DornochCaley

Damn, yes Pirlo. Can't believe i forgot him. I rate him highly though he still isn't as good as Cambiasso. I think Pato is fantastic. Though they need to keep him. The point i was trying to make was that they need to build more by spending. What really good defender have they spent decent money on recently? None that i can think of. Maybe you could correct me?

Wyness is too old now. He is too old to play upfront and Sanchez is good in the hole. Mo is terrible. End of.

First Italian game in a while was it? How did you know? :tonguecheek: Yes infact it was. I lost interest in Italian football a couple seasons back as it is not even a two team league.

End of the day, we choose if we go to the away games or not. No one has the right to slag off another fan for not going to an away game as they do not know the reasons behind them not going. Money ect. Everyone just get on with their own knitting.

In all honesty, i couldn't see Milan's midfeild and defence dealing with Inter. Cambiasso is better than any midfielder Milan have and expect Gattuso, AC do not really have a player than can work the midfeild. Clerance is getting too old and Ambrosini is not good enough to be relied on. If he has part of a four or five man midfield he might fare diffrently, but not when there is only 3. The Milan defence is bad. With all their defenders fit, they have a choice. Play a back line with the average age of about 36 or play with a defense that does not have the same quality. Not a good outlook. And unless Milan actually invest, they will not get anybetter. Who have they spent money on in their squad that is worth it? Ronadinho and Huntelaar. One of them doesn't get played as often as he should. They have too many that are near their pension. Inter will continue to dominate Italy until AC Milan spend. Juve are not the team they used to be. They have some real good players but they are weak in a couple of areas which needs looking at.

It was a good game. Milan defensively are terrible. To think they back line they once had, and compaire it to now...shocking.

Aimed at me or another?

But thats him. Many others have families to look after ect. I have other things to pay for while money is few and far between right now.

IT has taken over mine, and all my freinds lives tbh. HookedOnCoDSupportersClub!

Some would say the same about us though.

The Immigrant song by Led Zepplin!

HT:1-0 FT:2-0 1st Scorer ICT:Sanchez 1st Scorer Opp:N/A Crowd:2913

Its easier just buying a wired xbox controller. They work the same.

I hate how when you watch the OLYMPICS, the commentators still manage to put 1966 in there at some point.

Taking control of people's reproductive rights is hardly the preserve of the National Socialists - the Romanian socialist state under Ceacescu banned abortion and rewarded couples for bearing children, many countries in the former Eastern Bloc forcibly sterilised undersirables (usually dissidents or gypsies). The usually childish refrain of 'I'm an anarchist, no central government, everyone should be equal, share wealth'. :angry: Sharing wealth requires that capital be distributed equally - who distributes it if not a centralised state? You cannot have any form of socialism without centralising authority to a Politburo, a Central Committee. It just can't happen, never has, never will. What usually happens, as in Venezuela, is a massive bureacracy is set up to give the illusion of workers co-operatives, local control but all this does is swell the state even further. A fairer society is a crock. What poor people need is not more company, it's more money and the best way to increase the wealth of a society is by free market capitalism. It's the proven method to improve people's lives, the world over. During Chairman Mao's reign, when he turned China into a very equal society (equally desperate) people queued up to try and sneak into Hong Kong, which is the most capitalist society in the world. I don't think many Hong Kong Chinese tried to jump the fence the other way. Hence the reason i said it is a dream. It will never happen and can never happen. Socialism is something that can happen. Just because power hungry people fecked it up does not mean it does not work. Fascism is something that will not work. We know that oppression and totalitarianism does not work. But Capitalism has just as many faults if not more than Socialism. So why not give it a try under a decent leadership?

Oh Gee Whizz! You're speaking a hole new Language! I will check!

There are points which could be raised with this post, firstly if you truly can communicate your point of view as well as you say through the spoken word then with considered writing you should be more than capable of doing so through that medium, take your time proof read your posts and think about them. Secondly, your audience here is bound to be very different from the social circle you discuss these issues with on a face to face basis, this forum is made up of a large cross section of the community with one basic interest (ICT) and as such the political opinions will be very wide ranging. Thirdly and perhaps a large consideration is that if indeed you are easily agitated and get wound up then people who you do talk to about politics (an intimate subject) will know this and will want to avoid such confrontation making them think that it is easier to agree with you rather than have you shout and swear at them. I get what you're saying. Though i don't talk to my freinds about politics. They think it is rediculous that someone so young even cares about it all It is usually teachers i talk about them too. And i don't usually get so wound up with them. Fact is, this is the internet, and you can do whatever you want on the net. You can be pissed off with someone over it because it can have next to no consiquences. Face-to-Face is completely different. In relation to proof reading my posts, its something which i should do. Though i am much better a communicating Face-to-Face as i am the type that uses my hands when i find something hard to explain and that helps a lot.

Yeah, story line that kinda let it down for me.

Ever consider the possibility that you are so easily shot down is because your views are blinkered and heavily flawed, perhaps if you were to look at the views of, what you would consider, the opposition and managed to argue successfully against them then your opinions would be looked at in a better light? A lot of your posts and arguements seem to deteriorate into swearing and anger which seems to be a trait of socialists and communists, "if you can't win them over with reason then shout and scream until they listen" this attitude gets my back up. I think that in a truly democratic society party politics should be done away with, when I give my vote to someone due to liking his/her personal stance on certain issues I do not expect to have them turn their back on those issues because some party "whip" declares that they have to vote in a certain way when they get to parliament, nothing wrong with a group of like minded people getting together to discuss issues but to have a parliamentarian forced to vote against a policy which won him his seat is wholly undemocratic IMHO. Well when i started this thread, i did not respond to certain people by swearing, the only reason i got worked up was because someone was just really pissing me off. I am easily agitated. At the end of the day, i don't really care if im not amazingly good at writing down my points, as when i speak of them, everyone seems to understand.

Ach dead leg. I get a dead leg all the time playing football. After a wee shake down, im fine to continue playing.

I have tired but i have all my settings on Auto. No change though.

I went to see it. Good film but not as good as it is hyped up to be. I still love Lord of the Rings and Star Wars more. 4/5 probably. The 3D effects were good though the colour is amazing when you take them off. The way they make the forest so colourfull is brillaint! I kept my Glasses and wear them to school. I like to pretend im from Resevoir Dogs! ;)

The whole political game about supporting 'the family' or supporting 'hard working families' is complete garbage. The Conservatives support for 'the family' is an absolute joke - tax breaks for marriage! Presumably this will encourage people not to get divorced as, although they may hate their partner, they'll pay ?25 a month less in tax if they get divorced! What a joke. The state should not get itself into a position of trying to 'nudge' anyone in the direction that the current government see's as right. As for gay rights, why should the state take a partial position in terms of what people do in their private lives? If two men or two women want to get married or live together or make the two backed beast, why should the government stop them? People are sovereign over their own lives and bodies - people should be able to do whatever they want provided they do not demonstrably harm other people in doing it. Why do you think protectionism is beneficial and necessary? This is, of course, a naive belief shared by the far right and the far left - protectionism is a leading cause of impoverishment and no serious proposals to increase protectionism are made by anyone in the modern sphere with any knowledge of economics. There isn't really a difference between your politics and the politics of a socialist like DornochCaley - you both want centralised power to promote some ethereal goal, be is 'faith, flag and famliy' or the 'workers of the world'. Fundamentally, you both believe that the state should take powers from individual citizens to puruse a 'greater good', which is the thinking that drives tyrannies from Tsarist Russia to Democratic Kampuchea. On the positive side you are both young so hopefully will grow out of this nonsense by the time you actually have a vote. One of Hilter's policies was to do with marrage and increase the population. He gave extra money to those who got married, stayed married and those who had kids. And although i am not a fan of homosexuals, people should have the freedom to choose who they love and who they are with. No Government should choose that for them. That is moving into the realm of totalitarianism. In the ideological side of me, i am an Anarchist. I believe that the wealth should be shaired equally and the only people really fit to rule the working class are themselves. So really, there should be no centrelised government. Thats all a dream though. The Realpolotik side of me reaslises that Communism will never, ever work. Socialism can though. Shortening the gap between the highest and lowest paid is something that can be acheived so that we live in a fairer society. Socialism will have its downsides. But so does the current system we are in. The banks being closed down. Many people out of the job. Banks being Nationalised yet the people, who's money bailed them out, get no say. Socialism is not perfect. But it is definately not worse than the current system we see ourselves under.

A man almost as far from my own heart as possible it seems. Just curious though, what is it that makes you support them? Or be so Right-wing? Since i first got into politics and looked at the issues it was clear to me I was a conservative (small c), and it was after long deliberation I decided to join the Conservative Party. The reason being that David Cameron and other Tory leaders in recent years have moved the party into the centre to win over floating voters, and have advocated what Cameron refers to as a new "liberal conservatism". If Cameron considers himself a liberal conservative then I am most certainly a conservative conservative :P Despite this I do like Cameron and believe he will make an excellent Prime Minister after the election. Socially I believe that the party's distancing itself from opposition to immigration and increased gay rights is incorrect, however it is nice to see the party still stands firm for supporting the family. These are the sorts of issues I believe in and I believe the Conservatives are the best party for me. There is a faction within the Conservative Party's MPs called the "Cornerstone Group", trying to promote what it views as the "Cornerstones" of a successful and moral life - Faith, Flag and Family. It advocates support for the Church of England, the family unit and patriotism. Were I a Conservative MP I would certainly be quick to associate myself with this group! The one area I majorly disagree with the party on is over protectionism - while it has been seen as a fundamental Conservative policy in the past to oppose protectionism in the economy, I actually view it as beneficial for the most part and necessary in some circumstances. So I suppose I am a fairly unusual Conservative Party member (not the least being that I am 17 years old and live in Scotland - Not exactly Conservative core vote), but I would say while I agree with the party enough to become a member, there are quite a few policy issues I do not agree with and hope to see the party alter. In short, that the party has moved too far into the centre and needs to, on most issues, return further to the right. Well i suppose someone has to support them ;) Sorry to say DC that although I don't agree with Tom's politics, his post here is far better constructed and argued than any of yours in this thread and if the two of you were up for election I would give my vote to him based upon the fact that I do not agree with party politics and give my vote on the candidate rather than his/her party. Fortunatly for me, i ain't here to win an election. I do find it rather hard to put my own opinions through though because even when i say the slightest thing on it i get shot down by a certain few people.

When isaid i know about NAT, what i ment was i know it pisses with my Xbox live connection and it is a firewall or something like that? Hmm i will give it ago and see how it works! Cheers