Image 01


Michael Collette

Wallpaper Other by timbrown527 18 comments

Duh, my bad. You were quoting Isaiah not Job. I'll just correct my own bad self here.

On the general point of my prior post I still stand by it. - Sep 30 2003

Wallpaper Other by timbrown527 18 comments

Figures of speech? I'm sorry, but if you take a presently known thing and compare it to something commented on 4000 years ago while ignoring the words used then nothing means anything. Anything stated or written can then be interpereted into whatever you want it to say.

Furthermore, Job isn't the only reference to a flat or circular shaped earth. Please refer yourself to Isaiah 40:22 and Matthew 4:8. One states it, the other infers it.

It should also be noted that if the sphererical notion of the Earth were translated "into" the Bible by Roman scholars, it may have had a little something with the fact that the Greeks had mathemetically proved not only that the Earth was in fact sphere, but also came pretty darn close to the correct diameter. They had no way of knowing that it wasn't a perfect sphere.

None of what I've stated invalidates the Bible any more than your statements validate it. After seeing a couple of your posts, with quite nice graphics I might add, that state a tid bit of Biblical verse as though it existed in a vacuum I felt I had to reply to this. By doing this you do not validate the Bible's authenticity. You simply open the floor to arguing validity on the basis of whether or not these tid bits of knowledge are unique to the Bible.

In essence, you're no longer discussing the existence or belief of God. You're reduced to quibbling over what color God is. - Sep 30 2003
First off, thank you for a well reasoned and thoughtful reply. I had given up on seeing one anywhere on the net concerning this topic. I still think you're wrong though :)

On the point concerning your request for links about Al Quaeda's involvement in Iraq, I've only managed one story talked about today.

The initial report on the bases in operation was given by Colin Powell in his address to the UN Security Council which C-Span covered. A number of other reports earlier on in the war stated that Al Quaeda members were involved with the fighting in southern Iraq. I believe I picked that up from radio news reports. During the conflict I've been tracking too many sources!

Rather than go point for point, I'll close this reply on the notion of North Korea. First off, Iraq didn't allow weapons inspectors in either until they were under the direct threat of military force. This point seems to get lost on those that think the UN managed this without serious US intervention.

Iraq hit the top of the list due to a number of factors, one of which is oil I will grant you. Not Iraqi oil, but the Saudi crude which we do purchase. We buy the Saudi oil due to it's quality rather than for political reasons. It's referred to as "sweet crude" due to it's relatively clean burn with a minimum of processing. Both the conflict in 91 and the one we're seeing now are a result of our defending Saudi, not Kuwait or just to attack Iraq.

Following 91, with Saddam still in place we were not comfortable with leaving Saudi undefended from invasion. This leaves US troops stationed in the Islamic holy land. We know this is a major irritant to Arabs, and Al Queada in particular. As annoying as this situation is for both the US and the Arabs, so long as Saddam remained in power we couldn't change it.

Furthermore, the US has a legal pretext to military action in that area due to a variety of UN resolutions, the last of which of course being 1441. No such pretext exists with the situation brewing in North Korea, nor is their the direct connection to middle esatern bred violence coming our way.

North Korea also differs in the nature of their immediate neighbors. South Korea, Japan, and even China have a great deal of concern over what is going on there, and have far more sway with them. If a peaceful solution is possible (and I do believe it is) the best chance is to have those folks lead the way and have the US play a supporting role only. This is the game plan that Colin Powell laid out before a Senate hearing shortly after his first UN presentation, and it would appear to be working thus far.

I do believe you're too quick to discount the diplomatic efforts that eventually led to military force being used in Iraq. It was the US that brought this to the UN. President Bush even went so far as to show up himself to go through the UN in looking for a peaceful solution. At each and every turn of events, Iraq had a reasonable means for preventing conflict. At each opportunity they neglected to take the mulititude of "last chances" offered up.

And with that being stated, thank you again for an interesting reply that rises well above the knee jerk reactions of those that prompted me to reply to this politically charged discussion in the first place. - Apr 17 2003

Wallpaper Other by starman71taylor 1 comment

I saw this shot, and immediately loved it. Then I went and actually made it my wallpaper. That lasted for all of about 2 minutes.

Problem is, it just looks too much like something that I'd be looking at in the foreground. It's too much of an eye catcher.

The concept is extremely cool, and done amazingly well. I still love this image. I just can't imagine what could be done with it to both keep its visual appeal and make it a suitable wallpaper for someone like myself. - Apr 16 2003
"What weapons??!! You have occupied nearly the whole country and found squat"

It took over 2000 inspectors more than 6 years to find anything, and only after informants came forward. It's just been slightly over 3 weeks, the bulk of which has seen heavy combat. Apparently the US military has been a wee bit occupied with little things like being shot at.

"If you had wanted support you should go after North Korea"

We are, in a similar fashion as we attempted to deal with Iraq, diplomatically. At this point we know that at least China is heavily involved with bringing a peaceful resolution there. Colin Powell has made quite clear that every possible diplomatic means will be utilized, which oddly enough includes not letting their saber rattling unnerve us.

"they are much more of a danger"

The primary concern of the US at this time is who is most likely to supply terrorist groups, which include Al Queda, with the means for mass murder in both the US and in Europe. Of the possible suppliers, Iraq hit the top of the list. Unlike N. Korea, they have put these chemical weapons to use on both the Iranians and people within Iraq itself. Their prior involvement with terrorist groups also makes them a prime candidate for far greater damage to the rest of the world.

"Oh did I mention there is no oil there?"

So far as the US is concerned, there's no oil in Iraq either. We've never purchased more than token amounts from them. If you're looking for their biggest customer, try looking to see where France has been getting dirt cheap oil during these failed sanctions. If I were Chriac, I'd never want those sanctions to end either!

If the United States wished to invade a nation to take their oil, we'd have sent troops to Venezuela years ago. As much as folks would like the world to be as simple as "war for oil", it just isn't the case.

"That Iraq would be in connection with for example Al Quiada is a completly unfounded rumor"

A live base of operations, and troops on the ground fighting alongside them is a bit more than rumor.

"Even if there is chemical weapon, is it a big deal?"

It's a huge deal. Militarily speaking, chemical weapons don't really amount to much. The US military is pretty well equipped to deal with attacks of this nature. It's the civilian population in those nations which these extremists have focused their anger upon that are under the greatest threat.

These weapons a relatively easy to transport, difficult to detect, and can provide 6 to 7 figures worth of civilian casualties if deployed correctly. A rather small group of terrorists could inflict more damage then an armed military force by utilizing these weapons.

"By the way, Afghanistan was liberated... what is the status of that country now?"

Free of the Taliban thugs that strong armed their way to power there. Slowly working to rebuild what decades of war has inflicted upon their people and the infrastructure they live in. The US, and other nations, are still in there to help support this effort so they too can join the community of nations as peaceful neighbors.

That's not to say there aren't serious issues to deal with there, or that everything is going smoothly. There are entire generations of people in that nation who have known nothing but war and hardships for the entirety of their lives.

For the US, it's one less safe haven for those who wish us harm to hide. It's also yet another nation added to the growing list that owe their freedom and liberty to the price the US has paid in blood to give them. - Apr 16 2003
"Think about it, there are the Shias, the Sunnis, two rivaling..."

Ah, maybe you're right. Maybe if we happen upon Saddam cowering in some bunker we should put him back in power as he seems best suited to govern all these complications.

"Try to install a democracy, and count the days until the country falls apart..."

Good point. A post Saddam Iraq should find someone more homicidal to govern, as democracy, capitalism, and liberty have proven to be total failures around the rest of the world. What Iraq needs is a good communist dictator without mercy or morals to keep things in line. Bash a few heads, cut up a few bodies, and generally torture folks until they love him. Maybe Castro is looking for work?

You've totally changed my position on this. I'm in total agreement now! - Apr 15 2003
"Tell me again, what exactly were the reasons for that war?"

3000 American dead, 4 airliners crashed, 2 landmarks destroyed, billions of dollars to reconstruct due to a group called Al Queda.

This same group we know is actively seeking the materials needed to make 9/11 look tame. Of those nations that could supply those weapons to this group both the US and British intelligence agencies believed that Iraq was the single largest concern for supplying these weapons. Additionally, per 16 prior UN resolutions following the invasion of Kuwait, Iraq was required to disclose what weapons they had, destroy them, and insure to the world that they were no longer making them.

"Oh right, it was just a FUCKING Bush who wanted(!) war, and NEVER tried to avoid it."

Due to the actions of the Bush administration early on, the UN was able to return weapons inspectors to Iraq in the first place. They had been forcibly removed by the Iraqis late in Clinton's administration.

Following the diplomatic and show of force efforts, the US lead the way in diplmatically dealing with bringing a peaceful solution disarming Iraq. It was President Bush who went to the UN in the first place to attempt to get the other nations on the security council to agree that Iraq posed a serious threat.

Initially, the security council agreed, passing resolution 1441. What doomed this resolution to failure was the lack of specific requirements and time frames as to when things need to be accomplished.

When President Chirac formerly declared that any resolution leading to war would be vetoed, any possibility for a peaceful solution vanished. It was made blatantly obvious to Saddam that the UN had zero intention to enforce its own resolutions.

"I just dislike the way that Bush and Rumsfeld go. Their aim is not peace anywhere, it is power, and power only."

If presented with a post 9/11 world, a group looking to do far more damage, and an obvious source for where this group would procure these items would you have done nothing? Do you wait until the death count in the US jumps into the millions before you act? Do you let the obvious and blatant financial interests of France and Russia stop you from doing something?

Now in a post Saddam world, Al Queda just lost a major supplier of devices for mass murder. They've lost one more safe haven to run to. All the while, the Iraqi people have gained their nation back, and will be provided the means to return to the community of nations.

It's not the United States standing all by ourselves out here. The hollow cries of wished for relevance from France make that all too clear. - Apr 15 2003
How about some cards showing the over 100 children being held as political prisoners that were just released to their families? Oh, how about cards showing the faces of the folks put through the plastic shredders just as the blades reached their knees? Gosh, wouldn't it be cool to have cards made up of the faces of the wives having their husbands returned to them in seperate bags? Nah, it'd probably be more interesting to get the faces of those women who'd been raped, or hung by their limbs for hours at a time. That'd be some damn fine entertainment right there! We could call it the Saddam Torture Deck. Could even feature those thousands of men, women, and children laying dead under the massive chemical attacks.

Just think of all the possibilities of card faces you could come up with for the over 2 million people that died under the rule of the guy showing up as the Ace of Spades in this deck. You may really be on to something here. - Apr 15 2003
Now we just need a version with cross hairs over these murderous thugs! - Apr 14 2003
Slicker for the Determined ;-]

Various KDE 1.-4. Improvements by illogic-al 47 comments

Sounds like you really meant to give this project a BSD style license rather than GPL.

If the intention was to just put it out there without any expectations of code changes being sent back to you, then BSD is what you're looking for.

GPL brings in the additional requirement that changes to your code must also be released with any further distribution of this work.

In general, BSD licensed code can be integrated into GPL'd projects, but not the other way around.

On the assumption that this project manages to get itself moved into KDE's packages the difference may prove to be critical. Definitely worth looking into the difference, and sticking with which solution best suits the intended goals here. - Mar 13 2003
Multi color KDE

Various Stuff by Amibug 2 comments

Where this might really play interesting is in 3rd Party apps. For instance, I've often wanted to configure a darker sort of color scheme, but this wacks out apps like NEdit. I know I could turn off KDE's mucking with non-KDE apps, but I do like having a consistent look.

Any ideas on how to apply differently between KDE and non-KDE applications? - Feb 18 2003

Wallpaper Other by Klapauzius 1 comment

Not only a great photograph, but it works very nicely as a wallpaper. All to often cool photos just don't work out for backgrounds. Definitely a noteable exception!

Thanks for posting. - Feb 07 2003
Konqueror LongShine

Various Stuff by superfreak 12 comments

By themselves, nothing at all. There are lots of places that your combination of gray and orange would work nicely. The reason it doesn't work here is that it simply stands out too much for a user interface. There's a reason traffic signs warning drivers about construction are bright orange. The eye is drawn to it hard.

It's also one of the reasons why so many themes use a subdued blue, or a medium gray as the primary color. The artist uses a more subtle color that is able to sort of blend into the background, yet still look pleasing when taken as a whole. Bright orange just can't do that as well.

On the plus side, what you do have here is an interesting mix of interesting flat objects that blend well together. The two-tone effect is a nice touch, giving it a unique feel. There's some good stuff going on here. Overall, it just feels like you're trying to grab the eye too hard. - Dec 17 2002
Women wallpapers

Various Stuff by ben 6 comments

It's not a matter of being shocked. The material simply isn't appropriate for a web site devoted to providing look and feel aspects to the KDE desktop.

A really nicely done icon is 100 times more helpful than a dozen half naked, half starved, half natural, half airbrushed models.

If I were to truly want to have some gal set up as my desktop wallpaper there are many other places to look that can provide far higher quality images for doing this sort of thing than this site. It's not that sort of content that someone would come here to find.

The real point is to help promote KDE as an attractive desktop alternative to every other darn thing out there. It doesn't do anything to help this matter by illustrating the fact that a number of post-puberty males have suddenly discovered that girls are cute and now want to let the world in on this little secret.

Rather than open a new section to the site, how about just providing some links off to the variety of sites that have all the ladies you can handle for wallpaper? - Dec 16 2002

Wallpaper Other by th.cherouny 5 comments

It's not that's it's blurry. It's that added snow effect on the interior frame that gives it a blurry feel. Take that attempt at drawing snow out of there, and this is one sharp image. - Dec 13 2002
Detected (1600x1200)

Wallpaper Other by adaudey 4 comments

Why would someone be making plans for an object that's not identified?? If you've got the plans in front of you, that sounds like pretty good identification to me! - Sep 20 2002