Park Life

Overrated.

Who'd have guessed. That turned out to be bollocks.... http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/news/2009/..._to_fork_in.htm Wahey! Another deadline. What happened to all that let the markets decide bollocks?! Exactly my problem with the whole issue; it should be one way or the other. Either... 1. Don't regulate past basic stuff like you can't charge people 1000% interest and let the chips fall where they may, or 2. Regulate and bailout as necessary. That's what's really screwing us in my opinion- we're sending this "Too Big to Fail" message and that's the wrong message. Wonder how these thieves are getting on with their plans for the next little war.

The bagels running England are putting the finishing touches to the next terror alert about now. Nice post from Fish earlier....I too am pretty much wound out regarding all the self-serving - short term bullshit from politicians in general.

"Yitzhak Rabin made a heroic attempt at resolving the cycle of violence in 1993 at the Oslo accords, so close in fact that he was murdered by a Jewish extremist in 1995." George Soros.

"...there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part." "If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions" No denial there. Is this what he said yesterday or just a cherry picked quote HF? And is there any real doubt about it [the holocaust occurring]? Any way, I'm happy to put my own prejudice on the plate. I admit I despise islamic states like Iran for their own abuses of human rights, so I guess I've got a conflict of interest in this discussion. It's cherry picked in that it's the man himself stating that the Holocaust happened. You can cherry pick the quote where he denies it too. I'd be interested to read it. Reading between the lines it sounds like a denial to me. I'm not going to add value by trawling the net with Google for other quotes so I'll trust you this is his worst public comment. In all honesty he comes off more xenophobic and racist than Nick Griffon most of the time.

He absolutely did (which is why it's a bit bizarre he was speaking - because the UN surely knew both exactly what he would say and what would happen). Aren't the UN trying to level the playing field a tad by giving him a voice even at such a low key event? The US veto of any resolution that might not be the best for their own or Israels interests narcs quite a lot of smaller members whose votes are completely discarded.... http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa03.html I'm not sure how it is decided in all honesty (if it was some block vote he may well "win" the right), that's the thing with the UN, there's several factions and at least one would gleefully fiddle whilst the world burnt if it got the targets they desired (which in fact it would, as they'd believe themselves to be capable of rising from the ashes much stronger). The problem the UN is basically build upon Western ideals, and for those factions such ideals are not particularly valued (in some case the exact opposite), yet what can the rest do when they realise their game has been taken away from them by those that don't want to play by those rules in the first place? (it's similar to Mugabe and the AU really) But I still can't see how anyone didn't think this was basically throwing a grenade into a bomb silo, which only leaves agendas for doing it. When you get to the security council the unfortunate fact is if it functioned like the general assembly nothing would ever get done (no matter the issue), as it stands it can be hard enough, it would be the League of Nations again and may well result in a similar outcome. As for the USA, they certainly use the UN to their own ends (but so do and have Russia and China), but in fairness they do pay for most of it. Actually the U.S. withold their subs for long periods when they are sulking. It's well documented.

"...there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part." "If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions" No denial there. Is this what he said yesterday or just a cherry picked quote HF? And is there any real doubt about it [the holocaust occurring]? Any way, I'm happy to put my own prejudice on the plate. I admit I despise islamic states like Iran for their own abuses of human rights, so I guess I've got a conflict of interest in this discussion. It's cherry picked in that it's the man himself stating that the Holocaust happened. You can cherry pick the quote where he denies it too. I'd be interested to read it. Reminds me of the misquoting in the western media (if it was reported at all) of the Chavez speech at the U.N. last year. One of the most intelligent speeches ever given regarding balance of power and resources and giving smaller countries a bigger voice at the U.N.

It's normal amongst free thinkers. FYI I fully support the U.S. taking steps in Pakistan (Waziristan) and Afghanistan. I have no issue with that, the number of training camps and the cruelty of the Taliban warranted it imo. But I am on record for not supporting the Iraqi invasion.

Thing is though that that's not what this was supposed to be about. And of course it's not like Dinnerjacket or the powers that be in Iran give a toss about that either, other than as a stick they can use to beat things for their own ends. It's what all countries do, but when we do it it's alright. Better to get round the table with Iran before it's too late if you ask me. Encourage a more moderate stance in return for goodies.

He absolutely did (which is why it's a bit bizarre he was speaking - because the UN surely knew both exactly what he would say and what would happen). They had enough trouble with similar issues last time and then it was just fighting about the wording of things (same issues though), not the "headline" speech as it were. He has repeatedly denied the holocaust and said Israel should be destroyed. Although he has backed away from both a little as the former didn't play too well domestically (it roused their large number of nationalists and religious nutters admittedly) or internationally, and the latter he seems to be using to try and "buy" nuclear concessions. Iran will have nukes and there isn't a thing the West can do about it short of invading. If you don't want nukes in the region you shouldn't have given them to Israel. Maybe, I wouldn't be surprised if air strikes were still a possibility though. Iran with nukes will be interesting though (even if you ignore the terrorism potential), they are jingoistic enough now, never mind with them. Air strikes will do nowt. The facilities are spread out across 70 odd installations and the key ones are sub-core.

Ans for yourself fuckhead. Is the purpose of these gathering window dressing or like Dinnerjacket should they be getting to grips with the real issues that divide us? I'll answer that question with a question: Do you think the purpose of his speech was to get to grips with the issue or to actually be divisive? Probably both. Do you think the conferemce is anything more than a back-slapping exercise anyway? The UN's a joke tbh. OK brilliant. You see if Israel had been there they could have ans his claims. But they weren't cause they sit pretty behind the American veto at the U.N. and continue to use state of the art warfare against civilians. They've seconded most of the fresh water in Gaza (soldiers routinely shoot holes in the watertrucks), they deny free travel in Palestine to Palestinians. Palestine is not allowed an airport or right to flyover. They bomb schools and power. Schoolchildren are encourage to paint messages on missiles and bombs that kill other schoolchildren etc etc...

"...there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part." "If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions" No denial there. Is this what he said yesterday or just a cherry picked quote HF? And is there any real doubt about it [the holocaust occurring]? Any way, I'm happy to put my own prejudice on the plate. I admit I despise islamic states like Iran for their own abuses of human rights, so I guess I've got a conflict of interest in this discussion. So we should overthrow Saudi Arabia then? Oh wait....

Ans for yourself fuckhead. Is the purpose of these gathering window dressing or like Dinnerjacket should they be getting to grips with the real issues that divide us? I'll answer that question with a question: Do you think the purpose of his speech was to get to grips with the issue or to actually be divisive? Answer the question.

He absolutely did (which is why it's a bit bizarre he was speaking - because the UN surely knew both exactly what he would say and what would happen). They had enough trouble with similar issues last time and then it was just fighting about the wording of things (same issues though), not the "headline" speech as it were. He has repeatedly denied the holocaust and said Israel should be destroyed. Although he has backed away from both a little as the former didn't play too well domestically (it roused their large number of nationalists and religious nutters admittedly) or internationally, and the latter he seems to be using to try and "buy" nuclear concessions. Iran will have nukes and there isn't a thing the West can do about it short of invading. If you don't want nukes in the region you shouldn't have given them to Israel.

"...there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part." "If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions" No denial there. Fuck you're quick, I was just looking for that.

Ans for yourself fuckhead. Is the purpose of these gathering window dressing or like Dinnerjacket should they be getting to grips with the real issues that divide us?

I beg to differ. His reactions and anticipation are world class. Not his finishing. I'm at work so I can't see the video. Is it the Pompey one? If so I still don't think that makes him a world class finisher. Far too many times in the last couple of seasons he's missed too many chances that someone who was a world class finisher would have buried. Most of his goals now come from him being able to make decisions and react faster than the defenders around him. Not because of his finishing ability. I would imagine all that you describe is part of what is known as 'finishing' non?

It's the wrong one. I normally link to Inzaghi (2J's love parade partner) missing twice from 5 yards.

Wot?

Who'd have guessed. That turned out to be bollocks.... http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/news/2009/..._to_fork_in.htm Wahey! Another deadline. Being someone closely related to the auto industry here in the States, I find it hard to believe that the government would insist that Wagoner step down and Fritz take the wheel. Not so much because I think Wagoner was a genius who was left holding the bag, but because none of the banks had their CEOs ousted throughout this process. Maybe I'm naive, but I think any large company is poorly run just by it's very nature. We just never noticed it before because nearly all Americans drive to work everyday, and as such, need cars to get there. How in the world you can fuck that up is beyond me, but at the same time, how in the world can you fuck up as an insurance company? That shit is the biggest racket on the face of the earth. You pay and pay and pay for some shit that might happen, then when it does, you get a tiny percentage back on what you've paid in over the years. I definitely wasn't a McCain supporter, but I also wasn't one of these moonies who was convinced that Obama was going to ride in on a lightning bolt and save us all from the big bad Bush. Clinton duped me with all his lies back in the first election I could vote in. It hasn't happened a second time. The truth is, we did it to ourselves, and like Thom Yorke so eloquently sang, that's what really hurts. We took on loans we couldn't afford from banks who knew we couldn't afford them, but the ever increasing housing market in this country made it all seem like a can't-lose proposition. When the real estate bubble finally burst and people couldn't even afford the no money down ridiculous ARM loans on houses they couldn't hope to afford, it all went to shit. Should the government have protected us from ourselves? In all honesty, no, but our government has transformed itself in my lifetime from necessary evil for the public good to babysitter and surrogate parent. It's all moot points though as this country was bought and sold when Nixon signed the HMOs into existence (at least in my opinion). Frankly, it all makes me want to vomit, and the two-party partisan cockblocking and name-calling that passes for politics in Washington these days gives me the dry heaves. To think I had family members die for this sham that passes for America these days is a fucking travesty. Totally agree that whichever party gets into power only maintains the status quo, the illusion of left and right wing policies is a charade perpetuated on both sides of the atlantic. The celebrations when their guy wins is baffling given that it's still exactly the same corporations that are running the show. Not sure I totally agree we did it to ourselves though. I know the view of government is different in America where the idea is they should interfere as little possible. But the only people that took out loans they couldn't afford were those gullible enough to be hoodwinked by the banks and the extortionate rates they'd offer someone on the bones of their arse. I believe it's the place of government to protect those people from their own stupidity, not enable the strongest members of society to bleed them dry and make off with their ill gotten gains. 5 star hotels, comissions, Bentley's, Chateau Lafite are all more important dontcha know...?

No you're right Alex, you and Parky are bang on, everybody else is wrong.

Sheep. It would appear people walked out at the mention of the word 'Israel'. Of the few quotes I've seen, a lot of what he said appeared to be correct as well. Aye. It was all prepped. Might as well have given them starting blocks. Cowards and sheep, letting down all the people they represent. Countries it seems these days aren't allowed to think or debate/discuss issues for themselves for fear of Amerika/Israel backlash.

I beg to differ. His reactions and anticipation are world class. Not his finishing.

Shouldn't the thread title be 'Burning Danny Bee"?