ChezGiven

Inherently Pious Wraithshop.

Exactly. Also Pardew is on a permanent pipe down this season after starting on that linesman.

You can just about forgive Depor for Luque and Xisco as they gave us Colo. Didnt we get insurance on Owen meaning those financial figures are wrong?

I still think if the ref had given a yellow there would have been little controversy about it. Just on your point 2 Stevie, (i agree on the whole) but you can see Tiote's studs because they are not kicking into Fletcher's shin pad. The side of the boot is hitting the shin pad. I dont think its relevant as the ref has the right to send him off if he thinks its dangerous play because Fletcher and the crowd have made him think that. What pisses me off more was comments from Wilkins, Le Tissier etc saying it was studs into the knee when its the shin pad and imo the side of the boot.

We need to kick t-shirts out of racism.

We were the better side, they only dominated the game when the time spent down to 10 men started to sap the energy from the legs. The fact that Larsson and Cuellar didn't get booked just shows how bad Atkinson was. On the red card, I agree with Pards but if he had just given a yellow there wouldn't have been any controversy.

This nonsense about wearing t shirts or not needs to be kicked out of football.

Sunderland are quite a poor side. I don't think a home side that gets 2 shots on target against 10 men deserves much. Possession means nothing if you cant carve out clear chances. Colo going off was the turning point, if he'd stayed on we would have won.

I asked a question about a video, i did not express any opinion on it. You obviously struggle with how i view this issue but for you US intelligence agencies only became competent organisations in 2002, you expressly stated that despite the fact the US had been attacked 3 times they werent expecting to be attacked and you also state that you cant see how 9/11 furthered the neo-conservative agenda. Seeing this as the type of event changes US foreign policy from Clinton's softly softly to imperialist neo-con happening 10 months after this specific group of neo-cons get into power as unlikely to be a coincidence must also be tricky. These neo-con groups are writing foreign policy papers in the late 90s describing exactly what is going to happen in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2001. It just so happens that the only sort of event that can justify the swing in policy occurs when they get into power. Amazing opportunism? What Bush knew? That they were going to invade Iraq when they got into power. 9 days after the event they are openly discussing the invasion of Iraq in the corridors of the Pentagon. That a plan was already on the table shouldnt really be up for debate tbh.

No I haven't.

Was that the winning answer? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/28/why-does-hot-water-freeze-faster

What? How is capital punishment more expensive?

Water is tricky, do you know why boiling water freezes more quickly than water at room temperature?

I was quoting Renton and he suggested it.

Fair enough but i have to point out that its far less likely that Samsung/Motorola/Nokia or Google/Microsoft are going to make the next big thing work. The next big thing is out there and its based around the frontiers of technology, which are more or less understood by all the tech giants. Its which one as a business can develop the segment as a product which sells. Thats Apple's biggest strength, they can go where others can only really follow.

Explain.

The idea that the iphone and the ipad have not been copied can only come from a very weird and singularly stupid place. You might not be able to patent the concepts for IP protection but lets not lose sight of basic facts.

Its not an apology per se. Lets not lose sight of the first iPad thread on here (started by me) where nothing existed except some failed early prototypes. In the face of incredulity and piss taking, the product takes off and revolutionises the market. Some years later, Samsung come along with a model that looks just like it. In this industry, it would have been remiss of Apple not to force Samsung into costly and resource-diverting litigation on this basis. Its part of the war games.

True but the rapid sell off shows where market sentiment is with respect to the robustness of google's business.

Transcript of the Interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now: March 2, 2007: http://www.democracynow.org/2007/3/2/gen_wesley_clark_weighs_presidential_bid AMY GOODMAN: Do you see a replay in what happened in the lead-up to the war with Iraq—the allegations of the weapons of mass destruction, the media leaping onto the bandwagon? GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran. I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, "Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second." I said, "Well, you’re too busy." He said, "No, no." He says, "We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq." This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, "We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?" He said, "I don’t know." He said, "I guess they don’t know what else to do." So I said, "Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?" He said, "No, no." He says, "There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq." He said, "I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments." And he said, "I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail." So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it’s worse than that." He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got this down from upstairs"—meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office—"today." And he said, "This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." I said, "Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir." I said, "Well, don’t show it to me." And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, "You remember that?" He said, "Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!" http://www.salon.com/2011/11/26/wes_clark_and_the_neocon_dream/

Its the same business model for the phones, wait for Apple to innovate, backward engineer it saving millions in R&D costs then spruce up the specs, copy design and under-cut. Its not rocket science.

Back in the real world everybody knows Apple are the market leader in the segment, saw the gap, made the product work, designed its functionality and then Samsung followed them into the sector. Woo Samsung!

Still slipping though, ad revenues moving in the wrong direction and net income down.

I see Google's revenues starting to slip. Obviously the big fuss was over the mis-timed announcement and the massive slide in market cap but the point which is badly hidden amongst this is that even though internet use continues to rocket, google ads revenue isnt. Because everyone now uses their mobile, or tablet and apps to view content, the Google model is being pressured.

It's significant because the US rides the wave of 'national security' fears to go to war in Iraq. It's significant because his Dad had unfinished business there, because the new American century group laid down a plan to invade Iraq in the late 90s and because in his mind, the reason why they got the chance to do what they wanted to do was 9/11. It was the strategic justification for their wet dream foreign policy. It could be serendipitous, obviously not for thousands of Americans who died.