Pop

I actually got the fanmods to remedy the unsightly bugs that came with the game. Some were fixed, some weren't. I haven't encountered any new ones. 'cept for the whole custom music deal, but I'm not sure if that was caused by the mods.

I always used stasis field + master speed + master critical strike.

Yes, but the holy land is in the ME.

Barbarian is one of the core classes for 3rd edition, so yes! They should be quite capable of kicking some ass. I'm more of a monk man, myself :D On that note, is the level cap / experience system the same one used in the original NWN? That is, do less powerful enemies decrease in xp value as you go up the level chain?

Has it been pointed out that the concept of jihad was not concieved by Muhammmed? So for one, it was factually inaccurate for the Pope to compare the two.

I'd actually prefer a Masquerade game. Dunno, it's just my opinion. I'm sure Obsidz will knock it out of the park no matter the circumstances. "Too bad they do not have the rights to make another DnD game like Baldur's Gate." Adding BG3 to VB on the wish list!

I second that, despite my disappointment with Requiem.

"Remember, folks. Whenever soemthing bad happens the easy way to do things is blame the US." It's not an easy conclusion to come by. The US involved itself with many anti-communist regimes and conflicts all over the world during the Cold War, the most famous example of which is Vietnam. British and American intelligence agencies were very active in the Middle East during that period, and as in other parts of the world they worked to ensure that no countries would fall to communism, generally by bolstering pro-western autocratic regimes. Such was the case with Saddam and such is the case with Iran. During the 1950s, Iran's parliament voted to nationalize its oil supply. President Eisenhower and the british government feared that Iran's vast oil reserves would fall into the hands of the Soviet Bloc, since the communist party was fairly influential in Iran at the time, but it wasn't fully in power. Not wanting to take any chances, the CIA staged a coup d'etat to overthrow Iran's parliamentary authority and install the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was staunchly anti-communist and was willing to deal with the Western powers when it came to the oil. Thus America "raped" Iran, and caused quite a bit of anti-American sentiments. The Iranian clergy was pretty much against this, but the Shah repressed his critics, and exiled the grand ayatollah Khomeini, who later came back from exile and took over after the Shah's inevitable fall. Khomeini pretty much blamed America for the hardships his country faced, and while he was a right extremist ****, he wasn't entirely inaccurate. Khomeini created the theocracy Iran is today, which is much more repressive than the Shah ever was, and its success in keeping power has given birth to the modern Islamic fundamentalist movement, because after all, if Iran could become an Islamic theocracy, why can't the rest of the ME? Why can't the world? Their biggest obstacle would obviously be the US, because of its modernist influence as well as the bad blood we incurred during the Cold War. It all goes back to American lust for what's under the ground over there. bah, I'm getting off-topic.

Hey, I'm jus sayin.

Whatever for? I played the new FEAR demo. Pretty entertaining.

Not a lot, unfortunately. As for other countries, Here's a general timeline (via wikipedia) of the whole deal.

Latest polls show that the newest wave of attack ads from the RNC might be effective enough to get the Republicans both houses of Congress next in November, as opposed to one. God, this country.

Heh, n/p. That dossier (containing the fraudelent extra images) was sent out in December. The original illustrations were published in September. The conflict should have never lasted that long. Had the gov't or the paper addressed the problem, it might never had escalated to that point. That's not saying that the **** wouldn't have hit the fan anyway. The entire thing could have been entirely avoided had the paper recognized that muslims would be affronted by the images and excercised a little caution, which was my original point. Even if the original images were harmless, they were a big "**** you" to muslims, and they opened the door to the heinous misrepresentations in the dossier. The freedom of the press is important, but the press has to be responsible in turn. Especially after the first publication of the illustrations, they were continually published in several countries for no other reason than they "had the right to".

I saw them all, and yes, most of them were pretty innocuous, except for the one where he's flanked by burka-clad women and brandishing a sword. This seems to be the picture that the ME seemed to be pissed about, in particular. As for the deportation of the artists, that would be hypocritical of the Danish gov't, as they refused to stop the Danish artists from releasing their illustrations on "free speech" grounds. Punishing another artist for excercising the same right isn't consistent.

Jon Stewart = Calls Scarborough a douchebag. Stephen Colbert = Calls Scarborough a retard. Joe Scarborough = Denounces Jon Stewart, loves Stephen Colbert. You're right, it makes perfect sense!

I didn't know Stewart extended the douche bag status to Scarborough It is kind of surprising, since Scarborough professes to "like" Stephen Colbert. How can you like one and not the other? They practically do the same thing. Except Colbert called Scarborborough a retard on air wierd.

So it's not the papers fault for creating the toons, it's the extremists fault for using the toons the paper created.

Wipe the froth from your mouth, "idiot". The drawings were commissioned by the Jyllands-Posten in Copenhagen.

Because if you disagree with something (say, religion in general), people like to talk about the negative things about it as it will reaffirm why they don't like it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It doesn't necessarily follow that these kinds of conflicts would cease to exist if religion is taken out of the picture. Man is not evil because of religion, religion is evil because of man. Colrom has good points. The Pope no longer has the credibility most people seem to assume he has. The Pope is not Christianity. His brand of strict thomism isn't held anywhere outside Vatican City. Besides, Ratzinger is a tremendous ****, even as popes go. "Yes, I am sure that that is exactly what the artists were thinking." It was, actually. The cartoons continued to be printed after peaceful protests and being asked to stop. That's when the violence started. The publishers had the opportunity to stop it, any sane person could have seen what was going to happen, and yet they didn't. Free speech one, Danes zero.

1 3 4 14 17 18 19 20 22 24 29 31 32 33 41 42

Is this MSNBC anchor, by chance, Tucker Carlson? *edit - No one should be surprised by this.

"Many Christians were enraged by this yet not one building burned down. Wierd that." Are you making the point I think you're making with that statement, and if so, are you retarded? "Really I'm not, the only thing that sometimes bothers me is that the superior one automaticley thinks he's enlightning and virtous when in fact he's primitive and raw just like the ones beaten on the ground, the so called enemies of the free world, etc." But is this inextricably linked to organized religion, christianity, islam, etc. as is the general gist of some of the arguments I've read? I don't think it is. Communist China were just as savage in their zeal to be a completely atheist state. "Nowadays wars are not about manpower. It is about weapons, and western world is superior with their arsenal and high-tech" Donald Rumsfeld thought the same thing, and he's losing his war. Bombs don't win wars, unless you're using nuclear bombs, which is psychotic. why does everyone here believe the violent reactions to the Danish comics to be indicative of the greater muslim faith? Why are people here willing to make value judgements about a religion while dismissing their tenets?

""Jesus is a second order prophet to the Muslims, as well. To a non-arab nationalist muslim, insulting Jesus is just as heinous as insulting the prophet. " Really? There's no proof of this." ... Have you read the Quran?

Not really. Jesus is a second order prophet to the Muslims, as well. To a non-arab nationalist muslim, insulting Jesus is just as heinous as insulting the prophet.

Somebody may have to create a "good day" thread.