NJS

I read it being summed up as having the view that someone "had to" be to blame for any death - a bit strange but even more so in this case since as has been said, someone else is serving time for it.

Oh the grounds of? They want justice, yes. But the evidence has proved it wasn't Knox who did it. There wasn't a single trace of her DNA in the room. Besides, the person who admitted carrying out the crime is already locked up for it. It always seemed strange that they wanted these two after the African lad had (I think) confessed. I've also read that an appeal to the higher court would be normal procedure on the prosecutor's part. Of course she'll be long gone by then.

I had 4 pints yesterday dinnertime (boss being off a sad excuse) and felt quite ill last night when I got home. I'm beginning to think I either need to start drinking more or give up all together.

They've also released a Kindle without keyboard for £89 - if you haven't already got one I'd recommend that.

No different to the fuckers in the past who wouldn't play on a Sunday - the way people just shrug and accept is just cowardice imo - no matter which faith. Though I would also say this is the first time I've seen it used as an excuse - and I don't believe he's the first devout one in the English game.

Most banks do what is called a "basic" bank account which requires no credit check - you can get a cash card with it but no debit card unfortunately. One of the Wonga/Quick Quid sites did what I thought was an interesting advert a while ago - as it only ran for a short while I assume they were forced to pull it. It compared the cost of getting a small amount (£50-£100) from them and paying it back a couple of weeks later on your pay day with an unauthorised overdraft complete with the usual letter from a big bank - guess which was cheaper. Overall the concept is a a bid sad and in some ways preys on the desperate but I don't think morally they're too far away from other financial organisations.

Obviously theres a nostalgia for our relative youth similar to the way some people stop listening to new music as they get older and declare whichever decade they were in as the best but I still reckon the almost reckless spontaneity of being a football fan in the 80s (or before) is a big miss.

I think you're right. But then that idiot downgraded other things like the honours listings too. Am I right in thinking the last (and possibly only) PM to have a state funeral is Churchill? WTF has she done that would have been deserving of that? If it's in the next 4 years then a state funeral's a cert imo - though even though I think he was a Fascist cunt, I can totally understand how comparisons with Churchill make it look OTT. One of the things I have against N-O is the number of student wanker apologists who just don't get what she was. I know I sound like an old git with a "you had to live through it to understand" but it holds true in this case. That applies to football pre-Sky as well obviously.

One establishment edifice that's never mentioned is the BBC - I still remember Moira Stewart (not her fault obviously) reading a bulletin at 5pm along the lines of "Hooliganism may not be the cause". As for Thatcher its one of a million reasons to celebrate her death.

The girlie yelp to persuade the ref should be the first thing clamped down - easy to recognise as the higher the pitch the more fake it usually is.

It's a pity sometimes we can't apply a sort of childish "it's only a red card if someone actually gets hurt" rule - although the feigning is supposed to persuade the ref that's the case anyway. I normally slag off Merson but last week on Soccer Saturday he suggested a weekly panel of ex-pros or whatever going through the incidents and handing out bans to divers and feigners - good idea imo - in that way Klasnic could have been sent off but then the other player banned for being a tart/cheat.

He had some good stuff but lost me with defending going down easily like the Norwich player did.

The masterplan must be to beat the Mackems twice and draw the other 36 games. Ba looked a bit better, Cabaye looked good, rest average apart from Obertan who was shit.

Right just got this Tapatalk and checked this shit out - looks like my lack of posting during the day due to treading softly at new place is over Well done web geeks.

No to the icing, big yes to marzipan. Don't really like almonds but I love marzipan - used to get wrong as a kid for peeling it off Battenburg and leaving the cake.

I know i can just wait until tomorrow or browse the web but does anyone know why a first salary payment from a new employer which will almost certainly have been done with no P45 input would suddenly see the net percentage of income tax go from about 21% to 30% and the NI go from 7.5% to 8%? (edit: compared to last payslip from previous place) Is this some kind of emergency measure which will be adjusted over time or as a one off? I think PP is the bloke but any other guesses welcome.

Allardyce flashback - a point at QPR will be heralded as a result - fuck off. We have a plethora of shit players and that includes some of the much vaunted "improvements" signed in the summer.

As a namby-pamby Leftie I fucking hate it when bollocks like "Bush and Blair killed a million Iraqis" is spouted. They certainly caused the shitpot (with obvious help from Saddam) but the notion that Western forces killed that number is shite. Seems like you can't mention the factional terrorism.

I don't think the idea of an empire is wrong per se though I suppose historically subjugation has been a common theme. Some of the more "noble" claims for the British Empire are quite desirable imo though a lot of them only really took hold post independence. I don't cling to the idea that all cultures should be celebrated and respected no matter how shitty they are and the idea of a "superior" ideal isn't bad. I guess in reality though you couldn't have the imposition of cultures without some brutality - its the degree of acceptable brutality and subjugation that is debatable. I do remember reading that the Mongols despite their reputation, never imposed any religion on their conquests - interesting in the sense that but for an untimely death, they would have conquered Western Europe which would have led to a different age. Of course the ideal form of resistance to oppression is the Parnell/Ghandi/MLK model but I can understand from a simple human nature pov how people like Mandela could become convinced that terrorism is the only way out no matter how immoral "on the ground".

Regarding the part in bold, some of the people they met talked of that, these huge bureaucracies that didn't communicate effectively with each other, along with a lack of action and incompetence from members of the government following warnings about potential terror threats to public airlines. As you say, it doesn't add up to much, it's just the inevitable consequence of human failings within organisations (incompetence). Unfortunately in this case it allowed for a terrible incident to take place. I've no doubt the US government weren't keen for the full scale of their incompetence to be revealed in investigations and so on. The war on 'terror' is a bad name for what is a war against radical Islamists. It's a war whether we like it or not, you can't reconcile with such an ideology. People like NJS will say that the existence of such a death-obsessed cult is a result of our previous governments' foreign policies and the conditions they have created: abject poverty, so on, so forth. What people like him ignore is that radical Islamists are the creator of poverty--the first thing they do is subjugate half the population and deny them access to employment or education. They are not an anti-imperialist movement, rather they seek to reestablish the Caliphate, however they are without any capacity for self-criticism, and their actions and beliefs are so hateful that ultimately it is a self-defeating movement. Hitchens is a great advocate of the battle against radical Islamists, a battle as he puts it, "of everything I love against everything I hate." I'm sympathetic with his views, hence I can get on board with the idea that military action in Afghanistan and even Iraq could potentially be a force for good. At the very least I'm interested in taking discussion of the issues further than a lot of the anti-war movement are willing to. They are still going over the same tired points that were brought up before the invasion began, and the reality of their position is that they'd rather have had Saddam Hussein remain in power until Iraq inevitably imploded (it was already well on its way, and who's to say the consequences of that wouldn't have been worse?), than have the freely elected president Jalal Talabani, an educated Kurd and longtime campaigner for democracy, in power. The truth is a lot of Brits are very conservative and this shows in their objection toward intervention in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Kosovo, Bosnia, Ruanda and so on. I tend to lean toward intervention where it is possible and warranted. Saddam needed getting rid of since the late 80s. I actually think both. Any ideology, no matter how fucked up and fundamentally wrong, can flourish given the right fucked-up stimulus. Just as I think that British actions in various parts of the empire including Ireland almost deserved some kind of response - even if that response is cuntishness in itself.

While completely accepting that Muslim Fuckwits actually carried it out, I've always thought I wouldn't be surprised if certain elements in the US knew something was coming - definitely not Bush though - his reaction was too honestly stupid. The building 7 stuff is quite interesting though.

True "Entrepreneurs" don't pay normal income tax so its a shit argument. If someone earns 300k say then on the the last 150k they retain 75k at present - if it was dropped they'd have an extra 15k - if you give someone who has all they want another 15k what the fuck will they do with it? Get the leather seat option on their next 911 at a guess - how the fuck does that boost the economy? Absolute cunts.

If you bothered reading HF's many accurate posts on this you'd know that the spending was fine until a global recession hit which caused revenues to fall. If there was growth then the increased revenues would easily cover this so called fatal debt - but idealogical cuts strangle growth.

Read the other day that the maximum spending under Labour was 35% of GDP - this was frequently exceeded by Thatcher and reached 40% under John Major.

Amazed Arsenal haven't come in for Tiote.