Mic09

We have, I disagree to an extent. There is no necessity in having an avocado or in having bananas or pineapples or peppers. You could just eat potatoes and apples. It would be far less damaging to environment, they are a local product, and don't need to be transited thought the entire world to arrive in the UK. In fact, you could sell your car and your phone, and rent an allotment or use your garden to grow them. So it's a question of how far you push this. I eat meat, and I prefer to buy meat from a local source where I know that animal led a good life. Game meat such as venison is my favourite. Yeah I pay a bit more for it, but it tastes better and I have a clear(er) conscience. Do I think a pig that comes in pork chops had a bad death? Sure. Do I think it would have been ripped by wolves if it lived in the wild? It probably would, no animal dies of old age - it usually gets eaten. It's a much more brutal way to die than being killed by a butcher. So maybe that pig shouldn't have lived at all? Maybe so, I don't know. If it's looked after properly, it certainly can enjoy a good life. Does my diet require a good source of protein? Yeah it does. But I think it's a flawed outlook to reduce life to a minimum necessity. And I am sure (I'm guessing) you do not live your life that way and enjoy many 'evil' things. We all do. But yeah, it's off topic, worth taking to the other thread.

I'm sure the salad that you ate grew in a field not covered by toxic pesticides, nor did the ploughing/harvesting of such field kill a wide variety of animals and destroyed their homes Of course I'm messing with you, it's a complex issue, I just dislike the dietary morality being tossed around. Back on topic, let's not kick cats.

People who eat shitty burgers are obviously unpleasant, but I wonder how many of those people tweeting to get Zouma sacked happily used their phone which was built by low pay workers in 3rd world countries, often with use of child labour? They can't possibly believe those workers were treated any better than Zouma's cat? Obviously I'm being sarcastic here, but the point is let's not engage in a competition of 'who is a bigger scum bag and why'. Zouma should have been benched, offer a large contribution to animal welfare and probably give his cat away to someone. He did wrong, and there is nothing wrong with concentrating on that issue alone, there was a crime and there needs to be a fitting punishment. It's as simple as that.

or 'whatever'. ''you can do whatever you want ''.

You could also make a moral argument that monocrop agriculture is a bad thing to pursue and damaging to animals and wider environment. Want a soya burger? You ain't a saint. But that's beyond the point. I just watched the video, the guy is done. Off he goes.

Let me settle the argument. We don't know. You are welcome.

One played for Liverpool and Man City. The other played for a relegation contender/championship team. Scores and assists are misleading.

Sure, but I think if Grealish decided to go once we got relegated he would now be speaking about a much better career than be enjoyed so far.

Lamptey is a good shout, but I'd argue if he is better than Cash. Would be a like for like signing, and that's risky. We know Cash fits in. Would Lamptey fit in right away? And would he improve us?

What's an even more difficult question, how do we know how the history will judge us in 50 years time. I think it's important to not get ahead of ourselves on pretty much anything. I'm sure Nazis sounded like a reasonable set of people in 1931, or at least not the most evil people imaginable. Many of us could probably relate to them on many fronts if we lived back then. If we think we wouldn't, we should probably get off the historical high horse. I always think it's a good idea to think every moral or political position very carefully, and then question it again. Do we support something "good" that's "obvious"? I'm sure the medieval crusaders were too. Who knows what future brings, and how can we know we are on the good side of history. Maybe whatever our western leaders do is leading us to WW3 because we supported this or that.

Probably now drives a Bentley to keep the appearances down!

Bit of a nothing story, but I wouldn't rock up in RayBans and a Ralph Lauren Polo shirt on my first dress down Friday in a new job. I think that's as close of a comparison to us mere mortals as one could imagine.

Not that I disagree, but why do you think this?

I think something like that is possible from Castore.

That's a very subjective argument. Has Jack Grealish thrown in the towel at Villa because he knew he can't push us any further? Has Coutinho thrown in the towel at Barca? Surely you could say that about any player going anywhere? Just because you leave (and he hasn't - he has been loaned) it doesn't mean he has thrown in the towel. And that's before we even consider the possibility that Gerrard has sat him down and said 'I don't see a place for you in my team now, or in the future'.

or 6, don't forget 6.

Jesus Chris. We have a very solid asset in Targett, one on a long contract and with clear ability. A solid premier league player in questionably one of the more difficult positions to fill for any team. He will not play 1st team football at Villa, and we have solid back up to Digne in Young. So we either stick Targett on the bench, OR, let him play football. If he plays football, he will be better, and he can; 1. Challenge Digne in pre season OR 2. Get us a bigger fee should he decide to transfer. Also, he is a professional footballer who wants to play, and wants to push his career forward. He won't do that sitting on the bench. What is this load of crap about not rolling his sleeves up or not fighting for a shirt... he is doing exactly that. I would much rather have a player loaned to get minutes than one who knows he will sit on the bench. It's a win win for everyone, literally everyone involved. How can we question this?

Sure - and I don't see you throwing shit on Rogan or Oprah. Which is fair.

Haha, that wasn't my point The point was to not look at basic info and buzz words, but understand the topic to have a solid opinion on it. Hitler was bad, but it's better to understand why. As with any other topic

You can watch a video of troops parading in Berlin in 1939. That is enough. Or you can read (and understand) the entire Main Kampf. I know who has a deeper understanding of the topic.

Sure, no disagreement there. I just think that if I am going to critique anyone, I would have a deep look into primary sources.

Maybe it takes listening to racism to being able to understand what racism is. You know, learning things. But, I don't think his show is racist. I'd rather do that, than not watch it and have an opinion. That's not learning things, that's ignorance. I would happily accept "I don't watch him, so I don't know much about him, but it sounds like he is saying racist things". But this never happened. Whooppie Goldberg was discussed, about her unfortunate holocaust comment - and all of a sudden racist Rogan is brought into it. By someone who doesn't listen to him. I think that's poor discussion and buzz words.

Yeah, because I listen to his shows. You do spend a lot of time attacking this man and his views, and dont listen to his show. That's a bit more weird. In fact, you brought him into the conversation about Whoppie Goldberg for no apparent reason. Why?

1st link - Ari shafir, one of rogans best friends and a regular guest is Jewish, and they keep making fun of their heritage. Ari takes the Mick of Rogan being Italian, he takes the mick out of his Jewish background. One is a pasta eater, the other is a money grabbing banker. They are comedians and are joking around smoking weed. 2nd link - I would suggest listening to the whole thing and getting to understand the Eric Dyson story. They suggested how it's weird that we group ourselves into colours, like it makes any difference. They talk about pointless divisions and how it's stupid to point anyone's race (like Eric Dyson has done) because we are all different, and you will never meet a "white" or a "black" person - we are all different. Taking 60 second soundbites out of 3 hour shows is poor form.

Could you please describe why you think Joe Rogan tells people what to interpret as racism?