That?s what neutrality is. It?s surrender to evil.
I see it in two ways: either as simple political cowardness, which I think applies to you and the French in general, or simple indifference, which applies to most of the planet.
And btw, at great risk to being banned again, I?ll say that to me, the Islamic ideology is not much different than that of Nazism. So to me, those that practice that ideology are Nazis. And yes, that would include most of the Arab population, whether they be active murders of Jews and Christians or not.
so..... those rumours leaking from apple about the colour (quicktime) iPod at MWSF and bootleg photos of motherboards and cases actually come from Palantirs?
this explains why some of those palantir posters are thereafter incapacitated by the power of Sauron's lawyers.
anybody calling dibs on Shelob? The Eagles?
will Motorola lay claim to the broken sword, in hopes that a G5 will slay the evil lord Gates, or are the ring and the sword best reserved for RDF usage?
can i be the white tree?
--
and for those who've seen the new extended edition of Fellowship, is Tom Bombadil in the extra footage? can't find confirmation yea/nay.
The Swiss and the French and Swedes, etc., are political cowards that let others do the fighting for them. As far as I?m concerned they were no better than the Hitler's formal allies.
One can even make a strong argument they were active allies of Hitler's. They supplied him with currency and with war machinery and facilities. Your precious Swiss were Hitler?s bankers. The Swedes provided him Nuclear know how and heavy water. The French provided Hitler all that country?s natural resources, as well as their naval hardware and ports. That?s been documented.
As far as the US, she was NEVER neutral. Never. Maybe isolationalist, but never neutral! The U-boat sailors will attest to that.
<strong>The Swiss and the French and Swedes, etc., are political cowards that let others do the fighting for them. As far as I?m concerned they were no better than the Hitler's formal allies.
One can even make a strong argument they were active allies of Hitler's. They supplied him with currency and with war machinery and facilities. Your precious Swiss were Hitler?s bankers. The Swedes provided him Nuclear know how and heavy water. The French provided Hitler all that country?s natural resources, as well as their naval hardware and ports. That?s been documented.
As far as the US, she was NEVER neutral. Never. Maybe isolationalist, but never neutral! The U-boat sailors will attest to that.
mika.</strong><hr></blockquote>
i was waiting this answer and especially for US. You are wise Mika : never upset your biggest allie. Always try to find some support among some US members, in the name of the common ennemy. Be kind with people that may support you on those forums even in subjects dealing with others things than Middle east. Can you have a different advice than your supporters ? What do you think of creationism for example ? are you scared at the idear to annoy one of your supporter ?
i was waiting this answer and especially for US. You are wise Mika : never upset your biggest allie. Always try to find some support among some US members, in the name of the common ennemy. Be kind with people that may support you on those forums even in subjects dealing with others things than Middle east. Can you have a different advice than your supporters ? What do you think of creationism for example ? are you scared at the idear to annoy one of your supporter ?
Who speak of cowardness ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Frankly, I find them conversations about God rather boring. After reading Dostoevsky?s The Brothers Karamazov, and analyzing the political relationship between Dostoevsky?s writings to the Tsar?s regime, any subconscious ambivalence on the subject I had in me at that time pretty much vaporized.
But here?s an excerpt of my thoughts on the subject:
My thoughts on the whole ?God? thing in the Bible are that it was basically used as a gimmick to unite several disbanded groups into one unified force under one political umbrella. It?s a gimmick that was common in that part of the world at that time. A nation was practically defined by the deity that it worshiped. It just so happened that the Israelites applied a little more intellectual rigor to their particular concept: a concept that was some thousands of years ahead of its rivals.
i was waiting this answer and especially for US. You are wise Mika : never upset your biggest allie. Always try to find some support among some US members, in the name of the common ennemy. Be kind with people that may support you on those forums even in subjects dealing with others things than Middle east. Can you have a different advice than your supporters ? What do you think of creationism for example ? are you scared at the idear to annoy one of your supporter ?
Who speak of cowardness ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is this really necesary to take the thread off course like this? Mika? Powerdoc?
There are plenty of other threads where this is the main topic...
<strong>The Islamic ideology is not much different than that of Nazism. So to me, those that practice that ideology are Nazis. And yes, that would include most of the Arab population, whether they be active murders of Jews and Christians or not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is this really necesary to take the thread off course like this? Mika? Powerdoc?
There are plenty of other threads where this is the main topic... </strong><hr></blockquote>
I would agree had the thread not been started with the goal of sucking up (read lick the arse off of) to those lil' Mika likes and childish name calling of those that have dared contest his usual drivel (read fascist bull crap)
Ban this aresehole. This is race hate.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No it?s not.
I?m speaking of an ideology. I hated Communism, but I love Russians and things Russian. But, you?re too dense and stupid, and a sniveling Tom to understand that.
I?m speaking of an ideology. I hated Communism, but I love Russians and things Russian. But, you?re too dense and stupid, and a sniveling Tom to understand that.
mika.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you should expect a friendly hello from your local neighborhood mod telling you that if you can't debate without name calling you shouldn't debate.
<strong>and for those who've seen the new extended edition of Fellowship, is Tom Bombadil in the extra footage? can't find confirmation yea/nay.</strong><hr></blockquote>No Tom - they apparently never even had any plans for including him. But I did like the extended version. Lots of good new scenes: Galadriel's gifts, Elves leaving Middle Earth, Aragorn singing about Beren & Luthien, etc.
Every new scene, I thought: "I can't believe they cut that!"
I would agree had the thread not been started with the goal of sucking up (read lick the arse off of) to those lil' Mika likes and childish name calling of those that have dared contest his usual drivel (read fascist bull crap)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who cares why he started it? It was a fun diversion from the other BS that we argue over day in and day out.
<strong>No Tom - they apparently never even had any plans for including him. But I did like the extended version. Lots of good new scenes: Galadriel's gifts, Elves leaving Middle Earth, Aragorn singing about Beren & Luthien, etc.
Every new scene, I thought: "I can't believe they cut that!"</strong><hr></blockquote>
Tom's role was really rather small overall anyhow. I look forward to seeng the full version as well.
Who cares why he started it? It was a fun diversion from the other BS that we argue over day in and day out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have nothing against Nitpicking, but this go beyond : There's much more to that character than just cleverness.. The more one analyzes it, the more one realizes how true the character is.. (speaking of Grima, a spie and a betrayor).
Tolkien is fine, nitpicking is fine, but hidden insults are not.
Comments
<strong>Those that are kind to cruel, are cruel to the kind. And vise-versa.
mika.
[ 11-21-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have never been kind with terrorists. Oh yes i forgot : all arabs are terrorists
I see it in two ways: either as simple political cowardness, which I think applies to you and the French in general, or simple indifference, which applies to most of the planet.
And btw, at great risk to being banned again, I?ll say that to me, the Islamic ideology is not much different than that of Nazism. So to me, those that practice that ideology are Nazis. And yes, that would include most of the Arab population, whether they be active murders of Jews and Christians or not.
mika.
this explains why some of those palantir posters are thereafter incapacitated by the power of Sauron's lawyers.
anybody calling dibs on Shelob? The Eagles?
will Motorola lay claim to the broken sword, in hopes that a G5 will slay the evil lord Gates, or are the ring and the sword best reserved for RDF usage?
can i be the white tree?
--
and for those who've seen the new extended edition of Fellowship, is Tom Bombadil in the extra footage? can't find confirmation yea/nay.
mith.
And swiss people are evil : they are neutral.
At the beginning of WW2, US was evil (because neutral), but after pearl harbor, he became good. If US was a character should it be Boromir ?
Really this way of thinking is fascinating.
One can even make a strong argument they were active allies of Hitler's. They supplied him with currency and with war machinery and facilities. Your precious Swiss were Hitler?s bankers. The Swedes provided him Nuclear know how and heavy water. The French provided Hitler all that country?s natural resources, as well as their naval hardware and ports. That?s been documented.
As far as the US, she was NEVER neutral. Never. Maybe isolationalist, but never neutral! The U-boat sailors will attest to that.
mika.
<strong>The Swiss and the French and Swedes, etc., are political cowards that let others do the fighting for them. As far as I?m concerned they were no better than the Hitler's formal allies.
One can even make a strong argument they were active allies of Hitler's. They supplied him with currency and with war machinery and facilities. Your precious Swiss were Hitler?s bankers. The Swedes provided him Nuclear know how and heavy water. The French provided Hitler all that country?s natural resources, as well as their naval hardware and ports. That?s been documented.
As far as the US, she was NEVER neutral. Never. Maybe isolationalist, but never neutral! The U-boat sailors will attest to that.
mika.</strong><hr></blockquote>
i was waiting this answer and especially for US. You are wise Mika : never upset your biggest allie. Always try to find some support among some US members, in the name of the common ennemy. Be kind with people that may support you on those forums even in subjects dealing with others things than Middle east. Can you have a different advice than your supporters ? What do you think of creationism for example ? are you scared at the idear to annoy one of your supporter ?
Who speak of cowardness ?
<strong>
i was waiting this answer and especially for US. You are wise Mika : never upset your biggest allie. Always try to find some support among some US members, in the name of the common ennemy. Be kind with people that may support you on those forums even in subjects dealing with others things than Middle east. Can you have a different advice than your supporters ? What do you think of creationism for example ? are you scared at the idear to annoy one of your supporter ?
Who speak of cowardness ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Frankly, I find them conversations about God rather boring. After reading Dostoevsky?s The Brothers Karamazov, and analyzing the political relationship between Dostoevsky?s writings to the Tsar?s regime, any subconscious ambivalence on the subject I had in me at that time pretty much vaporized.
But here?s an excerpt of my thoughts on the subject:
] <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=000345&p=10"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=000345&p=10</a>;
[quote]Originally posted by PC^KILLA:
<strong>
I?ll echo the same.
My thoughts on the whole ?God? thing in the Bible are that it was basically used as a gimmick to unite several disbanded groups into one unified force under one political umbrella. It?s a gimmick that was common in that part of the world at that time. A nation was practically defined by the deity that it worshiped. It just so happened that the Israelites applied a little more intellectual rigor to their particular concept: a concept that was some thousands of years ahead of its rivals.
mika.</strong><hr></blockquote>
mika.
<strong>
i was waiting this answer and especially for US. You are wise Mika : never upset your biggest allie. Always try to find some support among some US members, in the name of the common ennemy. Be kind with people that may support you on those forums even in subjects dealing with others things than Middle east. Can you have a different advice than your supporters ? What do you think of creationism for example ? are you scared at the idear to annoy one of your supporter ?
Who speak of cowardness ?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is this really necesary to take the thread off course like this? Mika? Powerdoc?
There are plenty of other threads where this is the main topic...
<strong>The Islamic ideology is not much different than that of Nazism. So to me, those that practice that ideology are Nazis. And yes, that would include most of the Arab population, whether they be active murders of Jews and Christians or not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ban this aresehole. This is race hate.
<strong>
Is this really necesary to take the thread off course like this? Mika? Powerdoc?
There are plenty of other threads where this is the main topic...
I would agree had the thread not been started with the goal of sucking up (read lick the arse off of) to those lil' Mika likes and childish name calling of those that have dared contest his usual drivel (read fascist bull crap)
<strong>
Ban this aresehole. This is race hate.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No it?s not.
I?m speaking of an ideology. I hated Communism, but I love Russians and things Russian. But, you?re too dense and stupid, and a sniveling Tom to understand that.
mika.
<strong>
No it?s not.
I?m speaking of an ideology. I hated Communism, but I love Russians and things Russian. But, you?re too dense and stupid, and a sniveling Tom to understand that.
mika.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think you should expect a friendly hello from your local neighborhood mod telling you that if you can't debate without name calling you shouldn't debate.
Harald, you too. Stop insulting arse holes.
I apologise to all all arseholes.
<strong>
</strong><hr></blockquote>
btw. In my book you don't even garner the respect of an ugly orc. You shall forever be nameless and without history.
mika.
<strong>and for those who've seen the new extended edition of Fellowship, is Tom Bombadil in the extra footage? can't find confirmation yea/nay.</strong><hr></blockquote>No Tom - they apparently never even had any plans for including him. But I did like the extended version. Lots of good new scenes: Galadriel's gifts, Elves leaving Middle Earth, Aragorn singing about Beren & Luthien, etc.
Every new scene, I thought: "I can't believe they cut that!"
<strong>
I would agree had the thread not been started with the goal of sucking up (read lick the arse off of) to those lil' Mika likes and childish name calling of those that have dared contest his usual drivel (read fascist bull crap)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Who cares why he started it? It was a fun diversion from the other BS that we argue over day in and day out.
<strong>No Tom - they apparently never even had any plans for including him. But I did like the extended version. Lots of good new scenes: Galadriel's gifts, Elves leaving Middle Earth, Aragorn singing about Beren & Luthien, etc.
Every new scene, I thought: "I can't believe they cut that!"</strong><hr></blockquote>
Tom's role was really rather small overall anyhow. I look forward to seeng the full version as well.
<strong>
Who cares why he started it? It was a fun diversion from the other BS that we argue over day in and day out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have nothing against Nitpicking, but this go beyond : There's much more to that character than just cleverness.. The more one analyzes it, the more one realizes how true the character is.. (speaking of Grima, a spie and a betrayor).
Tolkien is fine, nitpicking is fine, but hidden insults are not.
Sorry Doc. Personal attacks of that nature are uncalled for.
mika.
[ 11-22-2002: Message edited by: PC^KILLA ]</p>