NJS

I'm going to sound like a right lefty, hippy, soft twat here (which I accept) but I feel uneasy about "taking advantage" of repos. A lad at work bought one about 18 months ago and I couldn't help saying it was like taking taxi fare of a mate when he's passed out pissed. I completely understand and accept the notion of being responsible for a mortgage but just feel capitalising on misfortune isn't right.

Aye, from what I have seen/read I thought it was the pipeline rather than natural resources. Does anyone know what type of resources found? Cant read the article from where I'm browsing. oh aye - we'll build a p[iepline through AFGHANISTAN ....... how long would that last............ Was about the possibility of it, pre-9/11. Not about it happening now. Keep up. I can remember talking to a guy from Chevron way back - late 70's - about their plans for such a line. TBF everyone looked at him rather oddly....... then trhe russians launched in and it all went quiet .... on the pipeline front at least I'm sure there was somthing on The Power of Nightmares suggesting there was a planned pipeline and Karzai was chosen as a supposed puppet because of his enthusiasm for said project

Not sure what those prove but why would anyone with £1.6 million choose to live in South Tyneside? Just a general ripioste to Stevie's shithole pov. I guess it would depend on the usual factors - whether you have mates in the area, what the schools were like etc, etc. I'm not saying I would live there if I had the money - my mates in the area now live in Newcasle itself so if I was moving back to the NE I would probably look there. I would also say that if you did have that much money (and wanted to live in the NE at all) then it wouldn't make that much difference where you live - I guess Gosforth and Jesmond would appeal for handiness but apart from that a good house is a good house.

Anything in Benwell to compare to these? : East Boldon Cleadon

The old parts of Jarra and Hebburn are shit but the new part of Hebburn isn't bad. Shields has a few shitholes and a few nice areas like most towns and is certainly comparable to most of Newcastle and North Tyneside in that regard. As you also started off this chapter with Boldon I'd also point out that parts of Boldon, Cleadon and Whitburn (all ST) piss all over the vast majority of Newcastle and NT (though I accept they are Mackem tinged).

Agreed. Surely Birmingham would be a better comparison? Or are the gutter press suggesting that's a bridge to far for us? Hughton quotes Birmingham, Wolves and Stoke as role models. Of course forgetting that as I said Wolves were shit and also that they and Brum spent a good £20m each.

I think the adoption of the Mackem identity has sort of confused things in general. Certainly for my parents and for me when I was younger "Geordie" encompassed a pretty broad church - Sunderland fans certainly used to sing it and did so at Wembley in 73. Now though there seems to be a desire for a narrower definition which I think has resulted in terms linke Sanddancer coming to the fore as well. I've always defined myself by a hierarchy that goes Westoe/Shields/Tyneside/England/UK/Europe/Earth with whatever labels apply at each stage but I recognise that football support also adds in a factor as you say as well. I do recognise there is a difference in accents between ST and Newcastle but then again Blyth and Ashington I would say are more different. I also vehemently disagree with Stevie's shit about mackem words - as I said before while living in Shields for 32 years I never heard a native ever say skewel or bewk or any of the other classics.

I'm fucking sick of Wolves beeing mentioned as role models - they finished about 3 points above relegation.

I know the probable answer, but do you think you have more in common with a farmer in Hexham or Berwick or someone from South Tyneside? I think people in South Tyneside have more in common with all the urban people of Tyneside than the wilds of either old county - I don't see why anyone from Shields should feel akin to someone from Bishop Aukland more than someone from North Shields. Definitely more in common with someone from Hexham. It's 17 miles to Hexham from here, and probably 17 miles to South Shields. HTT used to talk pure shite, but he made a cracking point saying people from South Tyneside are a different type of geordie to ones from Newcastle so true. Some good points made in this thread.... http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/...ic,34150.0.html Good points like you putting Benwell and Pennywell below South Tyneside as a shithole? Fuck. right. off.

As well as the fact that a lot of other places in the empire had won independence through arms - obviously the contrived britishness of the Unionists makes it harder/closer to home.

I know the probable answer, but do you think you have more in common with a farmer in Hexham or Berwick or someone from South Tyneside? I think people in South Tyneside have more in common with all the urban people of Tyneside than the wilds of either old county - I don't see why anyone from Shields should feel akin to someone from Bishop Aukland more than someone from North Shields.

What's your definition of "anti-british" though? One million people protested the Iraq war - I assume you'd classify them as anti-British as well. As I've said before I despise the monarchy and would never swear an oath to it - I also don't give a shit about "war" casualties - I guess that means I should be shot. As Renton and I keep saying your attitude to justice would ironically be perfectly suited to living in Saudi or Taliban controlled Afghanistan.

I admit its extremely harsh but think it was a realistic answer at least in theory. Millions emmigrated in the aftermath of the famine because staying was worse so a mass migration isn't without precedent. I'm a great believer in the concept of taking down borders and allowing human migration in general - whether that's away from opression or just towards something better.

Not exactly the ideal answer and I accept the discrimination was wrong but I think they should have considered emmigration to the South and beyond. I know you could say they should stay and fight for a united Ireland but if things were that bad on a day to day basis with not much hope of unification (as there still isn't now) I'd say they could have left.

The point is in most cases they don't know - as I said there were a spate of Muslims last year arrested in dawn raids who were completely cleared and compen paid - in your world they would have been shot. As I said above, McGuinness was a front line "soldier" who has been convicted and I would have had no problem in the past with considering shooting him, Adams on the other hand is recognised as always having been political rather than military.

He would at least have had to have a gun and been threatening to get to that stage surely? If he'd emailed a mate and said "fuck this I'm going on a spree" should that have been grounds for execution? If so how many people do you think the police would have to shoot every day? Turning the question around do you think the police should have the right to shoot anyone just based on so called intelligence which has been proven on many occasions to be shit? Does this include all the Irish/Muslim "terrorists" who have been completely exonerated over the years - should we have shot them "just in case"? names ? Because, in actual fact, yes I think if we can get to them and they are proven terrorists, then get rid of them. That particularly includes Adams and McGuiness, and don't bother preaching about others stepping into their shoes, because it doesn't wash. Terrorism should not pay or be seen to pay in any shape or form whatsoever. Before you reply, remember that being unable to prove something doesn't mean they aren't as guilty as fuck. What's the point of replying with the names if you're just going to to say "he was guilty anyway"? The way you talk you want to completely suspend the rule of law. Ironically you mentioned Bird and an extension of his actions is exactly what you seem to want - suspect your neighbour is a terrorist but have no proof - why not just shoot him yourself and save the effort in using the law.

Thing is if you go back to the days before the republic was setup there were atrocities on both sides which make BS seem like a minor incident. I think it's a mark of how more "civilised" we are that at least enquiries are held (even if delayed) which wasn't the case in the days of empire.

She was education minister in Heath's government - not in anyway related I know but the only minister I'd guess who is still alive (and famous).

Bernadette Devlin thinks the "the government" should be put on trial - I can understand her need for justice but almost all those involved at that level are dead - even I wouldn't suggest holding Cameron in anyway responsible. (Though the ourrage if they dragged Thatcher into it would be amusing)

Shots were fired by IRA supporters after the first shots which were fired by the troops.

He would at least have had to have a gun and been threatening to get to that stage surely? If he'd emailed a mate and said "fuck this I'm going on a spree" should that have been grounds for execution? If so how many people do you think the police would have to shoot every day? Turning the question around do you think the police should have the right to shoot anyone just based on so called intelligence which has been proven on many occasions to be shit? Does this include all the Irish/Muslim "terrorists" who have been completely exonerated over the years - should we have shot them "just in case"?

That belief was not reasonable. He was slightly dark skinned and on the tube so they shot him. They gave him no opportunity to put his hands up or surrender. And has been pointed out, it's irrelevant to anything. ah. I see. You're getting there, but it was NJS who mentioned him, as he is one of those who seem to have a very idealistic attitude concerning things like this. A bit like asking terrorists to surrender first too. I mentioned him in relation to it being the woman in charge who should take the blame, not the blokes who pulled the trigger (though in the bloody sunday case both apply). Comparisons with Bird are ridiculous because De Menenzes was innocent, was unarmed and did absolutely nothing suspicious - and please don't trot out the proven lies told by Ian Blair.

If there was any justice in the world Brazil would have lost because of the number of soft cunts in their team wearing fucking gloves.

It's not in the public interest to name them imo. Most of the people seem to be happy that the dead have been cleared of any wrongdoing and that Cameron has issued an apology, in fact they're very pleased with the PM's words. IIRC the soldiers were originally going to be named but got a court order to guarantee their anonymity, still doesn't prevent them from prosecution and the DPP is going to look at the report. lets hope they prosecute the murdering scumbags Adams and McGuiness too then. Somehow I doubt it though. Why are so many people so keen to point the finger at security services on so many occasions like this, and not the real scumbags ? McGuinness has been in jail in the past - Adams has always been on the political side and uninvolved in any terrorism. As Cameron said in answer to your question, the rule of law applies to the state's actions.

I think the worst thing - much like the De Menenzes thing - is the lies that were told at the time and have been repeated ever since - including to a previous inquiry. Even basics like the first shot fired and whether the killed were armed have been the subject of those lies. Things like someone being shot in the back from 50 yards and then again in the head from 12 inches suggest murder to me - that isn't soldiers fighting in combat conditions or even losing control. The irony is of course is that it was the best recruitment drive possible and certainly escalated the troubles so any idea of putting people down or nipping rebellion in the bud was a spectacular failure.