disqusfxzygcokkn--disqus
Phil
disqusfxzygcokkn--disqus

that's because one side claimed to fight for the people that were tricked out of voting, housing and jobs, were antagonised by those who were supposed to protect them and had no representation in law enforcement or local as well as NI politics. the other side didn't even have their paramilitary and or terrorist groups

You're certainly right with some statements, but you overlook the fact that the amnesty for IRA crimes provided a weird kind of justification for them. when a convicted offender can be deputy first minister (McGuinness) in my opinion it says that not everything can be seen as black and white. also there were

couldn't agree more on the absent stakes. isn't there a single person in Stamford that over the last couple of weeks could've mentioned that there isn't a single thing these three matches are happening for? I think they'll be good matches but boy, at least have the GMs threaten their guys/gals if they lose. and the

minor thing: Harper and Orton are both the same age (36) and Kane is 13 years older. Wyatt is only 29, so "two aging legends vs. two young stars" doesn't cut it,

mainly because the boy Ford encounters wanders alone in the desert and engages with a non-host. there is kind of a difference to child hosts just playing on the streets in the main town, maybe even providing company for guests who brought their children. but a lonesome boy wandering the desert just cries for foul play

One thing has been bugging me ever since the episode was releeased early - I first thought that the boy Ford talked to was another guest, like the boy in ep 1 who confronts Dolores about not being real. When the conversation between Ford and this boy ends, and he commands him to go away, therefore revealing (at least