In Dubai, it seems Mikel taught them how to point to each other, showing where they

wanted the ball played. Ozil did it to GX twice for the 3rd. Pépé to Willock for the 4th. Laca to Saka for the cross he couldn't get on the end of.

I rather like this. I hope they keep it up.

Also playing Ceballos. Ozil needs quality players around him - like when he played with Santi and Alexis. MA started his Arsenal career as an AM, but then moved deeper when we signed Santi, and then even more when we got Ozil. So MA knows this is what Ozil needs.

He's starting to link up well with Pépé, too. We just need Hector to learn to link with him. Maybe he should start pointing as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

wanted the ball played. Ozil did it to GX twice for the 3rd. Pépé to Willock for the 4th. Laca to Saka for the cross he couldn't get on the end of.

I rather like this. I hope they keep it up.

Also playing Ceballos. Ozil needs quality players around him - like when he played with Santi and Alexis. MA started his Arsenal career as an AM, but then moved deeper when we signed Santi, and then even more when we got Ozil. So MA knows this is what Ozil needs.

He's starting to link up well with Pépé, too. We just need Hector to learn to link with him. Maybe he should start pointing as well.

---

He'll never point. He's too busy thinking about clothes, vegetables and Jeremy Corbyn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

wanted the ball played. Ozil did it to GX twice for the 3rd. Pépé to Willock for the 4th. Laca to Saka for the cross he couldn't get on the end of.

I rather like this. I hope they keep it up.

Also playing Ceballos. Ozil needs quality players around him - like when he played with Santi and Alexis. MA started his Arsenal career as an AM, but then moved deeper when we signed Santi, and then even more when we got Ozil. So MA knows this is what Ozil needs.

He's starting to link up well with Pépé, too. We just need Hector to learn to link with him. Maybe he should start pointing as well.

---

Which particular socialist loony is your choice for leader of the socialist loony party, g? As far as I can tell they all seem to be more concerned with trans rights than with ameliorating the condition of the working classes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Which particular socialist loony is your choice for leader of the socialist loony party, g? As far as I can tell they all seem to be more concerned with trans rights than with ameliorating the condition of the working classes.

---

I see Nandy decided to torpedo her position as The Vaguely Sane One by saying we should put rapists in women's prisons and abolish the monarchy.

To some degree, I do almost feel some sympathy for them because, in order to become leader, they have to pander to the sort of lunatics who are members of the Labour Party. Almost by definition that makes them unelectable by the wider public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Which particular socialist loony is your choice for leader of the socialist loony party, g? As far as I can tell they all seem to be more concerned with trans rights than with ameliorating the condition of the working classes.

---

I hate them all, C.

I would have rejoined to vote for Kier Starmer if it had been close vs RLB, just to pîss off the Corbynistas. But the party is a joke. That chap going for deputy - said that we wouldn't be able to scramble jets to thwart an invasion until Lab members had had a conference vote on it, and thinks we need a tabloid paper because the plebs are too thick to read long words.

My party has been taken over by a bunch of semi-literate Stalinists. Have you seen that Scotland woman playing the race card with the Commonwealth over being allowed to be corrupt?

They're evil, C. They claim to care about the most disadvantaged in our society, but really they're happy to see the Tories stay in power and keep playing the victim card.

I don't see a solution. We've become like the LDs - just playing at politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

I hate them all, C.

I would have rejoined to vote for Kier Starmer if it had been close vs RLB, just to pîss off the Corbynistas. But the party is a joke. That chap going for deputy - said that we wouldn't be able to scramble jets to thwart an invasion until Lab members had had a conference vote on it, and thinks we need a tabloid paper because the plebs are too thick to read long words.

My party has been taken over by a bunch of semi-literate Stalinists. Have you seen that Scotland woman playing the race card with the Commonwealth over being allowed to be corrupt?

They're evil, C. They claim to care about the most disadvantaged in our society, but really they're happy to see the Tories stay in power and keep playing the victim card.

I don't see a solution. We've become like the LDs - just playing at politics.

---

God knows what that nice Mr Attlee would say, g. :-(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

I see Nandy decided to torpedo her position as The Vaguely Sane One by saying we should put rapists in women's prisons and abolish the monarchy.

To some degree, I do almost feel some sympathy for them because, in order to become leader, they have to pander to the sort of lunatics who are members of the Labour Party. Almost by definition that makes them unelectable by the wider public.

---

Which loony was it who suggested that Corbyn should be shadow foreign secretary? :hehe:

They are actually mnetally ill. They must be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Which loony was it who suggested that Corbyn should be shadow foreign secretary? :hehe:

They are actually mnetally ill. They must be.

---

That was Rebecca Long-Bailey, who is loony-in-chief. However, I think you said you want to have the sex with her.

Dawn Butler, who I think is running for deputy doubled down yesterday and said babies are born without any biological sex.

So that bodes well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

That was Rebecca Long-Bailey, who is loony-in-chief. However, I think you said you want to have the sex with her.

Dawn Butler, who I think is running for deputy doubled down yesterday and said babies are born without any biological sex.

So that bodes well.

---

I just don't get all the pandering to trannies, etc. They make up about 0.4% of population and will clearly all vote for the Green party anyway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

God knows what that nice Mr Attlee would say, g. :-(

---

I know.

I've tried to explain to them that Mr Attlee chose partnership with democracies (incl. Septics) over fellow socialists, and that Ernie Bevan started Nato.

But they won't listen. They care more about virtue signalling that the Iraq war was "not in my name" than they do about getting you lot out and stopping the poor being trampled on.

It's really depressing. And now India's trying to imitate the 3rd Reich. I feel sad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Which loony was it who suggested that Corbyn should be shadow foreign secretary? :hehe:

They are actually mnetally ill. They must be.

---

They are. We need to get Momentum and the Unions out of the party. They no longer live in the real world. "The exit poll must be wrong because everyone I know loves Jeremy."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PSRB

I just don't get all the pandering to trannies, etc. They make up about 0.4% of population and will clearly all vote for the Green party anyway

---

Because pretending women can have cocks has become the go-to way of differentiating yourself as one of the good guys. It's the inevitable result of a race to the bottom among the woker-than-thou. In order to prove your credentials, you eventually have to deny demonstrable scientific fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

I know.

I've tried to explain to them that Mr Attlee chose partnership with democracies (incl. Septics) over fellow socialists, and that Ernie Bevan started Nato.

But they won't listen. They care more about virtue signalling that the Iraq war was "not in my name" than they do about getting you lot out and stopping the poor being trampled on.

It's really depressing. And now India's trying to imitate the 3rd Reich. I feel sad.

---

My Indian friends seem rather keen on Mr Modi. But they're all rich and hate Muslims. :-(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

My Indian friends seem rather keen on Mr Modi. But they're all rich and hate Muslims. :-(

---

To be fair, he does seem quite sound on the Allan question. On the downside, he dresses funny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

My Indian friends seem rather keen on Mr Modi. But they're all rich and hate Muslims. :-(

---

Rich, Prussian anti-Semites were keen on Adolf, C.

Gandhi, Nehru, Ambedkar, Indira and Rajiv were all British educated to varying degrees. They built a secular India. Now we've got the Nazi chai-wallah it's hell in a hand cart time.

All Indian PMs should have UK degrees. And all UK PMs should smoke chillums with sadhus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

Rich, Prussian anti-Semites were keen on Adolf, C.

Gandhi, Nehru, Ambedkar, Indira and Rajiv were all British educated to varying degrees. They built a secular India. Now we've got the Nazi chai-wallah it's hell in a hand cart time.

All Indian PMs should have UK degrees. And all UK PMs should smoke chillums with sadhus.

---

Hmmm. It does sound a leetle beet like you prefer the idea of a remote, political/managerial class who do what they want and are all related to a popularly-rooted democratic PM with support among the demos.

This would be very much of a theme with your take on UK politics, to be fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

Hmmm. It does sound a leetle beet like you prefer the idea of a remote, political/managerial class who do what they want and are all related to a popularly-rooted democratic PM with support among the demos.

This would be very much of a theme with your take on UK politics, to be fair.

---

You have a country where many are illiterate and the only thing that gives them happiness in their poverty is their tribal religious beliefs.

The different state govts now think it's fine to change the school books in a way that Goebbels would have approved of.

Where there was previously a free media, under Modi, all bar NDTV have simply become propaganda outlets.

Of course they shouldn't be allowed to start WW3.

Answer me this. The C18th and C19th centuries saw the British end up dominating the planet, while spreading their enlightened values globally.

Do you think it would have been better had we had full franchise democracy, or can you accept that the country wasn't ready for it and we had to move towards it gradually?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult

You have a country where many are illiterate and the only thing that gives them happiness in their poverty is their tribal religious beliefs.

The different state govts now think it's fine to change the school books in a way that Goebbels would have approved of.

Where there was previously a free media, under Modi, all bar NDTV have simply become propaganda outlets.

Of course they shouldn't be allowed to start WW3.

Answer me this. The C18th and C19th centuries saw the British end up dominating the planet, while spreading their enlightened values globally.

Do you think it would have been better had we had full franchise democracy, or can you accept that the country wasn't ready for it and we had to move towards it gradually?

---

The elites never think those they govern are ready for democracy because having to answer to the people means setting a limit on their power and having to do things they don't want to do.
And there are always reasons why people should be considered too backwards, simple or ignorant to be allowed to vote.

Suffice to say I'm deeply suspicious about the motives of anyone who ever makes these arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

The elites never think those they govern are ready for democracy because having to answer to the people means setting a limit on their power and having to do things they don't want to do.
And there are always reasons why people should be considered too backwards, simple or ignorant to be allowed to vote.

Suffice to say I'm deeply suspicious about the motives of anyone who ever makes these arguments.

---

It's a simple question, B. Walpole became PM in 1720. We had the GRA in 1832.

Had either of those dates seen the introduction of full suffrage (and a Parliament Act denying the HoL a veto) do you think the country (and the world) would have progressed as well?

Or do you think the plebs would have buggered the economy by voting for free gin and public papist burnings?

I'm talking about a specific historical period and a counter-factual. Was the UK ready for full democracy in 1720 (or even 1832)?