The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Leftist youth groups conduct street battles with police in Copenhagen
Originally posted by Kidicious
Yeah, I though you were playing a game. I would stop playing the look at how stupid I am game if you want respect.
RESPECT? GAMES? these are the tools of KID-LAND not of me. you started this whole disaster with your loony-cultist-anarchist defending crap. then you complain when it gets out of hand. then you cry when you lose arguments and resort to personal attacks. who is playing the games here sun?
Translation: the use of more force than is needed to arrest someone.
Such as hitting people with clubs etc.. however you don't notice that, or don't care. You are all caught up in defending some fundamemtalist christians right to force people to conform to the norm.
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh
NO one prevents that-- You see -- to me it was completely about the building.
Yeah, they just can't be poor there where they have been since 1982. They have to be poor somewhere else, like the way black people could ride the bus but just couldn't ride in the front. A lot of people like you said what's the problem they get to ride the bus if the people in that state don't want them in the front that's their right. Then people got pissed off because the blacks started breaking the law, and saying they should obey the law. This is all familiar.
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh
The use of clubs should only occur when the person being arrested fights back. I think that's fairly clear.
You are all caught up in defending some fundamemtalist christians right to force people to conform to the norm.
What. The. ****.
I loathe fundies, Kid. But the fact that some fundies bought the building doesn't really matter. It could've been anybody. The point is these lefty youth group types were getting something for free and then, when the city ended their little sweetheart deal, they went and rioted, which is bull****. Where do these people get off? They didn't get their way so they go and riot and break ****? Throwing stuff at the police (who are somehow the bad guys??). They have no inherent right to use that building. They didn't own it. They made no effort, so far as I can tell, to buy it in the past 17 years.
They were even offered another place, it seems. But no, because this building was some sort of lefty shrine (Lenin's speeches) they won't take it. Only this building will do. The city must give it to them in perpetuity for nothing.
Originally posted by Kidicious
Yeah, they just can't be poor there where they have been since 1982. They have to be poor somewhere else, like the way black people could ride the bus but just couldn't ride in the front. A lot of people like you said what's the problem they get to ride the bus if the people in that state don't want them in the front that's their right. Then people got pissed off because the blacks started breaking the law, and saying they should obey the law. This is all familiar.
you are comparing this to the civil rights movement..
:cough: :cough: excuse me... im allergic to bull****.
Hence what I said - violence down the ladder is not noticed.
Pointing a gun at someone, or beating them with a baton and forcibly locking them in a cage is not considered violence in our society.
pointing a gun at a criminal -- is justified
Locking people in cages is state-sanctioned-- I ask-- what would YOU do with murderers and rapists
Beating with a baton-- should generally not happen or only happen in self sefence
But look at this Danish situation. I haven't heard of any deaths despite the rioters employing Molotov cocktails-- that speaks to good police restraint-- An unrestrained force would have opened fire-- I couldn't agree with that to protect property
You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Yeah, they just can't be poor there where they have been since 1982. They have to be poor somewhere else, like the way black people could ride the bus but just couldn't ride in the front. A lot of people like you said what's the problem they get to ride the bus if the people in that state don't want them in the front that's their right. Then people got pissed off because the blacks started breaking the law, and saying they should obey the law. This is all familiar.
Um, the two situations are not really analogous. The only real similarity is that in both instances, somebody broke the law.
1) I disagree if you are claiming racial discrimination is the same thing as this "discrimination" against the poor youth group.
2) In the case of Rosa Parks (and others), opposition to the law, which was rightly changed, was non-violent. That is not a trivial thing.
3) Rosa Parks (and, by extension, all those who supported the civil rights movement) wasn't asking for something for nothing. She was asking for equal treatment under the law. BIG difference.
Don't worry, just start speaking again. I don't know where he has this from, but it certainly isn't from the real world.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
I hate to repeat myself, but I don't think the council had the right to sold the place to the cultists in the first place as they had made a deal with the youth 17 years earlier.
So it seems we agree.
Hmm sorry but I'll take the opinion of the Danish courts over yours. My understanding ( and please someone correct me if this is wrong) is that the youths fought the sale through court action but lost. So whether you are sympathetic to them or whatever . . . the legal ownership of the building was not theirs.
Again the identity of the purchaser is irrelevent to me. But people on your side of this argument keep raising it . . . If the purchasers of the building had been less ideologically repugnant to you, would the sale have been acceptable? Does justice for you change in the same fact situation if you switch the identies of the parties?
So I don't know what you think we agree about here-- other than I think you disavowed violence
You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Such as hitting people with clubs etc.. however you don't notice that, or don't care. You are all caught up in defending some fundamemtalist christians right to force people to conform to the norm.
KId kid kid
How many times do we have to say that the identity of the parties is irrelevant. MY view on this would be identical if a bunch of leftys bought a church. If they own it they own it.
I don't see how that stops the peiople from being Christians and in our fact situation I don't see how anyone is forced to conform. According to some Danes on here, the kids were offered other buildings
You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Tweet
Comment