Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 11/4/03 04:48 PM, Stormwarden wrote: I figure that humanity will self-destruct, with the exception of Austrailia.

Everyone else shall blow themselves up for some stupid reason or another.

*Makes plans to go to Australia*

Humanity seems to already have shattered. Notice the increase in sporadic violence etc. Not good for anyone.

At 11/4/03 07:57 PM, UsurperInsurgent wrote: If they did not want anyone to find it it... it would not be there in the first place.

Someone in the higher ups must have leaked some info ;) It would be neat to see what more they could possibly be hiding.

We die anyways. But yes, evolution would help quite a lot.

At 10/29/03 09:33 PM, Dagodevas wrote:

At 10/29/03 09:26 PM, NoMilkToday wrote: It's called the CPC now, the Conservative Party of Canada, or as I like to call it, the Crap and Poop Coalition ;)

How mature.

Hey, everyone cracks jokes, there is no reason to get up tight about it.

Ok, enough biccaring. If people want to smoke, they will, and if they don't, they won't. If one should find herself walking through smoke, it would be best to not care and not make a scene. It takes a LOT of second hand to kill a person, small bits will not. Now, that being said, should cars be illegal because THEY have emissions? That's right.

War on terror? Won? Well...no one wins in war. War is absolutely pointless. All it gets the participants is death and pity, if not that, just bloodshed. Oh and chaos in the end, which does the countries no good. SO, that being said. All this war on terror has done is prove that IT ITSELF is terror and thus there is a complete war on itself. Making bush fight himself. Proving he is a complete moron.

At 10/29/03 10:16 AM, bumcheekcity wrote:

At 10/29/03 03:40 AM, TheTio wrote: So, will George W Funk go down with a loss in his war, or will he get reelcted and go into overtime

I would like to say he goes down. I think he's below 50% Approval Rating at the minuite, but I could be wrong. Anything can happen between now and... when will the election be?

And let me point out that that 50% comes from only half of the voters. The rest of the non voters probably don't vote because BOTH parties have their moronic ways. so it's more like 25% +- approval.

At 10/28/03 09:14 PM, stasmaster wrote: What if the US just arbitrarily invaded a generic country, no warning to anyone, just went in and took over? What could anyone else do?
I'm not really talking abut Iraq. I'm talking about invasion without even any pretense of having any specific reason for it. Also, what would happen if the US invaded a country for the express purpose of taking it's land or something like that? (eg. invade Mexico to incorporate Mexico's economy in to theirs)
I'm not flaming the US here, it's just a hypothetical question.

What if...well...it proves to a lot of people that...they would be complete MORONS for doing it! Thats what the US probably considers terrorism anyways ;)

I think bringing plants into politics is rubbish. I have a message for politics, "Leave the plants out you moronic apes!!!"

That is all. People can and will smoke or not smoke whatever drug they want. It's a fact of life.

At 10/29/03 04:04 PM, RugbyMacDaddy wrote: I was refering to in the Provincials for Ontario, my bad. And the CAnadian Alliance no longer exists, nor does the PC party, there is now one party for the right wingers, which has yet to be named.

It's called the CPC now, the Conservative Party of Canada, or as I like to call it, the Crap and Poop Coalition ;)

The NDP may also regain official party status, Dalton McGuinty is thinking of lowering the official party status from 9 seats to 7.

At 10/28/03 09:42 PM, thenark wrote: Regarding the current situation in Iraq, with the uncontrollable terror attacks, I have a question. I want to know if people think it a question of nationalism, in that the arabs dont want an American influence in the region. or if it is, as Bush says a group of individuals who do not want to lose the priveleges they enjoyed under Hussein's regime, and are simply afraid of a free world?

Bush does not know what they perceive as free, nor do we. Only the Iraqis can say that for sure.

Ok, should, shouldn't. Either way, it's still the woman's decision.

At 10/27/03 08:53 PM, General_Patton wrote:

At 10/27/03 08:15 PM, NoMilkToday wrote: Each has his/her reality. Take the brain away, and it dissapears.

yes, kill the person, and they have no reality, because they are dead. I never realized that. Anyway, everyone has the same reality. However, it is our PERCEPTION of taht reality which makes it a different experience for everyone.

True, to word it differently, reality is the instance of everything, and perception of all these instances makes us have our own realities and instances.

[Insert conceptual shitstorm here]

And wait, whats THAT I hear? They were negotiating unpeacefully with bombs and bullets? Thaaaat's right. And insulting really doesn't help, I've been there and back.

At 10/27/03 08:19 PM, General_Patton wrote:

At 10/27/03 08:10 PM, NoMilkToday wrote:
So their job is to take the lives of the innocent for their own safety while not acieving their objectives. How about NOT having them fight and just have them talk about it and come to decisions then. People are WAY to friggen impatient and always want want wanting these days. I don't care for all these macho tough guy ass holes. And I don't care if they don't care about me.

oh lovely, so PEACE is the answer...No shit sherlock. Hey, maybe the solution is that we should all get along, YEAH, that the ticket. We should negotiate with people like saddam, hitler, idi amin, general tojo, Kim jong il, stalin, lenin, the confederates, Osama, etc... etc... they all are reasonable and logical men that would probably be willing to negotiate. Oh wait, thats bullshit, they would NEVER truly negotiate and abondon their true aims.

Oh, and you know that they wouldn't HOW? That's right! You and I can't say if they would or wouldn't because oh my, It's never been tried because politicians are too FEARING and would rather like to kick the shit out of 'enemies' and then 'say' they created peace.

I don't hate.

Each has his/her reality. Take the brain away, and it dissapears.

I'd like to see how he handles the fire situation when he takes over office.

At 10/27/03 08:04 PM, General_Patton wrote:

At 10/27/03 04:52 PM, Dig_the_Man wrote: Okay, how about this. Instead of sending a whole bunch of poor innocent (okay some are not so innocent) soldiers off to war, how about we send the Politicians who start them?

Not poor or innocent. Highly trained proffesionals with a sworn duty to protect this nation and its interests. You describe them as if they were girl scouts. They can kick ass and take names.

Yeah, give Bush a Glock 18 and send him up against all the other baddies in the world! Give Congress a bunch of 9 mms and let them go nuts in North Korea!? Tony Blair can take a Machette and go hunting in Iraq for friends and family of Saddam!

Hell, I bet we should have sent Churchill to fight hitler in the field of battle to deicde the fate of the free world. WHat you describe is going back to the days of sparta and a military regime. We'd be ruled by the military if what you say came to fruition,. We sure as hell would not elect a bunch of educated old men to congress if we knew they would fight our wars for us.

Hey, hey?!
Crazy, I know, why would we sacrifice professional politicians?

Yeah, why? Are you even thinking clearly?

So their job is to take the lives of the innocent for their own safety while not acieving their objectives. How about NOT having them fight and just have them talk about it and come to decisions then. People are WAY to friggen impatient and always want want wanting these days. I don't care for all these macho tough guy ass holes. And I don't care if they don't care about me.

At 10/27/03 07:39 PM, General_Patton wrote:

At 10/27/03 10:19 AM, Slizor wrote: Religion is silly crap and we already have the general forum for silly crap.

Silly, ask the crusaders, the warriors of Dar-Es-Islam, martyrs of all faiths, priests of all faiths, and, in fact, most human beings alive. If faith was so silly, no one would care. Religion is an attempt to answer why, rather than science's "how", or politic's "what". Saying religions is silly is no less silly in itself thatn claiming politics or science is silly.

Most humans are where they are, and I respect that. Although I think most humans are actually quite silly, even I appear silly to some for being nihilist and having no religious beliefs. But then again, I think that if they cannot respect me, I won't hate them for it. Simply put, everything is where it is.

At 10/25/03 11:32 PM, Guitar_clock wrote:

At 10/14/03 03:43 PM, yoman90531 wrote: NUKES NUKES
THIS IS A TOPIC FOR NUCLEAR MANIACS, NUCLEAR PHYSISTS, PEOPLE WHO WANTS TO KNOW HOW NUKES WORK!!
I LL POST MORE STUFF AS TIME GOES...

go fuck yourself. Not to be too harsh, but that was really stupid.

I'll have to agree, it was really stupid.

I think that in war, in some odd time, mandatory canibalism was the case. A soldier would have to eat the WHOLE body that s/he killed raw and uncleaned. Lets see them want war THEN!

At 10/27/03 06:10 PM, blueloa13 wrote: ok no one should have sex before puberty cuase it serves no purpose. and after puberty you should usually only have sex with someone within 3 or 4 years of your age. and i think after 18 you can fuck anyone (thats also over 18). Your old enough to make those decisions.

thats my personal opinion and i think that a 54 or so year old and a 7 year old is just fucking sick and he should be shot.

I agree that it is indeed sick, but going as far as killing him would make you just as sick.

At 10/27/03 07:44 PM, RugbyMacDaddy wrote: Clark is also a very highly decorated memeber of the armed forces, he really believes in the country and has worked his butt off for it.
Oprha could do a very good job, a definatly could beat Bush. IF she ran the USA I think alot more people would like the US because she probally wouldnt be all for bossing people around, rather trying to work together and not alienate the allies and other countries. I also think things on the home front would improve, things such as health care and education, and with her book club she would probally wan tto get rid of illiteracy and make a serious effort at it.

I think it would be good to have a leader who is intelligent and actually respects humanitarian rights and freedoms unlike Bush who distances himself from these all the time.

Btw, that post was a reply to mrpopenfresh's last post here.

Yes, most of North Americans are, but the middle east is quite different.

At 10/25/03 05:01 PM, bumcheekcity wrote:

Orit could be that Freedom Fighters are oppressed and Terrorists arent. What do you think?

"If a firefighter fights fire, what do freedom fighters fight?"

At 10/25/03 11:12 PM, JudgeFUNK wrote: Wisdom is where all value comes from, and without it, nothing has true value.

Value is a human concept...along with everything else since humans began to think and form ideas. Take away the chemicals in between nerve endings in the mind, and you get nothing at all. Chemicals are all we are.

At 10/25/03 08:52 PM, EnigmaOfTheDark wrote:

At 10/24/03 10:36 PM, mrpopenfresh wrote: Tell me what you think of the pope. What he should do, if he really makes a difference.

Die.

He's too conservative and too old to fix the issues that are flooding the church.

He will die, very soon indeed. Just to be replaced by another sickness...but as I said, in my opinion, religion is slowly ayling.