Liverpool FC Forum

by **dawson99** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:42 am

Yes, and damned good flogging.
Everyone knows s@int eats pasties

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:32 pm

dawson99 wrote:Yes, and damned good flogging.
Everyone knows s@int eats pasties

Quite right too Dawson

by **Bad Bob** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:49 pm

babu wrote:as far as I can see, he called S@int a pie eater and dragged one of leon's old Houllier threads out as wierd neil style attack on bigmick, s@int & stu.

Wasn't nasty at all, just weird & interesting.

That deserves a ban?

Hi Babu,

As ever, there's more to the incident than that. In any event, I envision this as one of those short-term sin bin bans that people have been suggesting we try. Neil needs a few days on the sidelines to sort himself out and remember that this is a forum for football discussion, where all supporters are welcome to air their views--even if they aren't always 100% positive about things and even if they don't have a Merseyside postcode. If he can accept that reality, he'll be welcomed back.

by **babu** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:23 pm

ok. fair enough

apologises to the real world for posting this here & bob.

nothing to see people, move on.

by **dawson99** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:25 pm

move along, move along

by **GOAT_2.0** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:40 pm

(.)(.)

Boobies.

by **fivecups** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:16 am

Bad Bob wrote:
babu wrote:as far as I can see, he called S@int a pie eater and dragged one of leon's old Houllier threads out as wierd neil style attack on bigmick, s@int & stu.

Wasn't nasty at all, just weird & interesting.

That deserves a ban?

Hi Babu,

As ever, there's more to the incident than that. In any event, I envision this as one of those short-term sin bin bans that people have been suggesting we try. Neil needs a few days on the sidelines to sort himself out and remember that this is a forum for football discussion, where all supporters are welcome to air their views--even if they aren't always 100% positive about things and even if they don't have a Merseyside postcode. If he can accept that reality, he'll be welcomed back.

Bob,

I still can't see what Neil was banned for mate.

He's been a good and humorous poster on here for over 3 years and shouldn't be banned lightly. These long-termers are the guys we should be wanting to keep in the forum.

by **Judge** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:53 am

neil wrote:

bob said to look in real world for neils ban

all i can see is

posted by him and a question to nanny ?

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:06 am

Judge wrote:
neil wrote::D

bob said to look in real world for neils ban

all i can see is posted by him and a question to nanny ?

I think Bob meant look in here for his explanation of the ban Judge

Although he should have been banned for spamming ....... posting just a smilie ... tut tut

by **Judge** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 am

s@int wrote:
Judge wrote:
neil wrote::D

bob said to look in real world for neils ban

all i can see is posted by him and a question to nanny ?

I think Bob meant look in here for his explanation of the ban Judge

Although he should have been banned for spamming ....... posting just a smilie ... tut tut

oops

by **Judge** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:12 pm

babu wrote:ok. fair enough

apologises to the real world for posting this here & bob.

nothing to see people, move on.

haha me hearties

by **Bad Bob** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:21 pm

fivecups wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:
babu wrote:as far as I can see, he called S@int a pie eater and dragged one of leon's old Houllier threads out as wierd neil style attack on bigmick, s@int & stu.

Wasn't nasty at all, just weird & interesting.

That deserves a ban?

Hi Babu,

As ever, there's more to the incident than that. In any event, I envision this as one of those short-term sin bin bans that people have been suggesting we try. Neil needs a few days on the sidelines to sort himself out and remember that this is a forum for football discussion, where all supporters are welcome to air their views--even if they aren't always 100% positive about things and even if they don't have a Merseyside postcode. If he can accept that reality, he'll be welcomed back.

Bob,

I still can't see what Neil was banned for mate.

He's been a good and humorous poster on here for over 3 years and shouldn't be banned lightly. These long-termers are the guys we should be wanting to keep in the forum.

See what I wrote in Kharhaz's "banned" thread, mate, so we can leave the Real World out of board politics. BTW, I never ban people lightly.

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:43 pm

Getting a bit like an easter egg hunt now Bob with a trail of clues to different threads

by **Judge** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:51 pm

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 3:27 pm

UFO claim over wind farm damage

Dale Vince of Ecotricity says there is no explanation

UFO enthusiasts are claiming damage to a Lincolnshire wind farm turbine was caused by a mystery aircraft.

The turbine at Conisholme lost one 66ft (20m) blade and another was badly damaged in the early hours of Sunday.

County councillor for the area Robert Palmer said he had seen a "round, white light that seemed to be hovering".

Ecotricity, which owns the site, said while investigations continued they were not ruling anything out - but the extent of damage was "unique".

The turbine is one of 20 at the Conisholme site, which has been only been fully operational since April 2008. The broken blade has been recovered and is being examined.

Local ufologists said they had received many reports of activity in the area and had teams searching for clues.

To make one of these blades fall off, or to bend it, takes a lot

Dale Vince, Ecotricity

Mr Palmer said: "I actually saw a white light - a round, white light that seemed to be hovering.

"That is the only way I can explain it - it wasn't a flare-like light - it was just round, white light with a slight red edge to it that seemed to be over the wind turbines."

Dale Vince, founder of Ecotricity, said the company was keeping an open mind about the incident.

"We don't have an explanation at the moment as to what the cause was," he said.

"We have been crawling all over it and have sent bits off for analysis to see if we can work out what caused it.

"Until we have some idea, some plausible explanation that it was not a UFO, I don't think we should rule it out".

'Low-flying aircraft'

He added: "To make one of these blades fall off, or to bend it, takes a lot."

Russ Kellett, from the Flying Saucer Bureau, said witnesses had told him of activity in the area.

"One saw what they at first thought was a low-flying aircraft on the Saturday evening and another heard a loud banging in the early hours of Sunday," he said.

"This is the second most reports of activity we have ever had - I have had over 30 phone calls and emails.

"To hit two of the blades, any object must have been about 170ft long."

The Ministry of Defence said it was not looking into the incident.

A spokesman said: "The MoD examines reports solely to establish whether UK airspace may have been compromised by hostile or unauthorised military activity.

"Unless there's evidence of a potential threat, there's no attempt to identify the nature of each sighting reported."

Ecotricity said it hoped to have the turbine back in action within a week.

link to bbc online

Liverpool FC Forum

The Real World - The Dog and Gorilla

Who is online