pap

Bin Laden isn't a US citizen, so I don't think we're really talking about the same things. As a US citizen, Awlaki had a right to a fair trial and judgement by a jury of his peers. Bin Laden was a foreign national and did not have similar rights.

Every government messes with electoral boundaries. The boundaries commission lurched in favour of the Conservative Party during Thatcher's day, and lurched back during New Labour's time in office. Not a new invention.

I'm sure plenty of Germans said the same things in 1934.

Where is the proof of this TDD? All of these things may be true, but they have not been proved to a judicial standard. You can try to justify the killing, but with no recognisable proof, there is no justification.

What criminal does want to get arrested? Or is interested in being tried? The criminals' lack of enthusiasm for being caught and convicted shouldn't stop us from trying to uphold the system we are supposedly trying to defend. The coppers can't say "the bloke doesn't want to be caught, doesn't want to be tried, so we'll just kill him instead", and nor should they.

Normally, TDD, when we accuse people of being very bad men, particularly our own citizens, we arrest them, gather evidence to support the accusations of their guilt, allow them to defend themselves, and get twelve of their peers to assess their guilt. If found guilty, they receive the appropriate punishment. Confidence in the judicial process is essential for a functioning democracy. Judicial process was completely circumvented here. The Americans basically decided he was a bad man, and executed him. Doesn't that worry you? A little bit? Our justice system isn't perfect, but absent a proper frame-up, I would have general confidence that I would be acquitted if I was accused of a crime I did not commit. This guy didn't even get the chance. The US Government subverted judicial process, ordered the killing of one of its own citizens, and has literally gotten away with murder. Don't know what is scarier, that, or the fact that no-one seems to care. Designating people as enemies and simply killing them isn't new. It's what we rightly despised about the Soviet and Nazi regimes. It's a very slippery slope, and if we don't start to ask questions when the leader of the free world starts offing its own citizens, when do we?

Like many, I was alarmed at the recent killing of Anwar al-Awlaki. Apparently, he was a very bad man, responsible for inspiring and nurturing Islamic terrorists. We'll probably never know. Awlaki was assassinated on the orders of President Obama for his alleged involvement in these activities. The politics of assassination has never sat easy with me. What's unusual about all this is that Awlaki was a US citizen, never indicted for a crime and not subject to any judicial process. Now I don't know about you, but I find this rather scary.

Firstly, it's what Mickey Mouse teams do. You don't see the big teams farting choons through their public address system. Secondly, it shows a lack of respect to the opposition, especially as away goals are never given any fanfare. It's classless pettiness. If other teams want to do it, let them, and we'll mock them for being the scumbag peasants they are. We are Southampton. We're better than this. It also shows a lack of respect for the intelligence, feelings and passion of the fans. We know if we've scored, we're more than capable of making our own noise and I haven't seen a single person on here defend it.

Yes it did, based on a campaign of lies and an alternative that was only marginally better. That doesn't mean that FPTP is inherently good. Just means that we have a lot of liars and a lot of very gullible people.

Definitely happens. Check out Saints vs Brum, All Angles Covered on SaintsPlayer. After Lambert's pen, you can clearly hear "Song 2" being played.

It's actually a 'no' from me too, so don't thank me for it. In fact, I emailed the club today asking why we're doing something normally associated with "mickey mouse" clubs. Will let you know if and when I get a response

To be fair, think I only heard it once in one of the highlight reels.

Of all the things to make their way across the Atlantic, one thing that really annoys me is when clubs play a snippet of a song after the home team scores a goal. I first saw this up at Ewood Park. Thought it was pretty sad at the time, but forgave the Blackburn fans because they don't really understand what football is. Now, it has been a long time since I've been to a home game, but I understand that we play Blur's Song 2 after we score at St. Marys. I think the whole idea is a bit low-rent, and detracts from the only important noise - the sound of the fans. What are your views?

The problem is that it works for the Tories, Andy. They have zero interest in government being decided by more reflective voting systems because they know that they'll never raise the popular support.

Stand on a lay-by on the A303 with a sign saying "Come get it here, trucker big boys".

As far as I'm concerned, they can roger each other all year as long as can they keep it up. (you see what I did there?)

Obi Wan never told you about your father, did he The9?....

Yeah, I would not be a fan of these legal highs myself. I actually like what Bill Hicks had to say about mushrooms and marijuana. Banning them is like saying "God was wrong". But on a more serious note, it's interesting to compare the way that different societies deal with the issue of narcotics. I remember the mass hysteria surrounding ecstasy when it first came out. At its height, ecstasy was claimed to have caused 40 deaths in one year. That same year, 33,000 people died through alcohol related causes. A big problem is education. Instead of accepting that people are going to do stuff, our government just made the subject effectively taboo. This meant that a lot of people who ended up using the drug had no clue about the effects of it, save that it might kill you. If the Government had really been concerned about the effects of ecstasy, they'd have got off their high horses and told clubbers not to drink too much water ( drowning your own brain was a big cause of ecstasy related death ) and not to get too hot ( body loses a lot of its ability to regulate its own temperature ). The other cause of death wasn't actually ecstasy per se, but the contaminants that it was cut with. On the other side of the English Channel, the Dutch government took a different view. They educated their young people, legislated so that clubs had to have adequate legislation and provided testing kits gratis so people could be sure that they were buying kosher stuff. To my knowledge, the Dutch have never recorded a single death which was entirely caused by ecstasy. We just need to be grown up about this. Prohibition has never worked, can never work, and causes more problems than it solves.

The points about the legalisation of drugs are well made. In pure public health terms, the legal drugs also do a lot of damage, but you don't see off licence owners or newsagents banged up for selling their wares. Every pound we spend on enforcement or imprisoning those who are caught is wasted, in my view. Plus you need to take on board what VFTT and Turkish have said about the difficulties of having stuff on your permanent record and getting back into employement. Prison should be reserved for truly exceptional behaviour which society does not want in its midst. I'm talking violent offences, sexual assaults, crimes against the person, basically. I've said it before, but we spend all this money on drug enforcement essentially to say "we don't approve of this". Politicians won't even countenance it ( Miliband came up with some piffly explanation which essentially amounted to "drugs are bad m'kay". People are going to play around with recreational chemicals, irrespective of whether they are legal or not. For some, the contraband status makes it all the more alluring. Speaking only for myself, alcohol was a lot "cooler" when we had to find our under-age companion with the deepest voice and the largest amount of stubble to buy it for us. The country owes a ton of money. Not only could we pay a lot of that back with the taxation raised, but we could also ensure that prisons are a last resort for those that are really deserving of a custodial sentence.

I read about Frazer's improvement ten years ago on an ancient scroll in the British Museum.

E.J Thribbs?

While I respect your views on Twitter, Ohio Saint, not everyone dismisses it as easily. It's a big deal. I completely agree that there is a load of ****e out there atm, but I've seen people accuse Saints fans of being arrogant because of what they've said on Twitter. Now, can't speak for everyone, but I actually think that we, especially us who've been turning up to places like Rochdale, are a pretty humble group of supporters. We've kinda had to be. I've always liked the fact that we've had respect from other teams. Triumphalist rantings directed toward Brighton, of all teams, doesn't really help that.

Excellent result, but some of our fans on Twitter need to rein this Brighton rivalry in. Well done to all at the club for this amazing run of 16 consecutive home wins.

What a load of crap. We've already had reports from posters on this very thread that he is a fat bast. They've also said "no thanks". Who are you going to believe? The ultra-reliable Beattie detractors or your lying eyes?* *Nicked from, as anyone with comedy taste will know, the late great Richard Pryor.