Dude. long time no see.

Hey there's this really funny cartoon called: YOU'RE A F**KING MORON. It's how certain celebrities and famous people are so darn stupid.

Link:

http://www.zipperfish.net/toons-categories/yaafm-series.php

Wonderful ! I've never seen a so perfect reply in Minitokyo unto now. I'm pretty sure you're a genius, possessing a dramatic personal culture.
Indeed, I forgot to mention what reply in what thread I'm speaking of: Does Capitalism represent the best economic ideology?
Sincerely, I'm incapable to cease my laudative regards at you and to restrain myself from asking this following demand:
Would you become my electronic friend?
Please take attention: if you refused , respond to me; I infuriated to persons who never respond. ^_^
Best regards.
Tnaxus/Empixus Xast

Quote by AcyxHey Fluke, I just wanted to say I'm sorry for having ranted on your "Should President Bush be Impeached" thread. It was a bad manuever on my part, and has been deleted so that others don't get carried off-topic.

No problem man, I'm glad to see that my thread has sparked some discussin whether it's negative or not. I had noticed one of your posts disappeared. Well anywho, seeya later!

I don't want to discourage you when we have our debates if you think I am then I apologize.....you do bring up valid points worth discussing and I really don't want you to stop voicing your opinions about it. Anyway, I just wanted you to know that I believe you are a decent person and I have added you to my friends list......if you didn't mind.

Quote by AcyxI think now is a good time to apologize for being such an ass. Liger, Shin, I'm sorry that I lost it, Styphon too. I'll be completely honest with you, I am no law major. Matter of fact, the primary field I invest my time in is science, namely aspects such as chemistry and biology. Well, all that and I've also been under a great deal of stress. You guys are fun to chat with also, although I have a very bad habit of outwardly projecting stress onto items such as writing, a flaw that I've been working very hard to correct for a considerable amount of time. I will try harder in the future so that things like this don't happen again.

-Acyx

Acyx, you didn't have to go and delete your posts. What's said is said, and you did in fact raise some very good points. For example, there are many policymakers who do believe that the AUMF does not take precedence over FISA and as such all electronic surveillance for the purpose of gathering foreign surveillance has to conform to all of the FISA statutory requirements. Both sides have sound arguments, and in the end it's down to the courts to decide which interpretation is the correct one.

I admit that in my response to your posts I may have gotten a bit personal; your implied grouping of me and all other participants who held a different opinion than you as "ultra-con fartknockers" and your suggestion that I am getting material reimbursement for my apparent support for the President were certainly offensive to me. I am a moderate conservative but not a staunch supporter of all of the administration's policies. My purpose in participating in the thread in question was not to support or contest the current administration's policies, but to respond directly to the question at hand: should the President be impeached?

Clearly, there is no legal justification for impeaching the President at this time, as he hasn't been found to have broken any laws. Furthermore, as I hinted to in one of my posts, I do not believe that President Clinton should have been impeached earlier, as while he did commit a crime, I do not believe that crime was heinous enough to be one of the high crimes and misdemeanors that would justify impeachment proceedings. In fact, I do feel that Clinton was an adept administrator, though some of his policies left much to be desired.

You said you were under a great deal of stress, and there I can certainly commiserate with you. Best of luck with everything you're dealing with right now, and hope to see you around in the future. I'm sure we'll find ourselves at odds again, but I hope that we can reach some understanding that will allow us to temper our words and ensure that any debates we may have in the future are not manifestations of any mutual dislike but rather of honest differences of political perspective.

With all due regards,

Wow dude...wow. Interesting post I must say in my Impeachment thread. I appreciate you taking the time out to write such a detailed comment.

merged: 05-04-2006 ~ 05:41pm
Gotta say it again dude....WOW...you and shinsengumi sure know your american and international laws I'll give you guys that much for sure I'd just say I guess my reason's for believing Bush should be outta office aren't as fact based as everyone else's. I just don't like the way he seems to run things be it starting wars, invading countries...just not right. Oh well, thanks for the comment again in my thread.

Quote by AcyxThe typified "white" european-looking Jesus observed in most depictions and drawings has been around at least since the fourteen hundred CE mark, as this was how Leonardo Da Vinci had depicted him in pieces of his artwork, as well as had it also been painted by many of his contemporaries in this same manner. Personally, I think the actual Jesus was either Black, or Arabic, depending on which of the varied cultures or ethnicities he may have been a member of.

People tend to forget that the middle east in this time was of course a bustling nexus for trade amongst the Mediterranean, and that in fact there are several ethnic groups that comprise this section of the world. More than likely the white version of Jesus first showed up in around the late 300's CE, after the Roman Emperor Constantine I (Constantine the Great) decreed Christianity as Rome's official state religion, replacing the pagan gods and goddesses of eras passed.

Though it's probably nothing more than a buffer created by the Europeans specifically for the purpose of feeling closer to their own version of Jesus, I personally do not care what skin color or ethnicity Jesus may have been. Siddharta was Indian, he preaches on how to be good to one another, do not wrong or kill one-another, do not steal.. Mohammed though being from one of the most demonized (now) groups of people on this earth speaks of the exact same thing, as does Jahweh, and of course his direct offshoot, Jesus.

Apparently a black man can break into your house or car, and steal your stereo; or an Arab can strap bombs to himself and blow himself apart over his overemphasized or overpublicised "religious superiority". But as soon as either of them offer you a path of kindness toward one-another, and peace of mind, body, and soul (I'm reluctant to say "Salvation", as that this would probably sound Zionistic of me).. is when the red flags start flying.

It's not surprising really, many people tend to think of their various gods and other articles of worship in such a three-dimensional sense. He who offers you salvation has to look exactly like his specific race of people, because they all know and realize subconciously that someone of a different skin-color or a different ethnicity is not like them, and is therefore inherently evil as many of their psuedo-reasonings would lead them to believe.

It's like when the first manned missions into space were sent up in the early 1960's, and people expected to see that of heaven when the astronauts cleared the upper atmosphere. Though many of them were disappointed when they found there was no heaven "up there", this demonstrates how shallow some people's perception of God actually was, and still is. I personally welcome the idea of Jesus being Black or Arabic as opposed to the traditional (and obviously doctored through centuries of being passed around through European church institutions) white Jesus. Teachings of these things should extend beyond skin color, although most people can't seem to break free of their buried xenophobias long enough to accept a fact such as that your religious leader may have very well been of a different race or ethnicity.

merged: 04-22-2006 ~ 09:38pm

Quote by SegurHe was white for sure,because no black man could have had such influence over people for the simple fact that blacks were slaves.Idea of Black Jesus is quite ridicolous if taken in fact the period of time and place for hes life.Also all church relics portray Jesus as white man,not as black one.
Idea of black jesus is made up by racist black people who dont have same type of religious god-like person to look up to.So they claim that their idol in fact shares their color of skin,wich is made up lie.

Alright, it's time for me to pick apart this quote from you..

Christianity was at least three hundred plus years old when the first of the christians were able to live free of persecution from the Roman Empire, as did slaves in the Roman sense comprise that of various persons from across the empire. Many free blacks such as those from places like Ethiopia and others abounded here, as that it was a trade hub for that corner of the ancient world.

The Catholic Church was established some three hundred years after Jesus' death, and of course throughout it's history; The church has made some changes to the original scriptures and of course more notably to Jesus as well. For example, as opposed to the traditional all-male disciples, Jesus was historically known to have had several female disciples as well, among these was the infamous Mary Magdeline (who was also a very close and well-trusted compatriot) who the Church tarnished and demonized as a harlot, the others were simply edited out, as that the oral accounts had since vanished, and thus nothing was left to be found of them.

My question for you is: Since when does a purely European-looking Jesus naturally occur in that of an area that is populated exclusively by differing ethnic groups of which none of the northern European traits are manifest? Those so-called racists are probably right that Jesus was of a different ethnicity than the cliche pure-white savior so elegantly depicted on your church altar's crucifix, murals, or stained-glass windows. Horrifying thought, isn't it? A black, or an Arabic man actually gave you your faith, and through some nine or ten centuries of the Catholic Churches' warping and alteration gave you the whitewashed image of Jesus you look up to today. Ah, how the feeble-minded try to substantiate their narrowed notions of God or Jesus, or any other holy figure, yet fail miserably to do so.

O_O you actually typed he whole thing...............I was gonna do that.....

Hey dude! I just got done watching Cowboy Bebop The Movie again for the first time in like a year. I was able to get through it OK but I still had a hard time seeing Faye go after that first bounty without invisioning that freak cross dressing dude you implanted in my brain. Just picture the scene of her/him boping in her/his fighter to the music and it's enough to make me projectile vomit all over the place. I really wish you would have never told me of this thing but I guess you were just posting to my thread. Damn what's a person to do. I think I am off to get some "eletroshock therapy". It's the only way to get get rid of that horrible vision. Please God let it work...

Thank you for participating in my threads! Your insight was very enlighting, and i agree we should focus on the immedate things such as global warming though sadly many people don't belive in it.

Shinsengumi89
Ps. Replies welcomed and keep posting!

Quote by AcyxSo in essence you've made a quintessential particle cannon, pretty nasty weapon you've got there, although how well does it work and does it have a practical application outside of pure weaponry in this particular incarnation? Also, exactly how large is this device and if extremely huge, could it be scaled down for use?

Sometimes it's better to stick with what's tried and true rather than what's of the greatest technological advancement. I'm sure that once they perfect railguns, those will be just as effective of a weapon as this particle cannon you make mention of above. With some improvements on the technology, this will probably exceed the projectile weapon in overall performance.

As a hand-held weapon, it's probably capable of developing 10,000 watts (or more or less). By the way it IS tried and true; they're used as HPM (High Power Microwave) technology under the government (with rumors that they're used in Iraq) and used in particle accelerators for experimentation at CERN or other private organizations for particle physics. It can also be and probably Is used in home-made rail guns/ gauss-guns.

Really I'm not trying to offend you or any1 else OR be an inconsiderate jerk, but I dont think the shoe fits quite right on the foot to say ''better to stick with what's tried and true rather than what's of the greatest technological advancement'' when it actually works and is used in industry governmentally and otherwise. PLZ dont take this as an offence.

merged: 03-28-2006 ~ 04:05am

Quote by AcyxHey man, just wanted to get back to you on your post in my guestbook. I'm not offended, not in the slightest. Although what I meant to say was that a weaponized application of the Ion Ray (particle cannon) is still a little bit of a ways off. Not to say that there aren't already applications of the said device in industry and/or government experimentation, these options are everyday practical uses of the same core technology. Just that it's application as a quintessential anime or Babylon 5-esque weapon has yet to be seen, and will more than likely not be seen during either my or your lifetime. Feel free to disagree with me man, I don't go off on tirades for legitimate tender (although there have been instances where I have lost my temper over very odious comments, see the political forums for details), nor do I hold grudges. There's no real need for apologies either, so don't be intimidated.

Take care,
-Acyx

I do see what you mean; to get this kind of power for an ION RAY is far off from present day. There Is a possibility it can be a non-lethal weapon? It can also be used as a close-combat weapon; the peak of the electrical pulse is too high for a grown male's heart to not burn from high current and voltage.

Quote by AcyxHe who advocates mass genocide or nuclear holocaust in lieu of peace or "freedom" is not worthy of my admirations or respect as anything but a psychopath, and I stand by this prior statement as being very well justified, thank you.

And there is a plethora of ways to attack the ideas advocated rather than the individual who advocates them. Name calling is not a refutation of the idea of genocide.

Your perception of him is your business, but it is my business to make sure that the forums is a civilized place for civilized discourse. If you are unable to discuss things without resorting to ad hominem, then I will ask you to refrain from posting at all.

Maido! Thanks for your reply on my thread!^^ See ya!