Your result for Which Chess Piece are You Test?...

The Bishop's Innkeeper

Take Which Chess Piece are You Test? at HelloQuizzy

i think i'm going to sit today out

( No happy stories here. )

Tornado blew my neighborhood the fuck up last night. Roads are closed, me and Lauren went wandering around clearing branches off the streets. Lauren's been pretty great. Don't get me wrong, me and her have never really been on the best of terms. I despised her when we were dating, I despised her more when she dumped me because she was cheating on me with just ridiculous people, I REALLY despised her when she moved in for a while, but we were intimate for a long time at a young age, and you don't realize how much of an impression that leaves. Even now, her politics aggravate the living FUCK out of me but there's a bond there, and that's something.

We're going through with the cremation, but we're not going to hold a visitation service until after school lets out for Buddy.

In the meantime, it seems like there is an overwhelming amount of reality to deal with in a very distressful situation.

Got drunk last night. Might get drunk again tonight. In the meantime, work.

After I got home yesterday, I didn't do much of anything. Guess it was shock.

The night was terrible.

Today I had to call relatives and talk to people and it hurt so bad that I felt like I was going to faint.

Right now I've been wandering around my house in a stupor. It feels like I'm trying to play chess on fire.

My mom died in her sleep last night from a massive stroke.

"What's the worst thing you can do to a beautiful woman?"
"Throw hot acid in her face."

Stacy Keach is awesome.

Also, incidentally, let me make some things clear on LJ here.

1) I have not been romantically involved with ANYONE for longer than I care to remember. If you've heard differently, you've heard a lie.

2) If I had been romantically involved with anyone in particular for any period of time, I would not engage in subterfuge to do so.

3) Horrible, awful, unkind things await those who have been telling tales about me out of school. I've got enough fucking problems and someone insults my honor and dignity? What. The. Fuck.

Angry, angry, angry.

I've never seen these.



Shatner's funny too.

Who's going to CloverJam Saturday?

I think the shark jump for Oz was the death of Adebisi. He was the last character to really show... I don't know, he's a villain for villainy's sake, like the Joker. Without that bad for bad's sake attitude the show devolved into high pseudo-Bard melodrama.

I need an Adebisi icon. I might've mentioned that before. I envy Karen's Keller icon.

All I gotta say is,

Where are the tits? Gimme some TITS!

Read Sal's post on the EA forums about Crysis. Enjoy.

Update: the link works now, and there are funny replies.

Seriously.

It makes me think of Puddleglum.

"The [U.S.] Air Force has made substantial changes in its handling of nuclear weapons in the wake of a B-52 flight last August during which the pilots and crew were unaware they were carrying six air-launched cruise missiles with nuclear warheads."

-- "Air Force Alters Rules for Handling of Nuclear Arms," Washington Post January 25, 2008.

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN, JANUARY 25--At a press conference in Islamabad today, Pakistani Brig. Gen. Atta M. Iqhman expressed concern about U.S. procedures for handling nuclear weapons. Iqhman, who oversees the safety and security of the Pakistani nuclear force, said that U.S. protocols for storing and handling nuclear weapons are inadequate. "In Pakistan, we store nuclear warheads separately from their delivery systems, and a nuclear warhead can only be activated if three separate officers agree," Iqhman said. "In the United States, almost 20 years after the end of the Cold War, nuclear weapons still sit atop missiles, on hair-trigger alert, and it only takes two launch-control officers to activate a nuclear weapon. The U.S. government has persistently ignored arms control experts around the world who have said they should at least de-alert their weapons."

Iqhman also questioned the adequacy of U.S. procedures for handling nuclear weapons. He expressed particular concern about the August 29, 2007, incident in which six nuclear weapons were accidentally loaded under the wing of a B-52 by workers who did not observe routine inspection procedures and thought they were attaching conventional weapons to the B-52. The flight navigator should have caught their mistake, but he neglected to inspect the weapons as required. For several hours the nuclear weapons were in the air without anyone's knowledge. "The United States needs to develop new protocols for storing and loading nuclear weapons, and it needs to do a better job of recruiting and training the personnel who handle them," Iqhman said.

Iqhman added the Pakistani government would be willing to offer technical advice and assistance to the United States on improving its nuclear weapons handling procedures. Speaking anonymously because of the issue's sensitivity, senior Pentagon officials said it is Washington's role to give, not receive, advice on nuclear weapons safety and surety issues.

Iqhman pointed out that the August 29 event was not an isolated incident; there have been at least 24 accidents involving nuclear weapons on U.S. planes. He mentioned a 1966 incident in which four nuclear weapons fell to the ground when two planes collided over Spain, as well as a 1968 fire that caused a plane to crash in Greenland with four hydrogen bombs aboard. In 1980, a Titan II missile in Arkansas exploded during maintenance, sending a nuclear warhead flying 600 feet through the air. In a remark that visibly annoyed a U.S. official present at the briefing, Iqhman described the U.S. nuclear arsenal as "an accident waiting to happen."

Jay Keuse of MSNBC News asked Iqhman if Pakistan was in any position to be lecturing other countries given Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan's record of selling nuclear technology to other countries. "All nuclear weapons states profess to oppose proliferation while helping select allies acquire nuclear weapons technology," Iqhman replied. "The United States helped Britain and France obtain the bomb; France helped the Israelis; and Russia helped China. And China," he added coyly, "is said by Western media sources to have helped Pakistan. So why can't Pakistan behave like everyone else?"

Iqhman's deputy, Col. Bom Zhalot also expressed concern about the temperament of the U.S. public, asking whether they had the maturity and self-restraint to be trusted with the ultimate weapon. "Their leaders lecture us on the sanctity of life, and their president believes that every embryo is sacred, but they are the only country to have used these terrible weapons--not just once, but twice. Paul Tibbets, the pilot of the plane that bombed Hiroshima, said he never lost a night's sleep over killing 100,000 people, many of them women and children. That's scarcely human."

While Iqhman glared reproachfully at Zhalot for this rhetorical outburst, Zhalot continued: "We also worry that the U.S. commander-in-chief has confessed to having been an alcoholic. Here in Pakistan, alcohol is 'haram,' so this isn't a problem for us. Studies have also found that one-fifth of U.S. military personnel are heavy drinkers. How many of those have responsibility for nuclear weapons?"

John G. Libb of the Washington Times asked if Americans were wrong to be concerned about Pakistan's nuclear stockpile given the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Pakistan. Colonel Zhalot replied: "Millions of Americans believe that these are the last days and that they will be raptured to heaven at the end of the world. You have a president who describes Jesus as his favorite philosopher, and one of the last remaining candidates in your presidential primaries is a preacher who doesn't believe in evolution. Many Pakistanis worry that the United States is being taken over by religious extremists who believe that a nuclear holocaust will just put the true believers on a fast track to heaven. We worry about a nutcase U.S. president destroying the world to save it."

U.S. diplomats in Pakistan declined comment.


-Hugh Gusterson, 5 February 2008

This is one of the best damn articles I've ever read.

Down to something like 10 challenges left in SSBB with everyone and everything unlocked. Now it's gone back to the old Horseshoe days of me, Mike and Scrub kicking the ever-loving shit out of whoever steps in our way.

Not gonna lie. Things have been difficult. But when are they not difficult? I'll live.

The position of the French prior to the commencement of hostilities in 1939 has always puzzled me. I can understand the defeatist reasoning to a point. A lot of people forget how brutal World War I was; the death of 2 million Frenchmen led to the loss of a generation of people. That's a heavy blow, and after that I can understand making heavy sacrifices for peace. It's why I've revised my opinion of Neville Chamberlain. The guy wanted peace, and I can't fault it, even if he was tricked by one of the most deceptive human beings in history.

But how can you sell your country down the river? I'm talking about the fuckers like Darlan, who SWORE ON HIS HONOR that he wouldn't let the French Navy fall into the hands of the Nazis, and then all of a sudden he gets made Minister of Marine of Vichy and he sells out. That fucker got exactly what he deserved.

I guess France gets such a hard time because the few guys that were fighting back, like PM Reynaud (a really honorable guy), don't get a lot of recognition in the history books. Plus, you compare the vast majority of the French high command to guys like Haakon VII and they get overshadowed.

I love Haakon VII. I think he's one of the coolest kings in history. He was the first king of Norway in 600 years, and he was democratically elected (brother of Christian X of Denmark, who had no problem selling out to the Reich). He was, essentially, a regular dude who was king of a small country. But when the honor and safety of his people were threatened he became a complete hardass and told the Nazis to fuck off and broadcasted a speech commanding every Norweigian to resist the invaders. In case you don't know a lot about WWII, Norweigian resistance fighters were bad motherfuckers.

Even a guy like Count Ciano stands out. Given, he was the right-hand man of Mussolini, but he hated the Germans and didn't want Italy drawn into a European war, and especially didn't want a World War. When the time came to overthrow Mussolini (the first time), he led the charge. That's why the SS arrested him after re-instating Mussolini and had him executed. I highly recommend you read his final entry in his diaries, which his wife managed to smuggle out of Italy somehow in a crazy story I can't relate here. He wrote it in his Verona cell the night before he was killed, and it's incredibly moving. The line "But they have miscalculated" is one of the biggest fuck-yous in human history.

Eh. Talking about World War II is certainly better than talking about a Wednesday. The curse has returned full-force.

I'm reading Rise and Fall of the Third Reich for like the billionth time right now. Not only is it a great historical record but it's one of the most well-written histories you'll ever read. Very enthralling.

However, I think I've noticed something that might require some research. I think Shirer had some Socialist leanings. I'm going back over the chapter on the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact, and while he takes the critical tone of Stalin that every historian takes, prior to that chapter he pleads the case of the Soviets in an almost apologetic manner.

For example, when discussing the events leading up to the Munich agreement, Shirer waxes on a bit about the efforts of Litvinov (admittedly, a pretty smart and long-sighted individual) to persuade France to honor its treaty obligations. Under the mutual assistance pact established between the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia, the Red Army could only come to Czech aid if France supported her with military action as well. Furthermore, he elaborates on Voroshilov's attempts to get the British and French to pressure Poland and Rumania into allowing Red Army troops onto their territories, something the Polish weren't keen on (to their detriment).

The fact of the matter is that despite the Blood Purge of 1936, Stalin knew damn well that Hitler wanted war way before 1939, and admitted as much to Churchill after the commencement of Barbarossa. He argued that the peredyshka - breathing space - the USSR gained was more important when Hitler decided to move east. But in expecting the Western democracies to act, he lost all chance of a Western front, which is the only surefire way to defeat the Germans. No matter how armed and trained the Nazis were, the General Staff would have NEVER accepted orders to fight two fronts, or (in my opinion) even one if the USSR had taken unilateral action in '38.
If Hitler sent Ribbentrop to the bargaining table with the "Stalin Wall" actually fortified with decent troops, Stalin and Molotov could have told them to fuck off and if they DARED step to Poland, the Red Army would tell the Pole colonels to fuck off and invade Poland just to counter the Nazis. Then they oculd've probably kept some of the territory they got for striking a bargain with Hitler after the war, and maybe even had a legitimate claim to the Balkan states without the acrimony that came up when the Soviet Union jacked it with a German guarantee.

If Stalin had acted with good will instead of being the cold bastard that he was, he could've gotten more for less (I think).

I've been waiting for this day since I got the Wii. I honestly bought this system for two reasons: the Virtual Console and SSBB. I mean, I was pumped about Super Mario Galaxy and Twilight Princess, but these were games that were slated for earlier systems (in SMG's case, that was supposed to come out for the N64) and there was a level of expectation there; a better version of the same formula.

I'm psyched about SSBB because of Sonic. That's it. I want to pummel Nintendo players into the ground with the Sega icon. I have years and years of pent-up rage that the Sega systems never got the love and respect they deserved.

The Sega CD was pioneering. CD format combined with the cartridge system; something Nintendo wanted to do with the Super Famicom but never had the stones to go through with it. You saw some of the best RPGs ever made for the Sega CD, along with really unique games that utilized the VCD-capability for really interesting experiences.

The Saturn was, admittedly, poor in some aspects. It's poor because Sega thought that a wild 32-bit 2D experience was what gamers were looking for (see Astar for what I'm talking about; I sometimes get misty that I'll never get to play that game again), not shoddy 3D with polygons the size of cats. Sony announced the PSX and Sega felt they had to change up to be competitive. Sega, you didn't need to change, baby. The PSX was a whore who took it where she could get it. You had STANDARDS. But the system changed up to compete in 3D design, so you had problems. Still, it was amazing as an arcade emulator and again you saw games that were really outside of the box; the kind of thing you see in old-school PC gaming design.

The Dreamcast was the best system of its generation. Period. The fact that there's still such large support for it bears it out. You had amazing hardware that was really easy to design for, and you saw some back-to-basics shit that was amazing (re: Ikaruga). The Sonic Adventure games showed a level of re-invention that Nintendo has never been capable of on a consistent level. You had epic RPGs, competent shooters for a console, the best versions of the hottest arcade fighting games PLUS some homebrewed multi-player stuff that was addictive. It was a console for the gamers that appreciated what was the pinnacle of console design. Effective 4-player games. Online capability (Sega had already made waves with that technology 10 YEARS EARLIER with the Sega Channel).

And who can forget the original Sega Genesis? If you like a Nintendo port of a Sega game more than the Sega original, you're retarded, plain and simple. Sega had the first effective wireless controllers. You could aim those bastards at a wall 30 feet away and get no interference. There was no comparison until the Wavebird. They were ALWAYS willing to take chances with the American market, while Nintendo took the games that were too good for us round-eyes like Seiken Densetsu 3 and kept them for themselves. Sega believed in American gamers because they weren't the usual elitist-racist Japanese game designers, and we shat on them in return.

So I gotta get one back for Sega. I'm going to teach these Nintendo fucks to appreciate game design by destroying their self-esteem with a Sonic spin to the grill.

I gotta call Ferret and Vick and get their Wii numbers today, I've emailed everyone else with my own. I'm so psyched. I honestly want to get a larger TV just to enjoy this game more. I DON'T HAVE CABLE OR A DVD PLAYER, and I want a larger TV for this game alone.

Truthfully though, I might get some King Dedede action in as well. That'd be fun.

5411 7897 0233 6192.

You can enter that number into your Wii once you have Super Smash Brothers Brawl.

My recommendation for a nickname is "Thanatos".

Seriously, you step into my domain and I will flay your SOULS.