millwall32

I'm seriously thinking of getting a snall Millwall tatoo myself..probably the wrong thgread to say that in though.

I cant quite remember, how did we get to find out who exactly is in there? Was at home doing nothing today and had a look at the website and that doesn't seem to say. Did we have a mole on the staff or soemthing? Cant find it in the thread.

higgins looks as rough as f**k in these photos http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/ho...ne-Higgins.html anyone think he should be on next year's list? if nothing else there's regualr news of exactly how he's doing...

I was realy surprised to hear that he was still alive.

That's were the "none of the above" option is for. Yes, I know but I think of that as a "spoiled ballot" and I didn't fancy that. Incidentally, I like the ot by MPFC above. Seems to have got death predicting down to a science since I last looked

I wonder why it is that whenever Thatcher is disscused in this forum we always talk about how she effectd the coal industry? Strictly sepaking she didn't close down the coal industry; she ended its subsidy and changed the trade union legislation regarding it. I'm much more bothered by "There's no such thing as society" ,myself.

Hope he's o.k. Heaven and Hell is as good an album a anything they did when Ozzy was in the band.

Go on one of the other two forums I post on http://www.thesnookerforum.com/board/index.php http://www.millwall.vitalfootball.co.uk/fo...tegory-view.asp

i domt think we'll squeeze another one in but i voted for kirk douglas....bit of a guess on my part

I dpnt think that its a quetion of the Brits being unforgiving so much as not being hypocritical at the time of a politician's death. no point in suddenly sayig that she was great if you've always dlsiked her by the way, i dont completely disagree with the lat post (terrible,terrible things happened to mining towns but unsustainable industires are called that for a reason) but i do think that he should get a state fneral for purely historical reasons....three general election victories,first woman p.m. and all that only problem is thatif you give her one you might have to give one to Blair too.

I really liked him in Breaker Morrant

The Daily Mail reports How long did the Queen Mum last once she started watching from a window? I noticed that she wasn't there, but I still think she's going to have a very long dotage.

Three posts between 95th and 96th birthdays says it all really. I think he wants to outlive Thatcher! I've wondered that myself and actually I hope he does. I think he will..... Even though he's been on the list for years without going he's a solid bet

I'm gonna take a guess at Peter O'Toole going next but I am a bit out of practice at death prediting.

That's a bit radical Lardy. I mean, you've dragged this thread back on topic. looks ok for a man in his sixties who's had a huge stroke.

don't know if it counts as "Birthdays, Births, Anniversaries ,etc " but this is my 1000th post in this forum.

I red that Spectator article too. Most recent phot i could find of him

By the way, I think that one of the photos on this site here has Dickie in it. Either the one titled "bar" (he would be the one not in the red jumper), the one titled entertainment or the one at the bottom with the violinist (he would be the one in the front in specs with his hand on his chin). Any thoughts anyone?

Don't think we'll be seeing much of him at the showbiz level in the future either. doesn't even show up on those dreadful clip shows...

I voted for Mccain because I want him to win, but with a heavy heart I have to admit that Obama will probably be the next President.

I must say I do like the post above from St.Peter as it seems to suggest that this thread could turn into a general chit-chat with occasional references to BS' behaviour and conduct thrown in. But can we at least admit that we are very unlikley to ban him and move on to something else?

I've been voting for Ronnie Biggs as the next to go for about three years now,always more in hope than expectation. Still, I did so again and hope this time it comes true...

If, and only if, some of the accusations made about invasion of privacy are true then that might be a good idea.

If homophobia, racism and being prejudist against the mentally challenged isn't enough for you, could we wheel in this prick-o-meter to see what it registers? (Enter Guest) Not to mention bad poetry. And stalkerish sexism, to answer the question seriously. An egregious misuse of Google translate, to answer it otherwise. I know that the things that would be solid reasons are not things that anyone involved is going to want to post in public. Again, it's all just my opinion. I highly doubt anything will come of all this. As I said few posts back I don't personally think that homophobia and racism are, in and of themselves, good reasons for banning him. However the Google translate thing and the details of a PM I recieved from another Deathlister earlier today are , if true, slightly more dodgy areas, crossing the line between merely saying things about people and potentially interfering with their personal well-being. It's nice to finally be getting a picture of what the issues under disscussion are, but I still don't have faintest idea what, if anything, we should do about it.

My quoting Canadian Paul for this post is nothing to do with him (her?) personally but I wnated to use the above post as it sems to be the only place in this thread in which the arguments in favour of banning Banshees Scream are laid out anything like explicitly and clearly. Simply put, they do not ammount to any kind of reason or argument for banning him from the forum.So far as I can tell he has sent private mesages to people who have found them objectionable. There does not seem to be any example of him posting anything directly offensive in the forum itself. Even if there were it would take a massive leap of the imagination and ego to imagine that writing something means that he should be banned. Let us supose that he has hurt someones feelings. Very well, but what does that have do with anyone other than him and the other person in question.It astonishes me when people think they have the right not to have their feelings hurt and that others should ammend their behaviour around their touchy sensetivity. Why not simply read it then ignore it, or reply to it, or disagree with it or whatever you may wish to do. Think about the nature of the forum in which we are all writing. the very nature of suggests a libera; attitude to what should and should not be said. Even if Banshee's were to post something unkind about women in gerneral, the handicapped, or another forum member , is any more or less "offensive" than us offering up estimates on when celebs will die? There has been a lot of talk about banning people latley and since all that has not generated a single cogent argument beyond "I don't like what ____ says/how they say it" I can only assume people are acting out of boredom an/or the wish to be supressive. As I said a few posts back, the voting on this thread appears to be faulty (it's recorded me as having voted when in fact I haven't) but if I were able to cast a vote it would be against banning him. So lets get this right. You sod off for ages, come back and state "There has been a lot of talk about banning people lately" Really? Show me the threads. Now, without wishing to pull your post to pieces ( which wouldnt be too much of an exertion )allow me to get to the point. How would you feel if I called you a"F*****g retard and a Homo? I found it pretty sickening. I dont really feel that having any kind of discussion with you is going to be fruitful TBH, you are so wide of the mark its a joke. As you believe we should not respond or just ignore bigoted, offensive, scumbags, like BS when they are doing what they do naturally (being offensive) perhaps you would care to ignore and not respond to me when I tell you that you signature is, indeed, a statement out of truth. " The mother of Idiots is always pregnant" Yes, she obviously gave birth to you! In answer to your question, if I were called "a F###ing retard and a homo" I will feel insulted, whether I happened to be those things or not. I would then have the option of replying, not replying, ignoring it etc. The fact that someone had called me that would not be a reason for banning them from something. in your post you do not point out how smeone saying it could be a reason for banning them. Also, I did not say that I believed people "should not respond" I said that they could not repsond or respond or whatever takes their fancy. Do you actually have any solid reasons for banning him?