Sheaf Saint

No, she most certainly doesn't. She sat with me and watched the Coventry game in 2012 on TV when we were promoted, and was a tad confused and upset to see me crying while I watched the players and fans celebrate on the pitch at full time. Apparently I have never shown anything near that level of emotion with her in all the years we have been together. She could never truly understand.

He had some of his best games in a Saints shirt last season on the right of a 4-2-3-1 Creating chances was not our major problem last year. Converting them was.

I'm gutted. This was the first game I looked for when the fixtures were released, as it's only a short trip from where I live and I never went during the L1 seasons. It would just happen to be on the day I'm getting married, wouldn't it!

It's funny isn't it. Some people have been completely losing their sh!t on social media about this. We're talking about a show about an ancient, possibly immortal, alien who can travel through time and space in an instant, escape death by regenerating into a new body, and destroy entire fleets of invading bad guys with a f***ing screwdriver! All of this is seemingly OK, but the mere suggestion that this being might be able to manifest him/her/itself in the body of a woman is apparently just too far-fetched and has ruined the show forever.

Your desire for a bit more loyalty and integrity in football is admirable, but I have to say I'm extremely glad you're not in charge of the finances of my employers.

Quite. I went to our away match at Everton shortly after he left for Utd, and I saw "DIY RONEY SCUM" (sic) daubed in large letters on a wall near to Goodison.

He didn't get much good service in a poor Blackburn team, but he scored some absolute corkers and showed that he can strike the ball better than most of the other players in our squad and knows where the net is. I think he can do a good job for us this season.

"Former Ch Supt David Duckenfield faces 95 charges of manslaughter and five other senior figures will be prosecuted over the 1989 Hillsborough disaster." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-40419819

Cranes and diggers I think

I've had a look through and I don't feel like I want to complete it because the questions are badly worded and vague IMO.

He didn't. He was manager at Alaves last season when they pulled of a surprise win there.

I don't really see how appealing to protesters to remain peaceful can be described as 'egging it all on'.

I don't know how many times I have to spell it out for you. In pure statistical terms, no I do not agree with him. But this is a very complex issue that cannot be reduced down to just numbers, unless you're some kind of simpleton. If you want to argue purely on these terms, then statistically speaking you are far more likely to be killed by a dog than by a terrorist attack. Do you believe that dogs are a bigger problem than Wahabi extremists?

I know. I didn't. There was a case of a Southampton man a couple of years ago who was arrested and convicted of preparing for terrorist acts. The case got only a very small mention in the national news... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11612542/Ginger-haired-extremist-Mark-Colborne-idolised-IRA-because-of-their-red-hair-court-hears.html If he had brown skin and was called Muhammed, it would probably have been all over the front pages of every tabloid. That's the point I'm making in that respect.

Yes, it's incredibly frustrating when people don't fully read what you post and jump to false conclusions about what you mean, isn't it This isn't about taking sides with you or John B. I agreed with you that his pronouncement was statistically incorrect, but I was just relaying that I believe he still raised an important point. Why can't you get your head around that? It's really very simple.

If you bother to read what I posted, you'll see that's not what I said. Do you believe that far right extremism is not a problem and can be ignored?

On purely statistical terms, he is obviously wrong, but he still makes a valid point. As a society we can't afford to put all our focus on combating wahabi extremism at the expense of ignoring the far right / white supremacist variety. Racial / cultural hatred leading to violent extremism should not be tolerated whichever 'side' is engaging in it.

It wasn't me that made the claim that it is just as serious. Obviously it's not, in terms of death tolls. I was just making the point that they are both still very serious problems that need to be tackled, and that, for whatever reason, any acts carried out by those claiming to be Muslim are much more widely reported and over-sensationalised than those carried out by white men.

They are both two sides of the same coin. It's just that one side gets a lot more media attention than the other.

I'm well aware of the political leanings of their editorial team, and I'm quite capable of reading their content with objectivity thanks. At least the article I shared was presenting evidence to show that what was printed in the Mail and the Sun on election day was factually incorrect. Whereas the link Nolan provided was just the turgid, speculative ramblings of a man with an apparent history of controversy and a staunch pro-Israel, anti-Palestine stance. It's little wonder he has an axe to grind with Corbyn, being that he wants to seek a peaceful settlement in their situation. https://athousandflowers.net/2015/10/25/weekly-w*nker-058-stephen-daisley/ Edit: Dammit, Saintsweb won't allow you to follow this link because it has a swear word in the URL. You'll have to google 'Stephen Daisley weekly w*nker' yourselves

A nice balanced and not-at-all-biased opinion piece from a Daily Mail columnist there.

My bold. It has been well established that he had dialogue with senior Sinn Fein members during the 1980s. But to my knowledge, nobody has yet been able to provide evidence that he actively supported the use of terrorism as a means to achieve their aims. I'm pretty certain that if such evidence existed, it would have been splashed all over the tabloid front pages well before now. Perhaps you could provide a source to support your claim?

In a way I'm glad that Labour didn't win this. The Brexit negotiations begin in just over a week and regardless of who is in government, the whole thing is going to be a total f*cking disaster. So when the full extent of the Brexit train wreck becomes clear, May and the Tories will have to own it and face the consequences.

Although he didn't win as such, he performed much better than expected even despite the opposition he faced from within his own party and the relentless smear campaign run by the media barons against him. So it's a moral victory for him because he has proved that there is a broad support base for his policies which can be built upon in the run up to the next general election. Edit: this was supposed to be in response to Batman's earlier post but I neglected to do reply with quote.