Game Parody of Obama School Speech Controversy a Poor Choice for September 11th

This week’s controversy over President Obama’s speech to America’s school children has morphed into a rather unfortunate online game.

Obama’s School Camp comes from Scottish firm T-Enterprise, which often mocks political issues with their Friday game offerings. Today’s game challenges players to press letters on their keyboards which correspond to paper airplanes floating toward an animation of the President. Press the right letter quickly enough and the paper airplane disappears. Otherwise, it strikes the Obama character.

The paper airplane imagery seems to be an especially poor choice for a game published today, September 11th. It seems an even worse decision given that the game comes from T-Enterprise, which was the firm behind the now-canceled Rendition: Guantanamo project. A consultant to that game was alleged to have ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

117 comments

  1. Lou says:

    Democrats are not exactly "pure and wholesome" (look at LBJ for proof) but at least they never heckled a Republican president. I stopped being republican because the party is seriously lacking of true leadership. You can try to defend them all you want but the evidence is clear. I am a full blown conservative and I don’t agree with some policies from President Obama but at least I show him the respect that a leader of the free world deserves. What about you?

    Now about this srticle, I think it’s stupid. I really don’t see the connections with paper planes, the president and the Sept 11 attacks. It’s like adding a fifth leg to a chair.

  2. questionmark1987 says:

    My roomates and i had a big discussion about this and I was finally able to hit on what really bothers me about it. I’m over 9/11. No I don’t think it should be forgotten or that it wasn’t a tragedy or anything along that lines. I’ve just dealt with it.

    More power to anyone who hasn’t, who lost someone and who still wants to feel despair and anger and sadness on 9/11. But do I HAVE to join you in your emotions just because I live in the same country? Do I HAVE to take a strictly anti-muslim, anti-middle eastern, anti-foreigner attitude even for one day because something terrible happened? 

    How many tragedies have happened in our country that I have to take a day of my life every year to cry/yell/hate/etc. for? 5? 10? 50? 100? Where do we draw the line? Columbine, Pearl Harbor, the Civil War, The Civil Rights Movement, 9/11, the Vietnam War, WW1, WW2, Kennedy’s Assassination… these are all important events in our histroy we should not forget, but do I really have to spend so much time and energy in my lifetime after I’ve come to terms with them in order to be respectful?

    I don’t think so, and I take offense to being told what I should take offense to in regards to these things. Different people have different values and I encourage them to stick to theirs, but for me, 9/11 happened, and the things our country SHOULD have learned from it weren’t learned. I don’t need to relive that day every year to recognize that.

  3. jedidethfreak says:

    Yeah, because Democrats have been great examples of maturity over the last 20 years.

    He was dead when I got here.

  4. Stealthguy says:

    You don’t even need an excuse anymore, it’s all about who’s loudest.

    YUR NAM hs 2 mny O’s in it! Im ofend’ed1!!1

  5. Mukake says:

    Game politics reporting seems to be getting more emotive lately. Why don’t we just throw in a few more references to how "disgusting" Rapelay is while we’re at it. It, just like paper airplanes flying at Obama, is a non-issue, but it gives us all a chance to be outraged and, even better, indignant. Maybe gamepolitics is taking a page out Obama’s book and taking a strong stand and using strong words on something unimportant.

  6. GoodRobotUs says:

    No offence to America, it was a terrible tragedy that happened that day, but I can’t help feeling like people are looking for reasons to take offence these days. And this is certainly one of those occasions.

  7. Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    Damn! I played through this game and only got 1599 points before I failed. This game is pretty tough, though its been a while since I last took a Business Tech class, and even then, I wasn’t a very fast typer. Still, I was hunt-and-pecking most of the time.

    P.S. For those who don’t know, the ones throwing the paper airplanes were the Republicans listening to Barack, not the children…although, after watching the shitstorms going on since Obama was elected, I can understand why anyone’d confuse the Republicans with a bunch of children.

    ——————————————————————————

     

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  8. Andrew Eisen says:

    The only controversy mentioned is the one over Obama’s school speech earlier this week.  GP didn’t make that up.

     

    Andrew Eisen

  9. DarkSaber says:

    I thought GP was above manufacturing controversy.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  10. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Not to mention the lives of thousands of Japaneses civilians.

    The options were, even if they took time to renegotiate the war would have rolled on because if you gave them time to reorganize they could make the land war more difficult.

    The options are

    Spend time, money and lives to

    1.Run massive bombing campaigns that would have resulted in the same or more damage as the 2 nukes.

    2.Bombing campaigns and a full scale land on japan facing not only the military but random civilian insergants as well(think vitnam with a double or higher ratio of insergantcy) were the toll of life would have been on a scale of Normandy is not more.

    Or

    Force their them into a quick resolution where a minimal of damage and lives taken useing 2 nukes.

    —————-

    It sucks but the alternatives were not better for any side.



    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  11. Baruch_S says:

    Yes, because it had nothing to do with saving the lives of thousands of servicemen who would have died trying to take Japan and all the Pacific islands they controlled…

  12. questionmark1987 says:

    So our decision was "We’re tired and bored so here you can all die and it will be over with."

    Yes that’s the kind of message I want my country to stand for.

  13. Shahab says:

    Whatever, I am an American I don’t mind if someone makes a joke. I wouldn’t do it in front of a 9/11 widow but I’m not going to cry if I upset some butt hurt individual.

  14. Moriarty70 says:

    I wasn’t just refering to 9/11 when I mentioned dark humour. I tend to see that any type of joke that’s dark or "offensive" gets condemed much quicker in the States than in Canada.

    Unless you trash Toronto, they just don’t know how to take a joke.

  15. jedidethfreak says:

    You’re right, but, as someone who lost a very close friend in the WTC attacks, this game isn’t bad in any way (as far as the controversy is concerned, anyway).  I don’t see any reason to get up in arms about this game, whatsoever.

    He was dead when I got here.

  16. d20sapphire says:

    It’s not that we don’t appreciate dark humor.  It’s just when your country is the one that was attacked, it’s very much a tender spot for every citizen.  We can’t really separate ourselves from the incident as much as people from other countries can.

    http://www.20sidedwoman.blogspot.com

  17. Vake Xeacons says:

    GP, regardless of whether or not I agree, the problem is I should have nothing to agree with. Where’s your non-partisanship?

  18. Moriarty70 says:

    Funny thing is, I found out a week or two ago my friends have set a wedding date of next September 11. The car I was in all broke into laughter and I then suggested that instead of throwing rice or blowing bubbles, we toss paper airplanes at the couple as they walk down the asile at the end.

    Mind you, this is Canada so dark humour is apreciated a little more.

  19. BrandonL337 says:

    Yes he did, scroll up it’s not that far

    There have always been motherf*ckers, there will always be motherf*ckers, but what we can’t do is let them control our motherf*cking lives. -John Oliver, December 1st, 2008

  20. F__ked up says:

    Nope I m was arguing that if you the logic that dropping nukes on Japan was Karma, by that same logic 9/11 was karma.  I only linked articles about what America has done that could be used as evidence that 9/11 was karma. I did not say that they did deserve to die or that it WAS Karma, notice the words BY THAT LOGIC, I was saying it could be argued that way and here is some evidence.


    I am a critical thinker not a dumb ass inbred conservative or a jackass liberal 

    Pedophiles are the new Nazi / Communist. Labeling someone a Pedophile will get them blacklisted even though there is no evidence. 

    Murder is not a crime when done in self defense, a time of war, or when done by court order (death penalty). People cry murder when fetus are aborted. How about when the mother could die? The mother is 13 years old? The mother was raped? The child is a product of incest? Is foster care really the best answer for children who’s parents cant take of them? How many children actually end up in foster care when their parents are dead beats? 

    A 14 year old is child when they have sex but is an adult when they commit murder?

  21. hayabusa75 says:

    The fact that you linked it in support of your karma argument says you did.  Your entire premise that what goes around, comes around means that you feel that everything you linked is karmically related to 9/11.  That is what started this debate, right?  Jedi’s and your comments about 9/11?

    "De minimus non curat lex"

  22. Wormdundee says:

    Just putting my view in here. Nuking anyone is an atrocity. That said, it was probably the most efficient way to end the war and I really don’t hold it against them. Just because something is an atrocity doesn’t mean that you have to disagree with it.

    I think with the way Japan was unwilling to surrender, any way of ending the war would have been an atrocity.

  23. F__ked up says:

    Where did I say 6000 people deserved to die? Citation needed.

    Is your reading level at a kidnergarden level? Did u you not read the posts above how karma is defined?

    Good god you are just proving how stupid you really are. 


    I am a critical thinker not a dumb ass inbred conservative or a jackass liberal 

    Pedophiles are the new Nazi / Communist. Labeling someone a Pedophile will get them blacklisted even though there is no evidence. 

    Murder is not a crime when done in self defense, a time of war, or when done by court order (death penalty). People cry murder when fetus are aborted. How about when the mother could die? The mother is 13 years old? The mother was raped? The child is a product of incest? Is foster care really the best answer for children who’s parents cant take of them? How many children actually end up in foster care when their parents are dead beats? 

    A 14 year old is child when they have sex but is an adult when they commit murder?

  24. jedidethfreak says:

    I know what we have done.  I looked at the links.  I watch the History channel.  What you fail to grasp is that none of this has ever been disputed.  Amends have been made for all of this in one form or another.  You are the dumbass for thinking that 6000 innocent people deserved to die because of Japanese internment camps.

    Those people died because a crazy guy doesn’t like that we support Israel.  End of story.

    He was dead when I got here.

  25. F__ked up says:

    You are a dumb ass. Pure dumb ass. I gave a ton of links to read of what americans did and yet come back with this? Go read the links first you will see the atrocities that Amerca has done some are on par or worst than what you have stated.

    I did not say it was America’s Fault, I said it was Karma, Their is a big difference, but a idiot like you would not understand the difference.


    I am a critical thinker not a dumb ass inbred conservative or a jackass liberal

    Pedophiles are the new Nazi / Communist. Labeling someone a Pedophile will get them blacklisted even though there is no evidence.

    Murder is not a crime when done in self defense, a time of war, or when done by court order (death penalty). People cry murder when fetus are aborted. How about when the mother could die? The mother is 13 years old? The mother was raped? The child is a product of incest? Is foster care really the best answer for children who’s parents cant take of them? How many children actually end up in foster care when their parents are dead beats?

    A 14 year old is child when they have sex but is an adult when they commit murder?

  26. jedidethfreak says:

    Yeah, because Islamic military organizations, Islamic terrorists, or even Islamic Sharia law hasn’t done anything like that.

    Oh, wait, kidnapping and beheading of civilians just for being American, mutilating of female genitalia because they don’t want them to become whores, preventing women from attending schools, treating women as property, killing Jews for being Jews, muslim political leaders gassing their own citizens, selling food and medicine meant for citizens so that the military has more weapons…

    But you’re right, America’s at fault for all of this too, right?

    He was dead when I got here.

  27. jedidethfreak says:

    There was no place on Japan that such a display would have been effective AND wouldn’t have killed a ton of people.

    He was dead when I got here.

  28. jedidethfreak says:

    Okay, now explain Muslims trying to rewrite history by claiming the Jews were never there to begin with, and by arguing with science to do so?  I mean, isn’t disavowing of science to protect a belief being pushed by the higher-ups in a religion something you guys blame on Christians?

    He was dead when I got here.

  29. jedidethfreak says:

    The US wasn’t stolen from Natives.  It was taken by force.  Something you advocate Muslims doing to the Jews.  Something they already did.  The only difference is they did it, and do it to this day, for nothing more than religious resaons, something liberals abhorr.

    Israel tried to abide by those treatys.  As they left, Hamas launched RPGs at people.  This happened just a year ago.  So nice try.

    He was dead when I got here.

  30. chadachada321 says:

    I agree with you there. I still don’t know if using both bombs was necessary, but it sure beat trying an actual invasion. I would’ve tried an "intimidation" tactic, detonating the bomb just out of range of the emperor’s palace. To show "hey, look what we can do. Now give up," but without killing lots of civilians.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  31. chadachada321 says:

    Oh, and for the record, I think that the world would be a lot less unstable if Israel didn’t exist. Any country based solely on one religion is generally a bad idea. I also think that, as I’m sure you can tell from my other post, that I think that Palenstinians have a right to say that Israel shouldn’t exist (it shouldn’t, the but UN made it so). As for other Muslims…eh, you don’t have to be Muslim to hate Israel for all of their bullshit and the way America bends over for them.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  32. chadachada321 says:

    Don’t forget that the USA was stolen from Native Americans. If the UN decided to give a large chunk of the US to native americans, I can bet that you (along with 99% of Americans) would find it unfair because we took that land hundreds of years ago. And you think that something that happened THOUSANDS of years ago has any relavence to what happened in the 1940s? In the 1940s, Palestine was a land owned by Britain. It was mostly muslim (I think about 60-70%) but also a fair chunk jewish (like 20% max), and they GOT ALONG PRETTY WELL. Then, the  UN decides to take well over half of the province and give it to the Jews who only occupied up to 20% of the land. So, palestinians (the muslim ones) fight back but get their asses handed to them, and then Israel steals some more land. This continues to happen all the way until today. Hamas has stated that if Israel would go back to (either the 1947 or 1967) treaty and follow those land boundaries, Hamas would stop attacking. Hell, Hamas isn’t even a terrorist group, they’re just trying to get land back that was rightfully theirs less than 80 years ago. Honestly, I’d say that Israel is more at fault. Here, I’ll link to some Times Online articles that show some of the things the Israeli military has done to civilians in Gaza.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5962905.ece

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5480440.ece

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5939611.ece

    The sad part is, you most likely won’t even read these articles. The Israeli military is doing things that are far worse than anything Hamas has ever done, and you don’t even care. Here’s a quote straight from an Israeli soldier: "That’s the beauty of Gaza. You see a man walking, he doesn’t have to have a weapon, and you can shoot him.”

    I’d say that those are the real terrorists, the ones that kill innocent men, women, and children, but that’s beyong terrorism. It’s cold-blooded murder just for sport.

    http://www.friendsofsabeel.org.uk/images/Israel-Palestine_maps.jpg

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  33. F__ked up says:

    Karma is GENERICALLY defined as "what goes around comes around" it does not necessarly mean that the same entity will return "the action" but that actions will return back.

    But lets see there is

    1953 Coup d’etat of Iran

    1963 Iraqi Coup d’etat

    1954 Guatemalan Coup d’état

    My Lai Massacre

    Japanese Internment Camps

    Augusto Pinochet And the CIA

    Philppe-Jean Bunau Varilla, Panama Canal, and Teddy Roosevelt

    Native American Massacres

    Canicattì massacre

    Biscari massacre

    Dachau massacre

    Salina, Utah POW massacre

    Rheinwiesenlager

    American Mutilation of Japanese War Dead

    etc

    etc

    etc


    I am a critical thinker not a dumb ass inbred conservative or a jackass liberal

    Pedophiles are the new Nazi / Communist. Labeling someone a Pedophile will get them blacklisted even though there is no evidence.

    Murder is not a crime when done in self defense, a time of war, or when done by court order (death penalty). People cry murder when fetus are aborted. How about when the mother could die? The mother is 13 years old? The mother was raped? The child is a product of incest? Is foster care really the best answer for children who’s parents cant take of them? How many children actually end up in foster care when their parents are dead beats?

    A 14 year old is child when they have sex but is an adult when they commit murder?

  34. jedidethfreak says:

    As for your comment on the second bombing, nobody wanted to "negotiate."  To say that’s America’s fault proves you’re an idiot.  Iran lost their "western-friendly" dictator right quick, and the UN wouldn’t do anything about Saddam either, but nobody attacked them.  Come to think about it, neither did France, England, Spain, Germany, Holland, or any other nation on this planet.  As far as your last sentance, when we go after cruel regimes we don’t benefit from, people like you claim it’s racism and warmongering.  Are you saying we should go after cruel regimes we do benefit from, but leave the ones we don’t benefit from alone?  I don’t get that.

    Also, if you’re going to try to equate killing innocent civilians to karma over political policy executed by uniformed military personnel, then I say that Israel should gather up 6 million German citizens and burn them in a vat of acid.  I suggest they get hundreds of thousands of Egyptian citizens and have them build giant pyramids.  I suggest they also put bombs on busses that Palestinian women and children ride and call it "retaliation."

    He was dead when I got here.

  35. jedidethfreak says:

    Nukes are an atrocity, but the invasion, that would have killed way more people, including civillians, wouldn’t have been?

    He was dead when I got here.

  36. jedidethfreak says:

    And I’ve come to expect this kind of historical inaccuracy from you.  The arab "viewpoint" is incorrect.  They drove the jews out.  Every time an archeological dig proves this, they claim that the archaeologists are infadels.  Explain to me how that can possibly be considered a valid viewpoint?  And allow me to rephrase the question, as you are semantically correct:  Name one Islamic terrorist that has not made comments about wanting the nation of Israel destroyed.

    (I’m guessing by the fact that you danced around my question with semantics, you can’t.)

    He was dead when I got here.

  37. ZippyDSMlee says:

    I can agree with that we have been unrealistic and at times stupid dealing with the middle east, what little we lost on 911 is eqaul to what we have tried to do in the middle east since the 30’s.


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  38. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Not really since sending in troops would have been as worse if not more so than firebombing would have done and resulted in the same end result.  Japan was in a religious furor over their god empower and would have easily deafened him and their honor as a society until the least bits of the population. Sadly regardless of anyhting the end result would have been as horrific.

     

    Now with that said I’ll take pre war japan over current US any day of the week! 😛


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  39. Monte says:

     Well Karma does not really need to apply to a direct retaliation… karma refers to the universe giving you your just deserts based on your past actions; as such who delivers the karma is irrelevant… For instance a criminal manages to get away with injuring and handicapping someone; a month later he’s struck by a random car and paralyzed; he still didn’t pay for his crime, but his smack down was karma…

    In this case, saying that 9/11 was a form of karma could mean to say as the universe’s response for America’s past deeds even if those deeds were irrelevant to what actually caused 9/11… For this we can bring up a second bombing in japan that might have been avoided with more negotiation; overthrowing Iran’s democracy to put in a western friendly dictator; or perhaps helping Sadam rise to power in Iraq in the first place; Or maybe tolerating cruel regimes that we benefit from… 

  40. Valdearg says:

    I, uhh, don’t think he said a thing about Terrorists NOT caring about Israel. He just said that that wasn’t all they cared about.. In fact, the BULK of his comment was how there are differing perspectives between Us, Israel, and Middle Eastern people. (Which, by the way, is a very, very accurate point.) We all think everyone else is Evil, or the Devil, and see in Black and White, when, in fact, there are many shades of gray involved.

    Then again, I have come to expect this level of illiteracy from the likes of you, Jedi. JDKJ is spot on when he calls you JediTheBonoboMonkey.

  41. questionmark1987 says:

    Are you FRIGGIN KIDDING ME!?! Nuking ANYONE is an atrocity! Dude just stop posting, you can’t seem to stem the stupid coming out of your mouth.

  42. jedidethfreak says:

    Name one Middle-Eastern terrorist organization that doesn’t care about Israel.

    He was dead when I got here.

  43. Speeder says:

    Like I said, that is the Jew viewpoint.

     

    From the arab viewpoint Rome drove the Jews away and they settled in their place, then UN started to give support to Jews invade them back.

    I don’t say that I disagree with any sides (in fact, I am a christian and I am biased toward the jew side most of the time), but I see that both sides believe that they have  a point, saying that one or other is evil, or that all terrorists want to kill jews, is a dangerous oversimplification.

     

    criadordejogos.wordpress.com

  44. jedidethfreak says:

    By anyone saying anything is Karma, that implies something was done to equal it out.  The argument that Hiroshima and Nagasaki was Karma has some merit, as it was an attack on Pearl Harbor that started the war for the US, and it continued in a very brutal and bloody fashion throughout the Pacific until Okinawa was taken by the US.  Japan still didn’t want to outright surrender, and, regardless of what you may think of the nukes, the results of a US invasion of Japan would have been much bloodier, and have many more civilian casualties.

    What did the US do to deserve 9/11, other than believe Israel had a right to exist as a nation?

    He was dead when I got here.

  45. F__ked up says:

    By that same logic

    9/11 was karma


    I am a critical thinker not a dumb ass inbred conservative or a jackass liberal

    Pedophiles are the new Nazi / Communist. Labeling someone a Pedophile will get them blacklisted even though there is no evidence.

    Murder is not a crime when done in self defense, a time of war, or when done by court order (death penalty). People cry murder when fetus are aborted. How about when the mother could die? The mother is 13 years old? The mother was raped? The child is a product of incest? Is foster care really the best answer for children who’s parents cant take of them? How many children actually end up in foster care when their parents are dead beats?

    A 14 year old is child when they have sex but is an adult when they commit murder?

  46. jedidethfreak says:

    Okay, but none of that supports the idea that nuking Japan was in any way an attrocity, especially when compared to an invasion of Japan.

    He was dead when I got here.

  47. jedidethfreak says:

    Apparently, someone needs a history lesson on the war between Muslims and Jews.  About 3000 years ago, Jews left a life of servitude in Egypt to start their own lives.  They eventually settled in what we now call Jerusalem.  About a millenia later, Mohammed made the claim to be a prophet of God, and started Islam.  This teaching spread to the east, until it gained a foothold in the Turkish empire.  Not too long after, the Turks laid claim to Jerusalem, it being a holy city and all.  They killed and enslaved many people to get it, and sent Jews away.  Flash forward to the late 1940’s.  America, Britain and Russia destroy the Nazi war machine and free Jews.  These Jews are free to go wherever they wish, but their homes still won’t take them back, due to lingering resentment of Jews caused by Hitler.  As such, one of the first actions that the UN takes, on the behest of the US, is to launch a military campaign in the Middle East to give the Jews Israel back.  This, and the continued support of Israel by America, is the reason for anti-American sentiment in the Middle East.  With the exception of the Barbary Pirates wars in the late 1800’s, and military measures in defense of Israel, this is the only "meddling" in the Middle East the US has done.

    Considering the comments of the Presidents of both Iran and Palestine (Israel and the Jews should be wiped from history), and the fact that archeological findings that prove my little history lesson are called lies by a lot of Muslim nations, to simply say that Israel is involved in a "border dispute" is just outright moronic.

    As for your comment on the American Revolution, yes there were more than a few British that may have considered our tactics that way, but we had a lot of international support, and didn’t kill civillians.  How much of that can be said about al-Queda?

    He was dead when I got here.

  48. chadachada321 says:

    The link that I posted below this one has all of the information about the Japanese surrender. It’s really long and contains a lot of stuff that I didn’t know about. Also some errors on jedi’s part too.

    Really good read too, I recommend it.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  49. chadachada321 says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan#Potsdam_Declaration

    And then the bomb part farther down.

    The Japanese big guys (the Big Six) didn’t even meet to discuss the atomic bomb until over 2 days later. 7-8 hours before the 2nd bomb. Although you are right, only 2/6 of the Big Six wanted an unconditional surrender (except with the Emperor’s spot guarenteed). Then, after Nagasaki, the council was split 3-3, with half wanting to surrender (but with Emperor’s spot guarenteed) and the other half wanting to also have no Allied occupation and to allow Japan to do their own disarmament and punishing of war criminals, along with the Emperor’s protection.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  50. Speeder says:

    I don’t ever expected to see a narrow vision like that from you.

    No, terrorsts don’t want to "kill Jews"

    First, terrorists according to Tom Clancy (a definition that I agree), are just people in a undeclared war. In fact, now that the US declared "war on terror" they ironically made terrorists into warriors, and not terrorists.

    So, we have all sorts of terrorists, we have freedom fighters (I am certain the the US people that died fighting England to achieve indenpendence were called terrorists too), we have extremists, mad people, sane people…

    So, let’s focus on the anti-US terrorists. These are in fact, really pissed at US, it is not "unprovoked" as some people say, unfortunally each action on the "war on terrorism" make more people mad than it actually make something peacefull, these don’t want to "kill jews"

    Then we have the terrorists fighting Isreal. Here I don’t call it terrorism, it is open war, territorial war that is, both sides want a territory, both have their reasons, and it is not clear who is right or wrong, accusing any side of being "wrong" is wrong in itself, from a islamic viewpoint, the jews are invasors in their territory, and defending them is defending evil psycho people. And from the Jew viewpoint, the islamic people are illegal settlers on their holy promised land by God himself, they believe that the islamic warriors are evil psycho terrorists. In the end both sides are only that, two sides fighting for a territory, neither are wrong (and neither are right).

     

    criadordejogos.wordpress.com

  51. Monte says:

    Ah i see, Now THAT’s what you should have said before when you said

    … considering the attack came 2 days later, i’d imagine it would be that polarizing… Frankly i find that the imperial holdings were out of the question, but i would see some willingness to bend on keeping their military (though not as full); i mean while we would not want to see them attack anyone again, i’d accept their right to be ready to defend themselves… better they defend themselves then having ourselves need to come in and use our own soldiers lives and spend money on the military

     

  52. jedidethfreak says:

    You’re right on the first point, but the second is incorrect on one detail.  Yes, after the first nuke, we still demanded an unconditional surrender.  The Japanese wanted more than just the ability to keep their title, they also wanted to keep all of their Asian imperial holdings, and the ability to keep their military battle-ready.  After this was rejected, primarily because of the battle-ready military thing, they announced that the Kamikaze raids would only increase, and that citizens themselves would be armed and sent into Okinawa en masse.  Thus, Nagasaki was born.  Afterwards, Hirohito consented to disarmament for 100 years and American occupation, and America consented to allowing the title of Emperor to be maintained and giving back some of the territories that Japan had held in the South Pacific that America had taken.  The second nuke wasn’t a result of Americas unwillingness to bend.  It was a result of the unwillingness to bend by both the US and Japan.  The only difference between the two was the US had the upper hand and demonstrated so.  Japan still didn’t want to budge very far.

    He was dead when I got here.

  53. Monte says:

    Actually that does not make what

     

    . Countries like to put in conditions before they surrender so that the conquering heroes don’t horribly screw them over.

  54. jedidethfreak says:

    You know why we don’t negotiate with terrorists?  The general reason is that all it would take for somebody to get whatever they wanted is to kidnap someone or threaten to blow up a building.  No government could operate if they had to worry about that every day.  As far as Islamic radicals, all they want is to kill Jews.  They’ve never budged on this.  You can’t seriously be advocating killing Jews to appease some psycho, are you?

    He was dead when I got here.

  55. jedidethfreak says:

    Actually, you and the poster above you are both wrong.  The Japanese never considered surrendering.  They had multiple chances to, as after Iwo Jima, it was really all down hill for them.  After taking Okinawa, we made overtures to peace talks.  They balked.  Plans were put into place to invade the mainland, knowing more civillians and military personnel would have died as compared to both nukes.  After the first one was dropped on Hiroshima, Truman pleaded with them to surrender.  They said no.  Two days later, Nagasaki was attacked.  Truman again pleaded for surrender.  Emperor Hirohito actually had to think about that.

    So, how is this an "atrocity commited by the US," when many overtures for ending were offered by the US and turned down, and when the only other military option would have resulted in more innocent people dying?

    He was dead when I got here.

  56. Speeder says:

    You are actually right, they were firebombed before the nukes, the firebombs had the same result as a nuke, but on their culture surrendering is coewering, so they were planning a negotiation with the US, probably they would offer something in return of oil.

    But you know… "we don’t negotiate with terrorists"

     

    criadordejogos.wordpress.com

  57. Leet Gamer Jargon says:

    Actually, chada, I think Japan was starting to consider surrender two weeks before the first bomb was dropped; they just didn’t get out the message in time. I’m not too sure, though, so don’t take my words as chiseled in stone.

    ——————————————————————————

     

    Game on, brothers and sisters.

  58. chadachada321 says:

    The 2nd nuke was indeed an atrocity.

    After the first bomb, Japan said they would surrender if their emperor would not be charged with war crimes, as the most important person in Japan was the emperor. America said "lol, nope. Unconditional surrender or else." Japan only wanted that ONE condition, and America said "screw you" and killed (hundreds of?) thousands more people than was necessary. Want to know the worst part of it all? We didn’t even capture the emperor. We let him go without charging war crimes or taking him prisoner. We did what Japan wanted all along but only after we got to nuke them again.

    The first bomb, yes, I agree was not an atrocity. But the 2nd was completely uncalled for and unnecessary. We wanted an unconditional surrender but when they wanted 1 small condition we refused, then upheld that condition anyways.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  59. jedidethfreak says:

    Here is the problem with the legality argument: by international law, the US Constitution only applies to people apprehended within the borders of the United States.  Since these people were apprehended in other nations, Constitutional protections do not apply.

    You are right, however, that having a CIA agent as a consultant doesn’t really lend any credence, but I’m not arguing that they do.  I’m arguing counter to the position that since this person claimed this did happen in Guantanamo, that it had to have happened.

    He was dead when I got here.

  60. nightwng2000 says:

    Actually, I don’t watch or read anything of Pelosi’s or any number of other similar folks.

    As to the detainees, if the CIA or anyone else involved, WANTED to find these individuals guilty of ANYTHING, they would find a way, by fair means or foul.  Even by making up evidence.

    Clearly, the purpose, then wasn’t to prove or disprove guilt of the detainees in any activity.  The purpose was clearly to obtain information from the detainees.

    People have to remember, this wasn’t a prison.  It wasn’t punishment.  No one was put on trial, convicted, and sentenced.  Legally, you can’t find someone guilty without a trial. 

    IF the CIA had evidence that any individual WAS a terrorist, then that individual should have faced trial, conviction, and sentencing.

    Can we question what did or did not happen during the detainment?  Of course we can.  We could no more trust a detainee’s claims about what happened there than we can trust the CIA or any investigating body.

    But, logically and what is supposed to be legally, an individual is INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. In the end, that’s all that matters.

    Could we trust the views of a "consultant" who previously worked with the CIA and made claims as to what happened during that period of time any more than we could a "consultant" who the CIA claimed was a terrorist and been detained there?  I don’t believe we could.  And in the end, what’s being made really is a fictional story.  So, if someone wants to make a game that paints a rosey, "patriotic" view of what happened there as the backstory, go for it.

    It would be just as accurate.

    Nightwng2000

    NW2K Software

    http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  61. jedidethfreak says:

    Like the CIA joke, but are you seriously drinking Pelosi’s Kool-Aid?

    The "consultant" said they were denied food and water, everyone was waterboarded every day, nobody was allowed outside, people were beaten every day for no reason, and that nobody there – NOBODY – was ever a terrorist.  Several investigations into the CIA have proven all of these false.

    Finally, it was based on the story concocted by the "consultant."  The story itself may have been fake, but they were citing things in-game that have been proven to be false as fact.

    He was dead when I got here.

  62. nightwng2000 says:

    First, HAHAHAHAHA CIA, yeah.  Impressed with their trustworthiness… NOT!

    Secondly, you’ll have to be more specific about what the "consultant" supposedly lied about.

    Thirdly, it was a game based on a fictional story.  Set in the future.  About events that haven’t taken place and probably won’t take place.  How much "accuracy" can there be?

    Nightwng2000

    NW2K Software

    http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  63. jedidethfreak says:

    It’s only in poor taste because it’s based on the lies told to the developers by a former inmate.  About the only thing that the "consultant" told them that wasn’t proven wrong by CIA documents and federal investigations was that waterboarding happened there.

    He was dead when I got here.

  64. jedidethfreak says:

    Iran and N. Korea have admitted to be actively pursuing nuclear weapons.  The only evidence that would be stronger would result in the deaths of thousands, if not millions.

    He was dead when I got here.

  65. Monte says:

     Well i imagine one of the reasons the UN can’t take action is that enforcing the law generally requires evidence of the crime being committed. Unless you have proof, all accusations about trying to obtain nuklear weapons is just that, accusations. The most you can really do with accusations is do an investigation to see if it are true; i think i recall that the UN has done what they can in those terms and have not found evidence. And when it comes down to it, to punish people with no actual evidence of a crime WOULD actually be a form of corruption in and of itself… really what you should be asking is that the UN should be function MORE like other corrupted organization; that way it could ignore due process and the need of actual evidence, to do what "must" be done. Granted this ofcourse would lead to accusations that the UN is corrupt, that they are treating countries unfairly and thus gain scorn by a good amount of the world and earn even more enemies and possibly loose some support to those that once looked kindly upon it… afterall, the reason we need evidence is because without it, there is always atleast a miniscule chance we are wrong and thus delivered an unfair punishment, created more hatred, and actually helped lend credence to what many in the middle east say about us. 

  66. ZippyDSMlee says:

    THe US cannot afford to be the world police wihtout the UN paying for it.

    Sorry but the US dose not have to do it as things will natraully balance out without such a high level of interferance.


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  67. jedidethfreak says:

    This is a bit misleading.  North Korea does make nuclear power, but they do so to use the byproducts for the development of nuclear weapons.  They’ve admitted this.  Iran just makes the weapons outright.  As far as us "meddling" is concerned, this is again because the UN won’t enforce the laws it passes.  By international law, the only nations allowed to have nuclear weapons are the US, Russia, China, Israel and Britain.  All other nations are in direct violation of international laws and UN resolutions.  However, with this as all else, the UN is just too much of a broken and corrupt organization to do anything about it.  If the US can’t or won’t, who will?

    He was dead when I got here.

  68. Wormdundee says:

    (because I don’t think that the conspiracy theorists this time are totally wrong)

    I stopped reading at that point.

  69. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Unforantely crazy or not a country should be allowed to make energy no matter if it can be used to make dirty bombs or nukes, as cazry as they are its a tactically used as a distraction as half the main world powers would wipe them off the face of the earth if they tried it.

    So in that regaurds it is the US fault for trying thigns in the wrong manner that wind up getting us blow back.

     

    Its also our fault for sticking our noses where we need not be like Iraq…..


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  70. jedidethfreak says:

    I’m well aware that the US is only part of the world.  You’re right that we need to engage in more diplomacy, but the other side of that coin is that NOT ALL OF THE PROBLEMS IN THE WORLD ARE THE FAULT OF THE US.  If a crazy dictator makes nuclear weapons, it’s because he wants to, not because a US President made a speech.  It is also not America’s fault that a country that started a war with us didn’t like what we expected of them for their surrender.  They knew we’d attack if they turned us down, and turned us down anyway.  It is also not our fault that Islamic terrorists want to kill innocent people.  Every action committed by America as a reason for this "retaliation" was done by military personnell, to a perceived enemy.  They are singling out defenseless women and children in an attempt to make up for the fact that, had they the guts to face off against those who actually attacked them, they’d be creamed.

    At least, when we fought for our independance, it was done so against an army.

    He was dead when I got here.

  71. ZippyDSMlee says:

    You are missing the point the US has been a witlessly bullish dealing its "enemies" and thus has had its ankles nawed on and knocked to the ground a bit, the US needs to relearn what tact and diplomacy is(not to mention learn to fcking hold to a budget….) as the US is not the world but aprt of it and can be removed from it at any time…


    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  72. jedidethfreak says:

    Obama isn’t responsible for any of that.  The people coming back was Bill Clinton, not Obama.  He made no effort whatsoever to deal with that crisis.  As far as Obama’s plan "working," There have been six missle tests since Obama took office, all of those missles supposedly able to hit targets in Alaska or Hawaii.  I wouldn’t call that "getting better."

    Maybe Bush calling North Korea part of an axis of evil was wrong, but let’s not forget why he said it.  He was trying to make nuclear weapons, and was selling conventional weaponry to our enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan.  That makes the comment retaliatory, not provocatory.

    He was dead when I got here.

  73. Speeder says:

    Saying that your country is part of axis of evil when you are attacking other country part of axis of evil is not a economic threat…

    And yes, I praise Obama for that, and I recognize that further escalation from North Korea now toward US is wrong, but Bush already did the damage, now to Obama fix it will be hard, but anyway, it seems that it is working already, North Korea reopened the borders partially again with South Korea, and even negotiated with the US and gave people back (if that happened with Bush in power, I am certain that they would only kill the US citizens and return their heads).

     

    criadordejogos.wordpress.com

  74. jedidethfreak says:

    Threatening with economic sanctions =/= excuse to build nuclear weapons.

    Also, this doesn’t work, as North Korea has merely escalated it’s own provocations since Obama took office.  Obama not only hasn’t antagonized North Korea in any way, he hasn’t RESPONDED to North Korea about their threats in any meaningful way whatsoever.

    He was dead when I got here.

  75. Speeder says:

    I don’t said that.

     

    But maybe if US (not America, I am American too… duh) did not threatened North Korea, North Korea would not need to threaten back.

    Of course, this is a MAYBE.

    But US DID threatened North Korea, now they cannot complain. That is my point.

     

    criadordejogos.wordpress.com

  76. jedidethfreak says:

    So, let me see if I understand you.  If America never attacked Iraq, Hussein would never have gassed all those Kurds, North Korea wouldn’t have sold them missiles, and they never would have tried to gain nukes.  Here’s the problem with that logic.  First, America started with Iraq BECAUSE of the Kurds being gassed by Hussein.  Nobody else cared.  By your thinking, nobody should have.  Second, Saddam was doing business with North Korea since the 80s.  That’s why they’ve been making weapons for the last twenty years – to sell them.  Since Kim Jong Ill doesn’t care who buys what from him as long as the check clears, and there’s a demand for nukes by a lot of the people he’s sold weapons to, of course they’ll work on a nuclear arsenal.  The only role America played in North Korea getting nukes is we built the first operational one.

    He was dead when I got here.

  77. Shahab says:

    Gamepolitics reachs in a lot of their articles. I take ANY editorializing on this site with a huge grain of salt.

  78. chadachada321 says:

    Honestly, I think that GP is reaching a lot in this story.

    "which often mocks political issues with their Friday game offerings." Today is a Friday, which means a new game. And this is the first Friday since Obama’s most recent speech. Just because today (the first Friday after a big speech, meaning the first time this site would have a game related to this speech) is the anniversery of a terrorist attack doesn’t make the game "in poor taste" or because of "poor judgment." They probably didn’t think about it (I didn’t know it was 9-11 until about an hour ago when I looked at a calender), and if they did think about it they probably dismissed it as irrelevent (because who would really get upset about this totally unrelated game that has some vague possible similarities to 9-11?).

    And as for "the fact that the publisher consulted with a person alleged to have ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban necessarily supports Mr. McCauley’s opinion that the game is in poor taste or evidences poor judgment," just because someone is alleged (based on nothing and with no trial or due process) to be a terrorist doesn’t make them guilty, otherwise it would be shady that Obama gave an education speech because he was "alleged" to be the anti-Christ/a terrorist.

    Allegations mean absolutely nothing without evidence. I have so much sympathy for that (almost definitely) innocent guy. Hell, if *I* was wrongly imprisoned without a trial or anything, the first thing that I’d do after getting out is go bomb a building belonging to whatever agency wrongly held me.

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  79. GoodRobotUs says:

    As terrible as I feel for Japan, I think, in the long term, that it was better to see the horrors of Nuclear war from the effects of 1 Megaton bombs that were used at the end of World War 2, than for it not to have been used, because, eventually, someone would have dropped a bomb, and if it had been 10 years later, it would have been ten times bigger, so in my opinion, what Japan endured as a country, taught us an important lesson as a race.

  80. Speeder says:

    First, IF (because I don’t think that the conspiracy theorists this time are totally wrong) what happened is what the government claim (islamic terrorist attack and whatnot), it was not unprovoked, the government itself claimed that it received a message asking them to retreat from the middle east and stop messing with them and their oil.

    The first thing that the Afghan president put by the US did was allow the construction of a oil line by US (I don’t think that it was a coencidence…)

    Also it is clear that Russia would have won WWII alone, it might be bad if that happened? Maybe, we don’t know, but it is clear that Japan was nuked for the sake of scaring Russia, Japan was already losing, Tokyo had been firebombed and the results were worse than the nuke actually, more firebombing altough would not be less atrocious than the nukes (like I said, the fire bombing was bad as the nukes) would caused Japan to lose the war too, but it would not serve as propaganda to the Russians.

    In fact, the US meddle too much with other people, when they bite back they wonder why… They keep wondering why Chavez hate them so much, and why he and some other presidents invited Russia to defend the South America waters (in fact, maybe lots of you don’t even know, but on the day that Brazil announced a large oil finding, US announced the reactivation of the fourth fleet to "defend" South America, later the Russians were invited by South America to defend them… I guess that the fourth fleet is not welcome), they keep wondering why so much people hate capitalism in South America, specially after what they did with Operation Condor. And they will probably keep wondering why the hell Hondurans hate them, after they insist in puting Zelaya back. (In fact, I dunno why US want to put Zelaya back… The population and the army revolted and removed Zelaya after he declared himself to be a communist, then the US want to put him back, totally bizarre… Maybe a bad way to seek redemption from Operation Condor…)

     

    So, before any of you say that any game that shed negative light on you is "bad taste" or "evil" or something like that, remember that North Korea only reactivated their nuke program after Bush called them part of "axis of evil" publicy and attacked Iraq (another part of "axis of evil", thus making easy to foresee an attack on them too).

     

    criadordejogos.wordpress.com

  81. questionmark1987 says:

    8 years ago we got attacked, unprovoked. A lot of people died.

    However I always find it kind of sad that we take such rightous indignation to it and turn it into something that (in some people’s minds) should limit free expression when really, we’ve done a hell of a lot worse to other countries.

    You can argue reasons and justification all you want but at the end of the day we’ve committed atrocities like nuking japan, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which haven’t done much more then destroy the infrastructure in those countries IMO), and many other acts of "policing" and "security" we’ve undertaken for our own reasons.

    Frankly, especially after the last administration, I’ve never really felt we had a moral high ground to stand on.

  82. Wormdundee says:

    Are you stupid? Germany had already capitulated by the time the nukes were dropped. Japan was the only country left. 

  83. jedidethfreak says:

    After getting involved against Japan, we were called upon again by Britain and the French Resistance to help.  Since Japan and Germany were already allies, it made sense to do so.

    He was dead when I got here.

  84. chadachada321 says:

    I personally don’t see why Japan attacking us means that we need to invade Europe. Why were against Germany anyways? Other than them being with Japan, that is. The whole "I’m with him, so I’ve got to declare war on you too" is what caused World War I and why America wanted to stay the fuck away from Europe’s problems. So why did we get involved?

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  85. jedidethfreak says:

    Oh, I’ll argue.  Revisionist history to make a political statement is abhorrent.

    He was dead when I got here.

  86. PHOENIXZERO says:

    Don’t bother arguing, they’ll want to see it how they choose to, no rational arguments or facts will change their opinion.


  87. jedidethfreak says:

    So, the fact that that "one" enemy we were attacking was also the LAST enemy doesn’t make a difference?  Those nukes ENDED THE WAR.

    He was dead when I got here.

  88. questionmark1987 says:

    We didn’t nuke japan because we knew it would end the war, we nuked them because it removed ONE of our enemies in that war, and it jsut so happened to be the enemy who dragged us in.

    Once again, you can rationalize and justify all you want, it doesn’t change the fact that we’ve done worst things in the recent and distant past then the "terrorist" groups we are responding to.

    edit: This was supposed to be a reply to an above comment.

  89. chadachada321 says:

    Eh, I don’t think that it’s a poor choice. The date is probably a coincedence, as the only thing related to 9-11 with this game are "planes," which are made of paper and are just disrupting a speech. You’re reaching a bit here, Dennis =p

    -If an apple a day keeps the doctor away….what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-

  90. Valdearg says:

    "My cat’s birthday is today. I’m not going to have this day ruined because somebody is crapping their pants over paper airplanes."

    Am I the only person who couldn’t help but chuckle at this statement? Not that I disagree with you, but.. Overdramatizing, much?

  91. Kajex says:

    My cat’s birthday is today. I’m not going to have this day ruined because somebody is crapping their pants over paper airplanes. Who the fuck cares if its some Al-Queda connected douchebag trying to push people’s buttons? If something like this draws in the waaaah-mbulance, I’d hate to see something people would REALLY be offended over- say, like (as others above have suggested) using flight simulator to recreate the entire scenario.

  92. nightwng2000 says:

    How is Rendition in poor taste?  It was based on a fictional future.

    Is the repeated use of having either Washington DC or New York’s Statue of Liberty seen in ruins in a fictional post-WW III setting in poor taste?  I mean, we’ve seen the imagry time and time again in books, movies, and TV shows. 

    And how about the use of Manhattan as a setting for a prison?

    Seriously, rich bad guys buying a famous or infamous locale as a base of operations, why is that in poor taste?

    The reality of the infamous setting is in FAR MORE poor taste than the fiction ever will be.

    Nightwng2000

    NW2K Software

    http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  93. JDKJ says:

    When the statement is "[a] consultant to that game was alleged to have ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban" (emphasis supplied), I don’t think it can be fairly said that Mr. McCauley is implying that the ties actually existed. Rather, he seems to be stating the fact that ties were alleged to have existed – which is indeed, to the best of my knowledge, a fact. You appear to be unfairly tasking Mr. McCauley with providing substantiation for an assertion he never makes.

    Having said that, I’m not sure, however, that the game’s content together with the fact of a release date of Septemeber 11 and the fact that the publisher consulted with a person alleged to have ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban necessarily supports Mr. McCauley’s opinion that the game is in poor taste or evidences poor judgment. But, hey, that’s nothing more than Mr. McCauley’s opinion and, as such, doesn’t necessarily require a lick of support. 

  94. nightwng2000 says:

    Oh puh-leaze!

    What?  If a kid makes a paper airplane today they are going to be arrested and charged with being a terrorist?  Are they going to be waterboarded til they give up the Mastermind to their cell?

    Ya know what?  The year anniversary I can understand.  Maybe the five year anniversary I could.  But, for all that crap they screamed that the attack wouldn’t change us, it seems to have changed us A LOT!

    Enough!

    The game was well within context!  It was about kids throwing paper airplanes!

    Ya know what else is hilarious?  The organization that is taking responsibility for having had Rendition cancelled LIED AND DECEIVED to FORCE the company to cancel the game.  And the organization claimed to be one protecting FREEDOM.  Lying to and deceiving others may be a protected Right, but using it to force your view on others is NOT.

    Dennis, provide FACTUAL evidence that the ties to terrorists.  As is shown in MANY articles, even the legal authorities had to release the person accused of such ties because THEY had no FACTUAL evidence to back up the charge.  If they had, then the accused should have been CHARGED, TRIED, CONVICTED, and SENTENCED.  But they didn’t.  Continuing to imply such is just as much a deceit as what the Vets for (Anti-)Freedom did.

    Do we continue to call individuals who were proven to be innocent of other crimes "alleged of crime X" years after THEIR innocence was proven or their guilt not proven?  In some cases, yes.  And that’s a sign of a very poor society indeed.

    Nightwng2000

    NW2K Software

    http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

    Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

  95. ded2me says:

    Seriously?? correlating the release date of a crappy paper airplane parody game into the WTC attacks.  Must be bored.

  96. MaskedPixelante says:

    Oh please. Is it in any poorer taste than say… me downloading the WTC map in Garry’s Mod, then ramping cars off the side of the building AS it’s falling?

    —You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

Comments are closed.