Gorgon

We saw opportunity, much like muslim militants everywhere did with the Arab spring. We could help instate a friendly democratic government in place of Ghaddafi. and we made lemonade in the proverbial sense, with air support and special forces ground spotters. That's not an invasion. Also, don't do that. People who haven't read the thread will think I actually wrote that.

Actually you have more battery life than normal. When the headphones use their own battery source it doesn't suck as much life out of your phone. If the headset runs dry you can still use a standard cable.

I'm considering these bluetooth ones. Audio quality is excellent once the components don't have to be so tiny, of course you have to be able to not bother that you look like a nerd wearing those at all times. Fortunately I have that quality. Bluetooth has become viable because the devices now have built in transmitters and recievers which was previously prohibitively expensive. The bluetooth earplugs however are for some reason all crap. Made for looking like an idiot while making calls on your smartphone.

This from the guy who famously said that if forced to chose between them, it is far better to be feared than loved. Pulling quotes out of the air to suit your position is almost always a trivial and pointless game.

Well, whoever it is kinda tipped his hand in favor of not talking about gun control. One has to be careful not to hijack the national sentiment suit one's campaigning. Not if it happens at the expense of achieving some kind of agreement or common ground. (I'm looking at you Bloomberg) Talking about gun control won't create any copycats though. Spending money on psychological reserach... I seriously doubt that will translate into anything tangible. Psychological research is not fueled by money in the way that, say, cancer research is.

We touched on how the media spectacle was a catalyst for copycats earlier, I wonder if the president's visit is going to exponentially increase the chances of aother incident. What if from now on no self respecting mass murderer would make do with anything other than children. I suppose it's part of his job to adress a tragedy like this and attempt to be a cohesive and healing influence. A leader is not supposed to think with his heart though.

I realise that there are other factors at play, but it's remarkable how many people are psychologically incapable of making the connection between gun availability and gun deaths. Every other stone gets turned, but it's like it's sacrosaint to even suggest that fewer people would get shot if fewer people had guns to shoot with.

It's not entirely fitting for a cabinet member to be all giddy that someone died even if he had it comming, but we are a long way from being a psychopath.

Isen't it past due gangnam style went the way of the marcarena

I think this is rather poingant. The BBC is a public service channel funded by tax payers and they should insititute a version of the hippocratic oath. In other words 'Thou shalt promise not to do more harm than good in your reporting'. Since the media spectacle is a catalyst for copycats and people seeking the same kind of notoriety they should indeed make it as boring as possible in the slim hope that some day expert knowledge rather than sensationalism will guide coverage of these things. The same goes for politically motivated terrorist attacks. It's not very likely to work, but you have to start somewhere.

This kind of thing does seem to happen with alarming regularity in the US, but the idea of a right to gun ownership is so deeply ingrained in the American consciousness that such legislation will get nowhere. Instead there will be more mandatory security and focus on identifying children who may turn violent. Personally I think the idea of a 'thought police' responsible for identifying these individuals is a worse infringement on personal liberty. However noble the intentions, I believe that will constitute the practicality of it. Children don't vote, and something will be done to show action is being taken. Wheter it's the smartest move or not is another matter.

I dunno, I thought it got rather samey and boring after a while. If I'm going to play a shooter I'd rather be shooting things with the mouse in FP perspective.

You can stare yourself blind on racism, just look at Louis Farrakahn. Yes, it has a lot to do with having had the experience of being viewed and treated as an inferior group, but when it starts to cloud your judgement that's really on you.

Superman is lame.

Played Assassin's Creed 3 on a friends console. It's boring like everyone says, glad I didn't get it. Way too much railroading, and being discovered in a stealth mission is a result, more guards appear, it get's harder, Ubisoft. Not an automatic fail and restart. And why are we still doing tutorials a third through the game. Why is this series a success. It's a mystery to me.

He's not particularly strong as an actor, but he has a good agent, or just a knack of staring in movies that turn out good on average. Maybe he's just figured out his limitations over the last years. His sci fi movies are rarely bad.

He was named, however briefly, the successor to Hitler so they couldn't just let him walk.

We don't even know half of the dirt the US did in the name of stopping Communism in the 60s and 70s. The focus on showing continuety from the third reich to modern fashist groupings is kinda misguided though. The individuals are not important, the ideological similarities are.

If it was all in Bag End we're good. The book is full of it in the begininng, but it tapers off drastically. Thank god.

Makes sense I suppose. Britain had a similar programme in case the Germans were able to invade. It involved training criminals and regular civilians in guerrillia tactics, and the Soviets outnumbered us in Tanks by more than half. It also makes sense that they were Facists. They are sortof the traditional arch enemy of Communism. Even if they are more or less the same thing.

Long before ww2 ended, would that be when the Soviets were taking their sweet time 'liberating' all the eastern block countries that would be come the Iron Curtain. Empire building, completely deliberate by Stalin, yes, the allies trusted eachother only to complete what they had set out to do which was to defeat Nazi Germany and not much more. Intelligence and technology assets were harvested by the US in particular with no regard to their Nazi affiliations, this is all well known, but Nazi POVs were assassinated on a large scale before they could stand trial publicly. Nureberg wasn't justice, it was a kangaroo court. Although the Nazis deserved everything that was comming to them, no mention at all was made of Allied war crimes. Hans Spedel was was one of the few people to survive the purges following the assassination attempt on Hitler, which he played a key role in. Probably the only reason he was allowed to have a role in post war Germany, but there is no denying his Nazi affiliations. If the allies had a use for ex Nazis they were not afraid of making them an offer they could not refuse, we have already mentioned Verner von Braun, but this is not surprising. National interests trumps justice every time. This does not mean that NATO is a Nazi organisation though. Again, the causality is entirely missing.

That has **** all to do with NATO, it's interesting I agree but you only find causality there because you desperately want to.

I'd say it was also up for debate whether the Raj were actually compromised of british subjects or whether they just got away with an elaborate snake charmer's trick. Ir's impressive either way though.

Would'nt that be Alexander's Empire actually.

Did anyone get Ezio does the American revolution. Also known as Assassin's Creed 3.