matt martel wrote: >Also, given the amount of adverse publicity, I don't think anyone in the >country is daft enough to think that by keeping up the flags (or indeed >putting replacements up) we are tacitly approving the takeover!
In the Guardian's report on Saturday's match (http://football.guardian.c o.uk/Match_Report/0,1527,1553805,00.html), Daniel Taylor described the absence of the banners as "the only reminder of anything remotely rebellious". Therefore, if they go back, it will be read as surrender, and not just by the Glazers. Therefore, there is no way we can allow them to go back. Business as usual is exactly what these people are trying to project. -- Harriet ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/GtUolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Please use [email protected] for general discussion. To unsubscribe send a blank message (from the email account in question) to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Join as a full member of IMUSA today: http://www.imusa.org/join.htm Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imusa/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
