sepultallica

does anyone think that there was a conspiracy to assasinate JFK? anyone think that there was more than one shooter? id like to hear people's thoughts on this. i did a little reading on this and found some startling stuff. did anyone laugh at the portrayal that oliver stone did on his movie, JFK?

does anyone think that capital (is it capitol or capital?) punishment is wrong because of the possibility that the court can convict an innocent man? obviously, executing an innocent man is wrong, no matter how you paint it right? i would obviously hate to be the one to get executed for not doing anything but is that alone enough to do away with capital punishment? is there any significance in saying that the few sometimes have to suffer for the good of society? sure, there are many more reasons that one could argue that there shouldnt be capital punishment but what about this one.

i dont know how this is relavant or even significant but here goes. my friend was a watch commander for the los angeles police department. he wrote more than 75% of the LAPD officer's manual. and while it wasnt the first thing that it read, it was definately on tyhe first page, "law enforcement can only work through the general cooperation of the public. when the general public no longer wants to be policed and told what to do..." i believe that anarchy can only work for short peiods of time and not in densly populated regions.

ive seen a few topics on music so i thought id start one. Has anyone ever thought of the psychological effects that music has on humans? Music is a major part of my life and depending on what is blasting, it affects me differently. I saw a report a while back, don’t know if it’s true but, I read that in iraq, the US military was playing some Metallica tracks in an effort to I guess drive them mad. Don’t know if it worked but they should have used something else if that’s where they wanted to achieve. In waco texas, I heard law enforcement tried using music to drive everyone out. I think they chose the wrong music. Should have tried some opera. Mothers will often sing to their infant child. Don’t know why but it apparently puts them to sleep. Best example that I can think of where music affects people is while singing the star spangled banner. The mood at a football or baseball stadium changes dramatically when this song in is played. The mood probably changes out of respect for the US but I think there’s more than that. It’s a wonder why minor scales bring out sadness while the major scales bring out the happiness. Throughout the day, I find myself listening to different bands and music to motivate me mentally. Whether it be at work, in my car, with my girlfriend, at church (just kidding), or while sleeping, I always have something blasting. If I have some last minute monster project at work that needs to be finished in an hour, ill blast something fast like slayer or sepultura. If I feel like strangling my girlfriend cuz she wont shut up, ill play some limp bizquick. If im trying to go to sleep, ill play some metallica or joesatriani, steve vai. If I want to be completely blown away and just swept off my feet, ill play dream theater or meshuggah. When im feeling funky, of course ill play some primus. When I find out that my girlfriend has dumped me again, ill play some type o negative. When im feeling fruity (not that that ever happens) ill play some cheesy 80’s glam rock like queensryche or poison. Maybe even some creed. At all other times, it’s up for grabs. So why is it that music touches us in that weird place. Why is it that music can take our minds off all the chaos around us, and make us thing that we’re in our own little world? How is it able to spark emotions and thoughts that one would not normally experience without… How was it able to drive my parents mad for all those years? I don’t know, but it does.

i thought the first reply on the link he posted was hilarious. let me have a crack at her.

i had posted a challenge in the challenges forum that was titled, women should not have the final say. i didnt get any takers on the challenge so im probably going to back out. I also had thought about it and I don’t think that I actually challenged anyone to what I had intended. ill post my thoughts here in hope of exchanging dialogue on the matter. here goes here's the scenario: a male and female adult engage in consentual intercourse. both agree on the precautions that they will take to prevent a pregnancy. neither partner wants a pregnancy to result from the exchange. both are responsible, law-abiding citizens. the female becomes pregnant as a result of the intercourse. up to the point of conception, the man was an equal participant. the woman is pregnant and the man is no longer physically need. the woman is now faced with a decision of immense proportions that will affect her and the man for the rest of their lives. she can either have an abortion, or give birth to the child. the choice is hers and hers alone. the man can only add input (and sometimes not even that) but the woman is calling the shots. this is where the scales begin to tip uncontrollably in favor of the woman. the scales tip and in most cases, the man usually gets a raw deal. so the woman has the luxury of making this decision on her own. deservedly so. she is the one that will have to endure nine months of the pregnancy, the pain, the suffering, and everything else that comes with giving birth. i dont know too many people that can argue that the woman shouldnt have absolute power in this case. she also has the power to not have the child. also a daunting decision and a dangerous one. lets see what happens after the woman gives birth or has an abortion. the woman has an abortion the woman has to undergo a recovery period. usually not that long. if im not mistaken, a couple of days and usually with no permanent damage to organs. on the other side, since the man had no say in the matter, he can only watch from the sidelines. if he wanted the woman to have an abortion then fine, all is well that ends well. if he had wanted the child (despite not wanting it prior to having sex) and the woman decides not to give birth, then the man is left with mental suffering. this can have a serious side effect on anyone. the woman may indeed experience this as well but not on the same level as the man would. the man had to sit there powerless while she has the abortion. men are suppose to be all tough and insensitive but deep down inside we're all wimps. except for me of course. this can seriously devastate a man. i consider this a serious blow to the man. the woman decides to give birth if the woman gives birth and the man wanted her to have the child, and he wants to be a part of the child's life, then he still faces some serious problems. if the couple live together and are content to raise the child together then all is well that ends well. that is of course, if they separate and they cannot come to an agreement on who who will have physical custody of the child. if the couple cannot decide on the logistics themselves and have to turn to the legal system, then the man is screwed. it doesnt matter if the man obtains the best lawyer on the planet, no judge will ever grant physical custody of a child to man when both parents are fit parents. this is not to say that there are laws that specifically favor women in these cases. on the contrary. i know of no statute in the california state family code, or any state for that matter, that specifically favors women over men when both parents are deemed as suitable parents. depending on the type of custody that is awarded to the woman, the man will have limited access to the child. access is further limited when the woman wants to relocate and the new home is remote. in many instances, the court will assign joynt physical and legal custody. but when one parent decides to relocate and joynt custody is no longer practical for both, the court will assign sole physical and sole legal custody. and usually to the woman. now the man has to suffer with not being able to see the child for long periods of time. needless to say, it is a devastating blow to the father. you compact this with the mandate from the court for the man to pay child support and you have yourselves the begining of the end. surely the responsible, law-abiding man would have paid the support without the prompting of the court but guess what, he now has to live with the humility of knowing that he was ordered to pay. and now people will think that he is a deadbeat parent and the court had to order him to pay support. The financial burden always impacts the man the worst. This of course pales in comparison to not seeing the child but it is a blow nonetheless. in addition, the child is now forced to live without the father and this of course has the most significant consequences. the father is mature and is able to deal with the tragedy. but the child is not yet able to comprehend what is happening. If the woman gave birth and the man did not want the birth to go through, then you have an all new set of problems. The man will continue his life paying for the child when he wanted no involvement. Obviously, the man will not contest the custody and he will not be a part of the child’s life but what happens when later in life, he has a change of heart? He decides he wants to be a part of the child’s life. The least he could hope for is visitation rights. He would have given up the option for joint custody long ago. But since he is still paying support, he may still have some legal footing. This is not likely since when determining custody status, the court always considers the child’s best interests as a priority. Introducing the father to the child could only make things worst for the child. Not to mention that the woman would have likely moved on and found another father figure. You can also rest assured that when the child is old enough, the mother will undoubtedly tell the child that his original father did not want him born. No matter how you paint this, the child will grow to hate the father. Another blow to the father. Surely, the decision to give birth or abort must remain with the mother. There is no way around it. But by giving birth, is the mother entitled to hold the best cards afterwards? Should the man necessarily have to suffer the remainder of the child’s life just because he was not capable of giving birth? I think not. The woman has to endure the pregnancy and labor. For that she gets to chose whether to give birth or have an abortion. After that, everything should go down the middle. Things shouldn’t be such a landslide. The man should have more power in this than he does. I will outline some things that can be done to even things up in the next post. I close this post with one final thought, it is not sufficient to say that the woman needs significant compensation forgiving birth and raising the child. It is not significant to say that she endured much and she should have the power. For any loving father caught in this predicament would gladly say, I would have given birth if my body was capable. I would have endured the pain only to have an equal chance at raising the child. I would have gladly raised the child and have asked anything of the mother. I would not have placed any responsibility on her that she did not ask for. I look forward to thoughts and comments on this subject. I did not write this with the intention of flaming women. I have not experienced this scenario. I do not have children. I can only imagine the torment that men must endure under these circumstances. I wrote this post in an hour so I may not have covered everything.

oh yeah, and by you declaring that ghosts dont exist, you are in a sense being closed minded. about it.

when i find that im on a side of a topic that isnt going well for me, i try to jump to the other side and ask myself, if i did believe (in ghosts in your case) then what would be some of the reasons as to why i would believe. i try to see if i could convince myself. your freind my be experiencing some phsycological problems that we.... like i said, i dont believe in them but to tell you the truth, if it were proven that they did exist i wouldnt be surprised one bit. you know how many people claim to have seen ghosts?

if what were true? there are a couple things there. and as for the purpose of life, you say that there wouldnt be a purpose if what im saying is true. that implies that there is a purpose according to your beliefs. can you tell me it?

i should ask my girlfriend. she is the master of that. ill have to make her a specimen. ill wake her up earlier and go to sleep earlier. i already know how she is when she goes to sleep late and wakes up late. i personnaly believe that one is not as motivated as much if you wake up late. my gf is unemployed and doesnt like to work, clean, or make me a sammich. i got screwed.

people actually do this? why? it has to be boredom.

i wouldnt support it if were intended to serve as a deterent. iim just saying that hey, you screwed society royally, now its time for you to give a little back. in the name of progress that is. i wouldnt think it would serve as a deterent.

i assume that you are not a christian. neither am i. not to say that being a christian is a bad thing but its not for me. i dont believe in life after death either as it defies logic and cannot be proven to occur. if it were to be explained to me in a manner in which i could understand completely, and with this information, i realized that it really happened, then i would have no choice but to believe in it. this would seem obvious to people of science and non-christians. unfortunately, chistians have tgier own way of thinking and they tend to believe that we can defy logic and live eternally in heaven or hell. to me, if one has no blood pumping, no oxygen circulating to cells, and no electric activity in the brain, then you are dead. there are no sould, there are no ghosts, there are no spirits.

im all for making criiminals test subjects for scientific experiments that would further medicine and technology.

i have a plasma tv and when i kill the power and all the lights in the room, i can still see it glowing in the dark.

keep in mind that they can be interchangeable. its very easy to replace one with the other.

i bet that 1 tb disc will be sensitive as hell. one little nic and its shot to hell. cds can take a beating. dvd can endure a little. i can say that i usually need more than 4 gigs on a disc. i share alot of stuff and if i was able to add more data on a disc it would help me tremendously but one tb is too much for the end user. i worked at a major television studio and its entire network had less than 1 tb of data. and that's with over 1000 pcs. i think the way things are headed, that disc wont make it. i think portable storage devices will out do it. i have an external hd that holds 500gigs. it uses a firewire connection. i can take this hd and plug in to any pc and synchronize anything i want. if i had the 1 tb disc, i would have to have drives on all the pcs that would use the disc. you know those drives will cost $800 at least.

those little two inch windshield wipers on mercedes benz are awsome. you know what i thought was great? that private shuttle/jet that became the first privately owned spacecraft to fly in to space a couple months ago. how about dvd players in cars?

i heard of the old ban that was expiring. its wierd how the government works.

peanut butter usually helps.

they can be used interchangably in some circumstances but they also have differences. i think strategy would imply an overall style or method that one would emplo, where as to tactics could be more specific to certain aspects of a strategy. when i play chess, my overall strategy is to play agressively and skip defence. i usually end up losing when i do. but sometimes when the king is ressured enough, people forget about offense. tactics i use for checkmate include having many pieces surround the king. one or two usually dont do it for me. i like to pressure the king in to moving. if he's moving, he's usually running for his life. hope that helps.

i abuse a gibson gothic explorer. i adjust the strap so that the geetar hangs down to my knees. i also play some warlocks.

did you try the leginfo.ca.gov site?