Holmes_and_Watson

Another colossally ignorant post. Your antisemitism is horrible enough. That you're clearly an imbecile, makes it worse. Instead of being limited to 3 posts a day, it's now a tirade of self delusion, infecting more of the threads. Too stupid to learn, too stupid to listen.

That could be using the old method of identifying antisemitism, though. In the last week, SOG has been looking to redefine antisemitism. The same opinions everyone else would find abhorrent, but rebranded to deflect attention. Perhaps the new definition will follow on from last year's comments that indicated that if it didn't mention the Holocaust, it wasn't really anti Jewish.

The deadline is 11pm tomorrow. (Why yes, I did just have to look it up 🙂) Southgate going to be using only those with a chance of playing. That would lead to a load of noise around those not starting, or not involved. And those players would want to know too. So, Southgate has told them before hand. Which is decent enough. Pretty rubbish to not start, then see the subs go by, and then not get picked. I guess scheduling the reason why the friendly is on the eve of selection. But odd from an injury point of view. Although they can bring folk in.

Long

Surprised at Grealish, for much of the same reasons as @Turkish. He gives a number of options to get past defences. But then, I've not seen much of the PL this year, and have heard more than seen good things about Eze and Palmer. Gordon has looked good whenever I've seen him. Some of the others are stand ins for Kane. Tough choice to make. Lots of talent, but a little bare in some places.

If only we were. I stopped 2 lines into the last post, seeing the number of fibs and editing he was doing in his head.

For the record, you backed Abbott to the hilt. You agreed with her heirarchy of racism. You then went on defending your heirarchy. A number of posters pointed out what your stance meant as you proceeded to discriminate against groups including jewish people. You didn't want to know. Nor did you care about Abbott's history of such comments. We continued to point the implications out, as your views went past Abbott's stance, past Corbyn's, past the extremes of Momentum, past Palestinian activists, and past Palistinian politicians, who had apologised for views you raced past. Along the way you ticked a number of common antisemitic tropes. Which, from the Israel thread, you're still doing. This week saw you trying to redefine antisemitism, as you don't like the label while holding the views. Up there with your gleeful 'maybe Jeremy was right' on deaths on a safe route, and the hostages really being a lot safer with Hamas, than with Israeli forces. Posters here did not suddenly decide anything. The impact of your opinions has been pointed out to you for years. Conflicted, you agreed with Starmer's actions against Abbott. But you could never reconcile your two stances. Even above Starmer is right, yet paranoid. Again, above, Abbott is wrong. Yet, actually... and off you go. Trying to retrofit later activity around views you just can't learn from, is something common to a lot of your posts. Sadly, it seems we'll be seeing a lot more of it, now you've paid your fiver. I can only hope, after this initial flurry, it gives you room to not cram everything together, and that perhaps that was part of the problem.

Is there going to be a public vote round?

Trial

Metamorphosis

Don't worry. We're sure to be able to take your unbiased, well considered statement, and twist it to support our own views. 🙂

Even Sunak looked embarrassed about the National service question. But repeatedly, and directly, asked Starmer what he would do across topics and there were, as you say, no answers. Sunak even got to play that into his closing statement.

Good that you can separate them. Either or both 😀

Final score Trousers?

About right. Starmer uneasier, too easily pushed off the ball, I mean point. Caught out on the tax rises. Sunak weighed down by record, hoping last quarters figures do a lot of heavy lifting. Starmer got early applause. Sunak a little laughter, but came back to get some applause.

Chairs

This. Although impacted post covid, he got back to being a starter in this squad. While others were learning to be flexible in Martin's system, Stu already had everything needed. He support others, could go on direct runs and was one of our technically best players. Wishing him the best for his future. And wherever that future is, wishing it has a slight breeze ruffling that amazing hair.

This is an object being thrown at a candidate for an election. Why should that happen to anyone looking to be elected? Why should it happen to anyone at all? He's targeted because of his views. What if was a politician you backed? Or who had a certain background, race or belief? That's not even beginning to link it with other abuse, or speculating about this encouraging others to throw other things, or take more extreme action.

Oh Alanis. And I thought all the song references to the Mitford sisters were just coincidence. The Mitford sisters were.... goes on for 15 paragraphs...

Politicians are the subject of increased abuse and attacks. Regardless of who it happens to, it's something I'd never want to see happen. Let them be judged by the ballot box (the votes in it, not it being chucked at someone)

An excellent point. A difficult decision for the authorities. Although one helped by Alanis being omnipotent, and telling them what their decision will be.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting Alanis shouldn't be allowed to march. But is getting her to march inside a soundproof box, in case she sings, an infringement on her right to protest? I think that's the key question here.