Croydon borough is not an EPL football team registered in the Cayman Islands, it is a borough of London and therefore should receive some money to regenerate after rioting, Crystal Palace is in Croydon, they aren't getting £40m. Once again, Only West Ham followed the directives given, you didn't, no one else did, just us, it's not our fault everyone else was too stupid or up their own arse to actually bother to follow the guidlines of the London LEGACY Development committee who wanted the 2012 Olympic stadium to stand as the monument to it and have Athletics there as it's legacy. Those were the conditions, and west Ham were the only team that offered that. and you're obviously so unbothered by it that your pathetic supporters have tried to have an enquiry, but, despite the BBC plugging it for you as well, you've only managed to gain 0.4% of the populations support. That could be less than the monster raving loony party polled.
I haven't really followed the story behind who got the Olympic stadium and how. I did go to watch the Olympics there though and it is a great stadium for athletics. Having skim read Little Ern's rant I take it that West Ham agreed to keep the running track while Spurs wanted rid of it. Watching football at stadiums with running tracks is **** and a bit 1980's.
You seem to still think that this is just a matter for Spurs supporters to be upset about, it's not. As I've said, this concerns all other premiership clubs. A significant financial advantage has been handed to WHU. It should concern all other premiership clubs. The fact that so few care enough about that is indeed indicative of the apathy that the general public has to how their money is thrown around. As the link I've posted alludes to, this should concern not only all other Premiership,clubs, but the tax paying public in general. As this link shows, the money given is £28mill. It goes to L.B. Haringey. https://www.london.gov.uk/prioritie...nding-programmes/mayors-regeneration-fund/faq
20,000 people signed your petition, half west hams average home gate. Nobody gives a **** except some pathetically jealous twats from North London. Spurs wanted rid of the whole stadium, if they had actually put in a proper bid rather than waste public money by making the LLDC look through a bid that completely ignored almost every stipulation, they may have a point. Most WHU fans wanted to stay at UP, but the decision has been made. what the spectator experience at the OS will be like for football is anyones guess, but the running track will be under the removable seating and won't be visible. It isn't West Hams fault everyone listened to Sebastian Coe and built a white elephant, everyone knew football had to go there, as far as I'm concerned the only inquest there should be is in which people signed off on it and whether they are still in any position of a any authority and collecting a wage courtesy of the taxpayers.
How observant of you! And the Spics, Chinks, etc?? Not to mention those highly amusing hissing noises we get every time we play you morons. It's also exactly the same as black people who may occasionally refer to each other by the 'N' word. That's O.k. For them, but you try it and see what reaction you get!...
Can't say they are two words I would associate exclusively with our fans. Just wondering, how did the song about Adebayors Dad washing elephants go again?
I think plenty would agree. That's avoiding the point, anyway. If I want to call a friend, dickhead, and he knows that's just us pissing about, that's fine. Somebody else does it, not so good!... It's the intent, as much as the words themselves.
The principle is the same. If the person you're calling the name is liable to find it offensive - and you are aware that they will find it offensive, then whatever word you use is just as objectionable.
Funnily enough Lionel Richie is talking about Kanye West using the word "N***er"" right now on the Piers Morgan show. He says it's completely unacceptable. I think getting offended by words or phrases is a bit silly. I certainly wouldn't get upset if someone called me "honkey". But if I did, I certainly wouldn't start using it to address my mates. Black people don't like the word "N***er" so why some of them want to keep the word alive is very odd. The same goes for spuds fans calling themselves "the yid army" then complaining when someone calls them "the yids." Strange behaviour.
Oh right. So, because Lionel Ritchie finds it offensive, then that makes it unacceptable generally? This is getting tedious, but once again, it's personal. If you know, or suspect that that the pejorative you are using is going to, or is liable to cause offense, then that is unacceptable. If Kanye West finds the word acceptable - from, presumably certain sources, then who is Lionel Ritchie to tell him what he should be offended by? Apart from that, WTF are you doing watching that twat Morgan!...
It's a difference of opinion NSIS. A debate. Nothing tedious about it. You are repeating yourself just as much as I am (more so probably). I'd imagine Lionel Richie speaks for many, if not the majority of black people when he says the word is unacceptable regardless of who says it. Kanye West uses the word in his songs - not just in conversations with his mates. He used the word lots of times in his performance at The Brit awards recently. Lots of young, impressionable people, black and white in the audience and watching on TV. This massive pop star. A role model to many, using a forbidden word in front of millions. As I said before. If a word is to be banned, then it has to be banned for everyone.
I would 100% disagree. If Kanye West is cool with the word, then fine. It goes back to what I said earlier, it's what you know or suspect will cause offence that is unacceptable. It's all a matter of intent. Almost any words, when used with malicious intent, can cause deep offence. That doesn't mean those words should be banned for everybody - there wouldn't be many usable words left if that were the case.
