random n00b

Only one as sharp-minded and well-groomed as yourself could possibly have seen through my cover!

I really can't think of any way to prevent this kind of thing, that wouldn't entail a reduction of Freedoms. You can't prevent people from engaging in savagery in the privacy of their homes. Impasse? Um, treated, how exactly? And for what purpose, actually? The assumption that any criminal, no matter the nature of their offenses, can be rehabilitated, is a legal dogma, not one based on rigorous research. Actually, psychologists and psychiatrists assert the opposite. In fact, this has CIA fingerprints all over it! Yessss...

It's just another potential health hazard fulfilled by people doing it wrong. Speeding? Drinking? The byproduct of laziness. Somebody that, for instance, won't cook food at home in the weekends and bring it to their jobs during weekdays isn't very likely to haul their ass over to the gym, either. I don't know about that. There's a plethora of info available on the worth of Mcfood, as far as health is concerned. If people don't want to listen, what are you going to do about it? And, what's to prevent me from making some delicious slickburgers in the privacy of my home? Those efforts would be better spent in teaching people general healthy living habits, than they are in attacking a handful of companies directly. Which raises the question of who stands to gain from that, and why. Everyone has an agenda... Well, Volo's example isn't much better at proving anything than Supersize Me, really. It would be interesting to have actual figures on the amount of Big Macs they sell for each salad, though, but I'm too lazy to investigate. Oh well. Time for my Big Mac. I'm nowhere as concerned about those companies playing mediatic games as I am about them playing cat & mouse with health inspectors.

If you make this kind of statement, you must be prepared to drown all opposition in a ****load of statistics that back you. And, for all its comical value, "Supersize ME" proves jack, from a statistical standpoint. It's false, too. "Junkfood" in controlled amounts and otherwise healthy habits will not make you fat. Your arteries, heart, liver, etc might not be too happy about it, but that's an entirely different issue. Obesity didn't start with the onset of Mcfood. It wouldn't end if you removed it, either. Unhealthy eating habits have found a way of materialising in fast food restaurants, but being fat is a choice, 99% of the time. Yes. It's a good exercise at pointing the obvious. A huge surplus of calories + zero activity = fatty. I don't think anyone disputed that?

Depends strictly on the amount of ammunition dropped. STALKER, for instance, gives you about the exact amount of ammunition so that you won't run out (provided you don't engage in prolonged firefights), assuming the enemy is using guns of the same calibre as yours. At any rate, I think it should be made so that the player isn't given time to "stop and loot" bodies after combat, in most cases. This isn't D&D, and I don't remember many instances of Bond checking the bodies for goodies, unless the plot calls for it. After a shootout, the player shoud be encouraged to get the duck out of fodge, not linger around idly. Fast action, that generates (or increases) plot tension, please. Have you played KGB? That's one spy game where 99 (100?)% of player decisions can ruin the game, forcing you to reload. It sure involves careful thinking and stuff. It's also probably one of the most frustrating games I've played. Despite its flaws, it's pretty good and rewarding, but I don't think that kind of decisiveness in player actions is very marketable, nowadays. I don't think Feargie wants AP to go the way of DX, regardless of its present cult status.

Which is proof, I think, of the lack of a truly defining forward in our team. This supposed technical superiority on paper I keep hearing about should have meant at least one goal, which Villa and Torres both managed to miss, repeatedly. I think it's pretty obvious that a well organized, competent defense (call it "anal", if you will, but give credit where it's due) can reduce Spain's scoring chances to near-zero levels. Italy at least showed that yesterday. Germany is very bad news... assuming the win vs Russia can be repeated.

YUM! Seriously, now. What do you do with this kind of scum?

Which, if you read my post, you'll find is not what I said. Yes, I guess you can be arrested if whatever statements you make can be construed as threats. But that applies to everyone, not just the US Prez. Otherwise, not likely.

WOOHOO!!

Good game, so far. I wish Spain would rely more on decisive attack actions than diving and ref action, but you can't have everything I guess. Cassano is doing pretty good so far, better than Toni even. Pirlo's absence is showing, I think, with long passes barely representing any danger from Italy. Here's hoping we'll see some goals in 2nd half, and a bit more of organisation on Italy's side...

Try contacting Fionavar via PM. It's been done in the past.

No, no. I was referring to the decryption thing. I didn't know about that 48-day (at first I read 48 HOUR, wtf?) thing. That's pretty effin extreme.

Wow, awesome game.

This is regarding to already ongoing investigations that have previously been authorized by the Judicial authority, right? I don't see the problem.

I was acting in character, but that's essentially it. Constitution hasn't been suspended, the govt hasn't been given carte blanche to perform anal probing on any and all citizens at their leisure, or anything. It's not the end of freedom as we know it. Sure, it's not cool that my electronic comms are being constantly monitored, but it's not such a big deal. It's not like some bozo at the other end of the line is actually reading what I post here, but even if he does, so what? They still can't arrest me if I say I'd kill Bush, or anything. I don't know how it works over there, but here, there are very strict limitations regarding how and with what purpose any private information can be used by the Administration and authorities, and AFAIK, Echelon doesn't change that. Yeah, yeah. Big Bro is here and all. Wake me up in time for two minutes hate.

No, not immediately. They were trying to deal with one big problem of the 20th century so far, though, that had been an important theme in WWII (and before, too) and that had seen no closure by the war's end (antisemitism). Jews hadn't been the cause for WWII, but they had been used by Hitler in his rise to power. Lol, you think they didn't see it coming? Don't flatter yourself. They didn't care though because the Arabs weren't considered a threat. So they dumped the Jews over there and were done with it. Easier than any of the alternatives at the time, probably. Lol armchair statesmanship

What do you mean, what?

Sure. Because back then in 1947, the Arab world was conceivably as big a threat as 1939 Germany had been. OMG! How could they not see the onset of global terrorism! And, looking at the numbers, they weren't off-mark by much, really. I'll take highly localized, moderately low-intensity conflicts over World Wars any day, thank you.

Come now. I'm sure you can do better.

Criminal negligence at worst, I'd say. Regardless of all the boasting and the hard-ass attitude, I find it hard to believe that harmful intent, or even the awareness that a serious risk to the soldier's health existed. Should have taken precautions to prevent or mitigate a possible heatstroke - he didn't, and a person died as a result. that's all there's to it. The fact that this happened during a more or less "brutal" disciplining (which is otherwise legal) is, I think, rather irrelevant. I don't think there would be so many people going "ooh!" and "aah!", if it had happened during regular instruction. Heh, that's funny. Probably subjecting a [unlawful combatant] prisoner to that kind of disciplinary measures would be construed as "torture", "inhumane treatment", and any number of other equally imaginative epithets. And yet people actually sign up for it...

What's all the fuss about? If you got nothing to hide, you got nothing to worry about...

Actually, psychopaths need very little motivation to "take the next step", to kill. In fact, an appeal to their vanity (the dying for God thing) and the assurance that there will be no reprisals (they'll be dead) can be just enough. Combine that with an often extremely low (the folks that do the bombing) or extremely high (the ones that plan them) IQ, and you have a winner. I'm not making up any of that. You say greed or any other factor can be a motive to kill, and I agree. But then, why the fixation on Islam? I'm not defending the clerics. They *are* profitting from the fact that attention is diverted towards the Evil Others instead of their own domestic problems. They maintain the Theocracy status quo, after all.

Ah, yeah. I guess I forgot to make my point - can't think straight when I haven't slept. The deal is, Islam is not what's pushing people to kill. It's just the tool used to generate a group identity that can then be redirected into a "US vs THEM" mentality, enough to have people support terrorism (or be able to look the other side, at least). Unfortunately, the exact same attitude is prevalent in the West, only in a negative. This is from Metadigital's profile, but I think it illustrates this very well: http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/monkeysphere.html

I wonder if Pro-death fashion would yield similar results?

Yeah. And the fact that we aren't taught the barbarism of the Umayyads (more like the opposite), should speak volumes, considering they were invaders and had to be kicked out for a fully "Christian" kingdom to be established. Actually, it was a period of unprecedented advancement in the region, not seen since the fall of the Roman Empire... Of course, it eventually came down to petty plotting and backstabbing, and things declined. And then... the Empi... er... Christians Struck Back! Why? Religion is just like any other social tool. You think TV or the Internets are actually opening your mind? Hominids killed their peers long before they had firearms. It's just a scapegoat. And, as Wals cleverly pointed out, we're just playing into the hands of the fundies by centering on Islam, instead of those pulling its strings. Actually, no. You don't need to have an entire population that's murderous - that's insane. It's much better to recruit those that are actually capable of doing the killing (which may account for about ~1% of the population in the West, I don't know over there), and then manipulate the rest into tolerating it. We invented that, as well. Hitler nailed it. I'm fairly confident that your average Saudi Arab couldn't cut your head off, even if he wanted. On the other hand, it doesn't bother him too much if another American Imperialist Pig is disemboweled. As I said, it takes a very specific set of factors to make a murderer, chief among them being victim of abuse as a child, but also neurological disorders. What the hell am I talking about anyway...