Fiery_penguin_of_doom Posts

Whats your definition of enjoying your youth? Are we talking about playing games and watching anime all day? Or are you talking about having some life experiences you can tell your kids about, like backpacking through Europe?

I think a young adult should get the opportunity to do something that will shape themselves in a positive manner for the rest of their lives. Playing video games until your in your twenties before getting a job isn't exactly a productive way to spend your youth.

Even worse, they can vote.

11,000 miles with no radio. Snow, ice, rain, more snow more fucking ice. Yeah, it sucked but, I made enough to buy a nice t.v and pay my expenses for a couple months.

I appreciate the warm receptions from my friends. Glad to know I'm missed.



Wrong date Tsujoi, it's the 28th of Feb. Skype has the date wrong.

We need to find a fix to quotes + one word replies.

Seriously, add some reasons regardless how inane, asinine or trite they are.

Quoted for Truth.

Also I find it illogical to "punish" people for slavery despite not owning any slaves. I have white in me, so why am I guilty of the transgressions of my distant White ancestors during a time that it was socially acceptable? yes, we find slavery appalling now but, back then it was different. History still requires context.

Edit; I'm not even sure if the "White people" in my family line ever owned any slaves. My mothers ancestry research couldn't delve prior than the 1880's.

White people have fucked over other white people throughout history. England and Scotland/Ireland comes to mind without even opening a new tab for a google search. How about the Romans and the Guals, Franks & Samnites.

People tend to let cracker slide as a pejorative due to the etymology. Various theories make it less of an insult and simple description. I'll use example from wikipedia for simplicity.

The main theory is that slaver foremen in the antebellum South used bullwhips to discipline African slaves, with such use of the whip being described as 'cracking the whip'. The white foremen who cracked these whips were thus known as 'crackers'.

The most insulting theory on wiki is

Flaser, this isn't the "do you hate america thread?". You made no comment about the topic at hand. Try to actually talk about the topic at hand rather than ranting.

Just in case you try to claim hypocrisy on my part I've already stated my opinion previously.

Edit: America is not the only country with a bunch of elitist pricks. Every country has them. You pointed out a behavioral trait of a sect of people and claimed that they represent Americans as a whole. Very flawed logic, I had higher expectations of you.



They have a right to express that desire but, they are not entitled to use the power of government to dictate what I can and can't see on t.v (along with millions of other Americans) because they find something objectionable. If everybody was allowed to use the powers of government to censor everything they find objectionable we wouldn't be allowed to say anything.

T.V. stations are companies and by using a recent supreme court ruling on campaign spending in political elections. Companies are granted the right to free speech just like the rest of us. What the channel decides to air is their speech and it's a violation of their rights to censor it.

From my perspective, a God as explained by Abraham religions (Islam,Christianity,etc) doesn't exist. I can find no scientific evidence for the existence and all the "experts" can come up with is circumstantial evidence or "Your theory can't explain it all therefore we are correct".

They have also tried to make evidence fit the explanation rather than the explanation fit the evidence.

Both religious and secular explanations can't explain how the universe came into existence. Yes, we have the big bang but, the big bang doesn't explain where the matter that was in the big bang came from. There are theories of the big crunch preceded the big bang but, you still end up with the same unanswered questions when you get back to the beginning. Religion has God create everything but, they can't explain where God came from. Unless, you follow the explanation that everything was created at the same time. Which leaves questions of "If God created everything then where did the dinosaur bones come from, why does carbon dating dictate age older than the "doctrine" explanation of creation? There are millions of questions and neither side can quite answer all the questions.

Scientifically we know matter can't be created or destroyed so it's not like the universe can simply spawn matter.

I'll propose a theory that just came to mind while reading the previous posts.

Authoritarian people found certain things objectionable (Old school religious people). I'd say the nature of the United States as a Christian heavy nation created an environment where nudity was objectionable but, not violence. This line of thought has continued to today with the excuse that exposing children or teens to breasts will somehow cause them to go violent or become sexually deviants. As if a 12yr old boy seeing bouncing breasts will turn him into a rapist.

I dislike the idea of censorship at all. If parents want to keep their kids away from material they find objectionable then buy a v-chip or use another method to monitor what their child is watching. There is a myriad of ways to choose what your child can see. It's a parents job to parent their children, not the government.

I act the same way I do with anybody whose opinions I don't agree with. I question them and indirectly make them justify their views with logic and statistics.

They claim black people can't be successful because they have inferior genetics.

I ask them "who did the study? Is there a place I can review it?" or I counter with

"So I assume you also believe Hispanics are genetically predisposed to play baseball and box".

Racists, like everybody else is guilty of the same blind faith to their views and beliefs. The way to change their minds is make them question their stances through properly phrased questions. Remember that not everybody can be saved. The trick is to make them question the very foundation of why they think the way they do. Eventually you break the chains that bind them to their ignorance.

You come to us quoting some unknown newspaper written by an expatriate that some if not most of us have never heard of before and you expect us to just swallow the pill? Think about it for a while. If I came to you with a link to a website that you've never heard of. With an article written by someone you've never heard. Would you instantly believe it's a credible source? Next time, don't get so infuriated when people are dismissive in a similar situation.

I've read the article and made a note of it and withdraw my previous statements about Major Hasan. Though I remain skeptical about the situation as a whole rather than subscribe to either side. Nor does the article make me view Hasan as a victim.

So let me get this straight, the state sponsored media rewrote an event so it would look poorly on the messiah they worship instead of showing the truth which would make the military (and by association Bush) look bad? Sounds logical, make the guy you support look bad by portraying his military as being so incompetent that they allowed a Jihadist survive within their ranks. Not only that but, you come to us with a what appears to be a blog. One which I have never heard of nor had the time to investigate to see if they are a credible source or just some loon who got a hold of a computer. Anyways, I'll look into exiledonline.com and it's credibility once I get back in a few days.

@Gibs: You have a point but, something should be done. You shouldn't allow a terrorist to drop a plane out of the sky if it's possible to prevent it. All I hear is support for full body and various other forms of intrusive scans that completely and utterly violate constitutional rights. These scans specifically violate the fourth amendment of unreasonable searches and seizures as no warrants are issued. On top of that the warrants are supposed to be specific and detailed of what is to be searched and what is expected to be found.

Maybe some sort of facial recognition of known terrorist or persons of interest at the time of flight such as the counter you check your luggage in at. Facial recognition is already instituted in public areas such as sports stadium and they have been effective the last time I heard. It's an interesting thought.



A six inch packet of plastic explosives sewn into his underwear and a syringe containing acid liquid.

Edit: To clear up any misconceptions people may have had. I am not seriously supportive of profiling. I posed a question for argument and attempted to support the argument despite not agreeing with it personally (i.e. devil's advocate).

Would it have been less sickening if it had been a 20 year old young man? And if so, why?

Actually yes it would have been less sickening. The general profile of the last dozen or so terrorists who have tried to bomb a plane have been male in the age range of 20 to 30. It's makes more sense to pat down a 20 year old man than a 70 year old woman. If you can find a single instance where a 70 year old woman blew up a plane then maybe we should consider frisking granny but, until then it's a waste of time harassing an old woman.


That's a bit self-contradictory, because from a legal point of view, general suspicion is the mother of profiling. I wonder where P.C. comes into play with profiling. Furthermore, I'm seriously gobsmacked and astonished to find someone of your self-professed political conviction speaking out in favour of profiling.

My self-professed political conviction also includes the prevention of crime where applicable. Though I don't remember actually speaking out in favor of profiling just posing a question (sometimes to learn something you must play the devil's advocate). I see it as asinine to ignore the obvious.

As for the P.C. nature as I mentioned. The current politically correct nature of some Americans refuse and will violently fight any notion that there are similarities in the people who have perpetrated every or nearly every terrorist attack since 9/11. It's "politically correct" to frisk granny while ignoring that there hasn't been a terrorist attack by an old woman bombing a plane in the last decade. Meanwhile, someone who fits the very characteristics of a terrorist are supposed to go un-harassed. I assume you are familiar with the flying imams controversy. In a nutshell,



The P.C. crowd chastised all who felt that these men were suspicious. Calling them racist, and just about every other nasty word in the English language. Simply because people were being suspicious on a plane and people felt that they may be in danger. So while the P.C. crowd has been hammering it into our heads that we shouldn't be aware of our surroundings and that "nobody is suspicious" or even going so far as to eviscerate anybody who dares speak up that somebody IS doing something suspicious but, turned out to not be a large problem once investigated. (though the behavior was still suspicious at the time). The P.C. crowd in the media spends no time dragging the person out in public to be flogged by the masses for what they claim to be bigotry, xenophobia or what have you. An unintended consequence of these public media floggings is that fewer people will speak up if they see suspicious behavior as they are scared of being wrong. That fear will be capitalized on by our enemies.

Therefore, Political correctness in this situation will get people killed.


On top of that, Political correctness lead many of the supervisors of the Fort Hood shooter to wash their hands of the situation simply because if they were wrong they would be gutted like fish by the media and every Islamic group in the civilized world. Fort Hood came about due to the failings of military personal from identifying a threat out of fear for not being politically correct in their assumptions that he may pose a danger to people.

In conclusion any logical person would know, if you are looking for somebody it's better to look for somebody fitting the description. If our police departments worked like our TSA regulations. The next time a black guy robs a store. Police will be kicking down the doors of every white woman in a fifty mile radius.

Edit: Glad to see your still alive lion. I can relate. I've had a bank account frozen before. Though they didn't specific why they froze it. I never got to unfreeze my account they simply mailed me a check a couple weeks later.

Wouldn't the better method be, trash the ineffective measurements and concentrate on the methods that actually work. If these scans are "working" as they claim then why did he slip in? He was on the watch list which is supposed to keep people from flying but, yet they let him on anyways. I'm not sure if they were aware he was boarding a plane but, it still remains that while on the list, he got on. This is why I am considering if we should profile people before they get on a plane.

@Flaser: I agree this does seem like they are just trying to make us feel safe while not actually doing anything about it. The cynical part of me would think that they are doing this on purpose in order to seize some opportunity when there is another (successful) attack. That's probably my distaste for this administration boiling to the surface though.

On Christmas day Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab a 23-year-old Nigerian with connections to Al-queda was able to board a plane in Amsterdam which he attempted to blow up while en route to Detroit Michigan.

Due to this event the TSA has announced new regulations starting at pat downs before boarding a plan for most passengers. These pat down will focus on the upper thighs and pelvis region. Also one hour prior to arrival at your destination you will not be allowed to leave your seat or be allowed to have anything in your lap which includes everything from a blanket, book or any other personal belongings. Unless you can suspend the book in mid air.

The TSA has also ordered all airlines to “disable aircraft-integrated passenger communications systems and services (phone, Internet access services, live television programming, global positioning systems) prior to boarding and "during all phases of flight”. So no wi-fi on your laptop while in flight or listening to Sirius satellite radio. If your the type that likes to see landmarks as you fly then you better stay glued to the window as the TSA is also ordering pilots and crew not to “make any announcement to passengers concerning flight path or position over cities or landmarks.”

I would like to note that these regulations do not apply to "Heads of State or Heads of Government” or the spouses or children of chiefs of state or to “one other individual chosen by the Head of State or Head of Government.” So presumably Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi, whose henchmen were convicted of bombing Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 259 crew and passengers, would not be forced to soil himself.

Though I can't find an article, I have heard the airline did follow all current safety regulations in screening of it's passengers. (Hopefully someone can find a quote or article.

So I want to ask Fakku, if that son of a bitch can get on an airplane with plastic explosives while he is on a terrorist watch list, even after his own father called the embassy and explained that he had a legitimate fear that his son may do something stupid. Then why the fuck am I still being forced to take my shoes off if the current regulations do jack shit? Also isn't it about time we start profiling instead of treating everybody like we're all terrorists? I found it sickening to watch an old women (possibly in her late 70's) get pulled to the side for a pat down. I believe this P.C. attitude is going to get people killed. I would rather see people profiling suspicious people instead of treating everybody as if we're all equally guilty. Why are the feelings of a few being put ahead of the very lives of the rest of us?

Edit: Apparently I can't spell anything around midnight.

Where the fuck is the mushroom cloud of death and destruction? Going on seven hours here.

behind enemy lines should be "fapped in a strangers house"

biodegrade and dead aim are almost redundant.

I expect a new IB game (which I'll never click the fucking link either).

He'll still rage. I'm still glancing in a general north east direction waiting for the mushroom cloud to appear. Which I will greet with open arms like so

inb4 animeholic's saber rage