Sheaf Saint

So partially true then. Which only exists in the recesses of your mind. I'll ask again - why do you think I have an irrational obsession? If you want to be taken seriously then you can't just make those kind of accusations against people and refuse to qualify them.

Just how do you arrive at that conclusion Alps. Serious question - How do you get the idea that I have an irrational obsession?

Or you could look at it from the viewpoint of learning lessons from history and ensuring those mistakes are not repeated. The last century is rife with examples of US-led imperialism (for want of a better word) causing global problems where none existed before. What makes you think anything is any different now? Take one example - the US-backing of Suharto's military coup in Indonesia. He went on to orchestrate the murder of millions of his own people and pocket something in the region of $30bn of loans from the world bank while consigning huge numbers of people to poverty. But we didn't do anything to stop him because he opened up the markets and allowed global corporations to exploit the workforce for their own gain. Free market at any cost. In the late 90s when the US and UK governments were bleating on about the potential human rights disaster in Kosovo, Suharto was committing atrocities against his own people while we sat back and did nothing - simply because he was using hardware sold to him by British arms companies. Can't upset one of our best customers by threatening him with military intervention now can we? Why did this not receive the same level of press coverage as Kosovo? Because that's the way those in charge wanted it - making sure that only what they decide should be reported makes it into the mainstream media. I know you will claim this is all irrelevant but the point I am making is that the US/UK governments have shown in very recent history what they are capable of when it comes to aggressive foreign-policy, and I have seen and read nothing to convince me that anything has changed.

What's the matter with you Alpine? Just because your insistence that Iran is responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism has been shown up by numerous posters to be catastrophically wrong, you seem to now want to paint us all out to be hate-filled anti-semites. You pop up every now and again to fire a broadside at anybody who is reasonable enough to treat what we are spoon-fed by the media with a healthy degree of scepticism, you don't provide any evidence whatsoever to reinforce your own viewpoint, and as a result you continue to make yourself look more and more foolish. How about this.... An admission less than a week ago from the US defence secretary that Iran is NOT attempting to build a bomb, yet we are still expected to fall in line and accept their view that Iran is an international agressor that must be stopped at all costs. If that isn't enough to convince you then I really don't know what else will.

How do you arrive at that conclusion exactly? If you look a little further down the wiki page (cited, in case you are dubious of the authenticity of it)... But of course, this doesn't get reported on western news channels because it doesn't have the same sensationalist impact as claiming that he wants to wipe Israel off the map. None of this, to me anyway, paints a picture of a madman who wants to engage in genocide.

Regardless of where I found these, there do not appear to be any quotes anywhere from people claiming that the translation used by the NYT, BBC etc... was correct. They have been universally denounced as inaccurate, and the quotes confirming this on wiki all have citations.

You assume that I am relying on newspapers. Far from it. A little research shows that many language experts have confirmed it as a mistranslation... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/260107offthemap.htm

No, it's not even remotely the same thing. Calling for an entire country to be wiped off the map is nothing like calling for a political regime to be removed. Not even the same ball-park. And you think that because I take the time to investigate the truth behind what is reported on our news channels, that means I am against my own culture? If the culture you refer to is the culture of controlling what information is reported to the public in order to gain support for any possible future military action, then yes I am firmly against that; as any sane and rational person should be. Just because I live in the western world, doesn't mean I will blindly accept everything that is fed to me by our political class in the belief that to do otherwise would be against my own culture. My inherent sense of reason prohibits such submissive thinking.

And you wonder why some people take exception to your posting style!

Sorry jjsaint, but you have fallen victim to the scaremongering and propaganda of the elite-controlled western media. Ahemdinijad never said that at all, as I have already mentioned in one of my previous posts. What he actually said was that he believed the current Israeli political regime should be wiped from the pages of history. Absolutely not the same thing.

I wasn't being pedantic at all. You are trying to argue that the criticism levelled at the US is unfair, yet they are still the only nation ever to have launched a nuclear weapon which is completely contradictory to your statement... This statement is completely false - Just how is that irrelevant? You can't win arguments by stating absolute untruths! And by labelling anybody who doesn't share your rabid anti-Iranian sentiment as a leftie, you do yourself no favours at all.

Do the names Hiroshima and Nagasaki not mean anything to you??? Again, we come back to the example of Pakistan. This is a pure Islamic state that has been in a perpetual state of war with its most hated neighbour since the country was granted sovereignty, and was in the hands of a two-faced, backstabbing military dictator when they developed their nuclear weapons, yet despite that they still managed to refrain from launching one. I have seen nothing at all from Iran to suggest that they would be any different. I'm not saying I'm happy about the situation - I am fundamentally a pacifist and would be much happier if nobody had nukes. But, sadly, I am realistic enough to know that's not how the world works, and I just don't see Iran as being this massive threat to world peace that you make it out to be. Lets face it Alpine, you do have a certain reputation on this forum for over-exaggerating your point somewhat.

But it is a historical fact that the current regime is in charge of Iran because of US meddling in their affairs. That is the point that is being made, which you appear to be overlooking.

If you haven't got anything constructive to add to this debate Alpine then why bother? It seems you have taken exception to anybody levelling the slightest bit of criticism towards the US without offering any sensible reasons why. I'll ask again... do you believe the US is whiter than white?

Hmmm. Is that you in your avatar Dr Who? Because if it is, I am confused why you appear to be wearing a top with a caricature of the two main characters in a film you consider to be among the worst of all time. Is it supposed to be ironic?

So do you believe that the US is whiter than white Alpine?

Wrong I'm afraid Alps. Islamic fundamentalism as we now know it (Al-Qaeda, Taliban etc...) originates from Saudi Arabia. But because the Saudi rulers are bed partners with the big American oil companies, the western news doesn't report that.

It looked like it was further upstream from Mansbridge, past The White Swan, along the Itchen Towpath. I did notice a couple of continuity errors with the program though. After rejoining the train at Swaythling the film showed it running through some open countryside, but there isn't any between there and Southampton Central. Also, Mr Portillo seemed to be totally unaware that the Southampton station described in his guide book was the now defunct Southampton Terminus and not the current Southampton Central where he got off. Probably not his fault, just poor researching from the program makers. Interesting watch though. I didn't realise that Eastliegh was only built to house the workers at the railway works, though it does make perfect sense when you think about it.

Point taken Phil, but my post was about the dispute over the claims to the holy lands currently inside Israeli borders (Jerusalem etc...) which is the entire basis of the tensions between Jews and Muslims in the area and the sole reason why the clerics in charge of Iran have beef with Israel.

I would be much happier about the UN/IAEA trying to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear arms if everybody else gave up theirs. Why is it OK for countries like the US to have them but tell other countries they aren't allowed to? I am far more concerned about the existing nukes in Pakistan than the future possibility of Iran getting them. Edit: With regard to your point about Iran causing havoc in Iraq - what do you expect? The two countries were at war for years while Saddam had the full backing of the US/UK. They already had the Americans occupying Afghanistan to the east, do you really believe that they would just sit back and watch while they took control of their western neighbour and former hated adversary?

This coincides nicely with a video that a friend of mine posted on youtube today... The idea that Ahmedinijad is building a nuclear bomb to attack Israel is ridiculous IMO for two reasons... Firstly, the whole basis of the conflict in the middle east is the argument over who claims the right to the religious sites in the area, and any nuclear attack would destroy all of the holy sites that both Muslims and Jews hold sacred and therefore defeating the object. Secondly there is the notion of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). Not only does Israel have nukes of its own, it is fully supported by the US - world's largest nuclear arsenal. Any nuclear strike on Israel by Iran would undoubtedly be reciprocated many times over. Everybody loses, and I do not believe that Ahmedinijad would be stupid enough to set such a chain of events in motion. He isn't this crazed, barbaric monster that he is made out to be by the western media. Remember the scaremongering by the western news channels over his alleged threat to wipe Israel off the map? Just a tiny amount of digging on the net reveals that this was misquoted, mistranslated and taken completely out of context, and what he actually said was that he believed the current Israeli political regime should be 'wiped from the pages of history'. Given their hugely unjust oppression of the people of Gaza, can anybody blame him for that?

Final proof, if ever it were needed, that football has completely lost touch with reality. The global economy is in crisis, but a 16-year-old with a talent for kicking a leather ball and has yet to make his first team debut is valued at £4m? Seriously... WTF!?!?

You STILL don't get it do you Alpine? Sheesh! You start this thread to try and highlight to the mods about supposed bullying. If that was your only concern then you could easily have done it via PM, but no - you started a completely new thread on the main board no less. This is attention seeking - nothing more nothing less. You don't see it because you don't want to. What's more, you started the thread to get some feedback and now that you have decided you don't like the feedback you have received, you claim the thread is getting boring. You made the bed - you lie in it! Having read through most of this thread I can find only a handful of posts I would describe as unfair or 'whipping' as you put it - the vast majority have made very valid points that you have chosen to ignore. You complain that there is a lack of real debate, but you flatly refuse to accept any position that is contrary to the pessimistic drivel that you constantly post, so if there is a lack of real debate then you are the guilty party IMO.

Alps, you complain that you receive abuse because you dare to have a different opinion from the party line but this is not true, simply because you do not offer opinions, you post absolute statements of FACT (or not, as it turns out) and that winds people up. For example, stating in yesterday's match thread that we would lose by 3 clear goals when we were one down. You didn't know that, but you still insisted on telling everyone else on the thread that it would without a shadow of a doubt turn out to be true. That is what annoys people - your absolute certainty that your negative position is correct and everyone else is wrong. Well, look what happened yesterday - we won and you made yourself look completely stupid. I don't think there is a single person on here who isn't concerned that we will not remain in the promotion hunt if our recent form continues much longer. But you seem to have this warped idea that you are the only person who can see it and that anybody else who shows a bit of positivity and belief that we can turn it around is delusional, and yet you have the audacity to complain that you are the one being picked on when people take exception to your constant negative slant on things. Can you really not see that everything we have achieved over the last 16 months or so - and I do mean everything - is due to the positive mental attitude that Adkins has instilled not just in the first team but in the entire club. We may not have the most expensive, most experienced or most talented squad in the league, but we are where we are because the players and the management team BELIEVE that they are capable of achieving their goals. So is it really any wonder that people get irritated when you turn up on the matchday threads and start insisting that we will lose?

How in the hell are they going to afford stuff like this then?... [video=youtube;SSbZrQp-HOk]