dune

Is Postie the clue? Is his name Pat?

ha ha, of course it was. When an ITK nudges and winks on a public thread it is a challenge.

You don't wanna mess with MK Dons.

PM me please.

The writing is on the wall in that respect. You only have to look at the booking fee and the matchday surcharge to see where we're going.

Exactly. A small pitch and stands that are close to the pitch. You can't beat grounds like this for atmosphere.

This I don't accept. It's a service that is integrated in the football clubs official website and the football club make money from it and actively try to sell it. In future i'd advise anyone with any complaints to contact the club because they are effectively the shop that sells the product and they are selling a shoddy product so they need to be told this.

If I could choose how our stadium would be i'd like to build one like the Dell. Something like the old highbury would be perfect.

This is gonna bug me now. fleeting, is that the clue?

The Wrekin Giant It's one of Shropshire's best-known landmarks - and legend has it, it was built by a giant with a grudge against Shrewsbury! http://www.bbc.co.uk/shropshire/content/articles/2005/03/23/wrekin_giant_feature.shtml

Good stuff.

I'm talking about roads and access and parking.

But it'd give a boost to the local economy if you were a producer of tartan blankets.

Not me, I was Voice of Reason once though. A few years back there was Lowe supporter called Sword of Truth and I used to agree with everything he said to annoy him.

The location isn't logistically viable for expansion. As much as I like the in town location we'd have to move imo for a bigger ground.

It's not education though, it's brainwashing to a political agenda. It's laughable how you get a few people who shout and scream and call me a fascist, when i'm not, but if you think about it's those who try to stifle the debate who are showing intolerance and that is akin to a fascist/comunist way of going on. This is what you should think and this is what you should say - that is the attitude of people like Andy. Anyone who thinks differently is an enemy that has no right to dare to think the opposite or even to think down the middle. The subject is not up for discussion for people like this. That is not how history should be looked at because history can teach us a lot because human nature is a constant, but you'll never learn anything, and thus the same mistakes will continue to be made, if it's not interpretted freely.

But in this day and age we can choose whether to be a sheep or not because there is a mine of info out there. Sadly the national curiculum doesn't give children that choice.

Actually here's a good example of the point i'm making about how history such be researched. In the 50's this would have been the taught view - clearly the mau mau very bad guys. History now has gone full circle and schools would teach that Imperialism was bad. I don't accept either view and I like to do my own research and base my opinions on that. You should not be taught what should be interpretted from History, it's far far more complex than that.

I don't dispute any of that, the Prussians were very millitaristic people, and their mindset was always going to be at odds with being passified by us and France. Times were different then, but we did make a big mistake by punishing them so much and driving the German people to rally behind a saviour millitaristic party in order to better their lives in their view.

I never said that and you know it. I foolishly thought some people on here might be able to engage in an adult discussion on a delicate subject and posed a question asking would Britain be a better country now ... 65 years later ... if we'd be on the axis side in WW2. I made the point that the holocaust was dreaful, but also the made the point that Britain rounded up thousands of mao mao "terrorists" in Kenya post 45 and put them in concentration camps just the same only we starved them and beat them to death. I made the point that we were no better. But I really can't be arsed to even try to have a serious debate on this because i've learnt that it's impossible on here because people like you are incapable of it.

I can accept I might be wrong on areas i've researched, but I endeavour to look at the details and not to base my conclusions upon the poltically taught agenda of the national curriculum/the political agenda.

I'm not saying it should be in the curriculum because there's only so much that can be studied, but if considerable time is spent studying that period of history then there is an argument that it should be included because it's a big part of the picture. My conclusion is that Hitler was a madman and was only able to rise to power because of the treaty of versailles, so the real lesson from WW2 IMO is that in victory you do not punish the defeated because all WW2 essentially is is WW1 phase 2. It's the same war.

No it's not. I think History should be looked at subjectively without political bias. I strongly believe far too many people are brainwashed and ignorant and base their conclusions on an one sided (leftwing) version of events and that is tragedy. It's not a subject that should be taught imo, it's a subject that should be researched and students encouraged to come to their own conclusions.

I will ignore you little tantrum and address your point. You may well have qualifications but that doesn't mean you are more informed than someone with an interest in the subject. I would suggest you try think outside the curriculum and what you are brainwashed to think and try to be a little bit more scholarly. There's always several angles to look at historical events, but I feel you'll never really grasp the subject like people like Simon Schama, because of your Marxist inclinations. If you require any assistance i'd be more than happy to help.

He was finalising his plans to invade Poland.