Happy Face

I agree with Leazes. No-one has any idea what he knows on these matters, he's never given any indication whatsoever. EDIT: Nor can you presume he's taken in anything you tell him either. He's shown himself to be inpenetrable to facts. An official Bush era document on how to start war with Iraq under false pretenses is brushed aside like Superman stands up to bullets.

Moving away from NUFC? You want shot.

So is the evidence real? It's manipulated. What reason is there for it being manipulated? Manipulated or not, I can see only positives from investing in alternative energy. Even if Global warming isn't being accelearated by man (and the evidence says it is almost certain, though not incontovertible) the oil we depend on is being burnt up at a faster rate every year. There will be anarchy once it runs out. We already have constant war because whatever tenuous grasp we have over the middle east must be maintained at any cost. We've watched this situation for 60 years and done little long term planning to solve the problem. The fact that Global warming is perceived as enough of a threat to actually do something, when those other threats have been ignored is good, right? Stuff like this.... http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS253507592420101012

Sky will be gutted when the counter stops 4 short while those 18 stoners down there lose a bit more weight.

I have acknowledged this already in a thread elsewhere numb nuts. My very facetious remark was taking the piss out of Leazes' blanket racism....they're uneducated backward farmers living in caves and beneath us....and also the gravest threat to world peace with the strength and intellect to back it up?

Belgium austria sounded like a cracker too.

Saw 5 minutes. The apprentice on iplayer looked a better option early on.

Strong proponents of gay rights the al-Qaeda.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/12/d...tml?ref=twitter Good to see a nation being dragged into the 21st century. Shame Obama couldn't take the props on this one.

do they ? Please show us where they have nuked the middle east ? No-one mentioned nukes....but the US are the only nation to have launched a nuke in anger at anyone. Keep up. ah. You said "military arsenal". Which includes nukes. As I said, if you answered the rest of the post without clipping it, it all becomes clear. So you didn't misread the post, you just wilfully ignored the point being made based on facts. Even worse you ignored it to wonder what the enemy might do hypothetically if they somehow outsmarted the might and intellect of the western military and became a nuclear super power (these are the same people you've said are uneducated backward folk). Your ideas are illogical. A Super Power ? Who said a super power ? Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons. He used them on his own people. Who is to say he didn't have them again, and who is to say he wouldn't have used them again ? He was mad, yet people like you say we should not have gone in, or didn't have a mandate to go in. If we had not gone in, because we had accepted that the hopeless UN didn't sanction it, he would arguably now have chemical weapons again [if he didn't have them already], then what next ? Who next ? See, people who argue against the 2nd invasion of Iraq make me laugh, it has almost certainly [however it has gone wrong now] avoided a build up of arms by Saddam and the use of chemical weapons again by him. Your ideas are namby pamby, naive, and do nothing other than encourage the leaders of such countries to build up their arsenal to attack Israel first, then what ? The leaders aren't backward, they know precisely what they are doing. I suspect deep down you know that this is right, because it is basic common sense, but can't bring yourself to admit it, having been brainwashed by the hippy generation in your earlier life..... Can't believe you've moved from the shaky ground you were on to the even shakier ground of Iraq, where the consensus is universal.... http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB326/index.htm They really worked a number on you if you STILL believe it was justified when the record clearly shows otherwise. Your anti-west stance still continues to mystify me. Perhaps you are a Mohammed ? Saddam would have gassed and murdered his own people again. End of. This isn't speculative, it's common sense. You would wait until he did, people like me prefer to stop him before he does it. You must have one hell of an anti-west agenda to spend your time scouting around for stuff like this [above] I'll take that as a complete capitulation. Scouting about? It's common knowledge.

do they ? Please show us where they have nuked the middle east ? No-one mentioned nukes....but the US are the only nation to have launched a nuke in anger at anyone. Keep up. ah. You said "military arsenal". Which includes nukes. As I said, if you answered the rest of the post without clipping it, it all becomes clear. So you didn't misread the post, you just wilfully ignored the point being made based on facts. Even worse you ignored it to wonder what the enemy might do hypothetically if they somehow outsmarted the might and intellect of the western military and became a nuclear super power (these are the same people you've said are uneducated backward folk). Your ideas are illogical. A Super Power ? Who said a super power ? Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons. He used them on his own people. Who is to say he didn't have them again, and who is to say he wouldn't have used them again ? He was mad, yet people like you say we should not have gone in, or didn't have a mandate to go in. If we had not gone in, because we had accepted that the hopeless UN didn't sanction it, he would arguably now have chemical weapons again [if he didn't have them already], then what next ? Who next ? See, people who argue against the 2nd invasion of Iraq make me laugh, it has almost certainly [however it has gone wrong now] avoided a build up of arms by Saddam and the use of chemical weapons again by him. Your ideas are namby pamby, naive, and do nothing other than encourage the leaders of such countries to build up their arsenal to attack Israel first, then what ? The leaders aren't backward, they know precisely what they are doing. I suspect deep down you know that this is right, because it is basic common sense, but can't bring yourself to admit it, having been brainwashed by the hippy generation in your earlier life..... Can't believe you've moved from the shaky ground you were on to the even shakier ground of Iraq, where the consensus is universal.... http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB326/index.htm They really worked a number on you if you STILL believe it was justified when the record clearly shows otherwise.

do they ? Please show us where they have nuked the middle east ? No-one mentioned nukes....but the US are the only nation to have launched a nuke in anger at anyone. Keep up. ah. You said "military arsenal". Which includes nukes. As I said, if you answered the rest of the post without clipping it, it all becomes clear. So you didn't misread the post, you just wilfully ignored the point being made based on facts. Even worse you ignored it to wonder what the enemy might do hypothetically if they somehow outsmarted the might and intellect of the western military and became a nuclear super power (these are the same people you've said are uneducated backward folk). Your ideas are illogical.

do they ? Please show us where they have nuked the middle east ? No-one mentioned nukes....but the US are the only nation to have launched a nuke in anger at anyone. Keep up.

He's been in a war zone and had a gun pointed at him on a regular basis, for a start. I'm sure he'll contradict me if that's not the case. Are you German or a Brit living in Germany ? Either way, you should be quite aware of the consequences of allowing madmen some rope .... Aye, the consequences can be dire.....when the madman has a modicum of power. But then if you'd been a German in 1938 you'd have been fully supportive of the Fuhrer and his program of killing whichever fellow citizens he perceived to be a threat. You'd have shouted down anyone opposed to that as unpatriotic as you have nothing but unquestioning obedience to your leaders and what they tell you. Right? Or are you saying a few uneducated, cave dwellers are being given so much rope they could mount a challenge to world democracy on a scale equal to the might of the German military? eerrr.....no. It's you who is supporting those who are gassing, killing and murdering their own people. I suppose you would have allowed Hitler Youth or Gestapo to march on the streets to demonstrate their "rights" of free speech ? Haven'I asked you this before ? Yeah, you didn't grasp the difference between holding accountable the most powerful government in the world with a military arsenal to dwarf most others nations combined....and less than 100 people living in caves when we discussed it previously either. http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/1...on.html?showall

I struggled to open the video using that link....

Must be a scouser. Nowt they love more than the sound of their own voice.

Judge about to rule....

Depends on RBS I guess. EDIT: They could extend the loan pending a sale Hicks agreees to.

It's on Sky One on Thursday.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/davidbond/2010/...s_for_high.html