搜索结果: *

Yeah i'll probably rework that image a little. The icons look a little out of place next to the background, so i might change them too. More concerned with the content right now though. 

Fixed, fixed and fixed

The email address with supposed to be a placeholder and yeah it was supposed to be unusable. Nothing i can do about the survey not working in Opera but thanks for letting me know.

Cheers for the feedback.

If you need any bodies i'd love to join.

Merentha 说:

I do not think, rhetoric or no, that Ahmadinejad is going to launch any weapons.

点击展开...

Why not?

Heres what i'm looking forward to:

Seven Kingdoms: Conquest
My favourite strategy game ever has a sequel! Seven Kingdoms 1 and 2 were probably the only two games i've ever loved.

ArmedAssault
New tactical shooter from the kings of the genre(OperationFlashpoint still hasn't been surpassed)

Sins of the Solar Empire
(Homeworld like game)

Bioshock
(Although it could be craptastic)

Sup Com
(of course)

Heres what i'm really not:

Most of the craption RPGs and MMO

Command & Conquer 3
(seriously come on, what has this awful series done for the genre since the original?)

Amen. I'd like to see some of this so called anti-Muslim propaganda btw.

The 7600GT is around £100

http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/computing/components/graphics-cards/browse?sort=3&saved_products=0&search=&price_min=100&price_max=&a_861=GeForce+7600GT&a_2734=&a_863=&a_865=&a_869=&a_2733=&a_862=&autofilter=on

Same problem, and i've tried reducing resolution, turning shaders off etc...

I've got a Nvidia 6800 fully updated drivers both directx and the card. Not to bothered at the moment, i assume it will be fixed soon.

Sorry been really busy. Thread updated.

Archonsod 说:

The BBC are very pro-government to be honest, but that's where their funding comes from so it's not so surprising. But this is part of the problem - the government can announce whatever policies it likes as long as it includes something the media will focus on. At the moment, there's a furore over whether muslim women should be allowed to wear veils, yet the fact that schools are now taking fingerprints (and similar information) from children without their parent's consent is brushed under the carpet. Which would you say was a bigger threat?

点击展开...

You would think the fingerprints, but lets face it which is more sellable?

Archonsod 说:

That's the problem though. I didn't elect a government to give me what I want, I elected a government to give me what I need. My wishes are coloured by my own personal prejudices, and that's a pretty poor basis for making decisions. I want a government who'll quite happily tell me precisely where I can stick my opinions if following those opinions is not in the best interests of the country. Instead, I have a government that moves from kneejerk reaction to kneejerk reaction based on what's on the front page of the tabloids this week.

One thing I admired about Thatcher (though I didn't agree with her policies): She was never scared to tell the public to eat **** and die if she believed it was in the nations best interests to do so. That's a much better quality than the ability to pander to the paranoid, panicky wreck that is public opinion.

点击展开...

Isn't that what Tony Blair did in Iraq? He went against public opinion because he believe this was the best for Britian. The same with tuition fees, and anti-terrorism laws, i'm sure their are more. It's quite a paradox isn't it, most people elect parties, to get their own way but thats not what goverments should do. Goverments should do what is best for the people not public opinion.

Archonsod 说:

Traditionally, neither are possible under Fascism. In the first case, fascism requires the total subordination of everything to the state. The only possible theocracy would be one which deified the state. In the second, Fascism draws from both communism and capitalism for it's economic practice. A pure communist (or capitalist for that matter) fascist state is not only a contradiction in terms, but entirely unworkable.

点击展开...

Well they are all undemocratic, thats what i ment. Isn't theocracy when the Church or whatever controls the goverment?

My question remains though, were would you prefer to live? Is there anything about Democracy that you like and thats worth protecting and fighting for? 

Johnathan Andrews 说:

That's very true that replacement theology is fairly common today, but it seems to be less common (at least among Southern Baptists, Primitive Baptists, and non-denominational churches in the USA of which I am familiar.  Covenant theology seems to have a little firmer grasp right now.)

点击展开...

Covenant theology, Supersessionism and Replacement theology are all very similar, and have been extreamly damaging to the Jews. The relationship between us is still strained.

Goodknight 说:

While we argue over these things there are people trying to bridge gaps. We need to come together before it is too late.

http://electronicintifada.net/new.shtml

点击展开...

 

What are you talking about? I doubt this website has done any bridge building.   

Archonsod 说:

TheMany 说:

But who listens to the UN? No the EU bill is far more powerful, and if you don't enforce it then your out of the EU or you lose some/many/all of the peaks. Don't know the details but i do know that in the UK the act comes up alot, especially when minorities are involved.

点击展开...

Not really. It's mainly brought up when the UK government decide to break it with their anti-terrorism laws. Truth be told it's even less effective than the UN bill - the worst the EU court can do in the case of a breach by a government is refer it to a higher court. This completely fails when dealing with countries such as the UK, since the EU is powerless to enforce such rulings against countries such as the UK. The worst they can do is complain, however not only does the UK retain a veto over EU laws, but we put far more into the EU than we actually take out.

点击展开...

Ok I need to do more research to understand this.

Archonsod 说:

Not really. Democracy is no protection against a tyrant, it simply alters the methods the tyrant needs to use. All it takes is someone with enough charisma or intelligence to manipulate the media. Furthermore, it allows the more influential sections of society to force their will upon the rest of it.

点击展开...

Other forms of goverment can just bypass this aspect, there is no need to control the populations minds. You just used intimidation and violence. There doesn't need to be a shift in public opinion because the population doesn't have a say. 

Archonsod 说:

UK Rupert Murdoch owns a large proportion of the media. Given that he has the power to ensure one party get's more favourable or more coverage than another, who really decides who will run the country?

点击展开...

I hav'nt seen this so blatently, indeed it's not so much whos in power, it's what their policies are. For example the BBC, who is extreamly anti-goverment and doesn't appear to be so much "pro party" but "pro certain policies".

I think that the strength of a Democracy is that so many opinions that are different are allowed, you only have to read The Independant or The Telegraph to see that the media is not dominated exclusively by either the right or the left. The strange thing about Rubert Murdoch is that he owns both, so i don't know that you can argue he has miss used his power, he is a business man pure and simple and his newspapers cater to the whole political spectrum. 

Archonsod 说:

Another problem with democracy is voter ignorance. The majority of people (or at least, the minority who can be bothered voting) will always vote in their own, rather than the countries, best interests. With others, they will vote based on a single policy (you could get a lot of votes simply by promising to execute paedophiles, even if the rest of your manifesto comprised of "invade poland and declare the third reik") or based upon peer pressure (many people back home still vote labour because their parents did, despite the current labour party being closer to that of the hated Thatcherite Conservatives than the socialist party they believe it to be).
The more I consider it, the more I think restricting sufferage is a good idea. The problem is, as soon as you start restricting votes, your moving into Fascism. However, given the current world situation, I'm not convinced that a fascist government would be a bad idea.

点击展开...

This is what Wellington argued back in the early 19th century, that the masses were too ignorant to vote, but i think that the masses are a good way of slowing change, of keeping the status quo, moderating politics. Labour was voted in because they moved away for "Militant Labour" and created "New Labour" a more moderate and appealing party. The same is happening to the conservative party, they are moving towards the left to cater for a shift in public opinion. What i'm am saying is that the media and goverment cater to the public so they have to appeal to the public.

Right now however, many of the Elites in Britian are of the progressive-left persuasion, and this means that the media and education and even some Judges are installing this bias into the public mind.

That is the weakness of Democracy and freedom of speech, but there is nothing we can do about it, but hope that public shift will still respect freedom of speech. I could argue that democracy is the most moral form of goverment because it gives people what they want, regardless of why they want it or how they have come to that want, it still makes the people of that nation accountable for the actions of that nation, as does freedom of speech.

Would you really prefer to live in a theocracy? Because thats what a facist state could be. Or how about a communist state?

Archonsod 说:

The EU bill of human rights is dependent on the states to enforce though, and I don't think it's ever been used for a criminal trial (although there's been a few civil prosecutions using it)
However, compare this to the UN bill of human rights, which was not only written by unelected officials, but it also carries a maximum sentence of death.

点击展开...

But who listens to the UN? No the EU bill is far more powerful, and if you don't enforce it then your out of the EU or you lose some/many/all of the peaks. Don't know the details but i do know that in the UK the act comes up alot, especially when minorities are involved.

Archonsod 说:

Thus is always the end result of democracy. The vocal minorities will gain power, and any attempt to stem it will be viewed as oppression. It's happened in every democracy, from the present day back to ancient Athens.

点击展开...

Some people could use this as any arguement against democracy. Couldn't they? I had an arguement with a radical left Christian and a Chinese person about this. Their main abit rather confuses thesis was that the West/Democracy was a failure because it wasn't perfect. The Chinese person thought that democracy in China would only weaken it. They both were full of conspirisy theories although so their dislike of the "Western Nations" was for a large part paranoia, but they were right, democracy isn't perfect.

I would argue that democracy is simply the best form of goverment, it protect the rights of it's civilians the best, not perfect but the best. It is the best protector against tyrants, but again not perfect. Would you agree?

holybandit 说:

And faithfull chicks arent all ugly...the girls that I go to church with are quite hot.

EDIT: I arleady knew about jesus camps from articles. But after actually watching the video ; I feel like puking. That **** is disqusting. Iv went to a christrian camp when I was younger (It was fun actucally) , this doesnt come anywhere NEAR that.

点击展开...

Amen brother, there are very few ugly girls in my church.

I went to loads of Christian camps when i was young and they were great fun.

Christian Anti-Semetism was the result of replacement theology in the church, it claims that the Jewish people have been replace by the church and are no longer God's people. It says that God's promises to the Jewish people have been revoked. It's still very popular in the church infortunately.

Hræfn 说:

TheMany 说:

Oh of course the White house has been taken over by them, i forgot.

点击展开...

George Bush claimed that God spoke to him, and I doubt that anymore than a handful of people in power in the US aren't Christian.

点击展开...

I don't believe Bush literally claimed God spoke to him and i doubt the majority of people in the US senete are fundamental Christians let alone extreamists. It's amazing how many anti-Christian acts have been passed in America when the "fundys" are supposed to be all powerful eh?

Smoson 说:

they want to be entertained!!!

点击展开...

My point exactly

Yoshiboy 说:

The single robin hood that will always be in my heart is the cartoon version.

点击展开...

Too true, that was a classic.

sneakey pete 说:

TheMany 说:

sneakey pete 说:

Yes. It is no worse than what is happening with fanatical muslims in other places. The difference how people treat it.

点击展开...

You really think that these Christians are more of a threat then Global Jihad and other extreamist Muslim groups?

点击展开...

Yes, espically if they have the worlds most powerful country onside.

点击展开...

Oh of course the White house has been taken over by them, i forgot.

Battle:

So what your saying is; law is based on the motavation of socities elites. Yes of course it is, society now is shaped by the whims of the countries elite, untimately even while our society is democratic, popular opinion is based on the media, and education(the elites). The views that the majority of the elites do not hold are demonized and are considered invalid opinions, not to be taken seriously. In effect todays media are a bit like the religous police in Iran, or the KGB during Soviet times, they just silience the opinions of their opponents in other ways.

Right now in Europe the Human Rights Act is effectively the Humanistic Bible. It is used as an absolute document, which judges any person or organisation which breaks it's rules. Doesn't anyone see anything wrong with this? A document, a act made by some guy, having so much power in Europe? The writers of this act were not democratically elected.

Battal you are right in your summary of the state of Western ethics. All laws produced by a country are made for ethical reasons, but where do these ethics come from? You state that law is purly for survival of a society and has no actual absolute foundation(right now in the UK). I think your right, i think that democracy has been corrupted by societies unelected elite and their propaganda.