Boooooooooooo! It's a foul job and now it' s only someone YOU that feels they hass to do it!

Sieg HEIL, ya ban troll!!

Your video, CCTV footage of Brisbane gunman's mall siege, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Four and a half hours long? Jesus christ. All I can say is she better lay siege to Damascus at some point.

When it comes down to a fair fight, Batman loses against anyone that doesn't just fight hand to hand and/or has a healing factor / super strength. But that's not what Batman's true power is. These idiot fanboys and their value system based on Street Fighter / Mortal Kombat bullshit. 3, 2, 1 -- Fight!

No, no, no, humans: His true strength delves into something which can only be whittled down via the collapse of Earth itself: Economic superiority. But even then, he's the Ritchie Rich of superheoes and would likely be able to rebuild his wealth on another planet.

All Batman needs to do is acquire an object of immense power and then employ it against whoever it is he's up against. He doesn't even need to fight but chooses to fight. If he's fighting Superman, obtain kryptonite -- or hell, gain access to the Siege Perilous and then just destroy the mind of whatever passes through it. He's friggin' Bruce Wayne and has a vast web of connections, bolstered by his income, which can get him ANYTHING.

Anyway. There are cosmic entities which have a greater pull of resources than Batman so let's match Batman's economic superiority (he's basically an army) against an actual threat backed by near infinite resources, such as the Negative Zone's Annihilus, Titan's Thanos, a time traveler like Kang the Conqueror, or the hive mind of the Phalanx.

Hell, I'd love to see Batman hack Galactus' base of operations and then invade and divert cosmic consonance.

But this pussy footing Batman VERSUS Deadpool is moot. Batman VERSUS anyone in a normal match up is stupid. Elevate your understanding.

I believe this is exactly how the siege of Jerusalem happened.

The best way to not get legally shot is don't try to kill people with your fists and by banging their head into the pavement.

Even if you don't kill them, causing permanent brain damage would still send you to jail for a long time. Mr. Martin would have been arrested and charged with assault if he'd lived.

If someone is legally following you because you're an unknown guest in their community and their community is under siege from constant home invasion robberies, it's much smarter to use words rather than try to kill them.

MY EARS! I'm going to hell because of you, she devil! GAH! I practiced celibacy and was home schooled to avoid any auditory temptations but now I'm ruined. Raped. Ear RAPED. Fucked in the ears.

And now I have no choice but to become the beast I always feared. FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK ME JESUS

Souls! Feed me souls! BLlaefoiugrbsrgbsgrubs -- and now I transform into my final form to destroy the sanctity of life and shatter the world. Laying siege to all holy lands! Nothing is sacred, all life is to be extinguished, and suffering will be endless. ENDLESS!!!!!

Millions, billions, trillions, untold time passes; dimensions crossed, the very meaning of ALL unraveled and laid forth, meaningless. Meaningless! All conflict, all freedoms, all philosophy is now folly; unnecessary as a multiuniversal nihilism cascades across the boundaries of consciousness. The godheads destroyed, their corpses rotting the core beyond ALL.

Blackness.

Void.

Nirvana crumbles and the enlightened turned against the balance. Yahweh screams in horror, corrupted and turned into a tentacle demon to rape its devoted followers. Ra's phallus goes limp. Baal is ground into an all beef hamburger patty. Shiva, Vishnu, Devi, Surya and Ganesha warp into a single form, becoming the Eye of Saron. The reptilians of earth devolve into alligators, and the greys become monkeys.

There is no shelter because there is only horror. For all eternity, in all realities.

Sorry, that's just my interpretation of the reporter's reaction.

Ok, I'll start with a few things that most people would probably agree with, but the police force currently would fight like hell to avoid. How about we decide to actually punish cops who break existing rules and laws. Use testing to weed out unbalanced power hungry or corrupt types from becoming cops. QUIT hiring COMBAT veterans to become PEACE officers. I'm sure there are many things that could be done to fix the problem with the police, its just that it's not being done because the police think the only problem is that we, the lowly people, dont always follow ALL commands,and sometimes we need to be put in our place. >> ^shveddy:
False dichotomy, among other things. There are innumerable intermediate steps between "allowing them to do whatever they want to you" and "shooting the motherfuckers." I'll admit that there is a point where armed resistance is warranted, but if you think that we have arrived anywhere near that point with enough frequency to warrant armed resistance, then you are crazy.
Yes, there are plenty of instances of people's rights being violated - but in 99.99% of those occasions, I think the problem can best be solved through other means.
Do I think that the students who got peppersprayed at UC Davis had their rights violated?
Yes, I do. But this guy seems to suggest that the proper response is for the students to pull guns and start a shoot-out. Let's imagine what that would look like for a second:
One of the students peers through the caustic mist with righteous fury and a wet t-shirt over his mouth. He can feel the comforting weight of his Barretta, held close to his heart in a chest holster, and he knows that this is the moment to act. He stands up tall despite the onslaught of bright orange asphyxiation, reaches for his piece and takes aim. Somewhat startled, the officer is suddenly defenseless with his canister and it is not long before he crumples to the ground in an ever expanding pool of blood. He basks in a brief moment of clarity before chaos reigns. His fellow students are quick to bear arms themselves, but the training, body armor and poise of the officers allows them a significant head start and the students suffer heavy casualties in this initial volley.
Not to be deterred by the deaths of their friends, the occupy movement takes up refuge in the life sciences building which, designed in the late sixties with a brutalist aesthetic, is mostly concrete and as such is a perfect fortress from which to outlast the ensuing siege and inspire innumerable citizens on the outside world to take up arms as well. Guerrilla warfare is the only tactic effective in such asymmetrical circumstances, and after a few weeks of violence the powers that be succumb to international pressure and agree to negotiate with the 99%...
...or we could launch an official investigation, fire the guy as a scapegoat after an admittedly long, expensive and cumbersome process, and let the public outrage that ensued lead to a more cautious approach to future student protests. Bloggers and editorialists collectively write millions of words on the subject, increasing awareness and generally shaming the agency that allowed it to happen.
Not perfect, but a whole hell of a lot more civilized.
Any time you use guns against a government entity in he US, you will eventually be caught and put in jail. Period. The only way to avoid this is to be a small part of a large popular movement that eventually overthrows the US government, and I don't see that ever happening with citizen gun-owners unless it involves guerrilla tactics. Imagine gunfights erupting at your local municipal buildings. Imagine pipe bombs at your local police station. People need to realize that this is what they are advocating when they argue for second amendment rights as a fourth check and balance.
If you disagree with that statement, feel free to fill in a reasonable sequence of events to span the gap between "guy whose fourth amendment rights are violated guns down cop" and "said guy is vindicated, and massive changes are made to our law enforcement policies." I suspect that we are far more likely to see a greater militarization of the police in response.
I humbly propose that we join the civilized world and come up with more creative ways to correct our problems.

False dichotomy, among other things. There are innumerable intermediate steps between "allowing them to do whatever they want to you" and "shooting the motherfuckers." I'll admit that there is a point where armed resistance is warranted, but if you think that we have arrived anywhere near that point with enough frequency to warrant armed resistance, then you are crazy.

Yes, there are plenty of instances of people's rights being violated - but in 99.99% of those occasions, I think the problem can best be solved through other means.

Do I think that the students who got peppersprayed at UC Davis had their rights violated?

Yes, I do. But this guy seems to suggest that the proper response is for the students to pull guns and start a shoot-out. Let's imagine what that would look like for a second:

One of the students peers through the caustic mist with righteous fury and a wet t-shirt over his mouth. He can feel the comforting weight of his Barretta, held close to his heart in a chest holster, and he knows that this is the moment to act. He stands up tall despite the onslaught of bright orange asphyxiation, reaches for his piece and takes aim. Somewhat startled, the officer is suddenly defenseless with his canister and it is not long before he crumples to the ground in an ever expanding pool of blood. He basks in a brief moment of clarity before chaos reigns. His fellow students are quick to bear arms themselves, but the training, body armor and poise of the officers allows them a significant head start and the students suffer heavy casualties in this initial volley.

Not to be deterred by the deaths of their friends, the occupy movement takes up refuge in the life sciences building which, designed in the late sixties with a brutalist aesthetic, is mostly concrete and as such is a perfect fortress from which to outlast the ensuing siege and inspire innumerable citizens on the outside world to take up arms as well. Guerrilla warfare is the only tactic effective in such asymmetrical circumstances, and after a few weeks of violence the powers that be succumb to international pressure and agree to negotiate with the 99%...

...or we could launch an official investigation, fire the guy as a scapegoat after an admittedly long, expensive and cumbersome process, and let the public outrage that ensued lead to a more cautious approach to future student protests. Bloggers and editorialists collectively write millions of words on the subject, increasing awareness and generally shaming the agency that allowed it to happen.

Not perfect, but a whole hell of a lot more civilized.

Any time you use guns against a government entity in he US, you will eventually be caught and put in jail. Period. The only way to avoid this is to be a small part of a large popular movement that eventually overthrows the US government, and I don't see that ever happening with citizen gun-owners unless it involves guerrilla tactics. Imagine gunfights erupting at your local municipal buildings. Imagine pipe bombs at your local police station. People need to realize that this is what they are advocating when they argue for second amendment rights as a fourth check and balance.

If you disagree with that statement, feel free to fill in a reasonable sequence of events to span the gap between "guy whose fourth amendment rights are violated guns down cop" and "said guy is vindicated, and massive changes are made to our law enforcement policies." I suspect that we are far more likely to see a greater militarization of the police in response.

I humbly propose that we join the civilized world and come up with more creative ways to correct our problems.

>> ^Asmo:

Anyone think the setup time vs a decent player would make this pointless?


The way he did it yes, especially since air units can still attack the tank.

If someone perfected doing this quickly then what might work is getting 2-3 tanks down there and then attacking the front of the enemy base with the remaining forces. Since they'll be defending pressure at the front it will be a lot harder for them to figure out what is attacking their mineral line or buildings.

Another possibility would be an early drop attack, especially against zerg. Use the glitched tanks to support a marine drop. The tanks can hit enemy units, but can't be attacked by melee units like speedlings or even roaches due to the short range. Then just kill off tech structures with the marines.

What might be more useful is stacking some tanks inside a few missile turrets on a high-ground corner for expansion defense. It would keep air units from sniping them and would keep the tanks from damaging each other. It would also hide the number of tanks you have from your enemy (much like the older "viking flower").

I don't know why, but I love siege tanks.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

An early Ron Paul book has been uncovered by the name of "Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution after 200-Plus Year (1987)" that contains racist, homophobic, sexist and anti-semetic themes similar to those in the newsletters. Will he blame this on his staff too?
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/30/in-early-book-rep-ron-paul-criticized-aids-patients-minority-rights-and-sexual-harassment-victims/



Ah, more baseless claims? What a fragile world it must be for a statist troll.

An early Ron Paul book has been uncovered by the name of "Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution after 200-Plus Year (1987)" that contains racist, homophobic, sexist and anti-semetic themes similar to those in the newsletters. Will he blame this on his staff too?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/30/in-early-book-rep-ron-paul-criticized-aids-patients-minority-rights-and-sexual-harassment-victims/

I wasn't really a Alexander fan, but a Diogenes fan. Probably one of my most famous favorite philosophers, what other philosopher got into fights with people for being a dick?! One thing I did like about Alexander was his courage that was down right fool hearty. My favorite story is about Siege of Tyre where they build a road to an island, and the he climbed the battlements ahead of his troops and jumped over the wall and started fighting. His soldiers didn't, and slow to realize of his decision, they finally noticed Alexander fighting the city Guard completely by himself. This rallied his troops to the point that the Island of Tyre was taken by an ancient army without a navy, a thing of legend.

Sad to say, I have only a superficial knowledge of the teachings of the famous Thomas Aquinas. Most of my energies have been on more secular minds. With that said, though, some of my favorite Christian minds are Søren Kierkegaard and George Berkeley. I didn't realize that Existentialism actually has a Christian heritage, I found that rather shocking as most christian's seem rather dogmatic when it comes to finding meaning in their lives. It struck me as interesting that there wasn't a unified feeling among christions to the deeper questions of meaning in life.

George Berkeley's metaphysics are awesome. He represents the only metaphysical experience of the universe that I think humans minds could fully comprehend. Granted, that doesn't mean it is correct, but I think the human mind is really only satisfied with the notion of minds, it is why "Gods" have always been with us, we need minds to be in control.

Sadly, though, even those great christian minds could not save my faith. There were to many problem I had with Christianity and the Bible that my faith was finally crowded out by doubt. You might call me the seed that fell among the thorns that was quickly drowned out of the sun. To me, though, my "Thorns" are truth and knowledge, so I hardly feel embittered or lessened.

In reply to this comment by Lawdeedaw:
Ah, Alexander. I don't know why I think of him a hero--he was bloodthirsty and ruthless, but I guess I admire him neverthelss. (Saw your quote by him.)

BTW, a really good religious scholar (The only one I like) is Aquainis (SP?)

@marbles That doesn't sound like strict constitutionalism so much as strict ideology. The constitution/BoR says nothing about restricting the first amendment on private property. Therefore, under what authority do the courts uphold laws against trespassing?

Also, call me a commie, but I don't view property as a natural right. It's arguable that using the threat of force to lay siege to resources stolen from the commons is the original sin of violence. I don't recognize the lords of old, nor their "rights" to the land. No man toiled to create the Earth.