Peter Anderson ⚽ Well what a weekend of sport that was.

It all kicked off on Saturday morning with the first FA Cup quarter-final between Coventry and Wolves. With the score at 2-1 to Wolves, and into injury time, Coventry surprised the big boys and scored 2. It was a classic cup game and a great start to the proceedings.

Next up was the first cycling monument of the season and the one that always provides the best finish, Milano-Sanremo. It can be won by sprinters, climbers or classics specialists as it depends on who still has the legs to get over the final little hill after 300 kms. This year it was a sprinter who reached the line first. Needless to say that it isn't necessary to watch the first 280 kms as it all kicks off on the run in to Sanremo.

Third on Saturday's list was the rugby. And on Paddy's weekend the men in green won their second championship in two years by beating a stubborn Scotland in Dublin. It is a crying shame that they could make it a grand slam, having lost to England last week. But it is always great to see Ireland play so well after many years of mediocrity.

And finally, Man City became the first ever team to get to 6 FA Cup semi-finals in a row by dispatching Newcastle at the Etihad. It was a pretty routine game from City's point of view. The most surprising thing was they managed to keep a clean sheet.

On to Sunday and I watched Chelsea struggle past Leicester. Despite being 2-0 up, on top for long periods and having a load of chances, they failed to close the game out and nearly paid the price as Leicester leveled the score. Then Leicester had a man sent off and Chelsea manged to stumble over the line with 2 late goals.

But in a classic weekend of top notch sport the best was reserved for last. England's two biggest clubs went head to head to see who was going to reach the FA Cup semis. It was a modern classic. Man U came flying out of the traps and put Liverpool under huge pressure. They got their just rewards and went 1-nil up. Then Liverpool steadied the ship and my immediate thought was that Man U needed to score again, preferably 2 and soon. One thing that we see repeated throughout history is clubs failing to make hay while the sun shines. Man City have been particularly guilty of it this season. The standard is so high these days at the top of the English game that you need a 3 goal lead to feel anywhere near safe. Man U didn't score a second and paid the price. Liverpool worked out that if they could get beyond the press there were acres of free space behind the midfield. Time and again, the Reds were running unopposed at United's back line. It was all a matter of time and the half ended with Liverpool 1-2 up. The second half was the reverse of the first half with Liverpool failing to capitalise on their chances against a now rapidly weakening United.

Despite bossing the second period it was 2-2 at full time.

And so to extra time. Liverpool regained the lead, 2-3. Then on a quick counter-attack Liverpool faced a 5 on 3 situation. A goal here would seal it. Elliot was on the right side and called for the ball.

Nuñez, instead of slipping him the ball tried to tee up a shot for himself, and a United player nipped in and took the ball. A massive match winning chance was missed. Klopp was furious. Just one minte later and Nuñez found himself with the ball in a defensive situation and tried a difficult pass forward, got it all wrong, gave the ball away and United were in. 3-3. With penalties looming, it was Man U that held their nerve and in one final counter-attck snatched the winner in a raucous Old Trafford.

Liverpool fans and pro-scouse pundits are quick to sing the priases of Nuñez. I just don't rate him. He is Liverpool's Raheem Sterling.

Sterling has a wonderful record at City, scoring over 130 goals and nearly 50 assists. But considering how many wonderful situations he found hiself in that produced nothing, he quickly became City's most frustrating player. If he was just 5% better he would have been a wonder player. Unfortunately for him, his final pass or finish was woeful so many times, or he was caught offside when he could see across the back line. And I see Nuñez in a similar light. Like Sterling, I think he will make a great substitute, but if he wants to be the main man he will need to go to an inferior club. Just like Sterling.

And now an international break. God, I hate international breaks, though I may actually have time to talk to my wife!

Peter Anderson is a Unionist with a keen interest in sports

Top Notch Sporting Weekend

 

A Morning Thought @ 2094

Jan Guillon ✒ with a piece that featured in two Swedish newspapers. Recommended by Eva Sennesvik.

Sweden signed a defence deal. It looks like Sweden has been at war with the US and lost, writes Jan Guillon in this note that was printed in Aftonbladet 25th of February -23 and printed in Norwegian translation in Klassekampen 9th of March - 23.

It looks like Sweden has been at war with the US and lost. At least when you read the latest defence deal between our (Swedish) government and the US government. It introduces American sovereignty in Sweden.

This is of course not the image conveyed in media. From Rapports (Swedish news) coverage I only remember images of a tiny, happy Swedish defence minister and a huge, grumpy American defence minister signing the secret deal, as if it was an ordinary routine deal. It is not. It is unique in our history and has unfathomable consequences. It’s about complete submission.

Right at the beginning of the deal it states that the US shall have “unlimited access to and use of predetermined bases and areas”.

Exactly. What are these predetermined bases and areas? They are listed on page 37. It involves All Swedish air-bases, and all military installations, 17 in total. In practice this means that the US will have unlimited control of all of the Swedish defence system, unhindered, power.

On undefined defence installations certain areas will be closed off as “only US military access”, where US jurisdiction will apply. But not only that. “On request” the US will have rights to use private lands, property, roads, ports and airports.

The States are also at liberty to “develop areas and facilities” for storage and defence equipment. There are no limitations for weaponry, not even nuclear arms (article 14), The parties “may consult on the aforementioned to the extent it is deemed necessary.”

Over a great number of pages the rights and benefits American soldiers based in Sweden shall have. American personnel, their families and civilian employees will be exempt from normal passport and visa demands. American military ID will be used in their place. Swedish Security police shall not control or put surveillance on American personnel. All cars owned by American personnel will have untraceable Swedish numberplates. All American personnel is exempt from paying tax, including taxation on purchases, even through customs bringing purchases in or out of Sweden, including unlimited sums of currency. American airplanes shall have unlimited access to Swedish airspace, just like all American ships will have unlimited access to Swedish territorial waters.

American airplanes nor ships can be inspected by Swedish authorities and so on in a very long list of decisions.

Sweden will forgo all criminal jurisdiction (article 12) when it comes to American personnel, their families and civilian employees. But in a slight contradiction it says: "if a member of the American forces or a family member is prosecuted by Swedish police, the jurisdiction is in the hands of Swedish courts.”

It sounds reasonable. But; “cannot be prosecuted in absentia” (12:4) , and if the trial lasts longer than a year it is void. As Swedish police cannot enter American suspects on their base, the American soldiers can in effect, together with the Swedish head of State, enjoy full immunity against prosecutions.

Civil law claims can not be directed at American personnel (article 15), and the list goes on to tiny issues like exemptions from paying TV- licence, but having to pay for bridge/ferry fees. And finally the not so surprising decision that Swedish trade union rules/rights are deemed null and void on American bases. (page 36)

The American contract makers – there are no traces of Swedish ones – seem to have thought about everything. But they do have experience from all the countries they have occupied earlier. Maybe they just took the capitulation agreement from, for example, Iraq down from a shelf and adjusted it a little.

Even the right to have their own tax-free zones for recreation, shopping, entertainment, hamburger bars and tax free alcohol has been examined.

The Swedish government may have put Swedish defence systems in the hands of Trump.

This Swedish submission to a superpower isn’t completely unique. But one has to go back to the second have of the 1700’s to find anything similar. Back then it was Russia who controlled Swedish foreign policies for a while.

This new submission is however voluntary and has nothing to do with NATO. The contract is strictly between Sweden and the US. Come Autumn we might see that the Kristofferson (Swedish PM) - government may have put Sweden’s defence in president Donald Trump's hands, even if he pulls the US out of NATO.

This is a scandal like no other. It is absolutely mind boggling how this could happen in secret, without it being discussed by the political opposition in the Foreign affairs Committee. Because that’s the way it must have happened. The other parties can’t have agreed with this and kept their mouths shut? And what were the government thinking? Are the “nationalists” in Swedish Democrats also prepared to sell Sweden’s sovereignty and shut up about it too? Who really wants to make Sweden Russia’s prime target in Europe in case of war? There are about 126 questions to ask in this the greatest political scandal in my lifetime. I generously leave that job to my younger journalist colleagues. Go!

A Note On American Military Bases In Sweden

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Nine Hundred And Twenty Three

Dr John Coulter ✍ Today is my 35th wedding anniversary and a chance to reminisce once more over our marriage photos from 1989.


There were relations and friends who could not come to the wedding even though they were invited, so I wonder what would have happened if we’d asked our wedding photographer to photoshop them into the family photos?

Former UUP leader, the late Jim Molyneaux, was a guest at our wedding and appeared in wedding album photos. Could you imagine if I was to photoshop Jim out of those photos and, when showing the album today to family and friends, replaced Jim with an image of current UUP boss Doug Beattie?

I don’t think there would have been all the fuss and furore which has engulfed the Royal Family over the Princess of Wales admitting she had edited the picture of herself and her children.

If ever there was a storm in a teacup, it was the near hysterical reaction to the evidence that the Royal snap had been supposedly ‘doctored’. It forced Kate into making a grovelling apology and reignited the speculation about her health.

We’ve had to listen to loads of moaning about trusting the Royals. But what was the big deal? It wasn’t as if Kate had edited in Prince Harry’s youngsters or changed the backdrop to a ski resort in the Alps. All she did was - albeit in a fairly amateurish way - adjust a few bits of the photo. It still remained a photo of her and the kids.

Then again, given the looney woke society in which we now live, there seems to be a body of opinion which looks for any chance to bash the Royals and especially the monarchy.

Basically, we could dismiss all the who-ha about Kate editing her photo as a bunch of eejits with nothing better to do with their time. Then again, were there more sinister undertones to the criticism over Kate’s actions?

Even in asking this question, have I too fallen into the wokery pitfall of seeing an issue where none exists? Have I too inadvertently become a conspiracy theorist?

What for Kate was simply a do-it-yourself tidy-up exercise of a family photo, has turned into a full-scale political row questioning the very future of the monarchy!

Given all the pomp and pageantry of the late Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations in 2022 and King Charles’ Coronation events last year, it is clear the British Monarchy is as popular as ever. So where is all this anti-Royal clap-trap coming over an edited photo?

The hard reality is that there is a republican element within British society which just want any excuse to call for an abolishment of the Monarchy.

Ironically, because one of the hallmarks of British democracy is freedom of speech, the anti-Royalists can have a platform to churn out their honestly held, but totally nonsensical rants.

Whether this small band of vocal republicans like it or not, the British Royals - and indeed Monarchy throughout the globe - are big business.

It’s been one of the main planks of the United Kingdom culture and heritage since the Monarchy was restored by King Charles II in the 1660s following the brutality of the earlier English Civil War of the 1640s, the execution of King Charles I and the Cromwellian era in British politics.

Then again, because of the evolvement of the so-called snowflake society, those folk classified as celebrities, or who live their lives in the glare of publicity and the public domain, can now expect to have every aspect of their lives poured over with a fine judgemental tooth comb looking for an excuse for someone to either criticise or be offended.

Politicians are having to watch off the cuff remarks; clerics are having to monitor the language used in live-streaming sermons; sporting stars are having to think about where and how they are being photographed - and now the Royals have to watch how what many of us ordinary folk indulge in, using modern technology to adjust family pictures.

Kate’s trivial editing of a photo is now being branded as a public relations disaster for the Royals. It has sent the memes industry into hyper-drive as folk make their own editing adjustments to the photo and share them online.

Maybe it says something about the kind of society the snowflake brigade have converted our once forgiving communities into. Are folk being hounded by the so-called wokerati who would be offended if a pin fell the wrong way onto a floor?

Is this happening to such a degree that people in the public gaze have to say sorry for comments or behaviour which a decade ago would have been laughed off as silly?

And not content with the present day, the snowflakes are trawling back over years, even decades, to find material to be offended about by challenging people in the public domain if they still held these views.

Unfortunately, it will deteriorate to a situation where people in the public arena will have to employ a new post know as a Comment Censor to vet every word uttered.

It won’t be just the concept of freedom of expression that will be under threat; the very idea of freedom of thought will also come under the scrutiny of the snowflake society.

Perceptions will merge with reality. Snowflakes will say - that person looks like they could make a racist or offensive comment! False stereotypes will be created and folk could end up having to apologise for wearing the wrong colour of clothing.

Wait, I’m bald! Maybe I should start wearing a wig or toupee. The snowflake society might perceive my baldness to be a sign that I’m from the skinhead culture, that I’m a fascist, racist, transphobic, homophobe! Dare I say it - Bald Folk Matter!
 
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online.

Wokery Has Gone Ultra Woke Over Royal Snap!

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Nine Hundred And Twenty Two

 

A Morning Thought @ 2093

Anthony McIntyre ⚽Which defeat to write about was the only decision to be made on tonight's piece.


Initially, I felt I'd blog the usual post-match summary of the Drogheda game up in Sligo which I attended with my friend Alfie. The Drogs put up a spirited fight but went down 3-1 to a much rejuvenated Sligo who have had quite the success against Louth opposition in recent weeks.  On the return journey to Dublin my daughter rang and asked if I would like to join her and her boyfriend in Cusack's on the North Strand Road for a Patrick's Day drink. Normally I find Patrick's Day too rowdy and tend not to go out on the swally.  But as Liverpool were playing Manchester United in the FA Cup I told her I'd head over to her from Connolly Station and watch the second half of the game.

So that was what decided tonight's post. The fate of the Drogs will have to wait until later in the week. 

The bar was full with a mixture of Patrick's Day revellers, swollen by the presence of Manchester United and Liverpool fans.  It was twenty minutes before my daughter managed to find a stool for me to plant myself on, one that swivelled. Most comfortable bar stool I have sat on in yonks. Liverpool were 2-1 up as they emerged for the second half. For most of it they seemed the better side but a failure to clear their lines allowed Manchester United to draw level, sending the game into extra time. Each set of supporters cheered when their team scored but there was no in-your-face bragging rights. Two woeful blunders in extra time allowed the Manchester men to steal a march on Liverpool by emulating the Scousers' penchant for scoring late winners. Now Liverpool are out of the cup. The quadruple has gone but I never seriously considered it as a realistic prospect. Still to lose a game they should comfortably have won left a bad taste in the mouth made no less acrid by Guinness and Jameson.

When the game was 3-3 courtesy of a careless pass from a weary Darwin Nunez I had flashbacks to the 1990 semi final in the same competition which saw Liverpool knocked out, going down 4-3 to Crystal Palace. And so it turned out. Harvey Elliot who came on as a sub and put the Merseyside men in front in extra time blundered after a corner kick, leading to a quick United counter attack which sealed Liverpool's fate. 

It is disappointing that Klopp will leave his post at the season's end without this trophy under his belt but ten Hag needed the victory more than the German. This victory gives him some breathing space. 

While it was a game for Liverpool to win there can be no churlishness shown towards United who did what they had to do and never gave up. The Liverpool boss summed it up:

Our decision making was not great. You have to accept the result. They deserve to go to the next round. It was a period in the second half when we should have finished it but we didn't and we know they could come back.

On the train journey home a Dundalk woman sat in the seat beside me. She had been on the beer in Dublin for Patrick's Day and told me all abut it! The one consolation was that she didn't like sport so both of us were spared a inquest-cum-rant on Liverpool's misfortune. Worse ways, I guess, to conclude a disappointing sporting weekend. 

Follow on Twitter @AnthonyMcIntyre.

Blunderpool

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Nine Hundred And Twenty One

National Secular SocietyCounter-Extremism Report recommends review of religious charities linked to anti-blasphemy activism.


A new report has warned UK 'anti-blasphemy activism' is becoming "increasingly radicalised" and being promoted by charities.

The report, published by the Commission for Countering Extremism, says responses to perceived acts of 'blasphemy' in the UK are "more organised than ever" and some of the most prominent voices involved have links to "violent anti-blasphemy extremists" in Pakistan.

The report also highlights the link between UK religious charities and anti-blasphemy extremism. The National Secular Society has consistently warned the charitable purpose of 'the advancement of religion' facilitates the promotion of extremism by charities. In September it referred Islamic Centre Leicester to the Commission after a sermon recorded at the centre suggested 'blasphemers' should be executed.

"Blasphemy flashpoints" linked to "new generation" of activists

Warning that responses to perceived acts of blasphemy are now "more organised than ever", the report identifies major "blasphemy flashpoints" linked to a "new generation" of activists working to "make blasphemy a key issue of concern for British Muslims".

Three incidents in particular are highlighted by the report: . . . 

Continue reading @ NSS.

Bigots And Blasphemy

Counterpunch As Western bombs rain on Gaza’s starving civilians, the New Atheism turns 20. 
The philosophical genre, which argues for secularism over organized religion, was kick-started by Sam Harris. His 2004 book, The End of Faith, promoted neuroscience-based spirituality in place of irrational groupthink. 

The philosopher, Daniel Dennett, soon followed with Breaking the Spell (2006), as did the evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins, with his 2 million unit-selling, The God Delusion. The late essayist, Christopher Hitchens, completed the quartet, known as the Four Horsemen, publishing God Is Not Great (2007).

Inspired by the attacks of September 11th, the genre appeared on the scene shortly after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. It became immediately clear that the Four Horsemen were exploiting Enlightenment principles to justify the bombing of women and children in third world nations. Muslim terrorists are not aggrieved by Western foreign policy, the authors claim, but rather by their fanatical devotion to their faith. The decimation of Iraq was not motivated by elite US strategies to control oil markets, but because “god” told Bush to invade. The state does not exploit religious differences for cynical realpolitik; but rather, hateful mobs randomly attack each other because of their different belief systems.

Continue reading @ Counterpunch.

The New Atheism At 20 - How An Intellectual Movement Exploited Rationalism To Promote War

Right Wing Watch 👀 In 2023, self-proclaimed Christian nationalist and unabashed Trump cultist Lance Wallnau announced his intention to travel the country ahead of the 2024 elections in order to break the “demonic strongholds” in swing states that are supposedly preventing Republicans from winning elections.

 Kyle Mantyla 

That idea eventually merged with the revival Fire and Glory Tour that Wallnau was doing with fellow MAGA cultist Mario Murillo, resulting in plans to merge political rallies with Christian revival meetings in order to help former President Donald Trump return to the White House.

Wallnau’s dream is now coming to fruition with the announcement of “The Courage Tour” in which Wallnau and Murillo will be joined by the likes of Floyd Brown, Lou Engle, and others for a series of events “dedicated to impacting the spiritual climate in 7 key states and 19 key counties!” The first three announced events will take place in the swing states of Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin.

The partisan purpose of the tour was made quite clear during a recent interview Wallnau did with fellow Christian nationalist Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA. 

Continue reading @ Right Wing Watch.

Christian Nationalist MAGA Cultists Launch ‘The Courage Tour’ To Put Trump Back In Office

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Nine Hundred And Twenty