pap

Rickie will be desperate to cement a place ahead of the World Cup, which will hopefully lead to some more inspired performances. Think Osvaldo being in the team will benefit him too - someone else for defences to keep an eye on.

Not really the point. Star Trek isn't meant to be for everyone, and it certainly isn't supposed to be a space-bound showdown between two antagonists. It does have its more exciting moments, but that is complemented with a lot of episodes that stimulate the brain or delve into the motivations of the characters. The other Star Trek films worked because the audience already knew the characters. The original series cast were a joy to watch. The chemistry between them is difficult to beat, and they had scope - II,III & IV are a trilogy - and work much better for it. I liked the first reboot, but with Into Darkness the direction, if you can call it that, became clear. They want as many people in the cinema as possible, so they're going to reboot on every film. Within 10 minutes of Into Darkness, Kirk's not fit to be captain again. FFS, I watched an entire film that was dedicated to getting him into that f**king chair. Why on Earth would I want to see him solve that problem again? Without the background, the only thing that Abrams is going to do is create more of these flash-bang action movies that move at a hundred miles an hour, thus by default, never allowing the characters to develop. We're therefore reduced to characters spouting fan service soundbites and nowt else. As I said, I liked the first movie. At its conclusion, Kirk sat in the chair with the captain swagger going on, I was very optimistic. They could take this thing anywhere. What they did was strip the carcass of a 30 year old movie and do a worse job.

Great post. Playing devil's advocate a little bit, Tim is just a character, albeit one that Pegg provided the words for. There's no guarantee his opinions are aligned with those of his character. Regardless, he was choosing to capitalise on geekdom's inherent wish for authenticity, especially with Star Wars, and has always presented himself as a geek. Though it's illogical to say so, you can't have your cake and eat it. He owes most of his career to the sort of people he's dissing. I don't think your justifiable nerd rage will be unique.

This ain't going to be your traditional vs. Who do you think wins in the comic?

I don't really get it. First, I hear that they want to riff on the story from The Dark Knight Returns, Frank Miller's book from the 1980s. That'd suggest a much older Bats ( close to 60 ) than is being offered up here. Next, why would Supes even fight Bats in this universe? He ain't the government's boy, like he was in the past.

Good piece in the Guardian comment is free section, which raises all the same questions about why it makes no sense for Assad to launch these attacks. Well worth a read. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/22/assad-toxic-gas-claims-syria

You lighter than 10.5 stone, Claps?

Nowt to do with that. Lot of people love Star Trek. It's been off the telly for years, so to have to put up with the crap of Into Darkness is a bit disappointing. Abrams and co really don't get it either. It's like someone has given them an outline of what the characters are supposed to say, some old plot lines and told them to make something with it.

Hehe. I love his defence of that movie. "A lot of people worked very hard". Presumably not the scriptwriters?

One of the most engaging gags ever, precisely because 90% of white dudes are thinking along the same lines as Randy.

Agreed. Wouldn't be surprised if we got a couple of free news stories out of it.

Daily Mail ran a story back in January that might have some bearing on this. Since deleted from their site, but the Wayback machine preserves http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html http://www.globalresearch.ca/deleted-daily-mail-online-article-us-backed-plan-for-chemical-weapon-attack-in-syria-to-be-blamed-on-assad/5339178 Contains text of email:- http://boards.dailymail.co.uk/news-board-moderated/10253799-syrian-wmd-false-flag-false-flags-way-life-now.html

Everyone else will follow this decision, I reckon. Trailblazing #saintsfc

Completely agree, which is why I place more stock in the rebels having more to gain.

a.k.a. "motive", traditionally quite important in investigations.

I like this, but if you're winning anyway, doesn't make a great deal of sense,

That's where we differ. I don't see what is in it for Assad. Only one side benefits from this.

Precisely. Assad's forces have been in the ascendancy for some time. It makes zero sense for him to willingly bring down further international condemnation by using these weapons, particularly as it has been made clear that this is a so-called "red line", and because he doesn't need to. What is in it for the Assad regime, who probably have self-preservation at the forefront of their minds? Nowt.

It's very good of you to list all of these things, holepuncture. I also love getting dissed by racists like yourself. It puts me in a great light, comparatively speaking. Seen any "vermin" lately, sir? That all said, I reckon your real problem is that you hate yourself, or your life, or what it's become - and it's everybody else's fault. Also sounds like you envy a lot of the people you list. Soz, chaps. Bit serious for TMS, I know - but I think it important that holepuncture works through his issues. Come now, holepuncture - you're amongst muppets. What's really on your mind? x

And jolly glad we are to have it. Of course, any stories which come from the Western media are entirely truthful. The state-run BBC isn't at all compromised and is completely independent Same for all those rolling news channels that are owned by corporate interests, presumably. I feel it's important to have a range of propaganda to choose from, don't you? Slight on me noted Here's your anti-semitism and references to people with far right tendencies. She was the victim of a couple of hit pieces, just as she was when she suggested she might prosecute NATO over war crimes in former Yugoslavia. http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/05/06/the_clarifying_of_the_uns_carla_del_ponte Oddly enough, the US state department backs up DP's claims that Assad's weapons remain securely in his hands. A piece on the hit-piece. Good this, isn't it? http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2013/05/07/carla-del-pontes-faux-pas/ Perpetual apologist for Israel takes a swing at DP, who actually lives in the region. Classic. Anyone else you'd like to call a bozo? The US state department that says the same things as DP? Please? The clamour to blame anyone but Assad? Have you watched the news today? I just hope you get paid for writing this nonsense. I certainly wish I got paid for reading it.

Liverpool is officially recognised as one of the UK's safest cities. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/liverpool-one-of-the-safest-cities-to-live-1401463 Fancy that.

And yet all the signs are that the US will be going in. Red lines. Escalations. Essentially what has been on rolling news. Fair play to the Beeb though. Was watching BBC News 24 a while ago; their anchor asked a very good question. Why would Assad use chemical weapons when he knows he has UN weapon inspectors on the ground?

Interesting. Cheers for this.

Numerous reasons. many already provided in this thread. Much lower cost of enforcement, ability to regulate the market and keep it free from contaminants, thereby keeping the public safer. The same sort of scrutiny applied to the long term effects of using a specific substance, much as we have with alcohol and tobacco, rather than the wholly inaccurate "it'll all kill you" rhetoric that's puffed up in the papers. People are at risk of contaminants because of the criminal source of illegal narcotics. I expect people made exactly the same arguments you're making about drug availability against booze in prohibition-era America. Society will fall apart. We need to be saved from ourselves. That piety may have warmed their hearts, but they indirectly fuelled vicious criminal gangs through the colossal miscalculation that we've made with drug policy, that prohibition is what people wanted. If that were true, demand would have fallen away long ago and this conversation wouldn't be happening. I'm not sure there are hard truths to be found here, but there is a reality. There has been enduring demand for narcotics in this country for decades, and the vast majority of that demand hasn't been wretched addicts, physically Jonesing for their next fix. It has been people seeking an alternative to being a beer monster on a Saturday night.