1_man_army

If you give the majority of people a break it will allow them to spend, which ultimately will help business to get back on it's feet which will have the knock on effect of getting the banks trading again.

He's going to get slated for that one in the papers. Worst I've seen in a long time. I think it was harder not to score. Hope he's not put off by it though. He was already a controversial choice before the game, Burley starting him was a gamble. They'll both get hammer tomorrow in the papers and rightfully so, Iwelumo is quite frankly inferior as an all round player to Steven Fletcher and Burley had the natural finisher Kris Boyd on the bench - both of which I would have played before Iwelumo. If we miss a playoff place by 2 points we'll look back at that miss with even more horror than we see now. He made Van Vossen's for Rangers miss back in the day look difficult.

Iwelumo's miss was so bad that I could have scored it...

I'm not saying it was or wasn't politically motivated, I haven't read the report or know who's involved in the investigation (I've just seen news reports about it), all I was saying is that it's the obvious rebuttal to the allegations regardless if whether they're true or not. and Jack, I think you've accidentally deleted your last quote...

Yesterday I watched; The Conversation - I'd been meaning to buy this before as I liked Coppola's other 70's films (Godfather 1 & 2 and Apocalypse Now). Anyway, I finally got around to it and I wasn't disappointed - this is an intelligent thriller where a conversation is continually interpreted and then re-interpreted to unravel a potential crime. It's much in the same vein as Blowup without being a shameless rip off. Peeping Tom - I've seen this a few times and it gets better with every showing. It's about a psychologically damaged man who kills women and films it while presenting his victims with their own death by using a mirror on his film camera (I hope that made sense). I've been a fan of Powell and Pressburger (Black Narcissus, A Matter of Life & Death etc) for a while now, this film is just by Michael Powell but it's as good as (if no better) than his work with Pressburger. I love the ending which is so clever and imaginative. The only thing that bugged me with the film last night is that ITV insisted on putting the sign language man on top of the film eventhough you can choose to put subtitles on if you're deaf. The idiot in the corner of the screen drove me mad. As a side note I only found out last night that Moira Shearer (who is in this film and in Powell and Pressburger's Tales of Hoffman and The Red Shoes) is from Dunfermline which is just a few miles from where I live.

I'm not speculating that she abused her power, it's part of the report's findings. As for the "oh please" comment, I can't help but shake my head, some people (on both sides) would forgive their ticket of anything to see them elected - it's quite pathetic. Just because others have abused their powers in the past doesn't mean it should be condoned now regardless of who it involves on either end of the political spectrum. Link: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jOTk ... wD93NV5L00

So what does everyone think of the report finding that Palin abused her power when she fired Walter Monegan? I'm betting that they try to play this as being politically motivated.

Isn't that the point of the image: "She's one of the folks" - most folks' pictures aren't touched up...

There will be a minority who vote for him only based on his race and likewise there will be a minority who won't vote for him because of it. It all evens out.

how is Reagan a war criminal :| ? It was a semi-sarcastic post, I was using to make a point (that being that it's easy to smear). His involvement in the Iran-Contra affair (he claims that he didn't know...my backside). That, and his support of several "good" anti-Communist dictators (including Noriega and Saddam Hussein). As I said the post was there more to make a point regarding how easy it is to smear like this rather than to just bash McCain or Reagan. I'm not really interested in talking about Reagan in depth as I don't want to take this thread too far off topic. (I know it's my fault for bringing the topic up but there was a slight bit of reasoning behind it when I posted).

McCain says Ronald Reagan is his hero and Reagan is war criminal... edit - Ginger NEVER underestimate how daft people on tip.it can be. The bar is set pretty low here at times by some and people still limbo under it.

Yeah try to just blatantly walk off with a group of teenagers drink money and see what happens to your head when they bounce it off of the pavement.

Jimi Hendrix - Like a Rolling Stone (Live) He might do the verses in the wrong order but I forgive him, he's a legend. Jimi seems to do Bob Dylan covers better than anyone.

I was thinking of getting O Lucky Man as well but I thought it would be best to see if I liked If... first. I'll tell you how I liked it once I see it.

I haven't seen it yet but I keep getting recommended to me and I've heard nothing but good things about it so I couldn't pass up the opportunity of getting so cheap.

Amazon were doing a 3 for £10 deal so I though why not.

(1) Al-Qaeda (who is widely believed responsible for 9/11) doesn't pledge fealty to any nation. That's a ridiculous reason. (2)Al-Qaeda doesn't affiliate particularly with Palestinian or Lebonese terrorists, nor do the many groups of Iraqi insurgents. So articles on the internet give you quality information, particularly if they're "not mainstream propagated"? This is amusing. No, it's the Koran's teachings being taken out of context, as well as many individuals with their own ridiculous goals of power. This started with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia anyways. You're showing ridiculous ignorance on the recent history of the Middle East. If you can find Osama Bin Laden, the I.S. government owes you...20 million dollars? I believe. Apart from the more wealthy, urban folk, many people in Iraq don't know (or care) about the West. They only know America (Britain, Italy, etc.) as the soldiers that may help them or may not.[/hide] I hate numbering points but I had no other way to break up the quote wall into seperate points that I could reply to. 1) Al-Qaeda doesn't pledge loyalty to a nation however, the point is that their recruitment has been helped tremendously because of the reckless policies of US and the UK over the last few decades. Our endorsement of "good dictators" (ie. anyone anti-communist or anti-socialist such as Mubarak in Egypt, Musharraf in Pakistan, and the Shah of Iran) has lead to a lot of anti-western feeling in the Middle East and elsewhere which is what has led to the creation and the thriving of extremist groups such as Al-Qaeda. Western presence in Middle Eastern nations hasn't helped either (the US military presence in Saudi Arabia was a huge controversy until the 2003 pull out). When you add to that the unconditional support we've given to Israel, and the two wars we're waging in Muslim nations, it's no wonder there is a lot of anti-Western feeling in the region. 2) Pretty much dealt with in 1. 3) Nobody will argue that the media has been completely fair and unbiased since the invasion of Afghanistan however, a lot of the problem is with the viewers/readers in my opinion. People seem unable to critically evaluate a situation and that's made worse by people not knowing the background of the Middle Eastern nations that are involved. Sure, certain newspapers/TV stations set their coverage up to reflect a certain political position (in UK, TV legally aren't allowed but there are ways around this) but you could argue that they're only reflecting the views of their consumers. I think people should, in this day and age, be able to look at a wide range of media and be able to come to their own informed opinion. Now that being said, the internet is a difficult place for news. You have to be very selective about the sites you use to get news online (I stick to BBC and one or two others myself) because the nature of the net allows anyone to make up what they want. There are so many crackpot conspiracy theories online that it's hard to take much of the so-called online "news" seriously. 4) Yes the radical interpretation of the Koran has led to many people adopting militancy but it's not the only reason. As I already said, a lot of people in the Middle East hate the West for our policies in the region and that's led to a lot of resentment. Poverty and desperation also play a part, your average suicide bomber is generally speaking, from a poor background, from a disadvantaged area, of little or no education and they're generally disillusioned young men in their 20's. People from that sort of background are far more susceptible to being exploited by extremists - that is not to say all become terrorists or even that a significant amount become terrorists, they are just more suseptible. There are also exceptions to this like everything else, Bin Laden himself comes from a pretty priveledged background. 5) Kuwait is only relevant to the first Gulf War, this war in Iraq was about mythical WMD's, then it was about regime change... 6) Talking to Al-Qaeda is impossible as their goal is the destruction of he West. Talking to enemies (ie nations) in general is beneficial. We can't continue to ignore the grievances of others, we need to sit down at the negotiating table and try to work through our differences where possible. That doesn't mean giving in to ridiculous demands (such as allowing the destruction of Israel) but it does mean we have to take a pragmatic approach to bringing peace and building relations with nations we don't like (such as Iran and N. Korea) in order to get some form of co-operation. Using an iron fist approach will only create more anti-Western feeling in the region, that isn't to say we shouldn't pursue terrorists abroad, we should just be very careful regarding how we do things. Negotiation worked with Libya who were the among the first and most firm of the Muslim states to denounce 9/11, amazing for a nation who just around 13 years before were accused of masterminding the Lockerbie bombing. I'm not saying Libya is perfect now, far from it, but the progress is outstanding and is proof of the route we should all take in regard to dealing with enemies. 7) It's ignorant to suggest that ordinary Iraqi's don't know about the West. People in less well off nations aren't as backward as you suggest. ---------------------------------------- Anyway, that is what all I've got on the issue at the moment. I hope my random musing didn't ramble and made sense. edit - Why am I unable to hide the last sentence of the quote wall (the same thing happened the last time)?

What? You haven't replied to this. You've just want on a rambling rant against America. Name calling is the last weapon in a debater's arsenal. Al-Qaeda (who is widely believed responsible for 9/11) doesn't pledge fealty to any nation. That's a ridiculous reason. You aren't even taking an intelligent view from either side. Stop trying to be rebel for its sheer sake unless you show the intelligence required. Al-Qaeda doesn't affiliate particularly with Palestinian or Lebonese terrorists, nor do the many groups of Iraqi insurgents. So articles on the internet give you quality information, particularly if they're "not mainstream propagated"? This is amusing. No, it's the Koran's teachings being taken out of context, as well as many individuals with their own ridiculous goals of power. Cough. Saddam Hussein. Cough. This started with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia anyways. You're showing ridiculous ignorance on the recent history of the Middle East. I'm still amused, but also sad for you. No, because as you've said, you're spraying random gibberish. Hating every person in America? Jesus, you hypocrite. Stop talking about love and peace when you're frothing over with ignorant hatred for America. I apparently know more than you. Al Qaeda never controlled Iraq. Get your facts straight at the very least. If you can find Osama Bin Laden, the I.S. government owes you...20 million dollars? I believe. Apart from the more wealthy, urban folk, many people in Iraq don't know (or care) about the West. They only know America (Britain, Italy, etc.) as the soldiers that may help them or may not. Okay, whatever you say.[/hide] Tip.it - The blind leading the blind, you're both wrong on certain issues. If I had the time tonight I'd go through them but right now I'm off to sleep. Hopefully somebody else will have picked through this before I read this thread again.

I live almost next door to the post office so I've done that once or twice. The only difference being I get them to wait behind the shop in the car park while I walk into the shop leave and then go into my house. No need for stories, it's pretty immoral but they shouldn't expect me to run the risk of arrest for them and have no chance of reward. I only get away with it because the kids come from other towns to hang around here so they don't know many people (ie. me) and don't know where I live.

edit - Sorry, I got confused on who I was responding to, please delete this one.

I think the point he was trying to make is that the need/desire for vengeance is only human.

That's the problem, there are no guarantees in economics, just likelihoods, trends and erm...hope.

[/hide] Wouldn't the meat get tougher from the animal walking around (in a free-range environment) as well though? Veal is all about soft baby cow that live in an environment like this: [hide=][/hide] I know what Veal is and how it's made, I don't necessarily condone it but Veal is tasty. I was asking in a far more general sense (ie. older animals and not just cows). The reason being that I vaguely remember seeing an experiment on TV (Richard & Judy I think) where they gave regularly farmed meat and a free-range option to members of the public. In the experiment, the 'normal' meat came out on top - many people claimed that the free-range was too tough.

It also said that the letter the economists received failed to mention a number of key points about the economic plan that McCain claims they endorse fully.

^^ Strange things can happen in politics...look at how the Tories won here in 1992. Hell, McCain doesn't even need to win the election, just ask Al Gore. I'm just hoping there's not an October surprise that shakes this election.