No they're not. Don't rest your case yet.
Has Mr Conn or Mr Sutcliffe told you what to have for breakfast yet?
20 minutes with Assem Allam
- Thread starter Imahappypsycho
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
No they're not. Don't rest your case yet.
Has Mr Conn or Mr Sutcliffe told you what to have for breakfast yet?
Then wats the point of anyone trying?...negative dicks should all be shot at dawn......just saying like before i win my next thousand!
This argument comes around now and then, and it is again being offered by Canada.
It's an internet forum, people have different opinions. All opinions are allowed and non have been 'censored'. I honestly do not understand what Canada and others are trying to say/ why they are saying it.
If you think we can get to a stage where someone answers the OP with 'Hmm, coherent argument my good man, and you've raised many thoughtful points, my response is this...please also accept my opinions' - then you're living in cloud cuckoo land.
It's an internet forum, people have different opinions. All opinions are allowed and non have been 'censored'. I honestly do not understand what Canada and others are trying to say/ why they are saying it.
If you think we can get to a stage where someone answers the OP with 'Hmm, coherent argument my good man, and you've raised many thoughtful points, my response is this...please also accept my opinions' - then you're living in cloud cuckoo land.
But now i must flush, and get on with my life till the next toilet break. See you at Ferriby some time. I'll be the one carrying the YP under one arm and a copy of the Guardian shaped as a 'Napolean hat' on my head. Having just wiped my arse on the Hull Daily Mail of course. Don't you just love the Hull menality?
Total fairy land ****e!
Not everyone sings at 19.04 at away matches, most do but certainly not all. Not everyone has a CTWD scarf and not everyone thinks the sun shines out of the arse of CTWD or Assem Allam. CTWD is a minority and We Say No is hard to hear above the tutting in the West Stand Upper. We are not a united fan base, that is delusional. Our fan base is fractured. Whilst we do have a common support of the team and manager, the rest is broken.
The poster gave an honest account of his chat with Assem Allam and how it has made him rethink his own view. Good for him, I don't share his view entirely but he has every right to express it..
Not trying to nitpick here, but we (or at least I) have no idea if it is an honest account at all.
Sigh. This is my point. You get bollocks like this on Internet forums, but no one in real life actually wants to change the name or thinks it's OK to keep having a go at your customers. I go to games home and away and I know full well what goes on there. I remember WBA and Middlesbrough in particular last year where it was a complete sea of scarves aloft at 19'04". Some people on here seem determined to convince people they've got 50 mates who all love Allam Tigers but at games it doesn't exist. The fanbase isn't united online, but in real life it most definitely is. There's 0 songs about wanting to change the name and 0 opposition to the chanting in protest to the name change. Your claim that the West Upper are all name changers just seems like a lazy stereotype.
Wanting to change the name simply isn't a valid view. In a whole year of discussing it on here we haven't had one coherent argument in favour of it, because there isn't one to be made. There's been plenty of bollocks implying we'll be relegated if we don't change the name, plenty of conspiracy bollocks about the fans wanting to control everything. People who insist on posting this crap for attention deserve any criticism they get for it. It's just Internet bollocks. If you think I'm wrong then start a We Say Yes Allam chant on Thursday and see how far you get.
"Hmm, coherent argument my good man, and you've raised many thoughtful points, my response is this...please also accept my opinions - that you're living in cloud f**oo land".
AA is an eccentric and seems to be the type who shifts his stance on a lot of things from day to day depending on his mood. Sometimes he seems a benevolent father figure other times he seems a cantankerous despot.
Maybe the OP expected the latter AA and encountered the former.
Agreed. I don't think anybody said he shouldn't say what he thinks. We just disagree with his reasoning.
I don't recognize your name on here. What was it on Tiger Chat. Then I'll be able to answer your strange comment on my "unique view of censorship and debate".
Lying...excuse me Peter!!. Did you even read my original post. The whole point of my post was AGAINST CENSORSHIP of the original posters post because he was expressing a pro-Allam thought that is anathema to the CTWD gang on here. As for DISCUSSION...that is exactly what I am for. What I'm against is shutting down discussion by characterizing opposition arguments pro-Allam as invalid etc on the grounds that they are ill-informed, nonsensical, or held by an insignificant minority. Unfortunately that seems to be where we are.
Because it might give me some perspective on how he arrived at that extraordinary conclusion. My answer is that my" UNIQUE view of censorship and debate" is that I'm totally against the former and for the latter. Is that unique? I would be much happier if CTWD subscribed to the same philosophy.
