<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><title>This was fun, doing this with you</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/</link><atom:link xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/feed/rss2/comments/"/><description></description><language>en-EU</language><generator>MokoFeed</generator><ttl>10</ttl><item><title>In response to:Bananaman</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c684061</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2006-02-12:/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c684061</guid><pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:27:48 +0100</pubDate><description>Didnt bananaman have an enemy called apple man? He was well shit. I used to get the theme tune for that programme stuck in my head a lot.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Also, if I was in your seminar, I probably would have made the same joke. In all honesty, I reckon I'd have got the laughs too. </description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c684061</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Bananaman</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c586726</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2006-01-21:/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c586726</guid><pubDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:34:16 +0100</pubDate><description>true james, true, i have edited the post to reflect what i feel was where the humour of the situation arose, namely the mocking of the question 'was he called bananaman cos he ate bananas ?' and subsequent illustrations of just how fucking obvious it was that this was the case, including explorations of how ridiculous and shit it would be if it were not the case. &lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
the fact that no-one could remember with 1000% certainty (i.e the 'for when eric eats a banana' line or mental images of him eating a banana') was neither here nor there and my original draft seems to have made too much of the fact we couldnt remember, leading to it reading like a plea for clarification on the matter or something. &lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Great times. &lt;br&gt;
Ok, average times. </description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c586726</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Bananaman</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c578398</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2006-01-19:/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c578398</guid><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:05:02 +0100</pubDate><description>Stu, stu, stu! What are you playing at mate?! The opening credits go:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
"For when Eric eats a banana, an amazing transformation occurs..."&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
How can you remember Bananaman and not remember that?&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Anyway, I think that pretty much answers your question. That is unless the narrator had also been fooled by Eric into thinking that his powers were banana-related and, as you said, his magical powers in fact came from some other source (photosynthesis perhaps?) Who knows?!</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c578398</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Bananaman</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c576076</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2006-01-19:/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c576076</guid><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2006 01:40:14 +0100</pubDate><description>banananananaman was a bummer i heard.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
he did more than just eat bananananas.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
dirty old fucker.</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2006/01/18/bananaman~484788/#c576076</comments></item><item><title>In response to:31st August</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c576029</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2006-01-19:/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c576029</guid><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:56:54 +0100</pubDate><description>I wrote the stuff myself yes, if thats what you mean mr joker 325. </description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c576029</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Who the fuck are you ?</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c567303</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2006-01-17:/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c567303</guid><pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2006 10:56:51 +0100</pubDate><description>you have mastered the who the f are you look!! Very funny!!</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c567303</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Who the fuck are you ?</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c453506</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-12-18:/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c453506</guid><pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:37:10 +0100</pubDate><description>Hahaha. Quality. I don't think there is ever a situation where 'the look' is inappropriate.</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c453506</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Who the fuck are you ?</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c448944</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-12-17:/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c448944</guid><pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 19:27:35 +0100</pubDate><description>Amazing post stu - very funny. I love the 'look' - I can relate cos I employ it whenever I can.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Great times, great times.</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/12/16/tee_hee~390469/#c448944</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Keswick - The Home Of Greatness</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/24/title~198689/#c369892</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-11-29:/2005/09/24/title~198689/#c369892</guid><pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:57:04 +0100</pubDate><description>thats it !&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Denzel Dexter !&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
You can't deny he looks like him though !&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
great times. </description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/24/title~198689/#c369892</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Keswick - The Home Of Greatness</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/24/title~198689/#c369772</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-11-29:/2005/09/24/title~198689/#c369772</guid><pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:18:38 +0100</pubDate><description>The prof in the Fast Show was called Denzel Dexter</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/24/title~198689/#c369772</comments></item><item><title>In response to:31st August</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c355721</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-11-24:/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c355721</guid><pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2005 22:00:26 +0100</pubDate><description>Your website looks great. Did you do it yourself?&lt;br&gt;
&lt;a href=""&gt;&lt;/a&gt; </description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c355721</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Pete is a T-Shirt Thief</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/25/pete_is_a_t_shirt_thief~200120/#c250483</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-10-12:/2005/09/25/pete_is_a_t_shirt_thief~200120/#c250483</guid><pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:50:51 +0200</pubDate><description>Hello Stu. just popping by and saying hello. Im quite taken by the jumper of the chap next to Pete. Although quite plain, the luminous stylings of the sleeves up the ante a bit. Unless Richard Madely's been altering the colours.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Get your band going, me old son.</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/25/pete_is_a_t_shirt_thief~200120/#c250483</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Pete is a T-Shirt Thief</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/25/pete_is_a_t_shirt_thief~200120/#c221408</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-09-27:/2005/09/25/pete_is_a_t_shirt_thief~200120/#c221408</guid><pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 14:01:28 +0200</pubDate><description>Apparently Richard Madeley of Richard and Judy fame has some photoshop skills. He took all his family pictures and de-wrinkled Judy and then reprinted them and put them back. Judy was really pissed off and he couldn't figure out why.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
(according to popbitch)</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/25/pete_is_a_t_shirt_thief~200120/#c221408</comments></item><item><title>In response to:Georgov and the mcmuffin meal.</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/01/title~156959/#c139140</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-09-08:/2005/09/01/title~156959/#c139140</guid><pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2005 21:49:18 +0200</pubDate><description>Wow, what a flattering picture.  And not in any way sleazy looking....the lettuce was a nice touch I feel.</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/09/01/title~156959/#c139140</comments></item><item><title>In response to:31st August</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c125267</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-08-31:/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c125267</guid><pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2005 20:21:48 +0200</pubDate><description>i thought the description of the number of geordies as 'disturbing' was quite amusing. it wasn't.</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c125267</comments></item><item><title>In response to:title-154140</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/title~154140/#c124986</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-08-31:/2005/08/31/title~154140/#c124986</guid><pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:08:31 +0200</pubDate><description>looking forward to the laughs!</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/title~154140/#c124986</comments></item><item><title>In response to:31st August</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c124982</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-08-31:/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c124982</guid><pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:05:03 +0200</pubDate><description>Madskillz roadshow goin dooooown!</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c124982</comments></item><item><title>In response to:31st August</title><link>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c124979</link><guid isPermaLink="false">tag:stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk,2005-08-31:/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c124979</guid><pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2005 18:02:20 +0200</pubDate><description>I thought you said "I'm only gonna post funny stuff up here" - what's this football bollocks about then? sort it out stu.</description><comments>http://stuartalanrook.blog.co.uk/2005/08/31/31st_august~154156/#c124979</comments></item></channel></rss>
