Dr. Gonzo

This is one the funniest things I think I've read on this forum. Also why the fuck would you care about "not wanting to live in a country where being English is seen as an issue?" Aren't you South African? Even if that were the case (spoiler alert - it isn't, hilarious claim though)... wouldn't you be fine in that situation? Seeing as you're not English? Also there's absolutely no debate on what it is fundamentally to be British - born in Britain or a British overseas territory or a citizen of a British country or British overseas territory? Ok then we all agree that you've got the fundamental aspects of being British. Not born in Britain or a British overseas territory or a citizen of these countries/territories? Ok, we all agree you've not got the fundamental aspects of being British. It's not some mysterious concept of Britishness - it's citizens of the UK, British Overseas Territories, and Crown dependencies.

Positioning and movement is the most underrated trait in all of football, regardless of position. Some keepers get heralded as great for making incredible saves for TV cameras - but they're not all that great, they've got to make these incredible looking saves often because they don't have great positioning for a goalkeeper. A lot of really good goalkeepers make a lot of their work look almost routine by being aware of the right positions to be in and making shot stopping just much easier for themselves... as well as having the ability to pull off actual incredible saves. Everyone knows defender positioning is very important. Defenders out of position = a pourous defense. That's easy. With midfielders and attackers, positioning is important for defending and attacking. Taking the right positions when their side doesn't have the ball, taking up positions and making movement that's going to lead to better quality chances is vital for attacking. In modern football, where there's more emphasis on tactics, retaining possession, and physicality - we're seeing players dribble a lot less, we've basically seen the #10 role take a massive decline in popularity worldwide... and football's changed. But having a good understanding of possession and movement still remain incredibly valuable traits.

Lol did someone forget to take their meds today?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army lol have you ever tried googling for things?

Go tell that to Cambodia. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

American culture is exported everywhere in the world, they're probably the largest exporters of their culture because they've gotten the good at getting everyone else to consume American media. The culture wars of the US are nothing different. This "culture war" shite is just coming from American news media, which is shit at providing news but exists mostly as a form of "informational entertainment" as well as peddling corporate interests. By consuming that particular type of American culture, getting enraged by the "culture wars" happening in a country you don't live in - you're only serving to make sure it filters worldwide. By getting worked up over these pretty minor societal issues in another country and worrying about how it filters to South Africa or whatever... you end up putting the culture wars on a pedestal. Actual issues to the US, South Africa, or any country, become less important once you're fully invested in the culture wars. If you're worried about corporate interests perverting US politics and that spreading worldwide, you probably shouldn't give a fuck about what corporate US media wants you to think about these minor issues. You're better off worrying about actual issues that impact your day-to-day life than worrying about an NFL team's name, whether a fan was wronged by some shit journalist at a fringe website, whether or not Bud Light is a gay beer, or if the next Marvel movie is going to be too "woke" etc... You're not supporting a strong and united America by having a vested interest in this culture war. The culture war exists to divide Americans and keep people thinking about politics like its a spectator sport where they've got a team to support and another team to hate. A strong unified America has people focused on the fundamental issues that impact almost everyone. The culture war just distracts people from these issues and tries to force people into backing politicians that will absolutely do nothing about these fundamental issues.

The culture war is of such little importance and is only used to drive a wedge between people to force them onto either side of "liberal" or "conservative" even though both parties in the US are remarkably similar - and that's because at the end of the day both parties are slaves to the same corporate masters. Regardless, I don't think you can assume NAGA (the institution you're talking about) speaks for all natives in the US - https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/02/04/native-mascots-survey/#:~:text=Contrary to polls showing that relatively few Native,team’s 87-year-old moniker and Native mascots in general. it seems like there's basically a 50-50 split over whether they support the name being changed. Regardless of what you, I, or any other white person might think... the previous name is a racial slur. At the end of the day... who fucking cares? It's an NFL team that's changed it's name from something that might offend half the people in the community it was named after. Now they've got a name that will offend less people and people just want to be offended that the name has changed. Who gives a fuck? It's an American football team name. I don't know if you want to talk about no anti-Arab hatred in the US though considering 3 Palestinian kids were just shot for being Palestinian. America's clearly got a problem with antisemitism and anti-Muslim sentiment. Given the events that have transpired in Australia, the UK, France, Germany, Spain, etc... it doesn't appear to be isolated to the US either. I also don't know what you're expecting in the US to do with this rally in Scranton, PA. If you expect cops to break the rally up... why the hell would you expect that? It's the US, KKK members can advocate for killing every non-white, white supremacists can hold rallies and chant "Jews will not replace us," a large number of morons can even storm the US Capitol building and just get a slap on the wrist for trying to overthrow the government. They take freedom of speech more seriously than other countries, even when it's hateful speech that shouldn't be protected. Expecting the government to do anything about a protest in the US is wild. Even when it gets violent and unlawful, I doubt arrests would come after the protests - like they did with the rioters who stormed the US capitol. And even then, the charges they'll get would be... pitiful considering the offense. And from what I can tell, these riots didn't get violent. They just chanted repugnant things. But you, a non-American that doesn't live or work in America, getting worked up about the US culture wars makes no sense. @Spike and I are non-Americans living and working in the USA. I'm pretty sure both of us see the culture war as nothing more than a divisive distraction issue. @Coma's American and I'm fairly certain he feels the same way. It's just bizarre to care so much about America's culture wars. For most Americans these issues aren't even close to important. If people stopped focusing on culture wars and started focusing on why politicians in the US are so bad at doing anything other than pleasing corporate interests, the US would be a lot better off. It doesn't need people that are pretty unconnected from the US other than consuming their culture joining in on fighting the culture wars that the corporate interests are pushing. What you're doing is just proving to the Murdoch family that their investment in getting people to care more about these utterly stupid culture wars is something that can successfully be exported to other countries - so that people stop caring about what matters and start getting at other peoples throats over stupid shit like the names of NFL teams.

I've never heard of this, but lol - Deadspin should fire the writer for sure. Still, I think that's a weird bit of American news to bring to the American politics thread. It's not really politics, other than some dickhead trying to fight a culture war and I'm sure the people most worked up about it are the ones most invested in this stupid culture war bullshit. Basically a total non-issue that if you're not a fan of the Kansas City Chiefs... it's not something that would be on most peoples radars in the US. It's not even anywhere close to the front page of the NFL subreddit. Seems like maybe this kid has a case for defamation, but that's not really political news is it? Some shit journalist for some fringe website being a shit journalist and getting himself in some legal trouble isn't really notable in the US tbh. It's the land of lawsuits.

While the rest of the world is distracted by Israel v Palestine part 6billion - Iran's killing off loads of dissidents for having the nerve to demand basic human rights the government insists on denying them. https://www.iranintl.com/en/202311285181

The irony in Hamas giving more care and attention to Israelis they've kidnapped than the people they're meant to be governing. Although the people of Gaza are just a convenient shield for them - whereas these hostages are a bargaining chip they can use to stay alive a bit longer.

Tbf it wouldn't be the first time a player moves to Chelsea, looks underwhelming, goes elsewhere and gets another big English club interested in him. Granted, his goalscoring record in his second stint at Shit Beverage Leipzig FC doesn't really indicate that he's improved at all. Having said that, he's probably an upgrade on Martial (how is Martial still at United?) and/or Antony (who's hilariously shit tbh) even if he's not improved at all and is going to be as inconsistent as he was at Chelsea.

What's up with the BBC? Between this and their tacit support of the IRI on BBC Persia, makes me really wonder what the fuck is going on with the BBC's middle eastern coverage.

Thanks it was my first time attempting it like that and it turned out really great.

David Cameron's back in government and now the UK's detected its first human case of H1N2 flu strain circulating around in pigs. Coincidence? Nah, the pig fucker's done this.

This makes me feel old and I don't like it.

26 26

I think so, but I'm not sure how true it is vs how much of it is a "Jews control the media stereotype." And while there may be a disproportionate number of Jews in the media, I'm not sure we can say they control it - it's not like Mel Gibson hasn't had a successful career in Hollywood. Having seen screenshots of what she's posted - I don't know how anyone can seriously say she's an antisemite. She didn't disparage Jewish people - just a wish for peace and recognition of Palestinian human rights, all while wishing continued safety towards Jewish people. I just think it's dangerous the way the word antisemite is being used. It takes away meaning from the word when it's used to silence people who aren't being antisemitic but vehemently disagree with Israeli policies. If society gets numb to accusations of antisemitism because the word is thrown around too much... then when it's used to describe people or actions that actually are antisemitic, there's a risk that people aren't going to take those instances seriously. It's also massively unfair to tarnish someone's reputation with false claims of antisemitism just because they disagree with the idea of collective punishment of all of Gaza as an effective means of bringing about peace. Going besides the point, I think the claims that the BDS movement is antisemitic because it "singles out Israel, while ignoring other geopolitical issues" is a bit ridiculous. All boycotts single out whatever is being boycotted and put their focus on that political issue while ignoring others. Sanctions on countries single out the actions of that government while ignoring other political issues. The boycott is calling on change in Israeli policies and a call to sanction Israel until it respects the human rights of Palestinians.

26 26

Her statements are so bland and tame and very far from antisemitic - it's the US so I think if I'm her, I'd sue for defamation. Calling someone antisemitic publicly is hugely damaging to someone's reputation, especially when sacking them for it. According to some screenshots of her instagram stories... they're pretty blatantly not antisemitic and are just generally pro-peace and anti-war anti-human suffering. I think zionists are doing a disservice to the worldwide battle against antisemitism by blindly tarring so many people as antisemitic for questioning the way they're going about dealing with Palestinians. It takes meaning away from the word when real antisemites say and do antisemitic things when it's just used as a blanket response to criticism about how Israel's government operates. It's like the boy who cried wolf, if you aren't going to be serious about a serious word and accusation... sooner or later people won't ever take the accusation seriously. This cycle of violence is only going to end when the party with the position of power breaks the cycle of violence. Otherwise the extremists of both sides keep feeding the extremism of the other side. From an Israeli perspective, I understand it is hard to want to break the cycle of violence against a group of people that are technically governed (although at the same time, Hamas does not act like a government and treats the people of Gaza like hostages) by a group that has put the death of all Jews worldwide as a goal in its charter. But from a Palestinian perspective, how do you make peace with a government that has demonstrated to you throughout your entire life that you aren't viewed as human. But peace was never going to come after the savagery of the attacks on October 7 - Israel's government is a collection of extremists. How do extremists respond to extreme attacks? With extreme attacks of their own. And honestly, I don't think there's any room for Hamas in a future for a better life for the people of Gaza. Hamas isn't concerned with governing, it's not concerned with civilian life - it's concerned with its holy war. But if the IDF can take out Hamas... what comes next? What happens in the aftermath of this war is going to be a pivotal moment for Palestinians and Israelis. Serious work needs to be put in to combat extremism - both Israeli extremism and Palestinian extremism. And unfortunately, the way Isreal's approached this war has just made it more likely another generation of Gaza grows up with justifiable anger and resentment towards Israel that leads to more and more extremists.

Tbh I'm just generally against group ownership of multiple teams across multiple leagues around the world. It inherently makes clubs focuses change and damages the integrity of other leagues. I'm also against club owners owning multiple teams in the same country - I think it's bizarre that the guy who owns Napoli also owns Bari and when/if Bari get promoted to the Serie A he'll be forced to sell Bari. So the owner of one of Italy's most well supported clubs has an interest in letting them grow to a certain point, but would lose control if they ever get promoted back to the top flight. I know it's not new and there's been nothing prohibiting it so far - and I think it's a bit weird that it's only now an issue that certain countries own football clubs. And even then... only really became a hot button issue once a major regional power started to throw its weight around in football. It seems to me that is more of the issue in world football than this idea of multiple clubs having the same owner. But I'd welcome something being done to stop group ownership... as well as to stop state owned football clubs.

Saudi public fund owned, owned by a Saudi Prince, Owned by Abu Dhabi, do Chelsea own any other clubs… idk, but cunts so not surprising, Everton’s new owners own a shitload of teams, Wolves? Weird but they’re Tory cunts so it’s on brand, and corrupt Greek mafioso who owns Olympiakos. I think other than Chelsea and Wolves, it’s just clubs voting to protect their interests - unless Chelsea and Wolves owners own other teams? It’s nothing really new though, and look at the Red Bull clubs as well. Should it be allowed? Probably not but it’s been allowed and I’m not surprised clubs that can use it to their advantage don’t want it prohibited.

You’ll probably get a slap on the wrist because avoiding embarrassment and protecting the image of the league is more important than sporting integrity. I think they’re dropping the hammer on Everton so they’ve got something to point at to say: look we enforce rules and take rules seriously. Even though the premier league was involved and rubber stamped the same financial violations they’re now punishing Everton for.

I’m hesitant to take a side because I think both sides are bad actors at the leadership level. Picking a side here, to me at least, feels like supporting one form of genocide over the other tbh. Or picking antisemitism vs Islamophobia. I don’t want to support genocide. I don’t want to stand alongside antisemites or Islamophobes. I want innocent Palestinians and innocent Israelis to live normal lives in peace.

Wasn’t the rule about leaving for breakaway leagues made after that happened though? Because I think it wouldn’t have been the most unreasonable punishment if not for the fact there was no rule against it. I think the way the prem has operated on this is a joke though. Worked with the club for years to resolve this - rubber stamping the finances each year. Then saying there’s a violation and referring this to an independent commission to impose the harshest sanction this league has ever seen. Trying to make an example out of Everton when they’re not even the first or second worst offenders for this type of offense is stupid imo. The message sent is if your club is rich enough, no problem… but for anyone else the rules really matter. And if relegated clubs sue Everton successfully, I think the league is really to blame - not Everton. Everton cooperated fully, the league rubber stamped everything. So this combined £300m other clubs want from Everton should be coming from the league’s pockets imo.