NJS

Emmanuel college - not sure if its still going but it made the headlines a few years ago for having creationist science on the agenda (which was backed by fuckwit Blair).

In terms of schools yes - I think streaming within a school is fine as it allows for pupils to move up and down as they develop and also mix streams if they are better at a couple of subjects. I was at the back end of the 11 plus system (first time around) and though I passed I always thought it was wrong that kids who failed were "written off" at 11 and expected to at best get "junior" academic jobs but were mainly meant for manual labour. I think within a comprehensive system/school it allows kids who are "average" to still have a good chance. I also think bright kids aren't held back that much by "thickos" - the school I went to had just changed from grammar to comprehensive and I never felt restricted.

It was more about the fact that they went to church together (their only "date" of the week) and pretended to be a happy family that was wrong imo.

I would add that the school governors/priests who know that parents are doing it and welcome them anyway are complete twats.

Hardly fair like. You should blame the ridiculous selection procedures which in my mind border on 'racist'. But if you had a kid and the only good school around was a catholic one you might be tempted to feign a bit of piety. It's a dilemma and I wouldn't knock parents doing their best but I'd always be uneasy with the dishonesty and especially in explaining that dishonesty to the kids. If both sides can shrug their shoulders and say the end justifys the means then fair enough but it's a bit too cynical for me. It's not just catholics of course - I used to work with a lass who did it for a CofE school and even worse did the "piety" test while her and her husband had separated and were awaiting divorce.

Good. They put us out the Cup in the 80's. Funnily enough that's a good example of how I feel as well and that I think have what people would call petty or bitter grudges against almost every club we've played since about 1970.

Defintely - though I think there'd be outrage in England (and Scotland) as well. I know historically the education system in the UK has a lot to be grateful to the churches for but we should have moved on by now. The sad thing for me is that I thought that as a pupil at a Catholic school in the 70s, I could see a decrease in the religious influence even in the 7 years I was there and presumed it would continue. Unfotunately using it as a fiddle to re-introduce selection has meant its influence has returned. The people who suddenly "find God" when it comes to the application period should be shot.

No its where groups of nutjobs or businesses put up a few quid and get the rest of us to pay the rest for the brainwashing of theirs and other peoples kids who are daft enough to send them there. State schools though? One of these public finance inititative things? Yes. My anti-religion stance aside, I don't think its particularly right that a group of parents whose kids might attend the school for 7 years should get have so much power in deciding its ethos or selection policy etc when the school may exist for decades. I think its taken choice too far - nowt wrong with parents taking an interest and getting involved but I think actually forming schools to their requirements is wrong.

No its where groups of nutjobs or businesses put up a few quid and get the rest of us to pay the rest for the brainwashing of theirs and other peoples kids who are daft enough to send them there.

I'd agree with that. I think the UK was far too dependent on the empire and Britain's place in the world and it took decades to get over the shock of it not really existing anymore. In that context the ruling classes had no idea of how to cope with the change apart from ensuring their vision of a society where everyone knew their place persisted. I've said before that the nostalgia for some golden era of morality in the 50s is something I particularly find offensive. Shit like sending poor kids off to Australia and putting single mothers and rape victims in asylums was only tolerated because far too many people were meek and afraid to question the authorities.

Just going by the name and the fact its an academy, it completely serves them rght for sending their kids there.

Again being the best out of an atrocious bunch does not make them immune from criticism. I'm not going to praise them for never coming close to relegation when we did. I'm not going to praise them for never selling players to meet financial demands when they did. They did screw fans and their overall motivation was making money not bringing success on the pitch. As I keep saying holding them up as some kind of club owning Gods is a joke. The serious question which you keep avoiding is if they hadn't sold up how on earth do you think Shepherd would have been able to continue? what would he have done when the crunch hit and his usual methods no longer worked? This isn't about what Ashley has done since but what would have happened if he hadn't bothered.

In 98 we were one victory against a Chelsea team playing in plimmas because of a cup final away from going down. I think it was 3 or 4 points in the end but without that victory we would have gone into the last day with at least the possibility of going down. This was due to the Ferdinand sale combined with the Shearer injury - the former being Ashley-esque in its stupidity. Wasnt that because we were a Plc though and the "shareholders" demanded the sale before the end of the financial year? At the same time, it was Hall and Co who ultimately put us in that position so swings n roundabouts like. Either way though, yes Shepherd was in charge at times when we nearly went down but the magic word is nearly, Ashley managed it fairly damn quickly yes, it was to raise the flotation price, or related to it at the time. Significantly, KK was told to sell a player for 6m quid for precisely this reason, Everton wanted Ferdinand and he told Douglas Hall that Ferdinand wasn't for sale. Hall said to Keegan that if that is what he wanted, then Ferdinand would not be sold. This is in Keegans book. Who was one of the first players sold by Dalglish that summer ? Yes, Les Ferdinand. I have always wondered if he was happy to sell him for the fee at the time, making it a managers decision. He had - at the time - Shearer, Asprilla and was about to buy or had already bought Tomasson. I don't suppose this will make any difference to those who want to bash Shepherd though for anything they can think of. I don't get your point - Shepherd and Hall were on the board of the plc and were the majority shareholders - you make it sound like the sale was imposed on them. I've never denied we had good times under them - I'm just pointing out that it isn't as black and white as you imply - there were shit seasons, shit decisions and many examples of fans being screwed. If you ask me whether that was a price worth paying for the good stuff I'd say unequivocally yes but that does not mean I'm going to forget the shite or wear the rose-tinted glasses you love.

In 98 we were one victory against a Chelsea team playing in plimmas because of a cup final away from going down. I think it was 3 or 4 points in the end but without that victory we would have gone into the last day with at least the possibility of going down. This was due to the Ferdinand sale combined with the Shearer injury - the former being Ashley-esque in its stupidity.

The Russians have a device which is so powerful it would destroy the world on it's own. I suspect that's bollocks. Why? If that "only" wiped out 50% of the species, it's hard to imagine a current man-made device that could do more including destroying the planet itself.

You feel like adding "for her age" when you see her then realise it doesn't matter.

The point about outgoings only is a good one - the majority of the income would be "one-off" hits like ST sales and kit launches - cash turnstile + matchday pie income will be minimal.

"That nerve is dead, we'll have to open up a fresh one" still sends a horrible shiver down my spine...

From Wiki (I know): Note the point about Appeasement - something Michael Foot is famous for opposing - ironic given the articles thinly disguised accusation of cowardice. As I sad - Fascist bastards.

to what support do you refer? They praised Hitler's election and also had an infamous "Hooray for the blackshirts" headline in support of Moseley.

Even if this is his intention aside from potential sales, he'll change his mind when we get relegated next season.

If the Mail want to mention the 1930s why don't they talk about their support for Hitler and other Fascists? Fucking cunts.

I was fully supportive until the Americanism popped up. What? Americans refer to teams in the singular - Newcastle is a shit team, Man Utd is a bunch of cunts etc etc. The correct ie English grammar is Newcastle are a shit team and in this case Newcastle United are known for taking a strong following.

Article on the BBC about the 1983 manifesto - "the longest suicide note in history" Article Probably the key point as the Tories killed them for it - doesn't seem that bad in hindsight. On Europe: Interesting that that was "rejected" given its support by a lot of middle england now. On Banks: As I've said before, if Brown had tried this at anytime before 2007 he would have been crucified - in hindsight this may have been a good idea. Overall there was nothing too "loony" about it - but the British people thought winning a war against a third world country and a "donkey" jacket were what mattered.

The Devonian one Laz mentioned is more interesting - I saw a programme about that one which suggested the volcanic eruptions in Siberia raised the global temp by 5c over about 40k years but that rise caused the methane on the sea floor to rise which caused another 5c rise - 10c = death to almost everything. I'd assume the dinosaur event was similar - the asteroid set in motion a climate change that took a while to "work" rather than being instant.