Very true. By the way Plech, have you ever read 'Torture and Democracy' by Darius Rejali? It is a really thought-provoking study, and I think you would enjoy it.
Scores die in Israeli air strikes
- Thread starter IhabX7
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Very true. By the way Plech, have you ever read 'Torture and Democracy' by Darius Rejali? It is a really thought-provoking study, and I think you would enjoy it.
The IRA never wanted the Brits out of the UK mainland. Bad analogy.
I never said Fatah were charming either. Al-Aqsa brigades are hardly a bunch of moderates. They shot my cousin in the face long before Hamas took control.
That doesn't mean Israel didn't make mistakes in the past. Would be better for all involved if the Palestinians don't respond with a set of mistakes of their own.
You, really, are a creepy shit.
This man approached our discussion with kindness and in a spirit of open arms with his Mumbia story. He explained something more than, 'I know a few Jews...'.
He deserved more respect than you blood-stained hand written twisted puke.
If anything, your response shows your racism and unyeilding hate for muslims.
I have tried to engage some of the posters here on their understanding of the historical context of the unfolding events in Gaza (and been ignored).An understanding which seems to determine stances and preclude reasonable debate about possible outcomes or the most beneficial outcome. I think some of the posters have made basic mistakes in the understanding of history and I would ask them to consider the three most obvious ways to fail to at understand history.
1. to judge historical figures by modern standards or their thinking versus modern thinking.
The Historical characters are blind to the future to use our current view to damn them is like blaming a blind man for his lack of sight.
2. To search history for a reason to justify your bias.
All nations have at some point in their history (recent or ancient) acted in a way which today would be abhorrent. If you search long enough and far enough back you can make a case for the destruction of all of them.
The way to tell whether you are doing this is to look at the point you start the clock.
3. If we accept that modern thinking is right then why should the past matter other than as a guide to mistaken thinking. Being prisoners to it only dooms us to repeat it. Injustices of the past were real, continuing them or trying to rectify them in the present just perpetuates suffering.
Put it this way, if my great grandfather butchered most of your entire family a hundred years ago. Killing my son won't bring them back or right the wrong.
1. to judge historical figures by modern standards or their thinking versus modern thinking.
The Historical characters are blind to the future to use our current view to damn them is like blaming a blind man for his lack of sight.
2. To search history for a reason to justify your bias.
All nations have at some point in their history (recent or ancient) acted in a way which today would be abhorrent. If you search long enough and far enough back you can make a case for the destruction of all of them.
The way to tell whether you are doing this is to look at the point you start the clock.
3. If we accept that modern thinking is right then why should the past matter other than as a guide to mistaken thinking. Being prisoners to it only dooms us to repeat it. Injustices of the past were real, continuing them or trying to rectify them in the present just perpetuates suffering.
Put it this way, if my great grandfather butchered most of your entire family a hundred years ago. Killing my son won't bring them back or right the wrong.
It's a stupid point anyway. Going by the logic, no country exists.
You, really, are a creepy shit.
This man approached our discussion with kindness and in a spirit of open arms with his Mumbia story. He explained something more than, 'I know a few Jews...'.
He deserved more respect than you blood-stained hand written twisted puke.
If anything, your response shows your racism and unyeilding hate for muslims.
I did find it to be one of the most distasteful posts I have read on this RedCafe and now I understand why because of your post. One man tells a vulnerable, touching story and the other responds with pure cuntery.
Holyland Red is currently the most disgusting poster on RedCafe, IMO.
Shockingly fecked up response.
Well put.
Anyone who doesn't know what will eventually happen if you continually attack Israel like Hamas have been doing is living in a different reality to the rest of the world.
I doubt that the Israeli military action will do more than provide a temporary respite from attacks but that is rather besides the point.
While clearly I dont think much of HolylandReds posts (and hopefully he reciprocates) he is understandably influenced by actually living in Israel.
I wont condemn him for being that.
In any conflict (and the Mid East is a classic example) nobody can be 100% right or wrong.
Nations act in accordance with their self interest as much as idealism.
Idealism is a luxury when the very existence of your nation and loved ones is at risk (especially bearing in mind historic precedents to which Israelis are sensitive....it wont happen again!)
What I do deplore (and I wont single out any individual) is the demonising of the other side (Palestinian or Israeli) to the point where they are deemed lesser people, with lesser feelings, less regard for their childrens safety.
It is a nasty, grubby, brutish war..........and sadly it has made normally decent people nasty, grubby and brutish.
Which is why I see only a bad end.
Neither side has any redeeming feature
- nothing to understand at all really. Here is what I do understand: he called a spade a spade. .... its just good to know where he and his mob stand on these sorts of matters and is a good insight for all of us into understanding how these people who 'actually live in Israel' think and feel. he is free to express what he chooses.
I have no condemnation for this type of person. he is not worthy even of that and would take no comfort whatsoever in any 'reciprocation' that he might offer, though I doubt very much that that will happen anyway..
admiral intent but totally lacking in any comprehension of the historical context. How did this historic conversation move from "Palestinians losing their homes, land, dignity and right to self govern" (the origins of the conflict) to now protecting 'Israel's very existence of their (illegal) nation'?
Try and they, you and others might, you will never be able to do this. People talk of a two nation state solution .... its utter nonsense. It will never happen.
Its your right and you have the freedom to deplore what you wish. And that right exists to me too. I am under no obligation to follow the misguided morality which so many on this board (and that is indicative of society at large in the Western world) adhere too.
It is at best a confused and at worst disingenuous morality, seeking to shift the question that should and will one day be answered ,to a question that they want answered which is driven by self interest.
Very well put, the Israeli's are behaving as a nasty grubby and brutish people and it comes very naturally to its leadership.
As I have stated again and again and will continue to do so with conviction to whoever cares to listen, Palestinians can only REACT to an aggressor who came in, took his land and today subjugates with disdain and complete impunity.
The Torah itself says 'though shalt take an eye for an eye', How else do you expect Palestinians to respond? We can go around these circles for days if you wish, its been doing for so 60+ years so we can carry on a few more days. But one day it will end. And Palestine and its people will get back what is rightly there's.
FitzJames, appreciate your post, none of the above is personal and there are always many sides on a debate. I am where I am. But in this instance, I know what is right and what is wrong and am flabbergasted that people on here defend the actions of Israel RIGHT NOW when a shameful chapter of the human story plays out before us.
In the end, none of what any of us says actually matters because the decisions have already been taken by others. All one can try and do on forums like this one is deal with ones own conscience. And whilst mine is greiving it also knows it is in the right place and has the moral high-ground. And its small victories like that keep me going. I'd just like all here at least to go through that introspection so this becomes more than just 'time pass on a blog' and then maybe just maybe have some empathy for what is really going on.
Thanks for reading and listening.
You, really, are a creepy shit.
This man approached our discussion with kindness and in a spirit of open arms with his Mumbia story. He explained something more than, 'I know a few Jews...'.
He deserved more respect than you blood-stained hand written twisted puke.
If anything, your response shows your racism and unyeilding hate for muslims.
'blood-stained hand written twisted puke' ... that is some fantastic copy writing skills there mate!
Do you work in the advertising industry like me? If not maybe you should consider copy writing... I'm being serious!!
'blood-stained hand written twisted puke' ... that is some fantastic copy writing skills there mate!
Do you work in the advertising industry like me? If not maybe you should consider copy writing... I'm being serious!!
Actually, I've come up with a name for a bottled water company that will hit the shelves in the coming year.
Can't say what it is, as it is still going through the copywrite process.
Also came up with a TV show titled 'Inkredible Journeys' ~ a traveling tattoo show. Midway through the pitching process I found out that the A&E channel has stollen my idea and begun production (Soon to be 'Tattoo Highway'). I blame my lazy-ass agent, but it's really a matter of not having the funds. Someone else had the money, I didn't.
But yeah, I'm considering a career move into the advert business.
Thanks for the kind compliments, though.
Israel force 110 Palestinians into house and then started shelling it...
Israel 'shelled crowded house'
09/01/2009 12:05 - (SA)
Jerusalem - The United Nations on Friday cited witnesses saying Israeli forces evacuated about 110 Palestinians to a house which they then repeatedly shelled 24 hours later, killing about 30 people.
It said that "according to several testimonies, on 4 January Israeli foot soldiers evacuated approximately 110 Palestinians into a single-residence house in Zeitun (half of whom were children) warning them to stay indoors.
"Twenty-four hours later, Israeli forces shelled the home repeatedly, killing approximately 30."
The UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) called it "one of the gravest incidents since the beginning of operations" by Israeli forces in Gaza on December 27.
"Those who survived and were able walked two kilometres to Salah Ed Din road before being transported to hospital in civilian vehicles.
Three children, the youngest of whom was five months old, died upon arrival at the hospital," OCHA said in a report on the situation in the battered Gaza Strip.
Asked for comment an Israeli military spokesperson said the allegation was being investigated as were other claims that civilians were fired upon and that troops failed to help wounded civilians.
Israel 'shelled crowded house'
09/01/2009 12:05 - (SA)
Jerusalem - The United Nations on Friday cited witnesses saying Israeli forces evacuated about 110 Palestinians to a house which they then repeatedly shelled 24 hours later, killing about 30 people.
It said that "according to several testimonies, on 4 January Israeli foot soldiers evacuated approximately 110 Palestinians into a single-residence house in Zeitun (half of whom were children) warning them to stay indoors.
"Twenty-four hours later, Israeli forces shelled the home repeatedly, killing approximately 30."
The UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) called it "one of the gravest incidents since the beginning of operations" by Israeli forces in Gaza on December 27.
"Those who survived and were able walked two kilometres to Salah Ed Din road before being transported to hospital in civilian vehicles.
Three children, the youngest of whom was five months old, died upon arrival at the hospital," OCHA said in a report on the situation in the battered Gaza Strip.
Asked for comment an Israeli military spokesperson said the allegation was being investigated as were other claims that civilians were fired upon and that troops failed to help wounded civilians.
I've never ever seen "you are talking utter bullshit" put so politely.
You obviously have impeccable manners and are a credit to your mother who has obviously raised you very well! I take it that you are referring to me.
Ok, lets have a go of it then. The problem here is that you can start your understanding from when the dispute started (Palestine suffering a forceful insertion of an invading population into a land that did not belong to them) or from where Israel now wants to move the debate (We are here now, please forget what rights you had and tolerate that we are living on land that we forcefully took from you).
And so when you speak of 'beneficial outcome', it all depends from where you start and whom 'should benefit'. I happen to start my understanding from the original problem and would seek that the Palestinians have the 'most beneficial solution' that solves their legitimate grievances.
That is an incredibly arrogant statement.
History is what it is and is fraught with interpretation, agenda, emotion, bias and manipulation to achieve ones own agenda. I feel that every day when I see how my own beautiful faith system, Islam, is abused equally by those who claim to belong to the religion and those who do not, both choosing to interpret its history in any which way that helps further their own agenda.
Not quite sure what you mean here Bill and would appreciate if you could expand further. Until then, I would still guess that your definition of 'modern' and mine will almost certainly be different.
This entire episode starts at the end of the 2nd world war when the Jewish people were devastated by Hitlers European ethnic cleansing programme. At the end of the war, a 'new home' was required for these displaced people. The 'new home' that was chosen and awarded to them was done so without any consideration for the people whose homes were being offered. It was a most contradictory decision, given that the western world that just cured itself from a bout of ethnic cleansing to then blatantly sow the seeds for another one to erupt. But hindsight tells us why:
Again, lets go back and try and remember the mood. This decision was sponsored by my very own British government. One who has mastered the skills of 'divide, rule and conquer' which by then has seeped into his national consciousness and culture, whose cunning for creating societal tension was a critical part of its strategy when running its empire, who suddenly realized that it could no longer be visible world power but could remain one behind the scenes if he could 'leave his foot in the tackle and twist it for lasting damage before he removed his boot.'
The world remains littered with these calculated decisions and struggles to resolve them. A few examples: By creating borders that are straight lines literally with a pencil and ruler when 'creating' countries across Africa which are the source for much of the conflict today in the continant, ensuring that the Asian sub continent would never find peace (India, Pakistan and Kashmir + India, Pakistan and East Pakistan (Bangladesh since 1971 when 3 million of its population were slaughtered in its fight for independence) and last but not least, leaving this 'little present' behind for the Middle East to deal with.
Our British government was very clever. With full knowledge that it was the discovery of gun powder which had allowed this tiny irrelevant piece of land to become the worlds most powerful force for over 100 years, they ensured that once Europe had found its peace after the 2nd world war, there should still be enough conflict to go round so that it could continue to innovate in its discovery of 'gun powder' and so still rule behind the scenes and benefit commercially.
While we are talking about history start points, and do let me know the start point you think we should start from, let speculate about future history abit shall we? What will happen to "Israel's legitimacy' once the oil runs out in the Middle East. I wonder, I wonder, I wonder. Its a thought that is dominating much time in Israeli intellectual think tanks and rightly so.
For so so so many reasons, I do not think 'modern thinking' is right.
Anyway, whose 'modern' are you talking about? European countries who pillaged and raped in the name of colonisation, modern day America who lied to the worlds foremost forum of leaders and illegally invaded a country which has now been ruined? Does 'modern' mean the policies that countries like mine, the UK, have pursued making it almost like a modern day Babylon land of immorality, depraved excess and the total destruction of common and universal human values or does 'modern' mean that is excusable to target and murder UN humanitarian aid workers like the Israeli's have done in the past few days? Indeed, when does 'modern' start given mankind has been on this planet for at least 7000 years and more if you believe in the big bang theory.
no it wouldn't.
But If I were a Palestian I might be curious as to why I lived in something akin to a refugee camp or shanty town whilst those who butchered my great grandfather lived in the palatial paradise that is Tel Aviv (I don't know this for a fact but am told by relaible sources and seen the pictures - the closest I ever got to to Israel was border control in Palestine - it was the most intimidating, violent without being violent and corrosive experience I have ever been through - makes even sitting in the Kop with a United shirt on feel like a walk in the park).
I'd wonder day and night about why these people could get away with what they had done. I would wonder why if they have started a war against me, they are supplied with weapons from the most powerful countries in the world and my guys had the fight with stick and stones. I would wonder why when my sons and neighbours engage in this war they are called 'terrorists' whilst the oppressive regime whom my brothers were fighting and call themselves soldiers target civilians and kill humanitarian workers and it be accepted as 'nuisance and unavoidable occurrence of war.'
No, killing another mans children would never bring back what I had lost. But I would spend alot of time think about why it happened and why nothing was ever done about it.
I'm just guessing that Palestinians spend part of everyday thinking about these sorts of things.
You, really, are a creepy shit.
This man approached our discussion with kindness and in a spirit of open arms with his Mumbia story. He explained something more than, 'I know a few Jews...'.
He deserved more respect than you blood-stained hand written twisted puke.
If anything, your response shows your racism and unyeilding hate for muslims.
ffs
ffs
what's your point?
Very good points, except that they are not based in fact. The British had already left South Asia when Pakistan and its borders were carved out of what had formerly been the British colony of India. The British didn't set these two people against each other by drawing lines, they're at each others throats for reasons of their own.
As for the "fight for independence" of the Bangladeshis, it had feck all to do with the British. Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) wanted independence from West Pakistan (today, Pakistan). And although the Pakistanis were of the same ethnicity, and had the same Islamic faith, they butchered, tortured, and raped their way through Bangladesh, forcing 8-10 million people to flee to safety in India as refugees. The carnage only ended because the Indian army rolled in and kicked the shit out of the Pakistanis, thus enabling Bangladesh to become an independent state.
The British didn't have to go about "ensuring the that the Asian sub continent would never find peace", as you put it. The locals were perfectly capable of doing so on their own, as they are in every other corner of the globe. I suggest that you brush up on your history a bit before you start making grand arguments about how Europeans have caused all the conflict in the world in a diabolical plot to ensure global supremacy. It is undeniable that during the colonial period, Europeans inflicted a great deal of suffering on the peoples they colonized. But if Europe had never thawed out from the last Ice Age, and been a barren wasteland incapable of sustaining human life, the world would still be full of murder, death and horror, and people with skin of all the different shades of humanity would be at each others throats.
I do love it how Israelis refer to the Palestinians as savage terrorists but then they seek to defend and justify the likes of Irgun and Lehi who were committing heinous acts against Britons and Arabs alike in the Palestinian mandate whilst we the British were struggling against the Nazis in north Africa and the Russians were hanging on at Stalingrad- Lehi even collaborated with the Nazis whilst their Jewish brethren in Europe were being exterminated.
These are the very foundations the State of Israel is based upon.
These are the very foundations the State of Israel is based upon.
I agree with you- what I want to know is what would have happened on the sub-continent had we of not split it up? There would have been wave upon wave of genocide creating the World's biggest anarchical state. Furthermore they forced us out, we had no option but to leave in a hurry.
You're usually spot on Chris, but on this occasion I beg to differ. I'm Indian myself, and half of my family was displaced in 1947.
The Partition of India was the partition of the British Indian Empire which led to the creation, on August 14, 1947 and August 15, 1947, respectively, of the sovereign states of the Dominion of Pakistan (later Islamic Republic of Pakistan and People's Republic of Bangladesh) and the Union of India (later Republic of India).
Wiki
I knew I'd be wrong about something big in there. Although I still maintain that there would be strife between those two neighbors regardless of who drew the boundary. Still, a little embarrassed.
Edited.
You, really, are a creepy shit.
This man approached our discussion with kindness and in a spirit of open arms with his Mumbia story. He explained something more than, 'I know a few Jews...'.
He deserved more respect than you blood-stained hand written twisted puke.
If anything, your response shows your racism and unyeilding hate for muslims.
Did I miss something?
To be fair, we lived in relative peace for hundreds of years prior to the partition.
The more this bloody battle prolongs in Gaza, more tough for Israel to get out of the tangles. They cannot survive for long taking on the entire Islamic world as a whole, at least the angle these attacks normally gets projected, and could run out luck on the longer run.
No mate..its not a relative peace but an absolute peace. India were ruled by Mughals yet there weren't any religious conflict as such, its only the British divide and rule policy that triggered factionlism.
Still when the partition was announced a larger percentage of Muslims preferred to stay in India rather migrating over to Pakistan. Indian secularism and soverignity is some thing other nations can learn from, we dont drive our constitution or values based on religion, its the nationalism that calls all the shots over religion. There were some hassles in the 60's when family planning and abortion were introduced as an option, when both Hindu and the Muslim clerics declared it as a conflict against their religious ethics, once basic amineties and livelihood became important factors hardly any of these dumbos bothered prattling over that from the 80's. Any country that projects religion as the front end should implode in due course.
Nehru himself was a failed administrator to start with, one of the worst rulers ever to rule India with unclear foreign policies and outdated ethics like Pachasheel that ended up India losing a great land mass to China. There was one horrible letter written by Churchill to Nehru, that raised concerns over Jinnah's health and wanted this guy to take over the entire subcontinent, as our friendly neighbhours lacked leadership and he would push the British government to make a move. Had it really happened Indian subcontinent as a whole would've ended up as a landmine.
Nehru dynasty in India barring Indira Ghandi's reign gave raise to plutocracy in the country and all they wanted to stick with the Non Alignment Movement and it ended up with conflicting foreign policies. Indian National Congress is the reason the democracy is rotten to the core these days.
Well, that would depend on the type of response wouldn't it? If Israel had responded by nuking Gaza, would that warrant international condemnation? Do you see why some might have trouble with the current response, which is basically killing children left, right and center?
Obviously Israel cannot tolerate a constant flow of rockets into its territory, but the amount of atrocious acts (shelling civillian shelters, bombing UN schools, firing at UN aid convoys...)they are committing (accidental or not) simply isn't acceptable. Also, it hasn't really stopped the rockets has it?
sammsky, I am sure the foreign policy of Bangladesh slowly started taking a U turn after the assasination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. I am sure you won't find Pakistani hatred in your parts these days
That is only a half-story though surely? The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem met with Hitler during the War and propagandised for them, so both sides met with the Nazis - and Lehi wanted to save the European Jewry from the death camps and wanted them transferred to Palestine.
If you go though sub continental history, you will note that Hindu And Muslim had never had any major wars OVER RELIGION for over 1000 years. There was the odd marauding Mogul prince who set up his Islamic empires, but even here, they went to great length to retain harmony and allow people the freedom to practice their own faith. There are many many examples of Hindu princes taking on Muslim wives and Muslim princes taking on Hindu wives to send a strong signal that religious turmoil was not the thing that they sought. Unfortunately for you given the point you are trying to assert, the civil war in the years leading upto the partition of India in 1947 is the only instance of mass scale tension between religious communities for many many centuries.
You ask what 'India' (the 4 countries that make up todays sub continent) would be like today had it not been broken with much encouragement and maneuvering from the British. Well, Jinnah claimed that the Muslims could never have fair governance in a country that had a Hindu majority. But his mathematics was flawed as today, the combined Muslim populations of India (180million), Pakistan (170 million) & Bangladesh (150 million) equals some 500 million people. Compare that with a modern day Hindu population in India of about 800 million and suddenly, one can quickly see that that their is no real minority, that a truly representative government that represented all faiths could have been formed and in fact there was no need to break up.
My opinion (derived from leading economists at The University of Lahore and the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, a top 10 global MBA school) is that if it had stayed together then todays India, containing 1.6 billion people would have its citizens living happily side by side (as they had done for many centuries before and then were manipulated by the politicians by the religion card). India and Pakistan would not have wasted all those trillions of dollars in protecting themselves from each other and going to war 3times, and they would have concentrated their talents, intellect and energies building roads, schools, hospitals and getting its people out of poverty and developed into a developed economy. Its a wicked thing that Britain did. And yet amateur historians like yourself and 'Chris H' proclaim otherwise.
My father would travel all across Asia as a young man and says that Lahore, Bombay, Delhi, Calcutta and Dhaka were all beautiful cities in the early 1960's and when he compared them to cities like Singapore, Kuala Lumpar and Bangkok which he also had the opportunitoes to vist he found these Soth East Asian cities to be provincial, poverty stricken and lacking of any culture and class. And yet in 30 years how the fortunes of these cities and the countries they are in have changed.
Still, 40 years later than planned, all 3 countries now seem to have passed the tipping point for economic development and the future looks rosier today than ever.
Your view that 'There would have been wave upon wave of genocide creating the world's biggest anarchical state' smacks of arrogance and gives a just a small insight into just how ignorant you actually are.
I agree. Those days are way past. That's not the point I was making. I was just educating this gentleman that in fact, Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are indeed different people
Nothing else insinuated !http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/reports/Jeningrad_What_the_British_Media_Said.asp
I'd suggest not believing everything you hear/read on the news/newspapers. Civilians are killed in the conflict, which is regrettable, and could have been avoided but for the constant bombardment of South Israel in late December.
You, really, are a creepy shit.
This man approached our discussion with kindness and in a spirit of open arms with his Mumbia story. He explained something more than, 'I know a few Jews...'.
He deserved more respect than you blood-stained hand written twisted puke.
If anything, your response shows your racism and unyeilding hate for muslims.
Wow, your insult's are really funny, you're so cool!
As for samssky's post, I did not get the impression he approached our discussion with 'kindness' since some of the things he said are clearly false and generally I had the feeling he is taking an extremely anti-Israel position. The fact that one of his friends was Jewish doesn't automatically give him the authority to spit on Israelis and insult them. It's not only low but hypocritical as well (as Plech already pointed out).
Is there some kind of international law or some kind of RedCafe etiquette somewhere which says one is not allowed to take 'an extremely anti-Israel position'
I cant take you guys seriously anymore. You just too funny. Not. You make some 'big claims' there based on your 'impressions' and 'feelings' that 'i spit' out 'clearly false' things. Wow there is alot of hypothesis, interpretation and reinterpretation going into your accusations there! Im sure there is some fact left in there somewhere.
I'll tell you for the last time, stop playing the 'victim card' and lets have the debate on the morality of what is going on right now. I know your problem and I almost sympathise with you... its because you have no basis for a coherent argument, you know what is happening is wrong, and you know that I know that you know. And so to stop this being exposed quite so forcefully as I am doing, so the same old 'victim' stuff comes out. You tried it a few pages back with your spectacular 'eejit' interpretation accusation Trust me, you're not very good at it!
Anyway, please, please, please stop whining, you're beginning to remind me of John Terry.