Wow, amazing... your whole post long as it may be has nothing
much to reply to my last post at all... And there you go again...
Trying really hard to impress us here with your english again...
sad case...
A pathetic sight it must be for one to remain deranged beyond
salvation. 
For someone who eternally espouses drivel
and shifts the goalpost from the geist of the argument out of
desperation just can't get anymore pitiful, can it?
A post that is littered with so much personal fiery but yet
doesn't have any answer to why its only Keane and not Schmeichel,
Irwin, Sheringham, Strachan, Pallister, Bruce, Ince, Hughes,
Beckham or even Cantona making all these needless comments... Bruce
has had his say already, if you are interested you can go and check
it out and see the contrast to Keane's.
Anyway, I was still looking forward to the concrete offers you
mentioned from Karl Heinz Rummenige and Florentino Perez.... But I
am guessing it's probably not ready yet right... Afterall, correct
me if I am wrong... aren't you the one that said I was in delusion
to even believe the G14 is no longer in existence just roughly 2
months ago? When in actual fact they have been disbanded earlier...
And you can go on and say their directors and executives still meet
regularly... delusion?
You still can't separate opinions from facts two months on, can
you? Oops...how could I reasonably expect an
intellectually-challenged nincompoop to be able to distinguish
the merits of facts and opinions when anything that goes against
the warped logic and liking of a simpleton is simply classified as
"rude" and "fiery" ?
For all the "say" you've been churning out and quotes from
dubious sources, I'm still waiting for you to reconcile the garb
you posted in the first two posts. Maybe, if you could so much as
comprehend simple English and try
making sense of how Keane's comments on loyalty was actually
bitter, we might just have a
more productive discourse. Failing which, it should hardly come as
a surprise that all you would be left doing is being impressed at
comprehending a degree of logic beyond the realms of your
malfunctioning intellect.
Oh, and do me a favour if you're
going to make any claims, instead of having need me to disprove
things you simply "recall" and then blatantly quote my response out
of context and thereafter, ask for further "proof" of what I said.
Is that beyond you?
Lest I forget, you may wish to note that your propensity for
quoting articles blindly is mind-boggling at the very least. You
may like to consider re-looking at the thread entitled "Berba will
be the new Cantona" and the garb you quoted blindly as follows
:
Sir Alex himself is positive the
deal will be completed, complimenting the Bulgarian and hopeful of
discussing a transfer with Tottenham Hotspur shortly. "We have good
expectations this deal will go through," said Sir Alex. "Berbatov
has been impressive for a long time and would be a great addition
to our attack.
So, are you such a dimwit you can't look beyond tabloid reports
whose credibility are no better than yours and simply paste
attention-grabbing quotes up without first independently verifying
the authenticity of such sweeping statements? Or would you, in your
defence, like to argue such
statements are actually a matter of fact just because you've
found them somewhere else and that Ferguson was lying when he said
he didn't make those comments? 
Perhaps, staying away from tabloids would be a good start if you
can't tell opinions and facts apart. Then again, can you even
identify tabloids in the first place?
Ok, Last time i check, this is still a forum... I belief in a
forum, everything is more or less an opinion but some are facts...
On Keane taking revenged on Haaland, this is a fact ! If you still
wish to deny this, I really don't know what else to say... On
Fergie, its an opinion base on his attitude towards Fergie... He
seem ever ready to have a pop at Fergie whenever the chance arises
don't you agree?
http://china.goal.com/en/Articolo.aspx?ContenutoId=639020
http://sports.setanta.com/en/Sport/News/Football/2008/07/17/Prem-Keane-wades-into-slave-debate/
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20051016/ai_n15711950
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2008/03/29/roy-keane-blasts-former-boss-sir-alex-ferguson-89520-20366493/
Whatever is said or seen are for those here to decide for
themselves... I don't dictate how they think and neither do you...
We just give our different sets of views and they will form their
own opinions of it...
Firstly, regardless of the avenue through which views are
expressed, logic remains logic.
As a matter of fact, I am still
waiting for you to clarify how Keane's interview - when viewed in
its appropriate context (a source of which I've included for you
lest you're overwhelmed by the task of finding it) - would
justifiably come across as bitter. Your quoting and taking
other incidents into account does not, on its own merit, render it
appropriate to cast aspersions and distort the credibility of the
words taken in its original context "bitter", does it?
Given your limited intellect, let's rephrase it another way. I
can't reasonably expect to call someone who has stolen something a
"murderer" and expect whoever's listening to be able to decipher I
am actually referring to an act of theft from the term "murderer",
does it? This is simple logic, not an opinion.
By the same token, I'm still waiting for you to clear up your
warped perception of how "I belief in a forum, everything is more
or less an opinion but some are facts" stands at the expense of
opinions actually defying logic.
For the record, lest your messed-up analytical process has
misled you, the statement "On Keane taking revenged on Haaland,
this is a fact!" is an opinion. The act of Keane lunging into
Haaland is, however, a fact.
After all, the credibility of an eye-witness is only limited to
giving a take of an event that actually happens, and not assess the
motive (or lack of) behind the event, isn't it?
Lastly, I think using "big words" and all that to disguise a
post to make it look impressive is ok but on close examination,
post with little substance, will come across like one big messy
drivel... You spent so much of your last post on me rather than on
the points of the topic... thats getting weird... We are in a forum
here... and belief me, just use simple words like everyone
here and you will still get the message across nicely...
I am rather surprise that for all the "big words" you cast
around frivolously, you don't seem to grasp simple stuff... And if
you are still not sure about whats this whole thing is all about...
Refer to my post before this... Btw, did you check out the Sat's
Straits Times page S23 yet?
I think you are going to get a real knock out of it... 
Firstly, what's "big"? Are you going to tell me "big words" is a
fact in the sense that everyone will unambiguously agree on the
same definitions of what constitutes a "big word"? If not, what
even makes you think I'm using these "big words" to impress you? As
a matter of fact, I was only using words I thought would best
describe and convey my thoughts. What business is it of mine should
you choose to view them as "impressive" and "big" due to your
linguistic incompetence and/or intellectual handicap?
Just to illustrate the merits of this point, I'm sure someone
who's linguistically more gifted than I am will hardly find my
words "big" or "impressive". At best, these are mere words that
convey my thoughts.
Apparently, now that you're done with sorting out the notion
that "big words" are subjective, it is indeed amazing you could
actually regard something blatantly illogical to the rational mind
as "simple stuff". Believe me, if you would so much as spend time
attending basic grammar lessons and hone your critical thinking
skills in the process, you would have little trouble putting across
more cogent arguments instead of hopelessly insisting opinions as
statements of fact!
Oh, and do yourself a favour - you may wish to consult some
other decent publications before blindly quoting anything from
tabloids in the future and it may jolly well save you the agony of
trying to explain a moot point which is lost on most rational
folks... 
