ClaphamFox

They definitely will not park the bus - they will come for the win. But this will leave spaces for us to attack. Their front four will give our defence their biggest test this season, but I fancy our attackers to have some fun as well. So 0-0, then.

Portuguese police have apologised to Kate and Gerry McCann for the way they investigated Madeleine's disappearance. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67229219

By all accounts they were a very tight group off set as well as on it. The social media age’s demand for instant emotional responses means that silence is regarded with suspicion. So full respect to the other cast members for resisting that demand and dealing with their grief in their own way.

They are indeed: https://www.otib.co.uk/topic/222465-he’s-gone/#comments

It’s being reported that he drowned. Awful 😢 https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/oct/29/matthew-perry-death-devastated-stars-remember-friends-actor-after-apparent-drowning

Has it really aged terribly? I always preferred Seinfeld but there’s no doubt Friends was very slickly written and I think it will still be watched for many years to come.

Maresca said yesterday he won’t rest players for that reason.

He clearly believes he can. That’s the level of moral authority he possesses 😉

Taarabt could cause us a few issues down our left.

MPH already posted it…

I had heard a rumour that Wout Faes is partial to consuming a White Russian or two before kick-off...

Is it definitely just Parkinson's? There have been various reports of cancer too...

Fit and healthy? There have been rumours for years that he has a serious medical condition and is only being kept alive by a heavy cocktail of drugs.

It could be good news, but it wouldn't necessarily be. Many of the figures around Putin who would seek to seize power if he dies are even worse than he is.

The topic keeps getting shut down despite the respectful tone of the discussion and the interesting exchange of views. Very odd.

If we were talking about the Daily Express or Telegraph I’d be inclined to agree, but I’m not convinced the BBC has an inherent pro-Israeli bias. I certainly didn’t get that impression last night when they were directly accusing Israel of being behind hospital explosion when evidence for that view was pretty much non-existent.

Thanks for the explanation. But don’t you also think that pro-Palestinian groups would have been lobbying just as hard? You seemed to imply the journalist was particularly susceptible to pro-Israel lobbying, which seemed quite an assumption without knowing any more about the journalist in question and his methodology when putting this story together. FYI I wasn’t suggesting that you personally are antisemitic (which I don’t believe), but one of the most beloved tropes of actual antisemites is that the jews control the media - I just think such suggestions should be treated with caution.

Out of interest, why do you put ‘Vanderbilt University’ in inverted commas? Do you not believe it is an actual university? And what makes you think this academic’s views can’t be trusted? Is it because he works at an American university or something else? Your suggestion that the ‘Jewish lobby’ is effectively bullying the BBC into citing dodgy academics, without any evidence to back it up, comes dangerously close to being an antisemitic conspiracy theory.

The BBC is finally getting around to analysing the evidence. It's still a bit sketchy, but they seem to be leaning towards the view that it was a misfired small rocket that hit propellants on the ground in the car park rather than a large projectile fired from Israel. BBC Verify

Of course, but there's a big difference between a journalist who has studied the evidence and formed an honest conclusion (which may be flawed) and one who has been told to parrot a certain line and just dutifully obeyed orders. There are undoubtedly some who fall in the latter camp, but far fewer, I suspect, than is generally believed. Last night the BBC was falling over itself to blame Israel for the hospital explosion. Like many other media outlets it is now backtracking. As it happens I don't think the problem with the BBC's reporting was one of bias, but rather one of undue haste. But they certainly weren't towing the government line.

I think this is unfair. I worked in the media at the beginning of my career and have many friends who still work there. And I know this squarely contradicts popular perception, but there are many, many journalists out there who genuinely want to report the truth and are not parroting an editorial line they've been given. Certain outlets, particularly in the print media, clearly have an angle they're likely to pursue, but by no means all do. Sometimes it seems that the public believes journalists are just taken aside and told to report something, and then just cheerfully obey orders even if they don't actually believe the thing they're reporting. But that wasn't my experience and I know it's not the experience of the people I know who still work in the media.

You'd be surprised (or maybe you wouldn't) at just how many people on social media appear willing to automatically dismiss everything Israel says as lies while automatically believing everything Hamas says without question. It really is quite extraordinary.

Yes, not killing people is always better than the alternative. And I agree with those who think it would be best if Israel opted against a ground invasion, which would inevitably cost many innocent lives. But it does raise the question of what happens next. Hamas invaded Israel and committed a genocide in the most horrific way imaginable. It will do so again and again if it is not stopped. A return to the pre-October 7 world is not possible. The blockade of Gaza will never be lifted while Hamas remains in charge. Hamas is not going to willingly give up power (it is an Islamic death cult, not a political movement). Ordinary Palestinians probably don't have the means, and may not even have the will, to overthrow Hamas. So what do we do now?

Link corrected 😉