majestic

The books contain a clear prophecy (part of which made it to the show) of her having three children and all of them dying before she does, with a younger and more beautiful queen coming to cast her down - which now really seems to be Danaerys rather than Sansa or Margery, at least in the show - and her little brother eventually choking the life from her. No, wait, the little brother part is a bit murky because it states the little brother. So it could be anyone's little brother, but assuming it is going to be Jaime isn't really that far of a stretch, seeing how in the books he already abandoned her and he teleported back to King's Landing just in time to witness how much she resembles someone he already stabbed in the back.

ERock is totally awesome. Like, for real. Yeah.

I'm not sure it is a good idea for Martin's health to start using Bolivian marching powder to up his output. /scnr

If this is the case, what is your opinion of the disenfranchised feeling some member citizens have expressed? The feelings of being disenfranchised are understandable. Even though the officials all come from elected governments, or are elected themselves, the public view is generally that the EU is unable to solve any of the larger issues and it almost always breaks down to bickering, and let's face it, at the moment it can't. The financial crisis and it's shockwave still preoccupy us with no real end in sight. This is because, unlike in the US, our central bank isn't allowed to fund member states directly. There are hogwash reasons given for this nonsense by "economists" but the reality of the matter is that we're still dealing with this crap because it generates profits for the almost almighty financial sector and because Germany needs a devalued Euro (meaning easier exports for a nation generating tons of profits from them). It seems impossible for the EU to actually decide anything when it comes to the immigration issues as well. Member states are actively shirking their responsibilities and when in doubt we actually go and pick on Greece because they don't stop everyone after we've actively forced them to dismantle their infrastructure and public sector. Or in some cases, like CETA an TTIP, both of which were and are negotiated in utter secrecy (without leaks we would have nothing) that contain nice things like supranational courts that supposedly should be able to overrule a sovereign nation's legislature if it is bad for our corporate overlords, well... I'm not surprised that people are disenfranchised. There are a lot of great things the EU has done, but it simply pales in comparison to the things going on at the moment, for which there never seem to be a solution. They're all seen as being disconnected from the worries of the little man and when you look at it closely that isn't even surprising, becase many of them are. Mix and match this with scandals like the Cash-For-Laws deal while back. Now that the Brexit seems to be going down there is one little piece of irony in it: Assuming the EU survives this deal (i.e. this doesn't cause a cascade and everything unravles at the seams) finding consensus among the member nations just got a lot easier, seeing how it often was the UK who actively worked against resolutions or demanded even more of a special snowflake status that some populist parties also often cited as one of the reasons why the EU is ineffective and useless. Huh, who knows, maybe we'll finally get that transaction tax idea going on track without London's crippling lobbying. *shrug*

Short answer: The people, of course - it is after all a democratic institution. Long answer: That kind of depends on which EU institution you're talking about. Since we're talking government I guess we can leave out the ECB, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors. That leaves: The European Commission, which is made up by one person per member state. These are nominated by the respective national governments and approved by the European Parliament. This is the executive branch of the European Union, or if you will, the actual EU government. This is the institution that generally proposes legislature then voted on by the Parilament and the Council of the European Union. The European Parliament, Rosbjerg already explained that one, parties in each member nation are voted for and then organize themselves into pan-European groups. The largest group is currently the center/right conservative European People's Party (a party which I utterly despise, but that's neither here nor there). Elections are held every five years in each member nation. The Council of the European Union, which currently has 10 different configurations with each configuration made up by members of each member state's government, according to their portfolio (e.g. the Foreign Affairs Council is made up by each member nation's minister of foreign affairs). This is the second part of the EU legislative branch. Lastly there is the European Council, comprised of the head of government of each member state. It has no legislative or executive power but is generally supposed to provide impetus, direction and, yes, general council to the other institutions. Until the Treaty of Lisbon this institution only existed in an inofficial capacity. There are no term limits that I know of. Every EU official in the governing branch is democratically elected. Either through parties in the national EU parliamentary elections with disturbingly low voter attendence (and then a lot of complaining, obviously, about how a distant and supposedly undemocratic government imposes their will on the member states) or through each member nation's general elections. One of the problems that often crop up is how the local governments appear to select the members of the commission - as a method to remove rivals or to make unwelcome failures disappear gracefully.

So here are my two cents, some points were already raised but yeah, I'll just repeat them as I hold them necessary: Putting Peter Dinklage and Emilia Clarke in the same scenes just showed how woefully sub-par she is compared to, well, pretty much everyone else on the show. Even Sophie Turner is better and she certainly is on the lower rung. The dragons burning the ships was some solid special effects work, but Dany was clearly using some sort of steps or a ladder to climb Drogon. Let the Dany/Asha shipping commence (please dear god no, just no). You go Rickon, just run in a straight line so Ramsay can play with you. Good boy. Hey Jon maybe you should listen to your sister. Sure she's a bit dumb but when she's right, she's right. Davos was awesome when suggesting to copy Hannibal's winning tactic of the battle of Cannae. I'm not sure the wildlings would have the necessary discipline for that though. Never mind, didn't happen anway. See, that would have been a nice, logical reason for the lines to break in the wrong way and the battle devolve into a bloody, chaotic mess. *sigh* Which brings me to the battle scene which I found... simply put, well, terrible. I have long since resigned myself to the fact that realistic "medieval" army makeup and equipment will always be sacrificed to the Rule of Cool and that is fine, within reason (e.g. wrong armor or the fact that even lowly soldiers all seem to be able to afford swords), but this fight did a number on my suspension of disbelief. Just how did that mountain of corpses rise from the ground? Did the soldiers climb it so they can f'ing die up there? Or did the same special Bolton commando unit that burned Stannis' siege equipment last season pile it up while everyone wasn't looking? Seriously? And even so, how the hell did Jon's forces end up being pushed behind it? Why isn't Wun Wun breaking the Bolton's newfound hoplite line by using all those corpses as bowling equipment? Why doesn't he at least carry a trunk or something to properly smash Bolton soldiers? And why did they just stand there and watch being encircled just like Aragon did at the end of the Return of the King movie (that was pretty stupid too)? I also get that Wun Wun's presence was necessary so he can smash the Winterfell gates (why are they made of wood by the by? Where's the moat? Or the inner or outer walls? Why does Winterfell's interior look like a stupid barn rather than a fortress? Only D&D know...). Lastly, why is it that every time there is a medieval battle on TV or in a movie that the two armies are deployed two miles apart and then charge each other? Ever tried running a mile in armor with some heavy weaponry and maybe even a shield and then fighting when meeting the other army? Yeah, right. *sigh* Rant over. Still liked the episode for the most part. I can pretend that silly engagement didn't play out the way it did.

I don't know. It would really be just like Show!Ramsay to kill Rickon in front of Jon and Sansa for ****s and giggles, and he's served his purpose luring Jon to battle. *shrug* edit: Oh, and yes, I kind of forgot the King's Landing characters. Kevan and Pycell are probably biting it. Loras might too, and Tommen, who knows. Tommen is actually in the way of Cersei ruling again, and the show has for some reason tried to establish at least some semblance to the political structure and whereabouts of the characters during the latter half of ADWD.

I'm guessing the last two episodes are going to kill off all characters that are left which aren't central to the plot any more. That includes: Brienne Tommen Rickon Meera Ramsay (he either loses Winterfell or the Others take him) Bronn (why bother if he has two minutes of screen time per season) A bunch of Freys Tormund Wun Wun Podrick ...

That was entirely terrible. I'm usually good at this sort of thing, but can someone explain to me how Arya not only survived four stab wounds to the gut which then got exposed to Braavos' certainly not very clean sea water in a world with no antibiotics (if by some stretch all four stabs missed the intestines) and after a good night's sleep on morphine leaps out of the window, manages to kill the Waif off-screen and then sasses Jaqen as if nothing ever happened and his only reaction is a weird smile?

This sale would be much more awesome if it wouldn't read "OWNED" in the lower right corner of pretty much every offer. All that's left are things I have no or only a passing interest in. Le sigh.

The SR readme lists no changes to Improved Haste (only to Haste) but it might come from somewhere else. With only the base game and ToB installed IH doubles the attack rate in the same way the oil does. I just noticed that the classic BG versions no longer appear in the GOG shop. Urgh. There go some of the funniest "reviews" ever.

Yes and no. With dual wielding one can reach 5 attacks per round with the Gauntlets of Extraordinary Specialization with the appropriate class and proficiency level but that limit can be overriden with Improved Haste or (Greater) Whirlwind Attack. As a fun excercise imagine what sort of enemies can stand against a Fighter/Mage with Mirror Image and Stoneskin while dual wielding Foebane under Improved Haste. Kind of bad for the employment rates of clerics.

This isn't some reader, we're talking about a note to his editor, probably the only other person involved in GRRM's creative process when it comes to the (main) books. Make of that what you will, but it does seem a tad silly to go to such lengths as to fake editor's notes to "disprove" a theory that simply goes on to be validated by the rapidly catching up TV show anyway. Martin might be a bit weird, but I sure hope he's not that much of a nutjob.

...and GOG takes my money again. Heh.

So Arya let herself be stabbed like an utter fool, the waif managed to fall for the ol' "stay under water a while" spiel like an utter fool and the Brotherhood Without Banners is nothing more than a band of common thugs and House Mormont commands all of 62 fighting men to make Sansa accept Littlefinger's help (if that what the letter was supposed to be). If it weren't for Emma Peel telling Queen Gorgo off this would have been a total loss. Even Bronn was terrible.

I'd say that's just wishful thinking, but with D&D you never know. The Faceless Men don't work that way, once a contract is signed, the assassination is carried out. There is no mercy for the victim because death is the mercy the Faceless Men bring. They're much more a religious order than an assassin's guild, also seen in the way the negotiate a price for their services. But yeah, that might work for the show.

The current Dalai Lama was friends with SA and later SS and NSDAP member Brad Pitt Heinrich Harrer who got stuck in Tibet after successfully breaking out of an English internment camp in 1944. 7 years in Tibet and all.

Of course. It's easy to be head over heels in debt if no one comes to collect. Not that the EU could implement something similar anyway. Cutting out the middle man by direct funding via the ECB would upset the poor investment bankers and a whole bunch of shareholders. Can't have that. Might have saved Greece though, who knows. But can't have that either because that would upset mama Merkel in Berlin. :>

GRRM stated flat out that Benjen is not Coldhands because we have seen a ADWD manuscript page with Martin's and his editor's notes where that question was asked: Leaf also stated that Coldhands was killed "a long time ago" and for a Child it seems odd that it would be a ranger who died fairly recently, given their lifespan. Not that I trust that resounding "No" here any more than I trust Leaf's words. Plus, why else would the show pull out Benjen after 6 years (with the same actor to boot)? Questions, questions... I almost didn't recognize Brutus though. For a moment I thought they swapped him for Faramir.

Look at Japan. 25 years of almost zero growth (and sometimes actual shrinking) and a debt to GDP ratio of 150 to 200%. Look what it has brought: Riots on the streets, anarchy, the collapse of infrastructure, massive unemployment rates, women prostituting themselves for a sandwich, the rise of populism both left and right wing... no, wait, that was Greece. Sorry. My bad. I got that mixed up somewhere along my train of thought.

Well, barring the creation of the Heart of Winter as seen on the show there are only a handful of known events in the history of Martin's world that could - in theory - lead to that sort of climate change: The Hammer of the Water employed by the Children to smash the land bridge between Westeros and Essos, its second use in the attempt to sever the north of Westeros from the south (creating Moat Cailin) and the Doom of Valyria. The Doom was too recent to be a likely culprit and creating floods and breaking islands is like to have an effect on the local climate but not on that scale. Somehow I doubt we'll get an answer either way.

Except I meant what the measters consider the official history of Westeros where the wall was supposedly built 8000 years or so ago, not the timeline as a sci-fi/fantasy concept. But yeah, Hodor becoming Hodor because Bran manipulated him from the future is not a concept that I liked. So why not stop the Children from creating the Others in the first place? Novels solved. Bleh.

They're vague hints. Actually, more a combination of a vision of Melisandre and what Bloodraven says to Bran. Besides, the timeline has been stated to be inaccurate so often we can pretty much assume it is out of whack. I don't think that D&D made the origins of the Others up (they are, after all, vulnerable to the one substance the Children made their weapons from).

So do you mind naming a few points how the EU is like the Nazis? I'm trying to understand this view Here you go : https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2016/05/21/greetings-slaves/ Ah, Hayek, the second worst thing to come from pretty Austria right after the little guy with the funny moustache.

You very seldom follow-up on certain interesting comments you make so I hope you do on this one What is your definition of "Yuroppan countries are outside the EU" Oh Bruce, really, HoonDing is all about shooting one-liners and not following up on anything. Sometimes he has a point, and sometimes, like here, he doesn't. Besides, with a minimal amount of research you'd figure it out: There are only two truly prosperous European nations that are not members of the European Union: Norway and Switzerland (I apologize to any posters from Iceland ). The former draws most of its wealth from natural resources and the latter from all sorts of criminal cash deposits (I'd write no offense meant but that wold be a lie ). While both are not members of the EU they all have a large number of treaties with the EU and enjoy many benefits without the most perceivable downsides like net budget contributions and overbearing EU regulations, but also the downside of being affected by some EU regulations without being able to partake in the decision making process. So far it would seem the, uhm, benefits outweigh the downsides. For populist parties they're also generally the go-to examples of wealthy states that do not need the EU to be prosperous, but it's very problematic to assume a nation could leave the EU and copy either Norway or Switzerland because of their very unique positions. Both could, though, serve as a template for a much needed EU reform by cutting back on the bureaucratic overhead and taking a few steps back to what the EU used to be in the past, a unifying economic pact, not a supra-national entity steeped in indecision and corruption.