Verbal

That wouldn't make any sense. Labour were far from annihilated in the last election, and the Tories were far from being victors. The next election is eminently winnable for Labour, especially when the cuts REALLY bite, as they haven't even begun to yet. The coalition will disintegrate - even those within it are aware that that's more likely than not - and so there is everything to play for. I'm not sure about EM, but I think I'll give him more than a few hours before deciding whether I think he has potential as a serious and engaging political leader.

Hart is not, and never has been a 'BBC correspondent', as often claimed by those jumping on his bandwagon, although he did, in the late seventies, present the occasional Panorama, as a freelance. Respected? By whom? He certainly isn't your classical model of an independent-minded observer of events - for example, trying (and failing) to persuade the Shah of Iran to go into exile in the UK after the collapse of his regime in 1979. And if you actually listen to that video recording, even Hart says everything is 'speculation' - aside from the 'certainty' that the towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion. This, he says, is based on a conversation with one senior engineer, a mate of his who saw the attacks on the tele. Utter tosh. He also makes a big play about Mossad, as if Israeli intelligence were all-seeing, all-powerful. They are not. Mossad was instrumental, for example, in creating Hamas as a bulwark against the PLO. It was a classic case, as one US intelligence officer put it, of the Israelis setting their own hair on fire and trying to put it out with a hammer.

...you finally get the spokesman you deserve. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/23/iran-unitednations

Is this the Karl Pilkington memorial thread?

Some words of wisdom from Palin today: "It's been made absolutely clear that those who hold these, I think, common-sense and pretty mainstream positions, who are attacked, unfortunately, some destructive false shots don't just come from the far left, and that's what I'll admit to learning in these last couple of years. "But those in the liberal media: you're worse for using, in that lamestream media, those unsubstantiated untrue hits, it's not fair to our country, it's not fair to the electorate, it's not fair to our democracy, and it is not fair to our troops willing to sacrifice all for our freedoms, journalists, ok?" Who needs Churchill (the guy with the cigar, not the dog)?

I think it's a con. The copyright language sounds like it's designed to 'be there' once someone who's been contacted by him checks on the website. This, for me at least, is the giveaway: 'Our unique search engines make finding [the photographs] easy.'

No, just beneath contempt, like all religionists.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting - because those are remarkably POSITIVE figures for Labour support such a short time after an election that was supposed to be 'disastrous', and during which they often polled only in the high 20s. Stanley's hopeless fantasy of Tory rule for a generation looks shaky even now.

Don't even THINK that. Oh, you did. Now you're damned to hell.

My first reaction was that it WAS a special effect. I was working on a film at the time, and had dropped into a postproduction house in Soho. As I walked in the door, the TV was replaying the plane hitting the South Tower. I remember looking at it and thinking: that explosion and fire ball doesn't look quite right. And then someone told me it was real. It turned out that an acquaintance of mine, a cameraman called Paul Berriff, was filming at the base of the towers that morning. He thankfully survived - and came away with some frightening (and never broadcast) footage. At the time, I was seeking permission to film at the Twin Towers, and the PR people at the WTC were meeting that morning to discuss the proposal. They also survived.

In the end, we are all answerable to CB Fry. Keep up.

For example, guess what the answer is to this question: Whatever happened with Lotfi Raissi, who was arrested in UK for teaching the terrorist pilots? Answer: he was completely innocent, and was recently compensated. Or this: Why were there no photos or videos of the Pentagon plane? Etc., etc. Ignore the 'truther' movement. The idea that 9/11 was the result of a black ops scheme deep within the Bush administration is fantasy writ so large only because the internet is a remarkably efficient transmitter of paranoic, conspiratorial garbage dressed as 'investigation'.

Shame you had to raise that nonsense.

The Mail doesn't 'wipe the floor' with the Guardian. They cater to different markets. The Mail is for angry dumbasses and The Guardian for happy, enlightened folk - speaking somewhat broadly. Unfortunately there are more of the former than the latter. Both are of the same mind, however, about Cortese's weird ban.

Nope. It seems the 'nutty muslims' have calmed the idiot down. Take the trouble to read the NYT piece...if you can. The picture with it will cause YOU to go mental.

Someone seems to be suffering from EDS - Enemy Deprivation Syndrome.

The idiot has backed down. Stunt over. http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

argumentum ad hominem. Look it up.

I wouldn't be surprised if Adkins' appointment is followed, by the end of the season, by some belt-tightening, with or without promotion. If it happens, it seems like an appointment designed to discourage the buy-it-to-fix-it thinking of the season just gone.

I don't understand this thread. We already have a new manager - Nicola 'Martin' Cortese, the evil football mogul who signalled his intentions with his last movie, The Departed.

Clue: he has a knighthood.

And who would be interested in this jury exactly?

Glasgow never gets PMs from anyone. Ever.

You're confused twice over. First, you confuse your schoolboy crush on a myopic racist with some sort of scholarship exclusive only to you. And second, you confuse my and others' repudiation of Smith as equating with having 'no knowledge of him'. Ridiculous.