Happy Face

Blackpool was nigh on 50k Sky sports was free yesterday.

In response to the lawsuit filed by Anwar Awlaki's father asking a court to enjoin the President from assassinating his son, a U.S. citizen, without any due process, the administration late last night, according to The Washington Post, filed a brief asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit without hearing the merits of the claims. That's not surprising: both the Bush and Obama administrations have repeatedly insisted that their secret conduct is legal but nonetheless urge courts not to even rule on its legality. But what's most notable here is that one of the arguments the Obama DOJ raises to demand dismissal of this lawsuit is "state secrets": in other words, not only does the President have the right to sentence Americans to death with no due process or charges of any kind, but his decisions as to who will be killed and why he wants them dead are "state secrets," and thus no court may adjudicate their legality. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB2000142405...3152390778.html

Anyone wanting to quote this back at AshleysSkidMark in future can copy and paste the following into a txt file on their desktop.

The waves have been huge down Tynemouth the last couple of days. Got a bit dark before any good photos were caught....but left the shutter open to get some light in and got a lovely cloudy sea....

He fucked the mackems the day like.

Scotland clearly has the best league in Europe. No-one beats the top 2 in that league.

Modern equivalent of smallpox on a blanket?

Must have had Titus over for a party.

Sunderland Goals: 2 Shots on target: 1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/e...rem/9020950.stm

Not sure why 'the day Shepherd left' is the be all and end all. I've said on here before, that view of Brian Clough at Nottingham Forest would tell you he was a shite manager. You'll no doubt also concede that Shepherd & Hall took this club a lot further in their time, than Ashley has been able to so far in his.

is that the one where I asked you to bet me that your boy Mike never gets the club into the top 6 of the premiership, which the Halls and Shepherd did in just over 2 years ? No not the bet that proves nothing, the one that I offered that would prove that the club has moved forward since being taken over - that we finish this season above where we finished in Fred's last season? Take my bet or not? you don't half like the smaller picture don't you ? Are you happy to finish in the bottom half of the league with no prospect of future european football ? What were our prospects or european football before Freddy left, with Roeder freshly sacked and Fat Sam at the helm? Take my bet or not? far higher than now, considering Ashley has sold off 7 of our better players and replaced them with cheaper inferior replacements. Will your boy qualify for europe or not ? He's got 2 years left of his 5 year plan to do what his predecessors did in less than half that time. It's not about who qualified for europe fastest after buying the club for fuck sake What a fuckin' playground argument. There's too many variables, it's a different, tougher league now. Everyone will tell you this on here, but you won't accept it because it doesn't fit your delusion how is it tougher ? There are the same amount of teams in it. If anything, if it is more money orientated, the clubs with the bigger revenues should be even more powerful than the other way round. Shame the policies of your man Ashley have hit our revenues which were the 14th biggest in football until he stepped through the door. BINGOOOOOOOOOOOOO! HE'S FUCKING GOT IT LADS The clubs with the bigger revenues SHOULD be the best. We should have been in the top 5 when Freddy left, based on the size of our revenue. We weren't. Therefore we were underachieving, yes? And remember, like somebody tried to teach you the other day, turnover is vanity, profit is sanity. You can't invest your turnover into the team if there's none of it left after paying your bills. Are you learning? Once the current owner has improved either he might be compared favourably to the previous owners. £7m profit a month in the Championship wasn't it? No

is that the one where I asked you to bet me that your boy Mike never gets the club into the top 6 of the premiership, which the Halls and Shepherd did in just over 2 years ? No not the bet that proves nothing, the one that I offered that would prove that the club has moved forward since being taken over - that we finish this season above where we finished in Fred's last season? Take my bet or not? you don't half like the smaller picture don't you ? Are you happy to finish in the bottom half of the league with no prospect of future european football ? What were our prospects or european football before Freddy left, with Roeder freshly sacked and Fat Sam at the helm? Take my bet or not? far higher than now, considering Ashley has sold off 7 of our better players and replaced them with cheaper inferior replacements. Will your boy qualify for europe or not ? He's got 2 years left of his 5 year plan to do what his predecessors did in less than half that time. It's not about who qualified for europe fastest after buying the club for fuck sake What a fuckin' playground argument. There's too many variables, it's a different, tougher league now. Everyone will tell you this on here, but you won't accept it because it doesn't fit your delusion how is it tougher ? There are the same amount of teams in it. If anything, if it is more money orientated, the clubs with the bigger revenues should be even more powerful than the other way round. Shame the policies of your man Ashley have hit our revenues which were the 14th biggest in football until he stepped through the door. BINGOOOOOOOOOOOOO! HE'S FUCKING GOT IT LADS The clubs with the bigger revenues SHOULD be the best. We should have been in the top 5 when Freddy left, based on the size of our revenue. We weren't. Therefore we were underachieving, yes? And remember, like somebody tried to teach you the other day, turnover is vanity, profit is sanity. You can't invest your turnover into the team if there's none of it left after paying your bills. Are you learning? Once the current owner has improved either he might be compared favourably to the previous owners.

5th best over 15 years, and you are talking about a few games at the end - and we weren't relegated under the Halls and Shepherd Anyway, I've been away a week and it seems only one, or two at the most, aren't trying to tell you how idiotic you are. So I'll leave it there. You don't achieve things over 15 years you achieve them over a season you fuck wit. Or are Blackburn still title contenders because of 15 years ago? you forgot the laughing emoticon mate. People might think you're serious. We're comparing old and new boards....no-ones saying the current owners are doing a better job at Blackburn than Jack Walker are they?

trut' http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle7147680.ece

Luke Edwards Good lad hyooton, keep everyone bored shitless.

Talksport? Talk cliche!

http://www.juancole.com/2010/09/rumsfeld-b...-war-crime.html

I really liked I'm Dave Gorman. I think it was the comedy graphs. The Googlewhack adventure was ok though he comes across as a dick complaining about what he's become famous for.....while doing exactly the same thing again. The zodiac experiment (can't remember what it was called) was canny shit. I still thought I'd give his podcasts a go....Jesus wept....fucking wank.

What are you on about? Where have I tried to make out anything about the stadium debt other than to point out that it wasn't down to Ashley. Also, have you got any links to quotes that Ashley was whinning like fuck? The only time I have seen him mention the extra debt was when he said that he would have still bought the club if he had known about it. Not wanting to drag it up because it's in the past and we should be moving on....but to answer your question, quotes from mike.... "Before I had spent a penny on wages or buying players, Newcastle United had cost me more than a quarter of a billion pounds." "I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it. The club is still in debt. Even worse than that, the club still owes millions of pounds in transfer fees." "I am Mike Ashley, not Mike Ashley a multi-billionaire with unlimited resources. Newcastle United and I can't do what other clubs can. We can't afford it." The way you're trying to paint a picture I'm starting to think you're Decka himself. You're starting to think, that's a first. Totally blahn oot.

Try telling Happy face that it's not down to Ashley, he's the one who is struggling. Not as much as you and Skid mark... You're not keeping up are you? I'm not trying to discard it. I'm saying it makes little difference to the current picture when you decide to it comes into play. There's a reason to bring it into the frame at the point Ashley arrived....because that's when it became instantly payable in full and we probably couldn't get another one if we'd tried. That's what I did in graph 1. There's a reason to include it all along...because whenever it was repayable...it was debt...which is what I've done in graph 2. Irrspective of the mortgage though....the growth in net debt takes a massive leap in 2008 onwards. Do you read posts before you reply? Yes I read them and considered them pathetic and laughable, and slightly embarrassing for yourself. Sorry!

What are you on about? Where have I tried to make out anything about the stadium debt other than to point out that it wasn't down to Ashley. Also, have you got any links to quotes that Ashley was whinning like fuck? The only time I have seen him mention the extra debt was when he said that he would have still bought the club if he had known about it. Not wanting to drag it up because it's in the past and we should be moving on....but to answer your question, quotes from mike.... "Before I had spent a penny on wages or buying players, Newcastle United had cost me more than a quarter of a billion pounds." "I then poured another £110 million into the club not to pay off the debt but just to reduce it. The club is still in debt. Even worse than that, the club still owes millions of pounds in transfer fees." "I am Mike Ashley, not Mike Ashley a multi-billionaire with unlimited resources. Newcastle United and I can't do what other clubs can. We can't afford it." The way you're trying to paint a picture I'm starting to think you're Decka himself.

Try telling Happy face that it's not down to Ashley, he's the one who is struggling. Not as much as you and Skid mark... You're not keeping up are you? I'm not trying to discard it. I'm saying it makes little difference to the current picture when you decide to it comes into play. There's a reason to bring it into the frame at the point Ashley arrived....because that's when it became instantly payable in full and we probably couldn't get another one if we'd tried. That's what I did in graph 1. There's a reason to include it all along...because whenever it was repayable...it was debt...which is what I've done in graph 2. Irrspective of the mortgage though....the growth in net debt takes a massive leap in 2008 onwards. Do you read posts before you reply?

Why did those players want out and why weren't they replaced once they left? One is whingey little french prick, Shay has been releasing whinges in the press about needing to sign players to challenge for a few seasons, he'd obviously got wind of City's interest imo. Insomnia was already replaced in Jonas. Milner arguably wasn't replaced properly, though the club did sign both Guthrie and Nolan, so in terms of numbers it could have been thought that we were ok in midfield. After all those years at the club, they just decided it was time? Nothing to do with being touted around by the club or having a laughing stock of a manager in Joe Kinnear hurtling us towards relegation one cringeworthy soundbite at a time? I think if Manchester City with an oil tycoon had bid for Shay when Bellamy was throwing chairs about and calling Souness a liar... he'd have wanted out then too. He might have.....but then any approach would have been turned down.... http://www.sunderlandecho.com/sport/sunder..._move_1_1118419 And that's a good thing? If a player wants out, then blocking a move isn't exactly going to best move, is it? I think we're in the process now of proving that it's a much healthier team when the players actually want to be here. If they're a good player and the fee isn't what it should be of course it's right to block a move...like Man U did with Ronaldo the season he won them the title....or Arsenal did with Fabregas this year. Top clubs don't let their best players run to other clubs with more ambition at a cut price. We weren't a top club though Exactly, that's why we were making savings even prior to regulation. And Ashley didn't buy a top club, he bought one that'd just finished bottom-half. So comparing Shay wanting to leave to Ronaldo and Fabregas? You say that as if you're proving me wrong on some imagined statement or other, rather than proving yourself wrong on the claim that Ashly didn't try to cut costs prior to relegation Because you say it as if it's a bad thing How were we going to get back into the top 4? By increasing costs? Where? You said "There was hardly 'cuts' before relegation was there?" Now you accept there were cuts and insist there had to be. Get back to me once you've caught your tail. So where's your point in all of this ? Ewerk's right, you're wrong.