Jump to content

MikeO

Admin
  • Posts

    55,328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    870

Everything posted by MikeO

  1. I didn't watch it though, it was @Tonsta sir, he made me do it (I saw him buying an unconsecrated ovoid shaped fermented cacao seed confection as well).
  2. "Nothing is sacred! I want my hot cross buns!" "Why don't you buy some then?" "Because Iceland have put ticks on them instead of crosses the heathen bastards, and I'm a god fearing man, I want bloody crosses on my buns" "Do they not sell them with crosses on?" "Yes, but that's not the point...I want to buy my hot cross buns in a place that only sells them with crosses on, why should I have to shop in the same place as stinking tick worshipping infidels?" "Have you considered going to Tescos?" "Fuck off!" "Don't be like that, here, take this chocolate egg as a gesture of goodwill."
  3. I obviously didn't get the memo Religious festivals being exploited for commercial gain? Unheard of! Whatever next?
  4. Great to see Southgate with a young, highly rated, left footed centre back on the pitch bench...only a friendly so we should be looking to the future. Dunk then demonstrates why you shouldn't play a shite, aging, right-sided centre back on the left. Southgate is a total clown.
  5. Cracking pass from Jordan earlier, just a shame he forgot Amadou's playing for the opposition
  6. According to the BBC match commentary Romelu Lukaku is an, "ex-Chelsea and Manchester United man". Played 166 games for us and a combined total of 155 for them But we're not worthy of mention obviously.
  7. Animal print fabric, leopard skin in particular; looks great on a leopard, shite on a person...cave dwelling homo sapiens 150.000 years ago I give a pass to.
  8. Good fun actually, found an bit of software I used to use for video editing on an old laptop...this is my wife
  9. How very dare you I've suffered for my art, now it's your turn
  10. Got a new back-up phone coming tomorrow, and decided to do some photo tinkering for a cover (if it's good enough for the royals). Just a little touch-up as you can see, hope the tabloids don't get hold of it
  11. Subject matter of that aside (Tottenham stadium F1 track?), it's a prime example of a fawning interviewer which is a real pet hate of mine. The prevalence of totally obsequious "questioning" is embarrassing, and with the rise of the podcast every man and his dog are having a go at it. Worst culprit for me is Nihal Arthanayake on 5live, dreadful. "He who praises everybody, praises nobody." Samuel Johnson. Anyway. No doubt King's Dock would've been epic, but it's old news, so we're just left with the unedifying spectacle of an old guy slagging off a dead guy. Let it go.
  12. Sad you feel that way. Can you be a bit specific, what exactly are you fearful of? And how do you think Liverpool will change?
  13. If they're allowed to stay they're not illegal, and people who arrive here by "irregular" routes mostly claim asylum so they can only properly be described as illegal (despite what the tories pretend) once their application has been processed, two thirds are successful in those applications. I've not seen immigrants living on the streets, or heard reports of such a thing, so it would appear that it is possible to accommodate them.
  14. Nobody thinks mass illegal immigraton is good for the country. How does an immigrant get to be "tick-boxed" if they're unchecked? Yes. You're entitled to your opinion.
  15. Looking for such a party is a bit of a pointless exercise though isn't it? Everybody of every political persuasion truly believes that their views are sensible, humane and decent. It's certainly something to strive for, but sometimes it's not easy. We're both old enough to have been around pre the 1968 race relations act, when it was acceptable to treat minorities as second class citizens. Had the word been in general use back then, there's no doubt that those who first suggested reform would've been described as "woke" (in the derogatory rather than enlightened sense). Fortunately they eventually won the argument; human evolution is great sometimes.
  16. Duke of Kent, "The St George's flag...was adopted by London and England in 1190, for their ships entering the Meditteranean, to benefit from the protection of the Genoese fleet. The English Monarch paid an annual tribute to the Doge of Genoa for this privilege." https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BBkvDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT82&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
  17. No point in carrying on with this, my point is purely that the right is influencing the political climate in an extremely negative (in my opinion) way, plainly a lot of people are happy about it. Fortunately the majority are not. I know full well, as I've said, that you're not right wing, and just because you agree with one of their opinions it doesn't make you so. We'll just have to disagree about the flag, nobody is making a mockery of it at all, and equating it to English "culture and values" is ridiculous. Culture and values evolve do they not? They certainly should, or do you yearn for the good old days of fuedalism, of religious and racial bigotry? May sound daft you're the one dreaming of the halcyon days of 1348 Just as another thought, the logo of that well known liberal group, the popular conservatives (an oxymoron if ever I heard one). When are their tabloid buddies going to lose their shit over them disrespecting ("are you disrespecting me?") the flag and/or making a mockery of British culture and values?
  18. Came to light in January https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/27/revealed-uk-granted-asylum-to-rwandan-refugees-while-arguing-country-was-safe#:~:text=The details of the four,first announced and September 2023.
  19. Adding two and two and getting five mate. I have no problem at all with your opinions at all and I didn't express any, so why the passive agressive response? I know you're not right wing and I know I'm as patriotic as the next man, I just don't go along with the absurd, meaningless and vacuous tabloid fuelled "woke" and/or "anti woke" nonsense. It's an invention, it means absolutely nothing; just used by politicians to further their self-interest and sadly people buy into it. "If I was on here 12 years ago and it came up for debate I would have been against the national flag being changed from it’s original colour scheme and design." There's the answer. In 2012 it didn't come up for debate, and it didn't come up for debate because nobody was searching for something to get offended by, it's all about the rise of the nasty side of nationalism and the far right (people might not like that description but "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.")
  20. Hamilton may have made the right decision, whether Ferrari have is highly questionable
  21. Nobody has addressd why it was fine for the union flag to be messed with in 2012 and everyone is chucking their toys out of the pram over this. In 2012 the whole kit was a "fake" flag while now it's a tiny bit of detail on the back of the neck. What's changed? For me it's as plain as day that it's the political landscape (not just in the UK), the right wing is far more visible than it's been in my lifetime. The cross of St George has never been the badge of English football, the three lions is. and the flags in the crowd and on the flagpoles at Wembley are red and white. In the unlikely event of us ever winning anything the red and white flag will be flown and people will paint their faces red and white, but people are losing their shit over a tiny bit of trim that's effectively invisible unless you search for it. It's lazy and meaningless for me, "...originally a very positive concept… but now completely appropriated by the hard right, and used repeatedly as a general-purpose insult by people who don't really know what they mean.." sums it up nicely. I'd counter that with the point that it's used out of context far more often by the right, to erroniously suggest that liberals are somehow unpatriotic. Just my thoughts, not expecting everyone to agree. But, to my original question, why is a far worse "destruction" of a national flag fine with everyone twelve years ago, but today it's not?
×
×
  • Create New...