Anon

Begum (and her army of simps for that matter) are irredeemable scum in my opinion, but by the letter of the law she absolutely should be repatriated.

If only our government and civil servants could work as hard at keeping illegal migrants out of the country as they have on this one single citizen.

47 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

I assume you're addressing this question to someone who said that it was. I didn't mention anything about the use of the word fat

Is it Cancel Culture then if the people who own the work, unilaterally decide to change it themselves in order to make more money?

Isn't that their choice? To deny them their own free will over what they do with the property they own seems a bit...hmm

But it's OK. Yet again I remind myself that I'm not here to change people's minds. I don't actually care what they do with Roald Dahl's books because they own them and I respect their rights to freedom of expression. I'm not going to change the minds of those who like to get outraged about confected cancel culture controversy. 

I'm sure the media will flip it round eventually anyway to "No one reads Dahl any more because the anti-cancel culture mob forced them to keep all the outdated stereotypes" ?

 

 

I wanted to know why the conversation had been slid towards racism and anti-Semitism, seeing as those weren't the examples of changes to the original text that have been given or discussed in this thread.

If you have examples of those things, please provide them and we can discuss them, but it seems like you're using Dahl's racist and anti-Semitic views to justify changes to his work that have absolutely nothing to do with either of those things.

In what way is calling a fat character "fat" either anti-semitic or tremendously racist? These are the examples we're discussing here, not racism. Can you provide any examples of these prejudices in his books? I'm not saying they aren't there, but it's a long time since I read Dahl.

Also, altering an author's work or removing it from circulation entirely is cancel culture. You seem to enjoy flipping between denying it happens at all and saying it does, but it's a good thing. It can't be both.

Warren Barton

Why are some drag queens suddenly obsessed with the idea of performing in front of children? If you want to read to kids, great, but can't you just do that dressed like a normal adult? If a woman turned up at a local library reading event in an evening gown with her face painted like a clown people would be scratching their heads and asking questions, but when it's drag queens we're all supposed to pretend this is normal?

44 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

No it isn't though is it? You've linked to the study and yet misrepresent the conclusion.

From the text - they are specifically saying that the data is too poor quality to draw firm conclusions, so it's disingenuous to make the statement you did.

 

 

 

Just in case you're not aware Stive, sections of the author's conclusion don't simply cease to exist when you choose not to highlight them.

"The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks."

13 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

Unless I've missed it, no one seems to have actually linked to the Cochran Library study on mask wearing:

The summary is at: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full

The full 300+ page report is at https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/epdf/full

It's a shame the evidence isn't more solid, but it's the best that can be done and this is almost certainly the most comprehensive assessment of mask-wearing globally. The conclusion is mask wearing doesn't appear to have an effect. I wish this was seen as a less political conclusion and everyone could get on with their lives without the mask-wearing, but sadly this has been politicized and some people are still terrified of leaving their houses if people aren't wearing masks. Governments and media need to take a long hard look at themselves.

Now, given that Carl is hardly using definitive language here and a sentence saying that mask wearing doesn't appear to have and effect is literally in the conclusion, I'd like to know where you get off calling someone else disingenuous.

I'll believe it when I see it in terms of City actually facing any meaningful punishment.

Whilst I have no particular love for City, I can't help but feel that the real reason for FFP is laid bare with all the fans of rival teams salivating at the prospect of sanctions. FFP has bugger all to do with fairness and everything to do with maintaining the current status quo at the top of the European game. Spending and wages are still wildly out of control and football is extremely expensive for the average fan, this will remain exactly the same even if the current boogie man (City) is hammered with the most serious sanctions.

You poor fools. How could you not understand? GNev only liked the tweet of someone who allegedly beat his girlfriend getting cleared to bring attention to the problem of violence against women. Just like he only took those big bags of Qatari money to bring attention to the suffering of migrant workers.

Thank the lord we have people like GNev to start conversations. He truly is a champion of the people.

The CPS released the following statement,

“In this case a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.

In these circumstances, we are under a duty to stop the case."

I believe Greenwood and his alleged victim have since gotten engaged. I think we can all have a pretty good guess at what has occurred and it's a bit grim.

As to whether Greenwood will play again, the released audio complicates the issue. Ordinarily if no charges are brought then the person should be allowed to continue their career, but I doubt many fans (in this country at least) would be happy to see him in their squad.

On 09/11/2022 at 08:20, jameso said:

That's a pretty good description of one of the hosts, never mind Luke Varney! I would watch/listen to more of those if they changed their personnel. I think some of the guests sink to that level too sometimes.

I will give Varney 20 minutes and see if it/he is as awful as you suggest!

I actually think that they're really good interviewers. They are able to put their guests at ease and encourage them to speak openly. Too much of modern football is sanitised PR speak, so it's great to actually hear the truth, even if that truth is depressingly juvenile and grim on occasion. 

23 hours ago, Crewton said:

I'm not trying to push anything 'down their throats', I'd just like them to stop oppressing one half of the world's population and criminalising other people's sexual preferences. It's the 21st century, not the 7th. Any international tournament should be open to the enjoyment of everyone without fear. FIFA did not fulfill this requirement when choosing Qatar.

As for "rich and decadent old man"? Absolute LOLZ considering the life of the average Gulf Arab.

You're a Troll though, so these posts are unsurprising. I've seen your work before. I can't ban you from this forum, but I'd strongly recommend that someone with the power to do so does.

Aaahh, moderators help! This person is disagreeing with me!

There really is no justice in the world is there? All you wanted was to force a change in the laws of a sovereign nation 1000s of miles away from your own country. Do you work for the US Department of State?

I'm no fan of Qatar's laws. I don't like how Islam treats women or homosexuals. Vast swathes of the world disagree with me. I'm not arrogant enough to assume that I should have moral authority over billions of people.

4 hours ago, Archied said:

Turns out lycett has done paid for shows in uae including Qatar ,

what a principled hero , no way was he just raising his own profile???

I am Jack's shocked Pikachu face.

44 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said:

They were laughing.

If diversity is such a good thing why can't we respect the cultural norms of Qatar. If everyone has the same laws and cultural norms then that's not diversity. Religion is very important to people in that part of the world and gay sex is prohibited by their religion. Why should the West try to force their cultural norms on the rest of the world.

Re. the loss of lives, as far as I know only three people died building the stadiums. In the early 1970s I worked on a construction site in the UK where more than three people died on site over about three or four years and that didn't even make the national papers. Many migrant workers have died building other things in Qatar but the death rate for migrant workers in Qatar is lower than that in their own countries. Most people brought up in the Third World have not had access to medical care as children and they are not as healthy as people in First World countries. A lot of migrant deaths in Qatar can be attributed to general ill health. A doctor who had done research in Central Africa told me that the average person there has so many parasites that it is amazing that they have the strength to do any work at all.

 

 

I agree with the first paragraph. There were way more than three worker deaths building the stadiums though and the treatment of workers in Qatar is appalling. I'm not dismissing the counter points you make. It's true that construction sites are death traps in India/Nepal/Pakistan, but that doesn't excuse Qatar not being better.

21 minutes ago, littleover ram said:

L'equipe have just named him in the worst team of the WC

 

At least he's getting his name out there. There's no such thing as bad publicity.

Edit - Info already posted on another Bielik thread.

3 hours ago, JoetheRam said:

I love me some of big Mich's. No pretence of being a tactical expert a la Ferdinand, Neville, Carragher et. al) just an ex-players view with a sense of humour.

He's similar to how Wrighty was when he started out - big personality but in danger of being used just for weak laughs.

But when you've got about 3 minutes to actually discuss the football, it can only be surface level anyway, so no point taking it as earnestly as Jenas, Ferdinand and Neville do for example. All of whom are such tactical geniuses they choose the easy option of the sofa rather than the dugout.

 

 

I mostly agree with this. I can't stand to listen to Neville and Ferdinand. If only they were half as knowledgeable and erudite as they believe themselves to be. A pair of self satisfied onanists.

I like Richards. It's nice to see someone genuinely enjoying the game. I'm a miserable git myself, so I'd likely spend most of the time glowering at him like Keane does, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy his presence.

If only Japan had called up this guy,

Ban this poster immediately for witchcraft.

It seems like it could be dodgy accounting practices to defer projected losses. As a Derby fan I couldn't really comment on such things. Rumours are that the players apparently agreed to pay cuts during the covid lockdowns, but were promised that they'd be reimbursed 'off the books'.

5 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

Fair play. A good bit of history I wasn’t aware of there. But I’m not surprised similar things have happened in the past.

But that was a long time ago now. An old historical precedent. I’d like to think FIFA can deal with this a bit better now. Like the members of any collective should take a vote on such matters.

’Is Kosovo an independent state, that we’re happy to welcome into our federation, and in its to compete in our competitions? Yes. Sorry Serbia, the ayes have it, and you can like it or lump it. Now that’s decided we’ll have no more of your nonsense at our games, or can jolly well sod off back home.’

Similarly, ‘Do we all agree that lgbtq+ are welcome at our sport, to show their affection for each other, and to join in with all other aspects? Yes. Sorry Qatar, the ayes have it, and if you don’t like that, you probably shouldn’t have agreed to host an event on behalf of the group.’

It's not just historic though. Iran and Saudi Arabia would still refuse to play Israel now.

The other problem FIFA have is that only just over 50% of UN members recognise Kosovo as an independent nation. Admitting them in the first place was a political act in itself. Of course there are plenty of FIFA members who aren't independent nations, but admitting Kosovo was always going to be inflammatory. Should FIFA admit Catalonia as an independent nation? How about South Ossetia? I agree with you in principle that football should be above this, but it's an issue I do have some sympathy for FIFA on.

32 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

No. Specifically I said this sort of politics shouldn’t be brought into the football, where it becomes a fifa problem. The regimes can do and think what they want, and that’s a problem for the un to sort out. 

but you can’t be bringing this s*** with you to a game of football. What happens when Serbia and Kosovo are drawn against each in a competitive match, or Palestine and Israel. It’ll be absolute carnage if bringing your geopolitical angst to the game isn’t stamped out.

the sovereignty of your opponent shouldn’t be in question. If you don’t agree the country exists, then don’t turn up, don’t play them, and see how far that gets you. But the fact that you are playing them means they do exist. So STFU and get on with the game.

I know they’re not playing Kosovo at this World Cup, obviously, but this is the thin end of the wedge and should be stamped out, before it does lead to all out war fare at a football match one day. 

My point is that they did bring this political stuff into football. Israel were expelled from the AFC in 1974 (and remain exiled) because so many nations refused to play against them. The sovereignty of the opponent was absolutely in question in this instance. Teams refused to turn up, didn't play them. How far did it get them? Well Israel were shuffled off to a different confederation and the boycotting nations got what they wanted.

How could FIFA possibly take a hard line and outright ban Serbia when there are other teams in the exact same situation at this very tournament?

4 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

Yep. I’d say it’s worthy of being kicked out of FIFA. If you can’t recognise the sovereignty of one of your fellow FIFA members, then I’d say your ideologies are intrinsically at odds to the core beliefs of the association. If the Serbians stand by their principles, then they shouldn’t really want to be involved with an association that recognises Kosovo.

on the football pitch is one place you ought to be able to put your politics to one side, and compete as sportsmen and women. The World Cup is, by definition, a gathering of the people of the world, where everyone can get kissed and enjoy a game of footy together, and forget about the s*** going on at home. Don’t bring that s*** with you. 

So, you're also advocating kicking just about every Islamic nation out of FIFA for not recognising Israel?

16 minutes ago, admira said:

288. 

Taribo West

How old is he now? 35?

24 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

Get what you're saying, but in professional sport you tend to do everything you possibly can to create and advantage and to win. But, that said, picking England ahead of Germany (or Canada) didn't work out very well for Owen Hargreaves.

People do, but I wish they wouldn't. Players should be advised to play for whichever nation they feel most represents them. I found the tug of war over Declan Rice incredibly sordid.

12 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

This is how I feel when people talk about teams boycotting a tournament. A football player works all their life for the chance to play at a World Cup, and maybe win the thing. They might only get the one chance. It’s not their fault it’s being hosted in Qatar. So they shouldn’t be asked to screw their possibly one chance to play in or win the World Cup just because some d******** at fifa picked the wrong venue. 

in the punditting world, it’s probably quite similar. 

I don't have a problem with that either, but if they decide they want to go and play in/commentate on/ or work at the tournament they should just do that and spare us all the preaching because it's evident they don't care enough about the issues they're whinging about to inconvenience themselves in the slightest way. Nothing any of them are saying is new information. We knew about Qatar's poor human rights records before, during, and after the bidding process. People "raised awareness" about it before, during, and after the bidding process. It made no difference. It will make even less difference now other than giving a load of smug p***** and unjustified sense of self satisfaction.