Mephedrone

I don't find him amusing but I can separate that from the fact that I don't believe he has anything valuable to say on the matters in question.

Even by that loose definition that article is more satire than journalism.

If I want a laugh at what the Sun has to say about current events I'll buy one.

i don't think anyone would compare brooker to woodward and bernstein. just because his articles are written with a comedic slant doesn't make him any less of a journalist though. the job of journalist doesn't require a specific point of view or style of writing. journalism can include satire.

you wouldn't say that uwe boll isn't a director because his films aren't as good as stanley kubrick's.

unfortunately i think many many people in this country (well, i'm not actually in the uk right now) do consider the sun's editorial positions as fact. as such, brooker isn't satirising the views of a paper that most people find laughable, he's satirising the views of a very real segment of society with just as much power to cause social change as those who subscribe to views you and i may find more acceptable. seems pretty alright to me.
 
no, i don't.

Yes you did
what statement are you referring to? some people use drugs responsibly, some people abuse them. is this not a fact?

NO


quite a few times actually. ah, memories...



thanks for suggesting i'll be dead within 20 years. your compassion knows no bounds.

You seem determined to press the self-destruct all the time, so go ahead do


i'm not trying to guide anyone in any way. i'm not as arrogant as you. i'm just giving my opinions.



So you say that any credible opinion other than your drink and drugs stupor history is arrogant. You are obviously in denial, so nobody can help you until you want to help yourself- simple really


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8582999.stm
Also read this if you dare, but you won't because it doesn't suit your intake stats
 
But he won't hit back until tomorrow, when his half a brain cell's had time to recover from its latest overload :squiffy:
 
So you say that any credible opinion other than your drink and drugs stupor history is arrogant. You are obviously in denial, so nobody can help you until you want to help yourself- simple really


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8582999.stm
Also read this if you dare, but you won't because it doesn't suit your intake stats

Wow, are they banning it? I never knew. :rolleyes:
Not everyone needs help.
Unless every drinker needs help.
Or every person breathing; which is actually truer.
 
if you want to have a discussion with me please learn to write sentences that are in some way comprehensible.

i'll answer you in point form because i'm quite sure you're mentally deficient in some way. i might not respond to some of your queries because, as i've mentioned, you write as if the majority of your brain has been removed.

- i know people who use drugs responsibly. therefore, your answer of "NO" to my question "some people use drugs responsibly, some people abuse them. is this not a fact?" is wrong. plain and simple.

- i assume your point about me being "determined to press the self-destruct all the time" is in reference to my past posts tinged by chemically-altered behaviour. don't you think it's a little unfair to judge me on things i've done in the past when you have absolutely no idea who i am now? you haven't said a word to me in months.

- no. i didn't say that "any credible opinion other than [my] drink and drugs stupor history is arrogant." i said YOU are arrogant. and stupid.

- i didn't say morrissey morrissey is a paedophile. have you never heard of irony or sarcasm? you probably have, just don't understand it. because of the whole stupidity thing.
 
This is an interesting discussion.

Right, I'm not making any blanket statements about who's right or wrong and I have never taken drugs so please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm really just looking for clarification. I don't really understand this talk of taking drugs "responsibly". Of course I know that alcohol, cigarettes etc. are drugs and have horrible consequences; however whilst drinking a pint will never (as far as I know) normally cause your body to immediately f*** up and possibly kill you drugs (in the sense of illegal substances) can. I find it hard to see how taking something that has the possibility of doing this can be done responsibly. To those of you here who speak of this responsibility when using drugs what exactly do you mean?

Also, I'm not sure this logic that if you've never done 'drugs' you're not allowed to hold an opinion on them holds water. To bring this to vegetarianism (inevitably on here it seems, sorry): i've never eaten meat and feel happy never to do so in the future - people tell me meat is fantastic but this does not sway me, is my opinion of meat eating invalid because I've never eaten it? No. This is also true of anyone's opinion on 'drugs'.
 
whilst drinking a pint will never (as far as I know) normally cause your body to immediately f*** up and possibly kill you drugs (in the sense of illegal substances) can.

no, but drinking 30 pints can.

part of responsible use is knowing what you're taking and knowing your limits.
 
Tags
yum drugs
Back
Top Bottom