Park Life

It's getting silly now.

Where I have coffee on Sat mornings. 2 min away.

One of the oldest houses in Hamburg (Just round the corner).

You wouldn't say that to big Mike.

We are screaming for a creative mf who can chip in with a few goals.

This is the square next to me.

"Mike Tyson, the former heavyweight boxing champion of the world, enters the room quietly. He has asked for bodyguards and got them. They mill around silently, darkly, in the background. Tyson is solid, nearly 6ft tall, and appears almost awkward in the spotlight. His notoriety within the boxing world exceeds that of all other pugilist icons, but the man here seems bemused by the attention. Bemused and battling to keep his body and soul together. For him it is all about body and soul, the body that’s been punched and pumped for decades in the ring and the soul that he says he hopes is on the ascendant. “I’m still trying to figure it all out,” he says softly in that familiar high-pitched voice with the pronounced lisp. He is hesitant when answering questions, scratching his rather elongated head thoughtfully. Once dubbed “the baddest man on the planet” — famously, he partially bit Evander Holyfield’s ear off in a championship bout, an action that cost him a $3 million (£2 million) fine — he’s now apparently committed to a new fight, that of becoming a better person. Tyson’s journey has been caught in close-up by his friend, the film director James Toback, in Tyson, a straightforward, intriguing documentary in which he speaks strikingly, candidly and at times with great wit about his life: his shabby childhood, his triumph in the ring, various falls from grace, the riches, the drink, drugs and sex, rehab — and, of course, serving time for rape." Rest here...inc short vid. http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol...icle5933097.ece

What were the odds you'd be first in?

At least one day a week I eat only raw things.

He said: “There is no hiding from the fact injuries have been the bane of my time at Newcastle. It is frustrating, however, and people will probably laugh, but I know I’m not injury-prone. “If you look at my time at Newcastle, the problems started when Paul Robinson landed on my foot against Tottenham just after Christmas. Loads of people get metatarsal injuries, but they are normally not as bad as mine. Nobody’s foot would not have broken in that situation. “I’ve then rushed my preparations for the World Cup. I played half-a-game for Newcastle. After being in plaster for so long my leg was de-conditioned and with hindsight, I should never have gone to Germany with England. “It’s easy to say that now, but if I had my time again I would still have gone because it was a World Cup. I’m not thinking what could have been, but with hindsight my leg was half as strong as it should have been. “Muscles support limbs and I twisted my knee awkwardly and that was it. All that came from someone landing on my foot, so I don’t think it’s my fault.” That knee injury, suffered in the first half of England’s 2-2 draw with Sweden in the final game of the group stage, ruled Owen out for the next ten months and he played just three games for Newcastle the following season." Tbf Paul Robinson used to be a proper fat cunt.

If Hiddink stays he would be a serious threat.

The pope is gay.

"A jumbo 18-pack of Quavers sits on the kitchen counter and there's a packet of custard creams in the cupboard. "Oh, they're for our niece when she comes to visit. She comes a lot," Emma insists."

Irony?

Well that's me telt 'You're that big-headed I bet you've got loads of mirrors and that', fucking hell Do you find your punters tend to ask for the radio on?

I really don't see how. Then again this is an argument that is made for Fop. The trap is laid.

Mark Thomas. Until Tuesday I was one of 800,000 innocent people in the UK who had their DNA on the police database. Most of us had a swab sample taken on arrest and our identifiable cell clusters have languished on police files even if charges were dropped or we were found not guilty in court. In 2003 I was arrested at a protest against the arms dealer BAE Systems and charged with causing £80 worth of damage to a bus. Leaving aside the irony that if any BAE Systems products only caused £80 of damage the purchasers would sue for a refund, seven months later I found myself on trial. After two days I was acquitted on the legal technicality of being innocent. More important, the court found there was no evidence for a crime having been committed in the first place. The experience left me frustrated, with only a 20-minute comedy routine to take away the pain of injustice. Now before folk howl that I am a champagne anarchist happy to harp on about civil liberties while murderers run free, let me explain my objections. I have no problem with those found guilty of a serious criminal offence being on the database, especially those in prison - it seems small beer that the state holds a tiny amount of their DNA on file when the primary clump of their genes is being held at Her Majesty's pleasure. Likewise those who have served their time: being on the database is the price you pay for having, as the Sweeney would say, "previous". Neither do I object to the police taking my DNA in the first place - but once a person is proven innocent what right and reason do the police have to retain the DNA profile? In December 2008 all this changed when the European court of human rights ruled that by retaining the DNA of the innocent, the UK government was in breach of Article 8 of the European convention, the right to family and private life. A spirit of optimism filled campaigners as Jacqui Smith had three months to comply with the ruling. However, the one thing we have learnt about Labour home secretaries and civil liberties is that they don't much like liberty. Or civility. Three months passed and nothing changed. So with my lawyer I sent a letter before claim to the Met commissioner, essentially threatening to issue judicial review proceedings unless my DNA was removed.

Send em back!

Philip Chawner, 53, and his 57-year-old wife Audrey weigh 24st. Their daughter Emma, 19, weighs 17st, while her older sister Samantha, 21, weighs 18st. The family from Blackburn claim £22,508 a year in benefits, equivalent to the take-home pay from a £30,000 salary. The Chawners, haven't worked in 11 years, claim their weight is a hereditary condition and the money they receive is insufficient to live on. Mr Chawner said: "What we get barely covers the bills and puts food on the table. It's not our fault we can't work. We deserve more." The family claim to spend £50 a week on food and consume 3,000 calories each a day. The recommended maximum intake is 2,000 for women and 2,500 for men. "We have cereal for breakfast, bacon butties for lunch and microwave pies with mashed potato or chips for dinner," Mrs Chawner told Closer magazine. "All that healthy food, like fruit and veg, is too expensive. We're fat because it's in our genes. Our whole family is overweight," she added." BNP poster material?

"Extracts from Ferguson’s wide-ranging interview with Alistair Campbell in the New Statesmen are splashed across all this morning’s papers. Asked by Campbell to name the Premier League’s top three managers, Ferguson picks Arsene Wenger, David Moyes and Martin O’Neill." I agree. Also I'd put Wenger above Fergy overall.

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this: and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar. To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse. So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour? That puts you in some heady company. You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it. Except it is NOT, only with certain groups which equals institutional racism, just as much as investigating a black persons death in a different way to a white persons death is institutional racism. It's still institutional racism, even when you happen to agree with it. How can a temporary strategy at a time of high tension and uncertainties be IR? I really think you're mis-reading this Fop.

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this: and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar. To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse. So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour? That puts you in some heady company. You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

Jesus wept man Leazes. I haven't done any u-turns, now or about 'planning' (I've always thought it a good idea to 'plan' the very next manager before sacking the incumbent, do you really disagree with this)???? Anyway, ffs, stop point-scoring and trying to derail the conversation to yet another Shepherd snore fest. My solution would be one of integration, in a nutshell. No faith schools would mean less divison in the next generation, period. Christian schools would have to go too mind. And if people didn't like it, they would be welcome to look for a different country to live in. I'd hardly think that makes me a hand wringer, but then again I'm not a sandal wearing Guardian reader either, I'm pretty much central in ideology regarding politics in all probability. To you though that makes me a loony leftist. Now what is this idea I'd be too horrified to know about. Deportation of illegal immigrants? No, I'm all for that and I'm pretty sure that's what happens to people who are caught out. But the problem stems from people legally living here, you know that, don't you? So my guess is what you're really talking about is enforced repatriation. So a serious question, how would it work? I'd honestly like to know, because I can't see any sensible way how it could, even if it was desirable. Integration isn't working, because hand wringers like you - but worse - are insisting that people like me [and worse] who say they should adapt to our ways or fuck off, are "racists". We will not get integrated schools with muslim kids learning how to be British citizens in favour of their muslim "schooling", and you know it. In fact, it will only go the opposite way, as is happening, ref the link I posted last week, which you [unsurprisingly] defended. I can say with absolute certainty, that in 20 years down the line, this whole situation will be a lot worse than today, and if you have half a brain and are prepared to admit it, will say that what I am saying now is absolutely correct. The comparison with the football club is relevant, I'm only pointing out that you, being such a smart lad, have been shown to be completely wrong but won't admit it. And time will prove you wrong again. Quite simply, people won't look for a different country to live in, because we make it too comfortable here for them, when we ought to have had firmer controls in the first place. I didn't say enforced repatriation by the way, but there are plenty of cunts in this country who we should kick out and if the legal system prevents it, then change the legal system. Do you know that police are guarding the house of one of those scumbags in Luton last week ? Why don't they guard a British man who protests against those who refuse to conform to the traditions of this country instead of banging him up ? We do have a choice in the matter of teaching our kids to learn urdu, and other such bollocks, and building schools for these racists, and the simple answer is to stop doing it and again, if they don't like it, then tough shit, they can bugger off back to where they came from. Your idealistic integrated society will never work, never. The only thing it will do is continue dividing the country. And wtf is a photo of Jack Nicholson got to do with it ? What planet do you live on Ha ha it's been working since the 60's. Britain is by miles the most integrated country in Europe. This new radical Islam is completely the fault of America and its idiocy and greed.