User information for belial

Real Name
belial
Nickname
None given.
Email
Concealed by request
Description
Homepage
Signed On
August 9, 2003
Supporter
-
Total Posts
22 (Suspect)
User ID
18010
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
22 Comments. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
17.
 
time limit
Jul 10, 2004, 22:51
17.
time limit Jul 10, 2004, 22:51
Jul 10, 2004, 22:51
 
So can you, say, play for ten minutes and then come back to it later? And it just keeps track until you hit the 60 minute mark?

13.
 
No subject
Jul 10, 2004, 19:51
13.
No subject Jul 10, 2004, 19:51
Jul 10, 2004, 19:51
 
"Once your hour is up it should kick you out of game and it wont start ever again till ya pay."

Well, that just seems ridiculous. I could understand making you start all over - which is what the Postal II demo did, and the Grand Theft Auto demo before that - but to ONLY let you play ONCE for an hour is a bad deal. I don't expect demos to last forever, but one hour seems a bit extreme ...

8.
 
No subject
Jul 10, 2004, 18:16
8.
No subject Jul 10, 2004, 18:16
Jul 10, 2004, 18:16
 
So does the game reset to the main menu after an hour - or are you prevented from playing it at ALL after the hour is over? I assume it just restarts you from the begining ...

I remember when the Postal II demo was released with a time limit ... didn't take long for someone to figure out how to set it to an unlimited amount of time. Isn't Lithtech running the risk that someone will figure out how to do that here - which means they'd get the whole game for free?

47.
 
Re: No subject
Jul 3, 2004, 02:01
47.
Re: No subject Jul 3, 2004, 02:01
Jul 3, 2004, 02:01
 
"Sorry, you don't understand."

Oh, yeah. THAT'LL work! Good come back, "indiv." With a brilliant defense like that, I'm afraid you have me at a disadvantage.

You say - oh so originally - that "hindsight is 20/20" (can I quote you on that? It's just that I've never heard anyone use that phrase before.)
So I point out that they knew that what they were doing was wrong AT THE TIME, therefore "hindsight" aint got shit to do with it, and your response is ... is ...

Wait a minute. What was your brilliant response again?

This comment was edited on Jul 3, 02:03.
43.
 
Re: No subject
Jul 3, 2004, 01:37
43.
Re: No subject Jul 3, 2004, 01:37
Jul 3, 2004, 01:37
 
"Hindsight is always 20/20. Most political activists don't understand this concept."

More bullshit. How many times do people have to read this kind of nonsense before they wake up? Let's see - the Bush administration was warned by people in the CIA, the State Department, UN inspectors and individuals in other governments that there was no evidence Hussein was either working with Al Qaida or possessed weapons of mass destruction. Bush ignored all this advice and sought only that which supported his desire for war.
As for the Reagan administration, it KNEW its allies in countries like El Salvador and Guatemala were murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians - and it worked hard to COVER UP that knowledge, so American aid - and the killings - could continue.
Mass murder is mass murder, whether committed in the name of anti-communism, or Christianity, or Islam or anything else. There is no excuse for it.

So drop this "hindsight" bullshit. It isn't hindsight if you knew about it AT THE TIME. Jesus fucking Christ - how clueless can you guys be?


36.
 
Re: No subject
Jul 2, 2004, 22:39
36.
Re: No subject Jul 2, 2004, 22:39
Jul 2, 2004, 22:39
 
"In retrospect many of Reagan's foreign policy decisions have lead to the problems we have today, but in the context in which those decisions were made they are much more understandable."

I HATE this argument. It's just so easy to dismiss ANYTHING with it. "Yes, your honor, in retrospect, shooting my wife in the head wasn't the right thing to do, but in the context in which I made that decision, it was much more understandable, bla bla bla"

Bullshit. Conservatives are always using this argument to excuse some evil act or monumental f_ck-up they committed in the past ... "You have to understand the way people thought back then, bla bla bla."
Almost every time, there were people who were saying it was a stupid idea BACK THEN TOO. I remember my history teacher during the 80's talking about the Islamic fanatics Reagan was arming in Afghanistan and how that decision would someday come back to haunt us and boy, was he right. But anyone who said so was ignored by the "liberal" media and Ronnie got his way and so did Osama.
This "you have to understand the context" excuse is being used RIGHT NOW to excuse the incredible blunder in Iraq. Bush and his apologists keep talking about how EVERYONE thought Hussein had WMDs.
Bullshit. Plenty of people were saying he DIDN'T have WMDs, that we shouldn't invade - they just got ignored by the "liberal" media and Bush got his way and...drum roll please - so did Osama.

Round and round it goes. Some people never wise up.

This comment was edited on Jul 2, 23:16.
17.
 
Re: Scotty
Jul 2, 2004, 14:51
17.
Re: Scotty Jul 2, 2004, 14:51
Jul 2, 2004, 14:51
 
I didn't think it was cool OR funny. But then again, I don't get off on the suffering of others, so maybe I'm not the right person to judge.

57.
 
Re: I can see I'm dealing with Jews here
Jun 25, 2004, 00:48
57.
Re: I can see I'm dealing with Jews here Jun 25, 2004, 00:48
Jun 25, 2004, 00:48
 

OFFICIAL BOSCO WARNING: Please pay no attention to anything the person posting under the name of "Bosco" says. He is one of those total losers who gets off on the attention he receives by acting like an asshole. So you should never respond to him by name, because that's all he wants - someone to notice him. Without your attention, he has no life at all. Pathetic but true. He's just a lonely, miserable little kid with his dick in his hand, looking for a response. ANY response.
So don't give it to him. Don't respond to anything he says directly. Talk ABOUT him in the third person if you must, but never address him directly. You'll just be helping him get his masturbatory kicks if you do. And you don't want to do that.

(I'm going to be away from my computer for a while. Feel free to cut and paste this message whenever you see the person going by the name of "Bosco" posting.)


47.
 
Re: Taking judicial activism too far
Jun 24, 2004, 22:33
47.
Re: Taking judicial activism too far Jun 24, 2004, 22:33
Jun 24, 2004, 22:33
 


OFFICIAL BOSCO WARNING: Please pay no attention to anything the person posting under the name of "Bosco" says. He is one of those total losers who gets off on the attention he recieves by acting like an asshole. So you should never respond to him by name, because that's all he wants - someone to notice him. Pathetic but true. He's just a lonely, miserable little kid with his weenie in his hand, looking for attention. ANY attention.
Don't give it to him. Don't respond to anything he says directly. Talk about him in the third person if you must, but don't go beyond that.

(Feel free to cut and paste this message whenever you see the person going by the name of "Bosco" posting.)

40.
 
Re: Taking judicial activism too far
Jun 24, 2004, 22:03
40.
Re: Taking judicial activism too far Jun 24, 2004, 22:03
Jun 24, 2004, 22:03
 


OFFICIAL BOSCO WARNING: Please pay no attention to anything the person posting under the name of "Bosco" says. He is one of those total losers who gets off on the attention he recieves by acting like an asshole. So you should never respond to him by name, because that's all he wants - someone to notice him. Pathetic but true. He's just a lonely, miserable little kid with his dick in his hand, looking for attention, ANY attention.
Don't give it to him. Don't respond to anything he says directly. Talk about him in the third person if you must, but don't go beyond that.
(Please feel free to cut and paste this message whenever you see the person going by the name of "Bosco" posting.)

This comment was edited on Jun 24, 22:07.
6.
 
Re: Bosco Warning
Jun 24, 2004, 21:57
6.
Re: Bosco Warning Jun 24, 2004, 21:57
Jun 24, 2004, 21:57
 


OFFICIAL BOSCO WARNING: Please pay no attention to anything the person posting under the name of "Bosco" says. He is one of those total losers who gets off on the attention he recieves by acting like an asshole. So you should never respond to him by name, because that's all he wants - someone to notice him. Pathetic but true. He's just a lonely, miserable little kid with his dick in his hand, looking for attention, ANY attention.
Don't give it to him. Don't respond to anything he says directly. Talk about him in the third person if you must, but don't go beyond that.

(Please feel free to cut and paste this message whenever you see the person going by the name of "Bosco" posting.)

This comment was edited on Jun 24, 22:31.
14.
 
Re: Watch out
Jun 24, 2004, 17:31
14.
Re: Watch out Jun 24, 2004, 17:31
Jun 24, 2004, 17:31
 
I think I'm going to just start posting this warning every time this kid tries another pathetic bid for attention here. I made the mistake of trying to respond to him directly, now I see others making the same mistake. So, sorry if anyone has read this before but it's for a good cause! (Feel free to cut and paste it yourselves if you want - just click on Bosco's name to see his last few moronic posts, and respond with the warning if you want to. Maybe we can shut off all attention for this guy ...)

The Warning:

"Bosco" is one of those total losers who gets off on the attention he recieves by acting like an asshole...You should never respond to him by name, because that's ALL he wants: someone to notice him. Someone to pay attention to him. Pathetic but true. He's just a poor, miserable little kid with his dick in his hand, looking for attention, ANY attention.
So don't give it to him. Don't respond to him directly. Talk about him in the third person if you must, but don't go beyond that. I wish there was some quick way we could flag this asshole so no one would make the mistake of talking to him - make his name show up in red or something? That way if he ever gives up using the "Bosco" name and shows up again with a different name, we could just flag him again and go back to ignoring his pathetic, loser ass.

45.
 
Re: Hmm...too bad
Jun 24, 2004, 03:30
45.
Re: Hmm...too bad Jun 24, 2004, 03:30
Jun 24, 2004, 03:30
 
"Damn.. Bosco forgive me for replying to your post without checking your profile and previous posts. I really could have saved my breath. didn't know you are just impersonating a troll here"

He's one of those total losers who gets off on the attention he recieves by acting like an asshole...You should never respond to him by name, because that's all he wants: someone to notice him. Pathetic but true. It's especially pathetic how he is using the royal "we" as if anyone else on this board would ever side with him. He's just a poor, miserable little kid with his dick in his hand, looking for attention, ANY attention.
Don't give it to him. Don't respond to him directly. Talk about him in the third person if you must, but don't go beyond that. I wish there was some quick way we could flag this asshole so no one would make the mistake of talking to him - make his name show up in red or something? That way if he ever gives up using the "Bosco" name and shows up again with a different name, we could just flag him again and go back to ignoring his pathetic, loser ass.

32.
 
Re: No subject
Jun 22, 2004, 22:48
32.
Re: No subject Jun 22, 2004, 22:48
Jun 22, 2004, 22:48
 
Bucky, I generally agree with you, with one exception. I think it IS okay to feed the trolls, as long as you are feeding them some form of lethal poison.

20.
 
Re: Only a fool would buy an ID soft gam
Jun 22, 2004, 17:45
20.
Re: Only a fool would buy an ID soft gam Jun 22, 2004, 17:45
Jun 22, 2004, 17:45
 
Oh you stupid, stupid fuck. Can't you find a more appropriate forum for your homosexual fantasies?

And you should give up the "I don't care" pose. Can't you do better than that? Any six year old could come up with that line and mindlessly repeat it the way you do.

Besides, it should be obvious to everyone that you DO care, otherwise you wouldn't be posting here trying to draw attention - ANY kind of attention - to yourself in the first place. Guess you're too stupid to realize we'd figure that out though.

Hard to imagine that somebody could crave attention SO badly they're willing to look for any variant - even contempt. But there you are. You and the hundreds of thousands of losers exactly like you.

I'm sure you'll just respond with something equally stupid, but when you look in the mirror, you know what I'm saying is true. Don't you.

You can keep crying out for attention if you want, but I've given you too much already. So long loser.

18.
 
Re: Only a fool would buy an ID soft gam
Jun 22, 2004, 17:27
18.
Re: Only a fool would buy an ID soft gam Jun 22, 2004, 17:27
Jun 22, 2004, 17:27
 
I've played my share of warez games, but I never felt like I had to be asshole about it. It's funny how a lot of kids these days seem to think that being an asshole should be a source of pride - as if it made them any different from the hundreds of thousands of other assholes out there.

Newsflash, Bosco: It doesn't.

12.
 
Re: wary
Oct 4, 2003, 03:44
12.
Re: wary Oct 4, 2003, 03:44
Oct 4, 2003, 03:44
 
"Blue, you expect us to believe this is a "conspiracy game"?"

Hah, yeah, I noticed this too! Funny post.


11.
 
Re: No subject
Oct 1, 2003, 11:41
11.
Re: No subject Oct 1, 2003, 11:41
Oct 1, 2003, 11:41
 
"Is this the war where Bush finds WMDs?"

If there aren't any WMDs, do you at least get to take control of the world's second largest oil supply, to keep it safe for democracy?

This comment was edited on Oct 1, 11:43.
141.
 
My mom has cancer too. Best wishes Blue
Sep 18, 2003, 11:22
My mom has cancer too. Best wishes Blue Sep 18, 2003, 11:22
Sep 18, 2003, 11:22
 
There are so many messages here you'll probably never read them all Blue, but I wanted to weigh in anyway.
My dad recently died of lung cancer and my mom is currently getting chemo for breast cancer. I saw your Out of the Blue and immediately felt for you. I don't pray but I will send you my best wishes. Good luck to you and your family and don't worry about keeping up with Blues News. We'll all wait for you.

8.
 
Re: truth?
Aug 9, 2003, 21:02
8.
Re: truth? Aug 9, 2003, 21:02
Aug 9, 2003, 21:02
 
Fair enough, nin. You sound like a wise man. As for getting the truth from various articles, I'd say we get part of the truth, maybe, at best. Having worked at a newspaper myself, I can tell you that what reporters know about a subject, and what actually makes it into the newspaper, are often two different things...

This comment was edited on Aug 9, 21:06.
22 Comments. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older