PDA

View Full Version : Altair Linked To Al Queda.



HeresToAtomBomb
06-29-2007, 01:47 PM
Associated Press
4/20/1191

JERUSALEM - In the war torn streets of Jerusalem the civic officials have fallen prey to a lurking menace. A myriad of military officials, Christian and Muslim alike, have been the recent targets of a nefarious Assassin. Believed to be a member of the Hashashin guild, a sect of hippie assassins opposed to the religious war and instead smoke pot all day, Altair's malice; however, knows no bounds.

In a recent drug/contraband bust of Altair's spacious Jerusalem bungalow, authorities recovered several pot smoking apparatuses as well as several implements - including a jar of faint green gas; later discovered in lab testings to be chlorine gas - believed to be used in the creation of biological weapons. Foul play is suspected and surveillance has, in fact, divulged that he has and continues to engage in dealings with Akbar Bin Laden and Derka Hussein: the respective progenies of Osama Bin Laden and Sadam Hussein.

The autopsies concerning the inexplicable deaths of a saracen warlord and a crusader, earlier this week, divulged that the same suspect - Altair Al-Zarkawi - is responsible for the recent assassinations. "With a confirmed ID", Crusader Captain-in-Arms Matthias Van Hogsgraaten suggests, "it is only a matter of time before we catch this wretched knave".

As of this time, Altair's whereabouts remain unbeknownst to officials and his elusive nature keeps the citizens in a constant state of terror. Whilst the Christian officials maintain a confident mindset in regards to the potential capture of Altair, the Muslim officials remain pessimistic. "Altair isn't a force to be reckoned with" a visibly shaken Mohammad Hassan admits, "that d-d-dagg-er he w-wields, you know th-th-e one that protrudes out of his fist, has made me soil myself many-a-time just thinking about it..."

On the aforementioned perceptions, Altair responds to these accusations of terrorism indifferently: "yo man, pass the bong".

Lhorkan
06-29-2007, 01:54 PM
ho's the apple, yo?

The_Sphinx
06-29-2007, 01:57 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Woody990
06-29-2007, 02:24 PM
WTF???
You have way too much time on your hands.

noobfun
06-29-2007, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Woody990:
WTF???
You have way too much time on your hands. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif unfortunatley you also have no clue about what your talking about

not hashassin its made up altair was a nizari

they didnt use hash its made up too

al-queda was made up by the fbi to indite bin laden using the laws passed for inditing mob bosses without direct evidence of them doing anything wrong

the muslim world had no concept of the crusades bieng holy wars, they didnt even have a concept of the crusades until we began to teach them it was a holy war and called the crusades in the 18th century

it was simply viewed as an invasion by another nation

so .... shhh ...

btw the games set during or after july 1191 so your dates just wrong

and jerusalem wasnt war torn, it was 6 years earlier but has been in saladins control for a while

saddam hussian was put in power by the american goverment and intelegence services and supported throught out the 7 year war so maybe his precursor would be a crusader friend too and not a friend of bin laden's precursor, becasue bin laden and saddam really didnt get on, were on different sides of a religeous split, to the point bin laden was calling for the oppressed iraqi's to rise up against sadam and create an islamistic state

its an attempted parody i know, but really you should have some clue about the subject first

princeofyo
06-29-2007, 05:21 PM
He posted the same thing on the gamespot forum...

racinemitch
06-29-2007, 09:23 PM
{Random Thought From Mitch}

1191-the date of this game according to noobfun (he probably has sources) is strange in that Al-Qaida attacked on 9/11-----1191---911---1191

Minues that extra one haha http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif


~Mitch~

AoKH_newIdea
06-29-2007, 10:00 PM
al-queda was made up by the fbi to indite bin laden using the laws passed for inditing mob bosses without direct evidence of them doing anything wrong

I think your intention of being the wise forumer in this thread may have been stretched a bit too far. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

TrAzz_jr
06-29-2007, 11:57 PM
i dont know if you guys realize that at the begining its says...associated press..with a certain date..maybe he got from somekind of old press archives... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif..iam not on his side or anything just posting thats all

AoKH_newIdea
06-30-2007, 01:28 AM
Originally posted by TrAzz_jr:
i dont know if you guys realize that at the begining its says...associated press..with a certain date..maybe he got from somekind of old press archives... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif..iam not on his side or anything just posting thats all
Um... you did happen to read the date, right? It would have to be one heck of a coincidence for the date to relate to the story this well.

4/20 = The world famous date for smoking a lot of pot.

1191 = The year in which the game takes place.


... not to mention they didn't report news like that back then...

TrAzz_jr
06-30-2007, 01:33 AM
nah really!?!?..lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

ScytheOfGrim
06-30-2007, 01:52 AM
dang bombshell, youd better not be trying to start yet another political debate??? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Omar1131
06-30-2007, 04:44 AM
close this thread. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifchokrarbacha

noobfun
06-30-2007, 04:54 AM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">al-queda was made up by the fbi to indite bin laden using the laws passed for inditing mob bosses without direct evidence of them doing anything wrong

I think your intention of being the wise forumer in this thread may have been stretched a bit too far. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

friad not no mention of al-queda outside of american or allied goverments was made until post 9/11 when every islamist group latched on to the idea and beagn calling them selves al-queda

also all the information the fbi had about al-queda was supplied to them by a guy called jamal al-fardal~(sudanese ex-associate of bin laden) who came to the fbi and told them all about bin-ladens group which he said bin laden had called al-queda, [my bad this part about copying godzilla attacks was by someone that was captured not the guy in question]


in return for his help he recieved a large payoff, entered into the witness protection program and got to be an american citizen

it later turns out that he was on the run from bin laden, he had approached osama to fund a terrorist strike he had planned, on recieving the money (a very large sum)he he went on the run and kept it for himself

there should be public records of the charges and the legislation used to indite osama bin laden for the embassy bombings

they are the same laws that were put in place to convict mafia bosses

you dont have to prove they did anything wrong just that they are in charge of a criminal organisation that has done somthing wrong

so with the help of our trusty friend jamal al-fardal the fbi had bin laden linked as the head of a criminal terrorist organisation

and so he was charged with the embassy bombings and found guilty

FableB
06-30-2007, 05:17 AM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">al-queda was made up by the fbi to indite bin laden using the laws passed for inditing mob bosses without direct evidence of them doing anything wrong

I think your intention of being the wise forumer in this thread may have been stretched a bit too far. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is no news for me, Al Qa'ida was formed by the USA government during the cold war to fight the Russians. That, and you should know too that the USA government funded other terrorist groups during the cold war just to fight the Russians.

Just like Saddam was their agent in the middle-east, but he later got out of their hands, launched some missiles to israel, stopped exporting the oil for a while, all that made the USA government furious. And decided to take him off his position.

noobfun
06-30-2007, 05:36 AM
Originally posted by FableB:

This is no news for me, Al Qa'ida was formed by the USA government during the cold war to fight the Russians. That, and you should know too that the USA government funded other terrorist groups during the cold war just to fight the Russians.

Just like Saddam was their agent in the middle-east, but he later got out of their hands, launched some missiles to israel, stopped exporting the oil for a while, all that made the USA government furious. And decided to take him off his position.

this isnt strictly true, alqueda was invented during the 90's

america did persuade many middle eastern goverments to set free all the islamist's they had in prisons(most islamist groups were seen as a threat to the govermants of these countries so were rounded up and locked away)

they were all given 1 way tickets to afghanistan, armed indirectly by the USA, again trained indirectly by the USA and funded indirectly by the USA( remeber all those training camps that were destroyed during the invasion of afghanistan, we trained them in what to train thier troops in, and helped set them up in the first place)

it couldnt be seen as directly supporting them as it would been seen as a act of war by russia and would give them grounds for legal retaliation (using international law)

yes the ruler of iraq was over thrown and sadam put in place in return for very good oil deals heavily sided in the american interests

the same happened in iran when the cia helps co-ordinate and fund the over throwing of irans democratically elected goverment, but a cival war over threw the (american approved)dictator and replaced him with a democratic/religeous mixed goverment

this is why iran refuses to do anything america demands and laughs when Mr Bush says he wants to replace iran's ruling regiem with a democratically elected one, (A) becasue it is democratically elected (for the most part) (B) the americans removed the previous democratically elected goverment

FableB
06-30-2007, 05:43 AM
Originally posted by noobfun:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FableB:

This is no news for me, Al Qa'ida was formed by the USA government during the cold war to fight the Russians. That, and you should know too that the USA government funded other terrorist groups during the cold war just to fight the Russians.

Just like Saddam was their agent in the middle-east, but he later got out of their hands, launched some missiles to israel, stopped exporting the oil for a while, all that made the USA government furious. And decided to take him off his position.

this isnt strictly true, alqueda was invented during the 90's

america did persuade many middle eastern goverments to set free all the islamist's they had in prisons(most islamist groups were seen as a threat to the govermants of these countries so were rounded up and locked away)

they were all given 1 way tickets to afghanistan, armed indirectly by the USA, again trained indirectly by the USA and funded indirectly by the USA( remeber all those training camps that were destroyed during the invasion of afghanistan, we trained them in what to train thier troops in, and helped set them up in the first place)

it couldnt be seen as directly supporting them as it would been seen as a act of war by russia and would give them grounds for legal retaliation (using international law)

yes the ruler of iraq was over thrown and sadam put in place in return for very good oil deals heavily sided in the american interests

the same happened in iran when the cia helps co-ordinate and fund the over throwing of irans democratically elected goverment, but a cival war over threw the (american approved)dictator and replaced him with a democratic/religeous mixed goverment

this is why iran refuses to do anything america demands and laughs when Mr Bush says he wants to replace iran's ruling regiem with a democratically elected one, (A) becasue it is democratically elected (for the most part) (B) the americans removed the previous democratically elected goverment </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Considering you have solid sources, I am wrong maybe about the cold war thing, but the solid fact is that they WERE funded by the USA.

noobfun
06-30-2007, 05:45 AM
Originally posted by FableB:

Considering you have solid sources, I am wrong maybe about the cold war thing, but the solid fact is that they WERE funded by the USA.

in a way your absolutley correct becasue ANY islamist group is now collectivly rounded up and made part of the (none existant) web of al-queda

ScytheOfGrim
06-30-2007, 07:19 AM
funny how america and britain blame people that dont exist!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

some1 has to take the blame and i guess we were the poor people stuck in the middle. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

noobfun
06-30-2007, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by ScytheOfGrim:
funny how america and britain blame people that dont exist!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

some1 has to take the blame and i guess we were the poor people stuck in the middle. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

dont get me wrong there is still a threat, originally it was from small isolated unco-ordinated islamist groups, who's main agenda is to turn thier country of origin in to an islamist state similar to the taliban in afghanistan, taking a swipe at america is considered fair game as its considered an enemy becasue of its international medaling, support for israel, generally putting military bases in every country it can and the spreading of american culture was seen as a bad force to the islamic way spreading selfish ideals that would break down society

but how do you get the public so afraid that they allow you to pass laws that infinge civil liberties and go against the established legal system, that simply would NEVER be allowed to pass under normal circumstances

say were facing a bunch of small unco-ordinated poorly trained militant groups that are 1/2 way across the world

or we are facing a massive world wide terrorist threat that could climb down you chimney and kill you in your sleep almost anytime it wants

the second option is also easy to keep looking like a threat, that huge skill base of propoganda built up during the coldwar can now be used against the imaginary threat to keep people afraid

america needs a massive enemy trying to take over the world to operate, it goes back to leo strauss political ideal that was based on the tv show gun smoke, without this common enemy to rally against people would question common values and morals and would decend in to an implosion of slefish desires

gun smoke~the good guy wears white, the bad guy is easily recognisable in black

the good guy is destined to travel, saving and policing each new town from the menancing bad guy bent on control and destruction~

its this thoery that the neo-cons of america grasped and took to heart and spread so well its become an american ethos

which is why america is always telling us they police the world and keep us safe(they must wear white and be the good guys other wise they have an identity crisis)

and as for the bad guys first communism now al-queda tag on iran now the imaginary threat of afghanistan and iraq are bieng dealt with(or realistically more threats are bieng generated)

islamism and neo-conservatism are different answers to the same problem, preventing public decay into a selfish society that turns it back on religeon to further its own greed

HeresToAtomBomb
06-30-2007, 01:36 PM
You guys are ridiculous. This post is merely a jokishly-written homage to a famous satirically subversive publication known as the Onion. If you had a modicum of understanding of said publication, you guys would have realized it is entirely a joke. Noobfun, I fear you are void of humor and really need to see a psychologist. None of this story was intended to be a factual replication of history. In fact, it was supposed to be quite the obvious. On the other board I posted it at least they took it for what it was and enjoyed it. I guess the intellectual standard is lower on this board http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. But, I digress...

FableB
06-30-2007, 02:22 PM
I'm sure everyone here knew that it was a joke, but its your previous behaviour that made them take it seriously.

And it's funny how you made the Muslims look like wimps, you just can't keep it inside you, can you?

AoKH_newIdea
06-30-2007, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by HeresToAtomBomb:
You guys are ridiculous. This post is merely a jokishly-written homage to a famous satirically subversive publication known as the Onion. If you had a modicum of understanding of said publication, you guys would have realized it is entirely a joke. Noobfun, I fear you are void of humor and really need to see a psychologist. None of this story was intended to be a factual replication of history. In fact, it was supposed to be quite the obvious. On the other board I posted it at least they took it for what it was and enjoyed it. I guess the intellectual standard is lower on this board http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. But, I digress...
... what are you talking about? Only one person took it half-seriously and then he was quickly corrected. You're giving yourself way too much credit.

noobfun, I think your name explains the content of your posts far better than I could. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

noobfun
06-30-2007, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HeresToAtomBomb:
You guys are ridiculous. This post is merely a jokishly-written homage to a famous satirically subversive publication known as the Onion. If you had a modicum of understanding of said publication, you guys would have realized it is entirely a joke. Noobfun, I fear you are void of humor and really need to see a psychologist. None of this story was intended to be a factual replication of history. In fact, it was supposed to be quite the obvious. On the other board I posted it at least they took it for what it was and enjoyed it. I guess the intellectual standard is lower on this board http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. But, I digress...
... what are you talking about? Only one person took it half-seriously and then he was quickly corrected. You're giving yourself way too much credit.

noobfun, I think your name explains the content of your posts far better than I could. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what that i like to have fun with noobs?

i underdstood what it was supposed to be i even mentioned it
its an attempted parody i know, but really you should have some clue about the subject first though i did say parody for some bizare reason

but a satire has to be a satire of somthing real, even if its only a satire of satire its self

it was neither

yepp your right i need to get my sense of humour looked at it only allows me to laugh at funny/strange/childish/painful things, ill trade it in to the laugh at everything model, think its called the village idiot 500 xls

maybe in its original context it was funny, but what youve posted is like telling a paddy and murphy joke(there are many many jokes about these 2 irish men) only they are congolesse instead of irish ....it just wont work

and fable yeah i noticed that too

AoKH_newIdea
06-30-2007, 05:45 PM
what that i like to have fun with noobs?
You're inability to pick up such (not-so-)subtle hints is scary.


i underdstood what it was supposed to be i even mentioned it
I assume this was directed toward "HeresToAtomBomb." You should really make that more clear.

noobfun
06-30-2007, 11:45 PM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">what that i like to have fun with noobs?
You're inability to pick up such (not-so-)subtle hints is scary.


i underdstood what it was supposed to be i even mentioned it
I assume this was directed toward "HeresToAtomBomb." You should really make that more clear. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

its not an inability to pick up subtle hints, more a spreme abaility to ignore them at will and substitue my own frame work

hey it was late so was bieng to lazy to copy and paste atom's comments in here yepp the last bit was atoms

ScytheOfGrim
07-01-2007, 07:10 AM
sorry newidea but you just showed YOUR inability to keep up with the topic without getting lost in the black hole you call your "imagination".

i couldnt help buutting in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif not that it concerns me, but i thought that it should be said. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif i cant help it, im 15 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

yes ive used that phrase alot lately.not meaning to start an argument. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

AoKH_newIdea
07-01-2007, 01:02 PM
its not an inability to pick up subtle hints, more a spreme abaility to ignore them at will and substitue my own frame work
Haha, how convenient. Makes me wonder if you would've known they existed, had I not pointed them out. Hahaha...


sorry newidea but you just showed YOUR inability to keep up with the topic without getting lost in the black hole you call your "imagination".
... wow. I'd love tell you what's wrong with your post, but I'm starting to feel a bit sorry for you. Are you sure in the right topic? You seem pretty confused.


i cant help it, im 15 Interesting... is there not an age requirement of 18 on these forums? I can't remember.

FableB
07-01-2007, 01:06 PM
No, this is an E rated forum.

HeresToAtomBomb
07-01-2007, 01:49 PM
Noobfun, a satire doesn't solely have to be about something real. I do not know where you learned the definition but I am sad for you. It might just be because you're 15...

Read theonion.com then come back and we can have an intelligent discussion. Mmkaythnxbubye.

Boromir323
07-01-2007, 02:04 PM
AtomBomb, you are without a doubt the most annoying person on this forum with the exception of pieceout, but he was funny and annoying, your just annoying. Quit insulting people because their 15.

chewie1890
07-01-2007, 02:08 PM
I think he's an acquired taste. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I actually thought it was kinda funny, I chuckled at a few points in the 'article'.

AoKH_newIdea
07-01-2007, 02:19 PM
No, this is an E rated forum.
Really? Disregarding the painfully obvious legal problems that could cause for this forum, it clearly states in Ubi's Terms of Use that you represent yourself as an 18-year-old when you sign up for an account.



UbiSoft Terms of Use:
"YOU REPRESENT AND WARRANT THAT YOU ARE EITHER 18 YEARS OLD OR OLDER..."

marinius
07-01-2007, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">al-queda was made up by the fbi to indite bin laden using the laws passed for inditing mob bosses without direct evidence of them doing anything wrong

I think your intention of being the wise forumer in this thread may have been stretched a bit too far. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
Besides, where is people's sense of humour? Atom posted a rather funny fake AP-bulletin and people start critizising his fact-checking etc. Shiish, this is forum to discuss an upcoming videogame, not a means to spew out any political conspiracy theory that springs to mind.

noobfun
07-01-2007, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by HeresToAtomBomb:
Noobfun, a satire doesn't solely have to be about something real. I do not know where you learned the definition but I am sad for you. It might just be because you're 15...

Read theonion.com then come back and we can have an intelligent discussion. Mmkaythnxbubye.

satire
One entry found for satire.


Main Entry: sat·ire
Pronunciation: 'sa-"tI(-&)r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin satura, satira, perhaps from (lanx) satura dish of mixed ingredients, from feminine of satur well-fed; akin to Latin satis enough -- more at SAD
1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly


well who are you trying to riducule or scorn?
and what follys or vices of the characters are you trying to discredit?

like i say its about something real, a means to discredit thier ideals or the public view of them(bieng a singular person or group). it starts with a little truth then works out from there in any direction the satirist decides to take it

maybe you could give me a link to the article your using as your *cough* inspiration, save me wading through hundreds of articles

o and happy birthday to me, today im 30 ^_^ Mmkaythnxbubye

moqqy
07-01-2007, 04:06 PM
happy birthday you

chewie1890
07-01-2007, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
Really? Disregarding the painfully obvious legal problems that could cause for this forum, it clearly states in Ubi's Terms of Use that you represent yourself as an 18-year-old when you sign up for an account.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
UbiSoft Terms of Use:
"YOU REPRESENT AND WARRANT THAT YOU ARE EITHER 18 YEARS OLD OR OLDER..." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The forums don't contain any of this violence though do they bud? No they don't. The content on the forums is still supposed to maintain an E-rating besides game videos. They want their forums to be clean of cursing and other adult topics.

If you don't believe me it's an e-rating then take it up with Z, cause she's gonna tell you the exact same thing.

Went through the terms of use myself and found this little jewel that you left out of your quote...


The terms of use: YOU REPRESENT AND WARRANT THAT YOU ARE EITHER 18 YEARS OLD OR OLDER, OR HAVE OBTAINED EXPRESS CONSENT BY YOUR PARENT OR GUARDIAN.

So anyones parents who acknowledge his use of the site is allowed to post here.

moqqy
07-01-2007, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by chewie1890:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
Really? Disregarding the painfully obvious legal problems that could cause for this forum, it clearly states in Ubi's Terms of Use that you represent yourself as an 18-year-old when you sign up for an account.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
UbiSoft Terms of Use:
"YOU REPRESENT AND WARRANT THAT YOU ARE EITHER 18 YEARS OLD OR OLDER..." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The forums don't contain any of this violence though do they bud? No they don't. The content on the forums is still supposed to maintain an E-rating besides game videos. They want their forums to be clean of cursing and other adult topics.

If you don't believe me it's an e-rating then take it up with Z, cause she's gonna tell you the exact same thing.

Went through the terms of use myself and found this little jewel that you left out of your quote...


The terms of use: YOU REPRESENT AND WARRANT THAT YOU ARE EITHER 18 YEARS OLD OR OLDER, OR HAVE OBTAINED EXPRESS CONSENT BY YOUR PARENT OR GUARDIAN.

So anyones parents who acknowledge his use of the site is allowed to post here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
nice find chewie, seems like he intentionally left that part out because he wanted to look like he is right.

HeresToAtomBomb
07-01-2007, 10:19 PM
You've clearly missed the point of my retort, my 30 year old friend named 'noobfun'. I merely said that you were incorrect suggesting that satire was limited to real individuals, a point that your definition does not refute. So, with that in mind, you are incorrect as the definition - at no point - suggests the necessitation of a factual party.

For a 30 year old, I expected much more http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. It isn't spelled indite either -- it is indict.

in·dict
–verb (used with object)
1. (of a grand jury) to bring a formal accusation against, as a means of bringing to trial: The grand jury indicted him for murder.

The word indite, syntax-wise, does not work at all in that situation as it means to write. Did you graduate from college?

AoKH_newIdea
07-02-2007, 12:23 AM
The forums don't contain any of this violence though do they bud? No they don't. The content on the forums is still supposed to maintain an E-rating besides game videos. They want their forums to be clean of cursing and other adult topics.
It doesn't? You may want to take a look around, 'bud'.


If you don't believe me it's an e-rating then take it up with Z, cause she's gonna tell you the exact same thing.

Went through the terms of use myself and found this little jewel that you left out of your quote...
You're interpreting my remarks in a completely wrong context. I'm not trying to offend anyone. The rating for the forum very-well could be "E" (although unlikely since it's widely and legally accepted that 13 is the minimum age for any forum), I couldn't care less. I was clearly bringing up the concern out of pure curiosity, not as a sign of hostility. Thus, your attempt at '1-UPing' me is pretty silly, no?

By the way, you need to sign up for a Ubi account to use the forums, right? Doesn't the actual Ubi account have the requirement of 18 years of age? Assuming I'm right in saying you need a Ubi account to use the forums (I could be mistaking, perhaps there's a 'forum only' account service), it wouldn't matter what rating for the forum is since you need the 18-year-old require Ubi account to use it.


So anyones parents who acknowledge his use of the site is allowed to post here.

nice find chewie, seems like he intentionally left that part out because he wanted to look like he is right.
You're right, I did "intentionally leave that part out," simply because it doesn't make much sense (I assumed it had a typo). You would need a way to prove you had consent from your parents, otherwise UbiSoft would be wide open to lawsuits. This makes me think it was supposed to say "Expressed written consent," similar to what you see is TV telecasts disclaimers. "Expressed" (verbal) consent wouldn't hold up in court very-well, considering a parent could simply say they didn't give consent and then UbiSoft is liable.

Unless, of course, by "expressed" consent they do mean "written consent," in which case I'm right anyway. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Note the fact that I left "..." at the end of my quote to aknowledge the rest of that statement in the Terms of Use. Translation: Although you meant to catch in a bind, you really didn't discover anything new or useful. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

AoKH_newIdea
07-02-2007, 12:25 AM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The forums don't contain any of this violence though do they bud? No they don't. The content on the forums is still supposed to maintain an E-rating besides game videos. They want their forums to be clean of cursing and other adult topics.
It doesn't? You may want to take a look around, 'bud'.


If you don't believe me it's an e-rating then take it up with Z, cause she's gonna tell you the exact same thing.

Went through the terms of use myself and found this little jewel that you left out of your quote...
You're interpreting my remarks in a completely wrong context. I'm not trying to offend anyone. The rating for the forum very-well could be "E" (although unlikely since it's widely and legally accepted that 13 is the minimum age for any forum), I couldn't care less. I was clearly bringing up the concern out of pure curiosity, not as a sign of hostility. Thus, your attempt at '1-UPing' me is pretty silly, no?

By the way, you need to sign up for a Ubi account to use the forums, right? Doesn't the actual Ubi account have the requirement of 18 years of age? Assuming I'm right in saying you need a Ubi account to use the forums (I could be mistaking, perhaps there's a 'forum only' account service), it wouldn't matter what rating for the forum is since you need the 18-year-old require Ubi account to use it.


So anyones parents who acknowledge his use of the site is allowed to post here.

nice find chewie, seems like he intentionally left that part out because he wanted to look like he is right.
You're right, I did "intentionally leave that part out," simply because it doesn't make much sense (I assumed it had a typo, maybe someone from Ubi can clear it up). You would need a way to prove you had consent from your parents, otherwise UbiSoft would be wide open to lawsuits. This makes me think it was supposed to say "Expressed written consent," similar to what you see is TV telecasts disclaimers. "Expressed" (verbal) consent wouldn't hold up in court very-well, considering a parent could simply say they didn't give consent and then UbiSoft is liable.

Unless, of course, by "expressed" consent they do mean "written consent," in which case I'm right anyway. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Note the fact that I left "..." at the end of my quote to aknowledge the rest of that statement in the Terms of Use. Translation: Although you meant to catch in a bind, you really didn't discover anything new or useful. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

noobfun
07-02-2007, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by HeresToAtomBomb:
You've clearly missed the point of my retort, my 30 year old friend named 'noobfun'. I merely said that you were incorrect suggesting that satire was limited to real individuals, a point that your definition does not refute. So, with that in mind, you are incorrect as the definition - at no point - suggests the necessitation of a factual party.

For a 30 year old, I expected much more http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. It isn't spelled indite either -- it is indict.

in·dict
–verb (used with object)
1. (of a grand jury) to bring a formal accusation against, as a means of bringing to trial: The grand jury indicted him for murder.

The word indite, syntax-wise, does not work at all in that situation as it means to write. Did you graduate from college?

my god do we really need to go through this in depth

well the american legal system is based on the british legal system, which relies fundamentally on written word,

in any case against anyone, they are indicted as it is a written charge that later becomes an oral charge(its still a written charge just someone reads it out dooh!) when read out in court

when ever court action is taken for cival or criminal action they become endicted, its impossible not to be

if the only thing you can refute the above posts with are an occassional spelling mistake im sure ill find a way to exist with the shame of bieng 30 and not having a spell checker fitted into my anal cavity

back to satire

ok lets try again


The Roman poet, Horace (1 B.C.) is credited as being one of the first satirists to use Satire in a stratified way in poetry. This formal way of writing satire tended to be composed of short verses, quite deliberately attacking situations and people.

Satire is, basically, a word used to describe works of art, including (and especially) literature, which is designed to ridicule and, often, parody. It is most often recognised in the political sense of making light of genuinely serious problems and issues. However, since Satire is a formalised subject, one must recognise that like any written genre, it also has its forms and modes and although in ancient times satire was more likely to be presented as poetry, it clearly also is presented as narrative and dramatic text.


Although satire is usually witty, and often very funny, the purpose of satire is not primarily humour but criticism of an event, an individual or a group in a clever manner.


The satyr play was a lighthearted follow-up attached to the end of each trilogy of tragedies in Athenian festivals honoring Dionysus. These plays would take a lighthearted approach to the heavier subject matter of the tragedies in the series, featuring heroes speaking in tragic iambic verse and taking their situation seriously as "straight men" to the flippant, irreverent and obscene remarks and antics of the satyrs.

as i said satire is based around a person(persons), event or value held (can be a cultural reference point)

the start point for any satire is one of the above and to work needs to be known to others

basing it on a none existant in an non existant event(you didnt even have an event) doesnt work especially mentioning to other none existants as reference points

your rather fond of theonion.com please show me another article from there that can claim the same start point (should keep you busy for a very long time)

taking a satire of an event and people and changing names dates and place doesnt mean its still a satire, youve changed the frame work so much it no longer has a working context so there for has nothing to say

lets look at some examples of satire

people
british politicians (http://satirefire.co.uk/page16.html)

the special mention of ukip and the bnp parties probabily wont make sense outside of the uk

sadam hussain? (http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s3i1413)

bush and blair (http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s3i21264)

events

the search for wmds in iraq (http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s1i1104)

weekends uk terror attack (http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s1i21268)

another about the attacks (http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s1i21233)

israels actions in lebannon (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/56637)

see they all have a person(s)/event/or view as a starting point, your did but no longer has one because of all the changes you made

p.s. i upgraded my sense of humor, they didnt have te model i wanted so i payed the extra for the "village idiot 5500 HTAB" it has the twin fool injection, the motor is amazing the slightest pressure and the torque flies off like a missguided missle

HeresToAtomBomb
07-02-2007, 07:32 AM
You've lost your mind, it was a satire of a PUBLICATION. Theonion.com, as I said before, check it out before you continue this conversation. You will see how very wrong you are. Satire can apply to film, literature, the news etc. For example, I'm sure you're familiar with Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. They are both examples of satirical movies that respectively parody the zombie movie genre and the action movie genre in a satirical manner. With that in mind, you haven't proven any point as this applies to, as I have said before, literature as well. If you suggest otherwise the only point you will be proving is mine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

As for your work-mix-up-cover-up, it is so blatantly evident you dont know what you're talking about. Endict isn't the proper term for the usage you employed. Admit you're wrong because the evidence is there. Endite, haha that is laughable my friend. Don't pull that different English garbage with me, endite means the same thing as indite which is wrong.

ScytheOfGrim
07-02-2007, 07:35 AM
bombshell cant get through a week without getting into an argument...even if its over a joke... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

noobfun
07-02-2007, 07:44 AM
Originally posted by HeresToAtomBomb:
You've lost your mind, it was a satire of a PUBLICATION. Theonion.com, as I said before, check it out before you continue this conversation. You will see how very wrong you are. Satire can apply to film, literature, the news etc. You haven't proven any point and if you suggest otherwise the only point you will be proving is mine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

doesnt film and literature come under a cultural reference?

news relays information about people and events


it was a satire of a PUBLICATION. Theonion.com so its a satire about theonion.com? because it doesnt mention it even in parody form and doesnt relate to it in any way shape or form

or did u mean "it was a satire from theonion.com i changed all the relevant details to and then posted"? (its a rhetorical question becasue this is what you meant, care to provide a link to the article, or the name of the article so i can read it in its working(there fore satirical) context)

moqqy
07-02-2007, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by ScytheOfGrim:
bombshell cant get through a week without getting into an argument...even if its over a joke... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

week? you mean an hour?

ScytheOfGrim
07-02-2007, 10:37 AM
nano-second is more accurate, but yet, it stil aint accurate enough...

you need an atomic clock to see how long it takes exactly. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.giflol.

me are funny.

chewie1890
07-02-2007, 02:55 PM
Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AoKH_newIdea:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The forums don't contain any of this violence though do they bud? No they don't. The content on the forums is still supposed to maintain an E-rating besides game videos. They
want their forums to be clean of cursing and other adult topics.
It doesn't? You may want to take a look around, 'bud'.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Firstly, the 'bud' comment wasn't meant to be insulting, lately I've been using the word in my everyday life. I've been trying to keep it out for this exact reason, but I guess I slipped.

The only 'violent' acts are that of fictional writing, and maybe that shouldn't be allowed in here because of the over-all E-Rating but it was let slide.


If you don't believe me it's an e-rating then take it up with Z, cause she's gonna tell you the exact same thing.

Went through the terms of use myself and found this little jewel that you left out of your quote...
You're interpreting my remarks in a completely wrong context. I'm not trying to offend anyone. The rating for the forum very-well could be "E" (although unlikely since it's widely and legally accepted that 13 is the minimum age for any forum), I couldn't care less. I was clearly bringing up the concern out of pure curiosity, not as a sign of hostility. Thus, your attempt at '1-UPing' me is pretty silly, no?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Forgive me for interpreting your comment in sarcastic way. I guess it's because the rest of your post involved you insulting someone with:



Haha, how convenient. Makes me wonder if you would've known they existed, had I not pointed them out. Hahaha...

And:



... wow. I'd love tell you what's wrong with your post, but I'm starting to feel a bit sorry for you. Are you sure in the right topic? You seem pretty confused.


That seemed rather sarcastic and insulting to me so I just assumed your post was going in the same direction.



By the way, you need to sign up for a Ubi account to use the forums, right? Doesn't the actual Ubi account have the requirement of 18 years of age? Assuming I'm right in saying you need a Ubi account to use the forums (I could be mistaking, perhaps there's a 'forum only' account service), it wouldn't matter what rating for the forum is since you need the 18-year-old require Ubi account to use it.


See the point that I'm trying to get across is that even if only people over 18 were supposed to be here that they still want to keep the forum content E-rated for the most part. Namely because even if you're older than 18 you can still take offense to things. Besides if a person under 18 has expressed written consent which Ubisoft requires them to say they have, then they can join.



Unless, of course, by "expressed" consent they do mean "written consent," in which case I'm right anyway. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

How so?

[EDIT:
Quoted from the rules:
If you're sure you're about to make a post on this, or any other of Ubisoft’s forums, please keep the following guidelines in mind. These rules should be pretty clear and simple to most, but seem to be hard to understand and follow to some. So for clarification, below is a summary of some of the main points of the Terms of Use. Everyone please note, that when you sign up to the forums, you agree to abide by the terms and conditions of these forums. It may be worth reading through them if you aren't sure.

The Ubi Forums are for all ages , please take this into account when posting. Inappropriate posts will be removed and the user will be warned and/or suspended at the Moderator's discretion.]

Tirinel
07-02-2007, 03:21 PM
reading this thread is amusing....

zgubilici
07-02-2007, 05:33 PM
Stop the bickering people or this thread will be closed.

As for the terms of use, all Ubisoft forums are E-rated and all the details are explained in the terms of use, regardless of how they may seem or not. We are not here to make the rules, we have to make sure they are respected.
So, this discussion has to end now.