ohhh_yeah

and Giroud.

"Michael Owen has been identified as a candidate to play for Shabab next season and we are in negotiations with his management team." "The player's agent is in Dubai to close the deal." "We are in talks with the player and his agent, but no agreement has yet been reached between the parties." "Things should become clear soon."

http://platformlondon.org/2012/06/26/blowing-the-whistle-on-sunderland-fcs-oil-sponsorship-deal/

http://youtu.be/BhVoLMWH6hk

http://i.imgur.com/I4CPN.jpg

why can we only post one video at a time now? http://youtu.be/wBujoJpDxo0

his new video...

Got really stoned this morning and then made the following. A huge pot of clam chowder, smoked and then braised four racks of ribs, roasted brussel sprouts with garlic, chilies, and lime juice. Deep fried shrimp and then added them to my fried rice. The rice also had red bell peppers, onions, pineapple, and chives. Prepared a spinach-artichoke-jalapeno dip, Put the dip on slices of fresh bread and topped it with some parmesan cheese before putting it in the oven to melt the cheese. Stuffed belly and now sitting back sipping on some whiskey while puffing on a cigar. Happy holidays to you all!

sorted.

Had a first date last night with this cute chick I work with. I bought quite a few 22 oz. smoked porter beers and we went to a local park. I brought along the following that I made. Sliced some focaccia in half. Deep-fried oysters, crispy bacon, blanched spinach, and sauteed mushrooms were all put on the focaccia bread. I then put two slices of pepperjack cheese on top of that. Then I got more focaccia bread. On that bread I put some beer braised pulled pork on it. I then added coleslaw, two onion rings, crispy bacon, and smoked porter bbq sauce. I then put two slices of white cheddar cheese on top of that. All four of the sandwiches were then put in the oven on a sheet pan until the cheese melted. I also made some garlic fries. We go out again this Saturday.

i posted several years ago how a bunch of us at a house party put a shock collar on the first person who passed out. then carried him to the end of the driveway and set him in the street. watching him running around trying to find a safe zone was hilarious.

Bendtner.

This week Barack Obama told an invited audience at Rio de Janeiro’s Municpal Theatre that it is Brazil that is the shining example that Libya should seek to emulate in its struggle to rid itself of its tyrannical ruler. “Brazil”, Obama declared, is “a country that shows how a call for change that starts in the streets can transform a city, a country, and the world”. Curiously, an equally charismatic Brazilian with his own interest in politics has been expressing similar opinions in an entirely different context for quite some time. “Brazil is like a new born country” he beamed through his distinctive beard, now greying with age, before adding “everyone who visits Brazil falls in love with the place.” He was right to be proud. This man is legendary midfielder Socrates Brasileiro Sampaio de Souza Vieira de Oliveira, and as the captain of the Brazilian side in Spain in 1982, and as a lynchpin of the immortal 1986 side – widely regarded as two of the finest teams never to win the World Cup – Socrates is better placed than many to eulogise over the virtues of the award of the 2014 World Cup to his homeland. Whilst the Brazil of today is far from free of problems, its progress in the last decade is remarkable. True dramatic improvements need to be made to both stadia and infrastructure in the next three years if a successful tournament is to place, and true huge steps still have to be taken to tackle poverty and unemployment, yet there is nevertheless the welcome urgency of progress in the air, and the considerable excitement at the thought of the World Cup coming back to Brazil has gripped the public. As Socrates himself remarks, “The world will get to see our perfections and imperfections as a nation.” But for Socrates and those of his generation old enough to remember the reign of the military government that controlled the country for over twenty years between 1964 and 1985, the modern, economically powerful nation that Brazil has become represents the culmination of a long struggle. It is here that Obama makes his point, championing Brazil as a pillar of hope, with words that resonate around the world. But, as the military’s control over Brazil began to fade over twenty-five years ago, Socrates was spreading his own, similar, message, and using his incredible talent as a footballer to further his cause. For a country that is completely obsessed with football it is telling that a footballer and a football club came to challenge the establishment in this way. As one of South America’s most popular clubs, forged in the working class districts of Sao Paulo over a hundred years ago, Corinthians has long been regarded as an institution of the people. Socrates too is indelibly linked with the club, as his 297 appearances and 172 goals for Corinthians made him one of the team’s, and his country’s, all-time greats. However Socrates would come to represent so much more than a cultured midfielder of the highest order to the people of Brazil. Already a well educated man and a vehement opponent of the ruling military government, Socrates – along with Corinthian’s teammate Wladimir – established the Corinthians Democracy Movement in the early 1980s that would become a form of protest against the military’s control and a tool to spread their message of the power of democracy. With the full backing of club president Waldemar Pires, Socrates and his colleagues took control of Corinthians and established a fully democratic approach to all team issues. “Everyone at the club had the same right to vote – the person who looked after the kit and the club president, all their votes had the same weight” Socrates explained. This organisation was established in part to challenge the over-baring and intrusive culture that existed in Brazilian football at the time. Players were strictly regimented, not just in their training and approach to the game but even with regards to their private lives, and Corinthians Democracy was intended to challenge these principles. But it grew to represent the struggle of a country fighting for political change. As Socrates offers; “It brought a conscience to the people that you could vote and change things – it made people realise together with other movements that were happening in the country that you could make change.” The government they rebelled against had swept to power in 1964 when a military coup had overthrown the democratically elected left-wing President João Goulart. The military had initially acted with the intention over-seeing political and economic reform, however hardliners within the forces seized control and began purging those who opposed them, imposing a fierce dictatorship. But by the early 1980s the military’s power was waning, and the final ruling dictator João Figueiredo had even pledged to open Brazil up to democracy. However hardcore factions of the military loyal to the government responded with a series of bombings that shook a country already in the midst of economic decay that had seen widespread strikes and protests. Corinthians were a superb side at the time, winning the Sao Paulo state championship in 1982 and 1983, and their blend of stylish, attacking football married with the political campaigning of Socrates and his colleagues captured the imagination of many. To spread their message the Corinthians Democracy Movement emblazoned the clubs kits with political slogans on match days, and huge pro-democracy banners were erected at their Pacaembu stadium. The movement also attracted the support of artists and intellectuals, as the political left latched onto the power of football in spreading the message for change. In 1982, despite warnings from the Brazilian Football Confederation (CBF) not to interfere in political issues, the Corinthians Democracy Movement agreed that the club would take to the field in shirts bearing the slogan “Vote on the Fifteenth”, urging Brazilian citizens to make their voice heard in the upcoming elections. By 1985 the military’s rule had ended, but it left behind a country ravaged by terrorist attacks, spiralling debt and rising inflation. The Corinthians Democracy Movement had played its part in bringing about change, and curiously, one of its own has since led Brazil to the forefront of the world. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva – known commonly as ‘Lula’ – rose from humble beginnings to serve as the thirty-fifth President of Brazil between 2003 and 2011. A lifelong Corinthians fan, Lula was heavily involved in the Union activities of the 1970s and 1980s that, along with organisations such as the Corinthians Democracy Movement, brought about reform. As President, Lula was immensely popular and guided Brazil to its place as the world’s eighth-largest economy, bringing millions out of poverty and into work, and attracting the World Cup back to South America for the first time in nearly forty years. Today the fight for democracy again dominates the headlines as not just Libya, but large swathes of the Middle-East and North Africa have been plunged into the chaos of political unrest. It is perhaps, then, more pertinent than ever to remind ourselves that political and social change are not earned exclusively down the barrel of a gun. As a creative art form of mass global appeal football can – and does – have the power to change the world, and it is of critical importance that we honour those such as Socrates and who used the game as a vehicle for change, particularly now, when so much of the world would benefit from the message of these great individuals. Posted: March 27, 2011 http://fiveinmidfield.com

You're joking, right? yes. but i have had a strong hatred for woodgate since he broke on the scene. nails on chalk board for me. drogba territory...

anybody else notice the picture on the wall in helmi's room in the clairefontaine video???

i would have andy o'brien replace woodgate... enrique for bernard... lee for dyer...

The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy The violent police assaults across the US are no coincidence. Occupy has touched the third rail of our political class's venality Naomi Wolf guardian.co.uk, Friday 25 November 2011 12.25 EST US citizens of all political persuasions are still reeling from images of unparallelled police brutality in a coordinated crackdown against peaceful OWS protesters in cities across the nation this past week. An elderly woman was pepper-sprayed in the face; the scene of unresisting, supine students at UC Davis being pepper-sprayed by phalanxes of riot police went viral online; images proliferated of young women – targeted seemingly for their gender – screaming, dragged by the hair by police in riot gear; and the pictures of a young man, stunned and bleeding profusely from the head, emerged in the record of the middle-of-the-night clearing of Zuccotti Park. But just when Americans thought we had the picture – was this crazy police and mayoral overkill, on a municipal level, in many different cities? – the picture darkened. The National Union of Journalists and the Committee to Protect Journalists issued a Freedom of Information Act request to investigate possible federal involvement with law enforcement practices that appeared to target journalists. The New York Times reported that "New York cops have arrested, punched, whacked, shoved to the ground and tossed a barrier at reporters and photographers" covering protests. Reporters were asked by NYPD to raise their hands to prove they had credentials: when many dutifully did so, they were taken, upon threat of arrest, away from the story they were covering, and penned far from the site in which the news was unfolding. Other reporters wearing press passes were arrested and roughed up by cops, after being – falsely – informed by police that "It is illegal to take pictures on the sidewalk." In New York, a state supreme court justice and a New York City council member were beaten up; in Berkeley, California, one of our greatest national poets, Robert Hass, was beaten with batons. The picture darkened still further when Wonkette and Washingtonsblog.com reported that the Mayor of Oakland acknowledged that the Department of Homeland Security had participated in an 18-city mayor conference call advising mayors on "how to suppress" Occupy protests. To Europeans, the enormity of this breach may not be obvious at first. Our system of government prohibits the creation of a federalised police force, and forbids federal or militarised involvement in municipal peacekeeping. I noticed that rightwing pundits and politicians on the TV shows on which I was appearing were all on-message against OWS. Journalist Chris Hayes reported on a leaked memo that revealed lobbyists vying for an $850,000 contract to smear Occupy. Message coordination of this kind is impossible without a full-court press at the top. This was clearly not simply a case of a freaked-out mayors', city-by-city municipal overreaction against mess in the parks and cranky campers. As the puzzle pieces fit together, they began to show coordination against OWS at the highest national levels. Why this massive mobilisation against these not-yet-fully-articulated, unarmed, inchoate people? After all, protesters against the war in Iraq, Tea Party rallies and others have all proceeded without this coordinated crackdown. Is it really the camping? As I write, two hundred young people, with sleeping bags, suitcases and even folding chairs, are still camping out all night and day outside of NBC on public sidewalks – under the benevolent eye of an NYPD cop – awaiting Saturday Night Live tickets, so surely the camping is not the issue. I was still deeply puzzled as to why OWS, this hapless, hopeful band, would call out a violent federal response. That is, until I found out what it was that OWS actually wanted. The mainstream media was declaring continually "OWS has no message". Frustrated, I simply asked them. I began soliciting online "What is it you want?" answers from Occupy. In the first 15 minutes, I received 100 answers. These were truly eye-opening. The No 1 agenda item: get the money out of politics. Most often cited was legislation to blunt the effect of the Citizens United ruling, which lets boundless sums enter the campaign process. No 2: reform the banking system to prevent fraud and manipulation, with the most frequent item being to restore the Glass-Steagall Act – the Depression-era law, done away with by President Clinton, that separates investment banks from commercial banks. This law would correct the conditions for the recent crisis, as investment banks could not take risks for profit that create kale derivatives out of thin air, and wipe out the commercial and savings banks. No 3 was the most clarifying: draft laws against the little-known loophole that currently allows members of Congress to pass legislation affecting Delaware-based corporations in which they themselves are investors. When I saw this list – and especially the last agenda item – the scales fell from my eyes. Of course, these unarmed people would be having the shit kicked out of them. For the terrible insight to take away from news that the Department of Homeland Security coordinated a violent crackdown is that the DHS does not freelance. The DHS cannot say, on its own initiative, "we are going after these scruffy hippies". Rather, DHS is answerable up a chain of command: first, to New York Representative Peter King, head of the House homeland security subcommittee, who naturally is influenced by his fellow congressmen and women's wishes and interests. And the DHS answers directly, above King, to the president (who was conveniently in Australia at the time). In other words, for the DHS to be on a call with mayors, the logic of its chain of command and accountability implies that congressional overseers, with the blessing of the White House, told the DHS to authorise mayors to order their police forces – pumped up with millions of dollars of hardware and training from the DHS – to make war on peaceful citizens. But wait: why on earth would Congress advise violent militarised reactions against its own peaceful constituents? The answer is straightforward: in recent years, members of Congress have started entering the system as members of the middle class (or upper middle class) – but they are leaving DC privy to vast personal wealth, as we see from the "scandal" of presidential contender Newt Gingrich's having been paid $1.8m for a few hours' "consulting" to special interests. The inflated fees to lawmakers who turn lobbyists are common knowledge, but the notion that congressmen and women are legislating their own companies' profitsis less widely known – and if the books were to be opened, they would surely reveal corruption on a Wall Street spectrum. Indeed, we do already know that congresspeople are massively profiting from trading on non-public information they have on companies about which they are legislating – a form of insider trading that sent Martha Stewart to jail. Since Occupy is heavily surveilled and infiltrated, it is likely that the DHS and police informers are aware, before Occupy itself is, what its emerging agenda is going to look like. If legislating away lobbyists' privileges to earn boundless fees once they are close to the legislative process, reforming the banks so they can't suck money out of fake derivatives products, and, most critically, opening the books on a system that allowed members of Congress to profit personally – and immensely – from their own legislation, are two beats away from the grasp of an electorally organised Occupy movement … well, you will call out the troops on stopping that advance. So, when you connect the dots, properly understood, what happened this week is the first battle in a civil war; a civil war in which, for now, only one side is choosing violence. It is a battle in which members of Congress, with the collusion of the American president, sent violent, organised suppression against the people they are supposed to represent. Occupy has touched the third rail: personal congressional profits streams. Even though they are, as yet, unaware of what the implications of their movement are, those threatened by the stirrings of their dreams of reform are not. Sadly, Americans this week have come one step closer to being true brothers and sisters of the protesters in Tahrir Square. Like them, our own national leaders, who likely see their own personal wealth under threat from transparency and reform, are now making war upon us.

“You always want to go back to your old club and prove to the gaffer that you are a better player,” Obertan said. “I feel like I’ve improved since arriving here, and I hope the manager is quite pleased with what I’ve done so far. I will try to play my best game, but the most important thing is the points, obviously, and what the team does. We are just trying to focus on this one and we know it is going to be a tough one. I’ve still got some really good friends there – I call Patrice Evra regularly – so I think it is going to be great to go back there, feel the atmosphere and play against him too. I’ve already told him that it’s going to be hard against me – he is in for a difficult game!”

“Everyone, including the referee, was astounded. He was put in a terrible position. Why can’t the referee overrule it when he is only eight yards away?” Ferguson said. “The problem is that the referees are full-time and the linesmen are not, and whether he ever gets a game again, the assistant referee, is not for me to decide but it was an absolutely shocking decision. It costs you. Two years ago when the linesman gave the offside goal against Chelsea it cost us the league, so hopefully we’re not saying that at the end of May.”

& have a red and blue turf pitch laid down.