Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[ralphjohn69]

First topic message reminder :

It's not logic. Most pot 4 teams are no worse than Rangers. If Rangers were the worst ever pot 4 team last year, what makes them any better now?

Because instead of playing another Pot 3 team they will be playing a Pot 4 team, who will probably be worse than a Pot 3 team so they have a better chance of getting 3rd, although it's obviously not guaranteed. You really don't help yourself when you post about football....

[super_realist]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67076341

BBC doubling down on not calling terrorists terrorists. Even Starmer weighing in against the BBC.

Remember - don't pay the licence fee. Never, ever, ever.

Compete BS from the BBC. Virtually every first world country refers to them as a terrorist group.
They claim it's because calling them terrorists would be "taking sides" I don't understand that, this is a group which murdered a grandmother, filmed it on her phone and posted it on her own Facebook page, it's beheading babies and indiscriminately gunning down civilians.
If you can call a murderer a murderer, a diddler a diddler, or a r***ist a r***ist (maybe you can't with the preposterous censorship on here) why not call a terrorist group a terrorist group?
They're so afraid of the Muslim lobby.

Rubbish. Try thinking.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67083432

Countries calling Hamas terrorists is not the same as the BBC doing so. You don't appear equipped to understand this sort of thing, but you'll just have to get used to it, I'm afraid. You ruin any argument you might have had with your last throwaway remark as well, which is just your own prejudiced opinion.

Why is it certain media outlets won't call terrorism terrorism. I don't buy the "impartiality" excuse given that the likes of the BBC are on record as NOT being impartial on many things.
Seems they only want to be impartial when it suits them.

I'm afraid I disagree. Again, your last sentence renders anything else you put forward as irrelevant, really. All it does is show your very obvious bias in forming your opinion on this.

It's not my bias when the BBC have had to apologise for bias and for lacking impartiality

[super_realist]

Gary Lineker et al strangely silent.

The only explanation is that they are left-wing terrorist sympathsizers who are rejoicing in private.

Wasn't that long ago that Lineker lamented the death of some Hamas terrorist, so you might not be wide of the mark.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news/palestinian-footballer-lamented-by-lineker-was-hamas-terrorist-1WAfc0XR0JURkNnq8SlAAQ

Oooo! Could it be that Lineker was commenting purely on the death of a fellow footballer? Could it be that he was unaware of him being, allegedly, part of Hamas at the time of that post? I wouldn't read that much into it.

I find it unsurprising that Lineker, or any other person that S_R labels as a leftist wimp, might be quiet at the moment. Anyone who might be critical, in any way whatsoever, of Israel knows that such thoughts aren't allowed at the moment, if ever. The accepted orthodoxy is that there's zero nuance to the situation in that area of the world. Israel = saintly; Palestinians/Hamas = the Devil incarnate. No questions asked. Obvious really.

Never stops Lineker and his hypocrite champagne socialist brethren before. Thought he'd jump at the chance to show how "worthy and earnest" he is.

It's odd that none of these "look at how decent and caring I am" types never stand up and categorically state that both sides are monstrous. They've always got to play to their particular political acolytes. They've always got to have "a side"

I'm not a fan of either and think both sides are depraved terrorists built on a history of being utter c***ts, there's no need to support either side, but people really should agree that depraved acts on either side are not "justified" or a "a proportional response"

[JuliusHMarx]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67076341

BBC doubling down on not calling terrorists terrorists. Even Starmer weighing in against the BBC.

Remember - don't pay the licence fee. Never, ever, ever.

Compete BS from the BBC. Virtually every first world country refers to them as a terrorist group.
They claim it's because calling them terrorists would be "taking sides" I don't understand that, this is a group which murdered a grandmother, filmed it on her phone and posted it on her own Facebook page, it's beheading babies and indiscriminately gunning down civilians.
If you can call a murderer a murderer, a diddler a diddler, or a r***ist a r***ist (maybe you can't with the preposterous censorship on here) why not call a terrorist group a terrorist group?
They're so afraid of the Muslim lobby.

Rubbish. Try thinking.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67083432

Countries calling Hamas terrorists is not the same as the BBC doing so. You don't appear equipped to understand this sort of thing, but you'll just have to get used to it, I'm afraid. You ruin any argument you might have had with your last throwaway remark as well, which is just your own prejudiced opinion.

Why is it certain media outlets won't call terrorism terrorism. I don't buy the "impartiality" excuse given that the likes of the BBC are on record as NOT being impartial on many things.
Seems they only want to be impartial when it suits them.

I'm afraid I disagree. Again, your last sentence renders anything else you put forward as irrelevant, really. All it does is show your very obvious bias in forming your opinion on this.

It's not my bias when the  BBC have had to apologise for bias and for lacking impartiality  

True - https://fishfocus.co.uk/bbc-apologises-for-bias/

[navyblueshorts]

Gary Lineker et al strangely silent.

The only explanation is that they are left-wing terrorist sympathsizers who are rejoicing in private.

Wasn't that long ago that Lineker lamented the death of some Hamas terrorist, so you might not be wide of the mark.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news/palestinian-footballer-lamented-by-lineker-was-hamas-terrorist-1WAfc0XR0JURkNnq8SlAAQ

Oooo! Could it be that Lineker was commenting purely on the death of a fellow footballer? Could it be that he was unaware of him being, allegedly, part of Hamas at the time of that post? I wouldn't read that much into it.

I find it unsurprising that Lineker, or any other person that S_R labels as a leftist wimp, might be quiet at the moment. Anyone who might be critical, in any way whatsoever, of Israel knows that such thoughts aren't allowed at the moment, if ever. The accepted orthodoxy is that there's zero nuance to the situation in that area of the world. Israel = saintly; Palestinians/Hamas = the Devil incarnate. No questions asked. Obvious really.

Ah OK, so why hasn't he commented on the Israeli footballer killed by the terrorists?

Not sure what media you're consuming if you think it's reported on purely as 'Israel = saintly; Palestinians/Hamas = the Devil incarnate.'

I have no idea - I'm not psychic. The comment he made that you referred to was last year, in a very different environment. I guess he's just decided it's better to say nothing on any front until things calm down a bit? Possibly a sound strategy.

[navyblueshorts]

Let me help you:

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

Bless, you're completely misunderstanding my stance. I don't pay for a TV licence because I don't need to.

That's fine, but perhaps you should make your actual position clear in the first place? You knew very well what I was referring to.

[navyblueshorts]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67076341

BBC doubling down on not calling terrorists terrorists. Even Starmer weighing in against the BBC.

Remember - don't pay the licence fee. Never, ever, ever.

Compete BS from the BBC. Virtually every first world country refers to them as a terrorist group.
They claim it's because calling them terrorists would be "taking sides" I don't understand that, this is a group which murdered a grandmother, filmed it on her phone and posted it on her own Facebook page, it's beheading babies and indiscriminately gunning down civilians.
If you can call a murderer a murderer, a diddler a diddler, or a r***ist a r***ist (maybe you can't with the preposterous censorship on here) why not call a terrorist group a terrorist group?
They're so afraid of the Muslim lobby.

Rubbish. Try thinking.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67083432

Countries calling Hamas terrorists is not the same as the BBC doing so. You don't appear equipped to understand this sort of thing, but you'll just have to get used to it, I'm afraid. You ruin any argument you might have had with your last throwaway remark as well, which is just your own prejudiced opinion.

Why is it certain media outlets won't call terrorism terrorism. I don't buy the "impartiality" excuse given that the likes of the BBC are on record as NOT being impartial on many things.
Seems they only want to be impartial when it suits them.

I'm afraid I disagree. Again, your last sentence renders anything else you put forward as irrelevant, really. All it does is show your very obvious bias in forming your opinion on this.

It's not my bias when the  BBC have had to apologise for bias and for lacking impartiality  

Your anti-BBC bias is clear, and has been for an age, therefore I suggest any prior point you made was arguably flawed.

[navyblueshorts]

Gary Lineker et al strangely silent.

The only explanation is that they are left-wing terrorist sympathsizers who are rejoicing in private.

Wasn't that long ago that Lineker lamented the death of some Hamas terrorist, so you might not be wide of the mark.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news/palestinian-footballer-lamented-by-lineker-was-hamas-terrorist-1WAfc0XR0JURkNnq8SlAAQ

Oooo! Could it be that Lineker was commenting purely on the death of a fellow footballer? Could it be that he was unaware of him being, allegedly, part of Hamas at the time of that post? I wouldn't read that much into it.

I find it unsurprising that Lineker, or any other person that S_R labels as a leftist wimp, might be quiet at the moment. Anyone who might be critical, in any way whatsoever, of Israel knows that such thoughts aren't allowed at the moment, if ever. The accepted orthodoxy is that there's zero nuance to the situation in that area of the world. Israel = saintly; Palestinians/Hamas = the Devil incarnate. No questions asked. Obvious really.

Never stops Lineker and his hypocrite champagne socialist brethren before. Thought he'd jump at the chance to show how "worthy and earnest" he is.

It's odd that none of these "look at how decent and caring I am"  types never stand up and categorically state that both sides are monstrous. They've always got to play to their particular political acolytes. They've always got to have "a side"

I'm not a fan of either and think both sides are depraved terrorists built on a history of being utter c***ts, there's no need to support either side, but people really should agree that depraved acts on either side are not "justified" or a "a proportional response"  

Generally agree here. However, why would you automatically assume that Lineker et al would jump at the chance to sound off on this? Perhaps you don't know the man, or have any real insight into his principles?

[navyblueshorts]

Spoiler:

"Terrorists Attack America"


Not sure where it leaves me that I might be on the same side as Duty and Super.  


"Terrorist

a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

I actually don't understand how calling someone a terrorist is taking sides if they literally meet the definition.

A fair point, well-made. In that regard, then, we can also safely say that the Israeli state is a terrorist organisation, can't we? I'm sure everyone would agree?

What? No comments? Shattering silence on this. Impressive.

[Duty281]

Can a nation state be a terrorist organisation?

[JuliusHMarx]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

[Soul Requiem]

Let me help you:

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

Bless, you're completely misunderstanding my stance. I don't pay for a TV licence because I don't need to.

That's fine, but perhaps you should make your actual position clear in the first place? You knew very well what I was referring to.

My position was perfectly clear in the first place, you merely jumped to an erroneous conclusion. Engage the argument in future would be my advice.

[JuliusHMarx]

Let me help you:

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

Bless, you're completely misunderstanding my stance. I don't pay for a TV licence because I don't need to.

That's fine, but perhaps you should make your actual position clear in the first place? You knew very well what I was referring to.

My position was perfectly clear in the first place, you merely jumped to an erroneous conclusion. Engage the argument in future would be my advice.

Why on earth, in a discussion about victimless crime and civil disobedience, did you jump in to effectively say "By the way I'm not committing a crime"? What a useless contribution that was.

[super_realist]

Spoiler:

"Terrorists Attack America"


Not sure where it leaves me that I might be on the same side as Duty and Super.  


"Terrorist

a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

I actually don't understand how calling someone a terrorist is taking sides if they literally meet the definition.

A fair point, well-made. In that regard, then, we can also safely say that the Israeli state is a terrorist organisation, can't we? I'm sure everyone would agree?

What? No comments? Shattering silence on this. Impressive.

I'd literally said that above Navy

[super_realist]

Gary Lineker et al strangely silent.

The only explanation is that they are left-wing terrorist sympathsizers who are rejoicing in private.

Wasn't that long ago that Lineker lamented the death of some Hamas terrorist, so you might not be wide of the mark.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news/palestinian-footballer-lamented-by-lineker-was-hamas-terrorist-1WAfc0XR0JURkNnq8SlAAQ

Oooo! Could it be that Lineker was commenting purely on the death of a fellow footballer? Could it be that he was unaware of him being, allegedly, part of Hamas at the time of that post? I wouldn't read that much into it.

I find it unsurprising that Lineker, or any other person that S_R labels as a leftist wimp, might be quiet at the moment. Anyone who might be critical, in any way whatsoever, of Israel knows that such thoughts aren't allowed at the moment, if ever. The accepted orthodoxy is that there's zero nuance to the situation in that area of the world. Israel = saintly; Palestinians/Hamas = the Devil incarnate. No questions asked. Obvious really.

Never stops Lineker and his hypocrite champagne socialist brethren before. Thought he'd jump at the chance to show how "worthy and earnest" he is.

It's odd that none of these "look at how decent and caring I am"  types never stand up and categorically state that both sides are monstrous. They've always got to play to their particular political acolytes. They've always got to have "a side"

I'm not a fan of either and think both sides are depraved terrorists built on a history of being utter c***ts, there's no need to support either side, but people really should agree that depraved acts on either side are not "justified" or a "a proportional response"  

Generally agree here. However, why would you automatically assume that Lineker et al would jump at the chance to sound off on this? Perhaps you don't know the man, or have any real insight into his principles?

Because he likes to demonstrate how "decent " he is whenever he gets the chance.
Probably he hasn't managed it yet as he's not managed how to get an attack on the Tories in as part of his tweet.

[navyblueshorts]

Can a nation state be a terrorist organisation?

Fair play. Thought you, if anyone, would ask that!

TBH, this is boring now. We're arguing the toss over a definition of a word when ~3000 are now dead, and Israel have ordered ~1.1m people to evacuate a damaged, built-up population centre in less than 24 hours before they let the dogs off war off their leashes. Still, I guess it gives them a fig leaf to wave and say "We were trying really, really hard to avoid innocent civilian casualties."

[navyblueshorts]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

[navyblueshorts]

Let me help you:

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

Bless, you're completely misunderstanding my stance. I don't pay for a TV licence because I don't need to.

That's fine, but perhaps you should make your actual position clear in the first place? You knew very well what I was referring to.

My position was perfectly clear in the first place, you merely jumped to an erroneous conclusion. Engage the argument in future would be my advice.

Don't be disingenuous and then attempt to look clever, would be my advice in future. You're welcome.

[navyblueshorts]

Spoiler:

"Terrorists Attack America"


Not sure where it leaves me that I might be on the same side as Duty and Super.  


"Terrorist

a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

I actually don't understand how calling someone a terrorist is taking sides if they literally meet the definition.

A fair point, well-made. In that regard, then, we can also safely say that the Israeli state is a terrorist organisation, can't we? I'm sure everyone would agree?

What? No comments? Shattering silence on this. Impressive.

I'd literally said that above Navy

Maybe. Apologies if so. Overlooked your reference to my post.

[navyblueshorts]

Interesting article in The Atlantic, here.

If you can't access, I probably shouldn't do this, but:

Spoiler:

[JAS]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

[super_realist]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

Haven't liked Boyle for years since he jumped on the "progressive" bandwagon but that sounds quite funny.
It's amazing that Biden hasn't been medically retired.

[JAS]

Gary Lineker et al strangely silent.

The only explanation is that they are left-wing terrorist sympathsizers who are rejoicing in private.

Wasn't that long ago that Lineker lamented the death of some Hamas terrorist, so you might not be wide of the mark.

https://www.thejc.com/news/news/palestinian-footballer-lamented-by-lineker-was-hamas-terrorist-1WAfc0XR0JURkNnq8SlAAQ

Oooo! Could it be that Lineker was commenting purely on the death of a fellow footballer? Could it be that he was unaware of him being, allegedly, part of Hamas at the time of that post? I wouldn't read that much into it.

I find it unsurprising that Lineker, or any other person that S_R labels as a leftist wimp, might be quiet at the moment. Anyone who might be critical, in any way whatsoever, of Israel knows that such thoughts aren't allowed at the moment, if ever. The accepted orthodoxy is that there's zero nuance to the situation in that area of the world. Israel = saintly; Palestinians/Hamas = the Devil incarnate. No questions asked. Obvious really.

Never stops Lineker and his hypocrite champagne socialist brethren before. Thought he'd jump at the chance to show how "worthy and earnest" he is.

It's odd that none of these "look at how decent and caring I am"  types never stand up and categorically state that both sides are monstrous. They've always got to play to their particular political acolytes. They've always got to have "a side"

I'm not a fan of either and think both sides are depraved terrorists built on a history of being utter c***ts, there's no need to support either side, but people really should agree that depraved acts on either side are not "justified" or a "a proportional response"  

Generally agree here. However, why would you automatically assume that Lineker et al would jump at the chance to sound off on this? Perhaps you don't know the man, or have any real insight into his principles?

Because he likes to demonstrate how "decent " he is whenever he gets the chance.
Probably he hasn't managed it yet as he's not managed how to get an attack on the Tories in as part of his tweet.

This is brilliant, a whole passage on what Lineker might have said if he hadn't kept strangely silent... only problem is...he has stayed silent. "Ach no problem, I'll just go to the Rishi 7 bins Sunak playbook...and make something up". IT NEVER HAPPENED!! If you want to make Poopie up in your head to justify your hatred of Lineker because you don't agree with him and his take on many aspects of life Supes, I'd suggest the best place for those thoughts and ideas is the privacy your own head.

[super_realist]

It was merely my surprise JAS that Lineker and his acolytes haven't tweeted when they are usually so keen to put in their tuppence worth to ANY subject that might make them look good to the great and the good of Islington.

[JAS]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

Haven't liked Boyle for years since he jumped on the "progressive" bandwagon but that sounds quite funny.
It's amazing that Biden hasn't been medically retired.

FFS there you go again, if somebodies views don't align to yours they're jumping on the progressive bandwagon. Starmer wasn't spared either. My father was a toolmaker... Well obviously... he made you ya cxxx

[JAS]

Quite funny that you'd categorise/demonise/tar with the same brush both Lineker and Boyle. Lineker wouldn't say booo to a goose whereas Frankie...he'd debate whether he would shag it then kill it or the other way round....obviously depending on which way round was considered the most progressive :-p

[super_realist]

Lineker falls over himself to give his view so I'm quite surprised he hasn't put his oar in here.
Boyle, at least in his TV guise has joined the "Stonewall cult" view of life and therefore become the sort of person he used to be so good at deriding.
Can't speak for his stand up, but you'd know better having just been at one of his gigs.

[navyblueshorts]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

Haven't liked Boyle for years since he jumped on the "progressive" bandwagon but that sounds quite funny.
It's amazing that Biden hasn't been medically retired.

FFS there you go again, if somebodies views don't align to yours they're jumping on the progressive bandwagon. Starmer wasn't spared either. My father was a toolmaker... Well obviously... he made you ya cxxx

It's quite funny that someone wouldn't advocate that progress is a good thing to aim for. Let's all just stagnate - obviously a much better idea.

[Duty281]

Video depiction of Supers inner monologue.

Spoiler:

We'll have to confront our cultural differences one day. Will it be a peaceful confrontation? Doubtful.

Very doubtful.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-67101089

[super_realist]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

Haven't liked Boyle for years since he jumped on the "progressive" bandwagon but that sounds quite funny.
It's amazing that Biden hasn't been medically retired.

FFS there you go again, if somebodies views don't align to yours they're jumping on the progressive bandwagon. Starmer wasn't spared either. My father was a toolmaker... Well obviously... he made you ya cxxx

It's quite funny that someone wouldn't advocate that progress is a good thing to aim for. Let's all just stagnate - obviously a much better idea.

You're conflating the adverb with the use of the word in relation to political do-gooders.

[JAS]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

Haven't liked Boyle for years since he jumped on the "progressive" bandwagon but that sounds quite funny.
It's amazing that Biden hasn't been medically retired.

FFS there you go again, if somebodies views don't align to yours they're jumping on the progressive bandwagon. Starmer wasn't spared either. My father was a toolmaker... Well obviously... he made you ya cxxx

It's quite funny that someone wouldn't advocate that progress is a good thing to aim for. Let's all just stagnate - obviously a much better idea.

You're conflating the adverb with the use of the word in relation to political do-gooders.

I'd say it was more a case of critics of alleged political do-gooders not grasping the concept of "progressive".

So if you don't like do-gooders does than mean you like political do-badders?? No need to answer...we already know!!

[super_realist]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

Haven't liked Boyle for years since he jumped on the "progressive" bandwagon but that sounds quite funny.
It's amazing that Biden hasn't been medically retired.

FFS there you go again, if somebodies views don't align to yours they're jumping on the progressive bandwagon. Starmer wasn't spared either. My father was a toolmaker... Well obviously... he made you ya cxxx

It's quite funny that someone wouldn't advocate that progress is a good thing to aim for. Let's all just stagnate - obviously a much better idea.

You're conflating the adverb with the use of the word in relation to political do-gooders.

I'd say it was more a case of critics of alleged political do-gooders not grasping the concept of "progressive".

So if you don't like do-gooders does than mean you like political do-badders?? No need to answer...we already know!!

Not at all, I'm talk about people jumping on the absurd bandwagon of the likes of gender ideology, critical race theory and all that hogwash because they think it makes them look good. I don't for a minute think they believe it.

[JuliusHMarx]

Blimey, as well as being the country's top geologist, or whatever it is, you're also the world's only genuine psychic. I'm in awe.

[super_realist]

Blimey, as well as being the country's top geologist, or whatever it is, you're also the world's only genuine psychic. I'm in awe.

Given how they fumble over simple questions and are trying so badly to fit an answer in to placate particular lobbies it would seem highly likely they don't believe it, they are seemingly just saying what they think wants to be heard, otherwise why find it so difficult to answer?

Do you really think that Sturgeon for example thought a double r***ist was an actual woman? Besides I clearly said that it was my opinion they don't believe it, I didn't state it was an actual fact, not did I even imply I read their mind.

[JuliusHMarx]

Oh, I actually really thought you'd read their mind. Now I'm disappointed.

[navyblueshorts]

Meanwhile, Trump praises Hezbollah as 'very smart'.

Yeah. No surprises there. Idiot. Maybe we could allow him into Gaza to negotiate w/ Hamas? I'm sure he'd be up for that...

I went to see Frankie Boyle in Reading last night and he had the most exquisite description of Trump..He's like a Wotsit with a quaver on top. Biden wasn't spared either, he's not doing a bad job for someone who doesn't even know he's president, he's just withering away, his skin is already translucent, he looks like a Vietnamese spring roll.

Haven't liked Boyle for years since he jumped on the "progressive" bandwagon but that sounds quite funny.
It's amazing that Biden hasn't been medically retired.

FFS there you go again, if somebodies views don't align to yours they're jumping on the progressive bandwagon. Starmer wasn't spared either. My father was a toolmaker... Well obviously... he made you ya cxxx

It's quite funny that someone wouldn't advocate that progress is a good thing to aim for. Let's all just stagnate - obviously a much better idea.

You're conflating the adverb with the use of the word in relation to political do-gooders.

Possibly deliberately, I'll admit.

[McLaren]

Navy

Sorry this is now probably past the time it was relevant, I haven't logged in for a few days. But yes, don't see why you couldn't label a state as terrorists. You tend to hear the term "state sponsored terrorism".

Although typically over the decades I think the usage of terrorism has been more around organisations much smaller than states. If I hear the term terrorist organisation I think al Qaeda, IRA, ETA etc, rather than a state.

Happy just to call what Israel are up to as genocide.

But I guess we shouldn't be all that bothered about what people call it, as long as the despicable nature of the act is conveyed. I just don't buy the BBC reasoning that calling someone a terrorist is necessarily taking sides, and yes I read the document Julius posted.

[super_realist]

Navy

Sorry this is now probably past the time it was relevant, I haven't logged in for a few days. But yes, don't see why you couldn't label a state as terrorists. You tend to hear the term "state sponsored terrorism".

Although typically over the decades I think the usage of terrorism has been more around organisations much smaller than states. If I hear the term terrorist organisation I think al Qaeda, IRA, ETA etc, rather than a state.

Happy just to call what Israel are up to as genocide.

But I guess we shouldn't be all that bothered about what people call it, as long as the despicable nature of the act is conveyed. I just don't buy the BBC reasoning that calling someone a terrorist is necessarily taking sides, and yes I read the document Julius posted.

You have to ask who would be on the side of a terrorist organisation like Hamas anyway, and why anyone would be upset about a news organisation taking a side against an organisation doing things like Hamas are doing

I would rather that a news organisation called them terrorists than they defacto approve of them by refusing to call them terrorist acts.
You can still support Palestine, but why on earth would anyone support Hamas?

[JAS]

Navy

Sorry this is now probably past the time it was relevant, I haven't logged in for a few days. But yes, don't see why you couldn't label a state as terrorists. You tend to hear the term "state sponsored terrorism".

Although typically over the decades I think the usage of terrorism has been more around organisations much smaller than states. If I hear the term terrorist organisation I think al Qaeda, IRA, ETA etc, rather than a state.

Happy just to call what Israel are up to as genocide.

But I guess we shouldn't be all that bothered about what people call it, as long as the despicable nature of the act is conveyed. I just don't buy the BBC reasoning that calling someone a terrorist is necessarily taking sides, and yes I read the document Julius posted.

You have to ask who would be on the side of a terrorist organisation like Hamas anyway, and why anyone would be upset about a news organisation taking a side against an organisation doing things like Hamas are doing

I would rather that a news organisation called them  terrorists than they defacto approve of them by refusing to call them terrorist acts.
You can still support Palestine, but why on earth would anyone support Hamas?

I think the world needs to wake the Frak up and stop going round in circles over semantics, the facts are this, Hamas has committed a heinous act, Israel has responded trying to outdo them in terms of heinousness. The only side anyone sane should be taking is..how can we deescalate this, it’s ALREADY provoking nut jobs in different parts of the world to have their own wee terrorist act.

So answer me this Super, if a Defender clatters into a forward after the ball has gone, studs up and everything, the opposing player then gets up and kicks 7 bells out of the defender…who gets sent off??

[super_realist]

Jas, the answer is very simple. You send both of them off, you don't hide behind describing it as "an infraction of association football rules for which the punishment is expulsion from the field"

As I've said previously, both sides of this theocratic lunacy are utter c***s, so why not just call it that? Not as if BBC won't call groups terrorist groups, they've done it before, so why not now?

[super_realist]

I'm listening to Biden speak about Israel on tv right now. Jesus, this guy is not fit for office. He can't even string a sentence together.

[McLaren]

Super

Surprised not to have heard your take on this.

BBC News - Man jailed for abducting schoolgirl while dressed as woman
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67144375

[super_realist]

Super

Surprised not to have heard your take on this.

BBC News - Man jailed for abducting schoolgirl while dressed as woman
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67144375

He's in the correct jail for a man. Why would I have an issue? Surprised you aren't saying his tran rights are being infringed.

[McLaren]

Is this not the nightmare scenario that the right claim gives them justification for restricting trans rights?

[super_realist]

It's nothing to do with trans rights, that's the point.

[JAS]

Jas, the answer is very simple. You send both of them off, you don't hide behind describing it as "an infraction of association football rules for which the punishment is expulsion from the field"

As I've said previously, both sides of this theocratic lunacy are utter c***s, so why not just call it that? Not as if BBC won't call groups terrorist groups, they've done it before, so why not now?

I don’t think the BBC would get away with that phrase pre watershed

[super_realist]

Jas, the answer is very simple. You send both of them off, you don't hide behind describing it as "an infraction of association football rules for which the punishment is expulsion from the field"

As I've said previously, both sides of this theocratic lunacy are utter c***s, so why not just call it that? Not as if BBC won't call groups terrorist groups, they've done it before, so why not now?

I don’t think the BBC would get away with that phrase pre watershed

The point is Hamas are a proscribed terrorist organisation, so should be referred to as such.
Israel, regardless of what you think of them are not, although it is clear both sides behave abominably.

Ironically the word "c**t" has probably been said on BBC more frequently, eg Nicky Campbell X2, James Naughtie etc

[JAS]

Meanwhile anybody watched the Partygate Documentary on Channel 4. Can anybody seriously watch that and think “Yep they did well, I’m must vote for more of that”

[super_realist]

Meanwhile anybody watched the Partygate Documentary on Channel 4.  Can anybody seriously watch that and think “Yep they did well, I’m must vote for more of that”

I think we are seeing the whole absurdity of lockdown rules and how pointless the vast majority of them were.

[navyblueshorts]

Jas, the answer is very simple. You send both of them off, you don't hide behind describing it as "an infraction of association football rules for which the punishment is expulsion from the field"

As I've said previously, both sides of this theocratic lunacy are utter c***s, so why not just call it that? Not as if BBC won't call groups terrorist groups, they've done it before, so why not now?

I don’t think the BBC would get away with that phrase pre watershed

The point is Hamas are a proscribed terrorist organisation, so should be referred to as such.
Israel, regardless of what you think of them are not, although it is clear both sides behave abominably.

Ironically the word "c**t" has probably been said on BBC more frequently, eg Nicky Campbell X2, James Naughtie etc

The actual point is that the UK Government have declared Hamas a terrorist organisation and the BBC are meant to be journalists, not simply a mouthpiece for the political scene at any given point in time in the UK.

Picture the scene when a Government is actually authoritarian and telling the BBC to parrot what it says is true. I reckon you'd disapprove of that.

Can we move on from this BS, now? It's hair splitting and doesn't affect the reality on the ground.

[navyblueshorts]

Meanwhile anybody watched the Partygate Documentary on Channel 4.  Can anybody seriously watch that and think “Yep they did well, I’m must vote for more of that”

I think we are seeing the whole absurdity of lockdown rules and how pointless the vast majority of them were.

Only absurd and pointless in the context of an infectious, airborne pathogen and the narcissism of too many people. Any measures were always, and were always going to be, behind the curve in shutting its spread down.

That said, if measures slowed the spread enough to allow the generation of the relevant vaccines, that was worth it in itself.

[Sponsored content]