SeVeR

Well how about we stop !@#$%^&*ing with them and see if they stop !@#$%^&*ing with us? I'd rather we did that rather than !@#$%^&*uming they'll !@#$%^&* with us whatever we do. I don't want to be apart of this media driven islamophobia just so some people can get away with fulfilling their conservative agenda.

Don't you mean a Merry Mithras Day? He did come first afterall... and was born to a virgin mother on the 25th of December to be the saviour of mankind before dying for our sins and being resurrected. Christianity would be a completely different religion and Jesus would be a completely different man-god without the Pagan-Roman God of the Sun. Makes you wonder how much truth there is to the Jesus story... Anywho, hi larry! Merry Mithmas!

We got up to nine people two nights ago and pub was going for about half an hour. Delic is working on something apparently.

Thanks, i'll be telling anyone i know in Dallas not to vote for your candidate.

i'll reply eventually, just don't have alot of time for forums right now.

yea maybe thats for the best... but only do it with the bullet damage, don't !@#$%^&* with firing rate or anything.

You would mind if it was your home they were getting. I want the Jews to have a home, i just don't want them to displace another people in the process. Why is it better that the Israelis have homes and the Palestinians don't? Ok good, so what if there were hundreds of thousands of Indians wanting land; Or lets say "enough displaced people to fill the country they lived in 60 years ago"? What then? Yes exactly, there's no equivalence to 2000 years ago when the Jews were originally displaced, so why should the Palestinians be displaced from their homes in this enlightened age? Well i'm gonna have to go there because you know as well as i do that people don't just give up their land over some 300 year old war. You would, I might, but i don't think we speak for a majority. In this case the claim was 2000 years old, not 300, you're talking about Romans in Europe, even you have to draw the line somewhere.

NBV: i don't deny that there are and were zionists, jews, and religiously driven sympathizers. Its not really an argument for Israel's existence... anymore than the views of Communists were arguments for the Soviet Union before and during its existence. Confess, NBV: If you think the Jews deserve Palestine based on the fact that they occupied the region 2000 years ago, you should equally think that America should be given back to the Indians, Australia to the Aborigenes, Central America to the Aztecs and South America to the Incas. Or you can believe that any hostile takeover of land is a perfectly fine thing to do and we should continue to do it for all eternity. Which is it Confess? NBV? There's an alternative, and if you don't deal in absolutes its easy to recognise. The difference between Israel and all the other land-takes in history is the period in time that it took place. We wouldn't stand for it in this time, we didn't stand for it in both world wars. Human civilisation has changed in the last few centuries with the birth of the international Law; the UN and the prior League of Nations are testament to that fact. Millenia ago there was no interntional law, we didn't care about who we invaded, human civilisation had not evolved to the level it is at now and shouldn't be held responsible for its wrongdoings. The Second and Third Reichs of Germany were held responsible, that shows you where we were at before Israel's creation. Secondly, Islam is still at war with Israel, the war may be a shadow of what it was but its still an unresolved issue with daily attacks. Unresolved issues need resolving, hence the periodical "diplomatic missions". Israel's existence shouldn't be taken off the table just because 60 years have gone by, both sides are still where they were at back then. That isn't realistic for the reasons stated in this post but also because there isn't a population left to take back all the land. Would anyone give the whole of America back to a few thousand Indians who are already living well, aren't blowing up military convoys in anger, and who aren't being attacked and killed by the occupying forces. But all that's just secondary to the previous points. They !@#$%^&* with Israel because its on their door-step... the door-step they used to own you re!@#$%^&*. You think they'd go for another weaker country, why? What possible reason would there be? I'm glad you've shown us all who the real extremist is.

1. Israel was created on Palestinian land. 2. The UN vote was won by America and it's supporters but all the regional countries of the Middle East rejected Israels creation. Would it be ok for China, Japan and India to decide the position of a Tibetan state in the middle of Europe or North America? 3. Harry Truman, America's president and the facilitator of Israel's creation, is actually quoted as saying Jews are more important to him due to having many Jewish cons!@#$%^&*uents/voters and very few Muslim cons!@#$%^&*uents. I can find the quote again if you really want me to. 4. The time at which Israel was created suggests sympathy for what went on during the holocaust. Why should the Palestinian people have to suffer in an attempt to make up for that? Israel belongs in Germany. 5. The Israeli's illegally grabbed additional land, which it won't give back despite international protest. Israel defies the very organisation that put them into existence.

"!@#$%^&* bent on destruction" has a meaning all on its own. I don't know why people would be !@#$%^&*-bent on the destruction of Israel. I know why alot of people are anti-zionist and want Israel peacefully dissolved; but !@#$%^&*-bent on destruction? I don't have an answer for that.

Your wish for peace on Earth is granted but everyone gets bored with not being able to kill eachother. The whole world starts twiddling their thumbs wondering what they should do. The rampant thumb twiddling causes a circulatory wind on all the major population centers of the world bringing about devastating hurricanes and tsunamis. Millenium Man gets swept away in a gigantic tidal wave. To escape the thumb twiddling nightmare the entire population of Earth re-locates to the Moon where they can once again kill eachother. Due to the small surface area of the Moon and the sheer desperation of man's supressed homicidal tendencies the human population is wiped out almost overnight in a sea of blood with the remaining lunar inhabitants drowning in aforementioned blood. I wish for a carniverous plant that eats any person i ask it to.

Thats not a bad idea, with the spawn points in east and west it would work well. Although i'd still be cautious about a third base detracting from the soccer gameplay even if it is in the middle of the arena.

Adding one carryable flag to the soccer game might make it more interesting. Just one flag though, we don't want a low pop to think they don't have a big enough team to handle the whole game. I'd suggest a team jackpot and no weapons bonus for carrying, the emphasis has to be on team-base play, not flying around getting kills. I wouldn't mess with the sets too much. They were fine when i was last playing and pub was getting 10v10, i don't know what they are now. I'll be back to England in a week and might have time to play.

I say incinerate the old centre and bring the bases closer together. Keep the old east and west, remove north. Add a small room just inside the entrance of each base containing a safety and a spawn point. To keep people interested with such a low pop it has to be small and with a purpose (base-concentrated).

I currently do not own a TV.... The things you say to rationalise your viewpoint never ceases to amaze me. You go far and beyond logical deduction to ascribe certainty to things based on pre-conceived categorisations that are little more than !@#$%^&*umptions. I want the removal of all religious symbolism from our culture, not only Christian, so why would that be down to the TV i don't have? All religions hold back science, including Islam. Christianity is the most guilty party because Europe had the wealth to educate its people and instead used it to supress scientific endevour through religious oppression. An important question. I would rather live under a dictatorship if i agreed with that method of government and supported their policies. I would rather live in that way if i viewed democracies as corrupt based on America's example. I would rather live in that way if I was apart of Islam. The democracy of the Middle East is a dictatorship, don't you see, they want it! I would call dictatorship the end-point of Christianity aswell wouldn't you? Again you blame Islam for its own anger. They're not angry just because it's "in their nature". They're angry because of Israel's existence and America's invasions. Is that too difficult to believe? On the !@#$%^&*umption our political system is perfect? Saddam kept control, America hasn't. Bush destablised an Iraq that had been stabilised by oppression, he gave them the freedom to kill each-other which is quite possibly the only thing worse than oppression. !@#$%^&*umption. Proof? !@#$%^&*umption. Proof? !@#$%^&*umption. Proof? Again, you're making !@#$%^&*umptions to rationalise your point of view. If the president of Iran is an anti-zionist then wouldn't he be saying those things because he BELIEVES those things? That alone makes the other two !@#$%^&*umptions redundant. I'm sorry, "the worlds time"? Was this debated at the UN headquarters or in Tehran? Yes, not every idiot opinion should be debated and i don't believe i said it should. I said it should be tolerated, i don't expect anyone to listen or anyone to give a !@#$%^&*. That kind of debate from some percentage of delegates doesn't make it a conference of anti-semites. It was an anti-zionist conference and i'm not surprised they've been portrayed as anti-semites.

You are right, people who deny the holocaust altogether have no credibility. But this was not a conference of holocaust deniers. Sure there were some people there who denied it but certainly not all did. Firstly we should all be able to debate any supposed fact we wish without being branded as a racist and/or sent to prison. I'm sure you don't get sent to prison for denying World War Two happened, you'd just get looked upon as a bit of an idiot. Thats how i look upon these people who deny the holocaust, as the evidence for it is overwhelming. Secondly, one cannot deny that the Western media has gone crazy about this conference calling it a band of racists and anti-semites, yet the conference was attended by Jews who we can assume weren't heckled, locked up or killed. The western media has flat out called this a holocaust denial conference when it was principally a discussion of how the holocaust was used to justify the creation of Israel. So i don't deny that it was attended by imbecilic anti-semites, i just dont' see anything wrong with letting them speak (to show their idiocy) and i don't see why the conference was labelled based on the views of these particular speakers. Well i do see why, it's to paint the anti-semites and anti-zionists with the same brush. This back-fired seriously on Ahmadinejad. I'm just sympathetic to their situation as the latest country for America to villify in the press. I've given a clear example of how the US has lied about the Iranian nuclear capabilities. I think i've quite clearly shown how anti-zionism is being portrayed as anti-semitism. I've shown how Iran is being misrepresented in the press on countless occasions, and the conference is just the latest. Look, there is absolutely nothing i would have done differently concerning the Zionist situation if i was President of Iran. I might have been a little clearer to avoid misinterpretation by the kinds of people who suspect every muslim of being a terrorist and an anti-semite but otherwise the goal is the same. If you call him a Nazi for what he's said then you paint me with the same brush. I would have said it because i believed it, not to acquire power, and there's no reason to think he is doing it for power. It means the same thing it did when you avoided it the first time. The exodus of Jews to Israel happened in many countries around the world at the time of Israel's creation. There is no reason to suspect Jews were persecuted in any of these countries prompting this exodus. But even more so, if Iran was persecuting Jews then they still would have moved to other countries where the persecution was less or non-existent... mirroring what happened after the Nazis came to power. I don't see any reason to believe the Jews were persecuted in Iran prior to the creation of Israel, the exodus is not an argument so i'd like you to drop it or offer some evidence that they were persecuted. My sources, who are Jews (including religious leaders/representatives) actually living in Iran, say they are happy to live in Iran and that the western media is lying about their situation. What are you reading? I'm asking you to prove that Jews are treated as second class citizens in Iran. Wrong. The current supreme leader wasn't even the President until after the hostage crisis. "The Iran hostage crisis was a hostage crisis that took place from November 4, 1979 until January 20, 1981" Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the current Supreme Leader of Iran and was the president of Iran from October 1981 to August 1989. He is the supreme leader from 1989 to present." (wikipedia) Fighting a proxy war... what country does that remind you of? I'd say the funding of the Taliban 25 years ago, something that resulted in thousands of deaths then and may have contributed later to 9/11 given the success of the Taliban to establish government in Afghanistan... is a worse deed than kidnapping some Americans who later got released. Neither administration is in charge now. So back to the original question, how has the current Iranian government made things worse? A forced democracy is a worse alternative. And who is to say the people don't want this theocracy? It appears they largely do want it right now. Then use your text-book and prove to me that "Iranians don't treat Jews as real people unless they convert to Shia Islam". Muslims to some extent have gotten beyond sporadic attacks on minorities but aren't typically as far along as the West. There is no reason to say they won't get this far. Jews never had enough power in the world to attack other peoples until the last 60 years. Again, no proof in the pudding. I think Bush has done pretty well though... he's into what... six figures now? 3,000 of those were Americans who died in Bush's pointless Iraq war. After 9/11 no-one wanted it repeated, but Bush has made it happen with almost the same number of American deaths in Iraq coupled with maybe 100,000 Iraqis and all for the purposes of stopping a dictator with no WMD's, turning a country into a tribal war-zone that has destablised the Middle East, and significantly multiplying the number of terrorists who want to make another 9/11 happen. Whether its stupidity or extremity i don't think its been paralled by many since WW2.

It was a discussion of the holocaust where it was imperative to get the other-side of the debate to participate. What good would a discussion be if all sides agreed. Many of the conference attendees believe the holocaust happened, as do i, but they were there to submit their objections to the holocaust being used as an excuse to bear Israel. How can it be a Holocaust denial conference when not everyone agreed to deny the holocaust? It sounds to me like a great historical debate where the true racists can be separated from those who disagree with the existence of the Zionist regime. Unfortunately all attendees have since been lynched in the press, as expected, and as i would be. Putting anti-zionists into the anti-semite camp suits alot of very powerful media-moguls. So if i stood up on a stage and preached my anti-zionist views from a historical and logical standpoint would i then be a Nazi? I don't see Admadinjead preaching hatred for a race, a religion, a social class or a community, do you? But there is no discernible difference between other countries and Iran for the exodus of Jews around the time of Israel's creation. You keep saying that, prove it. The fact that is was offered in the first place should tell you they have nothing to hide on the nuclear issue. Oh sure, because Muslims love blowing themselves up right? "These deaths" are the people who are dying and will continue to die for as long as Israel exists. 60 years on they aren't getting any less pissed off about Israel and i don't blame them, i'm not going to rationalise that anger to myself by saying "they love to blow themselves up", people don't get angry to have something to be angry about. Oh yea, that was around the time the American's were supplying the Taliban with weapons right? I don't think events from 25 years ago have very much relevence with the views of today's politicians. I asked you how you think the current Iranian government is making things worse, so how is a 25 year old event in the slightest bit relevent? So lets see what you're saying: They have to trust us but we don't have to trust them and can kill them if we feel/decide that trust is violated. I wonder how that looks coming from their perspective. Yes please explain it, preferably without starting with "well they're like Nazis, so ...". Prove it, where is your evidence for this statement? And vice-versa. I comprehend a society thats about 500 years behind our own in terms of religious integration. Despite my objections to religion i don't see them invading other countries or massacring minorities. Compared to Christianity they're doing quite well. Politicians do what they can get away with for as long as they can stay in power. Bush has gotten away with a lot due to 9/11, the only difference is he has justified it in a way that appeals to American's. What's more extreme: Invading Iraq for no reason or being anti-zionist? The media already picked one.

Again, its not a holocaust denial conference, i can't argue this point with you if you flat out deny to learn what its really about. If you believe this is true then you're calling me a Nazi. I want the illegal Zionist regime removed but i have nothing against the Jewish people as a race, as a community or as a religious en!@#$%^&*y. You interpret this as Naziism to make the Jews a scapegoat of some sort and i have no idea why. I'm not a racist and i'm not a Nazi, yet i see nothing but agreement with my views from Iran. Again, do you still believe this to be a result of persecution? If so then condemn all the other countries in the world equally. More Jews came to Israel from Russia probably than any other country and there has to alot that came from America. Were they all persecuted? What do you have to prove to me any of those Jews left Iran to escape persection, please do enlighten me. Really, your reply didn't answer me before. Look, i told you in the last post exactly what the situation is and you completely ignored it. Iran's own religious revolutionary Ayatollah said that Jews are to be respected. Iranians are against ZIONISM, they are not Anti-Semitic, ANTI-SEMITISM IS RACISM! They are against a political en!@#$%^&*y that they view as corrupt and illegitimate, they are not racists. How often do i need to say this, Jews have a representative in the Iranian parliament, there are 25,000 Jews happily living in Iran, their own religious leaders say they are happy to live in Iran. Iranians are not racists! Exactly, Iran offered all the things that America wants. So what makes you think Iran has anything to hide now that they won't give it all to America for free in response to threats? This is no excuse. I don't care what it takes because the whole of the Muslim world is still pissed off with Israel's existence and quite rightly so. Millions of deaths over the coming years as a result of that hatred is worth millions of people having to relocate now. How did they make things worse Astro? Nuclear fission reactors are the only viable alternative as nuclear fusion won't be commercially available for at least 50 years. Even then world distribution of that technology would take even longer. For the Iranian economy to survive and prosper they need to secure their own future and sell as much oil as possible. What political ideology is this that results in death and destruction? What? Tolerated can mean alot of things, you seem to interpret it as meaning the only thing between a rampant horde of racists and a bunch of innocent Jews. Or it could mean what it usually means, that they actually are tolerated with no ill feelings. Show me some proof (wow i'm asking this alot today). I feel the same way when in the company of Christians. I don't take it personally and they don't splash me with holy water, we get along fine... as do the 25,000 Jews in Iran. They're almost a complete an!@#$%^&*hesis of eachother in policy and public opinion. Admadinejad seeks debate while Bush acts unilaterally without it and ignores Admadinejads requests for debate. Admadinejad seeks co-operation with the UN through the IAEA on the nuclear issue, while Bush acts independently of the UN invading Iraq. Their personalities are opposites and their policies are opposites i support Ahmadinejad in both cases. Unfortunately the media is all that matters as far as public opinion is concerned and the media can be controlled.

Yes but did you know about the deal offered after America's invasion of Iraq?: "In it, Iran appeared willing to put everything on the table - including being completely open about its nuclear programme, helping to stabilise Iraq, ending its support for Palestinian militant groups and help in disarming Hezbollah. What did Iran want? Top of the list was a halt in US hostile behaviour and a statement that "Iran did not belong to 'the axis of evil'". It sounds reasonable to me. Is it any wonder that Iran ignores American demands today? Secondly what of the betrayal of Iran by the US following Iran's !@#$%^&*istance in Afghanistan? Bush calling Iran "evil" must have been quite a shock for the Iranians, do you think Bush meant to say "Iraq"? Although Iran and Israel are bitter enemies, few know that Iran is home to the largest number of Jews anywhere in the Middle East outside Israel. About 25,000 Jews live in Iran and most are determined to remain no matter what the pressures - as proud of their Iranian culture as of their Jewish roots. They choose Iran over every other Muslim country. Something must be getting done right. You say that the population reduced, when? When Israel was created? Is it any wonder that Jews would leave (like they did from every other country including the USA and the USSR) when they are given a homeland? Is it really your argument to say they left because they were being persecuted? That argument is as well applied to the USA or Russia based on the minimal logic you're applying here. You say they're treated second class yet: "Because of our long history here we are tolerated," says Jewish community leader Unees Hammami, who organised the prayers. He says the father of Iran's revolution, Imam Khomeini, recognised Jews as a religious minority that should be protected. As a result Jews have one representative in the Iranian parliament. "Imam Khomeini made a distinction between Jews and Zionists and he supported us," says Mr Hammami. And here lies the distinction i want you to realise. Jews are not all Zionists. There is no racism in being anti-zionist. There is no Naziism in being anti-zionist. And here quite honestly is where it all comes together, the words of a Jewish Iranian: "Whatever they say abroad is lies - we are comfortable in Iran - if you're not political and don't bother them then they won't bother you," he explains. Absolutely no-one said "its ok" as long as its not as bad as the Europe of old. You're actually adding words to this statement: "Anti-Semitism is not an eastern phenomenon, it's not an Islamic or Iranian phenomenon - anti-Semitism is a European phenomenon," he says, arguing that Jews in Iran even in their worst days never suffered as much as they did in Europe. Nowhere does it say that some level of persecution is ok in Iran as long as its not as bad as it was in Europe. I don't understand you, what made you think that? Again no, not being political means not supporting Israel. Iran is an anti-zionist country. It would be like supporting fascism or communism in the US, you'd be "bothered" if you did that right? If you had huge reserves of oil and knew the world would soon be in short supply wouldn't you want to sell as much of it as possible to rake in the profits? Oil is their entire economy, and nuclear power is their future, they will completely collapse otherwise when the oil runs out. They are completely transparent, they let the International Atomic Energy Agency inspect their facilities constantly. But maybe you should also know that the kind of nuclear power plant being built in Iran is completely incapable of producing the weapons grade plutonium isotope necesary for the construction of nuclear weapons. Something that gets over-looked in the press... Thats a pity. How do you think that lack of trust first came to be? Ugh, and so the western media strikes again. Its not a holocaust denial conference, the page even says that if you read it. Its a denial of the idea that Israel should have been created based on the Holocaust. Its a discussion of the Holocaust. Calling it a "denial of the Holocaust ever happening" conference is a creation of certain news agencies looking for the most extreme take. Yet again no. I want Israel to be peacefully dissolved. Like the Jews attending the conference.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5377914.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5367892.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5346524.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6171503.stm Some good reading. The world is in desperate need of understanding Iran.

I predict Mongolia to be the next superpower.

True, i would go further and say its the worst enemy of humanity.

Aileron, how can you believe this? Science started advancing from about 500 B.C. in Ancient Greece. Around 200 B.C a man named Eratosthenes calculated the cir!@#$%^&*ference of the Earth to within a very small error, yet Christianity actually took us backwards from that moment and for the next millenium "enforced" a flat Earth theory based on nothing but ignorance. All the great works of ancient Greece were stored in a great library at Alexandria. Then at some point it was destroyed most likely by the Muslims or by Christians in an attempt to knock down Pagan Temples (....again why?). From that point on science was at a near stand-still until the time of Keplar and Newton. One can argue that by that time things were already starting to be liberalised and by the Victorian era (1830-1900 in England) the Church held very little influence. Over a millenia with absolutely nothing to show for it. More than anything the true ambition of science is to ensure the survival of the human race. Christianity put us back 1000 years and it could be the death of us all if a major catastrophe beckons and we don't have the scientific mastery to overcome it.

They do more than claim, but you're right in a way. At home they do almost anything the Christian's want as long as they can get away with it. The reason is to get votes. Republicans appeal to Christians and Patriots to achieve power because they're easy to please and traditionally dumb!@#$%^&*es. Internationally, you're right, but is Armenia ever likely to reach the news? If it got enough attention the Republicans would change their tactics accordingly. The political move made would be something through the UN, some sort of peace/trade accord. But its not gonna happen unless the media gets the word out to the blind Christians who have little interest about anything that goes on outside their church. As for the Kurds, well they're also Muslim; they're just a dominated tribe and would be doing the same thing to the Sunnis, Shias and Turks if they had the chance.

I agree, Criz for Hsysop. And Telsons post made alot of sense, Manus would have been the best choice for Hsysop if he wanted it. Equally if we could have gotten Enterprise back then him too.