Menchise

It certainly surprised me. I thought the goal of advertising was to make people want to buy something. Who would?

No.

Here.

7#3 v3r7|c41 84r |5 c4113d 4 p|p31|n3. My first 1337 sentence! Yay! [ 03-16-2002, 21:21: Message edited by: Menchise ]

I am fascinated! Where can I learn l33t?

Not much info, but I thought it might be interesting. Lancer News If I'm reading it correctly, then BC3K 2.0 was the #3 selling space sim of '98. *thumbs up*

*sigh*

quote:I remember a debate we had where I laid out the economic realities of it and you never attempted to dispute it. Communism is an economic impossibility.I don't remember that. In any case, I'm still learning (currently reading Marx's Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844) and my debating skills have improved since my irritable posts of the past, so the four page debate threads will be revived in the future. [ 03-15-2002, 03:02: Message edited by: Menchise ]

My current science fiction top ten: 1. 2001: A Space Odyssey Boring? BAH! Its unforgettable storytelling imagery is almost a match for Shakespeare's storytelling language. 2. Star Wars (Episode 4) The folktale of the screen; this thrilling adventure puts its imitators to shame. 3. The Matrix The ultimate ass-kicking challenger of our perception of reality around us. 4. Dr Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb An eerily funny look into the enthusiastic madness of mutually assured nuclear destruction. 5. Blade Runner A future as revealing about human life and misery as any that's ever been foretold. 6. The Andromeda Strain Hard science fiction that's both cerebral and edgy in its faithful realism. 7. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country The original crew's final film features the best of Star Trek's character-oriented drama. 8. Planet of the Apes Humanity outside of humanity's point of view with a surprise ending that only Rod Serling could write. 9. Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) An ambiguous yet appropriately scary look into the seduction of destructive conformity. 10. Barbarella Sci-fi camp at its finest. Love!

quote:Nevada succeedes from the unionNevada secedes from the union.

Regarding the 'Silent Weapons' document (I haven't read all of it): Although I don't believe that it is really a top secret document, I do believe that oligarchic plutocrat movements exist and could eventually become capable of executing their goal. However, their system is seriously flawed for two reasons: 1) There is more than one "secret society" aiming for total control, each with their own ideas about how society should be controlled. In order for one group to achieve that goal, they would have to eliminate the others, which would involve conscripting the working class in a constant state of war between conquerors (much like capitalism but with higher stakes). If the general public (the foundation of any conquering elite's system of control) becomes consciously aware of the situation and start to resist in unity with the general publics of other spheres of influence, the plutocrats are doomed, because their ability to compete is crippled. 2) Even if one group achieves total control in the end, the oligarchy is still vulnerable to fragmentation and splintering as these few elites start getting their own ideas about their future role in society. This would lead to another state of war and another opportunity for the plutocrats to be overthrown.

quote:if man wasnt so greedy, communisum could have worked how it was orignally writtenIt has never been tried the way it was originally written.

*Nick brings out the rack* Let the interrogation begin!

quote:As a source of funding and development, but to have any kind of influence in the council? Wont happen.You think the corporations are gonna fund the UN without something in return? By definition, won't happen. The discussion is about receiving funds from multinationals in exchange for a seat in the General Assembly. Considering that a large number of these corporations' profits exceed the GDP of most member states I wouldn't be surprised if it did happen. quote:WHY is US funding some organization (and that's what it exactly is and should stay - not try to become some governing force) that is trying to inforce it's opinions upon US?That's probably the most important question in this thread, especially if you believe that the UN is aiming for one world government. I think there are three reasons: 1. As Tac previously mentioned, the UN is a convenient means for the USA to tell other states what to do. 2. The USA can violate international laws with impunity due to the extensive funding that it provides to the UN, while at the same time the USA can demand that other members be punished for violating the same laws. 3. Some very powerful elements within the USA agree with the opinions that the UN are trying to impose.

If there is going to be a Starcraft 2, it WILL be on PC because it's better suited to RTSes.

quote:ok no matter what political afiliation you are, this is weirdHehe. Not a bad voice for karaoke, but he'll end up on the FBI's Wanted List if he releases an album. quote:but this is even worse WTF?!

quote:Just the fact itself that UN is proposing some of the things they ARE proposing is showing how ridiculous and power hungry UN is.What proposals are you referring to? quote:Also I VERY MUCH don't like the fact that it's trying to flex it's muscle in the US and is sugesting that US constitution is old/outdated and needs to be changed. Who the @#$@# are they to tell US that our constitution is outdated and some of our laws barbaric (like the right to own a firearm for example)So what? The USA does the same thing to other countries and they don't listen either. quote:Also the reason US doesn't pull out from UN because right now it's harder to do than it sounds. It's not like US can say "we just quit, get off our land" (UN "offices" are located in NY after all), but trust me, when enough people get pissed off and will have enough of that the US WILL be out of UN and they WILL get off our land SO FAST.1. Contradiction: you say that resigning from the UN is harder than it sounds, then you say that it will happen "SO FAST". Make up your mind. 2. I don't think the US Government has the authority to evict the UN from its headquarters in New York because it's located on private land (donated by Rockerfeller). quote:It cant be based on private enterprise. Ever. Thats the whole point. UN is to be a worldwide organization run BY member NATIONS. Not by Bill Gates & ilk.That could change in the near future. It's already being discussed. quote:I hope its so. Own military will mean that they will be able to DO what they originally were intended for. KEEP THE PEACE. Own currency? EXCELLENT. Trade laws? Security policies? "All opperating independantly and with Jurisdiction over Member Nations" Sounds good to me. Whats the point of appointing a mutual overseer, giving it all the responsability and none of the tools? You know why this is so scary to member nations? It would make them all EQUAL under one body of law.Who watches the watchers?

quote:I'd catch up on my UN reading if I were you. They are proposing some pretty scarry things even as I Write this.1. Like what? 2. They're still proposals. Proposals cannot be implemented without a ratification by two thirds of the General Assembly. quote:The UN is increasingly socialist every day. It is not based on private enterprise.1. Then why is there an ongoing discussion about the possibility of multinational corporations funding the UN in exchange for representation? 2. Why does the Universal Declaration of Human Rights state that the pursuit of private property is a fundamental right? 3. What are some examples of the UN turning socialist? quote:feel free to correct my spelling some more, i left some nuggets in there for you. I know it stokes your ego.I point out spelling mistakes so that they won't be repeated. It's not an ego thing. quote:oh, did you know they are voting to increase their yearly budget to over 1 trillion dollars? A HUGE increase in operating funds. Sounds small by todays standards, but give it a few years.....An increase in funding does not conclusively prove anything. The important question in that context is, "Where is that money going?"

I am against the death penalty for one reason: if it's later discovered that the person was innocent they can't be brought back to life. [ 03-07-2002, 06:23: Message edited by: Menchise ]

quote:The UN is Evil. Wait a few years when all our individual countries sovrenty is completely gone. We will all be ruled by a Totalitarian Socialistic "Big Brother" society.First of all, it's spelled sovereignty. Secondly, the UN is anti-socialist (it regards the pursuit of private property as a fundamental human right). Thirdly, the UN does not have the power to impose any kind of globally central government (it can't even enforce the rulings of its own international court). Fourthly, the UN is totally dependent on funding from the member states, of which the USA pays 22-25%, hence the strong American influence over the organization (if the USA resigns, the UN is dead, period). If the UN is attempting to impose a one world government, it's because the American elite wants them to, and it would take a lot longer than a few decades let alone a few years. [ 03-07-2002, 06:06: Message edited by: Menchise ]

The Bridge Commander reviews are starting to show up. Gamespy gave it 85%.

quote:Oh please don't say it's true! The film blew bad enough and, as a rule, TV shows based on films just don't cut it (SG1 ain't too bad though).Neither is Buffy The Vampire Slayer. [ 03-06-2002, 07:16: Message edited by: Menchise ]

On a (sort of) related topic, Chris Roberts has formed a new company: PNR Entertainment (Point of No Return). They're planning a Wing Commander TV series, among other things. [ 03-06-2002, 01:20: Message edited by: Menchise ]

LOL! Where did that come from, and why did it take so long?!