Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 20:26:48 GMT
So, what about that Lines goal eh...... Absolute beauty. He really is a top man, OUR Chris. Admin...Sorry about this thread. Please delete.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 20:33:59 GMT
No idea but I am a trained killer and that man would get a round (bullet) if I still had a gun! You want to kill someone who didn't want to go to war? A war that took the lid of the mid east and gave us Isis. Maybe you should think before typing your pathetic post. Let's get a few things right. Should we have deployed on the original tour? my view "Yes" an independent country had been invaded, end off. Was the ending of the original conflict (IE free Kuwait) and nothing else correct? IMHO No it was not, we (as in the British) were already in Iraq and should have pushed on and if at all possible got Hussain, but that was never globally accepted as a course of action. Did you go to the area? did you witness the genocide? I did. - This is not why I dislike him. 2nd gulf war, we were sent on a Lie (which party was in Power?) - This is not why I dislike him. Why I dislike him so much? ""Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigably" one simple sentence. As part of a promotion course I had to explain why I liked somebody I did not know and why I disliked another. Well that one comment was said to a leader of a country. Hope that is alright with you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 20:37:25 GMT
So, what about that Lines goal eh...... Absolute beauty. He really is a top man, OUR Chris. Admin...Sorry about this thread. Please delete. Grant it was, and I am sorry that I just replied (post above) and took it off football chat again.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 20:42:08 GMT
So, what about that Lines goal eh...... Yes and please delete all the other political stuff too,its a Rovers forum not the 6th form politics debating society.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Feb 14, 2018 20:54:06 GMT
So, what about that Lines goal eh...... Absolute beauty. He really is a top man, OUR Chris. Admin...Sorry about this thread. Please delete. Why? I thought it was starting to show that we can actually chat about things on here without resorting to petty, personal insults. Stop being so sensitive you lanky f**king twat
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 21:07:57 GMT
Absolute beauty. He really is a top man, OUR Chris. Admin...Sorry about this thread. Please delete. Why? I thought it was starting to show that we can actually chat about things on here without resorting to petty, personal insults. Stop being so sensitive you lanky fing twat F off stumpy.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 21:40:38 GMT
So, what about that Lines goal eh...... Absolute beauty. He really is a top man, OUR Chris. Second goal was all about the quality of his cross as well.
|
|
blueginger
David Williams
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 166
|
Post by blueginger on Feb 14, 2018 22:48:12 GMT
We seem to be missing the important bit here, we have a supporters club in Bulgaria !! Who knew, 70 attended the match, wondered why the attendance was so high.
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Feb 15, 2018 5:06:06 GMT
Calling people racists isn’t debating It is if it’s true and was part of a further delving comment but, sadly, like in your post, the media pick up on these buzzwords. Christ, even our phones now have algorithms that pick up on certain words. He may be wrong on much but, I think anyway, his emphasis is on trying to avoid wars by manner of meaningful dialogue. It’s the same being used against Corbyn, because he’s been seen at meetings with who are demonised, rightly too, he is seen a a sympathiser. It’s never as clean cut as made out to be in my opinion. On the other side if the coin we have dear old Rupert. Serious question, who do you believe is the most dangerous of the two. Rupert Murdoch or Georgie boy ? I don’t understand why a media mogul who is one of the few, if not the only one, to not prop up his supposed “agenda” with money. All of Murdochs enterprises make money. They make money becauss people like his content. The guardian has to have millions of pounds of funding because nobody buys the paper, so rich benefactors pump in money to keep it afloat, so their views can be aired despite generally being unpopular. Same with the beeb. It would fall apart because believe it or not, other than a few nature shows, nobody wants politically charged sitcoms, or relentless feminist views on the website. Log on to the beeb website and try to find a day when a non feminist story itsnt on the front page, or some story about how group a faces discrimination on some trumped up hyperbole bulls**t the team have been wincing about. I’m far more worried about faceless ideologues propping up media which would fail if it had to justify its output by actually selling media people want - that is the definition of propaganda. Murdoch doesn’t do that and has created things consistently people like. If you have an issue with Murdoch, you have an issue with the majority of political and social attitudes. He isn’t in the propaganda game, so he’s not a danger.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Feb 15, 2018 6:49:34 GMT
It is if it’s true and was part of a further delving comment but, sadly, like in your post, the media pick up on these buzzwords. Christ, even our phones now have algorithms that pick up on certain words. He may be wrong on much but, I think anyway, his emphasis is on trying to avoid wars by manner of meaningful dialogue. It’s the same being used against Corbyn, because he’s been seen at meetings with who are demonised, rightly too, he is seen a a sympathiser. It’s never as clean cut as made out to be in my opinion. On the other side if the coin we have dear old Rupert. Serious question, who do you believe is the most dangerous of the two. Rupert Murdoch or Georgie boy ? I don’t understand why a media mogul who is one of the few, if not the only one, to not prop up his supposed “agenda” with money.
All of Murdochs enterprises make money. They make money becauss people like his content. The guardian has to have millions of pounds of funding because nobody buys the paper, so rich benefactors pump in money to keep it afloat, so their views can be aired despite generally being unpopular. Same with the beeb. It would fall apart because believe it or not, other than a few nature shows, nobody wants politically charged sitcoms, or relentless feminist views on the website. Log on to the beeb website and try to find a day when a non feminist story itsnt on the front page, or some story about how group a faces discrimination on some trumped up hyperbole bulls*** the team have been wincing about. I’m far more worried about faceless ideologues propping up media which would fail if it had to justify its output by actually selling media people want - that is the definition of propaganda. Murdoch doesn’t do that and has created things consistently people like. If you have an issue with Murdoch, you have an issue with the majority of political and social attitudes. He isn’t in the propaganda game, so he’s not a danger. We are talking about the same Rupert Murdoch are we? The only one I know is a well known for (large) donations to right wing organisations. Which of course he is perfectly entitled to do.
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Feb 15, 2018 7:17:24 GMT
Surely anyone is welcome when they say "up the rovers" (haven't heard anyone say that for a while!).. ?
|
|
simonj
Archie Stevens
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 817
|
Post by simonj on Feb 15, 2018 7:44:31 GMT
Surely anyone is welcome when they say "up the rovers" (haven't heard anyone say that for a while!).. ? Is that crystal?
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Briggs on Feb 15, 2018 8:04:57 GMT
Read your history instead of dancing on a sixpence Have studied it in detail, and have invested hundreds of hours watching debates on the subject, but thanks for the tip. Not much of a tip, is it? Sixpence. Can`t imagine the waitress being too impressed with that.
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Feb 15, 2018 9:29:41 GMT
I don’t understand why a media mogul who is one of the few, if not the only one, to not prop up his supposed “agenda” with money.
All of Murdochs enterprises make money. They make money becauss people like his content. The guardian has to have millions of pounds of funding because nobody buys the paper, so rich benefactors pump in money to keep it afloat, so their views can be aired despite generally being unpopular. Same with the beeb. It would fall apart because believe it or not, other than a few nature shows, nobody wants politically charged sitcoms, or relentless feminist views on the website. Log on to the beeb website and try to find a day when a non feminist story itsnt on the front page, or some story about how group a faces discrimination on some trumped up hyperbole bulls*** the team have been wincing about. I’m far more worried about faceless ideologues propping up media which would fail if it had to justify its output by actually selling media people want - that is the definition of propaganda. Murdoch doesn’t do that and has created things consistently people like. If you have an issue with Murdoch, you have an issue with the majority of political and social attitudes. He isn’t in the propaganda game, so he’s not a danger. We are talking about the same Rupert Murdoch are we? The only one I know is a well known for (large) donations to right wing organisations. Which of course he is perfectly entitled to do. Donations to political parties are a completely different thing to propping up publications which consistently lose money to further unpopular points of view in the public arena. Totally different.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Feb 15, 2018 10:22:17 GMT
It's frightening that otherwise intelligent people jump to the conclusion that they exist due to recent wars and those wars are why they don't like the west much. Investigate what the charges they have laid against the west actually are. I think you might find the entire population of the former Mesopotamia think that This is going back sometime to the old forum isn't it? If I remember rightly your argument was British firms couldn't do work in Kurdish parts of Iraq (ignoring the evidence of British firms actually working there) because we (& the French) had never created a Kurdistan. Of course had we created a modern day Kurdistan then British companies would obviously face hostility to contracts in modern day Turkey & Iran, a point you never did answer or indeed grasp. Galloway is a despicable syschophant but what modern history shows us is the world is a lot more peaceful place when the murdering tyrants like Saddam, Assad & Gaddafi rule with an iron fist. Of course they murdered great numbers of muslims in those countries but hey after their demise it was just left to other muslims to murder vast numbers of other muslims. Let's be honest muslims find it very hard to live with other muslims let alone none muslims. So his friendship of a murdering tyrant shouldn't be held against him. Indeed being a friend of terrorists isn't always a bad thing after all the UK was very fortunate that Corbyn was so friendly with the murderous b'stards in the IRA
|
|
|
Post by Bernard Briggs on Feb 15, 2018 11:43:13 GMT
I think you might find the entire population of the former Mesopotamia think that Let's be honest muslims find it very hard to live with other muslims let alone none muslims. That`s the truth of the matter. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the Balfour Agreement, The Louisiana Purchase, The Treaty Of Ghent, or anything else that happened in the past, it`s the inability of great swathes of the Muslim world to live peacefully with anybody who differs in any way from themselves, that is the cause of so much bloodshed.
|
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,151
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Feb 15, 2018 14:25:59 GMT
In fairness though Bernard (sadly) most of the Americans being killed these days are by young Americans in schools or gangs.....
Anyway as the good Dr F says that lines goal was class!
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Feb 15, 2018 18:18:14 GMT
We are talking about the same Rupert Murdoch are we? The only one I know is a well known for (large) donations to right wing organisations. Which of course he is perfectly entitled to do. Donations to political parties are a completely different thing to propping up publications which consistently lose money to further unpopular points of view in the public arena. Totally different. I said 'right wing organisations' not political parties. We are obviously never going to agree politically but I think you're kidding yourself if you think Murdoch doesn't use money to push his agenda(as do those on the other side of the argument)
|
|
syg
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,008
|
Post by syg on Feb 15, 2018 18:33:41 GMT
I can't be bothered to read most of the thread as it will just wind me up! Terrorists/armies, not much difference if you aren't a nation state. Armies, along with police are forms of state violence, they are the defining factor. Friends with sadam husssain, or selling arms to him. Ultimately the middle east is predominately tribal, democracies don't or generally dont work, dictators work well, they keep the lid on and as soon as they go - bang. Yugoslavia was a good euro example of that. Just to get it off my chest!!!! 1. The stupidity of politicians, even those highly educated in the foreign office, I find it extraordinary. 2. Joe public, can they not recall the argument that Iraq would destabilise the mid east and make us more susceptible to terrorism, well guess what! So anyway I've always liked Byron Moore as well.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Feb 15, 2018 21:07:57 GMT
It is if it’s true and was part of a further delving comment but, sadly, like in your post, the media pick up on these buzzwords. Christ, even our phones now have algorithms that pick up on certain words. He may be wrong on much but, I think anyway, his emphasis is on trying to avoid wars by manner of meaningful dialogue. It’s the same being used against Corbyn, because he’s been seen at meetings with who are demonised, rightly too, he is seen a a sympathiser. It’s never as clean cut as made out to be in my opinion. On the other side if the coin we have dear old Rupert. Serious question, who do you believe is the most dangerous of the two. Rupert Murdoch or Georgie boy ? I don’t understand why a media mogul who is one of the few, if not the only one, to not prop up his supposed “agenda” with money. All of Murdochs enterprises make money. They make money becauss people like his content. The guardian has to have millions of pounds of funding because nobody buys the paper, so rich benefactors pump in money to keep it afloat, so their views can be aired despite generally being unpopular. Same with the beeb. It would fall apart because believe it or not, other than a few nature shows, nobody wants politically charged sitcoms, or relentless feminist views on the website. Log on to the beeb website and try to find a day when a non feminist story itsnt on the front page, or some story about how group a faces discrimination on some trumped up hyperbole bulls*** the team have been wincing about. I’m far more worried about faceless ideologues propping up media which would fail if it had to justify its output by actually selling media people want - that is the definition of propaganda. Murdoch doesn’t do that and has created things consistently people like. If you have an issue with Murdoch, you have an issue with the majority of political and social attitudes. He isn’t in the propaganda game, so he’s not a danger. Hmmmm, ok then
|
|