SeVeR

I don't think Iran needs to concede anything to enter discussions. Consessions are part of agreements once the talking is done, they shouldn't be a requirement for diplomacy.

What does everyone think about the latest story to do with Iran: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5034228.stm Does anyone else see straight through the US's attempt to make Iran look like the bad guy when Iran will undoubtedly reject this offer for diplomacy. Why do "talks" require the suspension of enrichment? Once Iran rejects this is will open to door to US military action because they'll be able to justify it by saying "they didn't want to talk this out with us so we only have the military option left" US Foreign Policy is dispicable.

I don't want to change the subject too much although this is kind-of related. What does everyone think about this TV show called "To catch a Predator" where they set up a meet between a pretend 14-15 y/o girl and a person who wants to have sex with them. Then when they show up they get them on film and arrest them etc. I actually think its wrong. If they really want to catch pedophiles then they should pretend to be a 7-8 year old (boy or girl) because otherwise all you're doing is catching horny 20-30 y/o's who like many people think that once a girl is fully developed and is old enough to make up her own mind they should be able to have sex legally. I personally would not have a problem with a 14 or 15 year old girl or boy having sex with anyone so long as they wanted too. The only thing stopping alot of people is the law and the morals we've been forced to adhere too. I agree (with the pedos) that the age of consent needs to be reduced and i think programs like "to catch a predator" are pretending to be 14-15 y/o for a reason other than to actually catch "predators". 12 is a little early though. Sex with animals doesn't need to be illegal. Its merely a physical act that is taboo. Pornography should be allowed on day-time TV. Public Nudity should be legal. So i agree with them on most things although i doubt their motives and i certainly don't think the age-limit on sex should be eliminated altogether because certain ages just aren't developed at all in that way mentally or physically.

I don't think anyone's denying the level of the out-break 90 years ago... They're instead giving convincing reasons as to why it won't be the same today as it was back then. None of what you posted disagrees with what greased said:

Actually beef and other red meats have been linked to intestinal cancers because they facilitate the mutation of cells during the digestion process. Chicken and especially Fish are the best things to be eating... just get good quality chicken. By the way i know full well children and the elderly are most susceptible its just Fox did not phrase it like that. All they said was their wouldn't be enough vaccinations for them.... when if that were the case then there woudln't be enough vaccinations for everyone. They only mentioned those groups to get the fear factor. Nicepost though Greased, i agree with every word of it... except the Beef bit!

What do people think about the media frenzy telling us we're all going to die horrible deaths? My only source is Fox News because it comes on at 10pm and i can't be arsed to change channels, but are all the news channels doing the same thing? A few weeks ago there was a story saying that there won't be enough vaccinations for the children and the elderly. Why only those two groups? Is it because those are the groups we care most about? A couple of days ago there was a story saying that it's only a matter of time before bird flu hits America! Last night another story saying that an estimated 4,000 - 38,000 people will DIE in Tennessee! What the !@#$%^&*?!?!? Firstly i find this proposterous because there are plenty of diseases out there that could become transmittable between humans that aren't currently. Secondly they're acting like there is a massive casualty rate in the developed world when only a few people who kiss their chickens good-night in Turkey have died. Thirdly it's not even prolific in birds. It's complete fear mongering... i hear they're even making a movie about Bird Flu now... probably funded by Fox? -EDIT Oh looks like ABC is the one with the movie, i guess they're just as bad. http://www.tvsquad.com/2006/04/18/abc-bird...s-even-further/

You're right the show is great. Like when they drove off the end of an aircraft carrier or loaded cars onto a huge cannon and shot them at a target car. That's entertainment! I especially liked it when they drove sports cars through a small housing area occupied by the marines to see how many times they'd have gotten shot if they'd been escaping from an army base like in a Bond movie (yikes long sentence). Top Gear wasn't always such a great show though. I don't know how recently it changed to this hour long, 3 presenter format with a budget that allows the use of aircraft carriers but i'm certainly grateful.

Aileron: Without the pressure from the US it would have been very unlikely to pass The blame cannot be spread over the whole UN to say everyone had an equal part because that's not true. Well its still wrong to invade another people for no reason other than to take away their land. Why are you trying to make excuses for such a sin? I cannot, i just don't believe in absolutes. When you said "There is not a single thing he ever said that wasn't out of hatred and powerlust", I just coudn't believe that, i don't think his marriage was out of either of those things.... to say what you said he'd have to be devil. Is taking away peoples homes for no reason other than to give them to your richer friends not abuse? When that action results in the anger of thousands of muslims who strap bombs to their chests, is your blame still absolutely with the muslims who not only had to live through that but the subsequent annihilation through land-grabs? Who care's if its sovereign, homes are homes and to take them away in either situation is wrong. I'm sorry but calling Israel an excuse to keep killing is like saying equal rights is an excuse for being racist. The attack came from America and Israel, not the other way round. Yeah, they want their land back and elected a violent party because its been about 50 years with nothing done for them. Yep, thats what happens when Palestianians see Jews living on their land. Just because the people of Palestine are very angry that doesn't make it right to ignore the criminal act that started it. No, i just wanted to explain why he calls us Zionist Crusaders and I agree with him, i still want the !@#$%^&* dead. I think this is a problem with absolutes again. He is not absolute evil and not everything that comes out of his mouth has to be a lie. I still want him punished as ymuch as you do. The reputation of the country is at stake too. Plausible deniability through the press is the way they stay above water. "There's a lot to compaire modern day Al-Queda with WWII Japan in terms of the type of tactics they use...Al Queda probably would respond to the same kind of 'diplomacy' Japan responded to" If only they were a nation. But they're not and won't surrender to anything because we'd have to bomb the whole Middle East and large swathes of Asia, even then there are thousands of them in Africa too. 'Who I don't get is the 40% who changed sides. Did they honestly expect the thing to last a week, no one would die, and that the world would be bright and cheerfull by Christm!@#$%^&*?" It just shows how they were swayed by the !@#$%^&*umption of WMDs and the belief that they were saving some oppressed people who never took the time to rebel by themselves. Now they have developed their own opinions based on seeing it happen. Bushes media machine certainly did a good job at the start of it all. Look how he is criminalising Iran in exactly the same way. I wonder how public opinion is changing on that issue...

Please read up on the history of Israels creation. It was a UN par!@#$%^&*ion but it was clearly forced through by the US, read the following passage complete with a quote from Harry Truman (who obviously knew what he was doing..) The U.S. is largely responsible for the Israeli-Palestinian problem because of American decisions in 1947 and 1948. Most people who knew the Middle East at first hand opposed the par!@#$%^&*ion plan adopted by the UN on November 29, 1947. Patently unfair, it awarded 56% of Palestine to its 650,000 Jewish inhabitants, and 44% to its 1,300,000 Muslim and Christian Arab inhabitants. Par!@#$%^&*ion was adopted after ruthless arm-twisting by the U.S. government and pro-Zionist U.S. senators whose telegrams to UN member states warned that U.S. goodwill in rebuilding their WWII-devastated economies might depend on a favorable vote. On Nov. 10, 1945, U.S. diplomats from the Mid-East urged Truman not to heed Zionist urgings. He replied: "I’m sorry, gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism: I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my cons!@#$%^&*uents." The US used its power over the other UN countries to get the par!@#$%^&*ion forced through. Truman admitted his power in the decision. Yes they do, as does everyone. But they don't deserve to be given someone elses land leaving another people homeless in their place! Are Jews somehow more important than Palestinians? To many US senators they were. That statement you made is well and truly something that the US government and the Jews didn't do at the time Israel was created. No human being is absolute evil, although i understand your need to believe in absolutes. And can you prove that the comments of democrats (as well as republicans) influence the way Bin Laden speaks to the world? American governments since WW2 always have been Zionist crusaders. There is no use denying the human rights crimes of America unless you're a powerful Jew in the media, government or a big corporation spewing out pro-Israel proaganda and business threats to those who want the truth.

Are you saying Democrats shouldn't have free speech? Bush and most presidents that are have served in the US are Zionist Crusaders. Jews have a very powerful influence in America and as a result its probably the most Jewish country other than Israel... a country America created! America took the side of the Jews rather than the Muslims and their policy ever since has been to protect Israel and give them incredibles sum of money to build up their country. What America has done and continues to do should label Bush and previous presidents as Zionist crusaders. So when there is an element of truth to what Bin Laden says there shouldn't be a muzzle put on the mouths of democrats just because they agree. Its just like Hitler, people brand him as all evil but some of what he said was true. BTW i certainly don't think Bin Laden was influenced by Democrats. Alot of Muslims would call Bush a Zionist crusader and for good reason. It just looks like you've made a giant leap in your thinking process and ended up with a conclusion that fits you anti-democrat stance.

I was going to be serious but then it all fell apart... it was originally going to be Kulrick the Wise. I'll try and think of something else.

Phew, i'm glad i dodged that bullet.

Name: Kulrick The Wet Age: 206 Earth Years Occupation: Writer Recent Published Works: My Magical Penis, A Big Wand Is A Happy Wand, The Penis That Shook the World. Description and History: Kulrick stands a mere 50 feet tall and since no clothes will fit him he has grown a beard down to his feet to cover his genitalia. His life-expectancy is 500-600 years. He was originally created by "Grizzly Monster Labs" to terrorise a small town on the Europa Colony but got bored of eating people when he discovered his magical power. He quickly advanced to a Level 900 Wizard. The specific magical power he has is the power to douse people in huge amounts of a sticky white substance that dries and crusts within seconds. This was obviously a mis-calculation by the good folks at Grizzly Monster Labs. The sticky white substance is ejected from the tip of Kulrick's penis and he has since had a huge number of job requests that chart his rise to fame. Kulrick first enrolled in the police service on Earth and was used in the field to capture wanted criminals with his powerful SWS (Sticky White Substance) Cannon. However after many years in the police he was forced out due to stepping on too many small babies and eating too many sheep. His escapades capturing criminals gained him much news coverage and a permanent spot on the popular TV show "Cops". His new found fame earned him other jobs such as The Gunge Monster on the childrens TV show "Tellytubbys: The Next Generation", and a permanent place on the Fox Sitcom: "Who Ate My Dog?". After releasing his first book "The Magical Penis" Kulrick opted for the quieter life watching the storms on Jupiter and playing Asteroid Tennis. His book sells were enormous and his cementing as a public figure came when he was knighted by the Queen of Great-Britain, Northern Ireland and Alpha Centuari. Further books were published and Kulrick soon became a very rich genetically modified man. With the release of his last book, "The Penis That Shook The World" he was one of the biggest five authors in the world...literally. However book sells plummitted when the public decided he was getting too big for his shoes. He currently enjoys drinking himself to sleep on the roof of the 17th parallel bar.

i'll play, probably as a GM Human.

Well England only allied with France because Germany was the aggressor. It was Poland who England were technically allies with. England ended up on the same side as France because of Germany's invasion of Poland. It was the old bloodbath formula of war whereby you can't let one side get too powerful. Germany and England have traditionally been allies and in both World Wars the Germans wanted us as allies up until we declared war on their fascist regimes. Germany always really were our friends but just came under the wing of war-mongering dictators a couple of times leaving us with no choice but to balance up the odds to stop one nation conquering the whole of Europe. France have typically been the enemy of England for a thousand years and they've always been the enemy of Germany since Germany got organised into a European power. Of course in modern times we're all too liberal to hate.

That was the 1066 invasion by William The Conquerer on an England that was still a farming community and nowhere near a European Power. I'm talking about the thousand years since then. Other than the 1066 invasion what examples do you have that it was France's hobby? As for Germany-France i think the Napoleonic Invasion followed by France's aggression to start the Franco-Prussian War were enough to warrant Germany crushing France like a snail-s!@#$%^&* in 1870-71. Up until Prussia became a powerful state France was content to let them exist. As soon as France saw Prussia becoming a power-house they tried to initiate a war with uncomprimising demands and lost miserably. Italy has always hated France... i remember what each nation called the Black Death. The French called it the Italian Plague and the Italians called it the French Plague.

When money stops existing.

Without upheaval the bill would just get passed in the background. The protests served a purpose.

For a thousand years English kings have been going to France to kick the crap out of them on a regular basis. It's just a p!@#$%^&*-time for the English although they/we couldn't get away with it now. You're right that France has been a powerful nation and you're right about the "failure to kick the crap out of others" thing but they've had ALOT of failures and the only times they've succeeded were when they had the help of another country. They've had alot of bad-relations with other countries... i've heard about long standing hatred of the French from Germany, Spain, Italy and England which is pretty much every major power that has a border. i.e. no-one knows exactly what right and wrong are. Therefore absolutes don't exist in our minds but exist in reality only to be speculated upon.

I don't know if anyones mentioned what they're rioting about. The government has made a law to allow employers to fire anyone under the age of 26 for no reason at anytime during a "2 year trial period". Now the purpose of doing this is to encourage employers to employ young people because they would now have fewer rights than other workers and are a more attractive prospect for them. What its really going to do is remove the rights of those people who actually want to get jobs and work hard. The problem isn't the employers, its the people who don't want to work and would rather sit at home living of their parents. To some extent now the employers may favour employing young people but they actually have to want to work first. Fundamentally though its wrong because it removes the rights of workers to have notice of being made redundant and it removes their rights to a fair dismissal. I don't think there is a leftist attachment to these protests, it is something that people from all over the political range would be against. If workers/students = left in your book then what is the right?

Mmm dead magazines softened by time so i don't get any paper cuts. My body is essential to your survival? !@#$%^&*... are you a cannibal? My penis would never be limp for you Terra. The birds can die tomorrow, right now i like the sound of this chair. Empty stomach? Holy crap you are a cannibal! I'm taking my limp penis somewhere safer!

http://bible.cc/matthew/10-34.htm

I wasn't really thinking of WW2 when i implied the French are cowardly, always get the crap kicked out of them and act bitter to the rest of the world after. It started long before WW2. The kind of hatred that has built up for France takes centuries of bad-relations.

Hey i'm English! And i voted for the Liberal Democrats last election.... that makes me more Commie than alot of people! ....And i thought we had something special

Actually that sounds like a Bible quote. Although your grammar sucks and it may be slightly different. Can any hardcore Bible readers verify that? Is it the game Christians play when they give us the impression Jesus was a peace-loving guy?