Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

who are you?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by MrMichael
    I think he (atleast partially) means the deviation into Thatcherist debate dude
    if so, not my doing
    top hijacked thread pictures by the way

    Comment


      I liked the little almost-story they tell
      I could not dig, I dared not rob:
      Therefore I lied to please the mob.
      Now all my lies are proved untrue
      And I must face the men I slew.
      What tale shall serve me here among
      Mine angry and defrauded young?

      Comment


        Yeah of course we know these Economics professors dont include any kind of "morality" in their theories...Cynism at its highest level...

        "workers are living in the past", "protectionism", all derigatory arguments that needed a scientifical backing (to make it more complex and legitimated, free trade theories have become mathematics theories- "thats the way it is, you cant change it", with numbers and complicated mathematics models)...As a worker from Durham or Bradford could understand a guy from the city explaining how "modern" economics were working with Adam Smith theories...
        Fukuyama was the worst example with his "The end of history" in which he was talking about endless prosperity with the new technlogies, free-trade, less state, for every region in the world... Not even a year after his book, there was a crash in South-East Asia, Russia, South america and the Nasdaq crashed at its lowest level...
        This model has nothing to do with mathematics, its just happening in a certain period of History...This free trade speech has become a reality not only as a theory but also on a practical level..That doesnt mean its the only thinkable model and it wont last forever
        “If you are first you are first. If you are second you are nothing.”

        Comment


          Has anyone seen Tommy Tiernan's "Loose" dvd ? It's bloody hilarious .

          How mad is this thread ? I have just read it all and would like to say : Tut , tut to the fans in the Kop that upset Paul . Also , Los Rojos' drunken post was silly , but everyone makes mistakes . Univ mate , if you are going to talk on a subject , make sure that subject isn't one that draws bile from your audience , and if you must talk on a subject that angers people , at least research it a little bit . Regarding the OOT's point , I am an OOT and believe that all men (and women) are created equal , and have as much right to support LFC , or wander around looking at the sights of Merseyside , as anyone . As an Irishman (or woman Reg ) , I reserve the right to comment on Mrs Thatcher and her government . As for the rest of you lunatics , get back in the asylum , the doors are closing and that ship is about to set sail .
          "Every time i sit around i find i'm shot."


          La-di-da-di free John Gotti

          Comment


            Great thread lads, I have enjoyed every second .
            Football can be so divergent

            Comment


              Originally posted by Morphorino
              Not sure why you're quoting me there mate, don't actually recall saying that it bothered me that we have a good global following. So go and have a read of the thread again before making uneducated judgements. If it was a mistake then fair enough, we all make them.
              not intended to be critical,mate.

              just of the opinion that your reply to jamo regarding the 'Japs cash' (as it were) was a bit flippant.

              the fact that the club has so much difficulty with finances illustrates the importance of marketing the club overseas.

              so,the cash was crucial.

              Comment


                Originally posted by The Glove
                I was talkin about the drink being thrown mate.

                I was sat on the divide yesterday but something happened further up behind me, something was thrown but it wasnt drink.

                Oh and there was a set of ****s doing that easy **** once we scored the second, all in the paddock. They all looked like wools to me.
                Yeah there it was mate, sorry thought it was adrink

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Los Rojos
                  I've apologised for a very poor drunken post which in no way reflects my true feelings on the multi-national and multi-racial support our club attracts.

                  You have made a misguided assumption based on that original post. I can assure you that I am not a racist.
                  cheers,mate.

                  i hope that when I finally secure the funds to make the pilgrimage,there's lots of Scousers like you from Est/SCM/(that-which-must-not-be-named ) just waiting to ply me with alcohol before and after the game

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by univofchicago
                    Again, was totally unaware.

                    If I had knew, I wouldn't have brought the issue up in the first place.

                    Friedman visited Chile in 1975 during the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. Invited by a private foundation, he gave a series of lectures on economics. Several professors from the Chicago School of Economics became advisors to the Chilean government and several Ph.D. graduates from the same university – known as "the Chicago boys" – served in Chilean ministries. Friedman met with Pinochet during his visit to Chile. He had given a lecture advocating monetarist economics to the Catholic University of Chile. Friedman says that the "the emphasis of that talk was that free markets would undermine political centralization and political control."[12] Nevertheless, he was accused of supporting a regime whose policies included torture and the killing of political opponents. A number of protesters demonstrated against Friedman during the 1976 Nobel Prize ceremony.


                    Nice fella.

                    As a resident in liverpool in the late 70s and 80s I can testify to the devastating effects of monaterist policy. We were the "lab rats" in some ****ed-up thatcherite monetarist wet-dream. As mentioned previously monetarist policy is utopian - like most utopian "experiments" (communism etc.) it has devasting social effects. Just ask Salvador Allende and the other poor ****ers who Pinochet "disapeared" in order to further it in chile.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Tom
                      Friedman visited Chile in 1975 during the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. Invited by a private foundation, he gave a series of lectures on economics. Several professors from the Chicago School of Economics became advisors to the Chilean government and several Ph.D. graduates from the same university – known as "the Chicago boys" – served in Chilean ministries. Friedman met with Pinochet during his visit to Chile. He had given a lecture advocating monetarist economics to the Catholic University of Chile. Friedman says that the "the emphasis of that talk was that free markets would undermine political centralization and political control."[12] Nevertheless, he was accused of supporting a regime whose policies included torture and the killing of political opponents. A number of protesters demonstrated against Friedman during the 1976 Nobel Prize ceremony.
                      Quality point Tom! All goes to prove that liberal democracy is merely a technique of bourgeois rule, not something they believe in on principle. Anyone who listened to Norman Lamont's defence of Pinochet on Newsnight when that murdering scumbag was arrested would be in no doubt about that.

                      Comment


                        Hahahaha................i love threads when they turn into a "load of bollocks"




                        All hat and no cattle

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Dhavlos
                          I could say a lot about the inane nature of this post,
                          but to be honest there is no point because it speaks for itself.

                          So you and your son miss out on the occasional game bacause a few people decide to spend thousands of pounds and make a 20,000 mile round trip to fulfil their dreams and go to a game of the team that they love. And when they do they get treated to this kind of attitude.

                          Obviously the scousers simply want a scouse club supported by scouse fans. But why leave it there? Instead of banning just the wools why stop there? Let's get rid of the non-scousers that make up the playing and coaching staff? Let's see if you scousers will get the club you want then, without the global support and without a global presence within.

                          When I go to Anfield I'm almost amazed at the vast variety of different kind of people I see there - people from all over the world - makes me realise what a big and special club it really is. Then I read posts like yours and I wonder why people from places like Japan and Singapore bother to follow a club that attracts such a petty and small-minded support like yours.

                          Best supporters in the world my arse, cant even support our own let alone our club
                          Spot on, I flew from Australia in 2003 to watch a game and am coming again to watch more games. Am I less of a fan then a Scouser? Should I cancel the trip?

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by alunevans
                            Quality point Tom! All goes to prove that liberal democracy is merely a technique of bourgeois rule, not something they believe in on principle. Anyone who listened to Norman Lamont's defence of Pinochet on Newsnight when that murdering scumbag was arrested would be in no doubt about that.
                            Yes, Lamont what an utter scumbag. Equivalent to supporting Stalin. Thatcherism's support of Pinochet is the right's dirty little secret.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Tom
                              Yes, Lamont what an utter scumbag. Equivalent to supporting Stalin. Thatcherism's support of Pinochet is the right's dirty little secret.
                              Not that much of a secret though.

                              The point was made to Lamont that Allende was democratically elected.

                              His response was effectively "so what, he was doing things that damaged our friends."

                              Makes you wonder just how 'paranoid' Harold Wilson really was. And lets face it, if Wilson had just cause to be paranoid, doesn't that say it all.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by paulcooper4
                                I was absolutely gutted today when after scoring, the kop started singin "who are you, who are you?". ****IN PACK IT IN!!!!! I know we have a lot of cockneys in the kop nowadays, but we are not a cockney club. Leave that **** to them. I cant explain how embarrasing it was hearing it. On the kop`s 100th birthday too.
                                Very well said indeed. It's the thin end of the wedge. Next thing you know we've got some buffoon in a faux docker's ensemble - greasy mac, flat cap, rolled up Echo in his pocket - called Scally the Scouser as our "mascot", prancing around the pitch before games.

                                It's avoiding such idiocy, while others succumb, that keep our club special. We miust be eternally vigilant

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X