buctootim

Good game. I guess you're paid by Paul Daniels.

Thats also true. Predicting the future is difficult at the best of times. currently there are so many variables and unknowns its practically impossible to do it with any degree of accuracy. what you can do is lay out what will happen under various scenarios - which is what the IMF have done in the past.

What he actually said was the Government will trigger article 50 "before or by the start of next year" Its 2016 now. Therefore he is saying it will happen before or by 12 midnight on 31st December 2016. The Government lawyers have told the court the opposite.

But that wasnt their central prediction You being thick or dishonest?

No. "before or by the start of the year" means 2016. Just as "do this before by 5pm Friday" means 5pm Friday at the very latest, not 5.15pm, 8pm or fairly early Monday or Tuesday. Its a clear contradiction. Its not a massive issue, but it is very odd you would argue the toss over it.

Really? 1. When do you think "before or by the start of the year" is? Is it 2016 or 2017? 2. If "article 50 won't/can't be triggered before the end of the year" what year is the earliest it can be triggered?

Why do you think only Eagle and Smith have put themselves forward as leader? Neither could win a General Election imo - but plenty of other Labour MPs might be able to.

Thats good news for clubs like Saints - it levels the playing field. The rich clubs massively overpay and the selling club generally uses the proceeds much more sensibly.

Err yes. There's that comprehension thing again Des.

Im ambivalent about them. The vacuous arguments do trigger a reaction though.

"Lord Pannick QC: claimants have been deterred by racist antisemitic abuse and threats to Mishcon de Reya. Leveson: I take that v seriously" What does this mean? That the case has been withdrawn by the claimants; that thry have been bothered by abuse but are carrying on; or that additional claimants have been deterred from joining the action?

Yeah burn the ****ers instead of feeding them.

Don't forget Deutsche owes 50 times the GDP of Germany.

It was a bizarre strategy that was never going to work. It would have been politically impossible for the US to sue for peace after an attack by a smaller country on US home soil. The losses weren't that big a deal. Britain lost more ships and men at the Battle of Jutland than the US did at Pearl Harbour - and that was considered a victory. The use of nukes at the end of the war is a totally different situation. The point was about if nukes would have prevented that war. They wouldnt.

The nuclear MAD strategy is dependent on potential attackers thinking rationally. The US was far bigger and more powerful. Attacking them was a bizarre, unnecessary thing to do which ensured Japan's defeat. That attack was illogical and suicidal but still happened. Arguably nukes would have made no difference

Aside from the issues surrounding ARM, Brexit and exchange rate, there is a real issue in this country of companies being sold and losing their independence too soon / too easily. Britain isnt developing any serious world players in new technologies - despite a great record of innovation. Entrepreneurs in this country seem to sell out at an earlier stage of the business - taking some cash and running. In the US they stick around longer and build bigger. I dont know what the answer is, but Im sure Government could do more to incentivise innovation and independence.

There was an interesting interview on the BBC yesterday. Three French social workers in Nice were talking about how IS have professional recruitment teams. IS know which people are susceptible to their approaches and how to couch their approach so that they can make the target rationalise what they want him to do. Its a battle between the state and IS for vulnerable people's minds peoples. Most of them have never read the Koran. Two weeks before he killed over 80 people the Nice killer was a drinker and drug user. 14 days from being a violent dropout to being a terrorist.

Nutshell

I thought all safe standing was like the pictures below - basically a fold up seat and a rail in front to stop crowd surges - so it would take up the same space as a normal seat. Are there different versions?

This thread has pepped up. The resident right wingers are normally good for some desperate attempts to justify the ridiculous - but GDP measured by acreage is a new high.

He clearly didnt write it. He clearly didnt dictate it. He probably didnt even ask for it to be written - unless you're suggesting Man U hand out their letterheads for any player who fancies sending a note? Most big clubs have dedicated staff who take care of this kind of stuff for players - they get thousands a week. Also the Queen doesn't personally keep tabs on who is turning 100 nor go down the post office to send the telegrams. Shocking I know. None of that devalues the fact its a nice gesture from the club.

Uh okay. Wotsa letter?

Dolls

If you cant compete on money then you try and make your club attractive in other ways. Having a nice place to work, team spirit, shop window club, reputation for developing players, good academy, attractive area to live, not too much fish bowl pressure all matter too. Saints have done well on those measures.

Im a lapsed devout Atheist, now agnostic. Both the 'God' and 'Science' explanations have massive logic holes in them.