Yes, really. I agree with told all above. Let's discuss this question.

Awesome ! Glad your playing again.

Happy New Year !

Good to know. It’s not gay if it’s in the Garage.

They actually scoured the field with metal detectors to find an arrow tip point from that battle. They wanted to be sure what type of arrows the English were using. When they found it they tested a arrow built the same way and saw if it could penetrate the French armour. I won’t say anymore you need to see it what they surmise about the battle will surprise you. Really cool.

3 Friends who loved golf were on the golf course having a good time.  A storm came in and struck all 3 down with lightning killing them.

In the afterlife all 3 found themselves on a prestine golf course loaded with ducks.  A booming voice announced to them “Your reward for having lived such good lives is that you shall know heaven as being this golf course, the only rule here is that THALL SHALL NOT STEP ON THE DUCKS!”

One of the friends asked “why not”?

DO NOT QUESTION ME! - and suddenly God was gone.

A hundred years pass and the friends have a great time playing golf, but inevitably one accidently steps on a duck.  God Swoops down from the heavens with a hidiously ugly woman who he chains to the man and says “This is how you will spend the rest of eternity”.  And than they are gone.

The two remaining friends look at each other and say “Shit, DON’T STEP ON THE DUCKS!”

Being extra careful they play golf for a 1000 years, but unfortunately one of them does step on a duck.  God swoops down and grabs him up and chains him to a woman x1000 times worse than the first and says to him “this is how you will spend the rest of eternity!”

The last guy is paranoid as hell not to step on a duck.  10,000 years go by and he NEVER steps on a duck.  Still, God comes down and swoops him up.  But this time he chains him to the most drop dead, cum in your pants, hot girl you have ever seen - and than flies away.

Dumbfounded the guy tells the girl 'Wow, I don’t know what I did to deserve this".

She responds “I don’t know about you, but I stepped on a duck”.

Õî÷ó êóïèòü ñóìêó. Êàê ìîæíî åå âûáðàòü, ïî êàêèì êðèòåðèÿì?

@ezto:

Anyone know anything about Buddhism?

Yes, why?

It’s simple.  The answer is banana, Silly.  Oranges don’t have doors. :-D

I was hoping someone would open a thread about this.  Here’s a piece I wrote while exchanging e-mails with a friend on Lost in Translation.  Hope it doesn’t give anything away.
–----------
Hmm…I am wondering if my comments right now are influenced by seeing Munich over the weekend.  I felt Spielberg was reaching for a particular audience, specifically the hard conservative Israelis.  While the movie isn’t sympathetic to the Palestinians, it’s not unsympathetic to them either.  But really, it creates very thin Palestinian characters without really exploring what it is they are doing.  I believe Spielberg chose this route because he wanted to appeal to those conservatives, who really don’t give a damn what the Palestinians feel or want or need.  Rather, the movie showed everything a right-wing Israeli would see:  murders, terror, etc.  It also expressed the rage, anger, and frustration of the conservatives as well.  But then it showed what the logical extension of all those feelings, what those ideas would lead to, and not on a social level, but a deeply personal one, especially how loving Israel can make you less Jewish.

As such, I don’t think this is an Israel-Palestine movie.  It’s something that has been done rarely:  an Israel-Israel movie.  It’s an attempt in my mind to bridge the gap between the deep divisions in Israeli society.  Or maybe not bridge, but convince the other side.  Hence, its appeal and its focus are tightly played on the self-destructive nature of revenge, typical in some ways of many revenge movies recently (with the notable exception of Quentin Tarrantino), but also elevating that sensibility and relating it to a concrete social dilemma.