NJS

Has the number of civilian deaths dropped since Saddam was deposed? I don't know, what would have happened if he hadn't been deposed. Don't you think the world is a better place for him being deposed ? Do you think it would be a better place if Gaddafi was deposed, what will it take for you to think otherwise or the pathetic UN to sanction action ? Will he have to attack Israel , how many lives will be lost there if that happens ? Do you want more jets blown up ? Do you want his embassy staff shooting more civilians ? Why don't you stop pretending for one second that you give a fuck about any deaths of Muslims anywhere?

Surely that's a bit political?

It's horrendous in London - amateur drinker's day out. Used to have a boss who was Irish so did tend to make the effort but it's all very plastic.

Fair enough but it's obvious we need to wait a few days to see if the reactors are controlled. If they are then any suggestion of mass deaths in the population would be Parky territory. I meant both really - as I said originally I'm not anti-science - I've just always thought Fission was iffy. I'd love to see real urgent research on a huge scale to develop new sources - I've always been disappointed that there doesn't seem to have been that much progress in solar power in recent decades for example. Comparing the scale of deaths from a meltdown to the whole climate change scenario is fair enough but I still wouldn't want to see "only" 20000 (completely arbitrary) deaths as some kind of acceptable risk.

Directly yes - legacy deaths will exceed that and they were lucky with the prevaling wind in the hours after the explosion. I think its a bit early for your "its proved it's okay" position.

Is it just me that thinks that welcome mat is incomplete without a Seventies style medallion /open neck fuck off collared shirt combo?

I think it came as a bit of a suprise like. Very difficult to defend Japan's abhorrent actions in WW2, but that has no bearing on the modern day country. Their POW/scorched earth policies in China are indefensible I agree, but the actual attack on Pearl Harbour was typical global war-mongering politics with blame on both sides - the USA had imposed an oil embargo on them which was disrupting their actions in Indochina. A cynic would suggest it was very convenient as an excuse to enter the war. Of course the relevance to today is the same as people who still hate modern Germans.

Leaving aside Hiroshima/Nagasaki and the fact it's years ago anyway, the rank ignorance on this subject in general (probably down to Holywood as well) shows that they can't teach or learn history: The attack on Pearl Harbour was not out of the blue or unprovoked.

I caught the start of The Big Question yesterday but had to switch it off before it endangered my TV - started with a bloke saying God allowed things like this to happen and we'd only know why in the afterlife and also it was meant as test for those watching as well. Then another fuckwit said that God hadn't meant for people to live in such dangerous places - ignoring the fact that his "holy land" is an earthquake zone. Of course the real underlying view is "it serves them right for being Godless". Absolute bastards.

This is why despite being a science zealot, I've always been dubious about nuclear power. Even taking the waste issue aside, possibilities like this could make whole countries no-go areas.

I had to get the tube the other day to a couple of interviews - thankfully only 2 or 3 stop jobs but even in March/at the end of winter I noticed it had started to stink.

But only because of people's reaction - not the act itself compared for example with rape which if burning a book is "vile", surely defies description. so because fanatical muslims react a lot more to someone calling a Teddy bear Mohammed to what we do when someone burns a poppy, it should be looked at more seriously ? Rubbish. If anything, it only emphasises what complete arseholes they are and what they are demanding from YOU, under the threat of violence. I was making the point it was only a fucking book you stupid twat.

Where does it say that? Maybe it's just me but that implies a replacement for Carroll

Towing the line which is fair enough aside, it absolutely fucking terrifies me that they think we only need one striker.

But only because of people's reaction - not the act itself compared for example with rape which if burning a book is "vile", surely defies description.

Does that not grant favour to those more dispositioned towards violence or hatred? I remember having a "discussion" ie pissed conversation with a copper at a home match in the early 80s either against West Ham or Chelsea in the Leazes end where he was warning people for starting "We hate cockneys" - he said it was inciting violence. I asked him if it was the case that if the other lot started bother because of a song then surely they were at fault for being riled just by words. It didn't exactly get much beyond that but I've always though it was an interesting debate. The idea of complete freedom of speech is an ideal in my view but it has to take into account consequences. This is where it gets tricky though. I honestly do think the monarchy is an abomination as mentioned by KSA and I also despise religions but I'm aware that those views would/could cause offence and could certainly incite violence. Now of course I think that reflects badly on the people who take that offence but the desire for a quiet life makes me reluctant to support such brazen shit-stirring. Obviously involving the law in this debate is tricky as there may be a difference between someone who would go as far as chinning me for slagging off the monarchy to someone who would actually happily kill me for slagging off Mohammed. Ideally in my view the law should look at circumstances and motivation - the bloke who was jailed for the airport thing and the poppy bloke were obviously looking to cause a strong reaction so deserve some action. On the other hand if someone was engaged in a discussion which became over-heated or was taking part in what was obviously intended to be a peaceful demonstration then I'd look easier on any resultant action.

It is dependent on the attitude of the person. I know several people who are the first in their family to come to an English-speaking country and have developed fantastic English skills and have also adapted to the general attitudes and values that many hold here. These people also respect the law here. You cannot excuse the behaviour of the minority I was describing as 'human nature'; in my opinion, that is just letting them off lightly. I am only writing about what I have personally witnessed and experienced and I never claimed any particular group of immigrants to have a monopoly on this behaviour, merely that it was indicative of a bad character. That would of course apply to an Englishman who moved to Saudi Arabia and ran round naked screaming, "Allah is a faggot." It's fine to hold some cultures in contempt btw, just don't go and live in one that you resent. Of course historically immigration has been great for the country and the economy, but the landscape has changed now tbf. I think I've said before my only real personal experience of Muslim immigration was a Turkish lad I worked with until last year - who tbf was pretty Muslim lite religiously - who had gone the whole way and applied for citizenship with his wife (they have kids born here). I wasn't excusing fuck-wittedness totally - just saying their are parts of our nature which underpin it sometimes. I think the Muslim brotherhood thing I referred to earlier which could influence immigrants' views is mirrored with European/British emmigrant attitudes of inherent Western superiority. On immigration as a whole I find it funny that those on the right who implicitly support capitalism and globalisation are so opposed to the "natural" migration of labour. Having said that, I've said in the past that commonwealth immigration not based on skills is something I'd look at stopping.

Undoubtedly true but they don't haven a monopoly on that - the British did the same for centuries and to some extent emmigrants and "guest workers" in the middle east still do the same today. I think working in Muslim countries and insisting on having alcohol for example (however controlled) exhibits the same contempt for culture. To some extent it's human nature to stick to your gang/tribe when in a foreign country and I'd guess it only abates after a few generations.

I think LM is sort of right about one thing - a lot of Muslims do see themselves as Muslim first, British second which obviously jars with traditional views on patriotism like his. However I've said before perhaps the one thing I admire about Islam in principle is the concept of brotherhood encompassing all of them which obviously leads to some feeling more akin with Afghanis rather than British soldiers. As I've also said before if that principle was extended to all humans and always trumped petty localism, I think the world would be a better place. The offence itself falls under "doing something stupid to get bites" so I don't see a need for a stupid sentence to glorify it.

Teach the fucker to spell better than you for a start. Many congrats - all the best.

your post is correct, but they will NEVER do what you say in the bit I've highlighted, simply because their irrational hatred is to deep and they are unable to seperate the personalities from the facts. How would Shepherd be able to raise money now if he hadn't sold? Do you get that it's a different world now?

There's that relish again. And matching fuck all is easy. qualifying for europe more than everybody but 4 other clubs in 15 years is easy is it ? Without even mentioning saving the club from administration and leaving it 14th in footballs rich list ? How come Ashley hasn't done it yet then ? What a fuckin bellend. Happy memories with no trophies - just like watching the club when we were shit. The rich list was achieved with debt with which they saddled the club and then took further millions into their pockets - what did the fans get compared with them?

There's that relish again. And matching fuck all is easy.

McNamee came from Celtic I think.

3 on the left and only rarely 1 or 2 on the right - just use 3-6 (Unless your're going over the hill from West Boldon to Mackem land).