FuBai

I decided to go for 100 cb: ^^ I hit some very fast worlds - 30 secs-2min per game. I have joined Afflicted and will go for 80 def tomorrow for the sought after lvl 100 cb!

80 att! Thanks for all your support.

Well, you're a moron. The US gets the majority of its oil from countries like Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia. If the US was to invade a country for oil, why wasn't it Canada or Mexico? We're right by the country's border. Pardon me for butting in (and sliding off-topic slightly), but while most of the imports of Oil does come from these nations, that doesn't mean their reserves are all larger then Iraqs. Saudi Arabia easily has the largest reserve (~260 billion barrels). Canada would come next (~175 billion barrels) but most of its Oil is in the Alberta Oil Sands, which is more costly to extract and refine. Iran is third (~125), Iraq is next (~115), and then Kuwait (~100). Venezuela is around 7th at ~75 billion barrels. Mexico is more unknown, most people peg it between 15-25 billion barrels but I believe the Mexican government thinks its closer to 100. *Numbers are more then likely off by a few billion barrels but the order of countries should still be the same. On a side note, if I personally wanted Oil, I would invade Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iran or Iraq. Canada has the hassle of the Oil in the sand, Mexico should have a small reserve. --- Back on-topic. Is America a menace? Yes, but that isn't always a bad thing. Out of all of those, Iraq is the easiest target. You can't invade Canada, mexico, Saudi Arabia or Venezuela as you have no justifcation to do so, so will be slated by the rest of the world (Saudi has helped the USA often). Even American can't afford everyone to place sanctions on them. Iran has or will soon have Neuclear weapons, so going to war with them is bloody stupid unless you can dissable them first. Iraq had no WMD's or Neuclear weaps, had a dictatorial govt and muchos oilos. Thus, if you want oil, this is the best one to invade.

What a load of crap. I agree with many of the Buddhist teachings, as an atheist ("One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods" ) I just don't believe in a god. Technically speaking I could be an atheist AND a Buddhist. You, as usual. You're talking as the guy who lives in a world created for him, populated with animals and plants for him and with women created for him (who he can't touch until his silver wedding anniversary of course). If you are a budhist, you are an atheist. You can't not be if you follow most of the sutras - all of which deny any particular God exists.

just got rune defender:

stick with fletching. yews are also much cheaper now, so you can still make a decent profit. Darn autoers

It's not massivley common, but still happens - especialy when there are a lot of wcers there.

full t no hams + d scimm and rune kite - cheap and very good def and stats.

^^ thanks :lol: Just got 80 str:

yes. I am infact dead. :^o TUMP likes a nob of butter on thier potatoes.

Firstly there are two interpretations of the word kabas which is the Hebrew word used in Genisis 1:26 (In NIV it is dominion) to describe the terms in which Man was to have the Earth and the animals and plants therof. 1)The first possible meaning actualy means to rule and serve - in the same way a king was meant to rule his people and serve thier needs. So man was meant to rule the Earth, and yet maintain it - Noah saves the animals on God's command, maintaining the Earth. Man is meant to be the servant of creation, and to subdue it - parrallels with Gen. 2:5 and 2:15 - to "till and keep the land". This interpretation is often used by vegetarians - the idea being reinforced by the fact that Adam and Eve only ate plants and vegetables - infact no one ate meat until after the flood (Gen. 9:3). 2)The second meaning is to rape or enslave or use for humanities own perposes. This is to be found from the use of kabas in Neh. 5:5, Est. 7:8 and Josh. 18:1. As you can see, there are two different interpretations of how we should treat the enviroment. Both are ambiguous - to what extent can we abuse it for the second? And does serve and rule in a kingly manner mean we can eat them so long as we dont destroy the whole species? So, the interpretation is not so easy to state as you did. Moreover, I would prefer us to stick to secular arguments. And also STICK TO THE SUBJECT.

Thanls leesters. 21st of July Started off trying to get a bit of runecrafting in - my favourite way of making money by skilling. Another day, another 2k made, and another rcpker running for thier life...I love runecrafting. I leveled up to 61 rc: I had allready clicked to unload pouch so i missed the screenie. :( I sold 2k nats yesterday out of the 10k i wanted to craft, so here's a pic of what I have left to do: I also decided to level up that mining quickly, after finishing 2k nats in 1 and a half hours (record running time for me). Just nipped upto the coal and iron north of the zammy mage: Thats all so far...I may add more by the end of the day, it's only 6am when I am writing this, and I started rcing at 4am. Couldn't sleep :) .

Finaly got on this evning after convincing my dad to unblock it. Rced 1k nats, nearly koed an rc pker with a 23, 21 spec. He ran like a little girl, nearly pked me just from laughing. Not much happened. Wont spend alot of time on tommorow as i'm going into town with a m8. Hoping to lvl mining tomorrow.

Durial gets attacked by my rabid clockwork cat, which removes his head with a swift crunch of it's mechanical jaws, leaving a bloody head becrowned by a phat, which I steal.

Nope. TUMP thinks that a captain of a ship telling a crewman to "go help Rodger the Cabinboy" is funny yet dirty.

Banned for being. Just being.

Lmao. Anyone who tells you you have inner str deserves to get told to f off.

The people I am talking about believe that the country is really run by evil Christian leftists who are conspiring with bin Laden to bring down the world by refusing to help those with cancer by not using stem cells and then taking away all ownership of rifles so you can't go plinking with a .22 in the middle of a densely-populated suburban area, and that we are all going to be eliminated by the gestapo-esque police if we don't rebel and turn the Southern half of America back into a confederacy and legalize pot. If that really was the case then I don't think people would be very much worried about their legal or financial situation; it'd be "get the hell out of there." If it's bad enough they'll leave regardless of their legal or monetary ability to do so. It's alright if you think that the country could be run a bit better, but if you think that the country is going to explode and that's what you preach then why are you still living here? Many people fled Korea and Vietnam when the war came there illegally, despite the fact that they might not have been legally able to or that they didn't have enough money. If somebody truly believes that the US is going to start WWIII and that the States are going to get bombed to smithereens then they should shut up with their political preaching, save everybody the trouble of listening to their mindless drivel and get their stupid selves to somewhere else. 1) They may believe they can change the situtation by thier preaching, thus avoiding the calamity 2) Fiscal ability to leave is a big deciding factor in leaving or not, especialy when the situation is not immediate enough to require evacuation 3) It's not like you can just up and bugger off to where ever you feel like. Things like language, jobs, travelling illegaly has may dangers, worried about what they may face, being too young etc 4) do not attempt to characterise all extreme political activists as idiots. This is not true, allthough admittedly some are. Many academics have very politicaly extreme views that are quite sensible, or at least easliy justifiable.

In a survey conducted during the war in afganistan, 80% of americans did not know where afganistan was on the map, 20% of that 80% pointed to australia. I have visted America three times, never yet evading the "oh gee, what a nice accent" thing that just really annoys me. Thier geographical knowledge is very, very limited - but when it somes to American Geography they are very good. They have no history in comparison to europe either. All of the European countires (or people) have existed for thousands of years as a society. America was formed only a very short time ago.

I also see nothing wrong with them. Embryonic stem cells are merely humans who haven't been born yet. They are alive, just like any human. Destroying them by the millions to possibly save (they have very few results compared to adult stem cells) a few thousand seems terribly unfair. People are being stupid thinking that Bush wants to stop stem cell research altogether :uhh: I doubt he even understands the actual meaning of stem cell research, he probably will just veto anything that containst the phrase. =; He vetoed the public funding for collecting the embryonic stem cells. It's a moral issue. AFAIK, somatic stem cells would just as effective as embryonic stem cells, just no embryos being killed. Yes, george Bush is a "born again christian". However, I think that we are in danger of moving off into the realms of stem cell research, which isn;t that realated.

No, I simply stated the fact that we can afford to do so, many times I qualified it by saying that I don't think we should, but that we still can. Where did I say that? Looks like you haven't been reading again. Every time I say that we can spend money on it, I say that welfare spending is excessive. But I want you to realise that the child is a real human being, the Mother is a real human being. The Government of the UK has to be concerend with protecting its citzens from poverty, starvation and ill-health. It is one of the main principles in government in the UK today - even Thatcher didn;t get rid of the NHS. I dissagree with many points in the Welfare system, but I recognise that without adaquate provision the children produced will be abandoned, or the mothers will starve trying to keep both alive. And don't give me that crap about the teenagers not concieveing - its not like they plan to do it before hand, they just bonk away, not thinking of the consequences. How do we solve that? Education, Education, Eductaion. And I don't even like Labour. Underage pregnancies are a problem. Education is the way to deal with them. Look at Holland. I have seen the world as it is today, I have worked with people who are nto nearly as wlel off as me - I have worked with a Barristers firm for a few weeks, meeting people accused of murder, GBH, drug suppling and theft. You just cycle past everymorning saying "Dam, another young mother, that another about 1/1000000th of a penny that my daddy pays in tax down the drain. That could have gone towards tax cuts so we can be even richer." I'm sorry...my sheltered life? And are you accusing me of making up evidence for my claims? Well I can produce evidence to back them all up - you haven't even tried to. Wait a minutie you have said two things wrong in one sentance. Firstly, your suggestion wouldn't work, for all the reasons I have stated before, which you seem to have ignored because they don;t fit into the Tory world plan. Secondly, this is a public forum for d-e-b-a-t-e. If I don't like your view, then I will criticise it. You would get no support for that idea what so ever form the general populace. Or even the academics. Seriously, have you ever even been to a debating society? well, obvioulsy not, or you would be a small embarassing stain on thier shirt fronts. This is coming from someone who is right wing, economicaly at least, and doesnt believe that welfare should be nearly as big as it is.

Abortion is not killing, I proved this earlier on, perhaps you need reading lessons 4. You're a pompous moron. OMG! I didn;t agree with him, that makes me a pompous moron =D> Did i say abortion was killing...OH NO, yet againt I DID NOT! What I sad was bringing in harsher punishment does not prevent crime. Forinstance the death penalty in America has not lowered thier Crime in the 38 states that still execute people. Learn to read. We can seriously afford to spend that much on welfare. We are so bloody rich we are giving it a way free to Africa. Yes I think Welfare spending is excessive, but you fail to concider the fact that the children and the mothers are people, not selfish, money gobbling automatons. Wait...you have first hand experience? I'm sorry, driving past the slums and waving at the starving children is not first hand experience. How about you got kicked out of your house, only had one parent who earnt less than 10,000 a year, and couldnt even afford to go to colledge. That is first had experience. As I have said, Britain's unemployment rate is 11%. That means that 9/10 people are working. That includes these children of teenage pregnancies. They have jobs. I don't know where you get your evidence from, but I can substanciate mine on request. SO next time you get your stick an enjoy "Happy toff's Poor wacking day" actualy think about the people, rather than the small drain it causes on you daddy's pocket.

I liked his pk gallery. Some really nice pks. He seemed ok (a reformed character?) he should have 1 more chance before they ban his IP.

both accounts perm banned? That blows. What did he do? edit: answered below

44wariorz44? What did he evade?