thehats

Members
  • Content count

    7,000
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About thehats

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 12/10/1984

Converted

  • Location
    Steeler Nation
  • Gender
    rather not say
  1. Aint that the freaking truth... worse yet, interpretive dance!
  2. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - JFK
  3. The only thing that is sure is that a teargas canister was fired at this guy from near point-blank range, striking him in the head, resulting in a skull fracture and coma. Afterwards, several protestors rush to his side, and some type of crowd dispersal device is lobbed into those providing aid. Both incidents were performed by police, who were not in any danger, mere feet away from the victim. That's all we really need to know. Cops shoot a guy in the face with a teargas round from point blank range, nearly killing him, and when people try to help him they hit them with some sort of explosive device, directly next to the bleeding injured victim.
  4. I see a flash and a bang. Sounds like a flashbang to me. But, seeing as how this fellow was hit in the head from a launched round, a new 203-fired explosive tear gas canister does make sense. It would release the gas quicker. Here is the issue at hand, however. This man, who had just been hit by a tear gas canister launched into his face at point blank range (splitting open his skull, putting him in a coma), was being attended to by protestors as he lie bleeding from his head on the street. Police, mere feet away from him, then decide it's a good idea to throw an explosive device on top of him as a crowd gathers to render aid. That is the problem here. Flashbang or not (and it now sounds like an explosively activated teargas canister), the police fired it at the face of an unarmed American citizen at point blank range. And as others come to his aid, they lob another one right on top of him.
  5. There is no tear gas. Tear gas comes out as a thick continuous smoke that quickly fills the entire area. The smoke you see coming from the vicinity of the flashbang is called 'smoke', and is a common occurrence when material is combusted. Tear gas rounds do NOT, I repeat do NOT, explode. They do not emit a large flash and a loud bang. That is a flashbang. The smoke you see from the flash bang is the result of the explosion. It forms a small mushroom-cloud like puff of smoke that dissipates quickly. This is a teargas round: Notice there is no bang? This is a flashbang: Notice the smoke? Again, you are a FOOL if you think that was teargas.
  6. That was a flash bang grenade. Not tear gas. You have no standing to call someone gullible after such a ridiculous statement.
  7. crazy stat: for every employee walmart has, they generate $210,000 in revenue. for apple, its $1.3million O.o
  8. also, things like this maaaay have been a factor. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/whats-the-matter-with-wisconsin-this-time/243180/
  9. it was stupid. walker is the one who needs a recall vote. not the men who did their elected job. walker never campaign on union busting. so when he gets voted into office and thats the first thing on his mind, the people felt deceived. add to it the fact that he spent $250million his first month, and then in his 2nd month he tells the state he needs $250million and some of it should come from teachers... the recall yesterday was a sham. liberal PAC's wasting their money. it never should have happened. the true fight is Walker. Not the local guys.
  10. don't know why you are surprised. this was a foregone conclusion from the moment the guy went after the unions. the moment Walker gets into office, he spends $250million....- and then a month later tells the teachers that $250million needs to come from them through union concessions, then once the concessions are made he said "okay. now no more collective bargaining". it doesnt matter what party he belongs to.spending $250million and then asking for educators to take the hit for the new spending is going to be unpopular. add to it the fact that he never ran on union busting but that was the first thing on his mind when he took office, and people who voted for him are going to feel deceived. the recall election from yesterday was pointless. it was nothing more than posturing for the lib groups, and it certainly wasn't warranted and obviously the people agreed. but recalling walker? that's a whole different story. that's something the people of wisconsin WANT put to a vote, badly. the man did not run his campaign honestly. after his recall vote, we'll see if the people of wisconsin will vote for him again knowing fully what he didn't tell them last time around whatever the outcome, i'll respect the people's choice- since this time they'll actually know his plans up front.
  11. Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner in Romancing the Stone and Arnie and Jamie Lee Curtis in True Lies.
  12. I was reading up on Transformers 3 and word is that the scenes shot in 3D worked bette than anyone could have hoped. Apparently Michael Bay and Steven Spielberg are so concerned with how awesome this movie will look that they sent letters to cinema owners requesting certain brightness and focal settings for their projectors to get the most out of the effect! Harry Knowles over at Aintitcool.com has seen it, and said that the 3D is in some ways even better than Avatar. Also, " Now, I have to warn you - if you have a deep attachment to Chicago - you may want to take some sort of relaxant before seeing this film, because Chicago will get the snot kicked out of it". ::eek!:: :-D
  13. Depends on how it's used. I've seen 2 3D movies this year, Thor and Green Lantern, and neither experience was enhanced by the extra charge for the 3D experience. On the other hand, there are 3 recent movies that stand out and give me hope for 3D. Coraline, the stop-motion animated feature about a little girl in an parallel universe, was astounding in 3D. I could not get over how much the 3D added to the experience. Tron Legacy's visuals were really enhanced by the 3D effects. Avatar. Aside from the ground-breaking visual effects and motion capture technology, the 3D was the best part. Never have I seen a movie where it felt like the screen was a window. Nothing popping off the screen, no 3D gimmick moments. The entire movie felt real because it felt like everything had weight, everything had definition. I could not imagine seeing Avatar without the 3D. I probably won't see it again until home 3D systems are up to par with the theaters. A lot of it has to do with how the 3D is presented. Is the movie shot in 3D? No? Then it's probably post-converted crap. Green Lantern had the best post-conversion (taking a 2D movie and giving it a 3D effect) I've ever seen. Almost every 3D movie these days is post-converted into 3D. When more films are shot using 3D equipment in the first place, and not turned into 3D movies later using months of computer artists time, the 3D will be worth it. Until then, after Transformers 3 (which has a bunch of footage that was shot in 3D and not post-converted), I don't think I'll see another 3D movie this year. John Carter of Mars, The Adventures of Tintin, and Men in Black 3 will be the next movies I pay for the 3D treatment. And they don't come out for a while.
  14. The Descent freaked me out two fold. Claustrophobia... and gut-chewing troglodites. Speaking of torture porn like that Seed movie, go wiki the plot of the movie "A Serbian Film" and prepare to vomit.
  15. the most underrated comedy of the decade. and possibly the most frightening first-3-minutes of any movie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXRjmyJFzrU mike judge is still pissed off that fox never gave this a wide release.