ChezGiven

This was actually on Radio 5 about 2 weeks ago. They must be fucking short of celebs to play for them btw. Maybe JFK is handy with a bat? Is that it though (the source) or is there anything else anyone has heard? There are obvioulsy issues going on at the club so when you delve deeper into the situation there is more material about contracts etc but this all started 2 weeks ago and it was Mick Harford afaict.

WDP name change by friday. Nailed on.

Mick Harford was playing cricket with Joe Kinnear at the Bunbury CC who said he fancied a return to Newcastle (pissed up in the club house). Mick Harford then said this in an interview with Mark Douglas (or one of the Sunday Sun bloggers), this was picked up by Simon Bird who published it. Many of his twitter followers gave him grief for taking an idiotic source/angle national and he then retracted the idea. However, it was now in the national press and soon after some heavy gamblers put some money down causing further press speculation. Fuck all to do with the fans, the club or least of all the players.

Watched the game again last night, have to say Shola's overall performance was superb. I saw Louise Taylor had given him MOTM and i thought fuck off, at least Nolan and Barton were better. On a second (sober) watch, have to say his contributions were immense. Hold up play was excellent, loads of tackles won and 2 goals to boot.

If teams focus on trying to nullify Carroll's threat then Nolan should profit from that. He could end up on 15 goals quite easily. The work between Colo, Carroll and Shola for Nolan's 3rd was quality.

I got a bit sick of arguing that he was a fantastic footballer. If he maintains this form for the season, he will be the player of the season.

What an amazing day. Barton put in another great shift, was superb throughout but the ball he played over the top for Shola to run on to was Beckham-esque. Just watched MOTD and hadnt realised Shola's second was so good. The game had absolutely everything, loads of niggle (loved it when Enrique went a bit mental at Cattermole), a hat-trick, penalty, red card and to top it off a streaker. Woke up feeling minging after getting back mortal about 3.30 on sat night, mate had us awake by 9 pestering us to get back on the piss. Got back on it early and the day just kept getting better from there on in. Have also lost my voice, our lass will be happy.

I thought we were discussing moral hyprocrisy? You haven't pointed out a war that fits this example yet. Yes i agree that some hypocrisy is inevitable but we know that the US are acting like total cunts. Its a good thing that Wikileaks brings this to our attention if only for its positive impact on the awareness of the reality of war and the facile nature of the propaganda that has kept this one going for nearly 10 years. 10 years at war, ffs. Its just wrong. As for our example, the US were not acting like communists during their war in Vietnam, so how does Vietnam translate as an analogy? There was no hypocrisy in that instance in relation to their reasons for being at war. They hated communism and they certainly did not support any form of communism in their own country. Slightly different to Afghanistan's suffering of human rights abuses whilst a war against them is justified in the name of human rights. You still havent addressed this. The bottom line here is that you are a deeply unpleasant individual and your world view reflects that. I think you'll find most people reading this agree with that too.

You can position every war in the history of humanity as having a moral element, as all conflict inherently does. That's an axiom even, and you look very stupid trying to state otherwise. You did say the majority were about other things and this just compounds and underlines your stupidity. Your reading of 'the situation' is also borne of your stupidity and an ignorance of Saddam Hussein's regime. The coalition forces have a distance to go before the human rights abuses directly involving them compare to what Hussein accomplished in this field. I have not missed the point, you have just been promulgating a fatuous one from the very beginning. Give me the moral angle on the Norman invasion then? WW1 was started for moral reasons was it? Napoleon's rampage through Europe based on some moral argument? What a wanker you are. I feel sorry for your mum, with this persistent answering back no wonder she sent you off to boarding school.

You missed the point twice now. Not once were the US hypocrites with their approach to communism. So i return to the original statement, there hasnt been a situation like this before. The same situation would have been the US enacting communist policies whilst decrying communism. They didnt have to worry about looking like hypocrites either. I saw what you had written but ignored it in my response as it had fuck all to do with the main thrust of the argument. All ideologies have a moral underpinning them, fair enough, you can position the war in Vietnam has having a moral element. Thats one war in the whole history of humanity. I did say the majority were about other things. All irrelevant though, the point is that Wikileaks has exposed the rotten hypocrisy at the heart of the US campaign, a hypocrisy they did not demonstrate in Vietnam. This is worse, from a moral perspective.

Vietnam would serve as a good analogy if the US was secretly organising itself as a communist country. Even if you want to push communism as a moral concept, which it isn't, the US were not hypocritical about it.

So let's get this straight then, the US have not lost the moral high ground in this war? I dont think that highlighting the worst atrocity of the WW2 being outside a concentration camp in any way changes the argument. Shit attempt at side tracking the point you are losing on. The fight against communism was not a moral war, it was an economic one and part of a global power struggle. I don't think that it serves as an analogy for the moral issues thrown up by US propaganda and the proven human rights abuses in the middle east.

Were the allied forces in WW2 gassing jews in concentration camps? What were the moral crimes of the Vietnamese? I asked for your reasons on the NATO mission in Afghanistan so we could discuss it on your terms. I was a grown man in 2001 and was very aware of the media narrative. You would have been about 12 iirc. Floundering tbh.

Most wars have been about land and religion, only about 0.00001% of human conflic fits under the idea of a 'moral war'. The British empire, the Napoleonic wars, WW1, WW2, Israel-Palestine were not started because the oppressors / invaders wanted to topple an immoral regime. I would say all human conflict untill the 20th century has been about aggressive land grabs. Of course morality comes into any conflict but in WW2, the allied forces werent burning black people in gas chambers whilst issuing propaganda against the jewish concentration camps. Thats the basics of this issue. What moral crime of the Vietnamese did the US use during the Vietnam war to justify their presence there? Thats the analogy i am using. Wikileaks shows us that the US is propagating a view of an immoral culture, whilst acting in the same manner. This is just like using the racist killing of jews by Nazis in concentration camps in propaganda and then doing it yourself and trying to cover it up. There is always propaganda war and it has a moral dimension but i dont believe the allied forces did gas jews so they probably did have and kept the moral high ground. Something the US has clearly lost. I do love the fact you can hardly put a coherent post together, seething having been kicked into touch yet again i suspect.

Paul Merson doing the decent thing and admitting he was a wanker two seasons ago. http://www.skysports.com/opinion/story/0,2...6474449,00.html?

Idols is the scruffiest of joints imo, full of urchins and away fans. Sam jacks has rippers on now and again, the best place used to be that pub at the side of Planet Earth, it's doing my head in that I can't remember its' name now, does anyone know what it was called. Shut down about 10 years ago. The strippers didn't just strip that's all I'll say, and iirc was £2 a pint and you got a free whisky with everyone got in some right states before the match in there. My mate just text me, he's been watching the toon training he saw Tiote's score two 30 yard screamers and Carroll hit the bar from 3 yards. Is FYEO open on match day? Dunno. The Officers Deck is though you filthy porvort. Cheers mate. Nothing better to get you in the mood for the mackems than staring at some filthy growlers for an hour beforehand. Have you been?

Idols is the scruffiest of joints imo, full of urchins and away fans. Sam jacks has rippers on now and again, the best place used to be that pub at the side of Planet Earth, it's doing my head in that I can't remember its' name now, does anyone know what it was called. Shut down about 10 years ago. The strippers didn't just strip that's all I'll say, and iirc was £2 a pint and you got a free whisky with everyone got in some right states before the match in there. My mate just text me, he's been watching the toon training he saw Tiote's score two 30 yard screamers and Carroll hit the bar from 3 yards. Is FYEO open on match day? Don't know what that is? For Your Eyes Only. The only strip club i've been to in Newcastle.

Idols is the scruffiest of joints imo, full of urchins and away fans. Sam jacks has rippers on now and again, the best place used to be that pub at the side of Planet Earth, it's doing my head in that I can't remember its' name now, does anyone know what it was called. Shut down about 10 years ago. The strippers didn't just strip that's all I'll say, and iirc was £2 a pint and you got a free whisky with everyone got in some right states before the match in there. My mate just text me, he's been watching the toon training he saw Tiote's score two 30 yard screamers and Carroll hit the bar from 3 yards. Is FYEO open on match day?

Where is the best for strippers before the match?

Embarrasing, what day do you go back to school? http://www.statto.com/football/stats/engla...eague/2009-2010 Finishing above you and taking 4 points off you makes them worse? EDIT: 2 seasons running btw, taking 3 points in 08/09... http://www.statto.com/football/stats/engla...2008-2009/table So by that logic we are far superior to yourselves then? No-one said Stoke were "far superior" to you. But yeah, Sunderland are doing better than Newcastle the last couple of years. You should be much farther ahead comparing what the clubs have spent like. And despite a far harder start we still find ourselves ahead of you The only difference i can see overall are your draws home and away against Liverpool and Arsenal, we've played both Man U and City but we've played them away, you've played them at home.

Given the fact they've won one away game in two and a quarter seasons (other than games against Hull) no. Chez that's not being bullish or brash it's stating facts, I'm not going to the game on Sunday in hope, but expectation. You are being bullish but there is nothing wrong with that and if you read that post again you'll see me saying that based on the away from (which you have rightly pointed out) and the fact that they should be considered as equivalent to Fulham or Blackburn, that you are right to be bullish. Just because its the derby, doesnt change your normal assessment of the game. We've played better teams than them already this season.

You're right, that would be a shock.

Imbecile. How the mandate for war was constructed is irrelevant, since the inception of war, the US and allied forces have played the moral card repeatedly in an attempt to provide justification for their actions. Wikileaks highlights the hypocrisy of this given the human rights abuses. Vietnam was about communism and ideology, the first gulf war was about land, the balkans was about land and religion. If this war was the same, it would be positioned as the hunt for Bin Laden and the destruction of al qaeda. Its not because 9/11 killed 2,300 people so you cant morally justify killing up to a million in response and make the war just about 9/11. It has to be about something more than that, the PR girls who work in the military know this, so wikileaks fucks up their 'comms' strategy. Thats the up and down of this situation and if you cant see it then thats your problem, not mine.

Seemed like quite a supportive piece from Hughton's perspective. The opening sentence is a bit double-edged but it praises his signings, argues for his improved remuneration and concludes favourably. ...'rumours persist', nowt to do with her publishing an article of course. I agree there is a lack of her usual vitriol though, but still wanted an excuse for an ad hominem attack on her ugly mug. Her knives are still out for the club and she is doing him no real favours by furthering the talk about pressure on him.

Have wars always been characterised by one side claiming to act in the name of morality yet at the same time, failing themselves to live up to that? Doesn't really sound like the battle of Trafalgar. Previous wars have been about land, religion and stupidity, not complex moral superiority arguments.