 total,  252 ,  60
Comment Thumbs: 8030 total,  10102 ,  2072
Content Level Progress: 70% (7/10)
Level 17 Content: New Here → Level 18 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 64% (64/100)
Level 265 Comments: Pure Win → Level 266 Comments: Pure Win
Subscribers:0
Content Views:23147
Times Content Favorited:7 times
Total Comments Made:1884
FJ Points:6741

latest user's comments

#13 - And probaly still couldnt get any! Well, looking like…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/03/2014 on Respawn -2
#14 - meatygoodness (09/03/2014) [-]
Sloth? Man, did you fucking see that guy? He was built like a brick-shit house, I'm sure he could just take all the pussy he wanted :|
#32 - It was a Dutch fleet at Copenhagen. I'm getting the bulk of my…  [+] (10 new replies) 09/03/2014 on RIP in pieces 0
User avatar #34 - anoxz (09/03/2014) [-]
Funny, because in my history class, we were told it was the danish fleet at quarters at their main base in Copenhagen.

Popular opinion agrees:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Copenhagen

About the part of the Netherlands being, "a dirty douple corssing state...", it may be noted that it was the Batavian Republic, which was formed out of economic and political turmoil, afterwards being invaded by France and made into a yes-puppet.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavian_Republic

Maybe the british should be more grateful to the dutch. Esspecially at the Battle of Waterloo.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Waterloo
User avatar #35 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
Yeah, i really don't think we should thank you for waterloo... at all. Waterloo was a triumph for the British because of Wellington. We had less men and less equipment than Napoleon (even with all the extra soldiers from the Netherlands, Hannover and what not) and it was Wellingtons skill that won the day, not the fucking Dutch.

The Dutch involvement really does show the integrity of the Dutch people; "The French are about to win! Quick, attack the brittish!@

"Oh shit they defeated us! Now the French are about to lose! Quick, help the British!"

"We won! We truly are the best!"

Also, are you trying to defend your own country by passing blame onto a completely unrelated country? That doesn't change the fact that the Dutch have no integrity whatsoever and just want fucking trade routs.

Also, the Dutch should be thanking the British who, during WW2, housed the Dutch Royal family who fled. Where as the British Royal family refused to flee to Canada even though the Nazis were knocking down our door.

Also, before you say we weren't invaded, consider this; at the time they refused to flee our army was in tatters, Hitler was on the beaches of France with lust in his eyes and we were expecting an invasion any day. The British Royal Family refused to flee because they knew it wasn't the right thing for a Monarch to do. If Britain was going down, they were going down with the ship. But theres the Dutch Family, running away on a British ship.
User avatar #38 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
The Hitler-card... Really?

I couldn't give a single flying fuck about who and whoever is more powerfull than the other. It's in the past, and using ones past as justification for the present is silly. History is the mere study of the past and to give us a cultural understanding of our present.
One thing that rustles my jimmies though, are neckbeards who blindly throws out historical anecotes, without any confirmation or sources to back them up.

It's pathetic to see how people ignorantly blind themself from an objectiv view, to satisfy their own ideal imagination of the past.
User avatar #39 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
Thats exactly what you have been doing.

And the Hitler card? I didn't pull the Hitler card. The Hitler card comes out when you compare someone with Hitler, WHERE did I do that?
User avatar #40 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
No... I question what I read and what I hear.
You took the discussion out of its premissed and context, by drawing it into a new field, were you try to show of a anecdote, which you know nobody can mess with.

Call it Hitler-card, WWII-card or Churchill... I do not care.
User avatar #41 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
A new field? My Friend, we are talking about wars of our past and, if I am not mistaken, World War 2 was, in fact, a war.

If we go down the "you took the discussion of out its premise and context" may i avert your attention to your previous comment where you, out of nowhere, brought up the Batavian Republic which had absolutely no connection with what we were talking about/no connection with the discussion.

Lets just get things straight before accusing one another (i.e. you accusing me) of taking things in the wrong direction.

Also, I love how defeated you are; "Call it Hitler Card, WW2 Card of Chirchil... I do not care." As soon as you have nothing to say its all "I don't care anyway!"

Pathetic.
User avatar #42 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
What is really pathetic, is randomly tossing historical inaccuracies with no sources or confirmation... stating it as fact. But I already noted that earlier.

If however we are talking war, then why didn't you use your WWII argument at the beginning? Continue that, and I hope that you will back your sources up next time and try to be just little more objective.

User avatar #43 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
I don't need to back them up, a quick five minute google search will confirm most of what I say.

If you're to lazy to go an look, thats fine. But that doesn't automatically mean i'm wrong. I know what i'm talking about, if you want to research it that is your prerogative.
User avatar #44 - anoxz (09/05/2014) [-]
Well a five minute google search didn't confirm the precence of a Dutch fleet at the Battle of Copenhagen. It clearly show you don't know what you talk about.
#37 - anoxz has deleted their comment.
#26 - There would be losses on both sideds but Nelson was so BAD A… 09/03/2014 on RIP in pieces -1
#32 - Quite. 09/03/2014 on Kirito in the place he belongs -2
#11 - If a reporter doesn't know what the hell they are talking abou…  [+] (3 new replies) 09/03/2014 on investigative journalism +22
#236 - wtfduud (09/04/2014) [-]
One of the few times I'll thumb up someone who doesn't know They're/Their/There
#25 - anon (09/03/2014) [-]
You're a moron.
#20 - ihearcolors has deleted their comment.
#22 - I don't ******* know, i'm not an Historical Artis…  [+] (3 new replies) 09/03/2014 on RIP in pieces 0
User avatar #24 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
That drawings probably not going for historical accuraty.
and neither's the first one. besides, what's that guy's problem anyways. Trying to show off.

I'd tell by how it's just a one-sided pure ass-whoopin'.
There'd be losses & damage on both sides, given the enemy fired back.
Though your picture's a fuck'n awesome show-off of naval stragety in large quantaties
User avatar #26 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
There would be losses on both sideds but Nelson was so BAD ASS that he still destroyed the Dutch fleet (which i may add had superior numbers).

I just DESTROYED that guys National Pride and Achievements! FUCK YEAH BRITAIN


User avatar #25 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
*accuracy
*quantities
#16 - Well, chances are if you ask an Asian person where their from … 09/03/2014 on What race are you? 0
#11 - Just because one bad group refuses to acknowledge the actions …  [+] (3 new replies) 09/03/2014 on That awkward moment... -7
#17 - anon (09/03/2014) [-]
Not the point, we just find it funny that the Westboro Baptist Church are such a pack of cunts that even the Ku Klux Klan hates them.
#18 - vladimirherzog (09/03/2014) [-]
well the KK hate real easily, so it shouldnt be any surprise that they would hate WBC
User avatar #39 - zarcos (09/04/2014) [-]
Yeah but the point is that the KKK is on the far Right of the political spectrum, but so is WBC. The fact that WBC is so far Right that not even the KKK supports them is significant.
#9 - The founder of Ferrari was a bit of an uggo.  [+] (8 new replies) 09/03/2014 on Respawn +29
#87 - anon (09/04/2014) [-]
#12 - meatygoodness (09/03/2014) [-]
So he invented the pussy-magnet car
User avatar #18 - fuzzysixx (09/03/2014) [-]
Then after people realized their QC was shit, they started making their own cars. I.E. Lamborghini. Mercedes Benz master race Dat 560 SEC
#19 - meatygoodness (09/03/2014) [-]
I thought Lambo got shit-talked by a car manufacturer (Lambo used to make tractors) so the dude made his own cars to prove he could. And they were pretty sweet.

User avatar #33 - fuzzysixx (09/04/2014) [-]
It involved an argument between the two, and lambo was a tractor maker.
User avatar #27 - envinite (09/04/2014) [-]
It is.
#13 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
And probaly still couldnt get any!

Well, looking like Sloth from the Goonies i cant say im surprised.
#14 - meatygoodness (09/03/2014) [-]
Sloth? Man, did you fucking see that guy? He was built like a brick-shit house, I'm sure he could just take all the pussy he wanted :|
#15 - Picture 09/03/2014 on Ya know what im sayin +11
#17 - Battle of Copenhagen: A British force, led by then Vice Admira…  [+] (19 new replies) 09/03/2014 on RIP in pieces 0
User avatar #31 - anoxz (09/03/2014) [-]
May I ask for a specific source?

The Battle of Copenhagen was a naval engagement between the British and Denmark-Norway, to prevent the danish fleet from threatening british naval superiority. The Netherlands were a client state of the French Republic and under their management.
There are no sources that indicates that the dutch were participating in the battle, and there's no connection between this event and dutch participation in the wars.
User avatar #32 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
It was a Dutch fleet at Copenhagen. I'm getting the bulk of my infro from a five minute chat in my History class, we kinda skipped over the battle because it wasn't a part of the syllabus, but it was definitely a dutch fleet.

And i wouldn't really call them a client state, more " A dirty double corssing state who took the first chance to get their greedy hands on better trade ports so decided to declare war on Britain because it looked like Napoleon was going to win."

But hey, different countried call it different things i suppose.
User avatar #34 - anoxz (09/03/2014) [-]
Funny, because in my history class, we were told it was the danish fleet at quarters at their main base in Copenhagen.

Popular opinion agrees:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Copenhagen

About the part of the Netherlands being, "a dirty douple corssing state...", it may be noted that it was the Batavian Republic, which was formed out of economic and political turmoil, afterwards being invaded by France and made into a yes-puppet.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batavian_Republic

Maybe the british should be more grateful to the dutch. Esspecially at the Battle of Waterloo.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Waterloo
User avatar #35 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
Yeah, i really don't think we should thank you for waterloo... at all. Waterloo was a triumph for the British because of Wellington. We had less men and less equipment than Napoleon (even with all the extra soldiers from the Netherlands, Hannover and what not) and it was Wellingtons skill that won the day, not the fucking Dutch.

The Dutch involvement really does show the integrity of the Dutch people; "The French are about to win! Quick, attack the brittish!@

"Oh shit they defeated us! Now the French are about to lose! Quick, help the British!"

"We won! We truly are the best!"

Also, are you trying to defend your own country by passing blame onto a completely unrelated country? That doesn't change the fact that the Dutch have no integrity whatsoever and just want fucking trade routs.

Also, the Dutch should be thanking the British who, during WW2, housed the Dutch Royal family who fled. Where as the British Royal family refused to flee to Canada even though the Nazis were knocking down our door.

Also, before you say we weren't invaded, consider this; at the time they refused to flee our army was in tatters, Hitler was on the beaches of France with lust in his eyes and we were expecting an invasion any day. The British Royal Family refused to flee because they knew it wasn't the right thing for a Monarch to do. If Britain was going down, they were going down with the ship. But theres the Dutch Family, running away on a British ship.
User avatar #38 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
The Hitler-card... Really?

I couldn't give a single flying fuck about who and whoever is more powerfull than the other. It's in the past, and using ones past as justification for the present is silly. History is the mere study of the past and to give us a cultural understanding of our present.
One thing that rustles my jimmies though, are neckbeards who blindly throws out historical anecotes, without any confirmation or sources to back them up.

It's pathetic to see how people ignorantly blind themself from an objectiv view, to satisfy their own ideal imagination of the past.
User avatar #39 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
Thats exactly what you have been doing.

And the Hitler card? I didn't pull the Hitler card. The Hitler card comes out when you compare someone with Hitler, WHERE did I do that?
User avatar #40 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
No... I question what I read and what I hear.
You took the discussion out of its premissed and context, by drawing it into a new field, were you try to show of a anecdote, which you know nobody can mess with.

Call it Hitler-card, WWII-card or Churchill... I do not care.
User avatar #41 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
A new field? My Friend, we are talking about wars of our past and, if I am not mistaken, World War 2 was, in fact, a war.

If we go down the "you took the discussion of out its premise and context" may i avert your attention to your previous comment where you, out of nowhere, brought up the Batavian Republic which had absolutely no connection with what we were talking about/no connection with the discussion.

Lets just get things straight before accusing one another (i.e. you accusing me) of taking things in the wrong direction.

Also, I love how defeated you are; "Call it Hitler Card, WW2 Card of Chirchil... I do not care." As soon as you have nothing to say its all "I don't care anyway!"

Pathetic.
User avatar #42 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
What is really pathetic, is randomly tossing historical inaccuracies with no sources or confirmation... stating it as fact. But I already noted that earlier.

If however we are talking war, then why didn't you use your WWII argument at the beginning? Continue that, and I hope that you will back your sources up next time and try to be just little more objective.

User avatar #43 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
I don't need to back them up, a quick five minute google search will confirm most of what I say.

If you're to lazy to go an look, thats fine. But that doesn't automatically mean i'm wrong. I know what i'm talking about, if you want to research it that is your prerogative.
User avatar #44 - anoxz (09/05/2014) [-]
Well a five minute google search didn't confirm the precence of a Dutch fleet at the Battle of Copenhagen. It clearly show you don't know what you talk about.
#37 - anoxz has deleted their comment.
User avatar #18 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
Wait hold on

Are those two ships closest to us on the left firering howitzers?

That was effective enough for them to actually use that at that time?
User avatar #33 - anoxz (09/03/2014) [-]
Those ships are "Bomb Vessels" or later "Monitore" which carries few guns, and instead uses mortars for attacking coastal installation.
User avatar #36 - flybager (09/04/2014) [-]
Ah, so mortars.
I thought at first howitzers, which seemed odd to me.
Thanks for the info.
User avatar #22 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
I don't fucking know, i'm not an Historical Artist. I just fucking googled Battle of Copenhagen and that was the coolest picture that came up.

Its the text that you should be looking at not questioning if the picture i provided is Historically accurate.
User avatar #24 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
That drawings probably not going for historical accuraty.
and neither's the first one. besides, what's that guy's problem anyways. Trying to show off.

I'd tell by how it's just a one-sided pure ass-whoopin'.
There'd be losses & damage on both sides, given the enemy fired back.
Though your picture's a fuck'n awesome show-off of naval stragety in large quantaties
User avatar #26 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
There would be losses on both sideds but Nelson was so BAD ASS that he still destroyed the Dutch fleet (which i may add had superior numbers).

I just DESTROYED that guys National Pride and Achievements! FUCK YEAH BRITAIN


User avatar #25 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
*accuracy
*quantities
#20 - 4Chan, full of normal people. 09/01/2014 on Jerking off +9
#31 - Drink up Trig, were going.  [+] (1 new reply) 09/01/2014 on What a glorious fall +7
#32 - gridnomad (09/01/2014) [-]
I came down to the comment section hoping to find the famous Fools and Horses moment. Thank you.
#35 - Wearing headphones. That was REALLY ******* … 08/31/2014 on They Hatin +13
#27 - Best post. 08/31/2014 on Garlic Bread +3
#155 - The best was someone saying not having unprotected sex with so…  [+] (3 new replies) 08/31/2014 on Tumblr Logic 3 +3
User avatar #186 - darksideofthebeast (08/31/2014) [-]
Someone with AIDS and mental disorders probably made that rule up.
Just like those fucks who leave AIDS needles laying in spots where people can get poked with them.
If I have it, you deserve it too. - Fuckheads.
User avatar #172 - stifflimb (08/31/2014) [-]
Aint that like saying it's wrong to not have sex with a person just cause you dont want to.
User avatar #167 - kerfufflemachtwo (08/31/2014) [-]
Well, it is discrimination.

But it's the kind that is perfectly sane and healthy. And should be encouraged.
#9 - WHY ARE WE SHOUTING!? 08/31/2014 on HNNNGGNNAAAAHRRR 0
#27 - Picture 08/31/2014 on Can : 1 Dude : 0 +1
#75 - Yeah but that could be seen as Ironic or something. Just to ta…  [+] (1 new reply) 08/29/2014 on The kitty truth 0
User avatar #107 - mads (08/29/2014) [-]
Cis-gendered was a term created by sociologists Kristen Schilt and Laurel Westbrook. It's not a word only used by people who are deeply engrossed in that culture. It is a strict definition and used by any sociologist or psychologist when talking about people who identify with the gender they were born with.
It's not an insult and using it as one is fucking stupid.
#71 - Ah, and there's the clue that this was STILL written by some i…  [+] (3 new replies) 08/29/2014 on The kitty truth +1
User avatar #73 - nooneis (08/29/2014) [-]
come on though, kittens, frilly text, talking about injustice? this definitely came from tumblr
User avatar #75 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (08/29/2014) [-]
Yeah but that could be seen as Ironic or something. Just to take the piss. Cis is a special kind of word that only those deeply engrossed in the culture would use.
User avatar #107 - mads (08/29/2014) [-]
Cis-gendered was a term created by sociologists Kristen Schilt and Laurel Westbrook. It's not a word only used by people who are deeply engrossed in that culture. It is a strict definition and used by any sociologist or psychologist when talking about people who identify with the gender they were born with.
It's not an insult and using it as one is fucking stupid.
#112 - Picture 08/29/2014 on Evolution 0
#152 - You actually sicken me. Get her away!  [+] (1 new reply) 08/29/2014 on Welcome to the Flaglands 0
#153 - angelusprimus (08/29/2014) [-]
Its wales and a dragon.
#53 - Drinking diet coke can help. Click the message below if you ca…  [+] (1 new reply) 08/29/2014 on Soda girl 0
User avatar #93 - disembodiedlord (08/31/2014) [-]
I can respect what you posted in spoilers, but here's my counterargument:
My concern with artificial sweeteners stems from a chemical imbalance in the brain. For the most part, foods which are sweet tend to have a lot of calories, right? When the body consumes sweet tasting foods, the brain perceives this as caloric intake and can properly gauge the feeling of "fullness" and can give off a signal when to stop eating.

Since artificial sweeteners have little to no calories - yet are considered to be ~1000x sweeter than sucrose or fructose at a 1:1 ratio - the brain started to get confused as to when it should trigger the feeling of fullness whenever sweet tasting foods enter the body. Combine this with a relatively terrible diet (at least in America) and a lack of motivation to stay in shape (cars vs. walking), the pounds add up really quick.

#94 - I love the idea of the Germans in chains just sitting there ch…  [+] (1 new reply) 08/28/2014 on Random Interesting Facts... 0
#120 - shovelsandskulls has deleted their comment.
#140 - Yes i am welsh i do know the story... And that… 08/28/2014 on Welcome to the Flaglands 0
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 550 / Total items point value: 550

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #11 - joshlol (09/20/2014) [-]
interesting username
User avatar #8 to #7 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (06/20/2014) [-]
Well thats not very nice.
User avatar #5 - haranaslicer (06/15/2014) [-]
Can i have your toast?
User avatar #6 to #5 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (06/15/2014) [-]
No. Get your own toast you bum!
User avatar #1 - andranadu ONLINE (03/02/2014) [-]
nice name
User avatar #2 to #1 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (03/02/2014) [-]
Thanks! Took me ages to think of!
 Friends (0)