NJS

Correct. Also apart from the obvious Buffy/Angel try Jeremiah, Dark Angel and Weeds. 175760[/snapback] If you haven't seen the short-lived Firefly, it's among the best television I've seen in ages. 175790[/snapback] I liked Firefly (especially the latter episodes) and it had a lot of promise and it shouldn't have been cancelled... but I had an irrational bias against it because Fox axed Dark Angel for it which I loved. I now tend to wait and see if a series "makes it" before committing to it (I'm a download addict) because I'm sick of too many embryonic axes - most recently Threshold which I did take a risk in watching because of the Goddess Carla.

Correct. Also apart from the obvious Buffy/Angel try Jeremiah, Dark Angel and Weeds.

Wild Horses - The Sundays The exception that proves my rule - all cover versions are crap.

All terrorists love martyrs - in this scenario add in the religion bollocks and that factor is increased 10 fold. I think if Leazes had his way and a few examples were "executed" there would be a bomb every other day - it would be like living in Jersusalem when thats at its worst. As for the answer I don't know - but I think the "corruption" of more moderate Islamic countries by western values (ie capitalism + freedom) like the Gulf states and Egypt to an extent holds out our best hope.

They worked alright in Iraq, right ? No good pretending the technology couldn't be perfected, rather than bury your head in the sand. 144538[/snapback] Theres a diffenece between military dispersal techniques and a couple of nutters trying to put a terrorist weapon together - a bomb blows things up - the chemicals would go with it. This has all the signs of that one where they sent tanks to Heathrow or the one where Old Trafford was "targetted" (no charges ever brought) - absolute propaganda fuelled bullshit. I know there are people out there with the intent to do these things but we all know that your "final solution" to a relatively small problem is to ship out millions of people who happen to cotribute more to Britain than millions of "true" british. 144543[/snapback] "Relatively small problem".....usual left wing head in the sand bollocks 144553[/snapback] Relative to deporting a couple of million people (the majority of whom are citizens) I'd say it was small.

They worked alright in Iraq, right ? No good pretending the technology couldn't be perfected, rather than bury your head in the sand. 144538[/snapback] Theres a diffenece between military dispersal techniques and a couple of nutters trying to put a terrorist weapon together - a bomb blows things up - the chemicals would go with it. This has all the signs of that one where they sent tanks to Heathrow or the one where Old Trafford was "targetted" (no charges ever brought) - absolute propaganda fuelled bullshit. I know there are people out there with the intent to do these things but we all know that your "final solution" to a relatively small problem is to ship out millions of people who happen to cotribute more to Britain than millions of "true" british.

Chemical weapons don't work - its propganda to create an atmosphere of fear and to make the gullible hate muslims.

Nowt worse than a band stagnating. Rehashing the stuff that was popular, scared to just do what they want because they have to cater to their demographic. I look at Oasis and see what Radiohead could have become. I thank christ they didn't. 138832[/snapback] I'd like to have seen Oasis release their 3rd album onwards under an alias and see what critics and fans thought of them without the name Oasis and the first 2 albums to affect opinions. Anyone seriously think the music world would have batted an eyelid at those albums without the Oasis hype and reputation colouring peoples views. 138836[/snapback] Good point but I've always thought all Oasis albums are the same (not like that) in that they all have 4 perhaps 5 cracking songs and a lot of "Meh" type ones - and I include the "classic" first two in that. I think a band can evolve without doing a "Radiohead" though - U2 for example have tried different things (some of which I quite frankly hate) while maintaining a core style and overall quality (imo). I just felt that Radiohead were a bit too "bloody-minded" in the way they changed. I know they will claim they made music they wanted to but I also remember them saying that they specifically didn't want to be a "U2, biggest band on the planet" type deal which they were heading for. Another remark I recall referred to "3 frustrated guitarists" in the band which again suggests they went out of their way to go against the grain. I'm sure there are people who love the Kid A and the rest stuff but I feel a lot of their fans feel to obliged to listen to it in the name of "eclectic" music taste. I haven't got tickets for V this year as the lineup is poor imo but I may change my mind and see Radiohead as I think live they are more like their old selves. Talking of wrist slitting one of my main memories of Radiohead was after the Chelsea semi in 2000 when I took the huff and went home straight from Wembley and was in the house for 6:45. I switched on MTV2 and Fake Plastic Trees was on - I remember it causing a depressed tear or two and thinking it summed up following NUFC - at once soul-lifting glory and ultimate sadness.

I'm a bit of a cliche Radiohead wise - I love Pablo Honey and The Bends but think they started to disappear up their own arses with Ok Computer and made it all the way with Kid A and the rest. Being a "No guitar, no good" type music fan I think a band who are so fantastic to "betray" their sound and become knob twiddlers is probably worse than someone who just never had it like a pop group or something. I think interviews around the time of Kid A are revealing when they said they almost decided to release that under a pseudonym to see how it did - I think it would have bombed without the "emperors new clothes" effect of the fans who insist its genius.

I agree to an extent but would say that I was trying to argue that the "reality" end of the market is very sad and does men no favours but it tends to be drug driven in the first place. I'm not saying high class escorts are in anyway "noble" or the men any less sad but I think its a lot more civilised than the majority and a controlled environment ran aong similar lines would work and save a lot of women from abuse. I've always considered prostitution to be an endightment on the sadness of the male gender rather than any slur on women but unfortunately its always been part of nature. I do think your "harms all women" pov is overstated though - I don't think all women have a price and the existence of it doesn't make me think any less of women least of all the ones involved.

Shagging Kate Moss is one thing - being on the edge of self-destruction through stupidity is nowt worth glamourising. I know a lot of "talents" take drugs which I don't really care about but Doherty is just an idiot - I don't just mean the drugs per se but a couple of his arrests have obviously been as a result of celebrating his court appearances with more smack - as I said thats just stupid. If you do think he has musical talent then surely you should bemoan its waste?

I just meant that the pressure on the prisons if you "got your way" and then a new lot were added in "for their own good" as suggested by someone else would be quite severe. Death penalty deterrents don't work because nearly all murders are spur of the moment/unthinking acts of passion/stupidity. Those that aren't eg terrorsim are carried out by people who wouldn't care or would in fact relish martyrdom. Its immoral barbarism in my opinion.

rather than just let criminals off in NJS's world ? 129751[/snapback] Never said that - I just don't think the death penalty or your "lock them up and never let them out" works. I support quite long sentences for murder/rape etc and think drunk driving/causing death by driving is disgracefully unpunished but a lot of the justice system fails miserably for certain crimes no matter how much you increase the sentencing.

I agree with the sentiment that he's a fuck-up but if everyone who needed it was "locked up for their own good" they'd need even more prisons than in LM's world. If he starts affecting others (which is the suggestion here) then thats different, though I stand by my "free will" comments earlier but as Lazarus says British prisons aren't exactly smack free.

Bollocks in my opinion, should we turn a blind eye if they had raped her too ? 129684[/snapback] No, but I'm actually with Lazarus - I don't believe he was injecting her and think its more likely he was taking out a needle she'd used before passing out. I believe in free will when it comes to drugs - if you want to fuck yourself up (or indeed have a bloody good time) then its down to you - all I'm saying is that she went to his house and must have become "unconsious" somehow. Now if it was a naive fan who they "initiated" then thats a different matter but even the Sun suggest she was a regular visitor.

I think finding yourself unconcious on that particular floor could be seen as contributory negligence.

Depends how you do it - if a pimp is effectively a slavemaster then in my "brave new world" he'd be gone - if the pimp is for protection from the dodgy elements of society then a "sanitised" environment like they have in some places like Germany I think could work. (Once again I have no first hand knowledge )

Prostitution is victimless?? 129616[/snapback] If you take away the seediness of street walkers then a "free" woman selling herself/providing a service to a (single) man harms absolutely nobody. Of course the Kings Cross/Eastern european slaves/crack whores cycle is horrible but thats what I mean above by dodgy elements combining with drugs.

Persecuting people for drug use is a waste of time - until a sensible case why alcohol is okay and cannabis isn't is made then its a "war" that will never be won. I know the people involved in the drug trade are scum but thats due to the legailty - its like prostitution - a "victimless" crime is made into a dodgy business by the legal profession so that they can make money. Imagine a justice system where drugs are legal - "junkie" crime would disappear and the police would have the time to fight "proper" lawbreakers. Wastes of space like Doherty would die though I suspect without the fuel of celebrity which is only now based on his lifestyle he'd probably sort himself out. (NB Alcohol is the only drug I've ever used)

As I've said on other threads on religion its about time people dropped the excessive "respect" that they think these people warrant. At the start of the Hamza trial the prosecutor said that Islam and the Koran weren't on trial as it was a peaceful religion - my response would be "prove it".

I think Rob made a good point earlier about the "youth" of Islam compared to the other big two - however if you call modern Christianity "reasonably" mature we have to wait abot 600 years for Islam to catch up though it may happen sooner due to the insidous effect of western "pleasures" on the less brainwashed. I don't think we've got that long or even a reduced timespan - I think it'll come to a head.

Then again if a christian obeys the OT literally they couldn't play football with one that used a pigs bladder either. I get the impression that like some jews you can remain "loyal" to Islam and lead a "normal" western life in all reasonableness - as usual its just the extremes from any gang that grate.

I abhor the concept of blasphemy because I can't understand how you can blasphem something you don't believe in. I'm not sure about going out of your way to cause offence but its a good time to debate the issue - one criticism is that they wouldn't do this to jews which though true is something else I don't get - why not? As has also been pointed out newspapers in the middle east often lampoon jews as pig or apes so its the usual double standards from them.

Just watched the second part - He said pretty much what I would have said - especially his opinion that if an "untainted" and rational person had the major religions explained to them they would think it was "barking mad" - and that indoctrination of children is tantamount to mental abuse. I'm also glad he stated my view that morals for the sake of the actual morals are "more noble" than morals adhered to from fear of damnation or promise of reward. That pastors idea tha the only religion stops people from being rapists and murderers I found particularly "evil" in the true sense. I also loved the fact that he explained that morals have a Darwinian purpose and that that they are therefore much older and more natural than any religion.

Thats the problem with the latest proposals of trust schools - they will know that their income will depend on the income of their kid's parents and will start recruiting on "poshness" for want of a better word thus perpetuating the divide. What they need to do is find out the root key to good results which I hope isn't as simple as class/location or faith and apply it everywhere [/idealist]