Jump to content

Ackey

Staff
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    12,737

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Ackey

    **** PORT VALE AWAY IN GAME THREAD ****

    in Old Match Day Threads

    Posted

    :lol: Taylor bouncing the ball, like a 70s 'keeper.

     

     

    Optional - when you read this - I demand a video of that!

     

    If nothing good comes of this game I want to atleast laugh at that!

     

     

     

     

    COME ON!!!!

     

    'pool 1-1!

     

    We somehow stay second!!!!

     

     

    Whats the deal with Pogs? anyway it could be overturned? Sky have it down as "violent conduct"?

    **** PORT VALE AWAY IN GAME THREAD ****

    in Old Match Day Threads

    Posted

    Season-defining game?

     

    Hmm. Not sure about that. If it wasn't Vale Park maybe, but if you looked up bogey ground in the Oldham Athletic dictionary, it would have a picture of that bloody place.

     

    Not ideal if we lose - but it would be a minor slump - worst case 4th spot (if Bristol won their game in hand) and a point off second. And still 10 points clear of Play-offs.

     

    Wellens and Gregan back and all to play for.

     

    More along the lines of potential injury pile up than the result itself.

     

    Whatever happens, we'll KtF and as long as the lads give 100% until the last ball is kicked, I'll ask for nothing else!

    **** PORT VALE AWAY IN GAME THREAD ****

    in Old Match Day Threads

    Posted

    ----------Lomax------------Eddy

     

    ----------Haining-----------McDon----------Porter

    Pogs

    ----------Charlton----------Taylor----------Warne

     

    ----------Eardly-------------Lidds

     

    Its not ideal but this formation, for me, could do ok.

     

    Haining will need to be strong in the air, Gaz M will need to play deeper in the middle, and Lidds might have to get back a little more.

     

    But Taylor may cause problems thru the middle, and Lomax has the ability to overlap, with Eddy being able to drop in if they counter.

     

    Its not a first choice team, we know that. but we're not out of this yet!

     

    Come on Lads!

    Conspiracy 9/11

    in Threads Worth Keeping

    Posted

    Sorry about this, last point on Bush. Just before GWII, it was announced that the USA had a war budget of some $400 billion sat doin' nowt while they were in a slight recession. I know Rummy will gun me down quicker than you can say 'US friendly fire', but this is about right for a man of Bush's stature but I smell a rat, his name, George W Bush.

     

    That is the defence budget, that includes things like the Homeland Security initiative, the cost of the Star Wars Project, etc. etc.

     

    The figure I quoted, of some $300bn is the current cost of the War in Iraq, and this is in addition to that budget... as I understand it anyway.

     

     

    As Rummy says, I don't think the US had a hand in 9/11.

     

    But I'm certain they saw it as an opportunity more than a threat!

    Help me stop the spammers

    in Techie Help

    Posted

    If it's web based why not just change it?

     

    Its a bit of a pain to change your sites over, but its the best way.

     

    I moved from Hotmail to Gmail and I don't get any atall anymore.

     

    Plus I keep my hotmail account for use on sites which I don't trust to not sell my address, and then forward the mail from there to my gmail account!

     

    Easy ;)

    Conspiracy 9/11

    in Threads Worth Keeping

    Posted

    Sorry for the confusion.

     

    The stats collection was not a direct link to the terror attacks, more a question of the War on terror.

     

    Personally I think that 9/11 was a terror attack. But one which the USA knew could happen and one which the USA failed to deal with, at which point Bush and his advisers saw an opportunity to do something the US has wanted to do for some time, which was to get into the Middle East and develop a strategy for dominance (something which unfortunatly they have failed to do, at least with success the death toll is lower).

     

    The stats on the other hand, are just as you say, stats. They highlight the US commitment to this 'war' and how a frightening amounts of money is pouring out of the US economy, which it really can't afford.

     

    The NewsCorp stats are all subject to opinion. It can be argued that NewsCorp have started to back the Dem. so that they are seen as being more 'central' (The image of FOX as GWB's voice is no longer a viable commercial identity) however Personally I think it has a LOT more to do with the fact that the race for the 2008 Presidency is looking more and more like a Dem. win every day.

     

    When you look historically at how, in '94 Murdoch met with Tony Blair, 3 years before he became PM and 2 years before the Sun became a Labour 'paper again I think that assuming what I have is justifiable.

     

    Especially when you consider that, a couple of weeks ago (I don't have time to find the article to get the dates) Murdoch met with H. Clinton for meetings to discuss 'the future'.

     

    I've lost track of my main point, but I have to go. So I'll let you reply first then debate some more :)

×
×
  • Create New...