Thug

Without him we’d be 3-1 down. this guy just reads the strikers so well best villa keeper ever? Certainly the best of my lifetime - going back to Spink.

I don't understand all the comments about why did the ref blow the whistle for half time? Since when has there been a rule that you can't blow for half time if there is an attack going on? Never. Well past the 2 added minutes. I'd be furious if he DIDN'T blow for half time but rather added on time beyond what was due.

This guy has become my favourite player.

I’m sure Roger’s will come good eventually, but he’s not ready yet. Complete passenger in that first half

https://theintercept.com/2024/01/04/cnn-israel-gaza-idf-reporting/ Interesting read.

Yes of course, but people can be swayed by more emotive issues. Look at the last general election. Labour were making it absolutely clear that they were "for the many, not for the few" in terms of economy. But got thumped on emotive issues. (I also know that many didn't 'trust' him with the economy... but that was based more on a smear campaign than anthing else) I'm not saying you're wrong, and clearly things have worsened since then. But I wouldn't say it's clear cut. For example: https://www.statista.com/statistics/886366/issues-facing-britain/ You're absolutely right that the major concern is the economy with 50% But this also means to the other 50% that it wasn't. 50% economy 44% Health 39% Immigration. Some people (myself included) would prioritise other concerns because I have no faith that either party is going to make much difference to the economy. My main priority is that I hate the recent conservative rhetoric of trying to blame the vulnerable for their own catastrophic failures. I think they are on a very dangerous course of causing civil unrest, and need to be gone. Even if it means I have to pay more tax for the next decade. Of course I understand that not everyone thinks like me, and maybe I'm foolish to think that anyone other than those in my circle of friends do think the same.. I hope that makes a little sense, even if you disagree?

I think you'd be surprised. Most people would have no idea about how the different party policies would affect the "price of bread".

Stephen King. Misery. ‘Hobbling’ as a means to prevent an unwanted departure.

Definitely Emi’s mistake IMO. But no need to dwell on it. He more than made up for it with his other saves.

Oh what would that be?

The GDP of Israel is completely irrelevant In this conversation.

Wrong.

I have to type my post out again because, well, I have to. But what you are doing is using a straw man fallacy. Your initial standpoint was that it is ‘literally’ in Iran’s constitution to wipeout all Jews. You then posted a conveniently truncated version of article 14 to ‘prove’ your point. Even this truncated version did not prove your claim in the slightest. When a full version of the article 14 is posted, proving you wrong, you then argue a completely different point - this is where the straw man comes in. You changed the argument from the literal existence within the Iranian constitution to wipe out all Jews, to the fact that the Iranian regime is guilty of this. These are two completely separate claims here. 1. That the Iranian constitution ‘literally’ calls for the ethnic cleansing of Jews 2. The Iranian government is/was carrying out the ethnic cleansing of Jews. Point 1 has been disproven. Point 2 was not disputed. You are using point 2, to argue point 1. I.e your classic ‘straw man’ This is NOT semantics. This is a debating tactic that is used frequently, and has been employed persistently by the western media during the current conflict for propaganda purposes. I would appreciate it if you would withdraw your false claim that the ethnic cleansing of Jewish people was ‘literally’ in the Iranian constitution - this is a lie, and you are spreading disinformation. Posting truncated versions of articles to suit your agenda and support your narratives is not ethically sound. I guess you got it from Wikipedia. I suggest in future, to prevent misunderstandings, you go directly to the source you are quoting. If you want to make your claim that the Iranian government are/were/will carry out the ethnic cleansing of Jews under the veil of article 14 by making false charges, be my guest. You won’t have an argument from me. It’s a disgusting practice when Iran do it, and it’s a disgusting practice when Israel do it, and it’s a disgusting practice when the US use their anti-terrorism laws to hold people without charge for decades in Guantanamo bay. Misusing the constitution is NOT the same as your claim.