Lighthouse

Went to the bookies before KO and stuck £150 each on Saints at 9/1, Fulham at 17/2 and the draw at 23/2, I'll let you know how it goes.

Here please.

It's not the fault of any nation, other than the ones which publicly support and enforce this particular brand of Islam. Have a quick check of the countries where being gay is a capital offence, I pretty much blame any of them for this.

Saints - I'm not going. You're not having a penny of my money. I fully expect you to lose and get relegated. Go ahead, do your worst!!!

No, I just fail to see how this is Britain’s fault. Especially when there will be similar cases in many countries around the world where extremists have left to fight for ISIS. What you call ‘proper monitoring’ is the kind of stuff which makes people put tin foil hats on and hang coat-hangers from the ceiling. The only way to catch everyone is to have the government monitoring everyone’s phone calls, WhatsApp, voice mail, email, microphones in the mosques, school yards, CCTV on every street, etc. There are 2.8 million Muslims in the UK. We can’t monitor all of them 24/7 for signs of extremist indoctrination and nor should we. There is always the same public reaction whenever we have a terrorist attack, paedophile abduction or serial killer; why didn’t the government stop this. Well, if we want to all live in some sort of conspiracy theory, cyber nanny state from a Jason Bourne film...

What is it specifically that you think Britain did wrong, which lead to Islamic extremism?

No we didn't, they were crap. They only scored because we were hopeless defending a corner, allowing them an unchallenged knock down and tap in, followed by Stephens calmly passing them the ball in acres of space in our own half.

We will draw against Fulham, lose our last 10 games and stay up.

Not that any of it bothers me but I don't get the whole non-binary, pan sexual thing and how it's different from being bi, really.

I’d personally take our fixtures. If we can stay within touch of Cardiff after the Spurs game, we’ve got a decent chance. If we call the top 6 untouchable for both teams; 6 of our last 7 are winnable but only 3 of Cardiff’s are. It’s going to be tedious, painful sh*te for both sets of fans but I just about fancy us over them. 1-5 at home to Watford is far worse than anything we’ve done.

The onboard footage starts about 0:40 On the top surface of the wing, you will see the flight spoiler raising and lowering. This happens when the pilot applies aileron input (for rolling the plane) beyond a certain amount. On the left wing, this deflects upwards when the pilot is rolling left. If the pilot was attempting to counter turbulence I would expect to see the pilot (i.e. the controls surfaces) rolling left, to counter the turbulence rolling to the right. In other words, when the left wing is raised in this video, I would expect to see the spoiler raise up to counter it. This isn't the case and the aircraft seems to be responding normally to pilot inputs. Why is a different question. I wouldn't want to slag the pilot off without knowing the full circumstances but it does look like he is responding very slowly to the turbulence and just making the situation worse. I've seen it done, by a guy who thought he was the bees knees but was actually a bit of a helmet. Made an absolute dogs dinner of light turbulence on approach and was talking afterwards as if we'd just flown through a hurricane. I wouldn't be worried, it's seldom dangerous, unless you happen to be the upholstery in the cabin.

I’ve seen an onboard video of this incident from a passenger, which leads me to think it’s pilot induced. Still must have been freaky for those onboard.

On a VFR flight plan, over the sea, at night and in crap weather, one engine, no weather radar, low altitude... What a cowboy.

I think we will. Personally I'd say if he parents were Spanish and she was involved in a military coup to overthrow the Spanish government, it would. IMO...

I don't think you can really divide up the criteria like that because the two parts of that sentence are critical to each other. On it's own the sentence "Does abandoning Britain to fight in a foreign holy war make her less British?" - Yes. On it's own (i.e. supposing Begum was a white, Christian woman called Sharon Smith) it would make her a traitor. Less British, yes; should she lose her citizenship is a trickier question. It would be hard to make a case for that as she doesn't have any family connection to any other country. The reasons why Begum has chosen this lifestyle can't be ignored. She has joined an Islamic extremist movement and her parents are Bangladeshi Muslims. It would be naive to think there isn't any kind of link between the two. To put it as simply as I can - Religion doesn't determine your 'Britishness' - Her actions based on Her interpretations of Her religion do affect her right to be a British citizen, in this specific scenario. IMO - Not saying everyone has to agree but others (not you, I apologise) think that makes me racist. For the sake of clarity, I don't like Sharon Smith any more than Shamima Begum, in this hypothetical scenario.

I give up. If people seriously can't tell the difference between 'being a Muslim' and 'abandoning Britain to wage murderous Jihad in a foreign country' then they're never going to get my point. I've provided a couple of examples of when I think a Westboro Baptist wouldn't be Japanese or a Catholic wouldn't be British in a similar situation. You can have another if you like: Two Scousers move to Tashkent and have a son, they bring him up as a die hard Everton fan. Aged 15 he hears about two firms of Scousers and Mancs having a gang war on the streets of San Diego. He flies to America and spends the next 4 years doing drive-by shootings on bars in San Diego showing Man Utd games. Personally, I don't really think he's an Uzbek, so now you can call me racist against Scousers if you want.

That's the one Google came up with and it seems about right to me. If you have a different version then fine but I can't be arsed arguing over semantics. I'm not treating her differently because of her ethnic/national background but it is part of a situation specific to her. Do I think Muslims aren't British? No Do I think people who's parents are from foreign countries aren't British? Also No Do I think being born here means you have the right to claim British citizenship for life, regardless of anything? No Does abandoning Britain to fight in a foreign holy war, based on extremely warped interpretations of her foreign parents religion make her less British? Yes To answer your last question - No because murdering a couple of school girls in Britain isn't some foreign crusade. If however Ian Huntley's parents were Irish and he went to America aged 15 to wage a campaign for mass murder against the Protestant heathens, based upon the extremist preachings of Father O'Doyle in County Kerry, I would say he wasn't really British, just like Begum.

We will probably take the lead and throw it away and end up with a point. It’s going to be the most tedious race in history between us and Cardiff.

Okay, I'll help you with this using a quick Google: "Define: Racism - the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. - prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior." Arguing about whether or not someone's British citizenship is valid based on their personal circumstances, whilst simultaneously accepting 99% of her religion's right to be British does not make a person racist. To answer your question; No I wouldn't because if she has clearly come from British ancestry it's a different situation. That would make her a traitor and no less of a scumbag and if we could cancel her citizenship on the basis that she has pledged allegiance to another state then I personally would. Begum's parents are foreign, she has clearly chosen to follow grotesque bastardisation of their religion instead of integrating into British society. She joined a death cult based on an extreme interpretation of an ultra conservative Saudi branch of Islam, which willingly supports the mass murder of any British citizen. That to me trumps the mere fact that she happened to be born here.

Pedro just went full Tadič.

I believe the ‘Christian guilt complex’ he refers to could be aimed at people who spout gibberish like, “we can’t really complain about terrorist attacks after what we did in the crusades,” or, “ISIS is our fault really because we invaded Iraq.” I wouldn’t say it’s a Christian thing so much as a bazaar desire some people have to say things are, “our fault.”

I’ve never rated him and was surprised he was so highly thought of when being mediocre in a very defensive Puel team. I also didn’t understand the argument that a fairly standard shirt pull was justification for going full Harlem Globetrotter against Burnley. He got off very lightly compared to Hoedy but now the latter has gone there is nobody to distract fans from Jack’s many limitations.

Here please

I remember it being about 1/4 full last season when they played Man City, apparently because 6th in the League, a cup final and last 8 of the Europa league was such an embarrassment and they were staying away in protest. Can't beat die-hard fans who support their club through thick and thin.

My argument is that he was told when he was appointed that we are trying to reduce the wage bill and will need to sell before we can buy. Gabbi and Cedric were two players attracting interest and RH was told not to make plans for them or, more importantly, let them get injured. I think RH was okay with it, based on the premise that we were trying to bring in replacements, which of course we failed to do. Why would he not give them any game time to at least see what they look like? When he is willing to give a bunch of kids their first start to try them out, why was he so convinced an Italian international and a Euro 2016 winner aren't worth looking at? Not only did he not want to give them a single game to see if they were any good but you're saying he thought we'd be better having absolutely nobody in their place? What about Elyounoussi, does RH rate him? If this is the squad RH wants, why did we (supposedly) try and waste all that money bringing in Maehle, Agustin and the rest, if he doesn't want them? Can we at least agree he doesn't rate Hoedt.