Dark Moth

Have you been living under a hole the past year, or are you making things up on purpose? First off, if you're referring to the Islamic upheave against the Danish-drawn characatures of Muhammad, those were drawn as a satire from those who probably make fun of many groups of people, even Christians, which happens here in the good ol' US as well. And I don't know what you're trying to imply by the following. From the way you're saying, you make it sound as if the Muslim's behavior was justified and they're just the poor helpless victims being brutalized by the big bad west. Are you ever going to get out of this neo-hippy fantasy world of yours? This is actually very different than what the Christians did to the Jews. What they did is the ultimate form of hypocrisy, given many of those same people routinely bash Christianity and the West as being the great satan of this world. You see Christianity and Jesus being poked fun of all the time in western society, and yet no time have we ever had such a violent global reaction to such a trivial thing. What they did was uncalled for and only shows how far behind much of Islamic society still is from the rest of the world. Yes, it is the Muslims' fault for reacting so violently to just a few drawings lampooning Muhammad. Yes, it is their fault for being hypocritical. No, they are not just the poor helpless victims here. And NO, the west did go out and kill the poor helpless Muslims after their reaction to the cartoons. I don't know where in the hell you pulled that from. You seem to be the kind of person who'd blame 9/11 on the west, given some of your previous statements. I hope I'm wrong on that. Remember 9/11? How about 3/11 for those who live in Spain? Or 7/11 for those who live in India? Or how about the 9/11-esque plot exposed in Great Britain just recently? No, those aren't armies invading countries. But people are dying all the same. That enough for you? Or shall I post others? Or maybe it's just more acceptable for you for Americans to die instead?

Why do I get the distinct impression of a pot calling a kettle black? I'm just surprised you didn't resort to usual "I don't use logic anyway, so don't listen to me." tactic. Which is just your last resort whenever you're about to lose an argument. For your information, people generally 'insulted' your point of view because in pretty much every argument you've proven unable to do so with reason and maturity. Or maybe you can and just choose not to. And fer cryin out loud, just let the stupid bunny die already. As for Bush, well, the chances of seeing him impeached are miniscule. So don't get your hopes up.

Ah.

Microtext is so bloody annoying. M.C. Hammer - U Can't Touch This :cool:

Wasn't he also supposed to do 'Halo'?

Go away. Please.

And maybe to not scare them off with overwhored 'donut' jokes. Wouldn't be the first time we've heard that from you. You think you might actually do it this time? In before the lock!

Why?

It was never a 'cardinal sin' to do so, except maybe for a few months after 9/11. And yes, there were al-Quaida operatives in Iraq. And yes, Iraq and al-Quaida did have links before 9/11. But they never collaborated, and Iraq just didn't have anything to do with 9/11, which Bush never claimed anyway.

What was that for? Are you deliberately trying to be a smartass?

At the risk of being OT, can't you just stick to your regular account, Hades (aka giant pink bunny)?

Best wishes to you, your mom, and the rest of your family. My prayers will be with you.

Say what? For me it was the opposite - Weaving did a good job while Portman's acting left a lot to be desired. Not to mention in the film she looked like she was going anorexic. I think my main gripe with the film was that it was just too painfully political; lot's of anti-theism and stabs at current political regimes. That aside though, I enjoyed it overall. I also found it to be very 1984-like. And to state the obvious, it's coincidence that the corrupt leader had hair similar to that of Adolph Hitler.

I really don't post here much any more, but I thought I'd say hello just for the hell of it. Welcome.

Only for a little while. And in the best sort of way.

An online sudoku puzzle.

Mahnamahna.

O Rly? Well you were proposing that games be run by the children themselves. Maybe for the unofficial backyard baseball that's fine, but not for organized community sports. What you are proposing, and correct me if I'm wrong, is for these games to get rid of all adult coaching staff in general. You're completely ignoring the reasons why we needed to have coaching to begin with. These are adolescents and you're expecting them to organize these things themselves, train themselves and show good sportsmanship the entire time whenever things don't go well, which IMO is just silly.

I'm pretty disgusted by this actually. Not surprised though, considering how much of a ratings whore the networks can be.

You know why? Because I've carried on arguments with you in the past and frankly it's proven to be a tragic waste of time. Anyway, me and pixies were discussing the definitions of what is normal and what is not. I was just arguing under the premise that homosexuality was caused by a genetic defect, as someone pointed out earlier. The whole 'three arms' thing was just an example when we were naming these that weren't 'normal'.

What am I, a relationship adviser now? Anyway, I already made that point clear. If the man gets up and runs away, then the decision is the woman's.

Once again, whenever you aren't capable of arguing your point, you resort to personal attacks. This is why I didn't respond to your last plea for attention in a thread like this.

Are you suggesting that the law require some kind of compulsory mediation or counselling session? Would that involve the woman and man together or seperately, with or without their families? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> When did I mention law? I was talking about along a more personal basis. They're a couple, they should be able to talk about these things. If the couple are both old enough to be legally separate, then the decision should ultimately be up to them, not their families.

In situations like that, it'd be alot easier on the couple if they were responsbile enough that they wouldn't be put in that situation in the first place.