Nifflin

@Tim A lot of people want that, but we are being censored without cause and that isn't our fault. @Y_Guy You have been very negative about this from the beginning. Nobody takes you very seriously on the issue anymore, at least not TEF people.

Number 2 and possibly 5 are the only ones I would agree on. The others (specially the first) made me laugh. Those solutions are not realistic at all. Well, Israel would never settle for allowing citizenship and right of return because it is a democracy and it would end the concept of "a Jewish State." I personally think 1949 borders or 1967 borders is what would happen in a two state solution. You have to understand that the Palestinians will not accept an unfair solution, just like the Israelis wouldn't. Even 1949 borders would leave many people who would have to deal with never getting their land back.

Perhaps use your contacts to make them aware that a reasonable number of people are waiting on someone from the macros team to take ten minutes and respond. That way we preserve the paper trail and get a quick response.

I liked the articles, well written this week. I Don't Care is the one I'll comment to. Rach, I really sympathize with you. I feel pretty much the same way and went through the same steps. For me it happened when Free Trade was removed and I realized that bots were still around. Jagex didn't care, all they cared about was the credit card stuff. Thanks for hitting the nail on the head.

I think the Palestinians would accept the following solutions (in order of most acceptable to least acceptable); Returning of all lands to Palestine. Allowing Palestinians the right of return and right to be Israeli citizens. Return to 1949 borders. Return to 1967 borders. Current borders. I think the first three are actually realistic solutions. 1967 borders would be a stretch. In any case the right of return would be essential. Another factor to consider is the status of Jerusalem. When I visited there I was told of a peculiar system for administering the Holy Sepulchre, the Christian holy site. In order to prevent the different Christian factions from feuding over space within the Sepulchre during holidays, the key and authority was given to Muslim families to guard. As outsiders they are able to mediate disputes fairly. A similar system I think could resolve the status of Jerusalem. Perhaps some sort of UN jurisdiction (run by outsiders) which would mediate any disputes over the joint administration of the city. Edit: Gaza is tiny and peace will not happen as long as settlements continue to be built. I think lifting the blockade on Gaza and a cease to settlement construction would need to be two precursors to peace talks.

Crimes are never going to end. You know that as well as I. The world is too populated, and there's nothing you can really do too much about it. The strong survive and the weak disappears. You are going to quote me on the last part, but think about it before you do. Some people will be bad, some will be good. As long as free will exists so will crimes. Humans are not perfect. I just think that a peaceful, fair resolution to the conflict would be a major step towards not the elimination of crime, but the proof that humans are not inherently selfish and savage. Crimes will go on, but it's the responsibility of nations and individuals to choose not to contribute to the cycle. As for the strong and the weak, I think the current conflict is the result of two strong peoples clashing heads. Like it or not, the Palestinians are tough, the Israelis are tough too. I guess this is just where the two of us diverge in thinking then. I doubt any amount of debate can change that.

Gabe, wouldn't it make sense to advocate ending the crimes rather then justifying them? I actually feel bad for the Indians, I feel like they were abused. I can't see how because other people have been wronged in history it makes it okay to continue that trend. I understand the Israeli point of view to an extent. Following World War II there must have been a lot of hate, anger and fear. I understand their desire for a state and a homeland. I just don't understand why there needs to be victims.

I'm not attacking, I understand that you're a non-native English speaker. I'm just tired and don't feel like putting the effort to understand you at the moment. No offense meant. I just want it to be clear. :P

@ Gabe, I'm done with Isreal63 tonight, I can only decipher so many of his posts in one sitting Actually, I mentioned it much earlier on the thread. I met one Israeli who I cared for very much. Her father was actually an ambassador to a European country. What made her and her family different was that they were Palestinian Jews who had roots in Israel since like the dawn of time. They didn't invade or displace anyone, in fact they really hated the expansionary policies of the government and were really offended by them. She would tell stories about how when her grandfather lived in Israel in like the 20's and 30's Muslims, Jews and Christians would all live at peace with each other and though her family was part of the minority religiously, they were never second class citizens. I really respect the few people like that who are able to look past everything and see when something is wrong. Just a tidbit I thought some people here could learn from. As for displaced Jews I need for you to give me an in depth explanation of how it is relevant. I would specifically like to know how it justifies crimes against the Palestinians. I do respect you Gabe, you are far more articulate then Isreal63. Maybe you can explain it to me. Please don't tell me that there are no crimes, I posted a bunch of UN resolution citations and links to UN organizations about the crimes. I'm more interested in the reasoning and justification.

MFW you have copypastad the same set of stats on displaced Jews three times even though it has nothing to do with PALESTINE. :wall: MFW you selectively quote me. :wall: MFW you keep bringing up random things to derail the debate when you can't disprove something (like those UN links accusing Israel of crimes against humanity) :wall: MFW I remember that you are Israeli, likely indoctrinated with hate since birth <_<

I did not say you asked the stats but you brought up the Palestinian refugees, i don't won't to be bias so i brought up the Jewish Refugees. so how did i put words in your mouth? Okay, either way it's irrelevant to the discussion unless you argue that how other Arabs mistreated Jews makes it okay for Israelis to mistreat Palestinians. your links are From: hrw, amnesty, palestinemonitor occupiedpalestine. so yes it is 2/4 that is good math :huh: Eight links total. One from Palestinemonitor, one from occupiedpalestine, three from human rights watch, three from amnesty international. Two total from websites with "Palestine" in the name. Six from UN websites. Two out of eight. 2/8. The Germans didn't relocate they Massacred 6 Million Innocent Jews and millions of others to. I explained before and you replied and i replied to you but you didn't respond. I didn't say because of the six day war it was OK i said Israel has a right also to build homes there, but thank you for putting words in my mouth. Oh so it's a numbers game, it's okay to displace a few million Palestinians but not 6 million Jews? Mother[bleep]ing ethics, how do they work? Really, in principle both acts violate human rights. Either both are acceptable, or both are revolting. I choose to think that both are revolting. It sounds like you find them both acceptable. The irony is delicious.

I said your Jewish refugees weren't relevant. You said I asked you to give me stats on them. I asked you to quote where. You failed to quote. Saying I asked you to give those stats puts words in my mouth because I didn't. They aren't relevant to the current discussion. Those links I posted are to UN reports, end of story, generally accepted to be the least biased reports around. 2/4 did not use the term Palestinians in the url, that's just bad math. Thanks though, your inability to refute those sources leaves them standing. Also, explain how it is okay for the Israelis to demolish Palestinian homes and relocate them but it is not okay for the Germans to demolish Jewish homes and relocate them. I ask because you say the relocation is alright given that Israel won the Six Day War. Germans won the war with Poland. Explain please.

Again, how does winning the Six Day War give Israel the right to violate the human rights of the Palestinians? Surely you wouldn't be arguing that in winning Poland Nazi Germany had the right to do what they wanted with the Jews there. It's the same principle. If Israel has the right to abuse Palestinians then Germany had the right to abuse the Jews. Of those links most were from the UN, Amnesty International and The Human Rights Watch. All of those are reputable international organizations. Quote me where I brought up the "refugee problem" in reference to Jewish refugees? Also, let's not forget that Israel also recently committed an act of war against Turkey. Boarding a Turkish ship in international waters and killing 8 Turks. Turkish public opinion is very much against Israel. But you're right, it's off-topic. I am sorry when did i say winning the Six Day War give Israel the right to violate the human rights of the Palestinians? i said Israel has the legal right to also build there. palestinemonitor and occupiedpalestine sand pretty bias to me. Act of war on turkey? Maybe the opposite. The Turkish ship was trying to breach a Israeli blockade, Israel acted in self defense. Not going to argue the flotilla stuff as I've countered what you and The Gabe posted pages ago and explained why at length, basing it all on maritime law. Anyways, firstly I would like to point your your inability to quote me on the refugee stats. Proof that you put words in my mouth. Secondly, I would like to point out that those were two of around ten links I posted illegal demolishing including UN resolution citations and other UN and international organizations. Sorry if you've never heard of Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the General Assembly, The Human Rights Commiseration of the UN or even of the UN itself. I assure you though that they are credible international organizations. Let me repost those specific links and citations; Human Rights Watch (more on their website) Link on Treatment of Palestinians as Second Class Citizens (Human Rights Watch)Houses and Property Destruction (Human Rights Watch) Destruction of homes (Human Rights Watch) Mass Illegal Demolitions in the Gaza Strip (Human Rights Watch) Amnesty International (more on their website) Army Destroys Homes UN Report on Illegal Home Destruction (Submitted to the HRC) llegal Settlements Threaten Human Rights And some UN resolutions, can't find the links for all of it but this is a citation of various resolutions which proclaim the illegal demolition and subsequent settlements to violate the human rights of the Palestinians and be against international law. UN General Assembly resolution 39/146, 14 December 1984; UN Security Council Resolution 446, 22 March 1979; and International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, 9 July 2004, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, para 120 Explain how those organizations show a pro Palestinian bias or admit that you are wrong. Thirdly, you argued that Israel has the right to demolish Palestinian homes because it won the Six Day War. Demolishing homes illegally is considered a human rights violation regardless as the UN has determined. Also, explain how it is okay for the Israelis to demolish Palestinian homes and relocate them but it is not okay for the Germans to demolish Jewish homes and relocate them.

First, if Egypt started the Six Day War then why would Israel keep Palestine. Makes no sense, Palestine isn't part of Egypt. Anyways, my links were about settlement demolishing which you said was only used against terrorists. Those links I posted show it is used against civilians long after the war. Now you argue that it's actually okay to use against civilians, but for another reason. Get your case straight. Then you give me some irrelevant links, nothing to do with house destruction. Two of them I would like to point out are from Jewish/Israeli organizations (biased to the discussion we are having) and the UN one was from the HRC who I cited multiple times. The funny thing is the UN one isn't even about Israel and Palestine but about the use of the death sentence in Palestinian internal affairs. Not really relevant to the discussion. Then you give me some statistics. Again, how is this relevant? It doesn't dispute the fact that Israeli settlements break international law. You're arguing that because Israelis were abused (conceding this for the point of debate, though it could be argued against) in other parts of the Middle East then they have the right to abuse the Palestinians? Doesn't that just perpetuate the cycle of violence? Is that the Israeli way? They got abused so they have the right to abuse random people? Like that's the equivalent of saying that since a robber stole my TV then I'm allowed to take any TV in the neighborhood and that's okay. If the owner resists I can shoot them too. What i said was that Israel won a war its enemy's started it won it and got the spoils of war the The Gaza Strip from Egypt. and the West bank from Jordan. All your links are from Palestinian biased to the discussion we are having so it only fair i do the same. The Statics are relevant to the refugee problem which you brought up again. Again, how does winning the Six Day War give Israel the right to violate the human rights of the Palestinians? Surely you wouldn't be arguing that in winning Poland Nazi Germany had the right to do what they wanted with the Jews there. It's the same principle. If Israel has the right to abuse Palestinians then Germany had the right to abuse the Jews. Of those links I posted most were from the UN, Amnesty International and The Human Rights Watch. All of those are reputable international organizations. There is no bias, only fact in those reports and resolutions. I mean how can you say a UN resolution has a Palestinian bias, they don't even have voting power in the UN. Quote me where I brought up the "refugee problem" in reference to Jewish refugees? Also, let's not forget that Israel also recently committed an act of war against Turkey. Boarding a Turkish ship in international waters and killing 8 Turks. Turkish public opinion is very much against Israel. But you're right, it's off-topic.

First, if Egypt started the Six Day War then why would Israel keep Palestine. Makes no sense, Palestine isn't part of Egypt. Anyways, my links were about settlement demolishing which you said was only used against terrorists. Those links I posted show it is used against civilians long after the war. Now you argue that it's actually okay to use against civilians, but for another reason. Get your case straight. Then you give me some irrelevant links, nothing to do with house destruction. Two of them I would like to point out are from Jewish/Israeli organizations (biased to the discussion we are having) and the UN one was from the HRC who I cited multiple times. The funny thing is the UN one isn't even about Israel and Palestine but about the use of the death sentence in Palestinian internal affairs. Not really relevant to the discussion. Then you give me some statistics. Again, how is this relevant? It doesn't dispute the fact that Israeli settlements break international law. You're arguing that because Israelis were abused (conceding this for the point of debate, though it could be argued against) in other parts of the Middle East then they have the right to abuse the Palestinians? Doesn't that just perpetuate the cycle of violence? Is that the Israeli way? They got abused so they have the right to abuse random people? Like that's the equivalent of saying that since a robber stole my TV then I'm allowed to take any TV in the neighborhood and that's okay. If the owner resists I can shoot them too.

Actually you didn't give anything you said except for a personal testimony from your friend. Well, here are some links then. And videos if you're a visual person. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVFzTCKSerI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLe1MrVfoT0&feature=related General Info on the Illegal Settlements Criticism of Israeli treatment of Palestinian Children and Illegal Settlement Activity UN slams Israel over illegal settlements A few reports from international organizations; Human Rights Watch (more on their website) Link on Treatment of Palestinians as Second Class Citizens (Human Rights Watch)Houses and Property Destruction (Human Rights Watch) Destruction of homes (Human Rights Watch) Mass Illegal Demolitions in the Gaza Strip (Human Rights Watch) Amnesty International (more on their website) Army Destroys Homes UN Report on Illegal Home Destruction (Submitted to the HRC) llegal Settlements Threaten Human Rights And some UN resolutions, can't find the links for all of it. UN General Assembly resolution 39/146, 14 December 1984; UN Security Council Resolution 446, 22 March 1979; and International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion, 9 July 2004, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, para 120 Edit: I stuck to UN and other international organization sources but there is a lot more out there. Edit2: I don't need to link you to Histories. It's more or less the oldest history book ever. I mean it earned Herodotus the title "father of history."

This is still Jagex we're talking about. ;) I've been able to get responses from actual developers, not community mods, withing 24 hours of trying. Come on.

You did and we replied and you change the subject without replying to our reply. So actually you chose to ignore the reply not The Gabe. So why don't you go back and answer our reply's to it, instead of lieing and blaming us for what you did go back and fix your mistake. Well before there was a lot of evidence given. Exactly what type of evidence would suffice for you? We gave pictures, videos, personal testimonies, records from international organizations including UN organizations. Should I go to my friends, photocopy the deed he still has to the land that was stolen from him. Go on Google Earth and show the settlement that currently occupies that land? Das replied to that stuff so I didn't feel the need to. I can go back a few pages and drag it back up if you REALLY want. Could you give a source? Anyways the Persian empire was in charge of the land during 550–330 BC So i am not sure how there was a country there while the Persian Empire was there. So i will say again There never was a country called Palestine . I did, it's in Histories. That's the name of his writings. The originals are in Ancient Greek of course but I can post them here. Just ask. Edit: Refereed to as the Land of Philistine inhabited by the Philistines. Palestinian is the English word for them. The Arabic and original word is Philistine/Philistini.

I shower everyday to wake up. However, I did go through a phase last year where I didn't leave the house for like two weeks (was doing artsy stuff) and apparently the smell was there for the first three days or so but more or less went away after that. Hair was greasy too but also regulated after a week or so. Still, I feel fresher when I shower. I've also always wanted to try replacing showering with like doing the whole Roman bathe thing with oil and scraping it off.

I dunno if you can upgrade rings in f2p but if you can I would spend them on rings.

A very decent number of tipiters hang out in DGS.

To start off Palestine never existed. Israel didn't invade anybody they fought for their lives in 1947-1948 and again in 1967 when it Enemy were at its borders with blood in their eyes. Israel fought and won its enemy's taking spoils of war with them. So there was nobody there when the Jews entered the area known as Palestine/Israel? They didn't displace anyone? Nobody forced anyone to do anything. I already gave multiple examples of Zionists forcing Palestinians off their lands. Your choice if you ignore them. a) interventionalist attitude b) hatred of anything linked to islam c) friends in the middle east means it's easier to go to war with more muslims which means more oil and success for the military industrial complex and corporations That's pretty extreme. It's not about hate or oil, it's about the massive Jewish lobbying group in the US. For example after Obama made his comment about going back to the prewar borders he faced losing 1/3 (IIRC) of his campaign contributions for when he ran for reelection. That's how much money he received from them. Source? I'm referring to the AIPAC. Here is some info about them. AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation related to Israel. AIPAC regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. According to The Washington Post, "money is an important part of the equation." The Washington Post states that AIPAC's "web site, which details how members of Congress voted on AIPAC's key issues, and the AIPAC Insider, a glossy periodical that handicaps close political races, are scrutinized by thousands of potential donors. Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group, and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics. Between the 2000 and the 2004 elections, the 50 members of AIPAC's board donated an average of $72,000 each to campaigns and political action committees (because there are limits on contributions from individuals." One of numerous Jewish lobbying group in America. First off i am not gonna argue with you about religion there is a topic for that here, arguing over that the Bible is or isn't real isn't the argument for this topic. Second i think your proved my point for me, i am not arguing the source of the word, i am saying that the country "Palestine " never existed. The land of the present day Jewish State was ruled by one Empire after another, the only time the country was ever on its own was when in ancient Israel. Actually, Herodotus refers to a state of Palestine in Histories which he wrote in 420BC. There is no mention of a state of Israel. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

That being said if you lose any time by switching to a dagger then speccing you certainly lose dps versus just staying on a rapier.

Yes, the DPS isn't what I'm questioning, I'm just saying that at arma the staying power from divine/ely is better then the boost in DPS. In the long term you will bank significantly less and stay much longer. This is what I've heard from friends who go arma a lot.

Haha, if the dialog is something like... "Quick, find some ore! I need to make a platebody so I can tank hits!" I am going to facepalm soooo hard.