Jack the Sipper

You started calling non-Jews rats now? Anyway, it's great to see I've rattled your cage. Speaking of cages, stick around and, if you're a good little extremist, I might stick up the video of that poor bastard who was burned alive in a cage by your people at ISIS. First wank of the day material right there.

And there was me thinking he was ManeMan or Hades. Wor Hamas.

Last Christmas the Arse were on top, but the very next game they gave it away.

I've got no problem with female pundits in football as a principle. Some are decent and knowledgeable, like Alex Scott, whilst some male pundits and commentators are so thick, so ill-informed, so biased, that you know the only reason they're there is because of their name. Is there anyone out there that doesn't throw shit at the screen when Danny Murphy's monotoning his way through a game? I think reducing the debate about quality/token pundits to a male/female one is missing the point. That said, there's that one female commentator, don't know her name, who screeches her way through a match, with the most banal comments shouted through a rolled-up newspaper, that I really can't be doing with.

The Torygraph saying today that the 'battleground' at the next election will be on taxes. No doubt that inheritance tax cut, defending the biggest tax burden in peacetime history, and promising to pay for tax cuts for well-off people by further cutting budgets to starved public services will be to be a big winner. Last month they were saying the Tories would take the fight to Labour on immigration. Last week they were saying that Sunak would take on Starmer in a battle of the personalities. Real fucking embarrassment of riches that the Tories have got up their sleeves. With the emphasis on 'embarrassment'.

Since I made that post above I've been regularly putting more money into Bitcoin and Ethereum (more so Bitcoin) and sold the other coins at a small profit. I'm currently up over 70% in all. I would be up over 165% had I lumped it all on Bitcoin at the time I made the post above. I could listen to the sceptics that think it's all a con for idiots, pull out now and think myself lucky, but I'm going to put another few hundred in next week, hopefully catch the ETF and halving wave, then cash out some profits.

Probably jinxing it here, but I'm quietly optimistic here. Under Klopp we've tended to struggled more against sides that play ten behind the ball (see last Sunday). The Arse, all credit to them, just aren't set up like that.

Why gave gone the Man U route of listing players by their numbers, not their positions, like we used to?

Well, here's the first use of 'rats' from him in that thread. He goes on to use it a further four times over that day or so, yet despite you posting in that same thread dozens of times between him saying it, I don't see you pull him on it once. If you can show me otherwise then I'll apologise, no problem. Actually, looking at who did neg him and pull him up (including me, Captain Willard, Stronts, RedderLurtz) it seems eerily familiar to the list of people you've had serious arguments with on here in recent weeks. What to make of that. As for Rico, do you realise what a fucking clown you sound like here? You're forever banging on about how nasty and evil Tories are, and yet you class him, a Tory, as a mate. How the fuck does that work? Some major cognitive dissonance going on there! And I do remember you repping him on many occasions when he insulted people who expressed views that an actual leftist would have. Overall, your attitude towards him was totally sycophantic and pathetic, given your stated beliefs.

Swig, put down the bottle, take a deep breath and read the post again you short-legged, short-fused horrible little scrote. I didn't say you didn't care about football, I said you don't understand, or care to understand politics. Like the hooligan latches himself on to a club primarily to have a ruck, so you do with politics. You're a shitty little tribalist, a weak-minded twat that can't see past personalities. Thank fuck you weren't around in late 60s LA. Manson would've had you doing his work for him.

The fact that you still think 'leftist' is a slur speaks volumes for your lack of understanding of politics. You don't get it at all. Talking about Chelsea, you're like the political equivalent of a footie hooligan - doesn't really give a fuck about the game but just wants to be part of a firm and indulge in some aggro. It's notable that you launched a volley at me for calling socialists leftists, but had sweet fuck all to say to Planet Origi when he repeatedly called Jews 'rats' on the Israeli thread (interesting what else I found when I searched the thread for uses of that term...). Also notable that, when I and others were having it out with Rico, an actual right-winger, over his comments about trans people and Kyle Rittenhouse for example, you were patting him on the back and repping his insults in reply, like the submissive simpering little cunt who knows his place on here that you are underneath the bluster. So, take it from me, when I use the term 'leftist' I'm not directing it at you - to do so would imply you had some actual, sincere left-wing beliefs.

I voted for Labour under Corbyn and supported him on this forum when he was leader.

You're the biggest cunt on here by a fucking distance. And one last thing before I put you back in the bin, for all your ranting about Tories and their supporters, you used to simp and drool over Rico, probably the only poster that ever admitted to voting Tory on here, so you can take your fake outrage and bogus sanctimonious and stick it up your arse. Fucking fraud.

Like you don't already. You're the mad cunt that logs on to the Daily Mail so you can fume at the comments from the Tories. Weirdo.

Am I somehow responsible for what the Tories are up to, you thick melodramatic runt? Have I ever expressed support for them or anything theyve done, you feeble-minded fuck? I'm supporting the party and leader that's trying to get them out, which more than can be said for some of the two bob personality-led 'socialists' on here, that have had their heads wedged up Corbyns arse for years, and would rather see a Tory victory than a Labour one under Starmer. And what's wrong with 'leftists' as a description? I could say Corbynistas, which which be more accurate in most cases, because you're tribalists not ideologues but I'm too polite for that.

I guess anyone to the right of Mao is a Tory in your bleak, binary view of the world. Are the people who bang on about Starmer or who criticise Labour or Labour supporters like myself in the *checks notes* Tory Cabinet Thread Tories, 'cos that's definitely Tory supporting behaviour right there. Now I know it upsets confused arseholes like you, I'll talk about leftists and Starmer all the more.

The name of the Lib Dem candidate takes some beating, an ex copper called Savage Gunn.

Given that you believe a secular, more moderate, and more effective representative of Palestine (the PLO) existed before Hamas, that Israel also recognised this and created this Frankenstein's monster called Hamas with the intention of destroying the PLO, I'm not sure why you would dismiss the idea that another moderate and effective alternative to Hamas could ever come to the fore again in Palestine. Do you think that Israel would just create another Hamas after they've done with this one?

The PLO was ousted from the Gaza Strip by what many leftists and other supporters of the Palestinian cause believe was an Israeli-created Hamas, first in the 2006 elections, then in the Battle of Gaza a year later. Do you believe that Israel helped create or fund other otherwise encourage the rise of Hamas, at the inevitable expense of the more moderate PLO?

I want two front teeth for Christmas, failing that I'd happily see the whole Israeli government on trial for war crimes. But it's not about what I want, it's about what might bring about a solution to the problem of people being bombed out of their homes, right now. That's the hard reality, and if them being saved means an end to Hamas and the hostages being freed, I'd take that in a fucking heart beat. I certainly wouldn't consider it meaningless. I swear, I get the feeling that some who claim to care about the innocents above all else are actually more concerned that Israel don't get a win here. A price too far for them.

I forgot to add that, I do want the slaughter of innocents to stop, which is why I support a ceasefire, and always have done, and which is why I questioned you calling a ceasefire that involves, as you put it 'all hostages released, Hamas destroyed' as 'meaningless'. My support for a ceasefire, and the thousands of lives saved isn't conditional on whether or not 'Israel gets it's own way'. I just want lives saved at this point.

Not necessarily. There's always the possibility that a new representative of the Palestinian people could be secular rather than Islamist, political rather than militant, democratic rather than dictatorial. If, as so many think, Israel created Hamas to further its own ends, doesn't it stand to reason that an organisation that was the complete opposite to what they created would be more effective in representing the Palestinian cause?

Well, the fact that you called a 'sustainable ceasefire' that involves hostages being released and Hamas destroyed 'meaningless'. And they never had a 'ceasefire', but a 'pause in the fighting' If we're going to bandy these terms about and stick inverted commas around them then let's do it right. It was always the case that fighting would resume, unless all the Israeli hostages were released and Hamas surrendered. If you 'just want the slaughter to stop' wouldn't you be in favour of Hamas surrendering? Or is it because that's what Israel wants it's a step too far for you?

Leaving aside your 'etc', why would you be against Hamas being destroyed and hostages being released. What do you think the terms of a ceasefire that could be agreed on by both sides would consist of?