|
Post by Buddhist Kitten on Mar 6, 2004 17:24:42 GMT -5
Ummmm, I was kidding. Calm down. By the way Vlad the Impailer (Dracula) was the most famous for that. He had a cup in the forum of his city which, if anyone touched, they would be impailed. He impailed rats and birds in his spare time. What a sick poopie, huh? Also, the Romans hardly ever did that, that was just white trash Romans. I bet his uncle was also his dad, too.
|
|
|
Post by nightfalcawk on Mar 6, 2004 21:14:03 GMT -5
It's weird, becuase the real Dracula is actually more worse and more evil than the vampire Dracula. Ineresting vampire trivia: 1) If a corpse was brought out of a house feet first it was at risk of becoming a vampire. If a dog passed the path of the corpse, the likelyhood was thought to be very high. 2) Corpses were dug up by the church 5 years after burial to see if they were decayed. If they were not as decayed as they thought, the corpse was burned. 3) Ways to keep from being killed by a vampire; take a heart from a 3 year old corpse, boil it in water, dissolve into wine, and drink. Take garlic, mix it with urine and burn incense.
|
|
|
Post by nightfalcawk on Mar 6, 2004 21:22:36 GMT -5
People were so dumb back then. They still are. Said heart-wine mixtures are being sold in Romania today. All of what I said is still believed.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Mar 6, 2004 22:09:26 GMT -5
They still are. Said heart-wine mixtures are being sold in Romania today. All of what I said is still believed. Ahhhh, to believe in primative things and take them really seriously. Pretty ridiculous huh? I'm sure people in this country would never do anything such as that. Hmmmmmmmmm, Servo
|
|
|
Post by nightfalcawk on Mar 6, 2004 22:14:28 GMT -5
Ahhhh, to believe in primative things and take them really seriously. Pretty ridiculous huh? I'm sure people in this country would never do anything such as that. Hmmmmmmmmm, Servo Well, maybe George Dubya...
|
|
|
Post by Ator on Mar 7, 2004 2:06:59 GMT -5
Ha! He'll never find the Weapons of Mass Destruction. I have them hidden in my gym locker. LOL!
|
|
|
Post by nightfalcawk on Mar 7, 2004 9:34:54 GMT -5
Well, it's pretty obvious that the war was not for weapons, but for fufilling his father's dreams. Is it me, but does he look older than his father?
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 8, 2004 1:56:49 GMT -5
Ha! He'll never find the Weapons of Mass Destruction. I have them hidden in my gym locker. Gimme the key to that locker, fella. Can't help ya, fella. Gym policy. I hate to do this, especially to Forrest our honorable Grand Poobah... But as a moderator, I must request that we bring this topic back around to the film and away from vampires or Bush or anything else controversial. Can't we just stick with non-controversial things like Gibson's movie? Perhaps someone needs to start a specific "Bush is good/Bush is evil" thread, and keep it from cluttering up all these other threads. But that someone ain't gonna be me, no way. So has anyone else seen the film and what are your thoughts? #nosmileys
|
|
|
Post by Ator on Mar 8, 2004 3:28:08 GMT -5
I'm trying to figure out why everyone hates Bush. I like him. People complain that because there were no WOMD, we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Just look at Passion of the Christ. See how horribly Jesus was tortured? Sadam did just as terrible things to many of his people. Nobody sees the good out of this war. They bitch and moan about not finding the weapons, but they cant see that we liberated another country, freed people, put smiles on many Iraqis faces, and got rid of a mass murderer. Plus, we found all the ingrediants for the weapons of mass destruction any way. I think it's a hippie, liberal excuse. However, even though I like Bush. I still like to make fun of him. Why? Because he's easy to make fun of ;D The liberal media throws the "no WMD" lie around like a ragdoll. The fact is, Saddam was given months to hide the stuff while we floundered in the UN waiting for them to give the invasion a go. Now, look at Iraq. IT'S HUGE!!! It's like trying to find a missile in a 10,000+ square mile desert, quite literally! We've actually found buried MiG's in the desert surrounding Baghdad, so don't give me that "no WMD" bullpoopie.
|
|
|
Post by CherokeeJack on Mar 9, 2004 15:29:34 GMT -5
The liberal media throws the "no WMD" lie around like a ragdoll. The fact is, Saddam was given months to hide the stuff while we floundered in the UN waiting for them to give the invasion a go. Now, look at Iraq. IT'S HUGE!!! It's like trying to find a missile in a 10,000+ square mile desert, quite literally! We've actually found buried MiG's in the desert surrounding Baghdad, so don't give me that "no WMD" bullpoopie. It wasn't the liberal media. There is no liberal media (that has a TV station anyway). Liberal reporters maybe, but the government actually censors what is on the air, (Im going into broadcasting) most of the news editors are conservatives. Its just now people are starting to realize what is going on. It was director David Kay (a man who supported Bush and the war) who said there were no WMDs. He claimed furiously that they existed in the begining, but came back with his report with nadda. Not the liberal media. It was the government actually who said there were no WMDs. He even touched on the topic of impeachment (You know, lieing to go to war is not a good thing). Im not going to blame republicans or liberals or whatever for the state of the union. It's just Bush. We need him out. After he leaves, Republicans can have all the John Mccains (whom I like), Bob Doyles or whatever in the office. Bush can go to a rodeo, but can't spend one hour in front of a committee (which he is trying to fire) and help explain what went wrong with 9/11. Sorry Sampo. I know this is way off topic. so.. uh... WWJD?
|
|
|
Post by CherokeeJack on Mar 10, 2004 15:57:11 GMT -5
I highly disagree. The news stations are allowed to say what they want. The news makes Bush look bad, except Fox News...which is not run by just liberals. In communications I've learned the government does hold the power over the stations. This however can be said for any adminstration. The government DOES censor the media. Unless my prof. (who is a news reporter) was lieing and so was my text book.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 10, 2004 16:25:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by CherokeeJack on Mar 10, 2004 16:31:52 GMT -5
well if you want an informed opinion, get a "leftist" book as well. A good one is: Lies and the Lying Liars who tell them by: Al Franken
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 10, 2004 16:42:09 GMT -5
Goldberg's book isn't a "right-ist" book. He leans to the left himself.
I've read some of Franken's stuff. He's a better comedian than he is a political analyst. He seems to have some selective memory when putting together his analysis and quotes.
But don't we all.
|
|
|
Post by Buddhist Kitten on Mar 10, 2004 17:08:46 GMT -5
So, ANYWAY . . . Back to JESUS . . .
|
|