Darkon84

From the articles I've read, they're all in favour and the decision was unanimous? The games against them don't count towards the league anyway. They're effectively just a friendly team to play on the park when you're bored.

And to think there were people on here defending them. Disgusting.

Daniel Day Lewis is retiring from acting, aged 60. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-40349669 An absolutely remarkable actor who'll be a big miss from our screens. All the best in retirement!

These absolute sick Congolese c*nts. Chopping toddlers limbs off? Seriously, how can anyone do that . http://news.sky.com/story/congo-militia-attack-babies-and-toddlers-in-wave-of-violence-10921274

Yep, still turns out for Estudiantes at 42!

It may well have been, I can't confirm, but I've seen similar for various attacks, though as Stripey says, we should be focusing on the decent people rallying around to help.

The same happened with the Manchester and London terrorist attacks. The live coverage on Al Jazeera's facebook channel was full of hundreds of smiley & laughing emojis etc. Disgusting really.

Appreciate the input especially from someone over there. Obviously I don't get to see things 'on the ground' so to speak as you do, or go through the election cycle as you did so I'll take your views on board. I knew and expected many in America to be voting for self serving reasons, as the majority of voters do worldwide. The last election just really seemed to bring out the real bottom feeders on both sides which exacerbated every single issue and seemingly brought out the worst in a lot of people it wouldn't normally have. I've no doubt that the alt-right had a hand in provoking and causing problems at riots etc. I thought proud boys were basically just in to fvcking everyone and drinking all the time? I didn't realise they had a violent element to them too. I wasn't really aware of much Antifa violence etc until after the election anyway, but people were getting paid to attend Trump rallies and cause arguments etc to create bad press. There's video evidence of people explaining how it happens and admitting being funded by the DNC to do so. Either way, whoever it was, it's all out of order. BLM do have some grievences which need to be addressed, of course they do, but burning down your own neighbourhoods, shooting police officers, looting, stealing etc aren't ways to do it. I would be interested in what the racially disciminatory polices are which are still working against them today? That's an honest question, I don't know. For what it's worth, I wouldn't have voted for Trump either and I can see how his election has caused problems, but I think (from an outside view), there have been alot of contributing factors from more than just his campaign. These tensions have obviously been bubbling away under the surface for a very long time.

I'll have to try and keep this a bit shorter as there are things I need to get back to completing, but it still deserves some form of reply. Hillary: There were certainly things which may have influenced the amount of votes she received, such as voter turnout, but quite simply, I won't have it any other way than she just ran an awful campaign and she was an utterly awful candidate to match. In terms of making things difficult for certain demographics and areas to vote, from the stories I saw at the time, it seemed to be hugely the other way around. I've not seen or read the parts posted by Foxxed but I'll try to go back and have a read when I can. I can't deny that a country as huge and powerful as Russia could easily cover it's own tracks, but that still doesn't mean a thing. Without any actual proof, there's nothing that can be done. On the other hand, the American MSM were ridiculously in favour of Hillary and were trying to influence the election towards her. Now that is something which is nigh-on undeniable surely? Plus there were the undercover exposes taping admissions that the DNC were paying 'Agitator Companies' to recruit, pay, and send people in to Trump rallies to deliberately cause trouble and fights etc. BLM: We should probably leave this for another time as I could write an essay on this and the things wrong with them etc. Perhaps come back at a later date. I will agree that there is still huge race problem in some parts of the US, but most of the rhetoric they spout simply exacerbates it. It didn't help with the pathetic stance Obama took previously, to essentially give them free reign to do as they please and justify their actions. Aaaaaaaanyway. I'll leave that for now. Paris: As leading contributors to emissions etc, those 3 countries should be doing their part reduce impact on the environment. I agree that Trump's energy plans are looking backwards, rather than forwards. They're far too short-termist and won't do their local environment any good, but his rationale for that is probably that it won't actually make a great deal of difference over the next 4 years, and if it helps boost the American economy in that time as well as creating huge amounts of jobs, it's justified as America comes first. I don't think it's that he and his voters simply don't care about the environment. I think it's mainly economic and selfish. As you say, it's totally symbolic, nothing more, as they'll still be tied to the agreement for the next few years. Unfortunately, some anti-science nuts will think they've won, but still, for me, it's posturing to show the USA can do as it pleases, and to try and boost the economy short term. With regards to the economic side of renewables, I've got a vague recollection that the USA tried to pump loads in to it and got stung badly? That gives Trump the simple ammunition he needs to say what he wants on the subject I guess (even though it's wrong to do so). Also, even though solar photovoltaics are getting cheaper to produce/install etc, they're still pretty rubbish unless used in gigantic fields to power a small area, or until the solar batteries reduce in size, efficiency and cost. The average person is out for the majority of the day so misses out on most of the evergy produced unless they have a battery. I'm not sure if there are any state incentives for renewables in the US etc, but I would hope that if there are, they are run considerably better than the ridiculously implemented RHI scheme we trotted out and then retracted here. At least it made me busy for a short while anyway It's a shame that Musk (I respect the man and love some of his work, but I just can't bring myself to like him), has walked away from Trump's advisory team over this. I understand why he has, but it can be seen as a cop-out too as he could possibly at least wrangle Trump back on track, even slightly. Destruction of habitat is up there as one of the main things which needs to addressed for me but I won't go in to it now. I've just realised how long this is getting and what time it is, so I'm jumping ship, so the final points are quick... USA Climate Alliance: The ten member states combined make up 30.1% of the US population, 35.3% of US GDP, and 17.8% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions so that's a huge start already. Imagine if say, 10-15 more states get involved in that, that would be almost job done. Worldwide responses: Not surprised by some of that at all and an easy opportunity for some to put some soundbites out there and make themselves look good and feel smug. (I'd love to punch Justin Trudeau square in the nose). Extra credit point: I read not to long ago an interesting paper regarding carbon emissions, population/economic growth and how they're all linked. Essentially, while countries are still economically growing rapidly, their population has to increase and in turn, their emissions rapidly increase, therefore it will be difficult to keep to global reduction targets without already established countries/economies baring the brunt and going above and beyond. Only after becoming a stable economy and levelling out it's population too can it efficiently reduce emissions etc. It's not about climate denying or anything tin hat like that, just a different way to view the problem which I hadn't considered before. EDIT: Apologies if there's mistakes or poor sentence structure, I lost track a few times and took a call or two midway through.

Sorry @leicsmac for not fulfilling my promise of replying the other day, my week took a busy turn so I haven't had the time to reply correctly. The moment and train of thought has long gone to reply properly I'm afraid, but I'll give you one thing from it....I take back the 'cheap shot' comment. The debate has moved on now anyway so we'd only be taking a step back. With regards to the news of Trump pulling out of the Paris agreement last night, neither of us are surprised, and as Matt said, it's at least one election promise he can actually stand by and people will have voted for this (rightly or wrongly). Also, he has said he's willing to re-negotiate immediately and just feels the 18% the USA has to reduce by (second only to China's 20%) is unfair and actually costs more to implement than it's worth. According to a UN report, if I remember correctly, they concluded that the amount of Carbon savings we are making at the moment are only enough to 'prolong the Earth's lifetime by 0.02%' (I hate that description, the Earth isn't going to die because Trump pulled out of the agreement). Similar to Brexit, it can take up to 4 years to fully pull out of the agreement, so, all chances are, by the time that occurs (unless a new deal is agreed), a new president will probably be coming in and will agree to step back in at the old rates. Juncker's responses and jibes certainly haven't done him any favours and just highlights why so many people are against Globalists like him. Petty, spiteful, vindictive and righteous. On the upside, it has caused the United States Climate Alliance to immediately add 7 new states to it's membership who all individually do their part to reduce their own levels to the levels required by the Paris Agreement (roughly), thus showing that should individual states want to, they can do their own thing anyway, regardless of what Trump or the Agreement say. The Paris Agreement has no fines or actual power to punish any country should they fail to reach their designated targets anyway, only to 'name and shame', which I doubt any country would be bothered about anyway. The lack of discipline leads me to believe that many countries won't make their targets anyway. I'm all for everyone being more sustainable and everyone doing their part to reduce carbon emissions, but after reading more about the Paris Agreement, it's not really 'all that'. I'd personally like to see repercussions for not getting within a percentage of your target so that Countries actually have to do it, and I'd also be more happy if deforestation/re-forestation clauses were implemented in to it for a start. A couple of other, quick. random points of interest too (not so much Trump related, but USA related): Hillary is still losing the plot and has now said there were 1000 Russian spies and Facebook colluding against her to make her lose the election. That's around the 20th excuse she's used now and still not once blamed herself, or her lack of campaigning in the rustbelt states. It's embarrassing now. The Sydney Peace Foundation is planning to honour Black Lives Matter with it's Global peace prize in November. Wow, just wow. The same organization who encouraged riots, violence against whites, violence against police, and bans white people from attending any of their meetings, or black only memorial day parties - because segregation is good now? Rant over.

Appreciate the response mac. I had just written out a fairly concise response but my work pc decided it was the perfect time to crash, therefore losing the reply and about 2 hours work. Unfortunately, you'll now have to wait until tomorrow for the next installment as I'm not writing that all out again, especially when i can run out the door in 5 minutes for a pint. Christ knows I need one after this day I'm sure you can't wait! All the best chaps, see you tomorrow!

Cheers MC, I appreciate that and a very good reply from yourself. See, I'm not so bad after all, after being painted as a dyed in wool Trumpster previously Full agreement with regards to SA. i don't think anyone here can soundly object to our points. I'd actually quite like to know who organised his recent trips and the flight arrangements. They definitely deserve a round of applause, for originally suggesting it, sticking to their guns with it and following through with it as I'm sure there would have been a hell of a lot of obstruction and opposition to it. Ahhhh valid points regarding the NATO point, I wasn't fully aware as to the actual minutia of the pact etc so that's interesting....Every days a schoolday eh! I guess as you say, the results of that will just have to be assessed at a much later date and if you've signed up to an actual percentage for a period of time, it's kinda tough. As you say..whether that's fair or not is a different story. There have apparently been 3 people identified as the leaks from the WH who are 'leftovers' from the Obama administration who seem to have been leaking deliberately to make the Trump house look bad. I'll have to dig out the report/article where I read that, but it's certainly plausible. Either way, something 'yuge' needs to happen to try and get everyone running in the same direction as best they can. Whether Republican or Democrat in the house, its unacceptable for people to be acting so irresponsibly and childishly. I'd say the same thing if roles were reversed too. Yea Trump doesn't have a middle mode. It's either 'stop or go'. I don't think he was hoping to upset ISIS with his loser comment, but I think it does show the wider world what he actually thinks and it's refreshing from the regurgitated carbon copy soundbites like 'we must stand strong and not let it defeat us' et etc. NO, show some emotion and show the world you feel how they feel too. I liked him saying it. Wouldnt have been my choice of words, but it was refreshing to me nonetheless. Yep, but until actual evidence is presented, we just don't know. Unfortunately the media have it turned all the way up to 11 without anything to back them up other than 'anonymous sources', which, as i said before, just seems to be the phrase to give carte blanche to write and make up anything you want. Im sorry but that doesnt wash with me. I dobnt like it and i dont agree with it. If you want to be billy big bollocks at CNN and slander your own president, youd best stand up and present your case instead of hiding behind 'anonymous sources'. Thats my personal opinion though. The Comey memo not being presented within the allocated time does sound a few alarm bells for me though. Was it real? Was the information on it quite what was previously mentioned? if it was, surely it would have been presented immediately?

Haha well, that seems to be my role in this thread, trying to apply some sort of balance amid the howling, screaming, over the top reactions and 'anonymous informants' (which just seems to be code-word for 'do as you please and say its anonymous and you can get way with it in the news-nowadays). As I said, I'm not privy to the deals with SA. I'm dubious of any deal with them, whether it be USA or UK etc. Theres always something to be gained from it both ways which makes me a tad uncomfortable, but it just seems to be the way things are and will be, which wont change. They hold a certain key to hold over the rest over the world, which I dont like. (just to bring something back to Hillary again (you know i hate her), she took $25 million from them during her campaign but it wasnt a problem then ) I think the thing about Trump flying between the countries needs to be brought up. It might seem insignificant to many, but that is actually a HUGE thing. NO-ONE does that....EVER! But he did, and everyone agreed, which is astounding. To then go on to visit the wall, speak to leaders of all faiths one after another is unheard of too and Trump and his team deserve huge credit for that. It would have been laughed out of the room if previously even suggested, but he did it, and did it well with no (observable) dramas. Yes yes, the Pope trip....have a little look and there are numerous photos of him and the Pope joking and smiling together. Melania is a devout Catholic so it was huge for her too to be within those walls. The photo that did the rounds of the pop loking miserable is just his face. Have a quick look for his meeting with Obama and youll see the same 'resting pope-face' Regards to the NATO point - he said it all along and he's sticking with it so should be credited with that. Many countries do not pull their weight and never have. It's about time someone told them to do so. I'd stick by that even if it was Hillary (shudder). A country like ours should have done something similar long before. I'm with you on the Paris deal though, that was skimmed over by him and I didnt like that. We've been through this with each other before regarding renewables and I think we agree it's out of the world leaders hands really. It comes down to the energy providers and those who provide/use the carbon fuel. Until that's gone, nothing will really change, so in my eyes, it's all just bluster and posturing until then. FFS is AKON the 'musician' can provide x amount of solar panels to provide energy for hundreds/thousands off his own back, then surely countries could solve all the energy problems. Solar arrays in the sahara could power most of europe. Don't write off what he said about Manchester. Yes, any leader would and did react to it, but he actually reacted almost personally to it, calling them out as losers, rather than just the usual regurgitated soundbites. He seems to actually want to do something about it. Even if he doesnt in the end, he at least gives a glimmer of hope (whatever it may be in the long run, we dont know) by putting a foot down, and believe it or not, people respond to that. People are sick of the same old soft soundbites and facebook profile picture flags etc The Russia stuff has faded in to the background as no actual evidence has come about. The supposed memo between Comey and Trump which was supposed to be huge hasnt been provided within the specified time either. I'm not saying that parts of Trumps collective didn't have some form of connection with the Russians, but im still waiting for any actual evidence. 2 white supremacist murders....jeez Mac, you're better than that, that seemed a bit of a cheap shop to bring up white supremacists here. I'll condemn that like the next man, but theres the murder of Democrat Seth Rich being buried too. (Those two lines are a different line though so lets not go off on a tangent). Yep, I'll agree there, it's not a giant success, but when you're doing so many foreign trips in such a short space of time, especially between such heated areas will never be 100% success. The point is, is that it has been decent, and nowhere near the tornado the media have made. I appreciate your appreciation, thank you, its taken on board, thank you Luckily, the strongarms around Trump seem to be loosening their grip one way or another, but I'm still with you that I don't like his/their attitude towards the environment. Sorry for such an essay. I just got on a roll. I blame the pint at lunch. It's mainly, probably just waffle. Im sure it could have been condensed. Sorry everyone!

I've had a rather busy weekend etc so haven't kept up with a great deal, but flying on the coat tails of the apparent 'huge' news from last week that Trump had a handshake with Macron TWICE and then joked about it too, there are some real news stories to arise from his trip abroad. Perhaps it could be worth looking in a little more detail rather than handshakes, 'pope-face' and glowing orbs. First to Riyadh, then Tel Aviv, then Jerusalem, then Rome, then Brussels, then Taormina, Italy. First, he brokered a massive $100 billion-plus deal with Saudi Arabian leaders (I can't claim to know the details of such deals though) and delivered a powerful speech to 50 Arab leaders. Then he became the first to fly from the Arab nation directly to Israel, where he made history as the first sitting president to visit the Western Wall. He met Pope Francis. (This could be seen as a good, large point - He met Muslim leaders, Jewish leaders, Christian leaders, which could be seen as a brilliant stroke by the man the media says is over his head in the White House — and historic.) In Brussels, he demanded European leaders pull their own weight (and pay their fair share) with NATO. Which I think is a fair point which we probably could be pushing too. he responded forcefully to the terror bombing in Manchester, when — appearing with Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president, a leader (who, according to some, tolerates terrorsim) — Trump called Muslim bombers “losers." (OK 'losers' isn't particularly articulate, but the point still stands that something was said, rather than brushing under the carpet again) But of course, the real news is that him and Macron had a bit of a handshake which went both ways, Melania didn't hold his hand, and he touched a glowing orb. Again, as stated before, I don't support Trump, but I do pop up occasionally here for the sake of balance. Surely it's fairly obvious that most of the above have been overlooked for far more trivial things. As well as visiting the girl in the Israeli hospital who's dream was to meet him, where he took the time out to make it happen. Let's be honest. If that was Obama, the media would be creaming about how amazing he was.

I could picture every single part of that and had a smile on my face all the way through reading it. What a story, what a man!

I went for a long weekend for a stag do last year. The architecture is spectacular if that's your sort of thing, got a decent zoo, the hot springs are decent if it's sunny, though be prepared for any women in your party to be ogled by locals. The beer isn't the best but even the branded beers are still ridiculously cheap. In fact, almost everything is insanely cheap from what I found. The area down by the river isn't too bad when it opens up, with outdoor dining etc. The park with all the Communist era statues and monuments is fairly interesting too, again, if that's your thing.

Hope the charity event goes well. It's never easy to lose a loved one. Get well soon too!

If that's the case, I semi-retract my previous post. I'll have a bit more of a read up on the situation.

Two completely different scenarios there. Any President has absolute authority to discuss and share whatever information they like, it's not illegal. Classified information will have been shared with ourselves, and vice versa. Just imagine how much information Israel has received from the USA, or how much Iran gained from the USA/Obama during their dealings. It's really a nothing story.

Ha, I thought there might have been a chance of getting through a discussion without your doom-mongering, but there it is! I have to admit, you're not alone in that little conspiracy theory as it's something I've thought for quite some years myself, and when taking all things in to account, it's incredibly plausible. Only when the 'assets' have been stripped will the true low carbon/renewable/electronic energy tech be revealed. From a business point of view, you can't blame them, but it's beyond shitty to screw over the world's population and the Earth itself for short term monetary gain. Ah well. As previously said, that's something for another day. There's something about Musk which I find a little questionable but I can't quite put my finger on what At least he's trying new things and moving things forward though. On the domestic front, I quite like Tesla's 'Powerwall' solar storage units and they have been a good step forward, considering the previous best were all the size of fridges!

It's just a never ending shit-cycle I'm afraid. Haha is that the traditional Leicsmac underlying tone and warning of impending doom? Despite working in the engineering industry and clean/renewable energy, no governments around the world really fill me confidence. The same way in which the technology for cheap and efficient electric cars is already there....real investment or application of such technologies won't occur until there's no more money left in carbon based energies. That's a discussion for another day though.

It's certainly important to hear what he has to say, either way, but I'd imagine that after leaving such a high profile position, there will be some form of gagging order, at least for 'x' amount of years. Unfortunately, all I envisage happening (at least in the short term) is both sides becoming further entrenched in their respective camps and more mud slinging, despite both sides wanting him gone at various times over the last year or so. You'd think a few sensible heads might be able to pop up above the parapet and say hey, this might actually give the FBI a bit of a shake up and it can almost start afresh, provided a suitable candidate is put in place. So many ifs and buts! Thing is, as far as I'm aware, the investigations will still be ongoing regardless. Removing Comey won't just halt all FBI investigations.

I'd have no problem getting the actual truth out there, no matter who it affects...IF of course there is some hidden truth there. I know there's no smoke without fire, but we just don't know right now. The only problem is, with things like this, no-one is truly 'independent' in such investigations, unfortunately. Besides...I think the Clinton's are the ones with a track record of people around them disappearing

It's all very dubious until we know more. He was fired upon the recommendations to Trump by Sessions and Rosenstein, who were asked for rationale to do so. They could have said there is none, but both found reasons and recommended it occur. This needs to be held in mind. If you'd asked me if he should be sacked around June last year, I'd have said yes. If you ask me now, I'd say his handling of the incidents I mentioned would still warrant it to a point, though considering so much time has passed since then and January too, I'd say the moment has gone and he could possibly continue to do his job. I'm very dubious about the timing, but until we know more, it's all wild speculation.

I'm sure he has. The investigations surrounding Weiner, Benghazi, Blumenthal, E-mails, and essentially re-writing law for Clinton would be amazing to hear The flip-flopping of the left in the USA over this is hilarious. I'm pretty sure everyone wanted him sacked back in January, and now they're all condemning it and sticking up for him What a huge mess, on both sides.