Zombie

We're getting close to that annual festival - the festival of dead souls known as All Hallows' Eve, or Hallowe'en. This festival of the dead is ancient, stretching back in time to the Celtic festival of Samhain which marked the end of the year and the beginning of winter. It was believed that on the evening of Samhain supernatural creatures were abroad and the souls of the dead were allowed to revisit their former homes ... So this is a good time to remind everyone of the dangers of dolls ... evil dolls. Here's a short documentary on one particular doll called Robert. It's probably best to watch it when it's dark. And you're alone. And the wind's making that branch tap on the window. Or is it a branch? Anyway, back to that factual documentary

This has been the triumph of the neo-cons where everything is religious based and polarised as "good" or "evil" [as Dubya said, you're either for us or against us] and military response is the way to conduct international relations. It's been a big win for the military-industrial complex you mentioned but a catastrophe for the world - it's an incredibly simplistic, reductionist, stupid, divisive and dangerous way of conducting politics; it's resulted in a far more dangerous world where more people than ever now HATE the US with a passion and is the most effective recruiting agent for new generations of young impressionable minds to hate the US and wage a terrorist war that can never be won because it's being waged internally by individuals driven by collective hate not by any centralised command structure; it makes Dubya's fatuous crap about "winning hearts and minds" seem like a sick joke; and it has stripped away individual rights and freedoms that have been fought for by citizens over centuries and continue to be removed slice by slice until, like the proverbial cucumber, we will be left with nothing but complete control and oversight of everything we do - as you probably know the US puts more people per head of population in prison than any other developed country [nice big win for the US "security" business]. Nine years ago - 2004 - the BBC showed a 3 part series by Adam Curtis, The Power of Nightmares - The Rise of the Politics of Fear. It's an interesting comparison of neo-con beliefs and radical Islam. The modern equivalent of the 20th century struggle between communism and fascism. In the end they both seem to be opposite sides of the same coin - a very bad penny. You won't agree with everything but it's worth catching on the interweb. Not surprisingly it was never shown on US TV. http://sophistryandillusion.com/videos/Adam-Curtis/The+Power+of+Nightmares+-+part+1.flv.php

Glad your gran is sorted. But no 85 yo should have to go through that - it's shameful and cruel and no decent society should allow it. And you are right about funding for an adequate pension. Only the politicians and the corporate robber barons, the directors of public companies who help themselves to the profits earned by ALL the company workers, get good pensions. For the rest - the average Joe - it is not economically possible to fund for an adequate pension to last them for possibly 30 years. The state has to have a role in ensuring dignity and decency in old age. And we ALL have a vested interest in this because - surprise surprise - we will all get old and decrepit if we get to live full term.

Happy birthday Rustle! Hope there's lots of paper rustling as you rip it off your presents

so it's a toss up between "the problem's too big to fix", "it's not my / our problem" and "it's not a problem"

I like DR. Despite his huge wealth and mega success he still seems like a regular guy you could have a chat with in a pub who's probably still in touch with his old mates. Part of what makes him so attractive - apart from "little" Daniel - is his willingness to poke fun at himself, like in this radio interview, and in Ricky Gervais's Extras. Contrast him with so many mega movie stars who are so up themselves, living in their security guarded mansions cut off from the rest of society.

Hi I'm a ... healthy eater

Answer the door smiling and naked, and call over your shoulder: "Jeff, honey, your birthday present's arrived!"

There's nothing new about the current coming US debt crisis - the current coming US debt crisis has been illustrated for well over a decade under government from both sides. Human beings are generally unable to understand the bad consequences of exponential "growth". OK, in this case it's not exponential it's compound. But the outcome is the same - compound just takes a little longer to get there Nor are they capable of comprehending the numbers - they are simply outside ordinary people's experience. Couple this with the demonstrated attitude of so many Americans - including stereotypical family guys on this site - that, even if it's bad, if it's not gonna happen in their lifetime [whatever "it" happens to be] it's "not my problem", plus the default position of just believing on "faith" whatever their party parrots ["faith" is big in your country right?], is it any wonder that your elected representatives avoided picking up a poisoned chalice that is simply beyond the comprehension of the average American party fodder? Much more appealing to focus on personal self-enrichment and if it goes pear-shaped for the whole fucking nation simply blame the "other side". Welcome to US politics - a model for the world.

"Now will MC follow up on the ploy? Who knows. But I have faith he will or the friend will really be screwed. But will the MC change his freewheeling ways? Probably not ... Hollinghurst's MC changing and discovering the power of love and sacrifice would have been trite and silly. It wouldn't have made much real sense. But then again, the story doesn't leave me satisfied, depressed really. " It's an interesting question where to stop the story - any story - because "The end" is when MC dies As for you being left unsatisfied / depressed I find that too. I think his writing, though of high quality, is curiously uninvolving - I don't care for or about the MC, and that gives the story a kind of emptiness.

Man, it's your hyperbole that's trippy :funny: The way I see it a cover of a crap song is gonna be ... crap. There's an old English saying about this - you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. So if you liked the covers of some of their songs then they can't have been that crap Maybe it's the particular "Merseybeat sound" they made that curdles your gizzard See, I have two conflicting responses. Intellectually I know the Beatles are one of the most significant bands to date with a permanent place in pop history for a shedload of reasons - they took pop music in some radically new directions - they wrote some very original stuff [sure some was derivative but what composer doesn't steal?] - some of their lyrics are true poems of high quality [Yesterday is one of the finest poems ever set to music] - they were unquestionably very influential on a load of other bands both at the time [brian Wilson / Beach Boys for example] and ever since [including execrable talentless shits like the Gallagher brothers] - you lot are posting all these comments on them But I never listen to their songs because in a weird way they kind of depress me. Just as I know that Shakespeare is and probably always will be the most important playwright in the English language. But I never go to see his plays. Here's my take on all this. Every new generation wants to consign the oldsters to history, to make its mark - it's what we're programmed to do. So it must make them pretty pissy when they discover that a bunch of old men were there before them 50 years ago - all those bands, not just the Beatles - and they nicked the best licks. It's not fair when a 17 yo budding pop or rock star comes up with a new guitar lick, or keyboard riff, or rock lyric only to discover it's all been done before. And history isn't fair. Never was, never will be. Newton got all the glory and he STILL gets all the glory after 300 years, while the brilliant Robert Hooke is and probably always will be the forgotten man.

Happy birthday Daithi Hope you liked my present *coughs* ... er, the one I stole from you

Happy birthday Paya - a special one to remember

Well done

No, this is wrong. The trade was not illegal - it was perfectly legal. What it was, of course, was utterly immoral trade. And Britain's behaviour was shameful. You are right, however, about poverty being the driver for supply. Afghanistan is a case in point - there's no other way their poorest farmers can make a living. But the huge savings from no longer having to wage the "drugs war" - and when you add up the costs they are staggering - could be more usefully reinvested in countries like Afghanistan to stimulate other more beneficial trading activities. International co-operation seems unlikely. But as individual countries accept the futility of this "fight" and start decriminalising they will remove themselves from the illegal drugs trade. They will of course be able to impose strict controls just as with alcohol and nicotine - there is no difference that would prevent this. Which means these countries need no more be "buffer states" for narcotics than for nicotine or alcohol. This will, of course, increase the strain on those countries that continue to fight this futile war because the drug barons will then focus all their activities on those territories. Just like those other drug dealers - the nicotine pushers - had to move on to countries in Africa and Asia when their lucrative home markets dried up

Well said. The "war on drugs" is a fatuous notion and every politician that parrots it merely confirms his unfitness for office. The US has been here before, nearly a hundred years ago with prohibition, and parallels with organised crime and quality - bootleg alcohol could make you blind - are virtually identical. Even the police are - finally - seeing the stupidity of current drugs policies. Last weekend one of England's Police Chiefs - Mike Barton, Chief Constable of Durham - said "decriminalisation was the best way to wrestle power away from criminal gangs" and drugs should be available on the NHS through prescription - that way the concentration and quality could be assured. “If an addict were able to access drugs via the NHS or some similar organisation, then they would not have to go out and buy illegal drugs. Drugs should be controlled. They should not, of course, be freely available. I think addiction to anything - drugs, alcohol, gambling, etc - is not a good thing, but outright prohibition hands revenue streams to villains.” http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/legalise-hard-drugs-says-chief-constable-1-3117437

OK so George Laraque was a no-talent thug - now a retired thug - but that only means the concerns he is now expressing about the consequences of what he used to do actually carry more weight than some namby pamby wet wimp He's seen and experienced what happens from within the game. That's not actually a reason. Speaking for myself, if I want something it's because I want something - it's of no interest to me who else wants it or doesn't want it. I make up my own mind based on the merits. I guess you are the same? The example previously given about rugby is relevant. Rugby is now a much safer sport than it was because of the changes in rules and attitudes. Players now suffer much fewer and far less serious head injuries. But the game is just as enjoyable, just as fast. And the game now gets more money and bigger crowds. All this could happen with hockey. And then there's the young players not wanting to come into the game, and children being turned off, and parents staying away from the game as reported in the article because this isn't about hockey being a "contact sport" - it still would be, just like rugby - it's about violence. .

Well consider this from yesterday ... Georges Laraque, the enforcer for the Canadiens when he retired in 2010, spoke about the mental pressure of the enforcer role in a 2011 CBC interview. “A lot of people can't deal with the pressure in their minds and they use drugs and alcohol to deal with that. The three players that passed away, there are another 50 of them that used to be heavyweights and have problems with alcohol and drugs because of that role.” Neurosurgeon Robert Cantu and his team at Boston University were going public about their findings from studying the brains of deceased athletes, including NHL enforcers, and they often discovered degenerative brain disease caused by blunt impact to the head, chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). "Any time I hear of an athlete who has had a lot of head trauma who commits suicide, I am immediately concerned that chronic traumatic encephalopathy may have played a role," Cantu told CBC News that summer. Then in December, neurologist Rajendra Kale wrote an editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal calling for "a ban on all forms of intentional head trauma, including fighting, along with severe deterrent penalties such as lengthy suspensions for breaches." Kale, then the journal's editor, didn't mince words about fighting in hockey: "This brutal tradition should be given up now that research has shown that repeated head trauma can cause severe progressive brain damage." Essentially this boils down to one simple question - do you want this violence and these serious brain injuries to continue as entertainment for the crowd? http://www.cbc.ca/news/george-parros-injury-renews-debate-about-fighting-in-hockey-1.1876908 *worth reading the whole article about children and parents who are in fact being put off the game - and also the comments section* .

Thank you for that link. Clearly there's a big difference between attitudes to violence in hockey in North America and the rest of the world. Of course, in Europe we used to have bear baiting, cock fighting, dog fighting, bare knuckle fighting. And rugby was a pretty brutal sport too. But rule and attitude changes mean rugby is now a sport everyone can enjoy - the whole family. Can you say the same about NHL if fighting is still so prevalent? Families want their children to see "grown ups" fighting like that? Because the fact is rugby is still an exciting fast-moving sport with far fewer serioius injuries than used to happen - and it now has more supporters and earns a lot more money. Who would deny this is a good thing? So, yes, some may have an appetite for blood and violence but appetites can be changed to a more healthy diet Oh, and we used to send children up chimneys but things move on

I think the problem is systemic. Politicians are by nature combative, but your system seems designed to end in this kind of deadlock - not intentionally, but because it has no effective mechanisms to unwind the polarised conflicts that build up. As things stand it is making your country look ridiculous in the eyes of the world. You are not going to change human nature so the only solution is significant change to your constitutional arrangements. But I don't see that happening any time soon. Meanwhile I'm sorry about your grandmother, and the hundreds of thousands of others being seriously hurt by the turmoil - your politicians have let them all down big time.

Well why stop there. Why not go the whole hog and bring back Gladiators.

Already posted. Mark Arbour's advice is very good - there are people who can and will want to help

First you're not alone. This is the gay story for so many of us. We each have to go through the same stages in life - denial, self loathing, closet acceptance, coming out. Some of us sometimes get stuck at one of these stages. But there are people who can help - good friends you can trust [these are very few and to be treasured] and professional counselors [GP doctors, analysts/psychiatrists - you need to find a good one you can also trust]. Mood swings may indicate some underlying issue that may be helped by medication - bi-polar and so on. Your GPA grade drop says you need to take action. If it were me I'd probably see my GP and be completely honest. Doing nothing is not an option where your education - and therefore your future life chances - are at stake. Good luck. I'm sure you can deal with this

Oh Read your opening line - excited and expectant - then it just ... stopped

Mike's right. Tet's vid was cage-fighting-on-ice and the TV blow by blow commentary made it seem this was the sport! And TV is the problem. As Tet says it's brought the billion dollar incomes to all the world team sports. And the money has corrupted these sports: the sports authorities [who do nothing that might threaten the money]; the players [who know they are too valuable to be properly punished]; and US TV companies like in this video clip who make it into a ratings-winning Roman Gladiator Bloodfest Event. But TV is also the solution. High definition pictures, multi camera angles and instant playback provide solid evidence to allow refs to stamp on stuff like this. But they won't unless they get clear top down direction that this will not be tolerated. And the cabal of old/incompetent/corrupt/ men who sit on the governing bodies do nothing that threatens the money or upsets the clubs who've sold themselves to the TV money and would go belly up if that money was pulled or their player assets were terminated. It's the same in football - what you call soccer - where there's been a spate of "biting" by top players. This is disgusting. If players knew they could be banned for life and lose their £10m pa income no player would ever bite again. But clubs would be very upset to loose a £60m asset at a stroke. The clubs are central to this problem. If the governing bodies do what they're supposed to do - regulate and enforce decent standards - then the clubs will realise they have 100% responsibility to protect their player assets by enforcing rigorous discipline at club level - making it clear to all their players that behavious like this will not be tolerated [and they can insure against the risk of rogue players]. It's not rocket science .