Walsingham

Whoah there, settle down, chaps. I am personally a supporter of the notion that a person who genuinely wants to die, or is suffering too much to choose either way, probably ought to die. I've said as much many many times. For feth's sake, it's part of your state run military training that if someone's in excessive pain, and aren't getting better, then you hit them with several shots of morphine. But I do not intend to cheapen or confuse the very simple logic of the drug prohibition debate by introducing imperfect analogies. The key point being that the legal distinction between self adminstration being voluntary and external administration being voluntary is far from trivial. Where the hell is Pop when you need him?

Today I donated my thousand dollars worth of flight vouchers to the charity Afghan Heroes, who support serving soldiers and their families. Really believe I feel better for doing this than using the damn things. Completed my Christmas shopping by buying books, DVDs, and booze. Uninspired, but hopefully good.

Case in point: seems utterly solid on evidence, no remorse, nice to know he'll be in high security at a cost that would otherwise pay for support for the kind of women he preyed on.

http://darryl-cunningham.blogspot.com/2010...ate-change.html Way to not read the actual article. EDIT: I love how your post goes int othis massive cartoon ramble about right wing "super rich" conspiracies using agitprop... in the most flagrant agitprop language. e.g. (paraphrasing slightly) "People who don't believe in global warming are either ignorant, but open to changing their mins, or they're deranged religious or republican zealots." C'mon, Krez, really. I expect a bit better from you.

Euthanasia is suicide. I would say it's pretty damn relevant to what you mentioned but whatever. It's a very different architecture, because it's an organised event. It's like comparing getting other people high with getting high yourself. The key distinction being that between an assault by another party and self harm.

I don't know the source at all well, but I stumbled on this article which suggests that even the small percentages of muslims polled in one study who support Al Q translate into millions of supporters. I'd suggest the numbers look a little off, but the principle is sound.

You can say that again. I didn't quite hear you, these aged ears being what they are.

I'm not going down the euthanasia conversation because I don't feel it's analogous. It is no longer illegal. You can certainly still get in trouble if you wander onto a train line, as I witnessed from a train near Reading. But otherwise they basically try to talk you into getting help. Essentially on the grounds that it won't do you much good if you don't want to go. Also, yes, giving someone a criminal record when their life is already terrible is ...counterproductive. My central point here is that if someone wants to do themselves in as a means of escaping trouble then you can't stop them with the law. There are just too many ways to do it. Which I would argue is analogous to the notion that if someone wants to wreck their life by getting high then you can't stop them with the law. There are just too many ways to do it. And ppeople don't quit when their money runs out either, they just steal or sell their possessions or bodies. Sadly, what I'm NOT saying is there is a solution to the problem of individual harm outside law enforcement. The ONLY consequence I am trying to highlight is that using the law and failing has terrifying consequences around the world and in our own communities.

Well that was predictable, I guess ROK/US called their bluff. Either that or there's some back room deal that gave Kim what he wanted (Japanese showgirls?). Or a phone call from Beijing. Ew. Wait, sorry, just following the train of logic from the showgirls. Novel thought for a sex phone line though: senior Chinese state officials.

This time I went NCR all the way. Thought I could build my own state and aid them as an ally, but apparently not - although this was pretty well explained so no complaints from me.

Very interesting, and easy to follow article. Thanks.

At 50 hours I just finished my first play through of Fallout New Vegas. In every detail it was just fantastic... except the sudden crashes. It must be heart breaking for the devs to have such an awesome game let down by some issue with the saves [i saved the long way every 10 minutes and that seemed to tackle it]. I'm going to wait a while, but I am hugely looking forward to at least two other play throughs.

I haven't had time tto read the intervening posts, so apologies. Just wanted to throw something in again. Suicide used to be illegal in the UK. Making it legal was fought tooth and nail by people who believed passionately that it would mean more suicides.

This is an interresting question, and one I'd like to respond to in a little detail. But for now: 1. The military in a democracy need to reflect the mores of the culture they serve, or abandon the support of that culture. 2. I certainly have no objection to the courage, discipline etc of homosexuals, and see no reason why there should be a decrement in the military virtues simply because of where the individual wants to push their junk. * 3. Various military organisations have accepted homosexuality without an apparent loss of function. HOWEVER 4. There is a profound virtue to be found in the existing military culture and ethics. 5. The above preclude homosexuality on grounds that it interferes with normal intense bonds which occur on the front line but which have nothing to do with sex. 6. I suggest that accepting homosexuals is not a one item modular change. It is a whole system change. 7. Conducting that change is not going to be straightforward. It may not even occur. This will leave our Forces weakened in the short term. 8. It may be that in the long term the benefits outweigh the negatives. It will permit the Forces to compete for public support. It will prevent the alienation of homosexuals, with attendant loss of skills and even hostility. It will prevent homosexuality - an extremely common phenomenon - being a route for corruption and compromise of personnel. *Having observeerd squaddies on the pull, I can testify to the fact they'd put their junk in some bloody awful places.

I love the game so mycg, but have run into my first squadron of bugs, surrounding the Beyond the Beef quest. What blows my mind is how much care and attention to detail goes into the scenes and the storyline. I was really feeling tense and excited about the plot emerging. ...And then WHAM total game lockdown.

You should cook my drunkards pudding. Mix equal quantities of sugar and suet with slightly more self raising flour. Add a small quantity of spice. Add warm water and mix to a batter. Place this mixture into a cake loaf tin, and bake in some sort of oven. Meanwhile, in a double boiler mix dark chocolate and milk chocolate and fresh cream, until it is all melty. Once the suet pudding is ready and crisp on top, remove from teh oven and pour a generous quantity of liquer or brandy over the hot surface, immediately topping with the chocolate sauce. Sprinkle finely chopped strawberries or other autumn fruits on the surface and serve.

There's also a strong left wing tendency in the IRA. I also think that tl;dr on this sort of topic is a pretty poor effort. Mental muscles not up to ones on your arms, chunky?

Actually, pmp10 it's precisely because of serious crimes like murder that I think there's a powerful domestic argument for legalisation under license. At present our overburdened penal system lets murderers and other violent criminals go free just to make space. Decriminalise drugs and we'd have space to keep first order bastards behind bars.

I was supposed to do several things today, but I spent teh entire time playing Fallout New Vegas. I knew this would bloody happen.

BREAK BREAK! I just got FO New Vegas from one of my siblings! Just when I was thinking I won't be getting much work done before Christmas anyway! Siblings are awesome. *La cucaracha the Walsingham*

Fair rattling along today. A lot of work done, plus it looks like I will be able to finagle some good stuff for my second favourite charity http://www.afghanheroes.org.uk/homepage.asp (My first being the NSPCC)

Actually there are a lot of people getting arrested for Islamist plots who subsequently get released. You get people living in close proximity who the police detain on grounds that they had to know about the bomb making or what have, but whom courts won't convict. I don't know whether that's lousy police work, or failed jurisprudence. Just interesting.

Paranoid much? Instead of moaning about other people's anti-Americanism, I'd instead be worried of how your country is perceived by foreigners. Absolutely. Racism has nothing to do with it. Stop being such a baby, a healthy dose of skepticism is in order towards the worlds only remaining superpower. When it comes to national imperatives and foreign policy we don't have to all get along. In fact we are guaranteed not to. Wikileaks might well be irresponsible, but they would cease to have a point if they held anything back, and it's still the 'little man' vs the system. Get your priorities straight, fight the power and all that. And I raise you an adolescent rebellion fantasy. Skepticism about US motives is perfectly sound and proper. If you go outside the law - democratic law - you aren't fighing the power. You're fighting the people. As for holding nothing back, just listen to yourself. I've been sparring with you for far too long to believe you buy that bull****. Secrecy is essential to certain actions. It is essential in opposed actions such as crime, terror or war. It is essential to achieve open honest negotiation between organisations. It is essential to ordinary people who have a right to privacy and security. This is precisely and emphatically the point of the original post. Assange and wikileaks aren't fighting for open information. They're breaking the law to push their own marginal view of the world onto everyone. It's a view some people support, but it's a view which most people either don't or really wouldn't like in action.

Fair questions. My answers: 1. Alcohol isn't easy to turn away from. IIRC it has a higher recidivism rate than heroin. 2. Heroin IS freely available. In some parts of the UK it's cheaper than a pint of beer. 3. You should care for the same reason I care: the damage done by organised crime controlling the drug trade is immense. It corrupts our institutions, it diverts policing, it provokes violence. 4. If you expand your thinking outwards then you see how millions of people suffer under narco-states and narco-terrorism. Neither of which could exist if supplies of the drug were made available at cost in the way Bob is suggesting. Mexico, Afghanistan, Colombia, Brazil, directly. Other countries suffer as transhipment points. 5. All these problems might be acceptable if prohibition stopped most people from getting the drugs. But this is not the case.

Agreed on Star Wars Rebellion (Supremacy in the UK). A game I enjoyed and played so much that I now actually understand the astromech droid bleeps.