Self-entertainment is the new order of the day, isn't it?
You must be getting fairly bored and helpless
seeing one argument being rebutted after another...
And what's your purpose of you quoting the part you underlined?
Trying to shoot yourself in the foot further to ensure a total
whitewash in this argument? Is your linguistic incompetence so
drastic you can't actually comprehend the essence of what you've
underlined is identical to what I stated in the post taken from the
original thread?
Why don't you quote the entire post from the thread you've gone
to great lengths to dig up so as to spare me the effort of
embarrassing you further on that count? 
As if your confusion between reality and fantasy wasn't acute
enough, from where would you derive the notion that I wasn't aware
of your claims? Rather, the more pertinent point is : are you aware
of what I was disputing? Apparently, from your valiantly desperate,
albeit futile, attempt to engage in self-contradictory quoting, you
don't. Either that or you must be having another bout of
Schizophrenia...
For the record, the "link" you provided that you claim had not
been updated had in no way suggested the G14 had disbanded. Why
don't you go over that again before embarrassing yourself
further?
Or lest you get too carried away in a lost cause, why don't you
try explaining the countless faux pas you've unerringly and
consistently produced? For starters,
how's explaining your embarrassment of your insistence that Keane
was bitter about Fergie and the club because of the manner of his
departure, despite evidence to the contrary? Perhaps, you could start by defending the
following lost cause of yours : "I have already said its not just about
Ronaldo, loyalty, or anything else, its more about the character's
general feeling of bitterness towards Fergie and the club."
Are you deranged or deluded? Would you like to quote me in the
appropriate context? If you're going to quote me on that one, the
least you could do would be to quote the post in its entirety
instead of just two liners from a post which was effectively
dealing with the interpretation of what constitutes the G14, rather
than whether the G14 is in existence. It was in that context that I
said "whether they're functioning or not is another matter" as
the geist of my point was to ensure you understood the term G14
referred to.
Apparently, your imbecilic intellect has actually permitted your
stupidity to scale new heights such that you actually associated
that quote of mine with my "I stand corrected" on what was
effectively another issue. Or is that simply another faux pas
arising from you being retarded? 
Perhaps, to illustrate the sequential logic (or lack thereof)
that typically exemplifies your idiocy as demonstrated above, why
not try concocting a case to justify another faux pas of yours :
namely, making sense of how your first post in this thread actually
justifies the ludicrous notion that "this post is purely about
Keane the person" ?
Am I twisting and turning or are you quoting me out of context
and ramming words down my throat? Refer above to what I've
explained in my defence of the G14 issue. Do consult someone who is
linguistically more competent than yourself to interpret my words
in its originally intended context. Apparently, your inability to
view and comprehend statements made in the appropriate context is
uniquely dire and exclusive to a dimwit. It surely can be no coincidence that your
frequent knack of misquoting others (from the tabloids to yours
truly) can be so unbelievably abhorrent. For starters, you
may wish to consider attending basic grammar school to facilitate
your comprehension.
Perhaps, addressing the parts in
red quoted above in the meantime might save you the ignominy
of having need to twist and turn. If you wish to discuss anything
more about the G14, first do yourself a favour and explain the
ignominy and self-contradiction of what you've typed in red
above... That's just the tip of the iceberg as far as
your colourful and exhaustive list of faux pas goes...
Was he misquoted or did you misquote him? If your
misinterpretation has arisen from your stupidity, there is hardly
anyone capable of helping you.
As far as I'm concerned (and yes, this is a prime example of an
opinion lest you get confused between opinions and facts), Keane's
comments in its relevant and appropriate context smacks
of nothing but objectivity and hardly anything that resembles your
brand of bitterness.
If anything, your desperate
attempt to mount a character assassination by painting colourful
pictures of his previous misdemeanour to distort the essence of the
article you were quoting is the sharpest illustration of bitterness
seen here thus far.
Your loose canon must be getting the better of you. Either that
or your linguistic inaptitude has got to be so overwhelming that
would even put a toddler to shame.
As mentioned above, go over my words in its appropriate context
instead of selectively plucking my words from its original context
and re-applying them elsewhere.
Although labelling you a "liar" would hardly look out of place
in view of the hidden vendetta you've been carrying with you in
your earnest attempts to forcefully paint the world the way you see
them. Perhaps, a foolish liar like yourself would like to back up
the statements you made in red for a start instead of beating
around the bush? Oops, and did I advise you to at least master the
art of lying convincingly if you're gonna con your way
around? No wonder they say empty vessels make the most
noise.
As for your point on Keane having "such thoughts" (whatever they
may be, but I'm not commenting further until you've addressed your
points in red above lest I get quoted out of context - yet again!),
how does the possibility of him having "such thoughts" serve to
convey his "bitterness" purely from the article you quoted? Trying
to force your way through a lost cause when you obviously can't
justify the rationale behind his "bitterness", aren't you?
At least, there's a wee bit of saving grace from you here,
although the logic still leaves much to be desired. Read what I
mentioned above - who's misquoting and misinterpreting him?
On the basis of his interview in
full, how anyone could conjure up the sort of distorted and
warp logic as yours is beyond me. Was he misquoted or did you
simply choose to believe what you want on the basis of your own
perceptions and biases which are not necessarily founded?
You really need to enlist the help of a decent grammar school,
don't you? For the record, what you're stating is still
effectively an opinion.
To illustrate your dire lack of common sense and pathetic
comprehension of facts and opinions, are you for a moment telling
me you'd be hanged just by walking into a police station confessing
to having committed a murder without any other forms of validation
to ascertain that a case of murder has indeed taken place? Or for
that matter, would my telling you your mum having had an
extramarital affair (which may or may not be true) necessarily
translate to be true?
Perhaps, coming back for another dose of logic would do you some
good if you could digest the above.
Oh no, not at all… I see an
end to this whole thing very soon as I think I have more or
less done enough to show the character that you are from this
whole discussion… I belief by now we can establish the systematic
ways you would go about to hide your blunders in this forum. But I
am not expecting any sudden changes to your ways or
replies anyway as that would be too unbearable for you to
make...
Actually I would have liked
to quote the entire statement but found the other words
there were irrelevant to the points being made here... They
were just another load of mindless bashing like those we all can
see here...
The real reason they were
quoted is to show the systematic actions by you to twist and turned
whenever you find yourself in a situation... I won't want to call
you a liar cos that would be even too low for me to
use in here on anyone so lets just say I would rather call it
a dishonest move/person...
Ok, did I quote you out of
context? And ramming something presumingly down your throat? If I
did, please show me where did I miss out?
You were not aware that the
G14 disbanded did you? I saw the link you provided before they
updated it… It didn’t mention anything about disbanding… Then you
base your another mindless reply on it and said this…
You must be fairly deluded to even believe the
G14 is no longer in existence when directors/executives from those
clubs still meet regularly (check out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-14 just in case you haven't got a
clue what G14 stands for). Or are you so bored you've decided to
challenge facts when you can't withstand your opinions being
challenged?
This was the very first
statement you made dated 28 April 2008 to my passing comment on… Anyway, the G14 is
no longer in existence... Period.
Again, here you are trying
real hard to distort things as usual…
For the record, the "link" you
provided that you claim had not been updated had in no way
suggested the G14 had disbanded. Why don't you go over that again
before embarrassing yourself further?
I think you are dearly
confused now… The link that wasn’t updated came from you… Did I not
inform you that then? Or you can go and check that post for
yourself. You provide it to prove your point that the G14 was not
disbanded. The links I gave you were the updated ones remember?…
Don’t go twisting and turning words here now… And If you care to
see the date when was it published, perhaps you can save yourself
more embarrassment again…
On the link I provided, it
stated
Tue, 15
Jan 22:18:00 2008.
With the
title: G-14
disbanded
First paragraph :
The G-14 club pressure group has been
disbanded after reaching agreement with FIFA and UEFA on a number
of points, including financial compensation for players competing
in European Championships and World Cups.
Ok now… with your so called
superb English, which part of the sentence dated
15 Jan 2008 did you not understand the
meaning?
Do you know whats the meaning
of “has been disbanded” in the first place? Coming up with all that
excuses in your later post is such a disgrace which I will also
address later.
I will quote you again in full
paragraph… 28 Apr 2008
For the lack of clarity, I
will cede this point to you in view of my ambiguity and your
hapless and mindless arguments elsewhere which have made completely
no sense. All said and done, you may wish to note that despite the fact the G14 had
disbanded in February, the factual statement of directors
and executives of the G14 clubs still held plans to meet
after the G14 umbrella being disbanded to iron out the existing
issues and the eventual integration of these clubs into the ECA
(G14's successor) still stand.
Then there is another
one…
Firstly, with regards to the
G14, I was challenging you on the notion of the idea that it had
ceased existence at the time of my post. While announcements had
been made in principle for the disbandment of the G14, you had not
- as then - proven that it had been disbanded.
So… What lack of clarity are
you referring to? Lack of clarity to us all here or to you only? Or
is it just another one of your facts distorting methods? Thanks to
your own words, I now can say you should know that the G14 was over
by Feb 15 weren’t you?
The above paragraph from you
is just like what I have been saying… twisting and turning your
words… your defence on your knowledge of the G14 issue is pathetic…
It’s a load of bull you made up to cover your earlier error on the
disbandment… You were not aware of it before but when exposed,
changed track… This is the characteristic of you that I have come
to know. Unfortunately.
Maybe just for compassion
sake, I will let you cast some doubt on it for a moment… Perhaps
the clubs may have planned to meet after it was announced, But wait
a min, that announcement was made on Jan 15 2008… By Feb 15 2008, everything was over! And your post was
dated Feb 28
2008… Hmmm… Does it ring
any bell?
So now it lead us to your this
question again only yesterday… You still can't separate opinions
from facts two months on, can you?
Now what’s this all about?
What’s your opinions and what’s your facts now? Are they
interchangeable?
2 months back, it was first
your "facts"... Then it became only an opinion after
I have provided you with the latest report on it? So who still
can't separate opinions from facts today?
Now, clearly like I said… This
thread is about Keane the person isn’t it… I guess it has evolved
into something else hasn’t it… I would have liked to keep it at
that but you just seem on bring in all sorts of other things didn’t
you? You seem to make a big deal out of the title when I have
already mentioned to you that it was from a Press report… Do you
understand what is a Press report? I also said you can find it on
the Straits Times too didn’t I... Did you go and see the Straits
Times or not? Why you don’t want to tell us till now? For your
info, I didn’t quote him, I didn’t mis-quote him, I just
quoted the Press report… Happy?
What I did say was it could
more or less be a general feeling of Keane towards Fergie by
some... didn’t I? If you do not feel that way, it does not mean
others don’t or can’t isn’t it?
Again, Just providing one
positive report means its prove? Someone said something nice and
its not possible to harbour ill-intent? Have you not seen
politician doing this all the time? Anyway, does it take away the
negative ones he has said? Again, I put to you my question which
you have conveniently avoid or ignore answering...
Why is it always Keane being "mis-quoted" and
not Schmeichel, Irwin, Sheringham, Strachan, Pallister, Bruce,
Ince, Hughes, Beckham or Cantona?
Maybe you can come up with something? But did
it cross your mind that maybe he wasn’t mis-quoted at all in the
first place? So could Keane still have a hidden bitterness
towards Fergie for his sacking? Its not impossible is it, and why
not right? Can you or anyone prove otherwise either way? I know I
can’t but neither can you right? But the many press reports are
there this is true. And if you could be so kind to give us your
opinion on the individual questions I put to you, maybe we can
establish the possibilities of the man's nature and come to
understand why some belief he could still be bitter over his
sacking...
