Most of John Henry's companies are regulated by the US government. So its not that different really. I reckon we should agree to disagree though, we obviously have different opinions on what's expected from footballers on social networking sites and in the public eye and we'll never agree with eachother on this point.
we have proved you wrong countless times the official conspiracy theory is widely accepted as bullshit, they have changed their story 4 or 5 time on 4 or 5 different subjects simply because they have been proven wrong. you dont even know what you are blindly defending, and the same goes for most arsepiece official nuts who havent even read the full story they believe. bunch of sheep, follow the masses, the minute more than half the world beleives inside job you will jump ship you little rodent
There's no point speculating over hypothetical situations. We can only discuss what actually happened, not what might've happened in a different situation.
thats as maybe, but if we are being honest here, i strongly suspect that this issue would not have been raised had he towed the official line. i feel its his opinion thats on trial here, and i believe that that is wrong. for the record, i dont belive what Nathan says, but i do belive he has the right to say it.
oh really? i thought the censorship of the written or spoken word had more to do with the nazis and the communists. i must have got that seriously wrong. ever read 1984? "how many fingers am i holding up"? (thats not an insult by the way, just a quote from the book)
and by the way, nick griffin is typical of the people i oppose the most. he hides behind HIS freedom to speak freely, but opposes those that wish to speak against him. his opinions are easily disproved.
suggest you do bud. look, in a free society people have the right to think and say what they like. now i know it opens the door for all kinds of extreme views, but thats just the way it is. out of a healthy open debate, the truth emerges, i truely believe this. where do you draw the line, who decides what is acceptable? curtailing freedom of speech is, in my opinion, a very dangerous road to travel down.