luckypierre

How does that ignore function work?

Beckham should be nowhere near RB against any half decent team. I'd rather see us go 3 at the back, as a RWB his defensive deficiencies will be less of an issue. He's no good as a holding CM either, we've been there before.

Gerrard was the most involved out of all the midfield, as he was playing deep it was hard for him to make any impression but it was him who was keeping it ticking over. I agree with Jimbo , its one or the other and for me its Gerrard. Imo he just offers more at this level. Shame Beckham cant tackle/play a more defensive role cos it could solve two problems.

So the other option is to take him out of the team, and replace him with someone who can't deliver anyway (Wright-Phillips). It's fashionable to knock Beckham though. 148916[/snapback] .. I've never once said he should be dropped, I appreciate what he does still bring to the team its just infuriating because it could be more The other option, like I said, is to remind him what he does best. Its what Fergie used to when his ego and ambition got the better of him at Man U.. well Fergie would drop him but no one wants that. I just think he's given too free a reign. Its up to the management but its one of Svens weaknesses. Its got fuck all to do with fashion and tbh Ive said it for a long time, he's been doing the same thing since Sven took over. To be fair to him though recently he's not been as bad as he used to be. Papa, I'd never knock his workrate and tbh 90% of the time his own personal performance. Some times that personal performance has got in the way of the teams performance though. Set pieces have been phenomenal recently but worryingly its tied with us being fairly poor from open play imo. Beckham playing like he can and used to would go a long way to solving that.

How many from set pieces? How ever you want to put it Gol he doesnt get in the same positions, knock in the amount of crosses and have the same attacking threat as he did when at his peak. Theres nothing physically or tactically that stops him doing it. Its all mental, he wants to be the main man, at the centre of everything so he ends up playing too deep and fairly often nowhere near the right.

apart from he doesnt cross anymore, well not for England anyway. All we need to get the most out of Beckham is for one of the management team to blast him and tell him he's not a CM, to stop dropping too deep and to get back to playing like he did for Man U.

Shame Renton, because I think its scary that people are happy to see terrorists free on the streets of the UK 148407[/snapback] If you have no intelligence you can't help but let potential terrorists roam the streets ffs. Are you dizzy yet? 148413[/snapback] No. I think you should call it inadequate legislation. How would you know there is "no intelligence" ? 148422[/snapback] How can you bring legislation against terrorists when you don't know who the fuck the vast majority of them are? 148518[/snapback] Can't you read ? Do you try to understand anything ? How do YOU know they don't know who the terrorists are ? 148535[/snapback] Actually, I see Sima has ignored this ? Not like him at all 148581[/snapback] I think the police raid this thread is about gives us a fair clue that they don't. Unless of course the authorities are deliberately targetting innocent people as part of some devious plan 148632[/snapback] I think the police raid this thread is on about does nothing other than prove the point that they can't get everything right, as people have agreed. As people have also agreed, intelligence MUST be investigated and they must be prepared for the worst possible scenario. You must see this, unless you are soooper doooper intelligent with a medical qualification like Renton, so therefore think we should just prepare ourselves for the bomb to go off instead. And - "found no evidence" is not proof that they aren't involved in terrorist activity, only that they "found no evidence" at this current time. Or maybe needed more time to find it....whatever. 148648[/snapback] Leazes the Police seem to be pretty much admitting they were wrong, they've had the run of this house in question and they haven't found a thing. The people involved seem to be completely innocent parties. That seems to be the conclusion drawn from most quarters. I've already said the police had to act on their intelligence btw. The point in my previous post in this thread was a rather obvious one that had nothing to do with that though, i.e. the authorities don't seem to know who/where the terrorists are. I think that's an intelligence issue, rather than a policy/legislation issue. 148655[/snapback] the nature of the beast, it always has been, which is why you cant fight a war against terrorists

Happy Birthday dude

Can't really argue with that tbh 147483[/snapback] That is what they're doing though. Hasnt the chemical bomb raid proven that? Hamza was a loud mouth who was suspected of prior terrorist links. Now if you want to follow Leazes approach the guy wouldnt have been deported as soon as this came to light. Hamza is a mouth piece, someone behind the scenes, who doesnt get his hands dirty. Ive got to assume this wasnt know when he first apllied for asylum. Seeing as Leazes is the one who thinks he knows about security and intelligence I find it strange that you would have policy of killing any intelligence lead by immediately deporting a suspect . I agree entirely that these people should be eventually arrested and/or deported but it makes sense for this to only happen after the security forces feel there is no more intelligence to gain from them being free. The people in charge who know a lot more about his then either you or I and certainly more than Leazes have to make that decision. Its a difficult job but no doubt they'll have to weigh public safety with potential intelligence and the greater good that may do for future public safety. They probably have to make that decision daily. 147494[/snapback] Umm there.... 147516[/snapback] A general 'you'. I thought that was obviously aimed at Leazes view on immediately arresting and deporting, especially seeing as the bit in the sentence you didnt bold actually says so

where did I say you said you would?

Can't really argue with that tbh 147483[/snapback] That is what they're doing though. Hasnt the chemical bomb raid proven that? Hamza was a loud mouth who was suspected of prior terrorist links. Now if you want to follow Leazes approach the guy wouldnt have been deported as soon as this came to light. Hamza is a mouth piece, someone behind the scenes, who doesnt get his hands dirty. Ive got to assume this wasnt know when he first apllied for asylum. Seeing as Leazes is the one who thinks he knows about security and intelligence I find it strange that you would have policy of killing any intelligence lead by immediately deporting a suspect. I agree entirely that these people should be eventually arrested and/or deported but it makes sense for this to only happen after the security forces feel there is no more intelligence to gain from them being free. The people in charge who know a lot more about his then either you or I and certainly more than Leazes have to make that decision. Its a difficult job but no doubt they'll have to weigh public safety with potential intelligence and the greater good that may do for future public safety. They probably have to make that decision daily.

I've avoided posting about the world cup just in case I take Rentons mantle of most miserable poster. I know the hype says we can win it and on paper you could argue we have the players but has anyone actually seen this team put in a performance that says we have a realistic chance? or is it all on faith and hope? Its been together for a long time and Ive still yet to see it. Regardless of the players we have its the same old problems, we dont do the basics well enough. Even when we were supposedly dominant in the first half we were sloppy as hell. Even when we play the ball around a bit you just know that at some point someone is just going to hoof it upfield. Beckham still isnt getting into the positions were we can really take advantage of his crossing from open play. I dont think its purely down to the manager either.

Ive got Iran and Leazes USA cruel cruel fate

Nooooooooooooooooooo tbf though seven samurai has been remade a million times

( | ) <==8

Im in

Not at all, I did Chemical Engineering so it had fuck all to do with politics.. though it could mean Im more of an expert on bombs.

I know I know someone stop me

sorry Gemmill but last one.. its not misuse of words. I do not have the choice to be hit by a drunk driver. I do not have the choice to be set upon or not by some drunken arseholes in town. I do not have the choice of a terrorist placing a bomb in a place where I might be. Its the same overall question? Does the reason of saving lives warrant the erosion of civil liberties? Yes or No? You cant pick and choose your situations to suit. Far more people would be saved by banning alcohol than would be if we had no more terrorist attacks This is definitely the last post as you continuously ignore anything anyone has said about this issue. Curtail whos freedom? We dont know who they are , thats the problem! You cant prove youre not something, prove you arent a terrorist Leazes, how would you do it? What measures are we preventing? Its already been pointed out that actual terrorists, not fictional, have not entered the target country by illegal immegration. Targeting an innocent group of people and labelling them terrorists just because they're immigrants from the middle east wont solve anything! All of the 7/7 bombers didnt fit this profile. The bit in bold is exactly the way the situation is. Again what measure by pointing out that immegration has nothing to do with terrorism am I blocking? You can never have enough manpower, or enough funding ffs. We dont know who these people are because of the nature of who they are and what they do. The US is using all of it s resources to find the most famous terrorist on the planet, and they cant! How do we find terrorists that we dont know anything about? I don't think so. At the end of the day, the IRA bombed us because they wanted us out of NI, do you think if we pull out of the middle east the global bombing and terrorism would stop ? Along with the immigration problem ? So banning a whole group of people from entering the country because some might be terrorists wont make a difference? Thank you I asked the question earlier and unsurprisingly you didnt respond. What are Al Quaedas aims? Hamas's? Why does the specific aim make a difference to how we tackle it? They all have one. It might seem rather stupid and pointless but its there just like it was for the IRA. Theres no difference. These arent just mad muslim groups raging around the globe with the intent of killing people for the sake of it. Al Quaeda certainly initially wanted the US out of Saudi Arabia. Like I said before the only way terrorism stops is if they get what they want or the reason wanting it are removed. You cant fight a war against terrorists! You cant fight a war against an enemy you dont know! You'd think this was a new problem the way you go on. How many active terrorist groups are there now compared to the 70's and 80's? Hardly any. The immigration problem is a completley separate issue from terrorism. Why keep trying to link it? Its farcical. If we do pull out of the middle east and the reason for terrorist attacks stop why would that affect immigration into this country? Completley different issue You make too many assumptions about me. They are all wrong. At least you admit that immigration is increasing. Increasing the potential for more "disaffected UK citizens". Correct ? I get the impression you are happy to let it continue. We do not have the duty or the facilities to care for the rest of the world. We should not be regarded as a gravy train, which we are, which is of course why they single out Britain. How much more strain do you think can be put on the the country and our social services ? Which is all going to increase the potential for "more disaffected UK citizens". Correct ? If you want to discuss the merits or not of immigration its a different discussion. Again though its a rather tabloid look at the issue. Whats the percentage of immigrants on benefits comapred to those at work? Whats the same percentage for those you would describe as British? Which social group is really putting the strain on the welfare state? It isnt immigrants. What assumptions have I made? How are they wrong? You go on about life experience but it doesnt seem like you have much. What would make immigrants, and minority groups feel disenfranchised? To be given the same rights and freedoms as everyone else in this country? or to be treat like shit from day one? I didn't say they don't get things wrong. All we can do is minimise it as best as possible. Of course I know terrorist suspects are under surveillance. Not enough though. And the law isn't tight enough to deal with them properly. Which is what I said at the beginning. Surveillance in NI is different to surveillance of a middle eastern terror network. These are established over a number of years. Establishing networks in NI is obviously easier than in the middle east. And the potential of this middle eastern terrorism vastly exceeds that of the IRA, making it more important for it to be tackled more stringently. The IRA bombed us because they wanted us out of NI, yes ? Remind us again why middle eastern terrorists are bombing us ? What law isnt tight enough? how will it benefit? The potential of a middle east terrorist group does not exceed those of the IRA because of the reasons you yourself have stated. If terrorist cells are here , they are here and the act autonomously. They havent got the same manpower and support network in as close proximity as the IRA had Errm well we havent been bombed by middle eastern terrorists, have we? not for a long long time. I'd guess the last middle eastern connected incident was Lockerbie, could be wrong like Why are there middle eastern terrorists? Ive put that question to you numerous times. For some reason you think its because they want to live here??? Are you not aware of whats been going on the world for the past 50 years? Terrroism isnt new. Middle eastern terrorist groups arent new. The arent even as active as they were in the past.

or you can do what I used to and put whatever you want in SAP as no one checks the bastard thing anyway

I'd like to say yes

you have to register first before the code works Cheers Gemmill saved me £30

Anyone else used this? doesnt seem to work for me

and unsurprisingly you miss the point. You said we were under an increased terrorist threat (originally no distinction). We're not. The point is it doesnt matter what the terrorist is, they are tackled in exactly the same way. Sarcasm eh? Do you want reminding of your very first post? Get off the high horse man! Its the likes of the Sun and the Mail who continue to perpetuate the myth of the link between immigration and terrorism which you subscribe to. Its a myth. The evidence and facts point to something completley different. i personally think its incredibly dangerous to get the issue mixed up. It isnt going to help, solve or tackle either. It will only make them worse. well it comes from this The IRA to you was different because they didnt want to live here. Plenty of IRA members were here under the cover of living and working in the UK. Do Islamic terrorists want to live here? How is being a terrorist productive to living somewhere .. Ahhh but those immigrants might one day turn into terrorists and because of that we should stop them coming in right? Again back to previous questions what proportion of immigrants are from the middle east? How many muslim? Should we judge a whole group of people based on the possible but unlikely potential threat of one tiny group? Why dont we do that for all then? Why dont we legislate against white men. Lets have a curfew , it'll help stop crime. Lets ban alcohol it'll stop thousands of deaths a year, more than any terrorist threat, from alcohol related disease and crime. Who cares about civil liberties when it save lives right? Wouldnt your suggestion have worked just as well with the IRA? Dont let anyone Irish into the UK? You havent suggested that and have tried to distance the IRA from the current situation? why? Like Ive pointed out the IRA were a more serious threat because of their proximity both physically and their support network. whats increasing? Immigration? yes but yet again this isnt linked to terrorism and has nothing to do with how we best tackle it. The threat historically and factually is from present UK citizens and organised, funded terrorist organistions that have the resources to enter a country legitimately. Theres so many ifs and buts about that statement its ridiculous. Why are immigrants more likely to be influenced?. The vast majority want nothing more thant to have some affinity to the UK , they've come here for a better life. Where the evidence to back your statement up? Or the life experience? Ever lived outside of Newcastle? Ever lived in a muslim community?. Probably the best way to put them on the road you describe is to single them out and treat them like criminals, give them something to hate this country for. Oh and before you jump in this doesnt mean we should give them free houses and have all their relatives over either. Did the british lads responsible for 7/7 not have an affinity for the UK then? if not, why? How do you decide who has an affintiy for the UK or not? What are your criteria? the police and the intelligence services dont get things wrong then? Course they do! Do you think that people suspected of terrorism arent under survaillence? Theres no laws that need changing for this to happen. Its the same problem as it was with the IRA and it comes down to intelligence. No changing of laws will change this. It wont make it easier to find who terrorist x is because we just dont know who and where they are. The problem is they arent on the list! Or if they are and they are more organised have the resources to avoid detection. I did say this was against my better judgement can a mod take away my ability to post, I know I'll keep doing it and I really dont want to