Civil War Daily Bugle thing

[genesis]

Anyone else pick it up and notice a pleasant surprise on the inside when it had listed who was on Cap's and Iron Man's followers and under Cap's it was none other than....

SPOILER
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
HAWKEYE
I dont have a scanner so if someone can scan that for me that would be great.

PS

Sorry if this was posted elsewhere just got excited.

[Bobster777]

Anyone else pick it up and notice a pleasant surprise on the inside when it had listed who was on Cap's and Iron Man's followers and under Cap's it was none other than....

SPOILER
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
HAWKEYE
I dont have a scanner so if someone can scan that for me that would be great.

PS

Sorry if this was posted elsewhere just got excited.
They mean the girl Hawkeye from Young Avengers.

[Sam T.]

maybe they meant that chick from Young Avengers???

[Doom Hammer]

Kate Bishop is a Young Avenger, currently going by the codename of Hawkeye. And yeah, she's with Cap.

Sorry to burst your bubble...

[Sam T.]

Clint needs to take back his name from her!

[Haunt]

Clint needs to take back his name from her!


he'd have to be alive to do that. and, so far, we haven't seen him in the living flesh. :)

[genesis]

yes he does and now i'm sad i got so happy Clint was so awesome and then he got killed in the third issue i ever read with him in it.

Darn you Bendis.

[Sam T.]

no ..he is still alive...I know it in my heart he is. towards the end of House of M you see hawkeyes' arrows and a newspaper clipping...thats got to be him!!

[Bobster777]

yes he does and now i'm sad i got so happy Clint was so awesome and then he got killed in the third issue i ever read with him in it.

Darn you Bendis.
No worries dude, he'll be back soon enough. For all we know, DD could still be Hawkeye. After all, this DD seemed to have sight (he was the one that saw Thor ("my God"...Daredevil line when he saw Thor).

[genesis]

See i thought it was hawkeye who was daredevil all along then i saw it in the daily bugle thing and figured it was a slip up because the daredevil looked like Matt Murdock.

[Haunt]

No worries dude, he'll be back soon enough. For all we know, DD could still be Hawkeye. After all, this DD seemed to have sight (he was the one that saw Thor ("my God"...Daredevil line when he saw Thor).

even a small line like that sounds out of character for Clint; as does the dialogue in the diner. Clint's a cocky guy and grew up in a carnival. in other words, not much impresses him. he wouldn't be wowed by getting a fake identity. he and the Thunderbolts did it often. and his jaw wouldn't drop if Thor returned. at most, he might give his trademark smirk. but that's all my opinion. i'm still going with Paladdin as being the impostor; even if he looks nothing like the guy in the diner. i thought it might be Iron Fist but he seems to be playing roles elsewhere in the marvel universe.

p.s. you know what would be really funny? if the impostor turned out to be Nomad doing a favor for Captain America. he's approximately the right height and build. he is an acrobat who used a throwing object. and he could, conceivably, have looked like that guy in the diner. only problem is that he died not too long ago. stranger things have happened.

[Bobster777]

even a small line like that sounds out of character for Clint; as does the dialogue in the diner. Clint's a cocky guy and grew up in a carnival. in other words, not much impresses him. he wouldn't be wowed by getting a fake identity. he and the Thunderbolts did it often. and his jaw wouldn't drop if Thor returned. at most, he might give his trademark smirk. but that's all my opinion. i'm still going with Paladdin as being the impostor; even if he looks nothing like the guy in the diner. i thought it might be Iron Fist but he seems to be playing roles elsewhere in the marvel universe.

p.s. you know what would be really funny? if the impostor turned out to be Nomad doing a favor for Captain America. he's approximately the right height and build. he is an acrobat who used a throwing object. and he could, conceivably, have looked like that guy in the diner. only problem is that he died not too long ago. stranger things have happened.
Well, it definitely looks like Matt so this may well be the real DD we are dealing with. That's why I can't wait to finally see the reveal on the DD book.

[Haunt]

Well, it definitely looks like Matt so this may well be the real DD we are dealing with. That's why I can't wait to finally see the reveal on the DD book.


yeah, but (again) would Murdock really be talking like that either? this impostor seems unused to working with these individuals. and Matt, so shortly after losing Foggy, wouldn't be all happy to be using fake identification. it's not like it's something he hasn't done before. heck, he had a face lift (courtesy of SHIELD) at one point.

[Bobster777]

yeah, but (again) would Murdock really be talking like that either? this impostor seems unused to working with these individuals. and Matt, so shortly after losing Foggy, wouldn't be all happy to be using fake identification. it's not like it's something he hasn't done before. heck, he had a face lift (courtesy of SHIELD) at one point.
Ah, good point. Ha ha, looks like the mystery persists then.

[roundman]

I thought the Bugle insert was really good. Definately worth the fifty cents.

[Haunt]

Ah, good point. Ha ha, looks like the mystery persists then.


some genius on the marvel boards figured out it was Iron Fist by some dialogue in the most recent Cable and Deadpool. Deadpool fights the impostor and says that his fighting style is familiar. but it's basically a move that Iron Fist used on him in their last fight. weird huh?

[Bobster777]

some genius on the marvel boards figured out it was Iron Fist by some dialogue in the most recent Cable and Deadpool. Deadpool fights the impostor and says that his fighting style is familiar. but it's basically a move that Iron Fist used on him in their last fight. weird huh?
I don't know how he was able to figure it out from C/D because spoiler Deadpool doesn't get to reveal it (Cap throws his shield at him). end of spoiler. If anything, people were saying they learned the fake DD's identity from Civil War 1: Director's Cut.

[Tony Starkz]

This was a real treat.Kudos to Marvel for putting this one out.Enjoyed the Invisible Hulk and Punisher sections.

[Bobster777]

This was a real treat.Kudos to Marvel for putting this one out.Enjoyed the Invisible Hulk and Punisher sections.
Invisible Hulk? Is that the pro side's secret new member? :D

[Pheonix-NoRelation]

I loved this. I loved pretty much everything about it. :rolleyes: So, um, yeah. It was good.

[AllisterH]

Did anyone get this? My friend has something called Daily Bugle but it wasn't at the comic store and apparently it has hints for future storylines....

Anyone got spoilers?

[The Lucky One]

Found the whole thing enjoyable, but especially the X-Factor article- Guido's comment to reporters that Madrox is called the Multiple Man because of "his mutant ability to multiply any combination of numbers in his head" was hilarious, and so was M's comment about actually being a little turned on by Jamie. Some of the articles definitely sounded more newspaper-ish than others, but the X-Factor one really nailed the feel.

-D

[Alpha to Omega]

Is She-Hulk a freaking idiot? Her whole editorial focuses on how only people who want to be heroes need to register and it's not like the MRA at all when according to Quesada the SHRA is exactly the same as the MRA except all super-powered individuals, instead of just mutants, need to register whether they want to be heroes or not. So unless she didn't bother to read the law she's a freaking idiot and a poor lawyer. Of course seeing as Slott wrote it I'm not surprised.

[Green Goblin 4]

Is She-Hulk a freaking idiot? Her whole editorial focuses on how only people who want to be heroes need to register and it's not like the MRA at all when according to Quesada the SHRA is exactly the same as the MRA except all super-powered individuals, instead of just mutants, need to register whether they want to be heroes or not. So unless she didn't bother to read the law she's a freaking idiot and a poor lawyer. Of course seeing as Slott wrote it I'm not surprised.

Well what Joey Q said is not in continuity, what She-Hulk said is. Therefore, what She-Hulk says is canon. Boyah.

[Sam T.]

I have to say that I throughly enjoyed this little newspaper!

[Nate Palm]

Well what Joey Q said is not in continuity, what She-Hulk said is. Therefore, what She-Hulk says is canon. Boyah.

Joe Q, Brevoort, the Marvel Civil War homepage and two other articles in the Daily Bugle Civil War Newspaper Special say otherwise. So I guess She-Hulk is just a plain fool. Maybe Speedball should get a different lawyer.

[Bobster777]

Joe Q, Brevoort, the Marvel Civil War homepage and two other articles in the Daily Bugle Civil War Newspaper Special say otherwise. So I guess She-Hulk is just a plain fool. Maybe Speedball should get a different lawyer.
She has been a lawyer for years, and she is in the thick of the pro registration side. I'm pretty sure she knows what she is talking about.

[Mjolnir]

some genius on the marvel boards figured out it was Iron Fist by some dialogue in the most recent Cable and Deadpool. Deadpool fights the impostor and says that his fighting style is familiar. but it's basically a move that Iron Fist used on him in their last fight. weird huh?

Nah i think someone figured out that in that Director's Cut that Marvel used a bunch of different people's names whenever DD's name was meant to be. I think Ben Urich was one somewhere. Silly stuff

[Bobster777]

Nah i think someone figured out that in that Director's Cut that Marvel used a bunch of different people's names whenever DD's name was meant to be. I think Ben Urich was one somewhere. Silly stuff
So, does that mean that the DC didn't have the reveal in it? I really hope so.

[SlightlyMad]

The thing that surprised me the most was that Jonah's "Parker: You're Fired" editorial. I was expected a rant, but Jonah gave a fair argument; it was a "conflict of interest" & misrepresentation on the part of Peter.

The Bugle should totally sue his butt!

[Tony_Clifton]

i just recently returned to the comic world after taking a break of quite a few years...I have to say i loved this Daily Bugle thing.....well done and a great idea to boot

[Dan_Slott]

Is She-Hulk a freaking idiot? Her whole editorial focuses on how only people who want to be heroes need to register and it's not like the MRA at all when according to Quesada the SHRA is exactly the same as the MRA except all super-powered individuals, instead of just mutants, need to register whether they want to be heroes or not. So unless she didn't bother to read the law she's a freaking idiot and a poor lawyer. Of course seeing as Slott wrote it I'm not surprised.

Alpha to Omega,
Hi. If you read She-Hulk's editorial, the point she's making is that the MRA was an act that was aimed at people (mutants) that were part of a race. And that's unconstitutional. The SRA is aimed at "super heroes", people who CHOOSE to use their powers as unlicensed first responders (police officers, firemen, paramedics, etc.). The law is the direct response to what the New Warrirors CHOSE to do-- not what the New Warriors ARE. That's a big difference.

In CIVIL WAR FRONTLINE, Firestar decides NOT to be a hero anymore. And it's tacitly understood that the pro-registration faction will NOT be going after her. In CIVIL WAR (and many CIVIL WAR related titles) it is stated over and over again that the registration is for those heroes who wish to CONTINUE their activities in a Post-Stamford world. The authorities will NOT be prosecuting capes & masks that DISCONTINUE their activities and stand down.

It's a nuance. And it works like this: As frequently said and reported,

"The Superhuman Registration Act would recquire all those possessing paranormal abilities to register with the government, divulge their true identities to the authorities, and submit to training and sanctioning in the manner of federal agents."

Well? How do you enforce that? If someone has paranormal abilities, but ceases to use them-- ceases to act as a super hero-- they're not really committing a CRIMINAL ACT. You can't really prosecute someone for what they are or what they intend to do-- only for what they have done. And until someone commits a superheroic/superhuman act post-SRA, they haven't DONE anything wrong.

This is something that Tom Brevoort has said numerous times in print, online, and on air. It's a nuanced shading to the absolute that "any person with superhuman powers who refuses to register is now a criminal." But that's the idea behind the SRA boiled down to an easy-to-grasp concept. Look at how it is actually played in CONTEXT. In CIVIL WAR #2, the authorities don't go after Patriot UNTIL he tries to foil a robbery in costume. The "superhuman powers" phrase also doesn't take into account characters like Punisher, Moon Knight, the Prowler... or, technically, even Iron Man (I doubt the public at large know about Extremis-- so bear with me on that). The "any person with superhuman powers" wording is a sound bite-- a way to get the IDEA of the SRA across as quickly as possible. Much in the same way that a phrase like "killing is wrong" doesn't hold when you're talking about shadings like "self-defense" or "accidental death" or "killed in combat." In the post SRA-Marvel, BEING an unregistered superhuman is not a crime. Committing an unregistered superhuman ACT is. But that wording just isn't as exciting.

I hope that's cleared things up.

And Alpha to Omega, do you think you could tone down the hostility just a skosh? This is comics. It's supposed to be fun.

[Pheonix-NoRelation]

I agree with Dan_Slott. The SHRA and MRA are the same in that you have to register with the government if you are either a mutant or a superhero, respectively. You can't choose to be a mutant, it's like your race, as She-Hulk said. You can, however, choose to put on a mask and cape, and go run around like a superhero.

[ivesaidway2much]

Oops double post.

[ivesaidway2much]

In CIVIL WAR FRONTLINE, Firestar decides NOT to be a hero anymore. And it's tacitly understood that the pro-registration faction will NOT be going after her. In CIVIL WAR (and many CIVIL WAR related titles) it is stated over and over again that the registration is for those heroes who wish to CONTINUE their activities in a Post-Stamford world. The authorities will NOT be prosecuting capes & masks that DISCONTINUE their activities and stand down.
How does a tacit agreement make a law that on paper seems unconstitutional actually legal? Could a law be passed that said all Asian-Americans should be executed, when tacitly it's agreed that the law only applies to Asian serial killers. In the future, couldn't any gov't official who knows Firestar's secret identity use the fact that she is in violation of the SRA against her. For instance, let's say in the future Firestar's identity is publicly known, and one day she embezzles money from her office job. Couldn't the judge at her trial use the fact that she is in violation of the SRA against her and increase her sentence because of it, even though she never commited a superhuman act again?

It's a nuance. And it works like this: As frequently said and reported,

"The Superhuman Registration Act would recquire all those possessing paranormal abilities to register with the government, divulge their true identities to the authorities, and submit to training and sanctioning in the manner of federal agents."

Well? How do you enforce that? If someone has paranormal abilities, but ceases to use them-- ceases to act as a super hero-- they're not really committing a CRIMINAL ACT. You can't really prosecute someone for what they are or what they intend to do-- only for what they have done. And until someone commits a superheroic/superhuman act post-SRA, they haven't DONE anything wrong.
This works great for someone like Firestar, who can hide her powers. But how about someone like Nightcrawler, Fever Pitch, or Beak whose very existence is a paranormal activity. It seems to me that the SRA would be easily enforceable for them. Would they be allowed to walk down the street while still being unregistered? Could Nightcrawler teleport himself to a movie theatre if he were running late for a movie? Or would 50 SHIELD agents be waiting for him outside once the movie ended?

[Alpha to Omega]

Alpha to Omega,
Hi. If you read She-Hulk's editorial, the point she's making is that the MRA was an act that was aimed at people (mutants) that were part of a race. And that's unconstitutional. The SRA is aimed at "super heroes", people who CHOOSE to use their powers as unlicensed first responders (police officers, firemen, paramedics, etc.). The law is the direct response to what the New Warrirors CHOSE to do-- not what the New Warriors ARE. That's a big difference.

In CIVIL WAR FRONTLINE, Firestar decides NOT to be a hero anymore. And it's tacitly understood that the pro-registration faction will NOT be going after her. In CIVIL WAR (and many CIVIL WAR related titles) it is stated over and over again that the registration is for those heroes who wish to CONTINUE their activities in a Post-Stamford world. The authorities will NOT be prosecuting capes & masks that DISCONTINUE their activities and stand down.

It's a nuance. And it works like this: As frequently said and reported,

"The Superhuman Registration Act would recquire all those possessing paranormal abilities to register with the government, divulge their true identities to the authorities, and submit to training and sanctioning in the manner of federal agents."

Well? How do you enforce that? If someone has paranormal abilities, but ceases to use them-- ceases to act as a super hero-- they're not really committing a CRIMINAL ACT. You can't really prosecute someone for what they are or what they intend to do-- only for what they have done. And until someone commits a superheroic/superhuman act post-SRA, they haven't DONE anything wrong.

This is something that Tom Brevoort has said numerous times in print, online, and on air. It's a nuanced shading to the absolute that "any person with superhuman powers who refuses to register is now a criminal." But that's the idea behind the SRA boiled down to an easy-to-grasp concept. Look at how it is actually played in CONTEXT. In CIVIL WAR #2, the authorities don't go after Patriot UNTIL he tries to foil a robbery in costume. The "superhuman powers" phrase also doesn't take into account characters like Punisher, Moon Knight, the Prowler... or, technically, even Iron Man (I doubt the public at large know about Extremis-- so bear with me on that). The "any person with superhuman powers" wording is a sound bite-- a way to get the IDEA of the SRA across as quickly as possible. Much in the same way that a phrase like "killing is wrong" doesn't hold when you're talking about shadings like "self-defense" or "accidental death" or "killed in combat." In the post SRA-Marvel, BEING an unregistered superhuman is not a crime. Committing an unregistered superhuman ACT is. But that wording just isn't as exciting.

Except it's called the Superhuman Registration Act not the Super-Hero Registration Act. And what about those whose superhuman powers deform there appearance would they be breaking the law if they didn't register? And if comics are supposed to be fun why have you turned a former Avenger into a date-rapist?

[Dan_Slott]

How does a tacit agreement make a law that on paper seems unconstitutional actually legal?

Sorry. I guess I wasn't being clear there. I meant that it was tacitly understood in the story. Not the law. That the writer (Jenkins) and editor (Brevoort) were making it clear to the reader that standing down is a viable way for superhumans to avoid pro-registration factions from coming after them.

This works great for someone like Firestar, who can hide her powers. But how about someone like Nightcrawler, Fever Pitch, or Beak whose very existence is a paranormal activity. It seems to me that the SRA would be easily enforceable for them. Would they be allowed to walk down the street while still being unregistered? Could Nightcrawler teleport himself to a movie theatre if he were running late for a movie? Or would 50 SHIELD agents be waiting for him outside once the movie ended?

This is America. You're free to look different-- no matter how different you look. I guess in the Marvel U. people might mistake someone who's horribly disfigured as a mutant. Or someone that's had lots of tats, piercings, or strange cosmetic procedures (ever see "Cat Man" on those Ripley's shows on TBS?). Looking different isn't a crime. Who's to say that Nightcrawler isn't a person taking a break from a movie set? Or whether someone walking out of the gym in their workout gear-- or someone wearing a Graffiti Graphics tee-- is in a costume? It's not UNTIL an unregistered Nightcrawler teleports in public that he's breaking the law.

Otherwise... imagine all the chaos that would ensue if your S.H.I.E.L.D. agents came across the annual costume parade down in the East Village! :)

[Silver Nimbus]

Alpha to Omega,
Hi. If you read She-Hulk's editorial, the point she's making is that the MRA was an act that was aimed at people (mutants) that were part of a race. And that's unconstitutional. The SRA is aimed at "super heroes", people who CHOOSE to use their powers as unlicensed first responders (police officers, firemen, paramedics, etc.). The law is the direct response to what the New Warrirors CHOSE to do-- not what the New Warriors ARE. That's a big difference.

In CIVIL WAR FRONTLINE, Firestar decides NOT to be a hero anymore. And it's tacitly understood that the pro-registration faction will NOT be going after her. In CIVIL WAR (and many CIVIL WAR related titles) it is stated over and over again that the registration is for those heroes who wish to CONTINUE their activities in a Post-Stamford world. The authorities will NOT be prosecuting capes & masks that DISCONTINUE their activities and stand down.

It's a nuance. And it works like this: As frequently said and reported,

"The Superhuman Registration Act would recquire all those possessing paranormal abilities to register with the government, divulge their true identities to the authorities, and submit to training and sanctioning in the manner of federal agents."


Thanks Dan. That's exactly the way I've been interpreting the enforcement of the Act and it's good to see an author in agreement.

BTW, love She-Hulk, loved the Thing (so sorry about the cancellation). Any chance we could persuade you to take on a Quasar title?

Please? For Gru?

[SlightlyMad]

This works great for someone like Firestar, who can hide her powers. But how about someone like Nightcrawler, Fever Pitch, or Beak whose very existence is a paranormal activity. It seems to me that the SRA would be easily enforceable for them. Would they be allowed to walk down the street while still being unregistered? Could Nightcrawler teleport himself to a movie theatre if he were running late for a movie? Or would 50 SHIELD agents be waiting for him outside once the movie ended?

Firstly, Beak is no longer a mutant (since M day). Secondly, so long as Nightcrawler is not using his powers for "super-heroe-ing" , there shouldn't be a problem. I thought the point that She-Hulk & Dan were making was that it's fine if you have powers, so long as you don't use them in first response situations, so Firestar could use her powers on her food if her microwave was broken, or Nightcrawler could use his if he forgot his keys, as these uses are not endangering members of the public.

Also, a funny thing I noticed on the Civil War cover (as opposed to the "Parker" cover); the inclination of Wonder Man's head & the smile on his face in relation to Hercules' skirt! :D

[Alpha to Omega]

Sorry. I guess I wasn't being clear there. I meant that it was tacitly understood in the story. Not the law. That the writer (Jenkins) and editor (Brevoort) were making it clear to the reader that standing down is a viable way for superhumans to avoid pro-registration factions from coming after them.



This is America. You're free to look different-- no matter how different you look. I guess in the Marvel U. people might mistake someone who's horribly disfigured as a mutant. Or someone that's had lots of tats, piercings, or strange cosmetic procedures (ever see "Cat Man" on those Ripley's shows on TBS?). Looking different isn't a crime. Who's to say that Nightcrawler isn't a person taking a break from a movie set? Or whether someone walking out of the gym in their workout gear-- or someone wearing a Graffiti Graphics tee-- is in a costume? It's not UNTIL an unregistered Nightcrawler teleports in public that he's breaking the law.

Otherwise... imagine all the chaos that would ensue if your S.H.I.E.L.D. agents came across the annual costume parade down in the East Village! :)

And yet Prodigy was beaten up and arrested just for wearing a costume and speaking. And need I remind you Mr. Slott that this is the same MU where lynch-mobs would regularly attack mutants on any given day? In Marvel America it's not okay to look different unless you want to be killed.

[Dan_Slott]

Except it's called the Superhuman Registration Act not the Super-Hero Registration Act.

Well, you wouldn't want to single out the Super Heroes and let the Supervillains get a walk, would you? ;)

But if that's one of your only gripes, does that mean you agree with the rest of my earlier post?

And what about those whose superhuman powers deform there appearance would they be breaking the law if they didn't register?

See my earlier post to ivesaidway2much.

And if comics are supposed to be fun why have you turned a former Avenger into a date-rapist?

An ALLEGED date-rapist. It hasn't been proven... yet. But if you'd read the solicits for September and October, you'll see that Starfox is coming back (as promised).

Since that story (in SHE-HULK Vol. 2 #6 and #7) first came out, I've been asking readers (especially the passionate ones like yourself) to please be patient-- that the story was in NO means over-- and that it would be revisited and concluded in the Fall. And guess what? Here it is in the solicits.

Meanwhile, since I've come back to Marvel in Spring of '04, I've clocked in over 40 comics (SHE-HULK Vol. 1 & 2, THE THING, SPIDER-MAN/HUMAN TORCH, GLA, GLX-MAS, TWO-GUN KID, and the BLACKJACK stories for AMAZING FANTASY) and I stand by that body of work-- a body of work that respects Marvel Continuity, avoids the dreaded "decompression" that everyone's always belly-achin' about, and has a sense of fun and/or wonder.

That said, yes, SHE-HULK Vol. 2 #6 and #7 was a departure from what I usually do. It was a chance to try something new and experiment with the book. As a reader I would hope that you'd appreciate when a book and/or creator tries to branch out and take risks.

Comics should surprise you. And from the feedback we got from those two issues-- well, it worked. And how. So on that level the creative team was doing something right.

Anyway...

To sum up:
Before you jump to conclusions, please look at my track record, please keep things in perspective, and please dial it back a bit okay? I mean, the "...she's a freaking idiot and a poor lawyer. Of course seeing as Slott wrote it I'm not surprised" crack is kinda harsh (though not as severe as some of the personal stuff you were hurling at Peter David in other threads!). 'Cause, yeah, it IS comics. And it IS supposed to be fun. And there's no reason that we can't talk to each other with a bit of mutual respect and civility.

[Dan_Slott]

And yet Prodigy was beaten up and arrested just for wearing a costume and speaking.

Or you could say he was causing a public disturbance. In CIVIL WAR FRONTLINE Prodigy was going out of his way to make a statement against the SRA-- a demonstration where he was flagrantly touting himself AS a super hero. And much like someone who might be carted off to jail for taking part in a sit-in, Iron Man intended to haul Prodigy off as well. The second Prodigy resisted Iron Man (a licensed hero) then it became a different story all together. Does Prodigy have a legal leg to stand on? Should he fight this in the courts? Who knows? Maybe THAT could be an interesting story for the SHE-HULK book?

And need I remind you Mr. Slott that this is the same MU where lynch-mobs would regularly attack mutants on any given day?

Yes. And those lynch-mobs would be committing illegal acts in doing so.
And, need I remind you, sir, that this is also the same MU where the Beast would hang out in discos, the Thing can sit down at a deli, and She-Hulk is treated like a celebrity.

In Marvel America it's not okay to look different unless you want to be killed.

Not necessarily. As pointed out above.

[Exo]

And yet Prodigy was beaten up and arrested just for wearing a costume and speaking.

You mean the guy who was consuming alcohol at the time and lashing out at Iron Man? Incidentally destroying an apartment rooftop, shattering a commercial billboard but most importantly endangering the lives of the civilians below.

And what about that other super"hero" Thunderclap who, accidently, killed a guy who was only doing his job? Is he allowed to simply walk back into the night, because he wears a mask?

Just because you have superpowers doesn't necessarily mean you're fit to become a superhero.

[Alpha to Omega]

Well, you wouldn't want to single out the Super Heroes and let the Supervillains get a walk, would you? ;)

But if that's one of your only gripes, does that mean you agree with the rest of my earlier post?

No.


An ALLEGED date-rapist. It hasn't been proven... yet. But if you'd read the solicits for September and October, you'll see that Starfox is coming back (as promised).

Since that story (in SHE-HULK Vol. 2 #6 and #7) first came out, I've been asking readers (especially the passionate ones like yourself) to please be patient-- that the story was in NO means over-- and that it would be revisited and concluded in the Fall. And guess what? Here it is in the solicits.

Even so having him escape from jail and get kicked in the nuts by She-Hulk doesn't exactly make him look innocent does it?

Meanwhile, since I've come back to Marvel in Spring of '04, I've clocked in over 40 comics (SHE-HULK Vol. 1 & 2, THE THING, SPIDER-MAN/HUMAN TORCH, GLA, GLX-MAS, TWO-GUN KID, and the BLACKJACK stories for AMAZING FANTASY) and I stand by that body of work-- a body of work that respects Marvel Continuity, avoids the dreaded "decompression" that everyone's always belly-achin' about, and has a sense of fun and/or wonder.


Your work doesn't respect Marvel continuity though, you had Maelstrom a master planner outsmarted by freakin' Mr. Immortal, you messed up the Champions power source and you had Thanos defeated by Squirrel Girl. Oh and you turned Living Lightning into a homosexual despite his past continuity just so you could tell a joke.

To sum up:
Before you jump to conclusions, please look at my track record, please keep things in perspective, and please dial it back a bit okay? I mean, the "...she's a freaking idiot and a poor lawyer. Of course seeing as Slott wrote it I'm not surprised" crack is kinda harsh (though not as severe as some of the personal stuff you were hurling at Peter David in other threads!). 'Cause, yeah, it IS comics. And it IS supposed to be fun. And there's no reason that we can't talk to each other with a bit of mutual respect and civility.

I have problems with PAD as person and a writer. And when you have other articles in the same paper saying the exact opposite it makes She-Hulk look like an idiot. And looking at your track record I'm not an optimist.

[Silver Nimbus]

Or you could say he was causing a public disturbance. In CIVIL WAR FRONTLINE Prodigy was going out of his way to make a statement against the SRA-- a demonstration where he was flagrantly touting himself AS a super hero. And much like someone who might be carted off to jail for taking part in a sit-in, Iron Man intended to haul Prodigy off as well. The second Prodigy resisted Iron Man (a licensed hero) then it became a different story all together. Does Prodigy have a legal leg to stand on? Should he fight this in the courts? Who knows? Maybe THAT could be an interesting story for the SHE-HULK book?

Let's count 'em off for Prodigy, shall we?

Initial Counts:
Drunk & Disorderly, aka Public Intoxication.
Trespassing (likely, unless he owned the building he decided to stand on)

After being confronted:
Resisting Arrest
Assault & Battery re: Iron Man
Destruction of Property

You don't need a SHRA to haul him away and throw him in jail. Plenty of existing statutes cover his criminal actions. Criminal violation of the SHRA is just the icing on the cake.

And as for my request that Dan take on a Quasar title? Why am I asking? Because I believe Mr. Slott has demonstrated his understanding of the Marvel Canon, humor, and drama through his titles, and I think he would do a good job on the kind of quirky book a Quasar title needs to be.

*Addendum* Oh come on now - you can't take the GLA/X/C stuff too seriously. It's 30 seconds away from being a What The? title. I can accept that the Maelstrom we saw might be a clone that's a bit... shall we say half-baked from the cloning process. And Thanos? Thanos? God that character needs to be taken down twenty pegs or so, on the basis of Starlin's rabid fanboyism of his own creation.

[Captain Shady]

You are a patient man Mr. Slott.

Just for that I'll be picking up one of your books that I haven't in the past.

[SlightlyMad]

Guess what this is:

http://www.worth1000.com/entries/119000/119101EKMJ_w.jpg
http://www.worth1000.com/emailthis.asp?entry=145498
It's a high horse that someone needs to get off! :D ;)

Like the man said:

This is comics. It's supposed to be fun.

[Dan_Slott]

But if that's one of your only gripes, does that mean you agree with the rest of my earlier post?
No.
Gotcha. You disagree with it, you just don't want to argue against it. Check. ;)

(Starfox's guilt) hasn't been proven... yet.
Even so having him escape from jail and get kicked in the nuts by She-Hulk doesn't exactly make him look innocent does it?
Whew! Then it's a good thing our legal system doesn't go by how someone 'looks'. :) Seriously, Alpha to Omega, it's a story in progress. If this was a murder mystery would you want to know FOR SURE if the suspect was guilty-or-innocent BEFORE the story was over?

Meanwhile, since I've come back to Marvel in Spring of '04, I've clocked in over 40 comics (SHE-HULK Vol. 1 & 2, THE THING, SPIDER-MAN/HUMAN TORCH, GLA, GLX-MAS, TWO-GUN KID, and the BLACKJACK stories for AMAZING FANTASY) and I stand by that body of work-- a body of work that respects Marvel Continuity, avoids the dreaded "decompression" that everyone's always belly-achin' about, and has a sense of fun and/or wonder.
Your work doesn't respect Marvel continuity though...
Says you. :)

...you had Maelstrom a master planner outsmarted by freakin' Mr. Immortal...
I had the hero of the story, the underdog, come up with a clever and endemic way to defeat the all-powerful villain. That's called "a story." I mean, if we were in Biblical times, would you be the guy whining that there was NO WAY David shoulda' defeated Goliath? I mean... that Goliath guy has like Class 100 strength and that David kid is 98 lbs. soakin' wet... And... Well... you get the picture.
It's also important to note that that Maelstrom story picked up on his last two appearances/supposed deaths in both QUASAR and an FF QUARTERLY. And if THAT ain't adhering to continuity, I don't know what is!

...you messed up the Champions power source

Nope. We revealed MORE about Champion's power source. Think about it, there HAS to be some link between those that possess/use the Power Primordial and the Infinity Gems-- because the Elders are the same guys who keep winding up the Infinity Gems. This is a REVEAL. This will eventually build to something. As much as Marvel Continuity exists and stays consistant-- it is also in flux, evolving, growing, and still has wide avenues to explore. And as time goes on, we learn MORE about things that we thought we already knew. For example, there was a time in Marvel's past when ALL the Infinity Gems were called Soul Gems. Remember? But then we learned MORE about them and our perception of them changed. And so has it changed again.

and you had Thanos defeated by Squirrel Girl. Yes. And Steve Ditko had Squirrel Girl defeat Doctor Doom. You got the cajones to argue against Steve Ditko? C'mon! I dare ya! Seriously though, you're arguing about a story that took place in the GLX-MAS SPECIAL? Oooookay. As for HOW she defeated him, we've already dealt with HOW it was plausible on MANY threads here on CBR. (I'd suggest using the SEARCH function). And how is that any LESS disrespectful than OTHER Thanos stories INvalidating his losses against cosmic characters like Thor? Do you take those retcons as slaps against Thor?

Oh and you turned Living Lightning into a homosexual despite his past continuity just so you could tell a joke. One: WHAT past continuity? Do you have any gay friends? Do you have any that have come out to you? Before coming out MANY gay people date people from the opposite sex BECAUSE they think that's what friends/family/society EXPECTS them to do. Some people don't realize that they are gay UNTIL after years of dating the opposite sex-- and sometimes even after marriage. So please, tell me where in Marvel Universe continuity it says that Living Lightning ISN'T gay? And two: it WAS funny. Or at least a hella' lot of posters, snail mal & e-mailers THOUGHT it was. :D
I have problems with PAD as person and a writer. I've seen a thread where you and other posters went after him. And, surprise, he responded in kind. I thought the shots at him-- and at him DEFENDING himself-- were uncalled for.

This is a small industry-- and message boards like this are a chance for fans and creators to interact. If we ALL worked at keeping things civil-- these boards could be a WONDERFUL place to exchange ideas and get feedback for ALL of us! And the industry/the stories/the characters/the product could all be the BETTER for it. REALLY!

But there's this UGLY side to the internet, where some people think that the anonymity of screen names gives them the freedom to behave in a very disrespectful and uncivil manner-- to fellow posters AND creators. And for all of some posters bluster about "this is the way I always act"-- that's bull. Because when you go to a con and/or signing EVERYONE is always curteous and respectful-- even when voicing opposing opinions. And why? Because there's a human connection. It's two people talking face to face-- upfront and honest. Instead of two strangers typing whatever they feel like on wordprocessors miles away-- hiding behind avatars and screen names.

I wasn't on the internet BEFORE I got into the industry. But let me tell you, if these boards were around when I was a fan-- if I had a chance to interact with guys like Miller, Moore, Simonson, or Davis back in the day... To get my opinions to them-- even (and ESPECIALLY) when they differed... I'd've given ANYTHING for that! How cool would THAT have been? Or, more importantly, how cool COULD that be TODAY?! And, I swear to God, ALL it takes is a little bit of etiquette and SIMPLE common courtesy! Honest! It's NOT about kissing anybody's @$$, it just about not KICKING any. Really!

Industry guys like writers, artists, and editors are PEOPLE. They're not like the guards at Buckingham Palace who just have to sit there and take it no matter how much cr@p you fling their way. Yes, comics are things we can ALL be very passionate about. But if you keep it about the work, if you're courteous to the creators and treat them like people-- people who DO try to put out the best work they can for YOU-- then maybe we'll all end up with the ideal-- a place where your opinions gets heard-- by the people who have the power to make them a reality!

Whew!

And when you have other articles in the same paper saying the exact opposite it makes She-Hulk look like an idiot.

Can you cite specifics? Because I don't see it.

And looking at your track record I'm not an optimist.

Sorry you feel that way. I'm very proud of my track record.

[Alpha to Omega]

My problems with PAD are from well before that thread and are from well before this board. I'm leaving this discussion since Conn Seanery the moderator has warned me if I continue I'll be banned.

[Violently Apathetic]

Mr. Slott, if you don't mind I have a question about the Act. I understand what is outlined as an illegal activity by said act, that is 'super-heroing' rather than just having superpowers and/or being a former superhero, but would the law take into account an emergancy situation? For example if Firestar saw someone being assaulted and intervened using her powers would that constitute a crime or does breaking the law require that you actively search for trouble? The former seems utterly unreasonable to me (so I doubt helping people would be considered a crime) and the latter seems somewhat difficult to prove since it relies on knowing the intervening parties' intentions. I was hoping that you could perhaps clear up where the law in the MU would stand on such a matter, if you have the time. Sorry if this has already been discussed before and I just missed it.

[Conn Seanery]

My problems with PAD are from well before that thread and are from well before this board. I'm leaving this discussion since Conn Seanery the moderator has warned me if I continue I'll be banned.
No, I told you to stop being rude. If you can't continue the discussion without being rude, that's your problem.

[Dan_Slott]

My problems with PAD are from well before that thread and are from well before this board. I'm leaving this discussion since Conn Seanery the moderator has warned me if I continue I'll be banned.

Sorry you feel that way. Personally? Ever since I was a lowly Marvel intern (though I'm sure Peter David wouldn't remember me from back then...), I've always found him to be someone who was genuinely entertaining-- who always had an interesting story, quip, or observation to tell you. And very quick on the draw.

[Dan_Slott]

Mr. Slott, if you don't mind I have a question about the Act. I understand what is outlined as an illegal activity by said act, that is 'super-heroing' rather than just having superpowers and/or being a former superhero, but would the law take into account an emergancy situation? For example if Firestar saw someone being assaulted and intervened using her powers would that constitute a crime or does breaking the law require that you actively search for trouble? The former seems utterly unreasonable to me (so I doubt helping people would be considered a crime) and the latter seems somewhat difficult to prove since it relies on knowing the intervening parties' intentions. I was hoping that you could perhaps clear up where the law in the MU would stand on such a matter, if you have the time. Sorry if this has already been discussed before and I just missed it.

Ah! See? THIS is where it gets interesting! What would happen in those kinds of situations? In the Bugle piece She-Hulk asks,
"If, heaven forbid, you found yourself in a serious accident, would you want a stranger with no medical certification moving your body? If you were held at gunpoint, would you want a stranger with no hostage-negotiating skills injecting himself into such an already tense situation? If you were trapped in a burning building, would you want a stranger with no fire-fighting experience to start knocking down walls? Now in ALL of those scenarios, imagine if that stranger's only credentials were a garish costume and a cape."

I think that's a pretty good argument for why I wouldn't want Frog Man or Slapstick coming to my hypothetical rescue.

In a post-SRA world, I think the scenarios you describe could lead to some really cool jump off points for stories. Because they WOULD be illegal acts now, wouldn't they? And the fact that that just doesn't FEEL right could create a lot of powerful conflicts and tales jam-packed with suspense.

[mandog]

I would love to see Marvel put out a monthly Daily Bugle that keeps readers updated on all the books. It would be a good way to see if something is going on in a book I'm not reading that I would be really into.
Plus it was just alot of fun.

No.




Even so having him escape from jail and get kicked in the nuts by She-Hulk doesn't exactly make him look innocent does it?



Your work doesn't respect Marvel continuity though, you had Maelstrom a master planner outsmarted by freakin' Mr. Immortal, you messed up the Champions power source and you had Thanos defeated by Squirrel Girl. Oh and you turned Living Lightning into a homosexual despite his past continuity just so you could tell a joke.



I have problems with PAD as person and a writer. And when you have other articles in the same paper saying the exact opposite it makes She-Hulk look like an idiot. And looking at your track record I'm not an optimist.

[mandog]

I'm with Captain Shady. You dont have to put up with crap, yet you do for us. I too will be picking up a book of yours that I previously havent.

You are a patient man Mr. Slott.

Just for that I'll be picking up one of your books that I haven't in the past.

[Violently Apathetic]

Ah! See? THIS is where it gets interesting! What would happen in those kinds of situations? In the Bugle piece She-Hulk asks,
"If, heaven forbid, you found yourself in a serious accident, would you want a stranger with no medical certification moving your body? If you were held at gunpoint, would you want a stranger with hostage-taking skills injecting himself into such an already tense situation? If you were trapped in a burning building, would you want a stranger with no fire-fighting experience to start knocking down walls? Now in ALL of those scenarios, imagine if that stranger's only credentials were a garish costume and a cape."

I think that's a pretty good argument for why I wouldn't want Frog Man or Slapstick coming to my hypothetical rescue.


Compelling enough, though I suppose the counter argument would be 'How would you feel if someone with the capabilities to help you just passed by because they feared being arrested for their purely altruistic actions? Or if heroes who were championed by the government were present but did not intervene quickly enough because they were tied up in bureaucratic red tape?' '

You're absolutely right though, arguing hypotheticals is intriguing enough, the truly interesting stories are bound to arise in practice. As against the law as I am I can't help but get excited over all the potentially great stories that are going to come out of it, especially in She-Hulk.

Thanks for responding to my question, btw ^^

[Alpha to Omega]

No, I told you to stop being rude. If you can't continue the discussion without being rude, that's your problem.

No my problem is that you want me to walk on egg-shells just because he writes for Marvel. If I had posted the same thing to another poster who didn't work for Marvel you wouldn't of batted an eye-lash.

[Alpha to Omega]

One: WHAT past continuity? Do you have any gay friends? Do you have any that have come out to you? Before coming out MANY gay people date people from the opposite sex BECAUSE they think that's what friends/family/society EXPECTS them to do. Some people don't realize that they are gay UNTIL after years of dating the opposite sex-- and sometimes even after marriage. So please, tell me where in Marvel Universe continuity it says that Living Lightning ISN'T gay? And two: it WAS funny. Or at least a hella' lot of posters, snail mal & e-mailers THOUGHT it was.

Yes I do have gay friends. So even though a character is shown dating members of the opposite sex by there creator you think it doesn't go against continuity to turn them gay? How about instead of making a character who’s been established as straight into a homosexual, you just make a new character who’s gay?

[Dan_Slott]

Yes I do have gay friends. So even though a character is shown dating members of the opposite sex by there creator you think it doesn't go against continuity to turn them gay?

Nope. It's not uncommon for a person to date someone from the opposite sex, marry them, have children, and then discover that they're gay.

So how can showing a character dating members of the opposite sex automatically cement them as being straight?

The Marvel Universe has always been known as one of the most progressive lines of comics-- always showcasing a multi-faceted and diverse cast of characters. In real life we can go through our day-to-day routines PRESUMING that someone we know is straight-- only to later find out that they're gay. Why is that such a BAD thing when it takes place in the Marvel Universe? And why does that raise so much of your ire?

How about instead of making a character who’s been established as straight into a homosexual, you just make a new character who’s gay?

Because in GLA #2 the mechanics of the story recquired an ESTABLISHED Avenger to out themselves to Flatman. Having the character be an Avenger was necessary to give the scene weight for Flatman, someone who (during Joe Kelly's run on DEADPOOL) was hinted at being a closet gay-- AND who had always admired the Avengers. If that scene wasn't set up in #2, the scene in #4 (where Flatman mustered up the courage to finally come out) wouldn't have had any resonance.

At that point, editor, Tom Brevoort and myself went through the Avengers roster and gave serious thought to which Avengers (of either sex) might, in fact, be gay. It was not something we considered capriciously. So let me put it to you THIS way: Are you saying that ALL the Avengers are straight and always have been? Is there room in your Avengers' roster for an ESTABLISHED Avenger to be gay?

I believe that if anything, this makes Living Lightning a more multi-faceted character and gives other writers more aspects of his life to explore in future stories. Unless you have a problem with that? :p

[Dan_Slott]

No my problem is that you want me to walk on egg-shells just because he writes for Marvel. If I had posted the same thing to another poster who didn't work for Marvel you wouldn't of batted an eye-lash.

And that makes it right? That's a weird way of looking at it. Shouldn't everyone in here treat everyone else with a little, basic common courtesy? That's MILES away from "walking on egg-shells". It's just being decent to each other. Not too much to ask, right?

[Bobster777]

Compelling enough, though I suppose the counter argument would be 'How would you feel if someone with the capabilities to help you just passed by because they feared being arrested for their purely altruistic actions? Or if heroes who were championed by the government were present but did not intervene quickly enough because they were tied up in bureaucratic red tape?' '

You're absolutely right though, arguing hypotheticals is intriguing enough, the truly interesting stories are bound to arise in practice. As against the law as I am I can't help but get excited over all the potentially great stories that are going to come out of it, especially in She-Hulk.

Thanks for responding to my question, btw ^^
Like I said before, the heroes would function basically as cops. Cops don't have to wait for the green light if criminal activity is going on. They'll have to explain their actions to their higher ups though. This is what the super heroes will have to do as well.

In terms of heroes passing in fear of getting arrested, I don't think they'll be arrested if they are in an impossible situation where they have to do something. However, if they keep doing it, then they would have to register.

[Alpha to Omega]

Because in GLA #2 the mechanics of the story recquired an ESTABLISHED Avenger to out themselves to Flatman. Having the character be an Avenger was necessary to give the scene weight for Flatman, someone who (during Joe Kelly's run on DEADPOOL) was hinted at being a closet gay-- AND who had always admired the Avengers. If that scene wasn't set up in #2, the scene in #4 (where Flatman mustered up the courage to finally come out) wouldn't have had any resonance.

At that point, editor, Tom Brevoort and myself went through the Avengers roster and gave serious thought to which Avengers (of either sex) might, in fact, be gay. It was not something we considered capriciously. So let me put it to you THIS way: Are you saying that ALL the Avengers are straight and always have been? Is there room in your Avengers' roster for an ESTABLISHED Avenger to be gay?

Not if they've been established as straight by there creators. What I'm saying is that if there creator's wrote them as going on dates with the opposite sex and gave no hints that they were gay then it's pretty much a given that there straight. If you were looking for an Avenger to out why not choose one who hadn't previously been shown in any relationship like Silverclaw?

[Bobster777]

Not if they've been established as straight by there creators. What I'm saying is that if there creator's wrote them as going on dates with the opposite sex and gave no hints that they were gay then it's pretty much a given that there straight. If you were looking for an Avenger to out why not choose one who hadn't previously been shown in any relationship like Silverclaw?
Gay men stay in marital relationships for decades and never give any clues until they leave their wives. Why, because they want to deny it. Therefore, you won't always see hints or clues.

[Nate Palm]

In the post SRA-Marvel, BEING an unregistered superhuman is not a crime. Committing an unregistered superhuman ACT is. But that wording just isn't as exciting.

I hope that's cleared things up.


Okay so let me get this straight. The Act requires all superhumans to register but it isn't a crime not to register? So when Tony Stark brought out his list of 137 and said that whichever ones weren't regstered [by tomorrow] would be hunted down, arrested, and imprisoned without exception, he was just blowing hot air?
I mean if not registering isn't a crime then how is it any different from how the Marvel Universe has always been?

[stillanerd]

Mr. Slott: Just want to say that I appreciate someone FINALLY making a logical argument for registration within the actual comic books. Logically, if superheroes did exist, there would be some form of law designed to hold them accountable for their actions. To paraphrase an analogy you made awhile back: if the Marvel Universe is a place where, if superbeings battle each other and no one gets hurt (which was the conceit in comics for years) then Captain America's stance is correct; but if the Marvel universe is just like the real world in which groups of superpowered individuals can accidently cause the deaths of innocent people who are unlucky to get caught in the crossfire (sort of like what appears to be the case for the Riverbank Massacre, although I'm of the opinion it was actually a set-up in that Nitro was in cahoots with members of the "shadow government" that Millar hinted at way back in Marvel Knights Spider-Man #1-12, although I'm sure that's top secret information you can't divulge on whether or not that's true :) ) then Iron Man's position is automatically correct.

However, with all due respect to your colleagues, it seems pretty apparent, in my opinion anyway, that in Civil War and the other related tie-ins, they want the readers to conclude that the anti-registration side are the "good guys" and the pro-registration side are the "bad guys," despite the claims of there being "no right or wrong side." After all, one side has Captain America, patriot extraordinaire, leading mostly younger, street-level and minority heroes to do what superheroes always have done: saving lives and stoping super-villains; the other side lead by Iron Man and S.H.I.E.L.D. on the other hand are either rounding up other superheroes and going after Cap, or "recruiting" supervillains to help them (Plus when you've got Maria Hill acting like a wanna be Eva Braun at times and Baron Zemo--the son of a Nazi war criminal--on your side recruiting super villains to hunt down super heroes, I wouldn't think you would necessarily consider your side to be the good guys). It seems evident to me that even though registration may be presented logically, we the readers, it seems, are to conclude that it may not be correct morally, in that it involves sacrificing one's civil liberties for the sake of national security--which of course is the big debate in this country (even though, as She-Hulk argued, superheroes CHOOSE to use their powers and abilities in such a fashion). Perhaps you'll argue this otherwise, in that it's not as simplistic as I'm making it out to be, but I do believe that is the "moral," for lack of a better word, Civil War and subsequent tie-ins are making. Doesn't reduce my enjoyment or interest in the series though because, after all, I'm curious as to what the aftermath is going to be.

[Bobster777]

Okay so let me get this straight. The Act requires all superhumans to register but it isn't a crime not to register? So when Tony Stark brought out his list of 137 and said that whichever ones weren't regstered [by tomorrow] would be hunted down, arrested, and imprisoned without exception, he was just blowing hot air?
I mean if not registering isn't a crime then how is it any different from how the Marvel Universe has always been?
I may be wrong about this, but these were probably confirmed individuals (seen on TV or whatever) still doing super hero work. Basically, Tony would confront them, and probably give them the choice to sign up or hang up their costumes. That's the only way I can rationalize it since according to the law, Tony can't force them to sign if they don't want to be heroes anymore.

[Dan_Slott]

Not if they've been established as straight by there creators. What I'm saying is that if there creator's wrote them as going on dates with the opposite sex and gave no hints that they were gay then it's pretty much a given that there straight. If you were looking for an Avenger to out why not choose one who hadn't previously been shown in any relationship like Silverclaw?

Gay men stay in marital relationships for decades and never give any clues until they leave their wives. Why, because they want to deny it. Therefore, you won't always see hints or clues.

Bobster777 pretty much nails it, Alpha to Omega. Because, really, HOW does a creator establish a character as straight? Can you really point to a character like Living Lightning-- a member of a team book without that much screen time-- and prove that that character is straight from the few walk-ons he's had with the odd date or two? Unless the character goes out of his way to go, "Hey, lookitme! I'm a heterosexual!" then what's to say they're NOT gay? (In fact, in THAT scenario, it'd probably seen as overcompensated SO much that... well... anyway...).

As for Silverclaw? That's just your way of saying, "Why not a character that I'm not as invested in?" And that's kind of silly. It just means I'd be having this exact back-and-forth posting with a Silverclaw fan who'd be complaining that I should've made a character that WASN'T Silverclaw gay... (like, say... Living Lightning?). And at that point it's all just picking nits.

[Jake V]

Okay so let me get this straight. The Act requires all superhumans to register but it isn't a crime not to register? So when Tony Stark brought out his list of 137 and said that whichever ones weren't regstered [by tomorrow] would be hunted down, arrested, and imprisoned without exception, he was just blowing hot air?
I mean if not registering isn't a crime then how is it any different from how the Marvel Universe has always been?
Having superpowers doesn't mean that you have to register, but if you choose to use those powers in some sort of vigilante capacity, you have to register.

[garin]

I'm more confused than ever about what the SHRA entails.

If Dan's interpretation is correct, there's no civil rights issue at all. Many of the anti-Registration side's arguments go up in smoke.

However, I believe that interpretation is different to the way it's been communicated elsewhere up to this point. Joe Q even says in interviews that it's just mutant registration with a wider net. The impression I had from the books thus far is that everyone with powers is required to register and undergo certification in the ability to control said powers. Then, if they want to, they can sign up with SHIELD and work as a sanctioned hero. Otherwise they carry on with civilian life as normal.

[Bobster777]

I'm more confused than ever about what the SHRA entails.

If Dan's interpretation is correct, there's no civil rights issue at all. Many of the anti-Registration side's arguments go up in smoke.

However, I believe that interpretation is different to the way it's been communicated elsewhere up to this point. Joe Q even says in interviews that it's just mutant registration with a wider net. The impression I had from the books thus far is that everyone with powers is required to register and undergo certification in the ability to control said powers. Then, if they want to, they can sign up with SHIELD and work as a sanctioned hero. Otherwise they carry on with civilian life as normal.
I may be wrong about this, but this is probably what Marvel wanted. Many laws in history have been written a certain way, but when it comes before a judge, it can be interpreted differently. So, there are probably many different ways that this law can be interpreted. The Marvel courts will have to sort it out.

[Violently Apathetic]

In terms of heroes passing in fear of getting arrested, I don't think they'll be arrested if they are in an impossible situation where they have to do something. However, if they keep doing it, then they would have to register.

How will they be able to prove that someone is looking to save people though? They could argue that they're in the right place at the right time...or wrong place, whatever. I also highly doubt that someone saved by a passing hero would be inclined to testify that said hero was out fighting crime without being registered.

[Bobster777]

How will they be able to prove that someone is looking to save people though? They could argue that they're in the right place at the right time...or wrong place, whatever. I also highly doubt that someone saved by a passing hero would be inclined to testify that said hero was out fighting crime without being registered.
Well, if they keep appearing in situations over and over again, then you can pretty much come up with the conclusion that this is something they are purposely doing.

[Pheonix-NoRelation]

I just wanted to let Mr. Slott to know that, like two other posters on this thread, I will be picking up The Thing: Idol of Million TPB when it comes out on 23 August, mainly due to your respectful counterpoints in this thread. :)

Now, if I may get bck to what this thread is about... I wish that there was a Daily Bugle like this every month or week. As I sat reading it, I felt as if it were really a newspaper. It was great.

[stillanerd]

I'm more confused than ever about what the SHRA entails.

If Dan's interpretation is correct, there's no civil rights issue at all. Many of the anti-Registration side's arguments go up in smoke.

However, I believe that interpretation is different to the way it's been communicated elsewhere up to this point. Joe Q even says in interviews that it's just mutant registration with a wider net. The impression I had from the books thus far is that everyone with powers is required to register and undergo certification in the ability to control said powers. Then, if they want to, they can sign up with SHIELD and work as a sanctioned hero. Otherwise they carry on with civilian life as normal.

Except Marvel IS trying to cast Civil War as a “Civil Liberties vs. National Security” issue as well as (and a “Centralized Authority vs. Vigilantism” issue--in some cases moreso. Their argument, it seems to me, is that while LEGALLY the pro-registration side may be correct, MORALLY the anti-registraion side is correct because in order while the superheroes need to be held accountable, they have to give up their civil liberties by either working for S.H.I.E.L.D. or no one at all (yes, that's what SHRA entails: if you ichoose to use you're superpowers as a superhero, then you HAVE TO work for S.H.I.E.L.D. or face criminal prosecution). And that’s the message Civil War is trying to convey: that one shouldn’t give up their personal freedoms for the sake of national security, which just sounds exactly like the mantra made by the opponents against the way the current “war on terrorism” is being conducted. And that could be what Marvel really means by there being “no right or wrong side” because one side is LEGALLY RIGHT but ETHICALLY WRONG while another side is LEGALLY WRONG but ETHICALLY RIGHT.

[garin]

Their argument, it seems to me, is that while LEGALLY the pro-registration side may be correct, MORALLY the anti-registraion side is correct because in order while the superheroes need to be held accountable, they have to give up their civil liberties by either working for S.H.I.E.L.D. or no one at all (yes, that's what SHRA entails: if you ichoose to use you're superpowers as a superhero, then you HAVE TO work for S.H.I.E.L.D. or face criminal prosecution). I don't agree with you here. Nobody has the right to be a superhero. If the SHRA only applies to active superheroes, then it's no different than the regulation that applies to policemen, firemen, doctors et al. I've never heard anyone complain that their civil liberties are being violated by requiring government sanction for those occupations.

[Violently Apathetic]

I'm not saying Mr. Slott is wrong, obviously he has a better understanding on what's going on than I do, but if its the case that not everyone with Super powers is forced to register then where is the Civil Rights issue? Marvel completely sucked the wind out of the Anti guys' sails with that and made the argument totally unbalanced. It doesn't seem like good writing to me, it would make more sense from a plot perspective to say that it DID require all people with powers to register but only those who decided to be 'heroes' to work in the governments employ, then both sides would still have a reasonable argument. As outlined by Slott though it makes the Anti side seem that much more unreasonable and that kinda blows. I feel a little mislead, I was under the impression there was a conflict of Civil Rights vs Security here, I thought that was pretty much the entire point, but that conflict doesn't exist if it really is as Slott says. *pouts* So what the Hell are the Anti guys fighting for?! Seriously, I still would rather support them but now they barely have a leg to stand on! These are not stupid people on the Anti side, nor are they a bunch of anarchists who hate the government, so why hasn't anyone given them a proper argument yet?

Bah, I'm just a little bitter.

[stillanerd]

I don't agree with you here. Nobody has the right to be a superhero. If the SHRA only applies to active superheroes, then it's no different than the regulation that applies to policemen, firemen, doctors et al. I've never heard anyone complain that their civil liberties are being violated by requiring government sanction for those occupations.

Just to be clear, garin, I agree with you completely. Taking the law into one's own hands is not a civil right and your example of the regulation of policeofficers, firefighters, and doctors, etc. fits perfectly.

And while I think the "civil liberties" angle being touted by Marvel is a somewhat bogus one, here is how I believe they are trying to make the case that the registration of superheroes is against their civil liberties (and also why I believe that Marvel really supports the anti-registration heroes): anyone who is registered with the government has to work for S.H.I.E.L.D. or no one at all. Otherwise, if they continue to act as superheroes but are not working for S.H.I.E.L.D. they become enemies of the state. This, I believe, is the reason Captain America, even though he himself is registered, is against the registration act and leading his band of "Secret Avengers," because while he may agree with the merits behind the act in that heroes need to take responsibility for their actions and be properly trained in their powers, he feels it should be up the heroes to decide who they should work for. If is was merely "deputizing" superheroes, I believe he wouldn't have a problem with it; except again, the law states that upon being registered, the heroes have to work for S.H.I.E.L.D. While Cap and others choose to become superheroes, they are not given the choice who they should work for.

And as a side-note: why S.H.I.E.L.D.? Why not, upon registration, could the superheroes work for some other organization like the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the secret service, the border patrol, the military, any major or minor police department, or just your standard security guard? Why THIS particular paramilitary/espionage organization? Unless, of course, the current head of S.H.I.E.L.D. and the backers of the SHRA have an ulterior motive in mind.

I'm not saying Mr. Slott is wrong, obviously he has a better understanding on what's going on than I do, but if its the case that not everyone with Super powers is forced to register then where is the Civil Rights issue? Marvel completely sucked the wind out of the Anti guys' sails with that and made the argument totally unbalanced. It doesn't seem like good writing to me, it would make more sense from a plot perspective to say that it DID require all people with powers to register but only those who decided to be 'heroes' to work in the governments employ, then both sides would still have a reasonable argument. As outlined by Slott though it makes the Anti side seem that much more unreasonable and that kinda blows. I feel a little mislead, I was under the impression there was a conflict of Civil Rights vs Security here, I thought that was pretty much the entire point, but that conflict doesn't exist if it really is as Slott says. *pouts* So what the Hell are the Anti guys fighting for?! Seriously, I still would rather support them but now they barely have a leg to stand on! These are not stupid people on the Anti side, nor are they a bunch of anarchists who hate the government, so why hasn't anyone given them a proper argument yet?

Bah, I'm just a little bitter.

See my response to garin above.

[Bobster777]

I'm not saying Mr. Slott is wrong, obviously he has a better understanding on what's going on than I do, but if its the case that not everyone with Super powers is forced to register then where is the Civil Rights issue? Marvel completely sucked the wind out of the Anti guys' sails with that and made the argument totally unbalanced. It doesn't seem like good writing to me, it would make more sense from a plot perspective to say that it DID require all people with powers to register but only those who decided to be 'heroes' to work in the governments employ, then both sides would still have a reasonable argument. As outlined by Slott though it makes the Anti side seem that much more unreasonable and that kinda blows. I feel a little mislead, I was under the impression there was a conflict of Civil Rights vs Security here, I thought that was pretty much the entire point, but that conflict doesn't exist if it really is as Slott says. *pouts* So what the Hell are the Anti guys fighting for?! Seriously, I still would rather support them but now they barely have a leg to stand on! These are not stupid people on the Anti side, nor are they a bunch of anarchists who hate the government, so why hasn't anyone given them a proper argument yet?

Bah, I'm just a little bitter.
Yeah, they should have said the law was one thing and just stuck with that. I guess that's the most annoying part of CW. However, I still think the anti side has a lot to fight for. No matter how you want to look at it (whether it is right) they are having a decision made for them. I just don't think many heroes would ever be for that.

[Pheonix-NoRelation]

And as a side-note: why S.H.I.E.L.D.? Why not, upon registration, could the superheroes work for some other organization like the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the secret service, the border patrol, the military, any major or minor police department, or just your standard security guard? Why THIS particular paramilitary/espionage organization? Unless, of course, the current head of S.H.I.E.L.D. and the backers of the SHRA have an ulterior motive in mind.

S.H.I.E.L.D. is corrupt and with Maria Hill as the commander, there has to be some ulterior motive. However, she did refuse the President's orders to nuke Genosha in New Avengers #20. Also, I think, like in many things, the US is a trend-setter. They probably chose S.H.I.E.L.D. so that they could then make it easy for ther nations around the world to pass ther own SHRAs and use S.H.I.E.L.D. also. In addition, S.H.I.E.L.D. is more prepared with better weapons to take down and train super-heroes.

[Exo]

I'm not saying Mr. Slott is wrong, obviously he has a better understanding on what's going on than I do, but if its the case that not everyone with Super powers is forced to register then where is the Civil Rights issue?

I always thought the superhuman registration act required anyone with powers to register. It's written as such on the very first page of Civil War #2. :confused:

[garin]

And while I think the "civil liberties" angle being touted by Marvel is a somewhat bogus one, here is how I believe they are trying to make the case that the registration of superheroes is against their civil liberties (and also why I believe that Marvel really supports the anti-registration heroes): anyone who is registered with the government has to work for S.H.I.E.L.D. or no one at all. Otherwise, if they continue to act as superheroes but are not working for S.H.I.E.L.D. they become enemies of the state.
This is absolutely true, but I still can't see it in terms of civil right issue.

With the passing of the SHRA, "super hero" just becomes another flavour of law enforcement. You have your FBI agents, your secret service, your police and now your super heroes, each role with their own rights and resposibilities.

In the same sense that it's nonsensical to say that you're a police officer in the FBI, or a soldier in the police, a super hero works for SHIELD. It's what now makes you a super hero.

The presentation of the Act so far (inconsistant though it may be) hasn't implied it acts like a draft, or has stop-loss like measures to prevent registrants leaving service. It seems to me that even after registering, if you decided you'd rather work for another branch of law enforcement, you could be re-trained. But then you wouldn't be a super hero- you'd be, say, an FBI agent (who happens to be able to fly), and your responsibilities would be those of an FBI agent and not a super hero.

[Psyco panda]

I loved the bit about Tony Stark building some giant 'morphing' mecha. I never thought they'd bring up the mega morphs again and that was just a great in joke.

[Dermie]

I believe that if anything, this makes Living Lightning a more multi-faceted character and gives other writers more aspects of his life to explore in future stories.

I agree....and I would love to see some of that followed up on!

I was surprised to see Miguel come out of the closet in GLA, since he had been shown with two previous girlfriends, both of whom were shown to be sexual relationships. But, as Dan said, in real life there are men and women who engage in opposite-sex relationships before they realize (or are prepared to face) their homosexuality.

In hindsight, I can even see how the whole thing comes together in a logical way. Miguel has been established as being rather religious, and coming from a Catholic family. Given the attiudes of many devoutly religious people, and the stereotypical macho image of hispanic men, it is unsurprising that Miguel would try to live his life as a straight man, rather than easily accept any questioning of his sexuality. He probably just tried to live the life he thought was expected of him, and tried not to think about any conflicting thoughts that entered his mind.

Then he was assigned to serve on the Avengers asteroid base...where it was him living alone with Quasar for months on end. Sure, Pulsar would travel back and forth from the base at lightspeed--but it was Miguel and Wendell that were living there by themselves full time. That sort of isolation in an all-male environment would very likely have forced Miguel to confront the truth about himself, because there simply wouldn't be any other way for him to distract himself.
The fact that Starfox was also supposed to visit them at the base from time to time might also have helped with Miguel's realization. After all, given Eros' passion for pleasure, and his intense sex drive, I strongly suspect he is bisexual. His preference is clearly for women, but I think Eros would be just as likely to bed a man if the mood struck him...so it is possible that Starfox also had something to do with Miguel coming out of the closet (although if he did, it would probably be best to wait until after the current Starfox arc in SHE-HULK is resolved one way or the other....). Either way, I think it was those months alone with another man, no distractions to let him hide from himself, that led to Miguel deciding to come out of the closet.

So, just looking back at the pieces of Miguel's established history, I can easily see how Miguel could be a closeted gay man, and see the circumstances that may have led to him re-evaluating his life.

I would love to see where Miguel goes from here. As one of the few latino superheroes (and with no secret identity, no less) Living Lightning had become something of a celebrity in the MU's latino community. Will he be as public with his sexuality, in an attempt to be a champion for gay rights as well?
How will his devout Catholic mother and his younger brother react to the news?

I think there is a lot of interesting potential to be explored with Miguel; his character was so loosely developed in WCA that he is largely a blank canvas for a new writer to explore.
Since Dan was the one to 'out' Miguel, I'd love to see him be the one to explore this further. Perhaps Living Lightning could have some legal problem that She-Hulk can help him with?

[Dermie]

If you were looking for an Avenger to out why not choose one who hadn't previously been shown in any relationship like Silverclaw?

Not your best example, since Silverclaw had a storyline where she was trying to establish a romantic relationship with Haywire of the Squadron Supreme....

[daniel2099]

some one talked about mutans
they have been hearded in to the x mantion since m day
like the jap during ww2

so what rights do mutans have currently?

[Steevyn]

some one talked about mutans
they have been hearded in to the x mantion since m day
like the jap during ww2

so what rights do mutans have currently?

They (right now) have the same rights as every other citizen, only the X-Men along with O*N*E are "protecting" them so to speak, from people that may cause harm. The X-Men, at the time, wanted to hide House of M from the public and S.H.I.E.L.D. (Until they found out in New Avengers) so they wanted to collect all of the mutants left over to make sure nothing got out that wasn't already out.

They called it a refuge, but obviously it was an internment camp. They could leave, but they couldn't. They said one thing but did another behind the scenes. That's why they revolted.

[Miss Kitty Fantastico]

I'm sorry if this has been raised elsewhere - last week's shipment got delayed until yesterday, so I missed most of the discussions about the comics therein - but on the cover of the Bugle, we see Namor apparently fighting on Iron Man's side. He's pretty clearly just laid one on Daredevil. And inside there's a mock-up of a registration card for Namor - fairly evidently not the real thing, but it got me thinking.

Now obviously the cover - within the fiction of the Bugle being a real paper - is an artist's impression, rather than a photo of a real battle. Captain America and Iron Man have only faced off once so far, and Wolverine and Namor weren't there, nor were Cloak and Wiccan conscious. So obviously the veracity of any 'claim' the art makes about who's on whose side is suspect, but does anyone think Namor might actually lend a hand on the pro side? It's fair to assume he wouldn't have anything to lose, materially-speaking - as a foreign head of state, he'd surely not be asked to submit to SHEILD authority, so 'registration' for him would probably be as simple as an addition to whatever diplomatic status he already holds - and for all his antipathy towards Iron Man, he did lose Namorita at Stamford. In between whatever it is he's doing to make Nitro miserable, I wonder if he'd throw in his lot with the pro-reg side, on a casual basis.

[Cosmic Book Fan]

I've only been reading these forums for about a week and had planned to just read them, but Dan Slott's comments have made me join and post.

First of all, thanks for taking the time to be active here, it's really great for us fans, whether we agree with you 100% or not.

Second, thanks for putting out a call for civility, the internet is a dangerous place because some people think they can get away with lashing out in ways they would never do in real life.

Third, I've really enjoyed your work so far, (Thing especially) and look forward to seeing what else is coming.

Now on the topic of Civil War: As great an event as the whole thing is, consistancy has been a problem all over the place. Events and words from various tie-ins seem to conflict with the main title. That said, has anyone read the SHRA? I mean for as much as has been written about it in the books and even more said on the internet, the complete details aren't out yet. In my reading it does seem like all supers are required to register, and failing to do so in itself constitutes a crime, but that doesn't mean it's the same crime as unregistered superhuman activity. To use the gun parallel, owning an unregistered gun in some places would be a ticketable offence, commiting property damage with that gun would be a different more serious crime, and murder with that weapon even moreso. And as far as working for SHIELD goes, I've been seeing different things that seem to suggest that you only have to register with SHIELD but are not going to be required to work for them. But I don't think this is all really clear yet.

Anyway it goes, both sides have lots to fight about, and while I'm PRO-REG, I agree that it seems like the books are more generally coloring the Anti-Regs as the 'good guys'.

Comments Anyone?

[Cosmic Book Fan]

While we're talking about the Bugle, can anyone tell me who the four characters closest to DD are? Someone cloudy, one with a staff, a guy and girl in tee-shirts?

And the Two in the air between She-Hulk and Thing? I'm thinking Black Widow and Quicksilver?

Thanks

[Elegance Liberty]

Mr. Slott, I just want to tell you that I think you are an upstanding comic writer and I wish I could handle situations/debates like these with your grace and civility.

I'm gonna go pick this up when I have the opportunity to, 'cause you just earned my support of your books big time.

Cosmic Book Fan: I do believe those are characters from 'Runaways'. The cloudy one is Karolina, the one with the staff is Nico and the girl is Molly and the boy... I forget his name. D=

[Miss Kitty Fantastico]

The four around Daredevil are the Runaways, I believe. The shiny one is Lucy in the Sky (Karolina Dean), the one in the black dress with the staff, I think, is Sister Grimm, and I'm just guessing the other two are fellow Runaways (I don't read the book, so I'm just going off their costumes/looks, which is tricky with the ones in civvies).

I'm not sure who those are in the air, higher up - I don't think either of them is Black Widow, the larger one looks male, and is possibly being knocked back by She-Hulk, and the smaller one is almost certainly facing off against Thing - Black Widow's pro-reg, so she wouldn't be either unless the Bugle mucked up who's on whose side. The former has dark hair, so probably not Quicksilver, though that's what his outfit made me first think too.

[ivesaidway2much]

Now obviously the cover - within the fiction of the Bugle being a real paper - is an artist's impression, rather than a photo of a real battle. Captain America and Iron Man have only faced off once so far, and Wolverine and Namor weren't there, nor were Cloak and Wiccan conscious. So obviously the veracity of any 'claim' the art makes about who's on whose side is suspect, but does anyone think Namor might actually lend a hand on the pro side? It's fair to assume he wouldn't have anything to lose, materially-speaking - as a foreign head of state, he'd surely not be asked to submit to SHEILD authority, so 'registration' for him would probably be as simple as an addition to whatever diplomatic status he already holds - and for all his antipathy towards Iron Man, he did lose Namorita at Stamford. In between whatever it is he's doing to make Nitro miserable, I wonder if he'd throw in his lot with the pro-reg side, on a casual basis.
I can't see what Namor has to gain by joining the pro-reg side. A large organized group of American superhumans working together, sharing information, and organized under SHIELD weakens Atlantis' international standing in comparison to the loosely affiliated supergroups pre-SHRA. Plus with the whole shooting the Hulk off into space thing and the pro-regs hunting down their anti-reg friends, Namor has seen first-hand how the pro-regs treat their allies when they become inconvenient. So he'd probably be kicking himself if one day this superhuman army, which he helped form, suddenly turned on Atlantis. And if Namor did blame the superheroes for Namor's death the target of his rage would most likely be Speedball, and I doubt the pro-regs would just let Namor kill him.

[Haunt]

it's too bad that Slott didn't pick someone with a cooler costume to out. might as well have been the Phone Ranger. look at this feeb. you'd expect to see him in the reject pile for an all-new retro-'er Justice League Detroit.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/Livinglightning.jpg

[Miss Kitty Fantastico]

It's true, the natural assumption is that Namor would be sort of nominally anti, but not really involved with the whole thing besides a sense of disgust that heroes are fighting each other like idiots. Then again, we thought the same thing of Thor...

[Nate Palm]

Alpha to Omega,
Hi. If you read She-Hulk's editorial, the point she's making is that the MRA was an act that was aimed at people (mutants) that were part of a race. And that's unconstitutional. The SRA is aimed at "super heroes", people who CHOOSE to use their powers as unlicensed first responders (police officers, firemen, paramedics, etc.). The law is the direct response to what the New Warrirors CHOSE to do-- not what the New Warriors ARE. That's a big difference.

In CIVIL WAR FRONTLINE, Firestar decides NOT to be a hero anymore. And it's tacitly understood that the pro-registration faction will NOT be going after her. In CIVIL WAR (and many CIVIL WAR related titles) it is stated over and over again that the registration is for those heroes who wish to CONTINUE their activities in a Post-Stamford world. The authorities will NOT be prosecuting capes & masks that DISCONTINUE their activities and stand down.


Heh just read New Avengers #22, guess She-Hulk and Dan ended up being wrong.

[Alex-face]

Hey I really just had to know would there be another issue of the Bugle, because a fantasy Marvel newspaper couldnt be a better idea, I mean, it saves you so much money not having to buy all the other issues just to know whats going on, and it gives a bit more realism to it, having its own newspaper. I found it very fun reading today for 2 hours straight!
Anyone have a clue?;)

[Alex-face]

Does anybody know about a continutation of The Civil War Bugle? It is really cool! I just was hoping there would be, because I really like reading it, adds more realism to it. :)

[Leebenhouse]

I'd buy it again, for the same price of course.

[Dermie]

Hey I really just had to know would there be another issue of the Bugle, because a fantasy Marvel newspaper couldnt be a better idea, I mean, it saves you so much money not having to buy all the other issues just to know whats going on, and it gives a bit more realism to it, having its own newspaper. I found it very fun reading today for 2 hours straight!
Anyone have a clue?;)

Marvel did one last year during the House of M, and it was succesful enough that they decided to do another one this year for Civil War. I expect that they'll end up doing another one down the line.

[Alex-face]

I got it for free here. They gave them out here as a freebe!? I saw themgoin for like, $2 on ebay though :D

[Green Goblin]

Has any got this special tie in I thought it was very good . I like the bit with Jamersom giving his views on the unmasking what did you think of it

[AllisterH]

A little late are we?

I find myself in 100% agreement with Jameson. Sure, we know Peter (and I guess Lois Lane can be thrown into this as well) are upstanding citizens but it does a terrible disservice to the public.

For example, does anyone in the wider DCU know about the mind-wiping even though it led to much destruction & death among the normal populace. Yet supposedly two crack journalists (Lois Land & Linda Park) knew about this and never once commented about it.

Seriously, both Lois and Peter ( & Clark Kent for that matter), ethically should NEVER report on superhumans At least without mentioning their bias since let's face it, we don't tolerate it for "lesser" things (there was a big brouhaha a few years ago when it became known a female reporter was involved with a pro from one of the city's pro teams and still was reporting on them).