Dark Moth

I'd definitely be LS, just without all the constraints of the Jedi.

In just a few years? No.

:D

I would never listen to Kreia's teachings any more than I would sleep with her. Besides, it's debatable that even she wasn't gray, but DS.

Meh. The teachings of the Sith are neat, and they have some cool powers, but that really means nothing in the end cause the Sith always lose. LS for the win.

I'm scouring the profile now as we speak. It may not come out today, but it will be out within the next couple days. That is assuming I don't get loaded with homework tomorrow.

You want a report?!!! You got one! Midterms are OVER! That means, I'm free!!! Just give me a little time. :">

Aww. *pinches Jawa's cheek*

No, because there's something called continuity, my friend. And since KOTOR is part of the SW storyline, they have to make it so the Jedi actually survive.

I also would like better-written characters this time. And I think the whole "I have to kill/hurt you to help you" theme was milked dry, so get rid of it or at least reduce it in K3. We saw that concept used for Kreia, Revan, Atton, Hanharr, and GO-TO. It got old after a while.

I saw how the Panthers were dominated in last night's game. The fact that they played like crap certainly helped the Seahawks. Their coach was flipping out! It will be a good Superbowl. I hope the Steelers take this one. And I think they will. :D That is, assuming they keep playing as they have been.

Wow...and nowhere in your rambling post do you actually post any proof that Bush said in his case for the Iraq war that Saddam Hussein was linked to 9/11. You give practically everything else but that. And some of the articles you posted came from RIGHT AFTER 9/11, when Iraq was a suspect on the list. But everyone accepted that it was bin Laden who was responsible. And actually, some of what you posted supports the U.S. stance even more, because what you quoted tells how Iraq had indeed supported terrorism and terrorist networks, like al-Qaida. In other words: more evidence supporting G.W.'s reasons for worrying about Saddam's regime. But hey, why worry about facts when fantasy supports your beliefs, right, BW? In the very first column??? Talk about blaming other people for posting BS when they haven't even read the stuff pointed to... Sorry, but there was indeed in the article what I claimed there was in... I can read. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What are you trying to prove in that post? That Bush was hinting at nuclear strikes against countries? Because that quote doesn't say that anywhere. You're misinterpreting it. It means that he'd strike out at countries that possess chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. It's absurd to think he was talking about the U.S. using those weapons anyway, since we abandoned using chemical and biological weapons a long time ago. I suggest you learn to read these articles more carefully.

Good job, everyone! :cool: The Juhani concept was definitely creative.

I agree with you on some points, though I think Bastila would be a great choice as a PC whether LS or DS. I think it would help add to variety, and given the fact that she shares a bond with Revan, she would be ideal for tracking him/her down. And as the game progresses, you could find out from her (or Carth) more about Revan's character and what he/she did between K1 and K2.

Steelers: 34 Broncos: 17 :D :cool: (w00t)

Sweeeeeet. I'm in need of another RTS, them being my favorite type of PC game. The last one I purchased was Age of Mythology, though I've been eying RTW for some time.

Hmph. If I were Bush, I would have told Osama that I would accept his truce if and only if he and the top leaders of al-Qaida turned themselves over to us. I'm sure Binny boy would have been a lot more hesitant to offer a "truce" then. I think this is a good sign, though. It shows he's starting to falter.

I was wondering when someone would comment about all the sloganizer sigs. I was actually going to do one too, but decided I like my sig better as a shameless plug anyway. :D

Indeed. But one major difference between Christianity and the Islam is here that with the Islam it has actually been used mostly by violent conquering type of guys to explain their violence (Bin Laden), while the crimes of the Christians have actually been done by an institution (The Church) that is the "official voice" of Christianity, and thus "in order of God". It is one thing to blame your violence on a believe. It is an other thing when you are The representive of your religion arguing for the killing of thousands of people... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Again, you're wrong. What do you think Muhammad's conquests were in the name of? Did you even read the Islamic Conquests link I gave you? These were Muslims, the supposed voice of Allah, waging war, including Muslim clerics themselves supporting them. They were waged in the name of religion. Even if there's no official institution involved, it can still be done in the name of religion. And even still, the institution doesn't always represent the religion.

No? You say that as if religion is directly responsible. You fail to consider the possibility that it is only because people misuse it, not that the religion itself condones it. Mankind has waged war ever since its beginning, religion is just another excuse for it. And what about the good things it has done, hmm? 5th Commandment, anyone? Love your neighbor? Love your enemies? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? "He who draws the sword dies by the sword"? You can't just go and blame religion for wars. Otherwise, you'd have to blame every other system/institution for its "crimes". Example: a policeman may abuse his authority. Does that mean all policemen are bad, or that law enforcement agencies in general are corrupt? NO.

(w00t) You idiot! Do you have any idea when Jerusalem was taken over by the Romans? Answer: before Christianity even existed. Muslims have done the same thing to others for the same reasons. And I'm saying maybe you should learn about them instead of spouting your usual rabble. Then again, I guess facts have never been a necessity for you, have they? Nor has offending anyone who is of the Christian or Islamic faith. I am not saying here that one faith is worse than the other, just disproving your rediculous statement claiming Christianity has killed more people than Islam has when facts prove otherwise. How is it not Muslim aggression, eh? If you're expanding offensively using war to conquer territories, that is aggression. That is how Jerusalem was captured. That is how Constantinople was sacked. Not if facts prove otherwise.

Those lists aren't everything, my friend, only the tip of the iceberg. And how about posting some lists yourself, instead of just making claims? Not that it's ever bothered you before, though. Christianity is not naturally warmongering, and some would argue neither is Islam. Many do agree it's mostly due to the pinheads who misuse it. As for the crusades, it may interest you to know that the Crusades were not first called for imperialism purposes but in response to years of MUSLIM aggression in the Middle East. The first Crusade was called in response to a call for help from Alexius I Comnenus.

As I said, you obviously know next to nothing about Islam's history, then. (here's a little more) But if you just want to keep posting unsupported opinion and ignoring facts, go right ahead.

AC/DC - TNT AC/DC - Highway to Hell :cool: