Pukko

<span style='font-size:37pt;line-height:100%'>Vi ska till VM i ĺr!</span> <span style='font-size:22pt;line-height:100%'>Och vi har nĺgot där att göra!!</span> Underbart! Booom, boom, shwapp, shwapp!!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ June 05 2002,15:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">in what other game would a 1-1 draw feel like a victory? but it does<span id='postcolor'> Not against England anyway (I really felt disappointed in the end with a draw there). A wonderful ending for Irland against Germany!!! But Oliver Kahn - waht a goalie   (and Jancker (it was he or? ); what a ex-footballer..) And congratulations USA ; and shame on you (from what I have heard) Portugal for playing lame football (I calculated Portugal against Italy in that semi)...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Okay... that made zero sense. The US is the wealthiest nation in the world, with the strongest military, not to mention we have more nuclear weapons than anyone else. There are no signs of violent unrest within our borders, and no enemies capable of doing much more than really pissing us off. Why do you think that there is a possibility of a US collapse?<span id='postcolor'> Well, a national collapse dont have to involve military or violence you know, and I thried to define it rather as a 'radical change'. I'm not really well enough into the fancy words and concepts necessary to really argue for what I really mean, its rather at strong feeling (and my definition of a 'feeling' is a abstract concept involving thousands words and concepts in a unclear order) I have that I cant disregard from. Lets hope I'm wrong! But non the less this kind of discussions is very crucial at this time (for all humans on this planet), you said yourself that you had a feeling that something is wrong here, and would like to find out what; the only concrete answer I can give you on that is that very much are a little 'wrong'. USA leads the western world, and the western world is built on illusions. When the illusions collapse, so do the western world as we know it today - all for the best for everyone at the end I'm sure though...... I'm sorry if it makes no sense, but I have a really hard time writing 'concrete' things, they are most often completely pointless; so I go on trying to explain (and refine) my abstract thoughts. Â

Whoooaaaaa! In the middle of one of the gratest, and most beautiful, meanings in life -the World Cup; tides are coming when this kind of discussions about US politics and policies can go on without flamewar!!!!!!! Â Now is this a positive sign or what? That this long after 9/11 creative discussions about US present and future (which in different ways concerns us all) can be held! This thread even started with a, recently completely taboo, topic about that the US government even might have had interests in limited terror attacks on US soil (which, probably if that is true, became wastly worse than planned). I'm also quite convinced that there are a lot to do in the USA, but cant but think that its already to late... One cant wash away ideologies and 'the meaning of life' of maybe the 100 of 300 million Americans that would die to have USA the way it is - in just a few years. I'm not saying that USA will 'blow up', rather that it might undergo a radical change in the closest decades. Maybe to be compared historically to the collapse of the Sovjet Union... Now, this is a worst case scenario; and I really hope that if it comes true, that the USA will not bring the rest of the world with them in its 'fall'. Since I recon this is quite possible, Europe will, for good or bad, need to quickly grow strong enough to survive a 'US collapse' and even to say NO in the case that USA is about to start a global Israel-Palestine conflict. Unfortionally it has already started through the 'war on terrorism' and all the things that led to it... But this is a POSITIVE thread, and thats the only way to make it for the better. IF this kind of discussions would take place officially in a much larger extent than today (or at least very recently), there might still be hope......... Â

Shit how good Italy looks then! Only 16 minutes in, but it looks perfect... If not Portugal or Germany do good, they are already in the final-final EDIT: Ooops, forgot Spain - might do a good cup for once....

Shit, I really think we needed 3 points against England. It was so close at the end.. so that we can have a decent end of the WC against France or Brazil. Sweden was disgusting in first half, but thats not very unusual; that it takes time for Sweden to get in the match. But I really expected a Swedish win here, dont think England really is a better team. Maybe individually, but not with that arrogant attitude 'we invented football, therefore we are by definition the best' - Svennis was obviously not able to wash that away.. Im much more worried about Argentina and Nigeria; recon a lose and a draw there - and England may win against Nigeria... Shit! But if we win the group , we are going straight to Semi again, if not Denmark beat us in 1/8

Messier Objects  I really like the M51!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ June 01 2002,09:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Here is an interesting article on Americans and football (soccer): The Soccer Gap </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> While eschewing anything deemed international or, worse, "European" suits the isolationist streak among certain conservatives, it seems to me that a much more proper Ameri-centric response would be to embrace the game for the purpose of demonstrating American superiority through it. For instance, doesn't saying "We play the best football in the world" kind of have a hollow ring to it? I mean, who else is there? But if the U.S. were to produce professional soccer leagues that rivaled those in Italy, Spain, England and Germany, and a national team that could defeat the likes of Brazil, Argentina, and France, how much crow would the internationalists have to eat then? To be honest, my attraction to soccer is just that I like the game. But if the lure of American superiority is enough to get you interested in the game (kind of like when Americans get interested in things like bobsledding and Greco-Roman wrestling during the Olympics), so be it. The time is ripe. Following the explosion of youth leagues, the quality of the American player development system has improved exponentially. We are even making some inroads on the rosters of clubs in England, France, Germany, and Holland. If American conservatives dedicate themselves to backing American soccer, the resultant energy and optimistic buzz might just push the U.S. men's national team to the final rounds of this summer's World Cup, or at least lower the percentage of the fans sitting next to me who voted for Mondale, Dukakis, and Gore. Help a brother out already! Strike a blow for federalism, apple pie, and the gold standard, and make a commitment to watch the World Cup this June. <span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'> I hope USA will stay out of any serious attempts in football (I will newer call it 'soccer'; I follow the 5 billion other peoples definition instead of the 300 million Americans). We all know how they can destroy about anything with their 'action-entertainment'. If USA would be influential football would soon be reduced to cheergirls (Talibans oppressing women? HA!! Why dont you got some cheergays too?) and cheap action + alot of intended violence... Keep the USA:ers (but not the (south) Americans) out of football - at least until they have dedeloped past a 'national baby stadium' - one of the most beautiful things left of human constructions.....

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hilandor @ June 01 2002,10:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">all we need now is Sweden to beat England and its a good week  <span id='postcolor'> You dont have to wait much longer to have your good week And now: Vi ćr rřde, vi ćr vide, vi stĺr sammen side vid side! Denmark will to start their way to meet us in semi final! (at best unfortionally, after sending home B teams like Argentina, Brazil, France and I even think there is some poor team called England around )

SUMA, MARUK, BIS (the greatest software developers in history )! PLEASE give a comment (i have been concerned over this since version 1.20 i think): Should the AA firing by tanks be inconsistent? Should only a few tanks fire at some aircrafts? I really enjoy taking a trip in a chopper once in a while, but its no fun if there are no danger!

I thought I had saved the most stupid I remeber, it was like: Become a licenced minister in only 6 hours GUARANTEED! Be authorized to performed: Weddings Funerals .... ... IN ONLY 6 HOURS!!!! PUT ONLY 11 000 000$ ON THIS ACCOUNT NOW!!! Well, since most of these fucknig disgusting spam mails come from, and only concern US citisens - this really (in a stupid way indeed) only adds to our 'anti-USA' spirits. To be forced to spend signifacant time each day if one have several accounts to delete this crap. And if you have'nt got energy to do it, and turn on the telly instead there are mostly US programs around..... Turn this thread in to US flaming too? Silly indeed, but not a unimportant part of our relation to USA Â

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ May 23 2002,19:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">unless you agree with Pukko that the Taliban werent such bad fellow after all-(a bit of Genocide never hurt anyone) <span id='postcolor'> SOB Â Poor bastard..... (BTW. I have bee logged on here for 8 hours now catching up all the 'serious' post made today, whilst doing other things too indeed. But I read all serious post slow and carefully, 'read between the lines' and considering all opinions. So Im a bit weary now....) Anyway: I do not defend the Talibans, but neither do I defend 'western society'.... I live in the 'western' country Sweden, that has rumors of it being relatively (and in many cases even 'the best' ) peaceful, tolerant and so on nation. *I* do am glad that I live here, but then I was born here. If i was born in Afganistan I recon most of my values in life would have been completely different; probably would'nt just long for a even faster computer and other things we 'westeners' hold high. Therefore I reserve myself not to say that their entire life is but crap; I'm quite sure they have many things we dont have - maybe like a social life were 'prestige' is not the most important thing and so on. Things we cannot appreciate because we want only what we are used to (and by socialisation forced to appreciate) get here.. But I dont give a crap about that I happen to live (and never could learn to appreciate an entire different lifestyle) in a 'relatively' good country. I will probably continue my way to be a social scientist, because I cannot accept all the awful shit we live in here. We really do live in a primitive society; I really cannot explain in detail all abstract concepts and theories I base this on, but they are to be found at your local University if you are curious. There are many other things I could comment on, but I will spare you of that for now. You can accuse me for writing 'intellectual bullshit' - well, if you do, so be it. There do not exist anything as a definite truth, but you can take as a rule that the more it hurts thinking about something, the closer you are. 'News' do not hurt... </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">IsthatyouJohnWayne, all I ever said was that the war in Afghanistan is not about how the Taliban treated the people. They treated them lousy, but it was slightly better than how it was before they came. You make it sound like the Taliban had Afghanistan in an iron grip, when in truth, they didn't have actual control of the majority of the land. They controlled the major cities and such but that was about it. And the Taliban burnt down villages and displaced people. So what? The US did the same in the Balkans, in Vietnam and so on. Russia did it in Afghanistan and in Chechnya. Israel has done it to the Pals. But all of a sudden, its terrible when the Talibans do it? Sure, its more crude having to chase the villagers with AK's than to use napalm or bulldozers. But the end result is the same, civilian suffering.<span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You can either help people through education, funding and support or you can force aid on them with the use of weapons. Sweden uses the first option. It is slower than the second but it doesnt cost as many lives on the side of the helpers and it ensures good relations so aidworkers are fairly safe. It also means you are treated with respect rather than fear. I'd rather be respected and be accused of working slowly than be feared and be accused of being hotheaded. Because hotheads that are feared usually get a bloody nose, sooner or later.<span id='postcolor'> 2 really good points Longy (amongst many others posted by you, Denoir and others here). The last one puts the finger on the power of 'abstract' actions; even if one could mention many more, that ofcourse are done all over the world (even to large extent by USA )

OMG how much there is to catch up with today, I think this thread was about something like this, or?:

Shame on you Nordin!!!! You forgot the 'fat chick'!!!!!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Akira @ May 22 2002,23:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And the destinction between "against war" and "apathy-inaction" stands.<span id='postcolor'> LOL. Obviously a Israeli ambassadeur in Europe 'accused' Euoropeans for being 'pacifists' some time ago. Now thats a real insult - he should be given a death penalty for that! Maybe it got something to do with that all European nations have proven themselves to be military powerful and successful a long or very long time ago. We got nothing left to prove; and since we during time figured out that war is a no good way to solve conflicts (sadly that conflict is still about the definition of war) we see about no reason for it. What you call "apathy-inaction" I would call: Sitting on the ass and try to improve relationship with all other nations and peoples. That has some future in it. War do NOT improve relationships, merely lets the warish nation join all others in the dark history of mankind </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Antje Vollmer, a parliamentary leader for the Greens party, junior partner to Schroeder's SPD, said Bush was using "an almost missionary approach against evil" which was causing tension and instability worldwide. <span id='postcolor'> Dont know if Pete were inspired by this statement that is to be found at the bottom of the CNN article, but I cant do anything but agree. US global policies are not very creative, if you ay so...... </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Yupp, but thats good, it will increase the general feeling of needing a European Superstate, which I personally can't wait to see. About time that Big Brother stops looking our shoulders.<span id='postcolor'> That is something I long for too. Maybe not exactly a 'European Superstate', but well a strong and influental Europe, that continues along the 'pacifist' road; and do everything to help and support other nations, even if it do not benefit Europe in the short run - thats a road to a positive globalisation

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ May 22 2002,21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just from CNN: Another bomb blast in Israel. Many casulties, they say. <!--emo& CNN Article<span id='postcolor'> I thought about giving a comment, but: .......................................................................................... ............................................................................... .......................................................................................... .......................... so what? Â

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ May 21 2002,18:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ouch Pukko, you are taking a very extreme opinion there. There are quite a lot Afghans to be found in Europe and their stories dont realy match with yours. The Taliban were a cruel regime. This "Look at us" strategy of yours doesnt help the people in Afghanistan. Fact is they opressed women, regularly prosecuted humans without any trial, raped children. Burned down whole villages on the front lines.... It is not a question of "western values" here, or maybe it is, but it is has nothing to do with the fact, that people were suffering. Afghanistan isnt a country like Europe a few centuries ago. In the 60ies more than 80% of all teachers in Kabul were women, and the country had in fact at reasonable economical health status. So this country was kept in the middle age by the Taliban. Of course the war had initiated misery, but it sustained by the Taliban. Whether we were better or not is not the issue here. Should women in Afghanistan still be stoned because we were not better. Should we let the Brasilians destroy the whole Rain-forrest, only because we also destroyed ours? You are basically saying that we are learning from history but it is not legitimate for us to teach others? How silly! It is like telling a father that he is not allowed to forbid his son to drink alcohol, just because he was young he was an alcoholic? It is not about who has the right, but who is suffering. Â You are fully ignoring the greatfulness of the Afghans (not only on TV) for the "liberation", whether it will last or not, and instead you are saying "we didnt have the right". Well, sometimes you need to take your right to help others!<span id='postcolor'> Ok, like I said, I did not mean to really defend them, rather give them the face of humans. And the main goal of this conflict is not to be creative about the Afgans situation; so far they have been quite lucky - only around 4000 civilian Afgans have been directly killed by the war - but I would not be surprised if we let them down again. And then they would wish to have the Talibans back. There is nothing special about the Talibans, their alienation is just necessary for us to think we are so good and continue supporting our systems. The western society works by illusions - Hiding by showing, heard of that?? And as i said earlier, my mind lives in a (but not necessary 'the' ) society maybe 100 years ahead (quite necessary to be creative in social sciencies), and in that perspective our primitive western world is, if not worse, then not much better than the Talibans. Too abstract to explain what really mean here..

I can only say: <span style='font-size:57pt;line-height:100%'>Dungeon Master</span> Introduced in 1986 (yep thats what Armstrong, Gastovsky etc was doing after the 'war' ) and one of the favourite games ever for many of BI's guys and gal (and for me). Check it out: http://dmweb.free.fr/

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ May 21 2002,16:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The opponent should be smart enough to weigh up risks with opportunities...... ......The same is true with the Al Quaida. How dumb can you be.<span id='postcolor'> I still recon that was Osamas (still if it really was him) and Al Quaida whole intention. As well planned as 9/11 was, they had most certainly prepared themselves for months to be able to continue operations. The very reason could very well be to turn world opinion against USA, and if USA dont change their ways (and continue to give reason for extreme actions)Â this could develop to a global Israel/Palestine like conflict. I really dont think that they were stupid enough just to send some planes crashing into US buildings just for fun; they had their reasons (justified to us or nor does not matter) and we will see their futher goals soon enough I recon. Attacking Afganistan is just another in a row of vaugly justified US military actions (playing the terrorists right in their hands), and could serve as just another reason for many people to want ot hurt USA. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The Taliban should all burn in hell. I dont allow any discussion there. Mainly because they werent an elected administrative power but a criminal regime of murderes and rapers. To defend them with arguments, just because you dont agree with US foreign policies is wrong. I am glad this country (once a very liberal place with advanced emancipation movements) has finally found a track that guides into the right direction. I must say I am afraid of fundamentalists such as the Taliban, which brutally surpress the weakest in the community (women). All our bla bla about religious-tolerance is fine when we talk about the true Islam, but dealing with fundamentalism needs to use iron fist, otherwise you gonna be the one soon wearing a full-body Birka. Â <span id='postcolor'> It makes me sad to see you too considering the Talibans to be the worst scum in the world, I wrote this recently, and I still stand for it: </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Pukko @ May 07 2002,17:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Regading the great defeat of the Talibans: I really hate the way western media alienates the Talibans as the most evil and cruel people around. Look, I dont really 'defend' them; rather trying to give the face of humans - the same goes for Palestinians (both in popular opinion viewed as Tolkiens Orcs or something): 1: The main problem we had with the Talibans was that they did not accepted western culture; all that we know of!!! Is that illegal? To think that its a sin to live a western life? Is religions illegal, and their (even if extremely interpreted) goal of salvation evil?? 2: Afganistan happened to be a very poor nation, maybe to be considered a century after some western nations (partly due to exploation, unfair competition, war, different interests etc). How the fuck good were we, the allmighty and holy western nations, some 100-200 years ago? Is the fact that a nation (to big parts due to us) has fallen behind reason enough to hate them and kill the evil Talibans who have been leading them for a few years?? 3: Remember that the Taliban was vastly much better than what was around before they came to power. 4: Western nations are also very oppressive - but in differance of the Talibans we dont, at least not usually, use concrete violence or 'more strict rules than anyone else'; creating the illusion that we are relatively better than the Talibans. But i can tell you - dare look under the shiny surface of western society; its far more smelling and ugly than any Talibans. Oppression of women? PLEASE! We have been the fucking masters of female opression until very recently!!!!!! And dare I say our very present disguting oppression of children?? Im writing an essay on that topic at the moment - quite abstract and hard to accept, so I will not try to explain that more here. The only differance between the western world and the Talibans is that we use SYMBOLIC violence; an abstract form of oppression that only ages of social research can destroy; we have SO much in our everyday life that we think is good and natural - but before we die of old age we will puke on many of them......... 5: The way things turn out in Afaganistan now, its very likely we will leave them to their destiny once again - and they will be back to the awful time that were before the Talibans<span id='postcolor'>

I just changed resolution to 1024*768 (from higher resolutions) and it all became very blurry. Maybe its a 'Texel Alignment' problem (remember a similar bug from Falcon 4)?

Yeah, I knew Freddie would be back!!! Saw all his movies in the 80's. Did you know he's Swedish? So there is a reason for all American agents running around my street the last months; Elm Street. Clever artist name though; Osama bin Laden...

You better harden yourself GFX; In 2 weeks the World Cup starts. Would almost be surprised if not most posts are about that 'wonder of hte world' then

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (LordZach @ May 17 2002,16:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">euro army? Â is that like millions of frenchmen armed with shovels? <span id='postcolor'> US army? Is that like millions of fat Americans killing the enemy by sitting on them? Regarding the topic: I often say that the most important thing in the 'western' world is illusion, and no illusion hold forever. Here in Europe we definitely live in a illusion world; but I recon it is far worse in the USA. 9/11 was only one of thousands important (and often very abstract) illusions brought down............

Pukko (or rather more correctly Pucko, but that is the name of a chocolate drink, and do not look as good) is a fashinating Swedish slang word for something like dumb ass or something; but it can hardly be used as a real insult - rather somthing one say to oneself when doing something minor stupid, or to friends. It really is not very serious word, rather quite fun. Well I started using Pukko as a 3D screensaver at a course some years ago, and I have kind of growed found of it since. I like the sound, look and meaning of it, and I am futhermore the owner of the domain pukko.com

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ May 17 2002,02:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (NEO [PZ] @ May 17 2002,01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And Pukko... Got a tasty Pukko today?  <!--emo&<span id='postcolor'> It's spelled Pucko <span id='postcolor'> Ok, I'm off to explain my username - Ditt jävla pucko!!