Otta

Not really interested in that. They've done it twice, and what is the point in a decider really? If they are coming back it should be for a new challenge.

Kessler to return aged 38. Reckon he could still jave a tear up with the likes of DeGale.

I said this elsewhere yesterday, but being as we are still EU members for the next 2 years, do you think they might lend us a negotiator, so that brexit looks less like a 5 year old debating quantum physics with Stephen Hawking?

If it's on youtube (and you're using a pc)... Under the video you'll see "share". Click that and some further options appear. Click "embed", copy the link and paste in to here. Sorted.

miga Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ???? Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > -skill shortages is the potential issue here so > > that does need addressing. > > or to put a completely OTT positive spin on it, > maybe we'll stop importing fully formed > professionals from abroad and start investing in > technical training here.....maybe. If I thought for a second it would lead to that sort of thing I could probably even get on board. But we don't exactly have a good record on that front.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I've said many times on here, my personal > experience is that young Brits deserve the bad rep > they get. When I lived in Liverpool (96 - 01) I'd constantly hear how there were no jobs. I walked around the town centre going in to every pub asking if they needed staff and had a job within the hour (whilst I was at uni). Then when I left I easily found a job in a betting shop and an agency job at a bank. The pay was shit (?5 per hour which was I think minimum at the time), but my rent was only ?45 a week for a one bed flat. Basically there is work out there, but a lot of people think it's not good enough for them.

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Where do you want to go UG? > > I'll pay for the ticket That is SO kind. That's the spirit.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > National Kindness is de rigueur outside London.... Unless your face doesn't fit of course.

jaywalker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought Otta's OP was quite a serious one. Well it was SUPPOSED to be. But whatever works I guess.

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Obviously johnnie. The well educated, well off, > are benefiting greatly from free movement, cheap > building workers (?20 a day vs ?200 a day for > 'electricians e.g Worth noting that this started because (well off) British builders started hiring cheap Polish labour and paying them peanuts off the books, thus becoming more wealthy whilst exploiting these workers. You can't really blame these workers for eventually thinking "fuck this, lets go it alone and undercut this prick". If tradesmen charged more realistic and honest rates, and actually did a hard days work, they wouldn't be so easy to undercut or beat on timescale. Let us not forget just how bad a rep the British builder used to have. You can't blame people for using a better and cheaper service. And ?20 a day is a figure you've just made up, let's be honest.

The pressure on the NHS / Social Care comes from the aging population, much more than immigrants. And no I am not having a pop at the elderly, I am just stating a fact. Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's not just about age, though that did play a > part. > > It was; > > Urban vs Rural > North vs South > Poor vs Wealthy > > > This whole thing was basically brought about by a London centric government ignoring English regions, where > poverty reigned and no one in power bothered to do anything about it. A modern day peasants revolt ultimately, but > obviously more complex than JUST that. I think you're right (I know Johnnie points to level of education, but that actually ties in with the categories you mention). Problem is the "peasants" have revolted in such a way as to not help themselves at all. Things won't change for them, but I suppose they might get worse for those better off than them, so in that sense they have just turned it in to a race to the bottom.

Great pyb. Gets a bit crammed through (because it's popular and there aren't enough of it's kind left).

It's a month away isn't it? And yes, one to watch!

Word. Many a thing gets lost in text.

red devil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > After the tub-thumping of her Tory party > conference and Lancaster Gate speeches, May's > letter looked decidedly conciliatory by > comparison. As a Remainer I'm not one who wishes > the economy to go belly-up just so I can later say > ''I told you so''. It's a difficult situation to > be in, I don't want Brexit to be a success because > one day I would want us to rejoin the EU, but > equally I don't want the country to suffer > economically. Personally I believe there will be > hardship, but probably no worse than the credit > crunch, and we'll therefore have to put up with > many more years of 'austerity'. But for me it > wasn't just about the economy, there's the social > aspect too. How we're perceived as a nation to the > rest of the world. I don't particularly want to > live in a country that's doing ok economically if > it means isolationism, inward thinking, and an > increasingly xenophobic and jingoistic outlook, > and that's how it's felt since the referendum. > Then there's the long-term political outlook. The > hard-right of the Tory party seized their chance > and have taken a power-hold on their party. May > has become a puppet, the acceptable face of > Brexit. They are hell-bent on leaving the EU at > any cost, even if it means Scotland leaving the > Union. And if that happens their grip will get > even tighter. Overnight a Tory majority goes from > a smallish one to a very comfortable one. In a > democracy, regardless of your politics, an > effective opposition is a prerequisite, and we > certainly haven't got that now despite the Gov's > small majority, and it's likely to get worse > unless Corbyn does the decent thing. Still, the > sun will continue to come up... This ^^^

Actually, slight correction. Before uni I had watched the film "In the name of the father", and then read "Proved Innocent" (on which the film was based), so I certainly didn't think the British had always acted honestly and honourably. And I liked The Commitments a lot ;-)

After JoeLeg?s post, I didn?t really want to comment further. But Mick Mack seems to have decided to target me personally, so I feel the need to respond. Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes, i was quoting you Otta. As I feel that your > stock response to any accusations about the > actions of the state, is to say exactly that. Your > comment came directly after a highlighted point > about the army (state) supplying explosives for a > bomb that killed Catholics. You dont seem to went > to differentiate. Although i can see some > softening of your stance maybe. Classic sly Mick Mack twisting. The post was about car bombs being used by loyalists first. Yes the British Army were mentioned, but the point of the post was very specifically about loyalist groups using car bombs before the IRA, hence the ?both sides did horrible things shocker? comment from me. At no point have I said as much about the state, let alone saying it enough to make it a ?stock response? (Feel free to read back). > But I'm no longer particularly fussed. This > subject is too difficult it seems for most people > to accept. If only we all had your brains and wisdom. > I note you reflect on Bloody Sunday as a shameful > day for the uk. But before say 2000 and without > the public enquiry would you not just have > believed the official version of events as it was > protrayed here, then. > There are so many events that didnt get an > enquiry, but people know what happened. I will be totally honest here, I was born in 1978. I was a child in the 80s, I was a teenager in the 90s. In my consciousness Ireland was just a far away place (Lewisham seemed a mission from East Dulwich, the world was small) with people that tried to blow things up in London. I had no experience of it except for having to evacuate places in London due to bomb scares. Bloody Sunday was a cracking U2 song, the lyrics of which I didn?t know except the chorus. "Sunday Bloody Sundaaaaaay", Yeah!!! Bit like Black Sabbath, no idea what it was about (I was 5 when it came out). I wasn?t even that switched on to the news in England, let alone Ireland. I cared about rock music, getting off my tits, and trying to meet girls. I then went to uni on Liverpool in 1996, and my best friends there were all, by chance, Irish (from all over), and only then did I really start to take an interest as they'd tell me stuff. Although it's certainly worth noting that they used to just take the piss out of the IRA, as in their eyes by then the IRA were just a bunch of thugs that would beat up known drug dealers (arguably a public service, but hardly freedom fighting). So had this been a thread about Ireland and the troubles, I'd probably not have posted. I'd have read Lordship 516's posts with interest, and learned from them. But this thread was about Martin McGuinness (and I don't believe at all that you always intended it to be a wider debate, I think that's your convenient change of tack). Whilst I may not have paid much attention as a child, I have looked at the history as an adult. Lordship 516 makes the point above "if you want to stop a runaway horse you have to run a long way with its direction of travel before you can turn it around". That is an interesting way of wording it, and perhaps the ONLY way was violent retaliation, I am not qualified to say. But I am not a violent person, and I can never think of a man of violence as a great man. And even if we agree (in theory) that some violent acts were a justified means to an end, I think there is ample proof that many people lost their lives completely unnecessarily, just to make a point. NONE OF THAT IS TO SAY THAT THERE WERE NOT OTHER PEOPLE JUST AS BAD OR GUILTY, BUT WE WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT THEM IN THIS MARTIN MCGUINNESS THREAD. WHEN WE COME TO TALK ABOUT THEM I'LL SAY THE SAME. And I have NEVER come at this from a defensive British/English perspective. That's all you making this an us & them type affair. I'll bow out now unless addressed directly. Lordship 516, thank you for your posts, they are both educational and considered. Others could learn a lot from you. And JoeLeg's post is a very interesting perspective.

Even a hermit needs a nest egg. Investing in property (especially in London) was probably a good move. People long for something a bit different (like Church conversions), I imagine a cave would be a winner.

Great place, but not somewher I ever pass, and a bit of a mission for a quick pint.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Lordship516 > > I admire your efforts in getting the EDF to give a > toss what the government did, but they don't. > > They fall into the following categories > > 1) Don't believe and won't believe that the state > did these things > 2) Believe, but don't care that the state did > these things > 3) Those that say it was justified, or "both sides > did terrible things" - forgetting that the state > is not supposed to take sides, but to protect all > groups within society equally I think you might be quoting me when you say "both sides did terrible things", and if so, you're quoting out of context. I said that (or something similar) about the IRA and Loyalist terror groups, not the state. Personally I don't feel that any of those categories sums me up (or probably most people). How about 4) Believe some of it (but would like to see evidence on some of it), think it was terrible, but wasn't born for most of it, and feels completely detatched from the British state of the day, and has no idea what I "should" feel about it. But still think MM was a nasty piece of work along with ALL violent terrorists. I was pleased Cameron apologised on behalf of the state for Bloody Sunday, because it clearly meant a lot to many of those affected. But equally I thought "you were 6 or 7 at the time". Lordship 516 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > The people directly affected on both sides cannot > forget but they can forgive or at least ignore it > and bear the scars silently so the next generation > can grow in hope for a better shared future. It > takes time & we all have to share the burden of > recovery. So in all seriousness, do threads like this help with the moving on? > Telling someone to move on is just stupid > so-called new age crap - telling them you > understand their pain is civilized and helps the > healing process. Telling someone you "understand their pain" if you werte not there or in a similar situation, is surely just empty bullshit. I couldn't agree more that we should be tolerant and listen and learn. But having read your post above about your experiences, I can't tell you I understand your pain, I have no idea what it was like.

To be fair to Keano, I am kind of with him. It's not that I don't want to see food in pubs, I just wish it wasn't in pretty much EVERY pub. I realise that the pubs (especially in London) basically need to sell food to survive, and that the sort of place I long for is history. But that doesn't mean I can't long for it. Think I said to someone the other day, what I long for is a really nice "old man's pub", just with good beer and less miserable old men. I need to move back to Liverpool, they still seem to exist there. Anyway, as you were.

Both sides did horrible things shocker.

Me too. Nicking that for facebook.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Re the OP. Isn't that what Martin McGuinness did? Behave Alan.

Whilst I agree on M&B, I have had one or two really nice roasts in the plough, as well as some not so good ones. So even they are hit and miss.