pap

The problem is the networks. ms pap is tying up part of some cellular network as we speak, rabbiting scouse at her bessie. I try to tell her that our actions could be preventing Nige and Nicola from the early doors transfer action, but she doesn't listen.

Am I the only one detecting multiple whoosh-age here? This is Whoosh Canyon, FFS.

Excellent. A bellend enthusiast. How many have you seen, and what's your interest? Polishing or ringing?

The OP has gotten faith and hope mixed up. I hope that Saints do well, but I have no faith that we'll do it and judging by the "what ifs" that people constantly play on the main board, people are not basing their predictions on blind faith. Past performance, level of form, the players that may be missing from either team - all garnished with a dressing of "anything can happen on the day". Religious terminology creeps into most areas of life over the centuries. Footy is no exception. "Temples" of football, "hand of God", "keep the faith" or supporters being known as the Southampton faithful, etc. The same term is being used, but it doesn't mean the same thing in footy as it does in religion. It doesn't even mean the same thing in marriage as it does with religion. This is the second real problem with the OP, equating football's concept of faith to the religious. Using that sort of logic, we could construct all sorts of brilliant accusations of hypocrisy. "Ah, so you like cakes..." "I love them" "Eat this mud cake" "But mud cakes are diff.." "HYPOCRITE!!" That about where this is going, Bazza?

We should see if we should gazump Didier Drogba from underneath the noses of AC Milan. He might initially fancy Milan and Champions League football. Then Cortese shows him the architectural splendour of Leisure World. Done deal.

There's a story in the Indy saying that Brum are now prepared to sell Butland. http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/southampton-and-liverpool-target-jack-butland-could-be-sold-in-january-8432583.html The 6M offer that was rejected in the summer would do now, apparently.

I've just been in PC World. They had Samsung 43 inch plasma ( not 3D ) for £300 and 32 LEDs going for the same price. I have the 32 inch version. Excellent "little" telly. We've got a plasma in the living room. Nice main TVs, but they can be pricier to run.

I got a score of 3 points in Bearsy's census thing. I don't think that is very middle-aged at all. I'm actually a bit fearful of it, hence my ire toward the Ship and Mitre and real ale pub experiences ( quite like ale, though ). Having kids about the place keeps you young and relatively up to date. I was watching 1 vs 100 the other day; the "1" knew absolutely nothing about some pretty common cultural touchstones that parents would know about ( he'd never seen Shrek, for example ). It was bloody infuriating.

To be honest chaps, I went into town to post something. While I was there, I picked up Judge Dredd complete case files 1 + 2 and Band of Brothers, gave it to the missus and said "wrap this up for Christmas". Was all cheap as chips. She pulled the same trick with a couple of her pressies. Much, much easier. On a more serious note, this is the last Christmas where we've still got children. Juvenile Unit #1 turns 18 next year. Really is zipping by very quickly now. Five years time, both my girls will be adults, probs out of our house on a semi-permanent basis. This Christmas, we scored our third proper family holiday ever, had no proper connectivity over the whole period, spent a lot of time watching films and playing games. Was ace. Felt like Christmas' past. Best present I got this year was a memorable time with the family. We even took the dog, normally banged up in "dog chokey" whenever we go away.

Ah, Bear; I never picked it up as a genuine cyber-bullying event. The USS pap sensors categorised it as banter and proceeded accordingly. If you genuinely were having a go and were just feeble in execution, then I can only offer you my profound apologies and the promise to spice up future posts with wild statements about Mama Bear. GHDs are not the answer. Rocking long hair in your mid-to-late 30s is a genuinely sad affair. I sometimes return to my car and discover that a Dire Straits song is on the playlist. I don't know how it happens; it just does. What I do know is that the only reasonable defence for long hair at this age is citing the historical significance of hair length; how cutting your hair short used to be a sign of subjugation to a superior force, or how long hair was associated with free thinkers or rogue bands of warriors. Those positions are not tenable if you look like the human equivalent of an Afghan hound. I have tried GHDs. They are not the answer.

You're not alone in the haircut looks crap stakes, Bear. My grandad is not a fan, and tbh, I'm at the stage now where everything is a pain in the arse hair wise. I have to tie it up when I'm cooking, it's not long enough to get into a complete pony-tail so whenever I put it up I have these cute girly strands delineating my jawbone. I don't really want to cut it all off, but at the same time, am experiencing tremendous difficulty keeping it all in check. For now, I will follow the advice of Churchill; if you're going through hell - keep going.

I think those are laudable sentiments from Chapel End Charlie. I wish him a speedy recovery from a clear case of acute amnesia.

Judge Dredd complete case files vol 1 + 2. Band of Brothers, Matrix Trilogy and Back to the Future trilogy on BluRay. Also, festive knitwear and a hipflask.

Dude, there is a top level link on http://www.moonfaker.com called Fly Jarrah To The Moon. Have you looked at his site at all? It's linked on every page

Why do you care? You never read any of the posts.

Got infinitely more time for David Davis than most of his party, and though I'm not a legal expert, you don't really have to be to suss out how this plays out. "You said Mr Mitchell called you a pleb. Are you sure?" "But you also said that there were x members of the public in the vicinity. There were only y...." Like I say, no genius required, and any competent defence lawyer should rip through this like a hot knife through butter. Begs the question really; why did Mitchell resign? Perhaps it's one of those blood in the nostrils / damned if you do / damned if you don't moments. Mitchell may have been telling the truth, but was facing the prospect of saying two serving officers were lying shortly after two serving officers were killed in Manchester. If I was being highly uncharitable, I could say that he should have stuck to the courage of his convictions, but that's the highly uncharitable position. The realist in me understands the sensitivity of the period in question, and also appreciates that people like me may have contributed to his ultimate demise. However you want to look at it, the Conservatives were absolutely unprepared to offer a robust defence of Mitchell when this story first emerged. Maybe this is just a characteristic of their governance, and if you took the charitable position, you'd commend them for not taking knee-jerk decisions and not cutting short holidays to deal with trivialities like riots on a national scale. Lest you think this point is flippant, let me assure you that it is anything but. Our society should be able to cope with its leadership being away, and as it turns out, can. Yet this remains one of Cameron's biggest blunders, and the clearest indication that One Nation, a slogan recently appropriated by the Labour Party, wasn't something the Conservatives were remotely interested in. Clearly not something the rioters bought into either.

Those are my honest feelings. Jamie, you seem to be confusing honesty with impartiality. Honestly, I'm not impartial.

This deserves an honest response I reckon. I am biased against Conservatives, and hand on heart, I'd love specifically for the "pleb" thing to be true. I suspect it probably is, but will never be proven either way. That's because the discrepancies in the video throw enough doubt on specifics to put its overall reliability into question. I actually think that's the play here; they want to keep Mitchell in government - this is the opportunity to do so. He's already admitted to swearing at them. I don't see that as a problem, and nor will most people. It is the word "pleb" that is a problem, because it speaks to the commonly held notion that this crop of Tories feel they're born to rule. The Tories want Mitchell back in government. They're muddying up the water enough on this one specific thing to allow that to happen. That Mitchell loses his rag with coppers isn't really an issue. The copper posing as a member of the public is dodgy as hell, and needs to be investigated. Since Mitchell has 'fessed up to the bad language, this can only be about the word "pleb". Reminds me a joke. Q: How many coppers does it take to work out if Andrew Mitchell said pleb? A: 30 Yeah, you're right. It's not funny.

You put it in quotes ( implicitly attributing it to me ) and continually misspelt it, tarring me with your freeform interpretation of the word "beach". What amuses me is your transparency.

I would like to know why Chapel End Charlie keeps using the term "dry beech sand" though.

I was ready to end this thread days ago.

I wish Jarrah every success on his trip to the moon. Haven't bunged him any money. I appreciate the different angle you're taking on this, but stripped down, it's the exact same tactic. You're not going after his content, you're attacking the credentials of the man. First on education, now on his Fly Me To The Moon page. First off, a lot of sites on the Internet ask their viewers to donate. This is not unusual, although I have to concur that the intended purpose of the cash is a bit of a stretch ( I wonder how well he's doing ). Another thing that is not unusual is repeatedly seeing people veer of the substance of his claims and onto what he is like as a person. You make an interesting point about his education. You may feel that a few A levels are insufficient for someone to have an informed opinion. I happen to disagree. Some of the smartest people I have ever met have never been near a University full stop. But for the sake of argument, let's assume that he is just a standard undergraduate with nothing to distinguish him from the rest of the student body save some wild-eyed ideas about the moon. If that is the case, dismantling the man's points should be an absolute cinch, especially for someone who meets your gold standard of University education. Why isn't this happening?

So anyone without a degree is not entitled to an opinion? What happens when he has qualified? What level of qualification does he need to have a valid point?

Can I ask why you are continually using the term "dry beech sand"?

You asked in the other thread where I stood on conspiracies. I was actively interested around 7 years ago and retain an interest today. It's not the sort of thing that occupies my every thought, but equally, I tend to run news through a bullsh!t filter; many people already do this to some extent. I'd argue that I'll I'm doing is taking less things at face value. I'm not trying to prove that the moon landings were faked. In the early stages of this debate those who were defending the official account went down the "you're wrong because faking it is impossible" route. On that strategy at least, they've failed. So nope, I have zero proof that the landings were faked, and I haven't done the in-depth research. People like Jarrah White have. Almost every question people have raised on here has been answered on his FAQ page. He's had to stretch to get some of his timing (measuring time through beard growth is not an exact science), but even so, that still seems like a reasonable way to estimate time when concrete confirmation is not available. So no concessions on feasibility, and no serious attempt to debunk Jarrah's FAQ page. The position on Jarrah's fashion stylings have been well made though