NJS

it would be better if they did give up. As for "shocking", remember PC Keith Blakelock ? I hope all you lot hurled your mass protest and voices of reason towards Winston Silcott, Mark Braithwaite and Engin Raghip and told them what you thought of the error of their ways and touched their guilty complex and human side. Fitted up and acquitted.

On the bright side if she's scouring Forums as the Barton piece suggest, there's a chance she knws how much she's loved.

My general anti-religion view aside, I wouldn't blame the Muslims if they gave up - they were /are trying to build a centre to build inter-faith relations and that's the reaction. As HF said, they are reacting all over the country to Mosques - so much for freedom of religion.

Shures are the business - especially with the triple flange - both for the actual things and the name.

I've never bought the hype about Harper - I think he's average at best. I have to say I was also surprised he didn't get a red card.

Probably will start against Accrington I would have thought. On Hughton, the test will come if/when we have a bad run - but so far so good.

It was definitely a Fawlty towers like in-joke imo - but probably daft in that he knows he'll get grief for it because of who he is.

Shit ref.

Note for David bullshit Pleat - Mick Harford failed as a number 9 for Newcastle because he was fucking shit.

I'll have to agree with you here NJS. it takes a simple person to define politics in such a way. Obviously there are exceptions but comparing Bevan, Atlee, Benn, Smith and Foot against Thatcher, Tebbit, Joseph, Ridley, Osborne and Cameron seems pretty simple to me. Anyway it sometimes takes sophistication to see though complexity. Benn, Smith and Foot never had to serve in government though to be fair. How about Galloway, Derek Hatton and Blunkett (80s)? Benn and Foot served in Labour governments under Wilson. Hatton was a wanker but his love for Islam aside, I don't think Galloway is that bad.

I think broadly speaking there can be "divisions" of musical taste which at first glance can appear racist - as someone who pretty much exclusively likes guitar based music, there are very few black artists in my collection. I don't in anyway feel I have to justify that - it just reflects the tendency of the artists and fans within the genres. I knew that LM was into stuff like Free and assumed he had similar states to mine albeit from an earlier time but his Motown "credentials" should put paid to any accusations of simple racism.

I'll have to agree with you here NJS. it takes a simple person to define politics in such a way. Obviously there are exceptions but comparing Bevan, Atlee, Benn, Smith and Foot against Thatcher, Tebbit, Joseph, Ridley, Osborne and Cameron seems pretty simple to me. Anyway it sometimes takes sophistication to see though complexity.

My simplistic definition of politics has always been that decent people are socialists (which in the past meant Labour but obviously not now) and cunts were Tories. That's why I always had a problem defining Liberals - people like David Steel and Charles Kennedy always struck me as decent blokes so I could never understand why they needed to follow a third way. On this basis Clegg has found his natural home. On people being happy, I think they've fallen for the tough talk on cuts - it might change when they actually affect people they know or services they use.

I get what you mean but according to the article, that's not the only thing he did is it? I think he felt her tits as well and generally came out with a load of shit designed to impress her - sounds like cuntish behaviour but he's suggesting it works as a rule which is even more pathetic - even if very rarely true.

I think grabbing a lasses arse is a fucking pathetic thing to do but at the same time I'm not sure whether it warrants prosecution and being on the sex offenders list. It's one of those things - like a fight between two blokes where nobody gets really hurt as I've said before - that in some ways shouldn't necessarily be reported. I'd have no problem with the lass being able to slap the bloke/knee him in the nads but I suppose that could lead to something worse when dealing with scum. Maybe one of those fixed penalty things like being pissed in a public place that goes no further would be in order. This doesn't mean of course that I don't take real sex crimes very seriously indeed and it doesn't mean that lasses should have to put up with this shit either but a possible jail sentence seems OTT to me.

There used to be a show on Tyne Tees in the 80s I think called Friday Night live with a hideous scouse bint presenting it (Gillian Reynolds?) and I remember one where Paul Daniels' son (can't think of his name) outraged an audience of fuckwits by describing cold reading to them and saying that his Dad could be a "psychic" but had the decency to admit it was an illusion.

I'm always in two minds when it comes to con men of any kind - a lot of the time I think you could make a case for charging the victims with stupidity but when they prey on the vulnerable - which includes the bereaved - I think they are fucking scum.

I've watched a few of them - he's a bit too nice some of the time when he should really just tell the people how much they've fucked up their dogs.

I'd say it was our greatest strength

I do agree there are elements of a sort of faith in modern science and I also agree we should be sceptical - I just think you're exaggerating the "well science can't explain everything" position which usually comes from religionists which is probably what condused Fish. Of course my "faith" means I'm more likely to agree with the idea that brain irregularities/mass hysteria explains the supernatural than life after death but that position is backed by logic/evidence - maybe that's a circular argument but I want to live in a world where things "make sense" through rationality rather than one in which we throw our hands in the air and say "Who cares how it works".

I know the "half" is just an expression but my arbitrary guess would be less than 1% is unexplained to any great degree. How literal minded of you Yeah but your inference is that even though science is sort of good, it doesn't really measure up in the big picture - I think you're wrong on that.

I know the "half" is just an expression but my arbitrary guess would be less than 1% is unexplained to any great degree.

Misfiring brain chemistry - and cunts like that John Edwards who make money out of peoples' very human sense of loss should be fucking strung up.

I remember remarking in the last few years after semi-decent results against the top teams that we''ve gone to those places with better teams and lost worse and I stand by that - we've only given Man U a game at OT about 4 times - the 1-1 in the first year up, the 0-0 when Solkskaer hacked down Lee and probably the one two years ago come to mind. Those slagging off Willamson's comments should remember KK's from the game when we lost 2-0 in 95 when he mentioned the lions and tigers not turning up to the show - a reference to players as good as Lee and Ferdinand etc being overawed by the occassion. I'd love to have a team that is fearless in any fixture but LM and Stevie are wrong when they suggest we have had in the past just as a consequence of having better players or manager. That arrogance only comes with real success imo.

Without being completely Mr 360 I accept some of that - some signs were good but I felt that was more them not being at their peak (which was why it was a good fixture time) but with a bit of half-decent play as well. My worry is that in some respects it wasn't different to two seasons ago - I never felt that team was completely shit and at times played some decent stuff as they did last night but defensive mistakes and a lack of cutting edge cost us dear - and that was part of last night's story. Especially when everybody seems to think that last year somehow proved Collocini and Enrique were suddenly world beaters. Maybe 2 or 3 players could fix it - I don't know enough about Ben Arfa or the other couple of links and I'm quite happy to see Campbell in but having garbage like Shola and Xisco on the bench does not suggest any depth (Guthrie and Lovenkrands not withstanding).