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
Just to check, do you know the similarities between racism and sexism?
yes actually i DO know the difference. AND i have NOT "discriminated" against ANY men OR women in here at all just to clarify. i also know this is another KID-TRICK question, as you are now looking for any available flaw in my wording to finally get a one up on me. wont work kid.
furthermore, dont even try to bring sexism into it, as you are probably skewing the meaning to try to finally prove one of your points. so lets have it kid. what was the trick behind your question?
Originally posted by Kidicious
AAHZ, you are just too defensive. What are you afraid of?
i am "DEFENSIVE" as a PERSON because of reasons i would rather not say on a public bulletin board thank you very much. we all have our problems kid. and dont try to change the subject either. because i never believe in answering a question with a question, i put the ball back in your court. you can try to defend your point of why these "squatters" were so persecuted if you wish however...
Some wealthy people offered to help them buy the building but the owners wouldn't sell. They wanted to demolish it. I kind of think it's not about economics, because it costs money to demolish buildings and then it will be an empty lots. I doubt seriously if the empty lot will be worth what they were offered for the building minus the demolition costs.
And it still amazes me why the hell they would want to do this if it weren't about hate. Indeed, no one else wanted to, which is why they got the building for cheap.
You forget that it's often way more costly to renovate an old building than to demolish the old and build new.
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 brought that up. But the fact is that none of us know the motivation of the group that bought the building. I tend to doubt they'd buy it to demolish out of spite (wow, what a waste!), but you never know.
Sorry I haven't noticed that - this thread can be a little confusing to catch up on, but if we are two that says it, it might catch Kid's attention
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.
You forget that it's often way more costly to renovate an old building than to demolish the old and build new.
Maybe, but I still have a hard time believing that selling it for a nice profit wouldn't be the best thing to do economically. I don't know what they plan to do with it, but getting a big quick return is pretty nice.
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh
Kommentar til rydningen af Ungdomshuset
I går den 1. marts 2007 kl 7.00 satte politiet sine styrker ind for at rydde Jagtvej 69. Det blev en hektisk dag med gadekampe, hærværk og bål på Nørrebro og Christianshavn. I skrivende stund er huset ryddet, men Nørrebro holder vejret idet Ungdomshusets brugere og sympatisører har varslet yderligere optøjer rundt om i København.
Som ejere af bygningen ser det ud til at vi nu endelig, 5 1/2 år efter købet, kan få adgang til vores ejendom. Vi har ventet længe på denne dag og glæder os over at retfærdigheden sejrer i og med at politiet nu håndhæver vores grundlovssikrede ejendomsret.
En lang proces
Siden september 2001 er medlemmer af Faderhuset blevet udsat for verbale trusler, voldelige overfald og adskille hærværksepisoder, som har forvoldt stor gene, både menneskeligt og økonomisk. Desuden er Faderhuset blevet hængt ud i medierne som en farlig fundamentalistisk sekt. Advokat Knud Foldschack m.fl. har forsøgt at skabe et billede af Faderhuset som en bagstræberisk hadefuld organisation, der har forsøgt at komme en blomstrende demokratisk ungdomskultur til livs. Den retoriske tilsmudsning og sminkning af henholdsvis Faderhuset og Ungdomshuset har dog siden urolighederne i december og nu igen 1. marts fået en stadig mere hul og utroværdig klang.
Politisk vold
At miljøet omkring Jagtvej 69 har en meget voldelig og hård kerne af politiske aktivister er nu tydeligt for enhver. Anarkisme er en ideologi, der bevidst tager afstand fra alle former for ydre styring af individer, det være sig regering, politi eller sågar forældres autoritet over deres børn. Det siger sig selv, at mennesker med en sådan ideologi arbejder imod det, at vi som danskere i fællesskab arbejder på at få et samfund til at fungere, hvor vi i gensidig afhængighed retter os efter fælles vedtagne love og regler.
Som danskere er vi vant til fredelige forhold. Politisk vold er ikke en størrelse vi er vant til at forholde os til. Vi er vant til at man kan snakke sig ud af konflikterne og nå til en fælles forståelse. I denne sag forholder vi os som samfund til en størrelse, der ikke vil indrette sig efter ydre styring, og som retfærdiggør vold i sin kamp mod "systemet". Ungdomshusets brugere har med deres krav om et nyt hus til 1 kr. vist, at de gerne vil tage imod samfundets ydelser, men på ingen måde leve op til samfundets krav. De har konsekvent bidt den hånd, der har fodret dem. De fleste danskere sætter pris på værdier som næstekærlighed og tolerance overfor anderledes tænkende. Vores trygge kår i Danmark har netop givet os overskud til at sætte disse værdier i højsædet. Problemet er, at når vi står overfor politisk motiveret vold skal der en resolut, handlekraftig øvrighed til at tackle problemerne. Vi kan ikke være så tolerante, at vi lader destruktive kræfter få frit løb.
Vigtigheden af en øvrighed
Som kristen kirke bygger vi på det bibelske syn på øvrigheden, som vi bl.a. finder i Romerbrevet kap. 13, vers 1-2
Alle skal underordne sig under de myndigheder, som står over dem,
for der findes ingen myndighed, som ikke er fra Gud, og de, som
findes, er forordnet af Gud. Den, som sætter sig op imod dem, der
har en myndighed, står derfor Guds ordning imod, og de der gør det,
vil pådrage sig dom.
Uden regering, domstole og politi får de destruktive kræfter i mennesker frit løb. Opdragelse til lydighed mod forældre og respekt for andre mennesker er fundamentalt for at kunne fungere i et samfund som vores. Det er ikke "samfundets skyld", men svaret findes i samfundets kerne, familien. Det er her de værdier skal indpodes, som får gavn for os alle på længere sigt.
Unge mennesker, som udvikler sig til autonome voldspsykopater (udtrykket fra det famøse banner på Ungdomshuset i sin tid), er ofte resultatet af en misforstået laissez-faire mentalitet fra forældre, som i afmagt overfor deres børns ulydighed begynder at forsvare deres ret til oprør imod såkaldt undertrykkende autoriteter. Det er fortvivlende at se forældre stå og harcellere imod politiet, når de netop står ansigt til ansigt med konsekvenserne af deres egen fejlslagne opdragelse.
Hvis et samfund skal fungere, må der være nogle fælles spilleregler. Vores demokrati beskytter ytringsfriheden og tillader fredelige demonstrationer. Men det vi ser på Nørrebro i disse dage er uforeneligt med demokratiets spilleregler.
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh
It's work time here so you have to wait a couple of hours.
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.
Well here's an English version of the squatters point of view. I guess we will have to wait on the opposing view.
The Trial
Ungdomshuset on Jagtvej 69 has been in struggle with the Christian right-winged sect Faderhuset for several years. The Copenhagen City Court and the National Court has judged in their favour and we have been ordered out on December 14th 2006.
The case is much more complex than it first seems and is a about a lot more than the future existence of Ungdomshuset. The case is about which agreements are in force, about who can be seen as representatives of Ungdomshuset, about the right of ownership versus the right of using and about whether we can be regarded as renters when we call ourselves activists.
Ungdomshuset is sold
In 1999, the Town Council decided to sell Ungdomshuset after 17 years of existence, hereby ignoring the agreement from 1982 stating that the right of usage belongs to the activists. Only few wanted to buy and Faderhuset was at first regarded as an unserious buyer, making them unable to buy the house. The house was instead sold to the brand new company Human A/S for 2.6 million DKK (about 450,000 USD), without examining the company. Within a year Faderhuset bought the majority of shares in Human A/S and Faderhuset got the house with legal cleverness denying the Town Council it’s buy-back rights, since only the company Human A/S changed it’s ownership.
The Trial begins
Faderhuset sues the four activists of the house who signed the agreement with the Town Council, demanding the house and 800,000 DKK in compensation for not being able to use the house. The actual issue of the trial is whether the Town Council can sell a house, to which the right of usage has already been given to someone else
On January 7th 2004 the verdict from City Court came, stating that Faderhuset was in their right to sue four activists rather than Ungdomshuset itself, since we function without a hierarchal management and are therefore not regarded as an organisation. However, they denied Faderhuset the compensation.
Both sides appealed against the decision, Faderhuset demanding the compensation and Ungdomshuset demanding the future right of usage. The 28th of August 2006 the National Court states, like City Court, that the right of ownership and usage to Ungdomshuset belongs to Faderhuset and that they are free to order it evicted.
This decision orders us out at 9:00 a.m. on December the 14th 2006. We are also denied the possibility to take the case to the Supreme Court, meaning that we have no more options within legal system.
Faderhuset has furthermore denied selling Ungdomshuset to a fund set up to continue its existence and are instead examining the possibilities of tearing the house down. It is still uncertain whether they will get an approval to do this. Their intentions are clear. Faderhuset are cynical speculators in quest for money.
We are left back with the biggest threat to the existence of Ungdomshuset ever. The politicians sold our political and cultural centre to a right-winged Christian sect. The politicians are to blame, the legal system is not an option and the police are coming.
We have to no choice! We must defend what we have spent 24 years creating!
Tweet
Comment