Since when does majority opinion automatically make something right. There was a time when majority opinion also supported slavery and segregation.

This is especially true when that opinion was formed in the crucible of an emotionally charged incident where people are reacting out of rage etc.


Agree totally with Orwell.

Barring the ability to read the authors' minds, concrete proof is rather difficult when we're talking about a comic book. The perception of 42's permanence is probably based on the Spider-Man issue where Iron Man said it was. As you've said, that was apparently an error, but most of us didn't know that until reading your post and either way, it probably understandably shaped some readers' perceptions of the conflict.

Points A and B are hard to argue, since we did see Speedball receive counsel and have a trial scheduled, although I think he may have been held longer than normally legal before being charged/being allowed to see his lawyer, explained by his "unregistered combatant" (or something similar)
status. We never do see anyone who is believed to still have powers actually taken to trial though, which, depending on the person, might have been an interesting issue.

Point C - several heroes make it sound like it's mandatory (the conversation at the baxter building where Uatu shows up comes to mind) and if they don't have to work for SHIELD either explicitly or as part of the 50-state initiative, what's the point of having them register if they still get to go do whatever they want? I guess it'd be a little easier to track them down if they go rogue, but barely even that. Training by SHIELD, at least, certainly seems to be required by the SRA (e.g. Arana, She-Hulk in an interview and basically every justification given by politicians involved the training of new super-humans).

Personally, I was with Cap, but I can respect his decision to surrender (didn't enjoy reading it, mainly because it was kind of abrupt) for what he perceived to be the greater good, which was the same reason he took up the fight in the first place. Kind of feel like they should've had 7 be more battling and then maybe end when the civilians stop Cap and then 8 could have been a better aftermath issue, but we'll have to see how they handle the aftermath.

Meh, i thought it was kind of funny, but not really necessary

Hahaha. You're funny. Care to offer proof? Or admit that you (or your "friend") is lying/rumor-mongering?

Sorry CC, but you're made of sand.

Sigh...

I worked in the comics industry for over a year, and made friends/contacts at every major company.

I'm only making the comment as a point of interest. Marvel claimed that there would be a death that would change the MU forever. It never happened.

I honestly don't care if you don't believe me, and I also wouldn't be foolish enough to post the name of an employee giving me information that would violate their NDA.

But you're right, I'm a known liar on the Realms, check my posts they are all lies.

Bah, why am I even bothering with you...you aren't worth my time.

For the others that like "what ifs":

The original "Back in Black" story-line was supposed to have Peter accepting the symbiote back in order to have the power necessary to avenge an attack on his family. It was supposed to be called "Spider-Man: The Hunter" as he went through his rouges gallery to find out who was the actual villain who did the deed.

But as you can see, the New Thunderbolts popularity and the closeness to "Hush" had that idea squashed as well.

Enjoy.

CC

Exactly. So Orwell (et al) can't practically claim "Oh, 42 is constitutionally wrong because they don't get lawyers!" How does he know that? He doesn't.


The main Civil War book said temporary. When in doubt, default to the main author's position.


So it sure sounds like Orwell was wrong, right?

Again, if you can support that, give me something. Otherwise, I have no problem that because of a war between heroes and a law passed AFTER Speedball's involvement in the deaths of hundreds that it took a while for something to be worked out.

Agreed, but they certainly still have the opportunity to show this.

Who makes it sound like that and when? Are they an authority on the law? I don't think Tony or Reed or Pym ever said anything like that.

What issue did Uatu show up at the Baxter Building (I can't remember it)?

So that if the powers they have are destructive in some way, the government knows who they are and can bring them to justice.

The cops could never go interrogate Spider-Man after the death of Captain Stacy because they didn't know who he was. How can you issue an arrest warrent for a "masked man?" This isn't the Wild West.

WE know he had nothing to do with it. But realistically he needs to be investigated.

And for better or worse, Marvel wants to tell more real world stories.

That happens in She-Hulk? If I'm remembering the issue, I believe she says it's required for Arana (or someone else) to exist as a super-hero. I'll search and double check, though (if it was something different than She-Hulk, let me know).

I loved it. I don't like Maria Hill though.

Convienient.

You might want to find a more trustworthy friend, if he's willing to violate his contract (if he exists). Of course, he might want to find a more trustworthy friend, if you're willing to post what he told you on the internet.

Your old posts don't concern me, as you are lying in some way now. Please stop. You aren't worth this site's time.

I'll throw in my $.02. I was very disappointed. The end was a bigger let down than Infinite Crisis for me.

All along, I felt that characters were being written very poorly. I could not see Reed or Tony doing the things they were being shown to do. I could not imagine Peter un-masking so publicly. But all along, I gave Marvel the benefit of the doubt that the end would by a slam-dunk that would explain this seemingly out-of character behavior.

That explanation never came. Instead, the ending hinged on Cap making a decision that I felt was also completely out of character. Then, the last half of the issue had what felt like a bunch of tacked on epilogues giving brief teases as to the new state of the Marvel Universe. It felt very rushed and haphazard.

Another major criticism of Civil War is how much of the action did not take place in the main title. If you weren't reading the tie-ins, you missed a lot. Even if you did read them, a lot of seemingly important plot points occurred off panel.

Big epic stories are almost always disappointing. But Civil War was the most disappointing in recent memory for me.

Are you kidding me?

What do I gain from fabricating this?

I can post about it now, because the drop dead date on the topic has passed. For example, my NDA stated I could not release the info on MTU until the Saturday of the pre-release.

Please stop making ignorant comments about things you know nothing about and people you know nothing about.

You are making yourself look stupid with every word. And please stop being a lemming and using inane "made of sand" comments. Once again, it makes you look like a follower, not someone with their own mind who could add value to this community.

Then again, you were a big contributor to the "Abercrombie T-Shirt Thread" so I can see how much you've added to the Vs. community...talk about wasting the site's bandwidth and our collective time.

I'm done putting you in your place.

Good Day Sir.

CC

I was actually kind of pointing out that your request for proof is hard to satisfy. You similarly can't prove that the inmates of 42 were going to get lawyers, only that Speedball did.

No disagreement. Just saying that even if it was contradicted, people still heard it and you have to expect them to factor it into their perceptions.

Maybe; again, at the time, Speedball didn't seem to have any powers. We don't know one way or the other how powered captives were going to be processed.

I'd have to read back through the Frontline's to remember exactly how long he was incarcerated before being charged/meeting she-hulk. I presented that as a speculation; it's hard to judge time when the issues are spread over several months. I'm sure National Security and general Bureaucracy can be sufficiently cited to cover any delays.

Though, and IANAL, his identity was known either at the time of the bill's passing (everyone knows it shortly after and since he was on tv, his identity was probably somewhat common knowledge) or shortly thereafter and he
performed no heroics after the bill's passing, so i think the labeling of unregistered combatant is a bit hard to justify. Obviously he has to stand trial for Stamford, though the extent of his eventual culpability would make for interesting legal procedings.
I think Uatu is in Civil War #2; bunch of people have gathered at the baxter building. Dialogue goes something like 'pensions and paid vacations? are they turning us all into civil servants?' 'more like they're shutting us down.' TV anchor person talks about training the heroes when he says that speedball couldn't name the president of the US' same issue has one panel of She-Hulk on Crossfire (or something similar) talking about training. Can't give specific references, but i'm pretty sure Iron Man mentions training when he's trying to convince spider-man that he's right.
I'd have to re-read to find other references, but it seemed like a lot of talking heads on tv were mentioning training. I could be wrong.

That is the one instance i mentioned where it's helpful (except probably in the case of shape shifters).

Talking about that panel in Civil War (i think) 2

Funny, I was going to say the same thing to you, but restrained myself. Good to see you're so fired up about it. People tend to get that way when they're caught in a lie.

Please, stop posting. You were caught, just admit the mistake privately and move on. It's over, pal. Thanks for playing.

Of course I can't. But I can only think of a handful of times we've EVER seen a lawyer visit a criminal in jail. Most of those are Daredevil or She-Hulk. But no one ever raised the issue until Civil War.

I belive the general assumption is that even Carnage got proper legal council when he was put in a microwave jail cell (no outcry at that issue, Spider-Man Annual right after Maximum Carnage). Thus, I conclude the same is true for 42. We just aren't seeing it.

I'm open to the possibility that isn't the case, but I think the burden of proof is on the accusor in this case. Why is THIS jail so different when it comes to legal council and the various super-human holding cells in other comics were not?

I think I have the answer, too. People believe that Civil War is a direct allegory on the Iraq War, and thus believe 42 must be Guatanemo Bay.


I agree; except that I don't find it hard to believe that Tony's crew would ARGUE that he was a unregistered combatant, and that accounts for the delay.

I'll go back and reread it regardless. I've read a LOT over the last 9 months (man, what crappy delays this series had), and coupled with all the interviews, I need to refresh what was actually said.


In any case, great post. Reputation points are in the mail.

I'm not sure that the problem is that people are projecting real life events on the series. At least not as far as this goes. My problems with it are purely story-related. We're not talking about stick a dangerous maniac like Carnage in some kind of extreme detention center becauseif he don't, he'll get out and innocent people will die.

Sure, some of those guys were incarcerated in 42. But so were heroic individuals who were fighting to save lives. It's overkill to incarcerate heroes (some of them non-powered) in an alien dimension. They weren't going to go on a killing rampage if they escaped.

Also, the way the story was presented, the heroes who were locked up there were given a choice: join us or remain incarcerated indefinitely. This coupled with the fact that Bullseye was allowed out on the streets just smacks of a complete miscarriage of justice.

We didn't see much of the legal working of the system in Civil War. But what we did see suggests that things weren't on the up-and-up.

No? It sure was common while the story was being printed.

While the war was going on and they were attacking SHIELD agents! Cap tried to break people OUT OF JAIL. If it wasn't in the N-Zone, do you think they wouldn't have broken people out of the Raft? Or Rikers?

Let's not forget the HUGE breakout at the start of New Avengers.

Why overkill? These guys can fly; an island won't work. Space maybe; but isn't the Negative Zone cooler?

Where? The heroes I remember being locked up were the ones attacking government agents.

He's not "on the streets." He's being controlled. He's got less freedom than some criminals the real world government releases to catch others.

It's a matter of your interpretations. You are chosing to interpret it as a "government bad!" view. Unless you have some citations I've forgotten (very possible).

I do think it has colored some people's views of the story. How could it not? The story encourages these kinds of comparisons. But I don't think that is necessarily why people are up in arms over the prison in the NZ.


No doubt they were fighting SHIELD agents. But, come on! What Marvel super hero worth his salt hasn't been shot at by a SHIELD agent? And sure, if they escaped, they would have tried to fight for their side and tried to free those who were loyal to their cause. But they weren't depicted to use lethal force.

Not really sure what the prison break in New Avengers has to do with anything other than to show that prison breaks happen in comics. My point is that locking away Carnage, who has just slaughtered everyone in his path remorsely in a specially designed containment cell is not the same thing as locking away heroes with political differences in the NZ.


I think you hit the nail on the head. I think it was done because it was "cool". But I also think it colors the way we view the Pro-Reg side. Spider-man, who represents the everyman, is horrified when he sees the prison and the conditions. So much so that he puts his family in danger and switches sides!

I don't have any issues to refrence right now, but my recollection is that Spider-man was questioning Tony or Reed. And he asked what happened to heroes who refused to join the Pro-Reg side. The answer I remember him getting was that they would be locked up indefinitely. This was probably in an issue of ASM as opposed to CW. But I'd have to look it up to be sure.

Also, regarding the whole "attacking government agents" thing, let's not forget that these agents were shown to be aggressively hunting down unregistered heroes regardless of whether or not they had thrown in with the Anti-Reg movement. That Luke Cage issue of New Avengers was pretty damning stuff.

He's got a chance to earn his freedom. The heroes who refuse to join the Pro-Reg side do not.

Well, yeah. It is a matter of interpretation. The story left a lot open for interpretation. My point was that it was pretty vague as to the specifics of what was going on. If CW had spelled out exactly what was going on from a legal perspective, we probably wouldn't have so many heated discussion about who was right and who was wrong. Of course, I think that would have made for a pretty dull story.

Obviously, I viewed the Pro-Reg side as the villains of the story. That's nothing more than my opinion. But I think it's a vallid one. I can point to parts of the story that support this view. And if someone thinks that Tony was a hero (as Millar seems to think based on the interview at Newsarama) they are entitled to that opinion as well. I just happen to disagree.

As far as the trial issue, I remember Spidey asking Iron Man point blank about legal representation for these guys and him admitting that wasn't going to happen. I don't remember whether it was Civil War proper or a Spidey title. So many books....

I'm Anti-Reg ( I could see both sides at the beginning but putting Norman Osborn in charge of a super team was about the last straw for me) but I see SHIELD's strategy. Trials are expensive and time-consuming, and then you have to worry about the ones that could afford to bond out of jail still actively violating the SRA until their trial.

The story deals heavily with civil disobedience. What is a citizen's right to break an unjust law? The law said Rosa Parks was to give up her seat to a white man. When she refused to do so, she was breaking the law. But thank God she did.

Cap has more experience in dealing with gov't bureaucracy than just about any human being could, better than 50 years active in the U.S. military. He knows firsthand how quickly the gov't can screw things up.

The U.S. government can't solve healthcare or education issues: Would anyone seriously want George Bush making the call about what to do regarding an alien invasion? If the Kree invaded, W would order to heroes to blow up the Shi'ar empire or some other unrelated planet.