CHOULO19

I know. That's why I said "almost impossible".

Whole Egyptian NT has been in shambles for some time. After becoming the first team to ever win the AFCONs 3 times on the trot they have now failed to qualify for it for the third consecutive time as well.

Well he won't be going away to the AFCONs in Jan. It is almost impossible now for Egypt to reach it now.

Our fans on this forum and on social media in general right now:

I'd take a hard-working Zidane over both

100k/wk was widely reported.

His and RLC's goals: Btw, 3 other Chelsea youth players (5 in total) featured in that game: Aina, Colkett, and Kiwomya.

Are you using the mobile version of the site? Don't think anyone before has had such a problem.

There was the post season matches against City in the states, but last season he had some attitude problems in the sense that he didn't seem to care except in big matches. That's why I said "if he can keep his attitude right". When you take youth players to preseasons or to be on the bench, you choose not just based on talent but also hard work to show the other youngsters that if you work hard enough you could get a chance. Thankfully, I'm reading that this year he's been putting more effort, maybe motivated by the fact that the likes of Brown and Boga and Baker are getting chances and he's not?

Jake Cohen himself then said on Twitter that he was mistaken and if Ian Herbert is saying that the Luiz deal is included, then it is included:

I HATE ginger! In fact, I even hate ginger people

Yup.

If he can keep his attitude right, RLC is BY FAR the most promising of those prospects. Both technically and physically he's superior to all of the others.

Haha. Honestly, I'm not a fan of cinnamon in sweets and pastries, but tea is an exception. It just gives so much warmth and energy in the winter. Would not have guess that you drink that much tea as well. I honestly thought that Lebanese people, and my parents in particular, are just weird that way. It's a matter of habit, I guess. Here it's not very common. Tbh, I'm not a big fan of milk in general; well my stomach isn't, at least.

One and a half spoons of sugar, no milk, and in the winter with cinnamon. Yummm.... We have some English teas here, but they're expensive. We drink this: which is pretty good.

Tea thread? Cool Weird fact, Lebanese people, especially southerners, drink tea even more than British people. My dad drink at least 4-5 cups every day. I drink a couple daily.

Name: smpl Reason: Obvious troll is obvious Punishment: Content moderated permanentlyAbility to create content removed permanently.Suspended permanentlyAlso move to Banned

Still didn't google it or have any idea what it is

And worst part is that you know he won't ever change. We might as well quit while we're ahead...

^^ Again, though, I'm not defending those beliefs or even saying that you have to accept them. I'm saying that you can't deal with all the people that hold those beliefs as criminals, especially when there are so many of them around. We can and should try to change those beliefs but we can't criminalize those who hold them if the reason of why they hold them is purely cultural and sociological.

Sorry if I'm sounding too 'philosophical' about this, but to me, it is at some point a question of morals and the relativity of truth. Anyway, the obvious difference in your comparison is that first, criminals are a very small minority in their society, so even if they are 'born into crime', they are still actually fighting against the moral standards of their society and environment. It is completely different when you are born and every single person you know believes for a fact that homosexuality is a crime and a sin. It is so hard for a single person to change such belief especially when it is related to a religious doctrine. The change has to come collectively (and slowly) for the whole society. The other difference is, crime is not a belief. In fact, morals such as don't steal, don't kill...etc. are universal because they are transferred genetically. No one, even criminals, believes that killing or stealing is right even if they are doing it. Usually they make up excuses that they genuinely believe: "The real criminals are the banks that steal from the people, I'm just a small criminal in comparison" "I was forced into killing to survive, it's society's fault." "They are criminals/killers too, I'm just doing justice"....etc. While sexual freedom is not a belief shared by all. Those people born in such conservative societies genuinely believe that homosexuality is what is immoral. As for the way they express those opinions, meaning how they deal with homosexuals, it's not any more violent or abusive as it was dealt with in most of the west 100 or even 50 years ago! We are so immersed in our current reality that we fail to see even our own history except through the eyes of this moment instead of the reality of that time. It's the curse of being human...

Yes on all of the above. But you're still kinda missing my point. I share all of those beliefs with you, so I can't 'defend' the opposite beliefs, nor is that the point here. You're saying, or rather implying, that because what you said above makes complete sense to you and me it should be 'transferable' as general knowledge and facts to anyone and everyone. But that is not the case. Our cultures and societies have had to go through (often painful) experiences and evolutions to arrive at the current moral standards and ethical norms (well, your societies goes through them, mine just copies off your cultures). But there are A LOT of people living in societies that have not gone trough that evolution or have not been influenced enough by globalization to adapt these norms from the societies that have. You can't blame those people for holding those beliefs even though you find them wrong, because they were born into those beliefs. You just have to hope that the natural (at least to us) evolution of morals and ethics catches up with those sets of beliefs eventually. Regarding people going to the WC in Qatar, I think there will most likely be some kind of compromise because neither will be aiming for or even want to change the beliefs of the others. Qatar does not want to end out an image of itself that it has a backwards barbaric culture and the visitors wouldn't want to piss off the authorities of the country they are in. And since you moved this to the politics thread, I think it's absolutely hilarious that the western media is making a huge fuss about those moral differences when it comes to the world cup, but NOTHING is said about those issues when Qatar and KSA (who is very similar and even more 'conservative') are the two countries that buy the most weapons from the west and sell the most oil to west in the world. "We can trust them with trillions of dollars worth of weapons, but a world cup? Not with those backward beliefs of theirs!"

This should be blown up, framed and hanged up somewhere for people to worship the sheer genius, classiness and general awesomeness in the picture: :wub:

Effectively, most likely there won't be drinking at the stadiums and there won't be half naked women. Other than that I'd imagine would be considered as an exception including homosexual players. Unless they start making out with their teammates on the pitch, I don't think the Qatari government would make any issues. After all, they want to send out the message that they can handle all that and host WCs and major events, but they'd still want to 'protect' their people from publicly seeing acts which they consider immoral/sinful. I have a problem with it as well in principle. But the morals that you and I share may be the dominant in the world in the sense that they are the ethics of the most powerful countries and most of the people with internet access and who study and discuss ethics and philosophy and sociology, but the fact is, there are more humans on earth who do not hold those morals than who actually do. We don't like to think about it, but there are billions out there who belong to societies, or parts of societies, who are not 'with us in the current moment in history' because their societies have had an evolution different than that of our societies and left them unaffected by the changes in the 'globalized' morals. Yes, I know that wasn't explained well at all, but point is, you can't just shove all those people to the side and say I don't want to deal with them. PS: I didn't mean that you in particular were taking things out of perspective or portraying them unfairly, but talking about the general view point of the public.

Are they...real? They look so doll-like!