Robsk II

Name: John Garrett Age: 13/14 Occupation: full time schoolboy and newspaper delivery boy Name: Haydn Jones Age: not sure, 40ish Occupation: Runs the local newspaper shop Name: Peter Smallman Age: mid40s Occupation: Sales coordinator, the Echo Name: Oliver Bath Age: 24 Occupation: Junior reporter, the Echo All of the above people are known to me on a personal basis. They could be the innocent victims of this boycott. They could lose their jobs. They could lose everything. Why? Because some idiots on here would rather see families and lives destroyed than entertain the idea that NC may be a little in the wrong. I hope you're all proud of yourselves. When John comes down the path with my paper in hand I'll be sure to pass on your best wishes, he'll need it after he loses his paper-round and can't afford his lunch at school. His mum doesn't give him anything, so he fends for himself. Or at least he tries to. Next time I pop into the newsagent and see Haydn, I shall pass on your best wishes and explain to him why his shop is empty. I'll give him a shoulder to cry on. He's on his own now his wife left him. He doesn't have the support at home that some of you will have during your "boycott". Next time I'm having a pint with my mate Peter, I'll be sure to take some extra money, just in case he's been laid off and can't even afford a pint with a friend. I'll make sure he knows that the boycott that cost him his job was done for a good reason. He can tell that to Sally, his wife. She'll need the comforting after their new born baby

Never said it was to replace parents - but I do think it's reasonable to expect teachers to play a positive supplementary role.. and sometimes they are the only positive experience on adults some young people have. Sometimes they are the only negative. parents should do everything, but unfortunately there is all too much slack. It takes a village to raise a child, as they say, but perhaps the decline in community, the rise of the individual, etc.. modernism blah blah - is to blame. Community and family groups would once have supported raising children in more cases than seems to be the case now. I've a lot of experience working with young people from challenging backgrounds and so on, but I have genuinely seen cases where they could have ended up much worse were it not for positive experiences and interventions by professionals, whether from formal / informal education, social support agencies etc.

I never said that. I was pointing out to others that there is absolutely a role to play beyond the dissemination of information, even beyond the encouraging of thought etc within the strictures of a subject area. As it happens, I believe the parent is mainly responsible, or should be, for a child's moral etc guidance. I also believe too many fail, though, which is why that sort of legislation exists. Just so as you know, I'm also a teacher, before you start questioning my credentials.

Actually, there is increasingly an emphasis on delivering the ECM outcomes framework within formal education in an embedded manner. OFSTED are now looking for it on schemes of work and so on. One of these is 'Make a Positive Contribution', which can include how to act positively in society, challenge racism etc. I believe this suggests that what Hamster said is far from a steaming turd, but the reality goes further. In my view this is a direct response of educative reform over the last decade to address what is tacitly understood to be the failure of parents, family units etc, to provide positive formative settings.

Sort out 70% of the architecture, and change 90% of the population into educated and cultured people, and more interesting businesses and venues etc would follow..

Excellent

Let's not worry too much, eh? INTERNET.

****ing brilliant, Stoke!!!

Nicky Banger.

Was over there in the Summer - **** me, but some of those whores were pretty special. I mean, we had just come from Hamburg, and while some of the girls on the Rieperbahn were very nice, most were blown away by some of those in Amsterdam. Guess it has some of the creme de la creme (pies) being an international prostitute hub. It was, as Lungs said, pretty tempting. We ended up in some club that was dead good, will try to remember which one it was.

Haha LOL!!1

I'm with you.

Ah, then I heard the end. Better.

**** that interview with them depressed me.

I can't see how anyone can deny MLT legend status at SFC, regardless of generations. Performances, memories, individual 'roy of the rovers' moments and statistics all back that up. Legend is hard to define, and subjective at best - but for me, it's if the fans remember them. More or less as simple as that. That's the only true test. Oh, although despite my amusement at St Will (generally and in his declining mental well-being), I have to say the last month has concreted Tiger Woods as a legend in my eyes. Good boy.

There is no meaning, fools. The closest one there is is 'breeding', or Sartre-esque existentialism in making your own.

Hi Kip. **** you. x

It's like Crouchiegate all over again. At the end of the day, plenty of people know other users names, and others can be guessed at or found out reasonably easily - but while this is perhaps a bit harsh, you blatantly set yourself up for it by both what you disclose and your choice to have an internet presence anyway - and your continual petulance, abuse and stupidity don't encourage sympathy. You just wished I would die, for example.

I just lolgasmed in my pants. "Computer nerd", haha. Are you a "golf nerd", or just a "Tiger Woods masturbatory obsession nerd" ?

.

It's because most people seem to have no understanding of anything regarding justice. Punishment is an outmoded and flawed concept that does nothing. Prevention, deterrent, is the only worthwhile function of punishment, and in a large majority of cases it fails in this regard. Too many people are sanctimonious, ignorant, arrogant, naive, about the real reasons for crime and so on. By and large, criminals offend for a reason that can be changed, and others with many of the more abhorrent crimes are mentally ill, and should be treated much more than punished. I do agree with locking people up to ensure the safety of others, but beyond that, it is a pointless exercise that costs the taxpayer far too much money for the 'service' it provides (be that jail warden women who f*ck the inmates, drug-dealing inside or whatever else). Clearly, something needs to happen to offenders, and consequence is an appropriate word - but not for the sake of punishment. If nothing is learned from a consequence, then it is a void and empty thing. While any parent would be disgusted by the alleged crimes of this man, any parent would also undertand the real nature of consequences, rather than the trite, vague point you make of them. As for this: "If the courts won't deal with scum in the way that society demands, then social justice comes into play" I have to say that the concept is flawed. The courts were set up to provide a sensible, fair framework for law and justice to be meted out as appropriately and fairly as possible, in theory. They are not perfect. Yet in this country, the man on the street does not himself make laws, and with good reason. Too many men on our streets are idiots, whether due to lack of education or whatever else. We are governed by people who supposedly know how to do the job for the best interests of the nation as a whole, rather than the subjective whims and selfish agendas of the individual. We have a police force and the judiciary for exactly these reasons as well. Specialists who are best placed to remain objective in cases such as these. Now, I am the first to say that there are failings in these systems, in all of these organisations - but they are a better, safer alternative for all of us than to be governed by the witch-hunting, reactionary peasant mentality of old. The system was created and refined by men better than you or I, St Keith, with good intent. I'm not always in agreement with the status quo, with the way the country, the economy, the ruling order is set up - but I know for sure that mob rule and 'social justice' would not be a way forwards; only a way backwards onto a dark slippery slope. Society as a whole is only able to determine the wider view of 'acceptable' social behaviour, and all the evidence suggests that organised specialist bodies need to act as a lens through which to focus that. Half the time they get it wrong, but then so do the public at large - then the more slow amongst us simply accept this as gospel. Consider the stance on drugs in this country - most of us unquestioningly accept smoking, and yet pillory other drugs - simple because they are illegal. This is usually entirely uninformed, based on nothing but stigma and misinformation. Alcohol and tobacco are both highly damaging drugs, physically, and often socially (money, behaviour etc). The damage done to the streets and shop-fronts etc, the crime committed by drunk people - is vast. The cost every weekend, obscene. Yet we accept this for some reason, because it is 'socially ok'. The vast majority of Ecstacy users have far a less negative impact on those around them, or the NHS in the longer term - but fuddy-duddy society, conservative minded society, sticks its fingers in its ears and ignores the facts. Often, we've got it vaguely right. Tobacco and alcohol haven't led to the downfall of society, and therefore it can't be so bad - but it doesn't make much sense either. Opiates were legal for centuries across much of the world, also here. No problemo, really - until some arbritrary high-horse decision simply informs us it is 'wrong'. Even looking across this board - there is clear evidence that living in a true democracy would be a bloody nightmare. We vote people in to represent us, and for all their failings, they are meant to do what is best for us, not what we want. So it should remain, because most of us want stupid things for stupid reasons, things that would shake the foundations of what we are at the same time proud of.

IT'S TIGER FREAKIN' WOODS! HE'S THE BEST!

I would be an excellent mod.

No, St Will. Obsession would be demonstrated in very different ways, as a rule, and I've not even interacted with you in months. I just find your Tiger Woods obsession to be very funny indeed, and your pompous, arrogant spewing of ill-informed garbage. You gimp. x

St Will is a PROFESSIONAL GOLFER. He admires WORLD'S GREATEST SPORTSMAN, ATHLETE, FOREMOST THINKER, PHILANTHROPIST, MUSICIAN and PERSON, Tiger Woods, to a point where it has some sexual undertones. St Will knows lots about EVERYTHING. Such a well rounded individual with such clear knowledge on EVERY SUBJECT HE EVER COMES ACROSS comes from YEARS of playing PRO GOLF with real other people, who the rest of us have nothing to do with. Everyone knows that golf is NOT ONLY A GAME, it is also a SPORT, requiring MORE SKILL and FITNESS than anything else ever. It is the SPORT OF GODS. Thankfully, St Will is CHOSEN by THE GODS to have enough awesome powers to be a PRO GOLFER, just like his hero, PRO GOLFER Tiger Woods, who is also the world's GREATEST DRIVER. In fact, Tiger Woods is the best at EVERYTHING. He is basically BEST FRIENDS with God and St Will. These two entities alone are worthy to sit at the same HALLOWED TABLE as Tiger Woods, and even then, they feel a bit unworthy. This is because Tiger Woods, St Will's MATE, and all-round GREAT GUY, is a GREAT GUY. Beyond great, in fact. Beyond even THE ALMIGHTY. It's no coincidence that THE ALMIGHTY has some letters the same as Tiger Woods' name! Tiger Woods is like Chuck Norris and Jesus rolled into one FANTASTIC PACKAGE, and he probably also has a FANTASTIC PACKAGE. He certainly should have an honorary world cup winner's medal, and an honorary Nobel Prize, because if he tried at anything, ever, he'd be the best. Hope this helps Smirking Saint understand St Will's FANTASTIC PROFESSION. Did I say profession? I meant DIVINE CALLING.