Are the Cardinals doing anything?????

[40yearfan]

ions | More On Colvin - posted at KFFL (http://nfl.kffl.com)
5:36 PT: Updating previous reports, despite the fact he is reportedly in contract discussions with the New England Patriots, the Detroit Lions reportedly believe they are the closest to signing free agent LB Rosevelt Colvin (Bears). A decision from Colvin and agent Kennard McGuire is expected within the next two days, according to John Mullin of the Chicago Tribune.

 

[RedStorm]

Originally posted by 40yearfan
ions | More On Colvin - posted at KFFL (http://nfl.kffl.com)
5:36 PT: Updating previous reports, despite the fact he is reportedly in contract discussions with the New England Patriots, the Detroit Lions reportedly believe they are the closest to signing free agent LB Rosevelt Colvin (Bears). A decision from Colvin and agent Kennard McGuire is expected within the next two days, according to John Mullin of the Chicago Tribune.

Yep. Sitting by and eating ice cream. Until Bidwill wants to speak of course. Then he pulls out his little puppet.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

This is just sad

I am so disgusted with the Cardinals I even deleted my Cardinals team on Madden 2K3.

Cardinals suck....Coyotes suck...thank god for Jerry Colangelo.

 

[EndZone]

Here is the most recent update on KFFL

Lions | Singleton Their Main Target At Linebacker? - posted at KFFL (http://nfl.kffl.com)
5:49 PT: Tom Kowalski reports for mlive.com the Detroit Lions may now be targeting free agent Al Singleton (Bucs) as their main free agent target at linebacker. Singleton reportedly replaces free agent LB Rosevelt Colvin (Bears) as the No. 1 linebacker on Detroit's list. The two reasons are: Singleton will come at a cheaper price and the Lions believe Singleton could be a better fit for the defense than Colvin.

 

[Ed B]

Yes, the Cardinals are "being patient".

 

[JeffGollin]

- Detroit Lions reportedly believe they are the closest to signing free agent LB Rosevelt Colvin (Bears).

- Patriots are close to signing a contract with Colvin

- the Lions believe Singleton could be a better fit for the defense than Colvin.

- Graves Optimistic About Signing Colvin

I glommed all of the above within the last 6 - 8 hours. So much for the credibility of NFL general managers.

 

[maddogkf]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
-I glommed all of the above within the last 6 - 8 hours. So much for the credibility of NFL general managers.

How does one "glom"?

I think I glommed once...but I was young and impressionable....luckily, the cops couldn't stick anything to me.

 

[john h]

Originally posted by maddogkf
How does one "glom"?

I think I glommed once...but I was young and impressionable....luckily, the cops couldn't stick anything to me.

I do not know what glommed is but it sounds bad and I am sure I am doing it.

 

[Stout]

I grokked that this 'plan' wasn't working out a long time ago.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Stout
I grokked that this 'plan' wasn't working out a long time ago.

Fenian eh?

Are you an IRA enthusiast?

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
Fenian eh?

Are you an IRA enthusiast?

Fenian? Actually, that was a Robert Heinlein word from Stranger in a Strange Land, the best Sci Fi book of all time.

But I guess you could say I would have backed the IRB or the early IRA...I don't think there's any way a moral individual can back the modern IRA.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Stout
Fenian? Actually, that was a Robert Heinlein word from Stranger in a Strange Land, the best Sci Fi book of all time.

But I guess you could say I would have backed the IRB or the early IRA...I don't think there's any way a moral individual can back the modern IRA.

An educated individual! I was reading about the IRB and the IRA last night for an exam I have in like 2 hours from now.

I'm part Irish, but North Irish Protestant. And the rest is English and Scotish. So I guess I totally disagree with the IRA all together, since it is in my blood to feel that way. Ireland has never been a united country, and there is no reason to force the North into becoming a part of Ireland.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Stout
Fenian? Actually, that was a Robert Heinlein word from Stranger in a Strange Land, the best Sci Fi book of all time.

But I guess you could say I would have backed the IRB or the early IRA...I don't think there's any way a moral individual can back the modern IRA.

The Fenians were named after legendary Irish hero Finn McCool...

 

[Stout]

Actually, Krang, though my lineage in Ireland is the same, I have to point out you are wrong.

First, Brian Boru (anglicized name) unified Ireland as the one and only Ard Rhi (High King) prior to 1014. Unfortunately, he was killed by a stray arrow at the Battle of Clontarf.

Northern Ireland never, ever used to belong to the English in fact, not just in force, as the rest of the country didn't. It was the English bastard pope, Adrian (the ONLY English pope, by the way), otherwise known as Nicholas Brakespeare, who used a faulty document called (I'll flub this-it's been a while) the something laudibilitier. Now, this was supposedly written by Constantine, giving the church dominion of all the lands and islands of the sea. Of course, since HE (an Englishman) was pope, he granted Ireland to England. How convenient. The document has, in recent centuries, been determined to be a fake.

Also, the Gaeltacht (or the six counties known as Northern Ireland) used the be the most Irish portion of the country. When King Henry VIII forced all Irish nobles to surrender their lands, swear fealty and receive them back AT THE KING'S PLEASURE, it set the stage for his daughter, Elizabeth, to seize those lands. In a purely money-making venture, Elizabeth seized lands, imported Scotch-Presbetyrian colonists (our forefathers, who became quote-unquote 'Irish) to work on huge plantations. Of ocurse, those plantations were huge disasters, and the English blamed the new Irish's woes on the Catholics, and they simply beat the Catholics down, and thus, roughly, began the troubles in the North.

This is my subject, man-ancient Irish history. In fact England is the root cause of 99 percent of everything over there. Sure, not the modern state of Britain, but they did it nonetheles

 

[Sandan]

Originally posted by Stout
I don't think there's any way a moral individual can back the modern IRA.

I'm glad to here you say that, I would hate to think that anybody would support murdering terrorists.

I find most American's have a wonderfully stylized view of the problems in NI. Many seem to think it is the Irish vs British or that the British army was there oppressing the poor Irish.

The facts are a little different, without the British army providing security in NI (up until recently, when some sanity seems to be taking hold), there woukld have been mass murders of catholic Irish in NI but protestant terrorist groups.

Unlike folks over here I lived in the Britain for 27 years, I have spent time in NI working and I can tell you that there was one thing the people wanted and it was to be left alone to get on with their lives without bombs going off. Only the minority activists cared about anything else.

A comment from an Irish girlfriend I was dating, long before I came to the states or meet Brighteyes. She said, "I know of many IRA members here in Manchester, but I woiuld be dead in a week if I told anybody". Nice people !

Just for grins, has anybodt heard of the Bogside, in Londonderry ? This is/was one of the most notorious IRA areas in the whole province, these fanatical IRA supporters were so dangerous that I only managed to drink 7-8 pints while out drinking for the night, nicest people just wanted to be left alone.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Stout
Actually, Krang, though my lineage in Ireland is the same, I have to point out you are wrong.

First, Brian Boru (anglicized name) unified Ireland as the one and only Ard Rhi (High King) prior to 1014. Unfortunately, he was killed by a stray arrow at the Battle of Clontarf.

Northern Ireland never, ever used to belong to the English in fact, not just in force, as the rest of the country didn't. It was the English bastard pope, Adrian (the ONLY English pope, by the way), otherwise known as Nicholas Brakespeare, who used a faulty document called (I'll flub this-it's been a while) the something laudibilitier. Now, this was supposedly written by Constantine, giving the church dominion of all the lands and islands of the sea. Of course, since HE (an Englishman) was pope, he granted Ireland to England. How convenient. The document has, in recent centuries, been determined to be a fake.

Also, the Gaeltacht (or the six counties known as Northern Ireland) used the be the most Irish portion of the country. When King Henry VIII forced all Irish nobles to surrender their lands, swear fealty and receive them back AT THE KING'S PLEASURE, it set the stage for his daughter, Elizabeth, to seize those lands. In a purely money-making venture, Elizabeth seized lands, imported Scotch-Presbetyrian colonists (our forefathers, who became quote-unquote 'Irish) to work on huge plantations. Of ocurse, those plantations were huge disasters, and the English blamed the new Irish's woes on the Catholics, and they simply beat the Catholics down, and thus, roughly, began the troubles in the North.

This is my subject, man-ancient Irish history. In fact England is the root cause of 99 percent of everything over there. Sure, not the modern state of Britain, but they did it nonetheles

Ah yes, Boru did unify Ireland, but died thus not unifying Ireland.

It's good to see other Celtic history buffs, but you seem to know quite a bit more than I! And yes, I fully agree that the English are the cause of all the problems in North Ireland. Hell, the English are(actually were) a big part of the problem in all areas of the world as far as conflict goes, especially in the Middle East.

 

[Stout]

I've most certainly heard of the Bogside, Nidan. Very representative of how poorly treated the Catholics have been in NI. Most foreigners just assume that the IRA are the only bad guys. Oh, not so. Take a look at Ian Paisley and some of the Protestant Irish terrorist groups. Granted, they hide behind thin veneers of legitimacy, but there are just as many bombings of Catholic institutions as well. *Sigh* That's the whole problem. There's no one left to point a finger at. So I point the finger at the Brits (no offense) and pray that Ireland will one day be united.

I just find it ironic that the English demand the IRA disarm but maintain their force in a foreign land (NI is a 'part' of the UK only because they say so and loaded NI with their own colonists years back).

Oh well. Those are my views in a rough manner.

 

[Shane]

Hey Skkorp how about moving this thread to the "Everything Else" section?

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Stout
I've most certainly heard of the Bogside, Nidan. Very representative of how poorly treated the Catholics have been in NI. Most foreigners just assume that the IRA are the only bad guys. Oh, not so. Take a look at Ian Paisley and some of the Protestant Irish terrorist groups. Granted, they hide behind thin veneers of legitimacy, but there are just as many bombings of Catholic institutions as well. *Sigh* That's the whole problem. There's no one left to point a finger at. So I point the finger at the Brits (no offense) and pray that Ireland will one day be united.

I just find it ironic that the English demand the IRA disarm but maintain their force in a foreign land (NI is a 'part' of the UK only because they say so and loaded NI with their own colonists years back).

Oh well. Those are my views in a rough manner.

The problem is: Many of the citizens of NI are Protestant Unionist, and to unite Ireland would not work for them.

Terrible problems in NI, that's for sure, and very complicated!

 

[CardsFan88]

The way I see it...

The reason why england caused so many problems, wasn't because of it wanting to cause problems.

It was because of what the other major powers at the time were doing.

Around all that time, spain, france, portugal, etc were going around and claiming all parts of the world.

In order to secure their future place in the world, and not be dominated by the spanish,etc they took advantage of the third world countries of the world. As did the other powers at the time.

I'm not laying blame to anyone or anything, just describing the situation as history.

Some recent history of our own is the same

Us Vs. Russia

what happens, we back iraq and saddam hussein and russia backs iran.
Around the same time we backed afghan mujuhadeen against russia.

We trained the people that later trained taliban, al-queada, and other islamic groups.

Why is there so much conflict over israel? Well the peace accords after ww2 gave the same land to 2 people. That plus their hatred to each other over thousands of years...and look what we have there now..fighting, etc.

Another step further, did you know that ho chi minh (long ago vietnamese leader) came to those accords because he read accords that to the effect stated that nations should govern themselves. Wanted to become a democracy, and the leaders of the world ( i don't know who exactly), told him no, he was under french rule, and there was war later with vietnam and france, then our vietnamese war.

Look how ALL of that backfired on us. Now we are trying to remedy it, and the world is looking at us unfavorably because of it. It understandable for there to be differences. If things aren't done right, it comes back to haunt the world.

Once again I'm just restating history facts.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by CardsFan88
The way I see it...

The reason why england caused so many problems, wasn't because of it wanting to cause problems.

It was because of what the other major powers at the time were doing.

Around all that time, spain, france, portugal, etc were going around and claiming all parts of the world.

In order to secure their future place in the world, and not be dominated by the spanish,etc they took advantage of the third world countries of the nation.

I'm not laying blame to anyone or anything, just describing the situation as history.

Some recent history of our own is the same

Us Vs. Russia

what happens, we back iraq and saddam hussein and russia backs iran.
Around the same time we backed afghan mujuhadeen against russia.

We trained the people that later trained taliban, al-queada, and other islamic groups.

Why is there so much conflict over israel? Well the peace accords after ww2 gave the same land to 2 people. That plus their hatred to each other over thousands of years...and look what we have there now..fighting, etc.

Another step further, did you know that ho chi minh (long ago vietnamese leader) came to those accords because he read accords that to the effect stated that nations should govern themselves. Wanted to become a democracy, and the leaders of the world ( i don't know who exactly), told him no, he was under french rule, and there was war later with vietnam and france, then our vietnamese war.

Look how ALL of that backfired on us. Now we are trying to remedy it, and the world is looking at us unfavorably because of it. It understandable for there to be differences. If things aren't done right, it comes back to haunt the world.

Once again I'm just restating history facts.

I might get blasted for saying this but:

The first terrorist in the Middle East were Zionists. They came to Palestine in the early 1900s and some were trying to steal the country away.

I feel that more concessions need to be given to Palestine to calm the Arabs (not just Palestineans). I've had many Arab friends and that is a major reason they distrust the Western World...

 

[Shane]

The only problem I see is that none of this belongs in this forum. You guys keep bumping this to the top of the Cardinals forum and it has nothing to do with football. Take it to the appropriate board guys come on!

 

[BACH]

Originally posted by Shane H
The only problem I see is that none of this belongs in this forum. You guys keep bumping this to the top of the Cardinals forum and it has nothing to do with football. Take it to the appropriate board guys come on!

Amen!!

 

[RedStorm]

I agree. And I am Irish....

 

[BuckeyeCardinal]

Nit Picky

Originally posted by Stout
Actually, Krang, though my lineage in Ireland is the same, I have to point out you are wrong.

First, Brian Boru (anglicized name) unified Ireland as the one and only Ard Rhi (High King) prior to 1014. Unfortunately, he was killed by a stray arrow at the Battle of Clontarf.

Northern Ireland never, ever used to belong to the English in fact, not just in force, as the rest of the country didn't. It was the English bastard pope, Adrian (the ONLY English pope, by the way), otherwise known as Nicholas Brakespeare, who used a faulty document called (I'll flub this-it's been a while) the something laudibilitier. Now, this was supposedly written by Constantine, giving the church dominion of all the lands and islands of the sea. Of course, since HE (an Englishman) was pope, he granted Ireland to England. How convenient. The document has, in recent centuries, been determined to be a fake.

Also, the Gaeltacht (or the six counties known as Northern Ireland) used the be the most Irish portion of the country. When King Henry VIII forced all Irish nobles to surrender their lands, swear fealty and receive them back AT THE KING'S PLEASURE, it set the stage for his daughter, Elizabeth, to seize those lands. In a purely money-making venture, Elizabeth seized lands, imported Scotch-Presbetyrian colonists (our forefathers, who became quote-unquote 'Irish) to work on huge plantations. Of ocurse, those plantations were huge disasters, and the English blamed the new Irish's woes on the Catholics, and they simply beat the Catholics down, and thus, roughly, began the troubles in the North.

This is my subject, man-ancient Irish history. In fact England is the root cause of 99 percent of everything over there. Sure, not the modern state of Britain, but they did it nonetheles

Not to be nit picky Stout....you do know your stuff.....however Brian Boru did help design the victory at Clontarf....but he didn't die in battle....he was an old man at the time and a Viking chief found him in his tent and killed him.....his men caught the Viking and tied him to atree.....by using the Vikings own intestines.