3,942 Forum Posts by "D2Kvirus"
At 8/2/04 02:45 PM, subpar wrote: Do you think it's really just to scare us? Do you think it's even real?
No, but it's the only way the Bush Administration can divert attention away from the Democrat Conference. Wait, did I say that out loud?
They've been blabbering about it on the news. They're probably making a huge deal out of it because they're tired of reporting how many people died in Iraq every day.
Apparently, more was made of it in the UK than the US (well, the 'rentals were over there and barely heard a peep about it), causing Bliar to follow suit.
Problem is, the "evidence" was old, so therefore not relevant (by the way, nice attempt to cover their asses with "It's not about the Democrat Conference." - what is it about, better tell people 3 years too late?!?). At the same time, Bliar is being told to go into minute detail, rather than assume we'll swallow it wholesale, like people would have two years ago, when snapping your fingers to get a terror alert worked. Haven't these people realised this was covered in Farenheit 9/11 quite clearly?
It seems like the terror alert level is ALWAYS orange. They're always raising it from yellow to orange, and they don't tell us when they put it back down to yellow because they want to scare us again without actually putting it up to red.
As I said, this was in Farenheit 9/11 (a direct quote, actually) - a film that's made $100m in the US, so a lot of people have seen it. They'll be wise to the usual raising of the terror alert, if they weren't already due to it being raised at regular intervals, but with less sincerity every time. People grow wise, then they grow weary.
Oh well. The news is only entertainment nowadays anyway. It's just like reality TV, except it's not always scripted.
Actually, it's far more scripted. After all, when was the last time Dubyuh made an off-the-cuff remark, do you think?
"Oh yeah, all the major financial institutions in New York will be blown up by al-Qu'eda soon enough!!!" - GWB.
"Oh, then the same must be true for London, then." - TB.
Have either of these fuckers realised this won't wash by now, especially after Farenheit 9/11 obliterated this way of thinking? I'm afraid you'll have to try harder to get atention away from the Democrat Conference, Little Gerogie...
Oh, wait, was that just a coincidence and little more? My mistake...
"It's the public's fault that the Diana Memorial Fountain is closed, as they should not have been paddling in it." - Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell. Completely forgetting that a month ago, when it opened, the public were activly encouraged to paddle in it. Of course, it's also the public's fault that the thing clogged up with leaves when it started raining, when it flooded the grass next to it, or the fact that granite gets very slippery when water runs over it, causing algae to form. Which is slippery. So, in other words, the designeres are not to blame for wasting shitloads of public money.
"John Kerry, reporting for duty *salutes*" - The reason John Kerry is only seven points ahead of Bush in the polls. Euch...
The thing is, in the last couple of weeks there was another case of a 14 year old being stabbed to death by a teenage friend, totally unrelated to this case. In fact, to underline how unrelated the cases are, the parents of that murdered child knew where the blame lay - the murderer was "evil." Emotive, yes, but still more accurate than trying to blame some videogame for your lame-assed parenting - and we have yet to hear from LeBlanc's parents, which says a lot.
However, there is one unbelievable piss-take in a knee-jerk manner. On amazon.co.uk, you can buy or sell the game, but they deleted all the reviews of it - so you can't talk about it (I should know, as I had a review of it). As I recall, the reviews weren't all saying "This game rocks! I want to go out on a killing spree, as it shows me how cool it is!!!", but this is irrelevant, apparently.
Fucking typical, in a boring and ill-informed manner...
So, it's "Silly Season", where there is no news to report, so how do you get some readers interested? Oh, wait, what's this - a 17 year old batters a 14 year old friend to death with a hammer, and the dead kid's parents are blaming a video game, because their thought processes are so rational at this point in time, aren't they?
Yes, apparently a kid was "obsessed" with playing Manhunt, accoriding to the victims' parents, as they go through the first couple of phases of the grieving process - Denial, then Anger - because they don't want to consider the REAL alternative. The fact they let their son play with a psychopath, allowed him in their house, and never suspected anything was wrong. And, naturally, the murderer's parents have been silent all this time.
So as a result, the game has been pulled from the shelves by Dixons (and related companies in the same group), although Virgin Megastores, Amazon and the rest haven't. Of course, the real reason Dixons pulled the game is to avoid potential lawsuits, since a 17 year old was playing an 18 rated game, not the fear of a repeat crime (since there have been plenty of those in the eight months the game has been out, haven't there? Hello? Is that an echo I hear?) Even the BBFC are saying it's a pile of crap, and 20 years ago this summer they were saying children might be influenced by watching horror films on video, hence censoring and banning left and right.
Still, it has affected some people. On Amazon.co.uk, the game could be bought second hand for £10 a month ago. Now it's going for £30, and eBay is getting jacked up with copies of the game. It's enough to make you want to grab a plastic bag, stalk someone, and jam it over their head, twisiting violently.
But then again, I'm an adult, I know better, and what I say goes. it appears, once again, the assumption is that you don't know right from wrong, fact from fiction, until you're...what, 18? And this myth is still being tossed around with credence? Fuck that.
At 6/8/04 09:45 AM, D2KVirus wrote: "Do not panic, otherwise the terrorists will have won." - Government rhetoric on "threats" of a dirty bomb on the British public.
"Right, we'll have to increase security even more, just in case such an event happens again." - Government rhetoric after tony Blair is hit with a condom full of purple flour.
"We're sorry, but we are not prepared to fund the works for a new sewage system in London, even if it does put an end to this Cholera epidemic that is killing the poor in the East End in their thousands." - British Parliament, 1848-58.
"There may not be any Cholera epidemic, but the amount of shit in the Thames is making the House unbearable to be in, as the stench is intolerable. Here's £3m, build the sewers." - British Parliament, 1858.
Some things never change, huh?
At 7/29/04 11:33 AM, JackOfShadow wrote:
The wall isn't a perfect defense. It is an effective one though. The amount of terror acts have decreased over the last months so apperantly Sharon is succeeding. The wall wasn't supposed to keep all alestinians out, just too decrease the number of those who get into Israel. And after all it isn't yet completed.
Already, you've gone from the wall is the only way to keep the Palestinains out (and therefore no bombings whatseover, so Israel is safe), to saying it's not perfect. Hello?!?
So it's just supposed to decrease the numbers getting through - by giving them an incentive to get through in the first place? Building a wall is just encouraging them, and if you can't see that, may I guess they built it right next to your bedroom window?
If we have people saying that the wall has given Israel five months safety (which is a lie and nothing more), what else are we to expect - it proves the Palestinians are bloodthirsty beats who deserve top be caged like animals? No, wait, that was the last guy...
So the French had their share of wars, as have the nordic peoples. However look at them now. France capitulated in WWII and Scandinivia was mostly nuetral. I don't say that the British don't have a fighting spirit, I'm saying that having a history of struggle that took place hundreds of years ago doesn't mean that you understand what it is like to live in a society such as Israel.
I was wondering when French capitulation would surface...
Why are the Israelis building the wall/barrier/whatever? To keep the Palestinains out - or in. Why did the Romans build Hadrians Wall? To keep the Caledonians out - or in. Repeat for any other notable wall in history. Come to think of it, the ancestors of the Romans have a habit of capitulation, ie WWII - point being?
It is meaningless to cite whatever problems there are in Israel, mostly as the Israelis are the root of them all. Why are they building a wall? Because in the past, in societies completely unlike Israel, walls were built and did their job, so it must work again, right?
The real problem with Israel is one everyone can understand: good guys/bad guys. And it's the Palestinains we are being told are the bad guys, by the Israelis and their acolytes. of course, this has never caused a problem before in history. Considering some of the unbelieveble hatred being spewed about Palestinians in this thread, there's your problem - black and white demonising. And it isn't usually helpful to demonise others based on origin/nationality/religion. A trip to the India/Pakistan boreder will tell you that.
I don't want Israel to become the 51st state either but we are running out of options here. Please since you seem so sure of yourself propose a way to solve this conflict. Don't just say "you have to stop killing them" or "be the first side to compromise", give me a way that will be practical and specific.
Why is compromising not practical, exactly? Why is putting your guns (missiles and whatever else) not practical? That's usually how things get resolved. Fanning the flames by building barriers which a large proportion of the UN are opposed to, that is never going to solve anything, buty it will cause more problems to be solved at a future date. Why do I have to supply a solution - you're the one living out there, so maybe you should be thinking long and hard, as it affect you daily, from what you lead me to almost believe.
Surprise surprise - there's a problem caused by the Israelis, but they can't think of a way to put an end to it. So, did the means justify anything?
At 7/28/04 05:05 PM, BenGaunt wrote:At 7/28/04 04:18 PM, Racehazard wrote:That is a truly awful film.At 7/28/04 03:48 PM, Ovalshine wrote: No, Iraq is the 51st state.Technically speaking, the 51st state is the 51st state. A film with Robert Carlyle and Samuel L. Jackson.
I was hoping nobody would remember it - mostly because I wanted to make that joke. Oh well, better play Manhunt, then bludgeon somebody to death with a hammer...Moral Panic Bullshit, gotta love it.
At 7/28/04 02:17 PM, not_typing wrote:At 7/28/04 10:10 AM, D2KVirus wrote: Now, you can cite five months without a bombing in Israel because of the wall, but does that stand up?That's the only thing that stand's up......... the fence was built so that terorists won't come in, AND THEY DONT.
Did you read that link? Terrorist bombing in Tel Aviv a whole THREE WEEKS AGO? If that counts as preventing the Palestinians coming over and blowing up parts of Israel, what's thwe next plan to protect the good people of Israel: handing out a leaflet telling them to duck and cover? Close your eyes and put your fingers in your ears when you see a Palestinian coming, so they won't know you're there?
They are coming over, or to be more accurate, THEY HAVE. So, in other words, all the all has done so far is waste a lot of man hours, and piss a whole lot of people off. People who then come over and bomb the nearest available piece of public transport. CONGRATULATIONS ALL 'ROUND FOR SHARON!
Oh and that remindes me, if you would have had a state of palastine one mile away from your house, i'm sure you would have built some swort of bariar, and the UN would have NEVER question it . If you think the poor palastinians can't sell tomatoes, and cant visit their families on the other sideI dare you to come here and see how dangarouse it is to live with no fence.
OK, you pay for the ticket, and meet me at the airport. What, weren't expecting that response, were you?
I take it you don't know much about British history, warring tribes, and building bloody great walls to keep the Caledonians out (OK, the Romans did that). And did that succeed? Not really, to the point the Romans just got bored and left - leaving Britain free for the Vikings, Saxons and Normans to invade and conquor at regular intervals. But do we have mad Scots tribes rampaging into England to massacre all and sundry, in a bid to get Carlisle back? No - however, the English army have regularly gone up there and massacred freely, and they had no place to run, due to the North Sea at one end, and a wall to keep them where they were at the other.
As for making out I portray the Palestinias as a bunch of dumb tomato sellers - dude, what the fuck is your damage? After all, you seem to wish Al Gore dead (I read profiles of all militant sociopaths who think they have an opinion, just to be sure), as well as belive that as soon as the wall comes down, there will be a million billion Palestinians pouring through to rip your heads off.
I've said it already - we have one bunch of Americans, we don't want another one. Especially since you sound like a Bush supporter. Then again, the amount of free reign Israel has to massacre palestinians, I'd be surprised if you weren't.
At 7/27/04 05:38 PM, Jemistad wrote: What yo' on about, Willis?
Since he can't run a country when he's hardly ever in it (or even when he is), can't we just vote in Tuscan local elections? Face it, the turn-out will be higher than most UK by-elections anyway...
At 7/28/04 08:24 AM, Spookshow wrote: Heavy racial and religious reasons are not BS my friend.
And there was I, thinking the Palestinians were more aggrieved by having their land taken from them with aggressive force.
Now, you can cite five months without a bombing in Israel because of the wall, but does that stand up? That's like saying there hasn't ben a terrorist bombing for five months in the UK because Britney Spears went to number one with Toxic. Ridiculous? Hey, have you heard the crap Blair keeps spouting at us? He says we're safe from terrorism, but spends £8m on a leaflet to mail to everyone so we know what to do in the event of a terrorist attack (which is watch it unfold on the news, since no international terrorist orginisation can be bothered with the UK anyway.)
However, there's been a bombing in Israel in less that five weeks, READ! Tel Aviv is Israeli, right, and that was three weeks ago. So, the wall has succeeded? Bullshit, pal - it's stoked a few extra flames, as if the Israelis going after the lebanese at the moment hasn't.
Wai, did I just say Israeli aggression? Sorry, my mistake, there's nothing wrong with trying to protect yourselves and your own wellbeing. We already have one bunch of homocidal dickheads reciting that line - they're called Americans. Why6 would anyone want to adopt their hypocritical attitudes, exactly?
"The more Indians we kill today, the less we have to kill in the next war. The more I see it, the more I am convinced they will all have to be killed, or be maintained as a species of poor. We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux and the Cheyenne, to the point of their very extinction - men, women, and children." - General Sherman.
At 7/26/04 10:54 AM, Spookshow wrote:
Do you really want a country like Latvia to have more power than say Russia? When you commit more to a fight you should get a better vote as to how the "more" should be used.
Did I say more power? No, I didn't - I said every nation should have an equal voice and equal standing. It's a very simple idea, I know, and probably won't go down too well in the Mid West ("Sounds like Commie-nism, Jim-Bob!"), but since when did the opinions of gung ho rednecks amount to anything important...asides from US foreign policy, anyway?
The US aren't committed to a fight, as they casually ignore the UN when it suits them. Ploughing in money and beating your chest isn't a commitment, either - it's aggressivly barging others out of the way so you can force your will when you please.
Just because an African nation doesn't have the bucketloads of cash that the U has, does that make their opinions unimportant? If you think that, may I reccommend a visit to Sudan at the moment.
At 7/26/04 12:06 PM, TheShrike wrote:
If only there were a way to strangle people across the web. =\
Just do the old way to get rid of Yahoo flamers/spammers/twats - password hack their account, then post their address on the board. They get quiet rather quickly at that point.
"Don't go back there, as it's being marketed for sex tourists." - Dubyuh, either trying to appeal to the Cuban-American vote in his usual charming manner, or score points off Castro by keeping his people from returning home. Either way, it hardly works, let alone looks good...
Blair runs our country?!? How - he's hardly ever in it.
When our so-called leader has a family trip to Tuscany, keeps up his other job as Foreign Minister for the US (a direct quote from Nelson Mandela), or handing over the reigns to lackies and underlings (including Mandleson), I think we reserve the right to vote in a country we don't live in. Ity's just following the principles of Blairism.
At 7/26/04 10:44 AM, Spookshow wrote: We hold ALOT of power there.
But why? The US is just one voice, just like Israel, just like the UK, and just like...ah, here's a list.
One country should not be elevated higher in the pecking order - it's generally a good idea to keep things working properly. That's like, in the middle of a meeting, Slovakia having a motion turned down and being told "STFU n00b" by the Italians (or whoever).
So what if the US have money or military clout (another way of saying they use it far too often) - it's because of the latter that they have the former anyway. Quite often at the expense of other UN members, actually.
At 7/26/04 04:00 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:At 7/26/04 03:39 AM, aviewaskewed wrote: http://gripboy.com/thisland/this_land_mov.swfWow. I've seen eight people post that link in forums in the past 15 minuites...
Slow starters...
At 7/26/04 10:41 AM, Spookshow wrote: Anyone look at Lovecraft, Heinlein and the like? Alot of the survialist books are like that.
Lovecraft is horror more than anything else, usually set in parallell realities. Dystopian works are set in a vision of the "real" world, sometime in the future, gone rather fucking mad.
And before I forget, watch Brazil. All of you. NOW!
At 7/26/04 10:38 AM, Spookshow wrote: The UN has no muscle without America.
Oh, right, I forgot that "fact." Thanks for pointing it out, and making it easy for us all to understand by showing no evidence or thinking, as that really slows things down.
Pillock.
I don't mean to be an asshole, but it's spelt "dystopia." It's one of my favourite words, so I'm allowed to get cranky.
Anyway, I also reccommend Contraband by George Foy, because it's set in this postmodern nightmare world which is all-too probably. Waltz-mosh, anyone?
Not even the top five - The One.
Come on, what will America do if the UN fles their muscles and force the Israelis to tear down this barrier, exactly? They can't carpet bomb the HQ, as that's in New York and will, therefore, look stupid, and it isn't as if they can invade each and every nation that votes against them, because a whole continenent and their armies uniting is generally a bit of a bugger to fight against. Especially if that includes the Russian army - as history proves they're the real hard bastards in battle.
Israel should just learn to listen, rather than recite the usual bullshit. If you don't want people trying to kill you, don't give them a strong, valid reason. After all, it isn't as if the world is like Croydon on a Saturday night, all tanked up (if you excuse the expression) and aggro, is it?
"Not giving a straight answer for two hours." - Tony Blair, in the Commons, defending himself against accusations that he's a LYING, MURDERING SHIT, in the wake of The Butler Report. The body languege of those sat behind him, however, told a different story...
And watching the news (by the way, why is BBC World news better than the stuff we get at home?), the UN state that the Wall must come down, with 150 countries supporting this motion. Yet five, plus the US say it's fine, which seems to be justification enough? Why?
When the UN and 150 countries all state that this wall is about as humanitarian as shearing sheep with a lawnmower, why are the US (and whoever the other five were, but that's not important) carry more weight?
To solve problems, maybe the 150 nations should've had their cases heard, not dismissed out of hand. Things like this always add up.
I know I said the morons could come out to play while I was on holiday, but I got back yesterday. You can fuck off now.
can somebody please alert the morons: It is safe for you to post for a week. I'm off on holiday for a week, and shooting next weekend. Just as long as they clear out by midnight (GMT) on Saturday night.
At 7/14/04 10:35 AM, JackOfShadow wrote:
Well I am baised, but who isn't. I try staying objective and when I'm saying that it's about time we started being offensive it's not my blood lust talking, I mean that if we keep on staying defensive one day palestinians will get through our defense. A perfect defense doesn't exist.
Can somebody please tell me what is "defensive" about driving tanks into Palestinian settlements, destrying homes and (bizarrely) zoos, and tearing down Arafat's compound from around him?
If that constitutes as defensive, I hate to think what the Israeli counter attack will be. Objective?!?
If you do think that there is another way, please, I'm open for sugestions. How about a little constructive criticism for a change.
Reading a few history books, perchance? After all, in 1948, didn't the Israelis go and massacre any and all Arabs they could find, just to proclaim the territory to be theirs? Don't the same Israelis push the boundries out further and further, into Palestinian territories?
If you're so worried about a few bad eggs crossing into Israel and flooding the streets with Jewish blood, can you tell me if there's a wall built for the very same reason, but to keep the germans back? After all, isn't it Germany's actions between 1933-45 that led to the creation of Israel in the first place? If there is a wall for the Palestinians, there should be a wall for the Germans - by your very thinking and reciting of historical events...that didn't involve israel, as it didn't exist. Hardly a basis for an argument.
You say you are not brought up to hate Palestinians, but I have yet to see any proof of this. You state they will kill you in your beds given half a chance - a very hateful mindset. There is more to hate than saying "I hate X!", as there are mindsets of hate (and fear) that create a victim complex, and the need for walls, barriers, guards, and troops.
You say the Great Wall didn't work - so why are you even alive to talk about this? Obviously, you should be dead now, because that's how you portray Palestinians. Not as a people, but as a virus, a homogeneous mass intent on killing and pillaging "your" land. And attitudes like this further inflame hatred on both sides. To act innocent is a destructive criticism, as if not one Palestinian has suffered wrongs from Israeli hands.
Perhaps the perspective is wrong. Western news always favours the Israelis, given more coverage to one killed in a bombing than ten Palestinians shelled by tanks. Agauin, this can set off a complex that will serve as propeganda to one side, which wil be manipulated as propeganda for the other, and it goes on - and on, and on.
Israelis aren't the victims, Palestinians aren't savages. By using black and white testimony, you show just how dire the situation is, and that's from your side.
"The intelligence used to justify the war with Iraq was misleading, the September Dossier was flawed beyond belief...but nobody is to blame, especially Tony Blair and John Scarlett." - The full gist of The Butler Report.
"My one wish is to use a rocket launcher on all Mosques in Bradford." - A BNP member, caught on hidden camera.
"Islam is a wicked faith." - BNP leader Nick Griffin, as above.
"It was selectivly edited." - BNP leader Nick Griffin, trying too hard.
"I'm suing you for Libel, after how you made me look in Bowling For Columbine." - James Nicolls, trying to sue Michael Moore. All it shows is just how big Moor ehas become, if the lawsuits crawl out from the woodwork...
"Iraq could launch Weapons of Mass Destruction in 45 minutes? Who are you trying to kid?" - The basics of the Butler Report. No, Lord Butler, you're wrong - it was made in good faith, Tony Blair is great and would never lie to anyone, and we must trust him so he can get re-elected. Listen to Lord Hutton, seriously...
At 7/13/04 05:06 PM, JackOfShadow wrote:
The wall is not what causing the terrorism, terror acts were commited long before the wall was thought up. Don't sive me any crap about the wall making things worse, the things are in such deep shit it can hardly get any worse. The wall does it's job so apparently it's not that crappy.
How can you say it doesn't make things worse, when building a huge great wall provides ammunition for your argument - especially when the UN are on your side rather than that of the enemy? If Sharon (probably will) left it standing, it will become a bigger bone of contention and an extra tool of propeganda.
We are as bad as palestinians? We din't start this conflict, they did. We have tried defending ourselves for many years but we are forced to start offensive actions.
Ah, so this is where your responses are coming from - BIAS.
By the way, D2KVirus, the Great Wall of China didn't stop the mongols from conquering china, hope the israeli wall works better.
I'm not the one who brought it up as proof positive of walls sorting out problems. But, if you want to use this, and the assumption that Palestinians will flood in and see the blood of Israelis running in rivers in half an hour (not told anti-Palestinian propeganda, huh?) at the same time, you must be wrong on one count.
So, are you wrong in assuming the wall serves a purpose and protects Israelis, or do you believe the Palestinians will not be turned away by it, and happily massacre you all?
