Heh… looks like Jast can put their game advertising on metro city transportation now. 
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/01/08/ … ban-vg-ads
I vote for XChange going first on a bus. 
On another note, some people in the Land Down Under that has made porn games illegal, wants them back:
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/01/11/ … its-sydney
Fight! Fight for everlasting lolicon! 8)
Well its just a prelim injunction so I wouldn’t be offering to be a consultant for such just yet. However, given this with some other recent court cases it looks like the pendulum is starting to swing to a slightly more relaxed view in regard to sexual expression.
Hmmm…
[url=http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/01/21/clinton.internet/index.html?hpt=T2]Clinton: All deserve Internet freedom[/url].
Meanwhile, back in America, a man could spend months in prison if he downloads lolicon (obscenity of which depends on the court). We need freedom too Clinton. :evil:
Obscenity always has been unconstitutional, but the issues are only tangentially related.
Freedom isn’t, and never was, absolute. Try emailing death threats to the White House and see what happens. (Or better yet, don’t 
Then by approximation, Clinton is being a hypocrite. Because if sending death threats to the White House is destablizing government (which it would be), then having unmigitated flow of information in an information tight regime is destablizing government (which it would be).
Hah, indeed. I guess that DOES follow Interesting, I chose that example because it was the first to come to mind - plenty of other things involving speech are illegal, on or off the internet. (“Hi, I am writing to you most hopefully. I am one prince of Nigeria and I be needing assistance most discreet to launder $200M US dollar.”)
But she’s not exactly a hypocrite, just a holier-than-thou meddler. If the Chinese arrested a dude for threatening to kill Party officials, I doubt she’d really have a problem with that. What she’s talking about is the sort of destabilizing speech that is perfectly acceptable in the US, and indeed plays a large role in our whole system. So really, she’s saying they should just use our rules. (Not so much better than flat out hypocrisy, but not exactly the same.)
When i was travelling to USA (I’m European), in the plane, they handed to everyone a Questionary before landing to JFK Airport.It was for the custom.
When i read those question… LMAo, ROFL that was my reaction.
Are you a terrorist? <=== seriously who will answer that he is one… Prank Aside
Do you Believe in God? <=== WTF it’s none of your business
Etc… etc…
One of my friend say yes at the terrorist one as a joke… We got blocked for 3 hours at the custom :x
They’ll do that. In fact, if they wanted to, they could have arrested your friend. Other people who’ve given similarly sarcastic responses have been arrested and charged. They have to take any answers like that seriously.
Yes, it’s stupid to ask “are you a terrorist?” on a questionaire and actually expect the bad guys to answer honestly. If I understand correctly, the way it actually works is that airport personnel are supposed to watch anyone who reacts oddly to the questions - or looks unusually nervous, or like they have something to hide.
At the same time, the questions like “has your luggage been handled by anyone you don’t know?” are much more serious. (A lot of the people arrested for being sarcastic said something like “yeah, a guy paid me $200 to put this odd package in my luggage. It ticks loudly.”)
He got a fine, and not a little one.
But the worse i encountered in NY was how American Drive… They’re obedient turtle ^^;
I mean i tried to drive like i’m driving in Paris… I got two fine and thousand of glare… If you want an exemple of how to Drive in Paris, just think about Ski Slalom
We call this terrorism.
We call this democracy.
I think there’s a pretty clear difference. Terrorism isn’t just wrong because it destabilizes government.
One country’s terrorist, is another country’s freedom fighter. One nation’s patriot, is another nation’s radical. It’s a bit arrogant to think that democracy is the only form of good government. Some democracies have committed worst acts of violence and destruction than some dictatorships. It’s also not like our government is 100% straightforward with everything either: try wandering Area 51 for a few hours and see what happens. Hell… they won’t even declassify everything about the JFK assassination - of the things they did release, about quarter or third were still blackened out. They still won’t tell us what really happened in Cuba with all that torture.
Also according to the Constitution, [u]ANY[/u] action that is taken to destabilize the US government is illegal. And thanks to suspension clauses, they can take away all our rights, even if we’ve done nothing wrong. It’s all written in there. You don’t have the right to overthrow the government, even though our government was founded on the principal that men have the right to overthrow their governments. Neat how that works. Why should China be any different? What we define as freedom and terrorism, is different from what they define as freedom and terrorism. Same goes with laws: just how in parts of South Africa I could marry my 30 brothers; but in the United States I’d be thrown in prison for at least three laws in most locations (incest, polygamy, and same sex marriage).
China isn’t America. America isn’t China. We don’t like it when China dictates how we handle our domestic affairs - why should China like it when we dictate theirs?
I’m not saying I like China, or that China is better than us. I’m just stating that it’s hypocritical. China has issues with freedom? We have issues with torture. China has issues with corrupt military-political relations? We have issues with corrupt corporate-political relations. China has issues with Tibet? We have issues with Native Americans. What we consider bad in China, they consider good. What we consider bad in America, they might consider good. That’s what different cultures and governments is all about.
Didn’t say that.
There’s a difference between witholding information and blacking out access to all information on the topic (essentially a modern form of book burning, minus the permanence).
But there’s implicit limits to that. Calling your leader a fag is not illegal here. It is in some countries.
That’s a copout. An extreme analogy would be “Sure, we murder people in their sleep here for political dissonance. But your country has problems too, like poverty. Deal with your problems before you start preaching at us.” China could immediately and with very little effort release their restrictions on political information (such as on the Internet). The international community is largely pushing for this as well. Government should not have the freedom to forcibly brainwash their citizens. Propaganda is one thing. Silencing all dissent is another.
So the “Trial” of Bill Clinton because of a simple Blowjob was a terrorist act and was illegal? ^^
With the potential of destabilizing ramifications. Freedom of information in China could result in a total collapse of their current government and society. Of course some in the West would like that, seeing how China is poised to be the next superpower in a few more decades. China is a stable, vibrant, and powerful nation. Of course it’s a suppressive government, but that works for them. Look at Iraq or Afgan: they have democracy, but largely things have become much worst, not much better. Russia is a broken shadow of its former self in it’s democratic age (although I use that term loosely, thanks to Pucchin and his buddies).
Your usage of “international community” is subjective to a limited scope. Obviously Iran, Nigeria, or Russia don’t care how China rules its people, and they’re part of the international community. We come from countries where society is taught that the state serves the people. That obviously works. However nations like China are taught that the people serve the state. That obviously works too.
I’m not saying I don’t want freedom for the Chinese: I do… but I do recognize that China could stay the way it is, and still become the most powerful nation on Earth. That’s what really has the West worried, more than Chinese Internet freedom.
According to the Republican Party it was.
…I think you guys are starting to be really off topic. I’m not sure this thread (or forums) is the place to have a political discussion the kind you guys are currently holding.
Sorry. My bad.
… Now remember kids - vi is for vile, EMACS rules!
Also, FF1 was totally better than FFXIII. Discuss.
I don’t think we are so much off topic.
I mean this whole affair is, in the end, totally political.
You could make quadruplets in FF1, therefore this is SCIENTIFIC FACT.
Actually you can, if your leader has some personal relations with you: http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php … -necessary
that article has an interesting, and contriversial, opinion given the tone of this thread. It defiantly has a bias.