DAM

There's two major flaws in your argument skifreak....

First off, you're assuming that the fans have the sense to decide for themselves whether or not it's safe to travel and they simply don't....people will do their utmost to get to the game regardless of conditions. I've done it in the past and would likely do it again in the future.

Secondly, by pushing ahead with the game then you are expecting players and staff to make the journey regardless of conditions. That's at least 40 people on the playing side, as many again, if not more, stadium and catering staff and then you've got police, stewards and media to add into the equation. If these people take up the advice of "Only travel if it is vital" and stay at home you could end up with 3000+ fans at the stadium to see a game that gets cancelled because they simply don't have the staff to see the game go ahead.

So what's the answer.......summer football?

Personally....i say sod him....he threw his toys out of the pram once before and turned his back on his country. I would leave him out in the cold! Apart from anything else...hes fine for scoring against diddy teams and thats it

Cut off one's nose to spite one's face is it?

Understanding that the planet does not have the capacity to support an ever expanding population using an ever increasing amount of resources does not make you a tree hugging hippy - rather than opting out, it means opting in to modern technological fixes that allow for sustainable development.

For me, the Green agenda will have to be adopted sooner or later on an international level if society is not to degenrate into warfare over ever diminishing resources.

The only thing which will really save the planet (this by the way is a SERIOUS post) is the humble condom and allied contraceptive methods. However I fear that attempts to implement such a policy would follow in the doomed steps of Kyoto and Copenhagen.

If we start off with the CO2, which seems to have become to the 21st century what Witchcraft was to the 17th, how is it produced? By PEOPLE.

Then there's food. Who eat it? PEOPLE. It's the same with water etc etc.

The problems which threaten the planet are mainly caused by there being too many people and the vital objective, however unlikely its achievement may in practice be, should therefore be to limit population.

Think, for instance, of the amount of CO2 which one person, especially of the North American variety, produces in a lifetime - his "carbon footprint", to delve into what is a rapidly expanding and increasingly hilarious Glossary of Global Warming Jargon.

Then think of the most prominent self appointed paragon within the climate change lobby - Mr. Al Gore.

How many hydrocarbon guzzling North American children has Mr. Gore produced?

FOUR.

Their combined lifetime carbon footprint, and all because Mr. Gore was unable to keep his bits in his trousers or unwilling to get a vasectomy, must be absolutely horrendous. So hang your head in shame Al for the damage you have done to the planet!

But sorry, I have allowed this thread to wander just a bit further from its original thrust so let me restore it with a question.

Given the current perception of politicians in this country, do you not think that Mainstander's earlier post, which was presumably partly tongue in cheek, maybe touches a few bases as far as the various parties in question are concerned?

I should perhaps also simply note that in recent elections, people do appear to have been exercising the "Don't Vote" option to an increasing extent.

Your post takes me back to around 1968 when I worked down the pit in Cardowan Colliery, outside Glasgow. One of the miners chalked on one of the overhead girders the words "we will outbreed you" and I have never forgotten that. He was one of the "non condom" brigade if you see what I mean.

So China brushed aside international appeals, including a strongly worded one from Gordon Brown, and executed a British drug smuggler who relatives say was mentally unstable and unwittingly lured into crime.

I'd say China are within their rights to have the death penalty in place for crimes such as these, and that we, as a country shouldn't interfere. I don't even believe appeals for clemency on the grounds of mental instability should be entertained. in any court-room.

If we as a country had the death penalty for drug pushers it would go a long way towards solving the problem of drug abuse. How many deaths have the drug pushers been responsible for over the years? Does that not make them murderers? What is the point of the soft option of jailing them when prisons are already full of drugs. Execute the barstewards, the country would be a much better place without them. No doubt the "dogooders" can't wait to have a go at me.

2010 election. So what are the choices?

New Improved Labour - nicked many of Thatchers policys in order to get elected in 97. Really The New Tory Party who for some strange reason still sing the Red Flag at there conferances. What a hypocriticle joke that is.

Conservatives - bunch of public school tw*ts hell bent on loking after there own and stuff the little man. The party of priviledge who still think they are the natural ruling classes.

LibDems - Bloody Nice Blokes but.... oops. Run out of anything more to say about the LibDems!

SNP - The White Heather Club. A "pretendy" political party which is really a Regional Single Issue Pessure Group. Small minded wee Jocks who love picking fights with Westminster and the English. More interested in using minority power at Holyrood to con Scots into independance than to run the place.

BNP - The Grand Loyal Orange Order of England. Bunch of racist, fascist skinhead neds who should be criminalised.

Greens - shower of tree hugging lentil eating hippys.

UKIP - Think their still running the Empire. Little Englanders.

Add to that the unifying "principles" which they all, as politicians, share with a vengance - Self interest, electability and screwing the expenses system for every penny they can.

These are your options apart from - Dont Vote.

A depressing but all too common attitude which is why the UK political scene is in the kind of mess it is now. As I said in another recent thread, we get the politicians we deserve. If you don't vote, then in my opinion you have no right to criticise what the subsequent government does. Just accept what your apathy produces.

Rather than simply not vote and thereby betray the sacrifices of those in years gone by who died so that we can have the right to vote, you should vote for the party that comes closest to reflecting your beliefs. Beyond that, join a party which comes closest to your aspirations and try to influence it from the inside.

Of course, your summaries of all the parties are nonsense but I accept that they are not intended to be taken seriously. For instance, the Greens are a far cry from your rather tired stereotype and consist of people from all walks of life who simply take a bit of a longer term view than others. Understanding that the planet does not have the capacity to support an ever expanding population using an ever increasing amount of resources does not make you a tree hugging hippy - rather than opting out, it means opting in to modern technological fixes that allow for sustainable development.

For me, the Green agenda will have to be adopted sooner or later on an international level if society is not to degenrate into warfare over ever diminishing resources. So better vote Green now and help to get the agenda into the media a bit more than it currently is.

God, we've got another Gordon Brown here - save the world, save the planet.

......the Tories were so inept, with their back-biting and internal pro and anti EU battles, plus other issues, that they stood no hope of forming a cohesive government.

Is that not still the case?

Anyone who votes for the Tories or Labour need their heads examined. Over my life span, and I'm not young, I have yet to see how Scotland has benefitted under either party.

Charles

Dougie D has completely lost me on most of his threads, methinks a slight complex, on the ones i did understand

Latviaman... great posts. All I know is that we are all Inverness boys together and I respect you all. OK under that old selective system I was lucky enough to become a Kaddie Rat but many of my Dalneigh PS mates went to the Teckie. Respect for the whole lot of us who were brought up in post war Council estates and didn't do too badly despite the likes of DD sniping away in the background.

For instance DD obviously doesn't like the Harriers and Highland Rugby Club and also has some problem with IHS. Sorry DD, but just to list two IHS FPs - Alan Rose was a stalwart of the 1976 HRFC team that "rose" to Scotland's top league and Melissa Whyte (Jeans) albeit now 45 years old, is now one of Scotland's top distance runners.

Don't know exactly what you mean by " we are all Inverness boys together" Charles. I attended the Techy but I am not from Inverness although I have very fond memories of the place. Many of my friends were from the Academy. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

If Alex Salmond is invited to take part, will Lord Pearson also participate? After all, UKIP receved more votes in the last Westminster elections than the SNP? Also, whoever is leader of the Green Party commune could also ask for an invite as they got almost as many votes as the SNP.

If BBC Scotland want to produce some pishy version of the debate with Iain Gray or Jim Murphy bumping gums with Baron Von Smugback then they should go ahead.

It would appear that Rabbie Burns's "such a parcel of rogues in a Nation" is still very much alive and kicking.

Sounds the usual - lots of chances and not enough goals. Hoping for more decisiveness next week. Very good one to wiin.

Yeah, btw can we cut out the reporting of English matches on the ICT matchday thread, please.

My sentiments exactly, it's most annoying.

LINK

The Archbishop of Canterbury has accused the government of treating religious faith as an "eccentricity" practised by "oddities".

The Archbishop is correct. In answer to your question, since when has the Labour government got ANYTHING right. This pathetic lot should never be voted into power ever again. There is an exception though, in parts of Weggieland voting Labour is a must - it guarantees the lazy ******** their Giro cheques.

The old "different budgets" argument used by many a politician and councillor to justify spending in one area when people suggest it would be more worthwhile spent elsewhere.

I bet you would even have us believe that if the money was not spent on Gaelic then it would magically disappear and not be available for anything else?

Or we could just deflect the argument by saying "more money is wasted in that than is spent on this".

You might even have us believe that Gaelic justifies itself by the intrigue and interest it generates with visitors, bringing them back here time and again, and as such making a huge contribution to the income we generate in Tourism!!!

It's all a load of tired old tosh and whilst we might all disagree on what cause/need is more worthy than any other, the simple fact is that Gaelic is neither. It's not a cause that saves or improves lives and we could quite happily survive without it....and from that point of view it deserves little, if any money from the public purse, certainly not to the detriment of things which might enhance the lives of more than 1% of the population.

I have nothing against Gaelic, those who speak it or those who wish to learn it and I have no objection to it being taught in schools. What I do object to is 10's of millions of pounds of public money being spent on road signs, office signs for public buildings, printing and producing information in the language when it is not required, grants for private companies because they hire the odd Gaelic speaker and also want to print their literature in the language when it's not needed, people being excluded from taking jobs because they don't speak Gaelic, even though an English speaker could do the job just as well...or worse still, paying people in similar/smae positions more money because they speak Gaelic, even though it adds nothing to the job they do or how efficiently they do it.

If we had spare cash in the pot, then fine, let's spend it on these things, the "nice to haves". However, the simple truth of the matter is that we are far from having enough in the pot and if we are going to spend money we don't have then we should at least be spending it on something that brings entertainment/contentment/a momentary break from the rigours of real life to more than a minute percentage of the population.

Good post especially the second paragraph. As an example, I wonder how much is spent on Translators for the thousands of illegal immigrants including those who appear in court cases.

Your edit may well be correct and if so then what is the point in pumping money into gaelic education? Is it not more sensible to divert that money towards education in subjects which will benefit these kids in their future?

Aye but it will benefit them - according to Smee they can all use it to get cushy jobs for the boys at ?38 000 :014: :D

Seriously though, this can be answered on so many levels. I refer you to my post on the first page where I said that the kids nowadays only want to know 'is this in the test?' They now have a cynical approach to learning facts which is seen as 'sad' and they are encouraged in this by the easy availability of the internet.

I submit that, if the adults take this approach too, then we're all sunk. Schools do try to provide vocational education as far as possible but anybody in education will want to aim much higher.

Mantis, I am not pro or anti Gaelic but I remember about 30 years ago (when there were more Gaelic speakers) there were more university graduates, per head of population, from the Western Isles than anywhere else in the UK. The point I am trying to make is that if you are fluent in more than one language, whichever language that might be, the brain is exercised more thus possibly leading to more intelligence.

"We can call ourselves Northangloland"

What a good idea.

Burn that flag and just behave yourself now Oz, you're being educated in my country now!

Well, I must admit that took longer than I expected. :D

I was joking!

"We can call ourselves Northangloland"

What a good idea.

Burn that flag and just behave yourself now Oz, you're being educated in my country now!

I'm self employed, looking after bored housewives. I can not go into any details as I have to be very discreet. It is very satisfying work but can be a bit demanding at times.

What a fuss about a poor wee mouse. I've got a dragon in my house - anyone want to take her off my hands?

I can remember reading a travel article in some English magazine about the Island of Ghia, which is just off the Mull of Kintyre.

The writer of the article informed readers that "Ghia" is pronounced like the word "gear"

I suppose "gear" is pronounced pretty much like Ghia - that is if you live in England and tend to ignore the letter "r" when it appears at the end of any word.

Gigha not Ghia.

Although my wife is fluent in English, it's still not her native language. She does pick up on some crazy terms we have. Such as when a letter told her to wait in the 'vestibule'. She asked what it was, I told her it was French for hall. Why not just say 'hall' then? There's no real answer to that.

And she loves nursery rhymes. Now there's madness. The Grand Old Duke of York - 'neither up nor down'. What the hell is that all about? How can a dish run away with a spoon?

Don't get me started on this subject! Their and there, weather and whether and then there's "he should of thought of that" when it should be "he should have thought of that". Our old teachers in the Techie and IRA must be turning in their graves.

This thread could get interesting...

Hope you have a sense of humour Rig!

When I go to games with my wife I sit in the main stand because thats her preferred viewpoint. When I'm on my own I usually sit close to the people I drink with. I've been ostrasized in the past for trying to get the so-called section G to show support and that has put me of ever trying to support them again. At my own expence I even supplied them with a flag that I've never seen being displayed.

When once I was all for their hype and promises now I see them for kids who see themselves as hero's when we're winning but anonimous when we lose. And very quite for most of any game.

Section G? You can spot them a mile away, they're the ones with the high foreheads and the eyes close together.

I'm sorry for all the rowdy squaddies (sorry, 'war heroes') and other tattooed 'hardmen' who aren't getting in. It's such a shame. But at the same time, it improves the birds to guys ratio, and decreases the chances of getting started on for the rest of it, so I'm 100% behind the policy. :020:

I'm an ex "rowdy" squaddie and have tattoos on both arms and on my back. I do not go out to "start" on anybody. I'm sure there are a few who do but in the same token there are some who have no tattoos and would sh1t themselves at the thought of going anywhere near a war zone, that will happily go out with the sole intention of picking on some tiny drunk lad. You should not tar all with the same brush. The lads in the Black Watch should be welcomed. I know that not all agree with the forces and where they are being sent but respect the lads who put there lives in danger day in and day out.

Now the guys won't be in there all you have to worry about are the tattoed women.LOL

Especially the tattooed women with the AK47s.

I feel the return of Duff will be like a new signing for the team.

He is, in my opinion, an excellent defender just needing the likes of Munro and Rossco to assist in the fine tuning.

ICT fine tuning? Munro's hoofing needs no fine tuning, he's very adept at it and Roscoe is past his best.

I not sure were barking up the wrong tree here, I watched the program, and usually I would not give politics or politicians the time of day, recently we have seen the true nature of quite a few of them from all parties with their bent claims for money, with the classic response the money will be paid back, does that make all Ok then?

How many of us would get away with making a bent claim on our house insurance if we were found out, for most of them I feel its a us and them culture.

I would not give Mr Griffin my vote after watching him, yes immigration is a problem in this country, but that aside the country needs running, im not sure where him or his party comes into that!!

Crux of the matter is why would people or why have people voted for his party, I think its because there is nowhere else to go, which of the other main parties are taking this problem seriously, whos listening to the oldinary man or womens concerns, at this moment in time you dare not mention it for fear of the PC brigade or being branded a racist.

Im also sure that doing nothing to quell peoples concerns will eventually give many a more racist attitude, being very honest what I see going on in the UK has given me a more hard line attitude to immagrant, and other issues, that can be dangerous for the wrong type.

My sentiments exactly. The thing with a lot of people, especially in the north of Scotland, is that they have no experience of the problems further south. I have lived amongst it. Make no mistake...we live a sheltered life up here.

From Wikipedia :

Nick Griffin on illegal immigrants.

In an interview with the BBC on 8 July 2009, during a discussion on European immigration, he proposed that the EU should sink boats carrying illegal immigrants, to prevent them from entering Europe. Although the interviewer (BBC Correspondent Shirin Wheeler) implied that Griffin may have wished the EU to "murder people at sea", he quickly corrected her by saying "I didn't say anyone should be murdered at sea?I say boats should be sunk, they can throw them a life raft and they can go back to Libya" (a staging post for migrants from Egypt and sub-Saharan Africa)

I would not condone that attitude in any shape or form. I am only saying that Nick Griffin was correct in saying what millions of people (including non-whites) think but have not got the guts to air their views in public. This is the way I see it - there is a huge illegal immigrant problem especially in England and the main political parties have lost the plot on border controls. There is no place in Britain for Sharia Law. There is no place in Britain for honour killings. There is no place in Britain for Muslim women to be treated like sh!t just because they are viewed as inferior to their male counterparts etc, etc.

I suspect that Mr Griffin would approve of certain aspects of Sharia Law - Especially the imposition of the death penalty for practicing homosexuals.

I agree there is no place for so called "honour killings" There have been several convictions in this country for such deeds, and those convicted are generally sentenced to life imprisonment.

I don't think it is just muslim women in this country who are treated like sh1t because they are viewed as inferior to their male counterparts.

I agree with your last statement but they are in the minority compared with Muslim women.

From Wikipedia :

Nick Griffin on illegal immigrants.

In an interview with the BBC on 8 July 2009, during a discussion on European immigration, he proposed that the EU should sink boats carrying illegal immigrants, to prevent them from entering Europe. Although the interviewer (BBC Correspondent Shirin Wheeler) implied that Griffin may have wished the EU to "murder people at sea", he quickly corrected her by saying "I didn't say anyone should be murdered at sea?I say boats should be sunk, they can throw them a life raft and they can go back to Libya" (a staging post for migrants from Egypt and sub-Saharan Africa)

I would not condone that attitude in any shape or form. I am only saying that Nick Griffin was correct in saying what millions of people (including non-whites) think but have not got the guts to air their views in public. This is the way I see it - there is a huge illegal immigrant problem especially in England and the main political parties have lost the plot on border controls. There is no place in Britain for Sharia Law. There is no place in Britain for honour killings. There is no place in Britain for Muslim women to be treated like sh!t just because they are viewed as inferior to their male counterparts etc, etc.