Bazzanotsogreat

Around 500,000 , but there ground is quite a way out of the city and have been trying to do something about it for a while know, but still does It really matter to them that they only got 7000 for a worthless game. They are always in the top 5 richest clubs in the world in anycase

I think that if the right manager convinced the stoke board about a certain player then stoke have around 3 million to spend on players

At least I knew who Scotland played so please as you said to me "please shut up"

And there are around 5 million of the worst racists north of Hadriens wall

Lots of showers predicted for tomorrow, oh and the umpires to give an Aussie out when he is out

A slight difference in the magnitude of the two events events .Maybe the reason I for one am not having a go at people for airing there views its just the typical line of " this has happened due to the US not signing the Kyoto agreement , so its the US's own fault " which is utter pish . AS i have said before if a storm of this size hit any low lying cityof simalr populace then the results would be catostrophic

Would the aussies still be moaning if collingwood was on as 12th man and he is the best fielder apart from clarke out of both teames

Yeah i have got Dyslexia, so what . Still managed to get a 2;1 at uni . I cant spell , but I would sooner be well-informed personally. Why do people get attacked for having dyslexia yet others spout utterley ill-informed trash out about topics they clearley have no idea about, yet no one insults them

And what have a degree in be a smug arsehole 1st class

Some of the anti-american stuff on this site and others alike make me sick, yes the US gets alot of things wrong ( including no proper relief to the people including supplies medicine etc) but to have a pop at them over this is quite sickining. How can people blame Bush for one of the the most powerful storms to ever have reached te area. People say its what comes around goes around 1stly due to goverment spending resources in Iraq instead of flood defence, wrong take Rotterdamn for example they have spent Billions of euros on defending the city from both coastal ans sea flooding but If a storm of such manitude hit the area you wood get simalr results in terms of flooding / damage as in NO And the second argument is even better " they havent signed the Kyoto agreement so thats what happens" when there is no sccientific link between global warming and the magnitude of a hurracaine infact I doubt many of the so-called experts on this site, no extremley little of the matter and are just having a cheap shot . I didnt see anyone having cheap shots at Indonesian and Sri Lanken goverments over the boxing day events ( who are both members of the top 20 most corrupt goverments in the world)

AS I have explained once before this disater has absoultley nothing to do with gloabl warming and even less with the tempretures of the sea in the gulf of mexico , read my above post,. this disaster was man -made but not to-do with global warming

The only problem with people saying that not all muslims are Suicide bombers is completley correct however relativly naive. I have recently completed a 3rd degree theses on the links between globalisation and terrorism and interviwed many of the Islamic community. A good 80% said that these people are nutcases and one offs however I came across two young gentlemaen who have informed me that they have given up there religion due there communities backing of terrorist funding even taking place in mosques , one young man who i interviwed told me that Drugs imported from Pakisatn /afghanisatn are been sold to white kids and much of the proceeds in funding terrorist activity in this country. He went on to say that whilst many of his local community did not agree with what was going on they both sympathisised with ideology and would not inform the police as " another muslim would never grass another brother or sister in ". This is shown by the lack co-opertion that has been shown after the events of the Leeds four

People in the country are worse to there counterparts in america, In this country peoples political alligience is set in Stone and no matter what the labour party does they will still vote for them , some fellow voters are scared of anything right from centre, so vote for labour as its " my father voted labour so I will do the same"

Its to do with the the sea reaching a certain tempreture off the coast of western afriaca and a certain amount of magnetic gravatational pull that makes the clouds swirl then you need a cool depression to mix with this system and youve got yourself a hurracaine. Going back to the global warming debate its like a scientists cop out to blame everting on global warming , the fact of the matter is that the cities natural defence the marshes have been destroyed and in there place have been built hard impermiable surfces where the water has nowhere to go + the fact New Orleans along with Bangledesh and Holland is the most at risk place to live in the case of coastal or inland flooding. The area should never have been built on to the extent it has, and to keep building on this flood basin in the 21st century with knowledge and technology we have is quite disgusting

heard Mcgill may play with either martyn / hayden been dropped with watson coming in at 6. and dropping kaspa and tait. Big risk for me If england bat first the leggies will be nulified on a very very flat oval wicket ( the flatest wicket in england ) it all depends on the toss

Its got absoultley nothing to do with global warming, its the fact that a large uraban concrete Jungle has been built on a basin-shape topography , which is prown to flooding via rivers and is in the gulf of mexico hurracaine prone zone. + the yanks have drained the only natural protection from flooding been the marshes in order to built more concrete structures, Its a trajedy whtas happened but was inevatable that force 4/5 storm would devastate the area

SSN have reported that Mcgrath is a serious doubt for the oval , which is expected to be another batsmans pardise

"Give us £100 odd million to spend on "top" players and we'll have a chance to play the sort of attractive football that Chelsea and Arsenal play. That ain't gonna happen, so unfortunately they’d better get used to our "style". We'll not be alone". chelsea have spent close on £500 million on transfers and wages in the last 32 months yet they still play defensive unattractive football, they resulted to long ball tactics in the champs league and were lucky to beat bayern with there 3 deflected shots