The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
while i was reading the 9/11 (or 11/9 if you prefer :) ) thread i noticed that the event broke a trend that seemed to follow almost every other "dark day in our nations history"
Remember when that guy was arrested for killing 90-year old woman, removing her heart and drinking her blood?
no?
well it happened and the immediate media response was "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
ok then, slightly more media coverage; remember when those 2 teenagers shot Columbine school up Littleton, Colarado?
SURE ya do!!
i'm sure you remember the same immediate media response as well: "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
** (actually, spooky as it seems, one of the kids from the columbine shootings had a note in his diary about stealing a plane and crashing it into new york. impossible for HIM to do, but quite chilling i thought...)
which brings us to the World Trade Centre. horrifying event, as were the other 2 examples but remember what happened afterwards?? "Bomb everyone!! we don't have to take this!!! wave your flags, close your fists, U.S.A.. U.S.A", etc. not once did they make mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
so playing Doom, in which you shoot fictional monsters will lead you to shoot up your school huh? better try and ban Doom then, Marilyn Manson wears makeup and black, CLEARLY insighting people to kill... best ban him too then.
so, fictional monsters and an image based in almost cartoon-like imagery then huh? not exactly grounded in reality is it?
now on the other hand, Microsoft Flight Simulator, as realistic as it can possibly be. so much so that you can log hours on the game to count towards a professional pilots liscence. made by an american company and used by flight schools the world over. The Al-Queda itself, trained and funded by the US army, given the tools with which to commit those sad events. and yet not once did anyone in US authority say "ok, we admit it, maybe that wasn't the smartest thing to do" they glazed over that bit and went straight to the invading part.
don't get me wrong, i'm not anti-US and by no means did those people deserve it, but it just seems that an atrocity against one section of society such as Columbine can be blamed on entertainments using arguements that are, at best, flimsy. yet an atrocity intended as a message to people in higher power appears to warrant a little more of a reaction that simply "ban a few games and target a few bands"
to me it kind of trivialised the unfortunate people involved in the attacks and made it more about the symbolic building and the fact that the US discovered it wasn't as bulletproof as it liked to think.
any thoughts?
Remember when that guy was arrested for killing 90-year old woman, removing her heart and drinking her blood?
no?
well it happened and the immediate media response was "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
ok then, slightly more media coverage; remember when those 2 teenagers shot Columbine school up Littleton, Colarado?
SURE ya do!!
i'm sure you remember the same immediate media response as well: "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
** (actually, spooky as it seems, one of the kids from the columbine shootings had a note in his diary about stealing a plane and crashing it into new york. impossible for HIM to do, but quite chilling i thought...)
which brings us to the World Trade Centre. horrifying event, as were the other 2 examples but remember what happened afterwards?? "Bomb everyone!! we don't have to take this!!! wave your flags, close your fists, U.S.A.. U.S.A", etc. not once did they make mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
so playing Doom, in which you shoot fictional monsters will lead you to shoot up your school huh? better try and ban Doom then, Marilyn Manson wears makeup and black, CLEARLY insighting people to kill... best ban him too then.
so, fictional monsters and an image based in almost cartoon-like imagery then huh? not exactly grounded in reality is it?
now on the other hand, Microsoft Flight Simulator, as realistic as it can possibly be. so much so that you can log hours on the game to count towards a professional pilots liscence. made by an american company and used by flight schools the world over. The Al-Queda itself, trained and funded by the US army, given the tools with which to commit those sad events. and yet not once did anyone in US authority say "ok, we admit it, maybe that wasn't the smartest thing to do" they glazed over that bit and went straight to the invading part.
don't get me wrong, i'm not anti-US and by no means did those people deserve it, but it just seems that an atrocity against one section of society such as Columbine can be blamed on entertainments using arguements that are, at best, flimsy. yet an atrocity intended as a message to people in higher power appears to warrant a little more of a reaction that simply "ban a few games and target a few bands"
to me it kind of trivialised the unfortunate people involved in the attacks and made it more about the symbolic building and the fact that the US discovered it wasn't as bulletproof as it liked to think.
any thoughts?
Page:
while i was reading the 9/11 (or 11/9 if you prefer :) ) thread i noticed that the event broke a trend that seemed to follow almost every other "dark day in our nations history"
Remember when that guy was arrested for killing 90-year old woman, removing her heart and drinking her blood?
no?
well it happened and the immediate media response was "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
ok then, slightly more media coverage; remember when those 2 teenagers shot Columbine school up Littleton, Colarado?
SURE ya do!!
i'm sure you remember the same immediate media response as well: "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
** (actually, spooky as it seems, one of the kids from the columbine shootings had a note in his diary about stealing a plane and crashing it into new york. impossible for HIM to do, but quite chilling i thought...)
which brings us to the World Trade Centre. horrifying event, as were the other 2 examples but remember what happened afterwards?? "Bomb everyone!! we don't have to take this!!! wave your flags, close your fists, U.S.A.. U.S.A", etc. not once did they make mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
so playing Doom, in which you shoot fictional monsters will lead you to shoot up your school huh? better try and ban Doom then, Marilyn Manson wears makeup and black, CLEARLY insighting people to kill... best ban him too then.
so, fictional monsters and an image based in almost cartoon-like imagery then huh? not exactly grounded in reality is it?
now on the other hand, Microsoft Flight Simulator, as realistic as it can possibly be. so much so that you can log hours on the game to count towards a professional pilots liscence. made by an american company and used by flight schools the world over. The Al-Queda itself, trained and funded by the US army, given the tools with which to commit those sad events. and yet not once did anyone in US authority say "ok, we admit it, maybe that wasn't the smartest thing to do" they glazed over that bit and went straight to the invading part.
don't get me wrong, i'm not anti-US and by no means did those people deserve it, but it just seems that an atrocity against one section of society such as Columbine can be blamed on entertainments using arguements that are, at best, flimsy. yet an atrocity intended as a message to people in higher power appears to warrant a little more of a reaction that simply "ban a few games and target a few bands"
to me it kind of trivialised the unfortunate people involved in the attacks and made it more about the symbolic building and the fact that the US discovered it wasn't as bulletproof as it liked to think.
any thoughts?
Remember when that guy was arrested for killing 90-year old woman, removing her heart and drinking her blood?
no?
well it happened and the immediate media response was "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
ok then, slightly more media coverage; remember when those 2 teenagers shot Columbine school up Littleton, Colarado?
SURE ya do!!
i'm sure you remember the same immediate media response as well: "Blame music, blame movies, blame video games!!, he listened to marilyn manson and played Shooting games!! ban them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (to semi quote the Daily Mail)
** (actually, spooky as it seems, one of the kids from the columbine shootings had a note in his diary about stealing a plane and crashing it into new york. impossible for HIM to do, but quite chilling i thought...)
which brings us to the World Trade Centre. horrifying event, as were the other 2 examples but remember what happened afterwards?? "Bomb everyone!! we don't have to take this!!! wave your flags, close your fists, U.S.A.. U.S.A", etc. not once did they make mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
so playing Doom, in which you shoot fictional monsters will lead you to shoot up your school huh? better try and ban Doom then, Marilyn Manson wears makeup and black, CLEARLY insighting people to kill... best ban him too then.
so, fictional monsters and an image based in almost cartoon-like imagery then huh? not exactly grounded in reality is it?
now on the other hand, Microsoft Flight Simulator, as realistic as it can possibly be. so much so that you can log hours on the game to count towards a professional pilots liscence. made by an american company and used by flight schools the world over. The Al-Queda itself, trained and funded by the US army, given the tools with which to commit those sad events. and yet not once did anyone in US authority say "ok, we admit it, maybe that wasn't the smartest thing to do" they glazed over that bit and went straight to the invading part.
don't get me wrong, i'm not anti-US and by no means did those people deserve it, but it just seems that an atrocity against one section of society such as Columbine can be blamed on entertainments using arguements that are, at best, flimsy. yet an atrocity intended as a message to people in higher power appears to warrant a little more of a reaction that simply "ban a few games and target a few bands"
to me it kind of trivialised the unfortunate people involved in the attacks and made it more about the symbolic building and the fact that the US discovered it wasn't as bulletproof as it liked to think.
any thoughts?
I would make a reply of your own, but you have exactly the same views as me. EXACTLY.
I want your purple shed.
Locky, you a Yorkshire feller?
yeah:)
Hurray and stuff
MSN?
MSN?
no, ADD. hehe, I'm funny. No, but I have an e-mail address:D You might have it: [email protected]
Emailing is soo much effo...
:) if you get bored, i'm probably on-line. not 2nite, at gf
Very_Metal wrote:
> which brings us to the World Trade Centre. horrifying event, as were
> the other 2 examples but remember what happened afterwards??
> "Bomb everyone!! we don't have to take this!!! wave your flags,
> close your fists, U.S.A.. U.S.A", etc. not once did they make
> mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did
> anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
Yeah, great, find me one quote from any respectable source where the suggested response to 9/11 was "bomb everyone". I'll bet money you can't, which kind of shows how inaccurate your assessment of the aftermath of the attacks is.
True, the American Flag was flown a lot, because it symbolises a nation. Last World Cup we had a fair few England flag's flying around the country as well.
I'd also suggest that your "close your fists" comment is not exactly a purely American response to tragedy, as the response of any nation to any tragedy is usually anger.
But, onwards to your last point, you say: "not once did they make
mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did
anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
For starters I think anyone who wants to try argue 9/11 was caused by games, muysic, films etc is way off mark. Secondly, no one needed to ask why, because there is no justification for purposely targeting civilians as the terrorists did, and on a larger scale the "why" was that Bin Laden's Al Qaeda group have a deep hatred of the West linked in part to the American presence and actions in the Middle East. Finding out "who" was the most important thing to do, in the hour following the first plane impact one of the Palestinian groups initially claimed responsibility for it, then, as the scale of the attack became evident, denied it. I think everyone who saw those images, especially live on tv, knew that the response against the perpetrators of it would be lethal.
As it is, we did not see a Clinton era "lob the cruise missiles in" response, but a 30 day period in which Bin Laden was clearly identified as the main backer of the attack, and the Taliban as being the government who harboured him and his supporters, and within that period the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Bin Laden were given unequivocal warnings that they surrender by the end of the 30 days or face the consequences, a UN backed campaign.
Ultimately there were reasons why 9/11 happened, but nothing justifies it, and in the end there will always be terrorism, the task now is to reduce it and make it near impossible to commit acts, by various means.
Doing so requires more than bombs, but I think there has to be a realisation that the underlying problems are not just with America and the Middle East, but within Europe and a variety of third world countries such as Somalia, Libya etc.
Anyone who thinks that the problem can be solved by looking at any one country is sadly wrong.
> which brings us to the World Trade Centre. horrifying event, as were
> the other 2 examples but remember what happened afterwards??
> "Bomb everyone!! we don't have to take this!!! wave your flags,
> close your fists, U.S.A.. U.S.A", etc. not once did they make
> mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did
> anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
Yeah, great, find me one quote from any respectable source where the suggested response to 9/11 was "bomb everyone". I'll bet money you can't, which kind of shows how inaccurate your assessment of the aftermath of the attacks is.
True, the American Flag was flown a lot, because it symbolises a nation. Last World Cup we had a fair few England flag's flying around the country as well.
I'd also suggest that your "close your fists" comment is not exactly a purely American response to tragedy, as the response of any nation to any tragedy is usually anger.
But, onwards to your last point, you say: "not once did they make
mention of the usual media target of games, music, etc. not once did
anyone ask "why?", they simply asked "who?"
For starters I think anyone who wants to try argue 9/11 was caused by games, muysic, films etc is way off mark. Secondly, no one needed to ask why, because there is no justification for purposely targeting civilians as the terrorists did, and on a larger scale the "why" was that Bin Laden's Al Qaeda group have a deep hatred of the West linked in part to the American presence and actions in the Middle East. Finding out "who" was the most important thing to do, in the hour following the first plane impact one of the Palestinian groups initially claimed responsibility for it, then, as the scale of the attack became evident, denied it. I think everyone who saw those images, especially live on tv, knew that the response against the perpetrators of it would be lethal.
As it is, we did not see a Clinton era "lob the cruise missiles in" response, but a 30 day period in which Bin Laden was clearly identified as the main backer of the attack, and the Taliban as being the government who harboured him and his supporters, and within that period the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Bin Laden were given unequivocal warnings that they surrender by the end of the 30 days or face the consequences, a UN backed campaign.
Ultimately there were reasons why 9/11 happened, but nothing justifies it, and in the end there will always be terrorism, the task now is to reduce it and make it near impossible to commit acts, by various means.
Doing so requires more than bombs, but I think there has to be a realisation that the underlying problems are not just with America and the Middle East, but within Europe and a variety of third world countries such as Somalia, Libya etc.
Anyone who thinks that the problem can be solved by looking at any one country is sadly wrong.
Page: