EVE Search - To those who would support slavers in Catch

All Channels

Intergalactic Summit

To those who would support slavers in Catch

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Conlin Gallente Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.01 06:51:00 - [61] No we killed a cruiser Blackbird from SSI trying to protect the tower as it was unachoring .
O Thief The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.01 11:24:00 - [62] Originally by: Kelban Kevar dont have anytower loss or stolen tower and i cant tconfirm that with any of my ppl you sure it was our and not a alle or are ya making stuff up again At Planet 7, Moon 10 of the GMLH system in Catch, a pilot known as 'Delta 40' from your alliance was guarding an unanchoring large Amarrian tower in a Blackbird-class Cruiser, along with three of his slaver associates. We had been closely watching the tower being dismantled for days. At the precise moment of unanchoring, a U'K black ops force moved in, combined with a conventional gang from another direction. Following the swift internvention of the black ops force, the protectors of the tower ran or were swiftly destroyed. At this point, I personally decloaked my Prorator (which I can assure you, despite being of Amarrian design, has been modified to accomodate employees in comfortable conditions rather than slaves) and scooped the tower. We thank you for your contribution to our just and noble cause. Remember - it is not too late to see the error of your ways and join the fight for freedom yourself. U'K are forgiving people, but until you renounce slavery and those who support it, you will only find misery in Catch. You have had fair warning. All slaver residents of Catch have had fair warning. There can be no more excuses.
Poreuomai Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.03 13:39:00 - [63] Edited by: Poreuomai on 03/01/2009 13:39:54 Originally by: Kelban Kevar lets see were do i start as far as i know my allaince does not support slavery basicly cause we dont roleplay How strange then that some of your members, like "DELTA 40" for example, have "CVA FRIENDLY." in their bio. *Let My People Go*
O Thief The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.04 14:45:00 - [64] Our struggle for freedom in Catch progresses well, despite the inconvenience of a major war. Two more slaver-friendly POS have been destroyed, with others successfully reinforced. Our warriors relentlessly hunt those who would support slavery. The message cannot be more clear: system by system, ship by ship, POS by POS, we will drive the friends of slavers from Catch relentlessly. There can be no release from this misery until slavery is renounced and freedom embraced.
O Thief The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.14 14:18:00 - [65] Our fight for freedom progresses well. Since my last update, warriors of the U'K have maintained near constant harrassement operations against the friends of slavers who made the foolish error of residing in Catch. Yet more slaver-friendly Capital class vessels met their end at the hands of our brave warriors, in the slaver associated own cyno-jammed systems. We, the U'K, thank our freedom loving friends in -A- for their contribution to these kills. Our constant patrols have also successfully forced the cancellation of major industrial operations by slaver-friendly alliances. Not only that, but as part of our harrassment campaign, we successfully disabled the Cloning and Repair facilities of a slaver pet. The message now is the same as before - if you side with slavers you are a target. If you reside in Catch even more so. We are the oldest recognised alliance in New Eden. If you hope that by closing your eyes we might just go away, or move elsewhere, you are mistaken. There will be no end, no release, no let up from our campaign until those who support slavery in Catch renounce their past, and join us as brothers in arms in the glorious fight for freedom!
Il Morte	Posted - 2009.01.14 17:35:00 - [66] Alright I just finished reading through this report and as I have been away for awhile I want to see if I get this straight. Uk has problems with CVA (we know this) as well as the people in Catch. (which last i checked would be Sylph and -A-) Uk is friends with -A- so that leaves Sylph. They attack System Shock cause they are in Catch and don't talk to them diplomatically before hand they just assume they are bad. SSI claims they are not slavers or pets of slavers they are just trying to eek out a living. However UK in their infinate minmatar wisdon decide that since they accepted help form CVA and Sylph they are bad people and rather than offer their pwn help they just attack them. UK then says join us and we will stop. SSI says no of course, as who ants to give in to terrorism other than Nancy Pelosi. SSI obviously from the reports here can not defend themselves proplerly hence UK stomping on them (although it is not stated I would venture to guess it was an SSI outpost that was hit not a Sylph or -A- outpost since -A- and UK seem to be friends now, and CVA and its little pets are in providence. So basically if I am correct so far in summing this up it appears that UK is stomping all over SSI and will only stop if SSI denounces CVA and its holders and Sylph in Catch. Which if they turn them red would cause those Alliances to stomp on SSI. So the basic question I would have is what assurances does UK offer to them for protection against CVA and co. As it seems that the oupost that SSI has is in the middle of Sylph Space and I am sure they would not want a red outpost in the middle of their space. It seems that UK really has forced SSI into a no win situation here and did not think things through properly again. I wonder if all of those years in chains and servitude has clouded their leaderships judgement. I must sign off now as my popcorn is done and I truly await the outcome of this endeavor.
O Thief The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.14 19:59:00 - [67] Edited by: O Thief on 14/01/2009 20:00:01 Originally by: Il Morte So the basic question I would have is what assurances does UK offer to them for protection against CVA and co. As it seems that the oupost that SSI has is in the middle of Sylph Space and I am sure they would not want a red outpost in the middle of their space. It seems that UK really has forced SSI into a no win situation here and did not think things through properly again. I wonder if all of those years in chains and servitude has clouded their leaderships judgement. I must sign off now as my popcorn is done and I truly await the outcome of this endeavor. Well, lets be clear in our terms of reference here. -A- are the dominant force in Catch, and some would argue the entire south, not Sylph. SSI's station system is closer to ZXIC (-A- station) than it is any Sylph station. In my opinion, and it is just my opinion, they chose the wrong side intially when setting themselves up. However, this is neither here nor there. I could only imagine -A- becoming involved in force if the Providence block dangled capital ships close to their space(ie, SSI's space), for the simple reason that they like to kill capital ships and have something of a history with the Providence residents in this respect. However, there is currently no reason for them to do that (and I doubt the Providence holders they would risk their caps anyway). I cannot speak for them but I doubt -A- are interested in the wider politics, they probably just want juicy kills, but having a friend you can call upon when juicy kills are available is certainly something we appreciate. And it can help us progress our own political aims of spreading the cause of freedom. For us though it is a good situation and, I think, a smart political move. I disagree that SSI are caught in a lose-lose situation. De-aligning themselves from the slavers cause, given their situation, is not only possible but sensible. As for us being terrorists, call it what you will. We fight for freedom at any price.
Il Morte	Posted - 2009.01.14 20:18:00 - [68] Edited by: Il Morte on 14/01/2009 20:18:55 Thank you for the response O Thief. I wonder what -A- views are in regards to Slavery as well; as I have not really heard a formal declaration from them, and if history is not mistaken (rarley mistaken though often distorted) they were once allied with the said Slavers of CVA and its Holders (ever notice how CVA has holders when everyone else has pets, I think it needs to be looked into as it is truly biased). You speak of fighting for freedom which is of all the things to fight over the most noblest of all (except for corporate profits of course) but yet I do wonder where -A- aligns itself on that front or as you said they do not care. Which last I checked was SSI's response. If -A- truly does not care then that must mean they harbor slavers as well therefore how can you ally yourself with them. It would be interesting to hear and official -A- Statement on this, and your reaction if they do not condemn slavery and all of those that hold slaves. I have read responses from most of the parties in here with the exception of Sylph I believe and an official response from -A- on the slavery issue. I hope to hear fron them soon. May your missles fly true and your stocks always rise.
O Thief The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.14 20:47:00 - [69] Well, actions do speak louder than words, and I personally take great comfort from the actions of -A- in relation to the Providence slavers. The mass slaughter of the Providence holders conventional and capital class vessels, whilst not specifically labelled as 'anti-slaver' does have that effect, by virtue of the choice of target. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Poreuomai Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.14 22:36:00 - [70] Originally by: Il Morte SSI claims they are not slavers or pets of slavers they are just trying to eek out a living. However UK in their infinate minmatar wisdon decide that since they accepted help form CVA and Sylph they are bad people and rather than offer their pwn help they just attack them. As I said earlier, "DELTA 40" for example, has "CVA FRIENDLY." in his bio.
Karn Mithralia Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.14 22:40:00 - [71] Its worth noting our targets in Catch (including IAC) have always been fench sitters to a greater or lesser degree, that is until the push comes to the shove. Sylph are perhaps the classic example in this regard. SSI are the latest in that tradition and attempted to play both sides of the diplomatic coin, poorly I may add. Its never a great idea to lie and hurl abuse at the enemies diplomat especially when he takes steps to contact you for a possible peaceful resolution. Honesty and mutual respect carries much weight, at least in my diplomatic circles. As already indicated SSI picked possibly the worst place to set up shop - on a central pipe into Sylph space and then Providence, they then inflamed the situation by trying to stop us transitting through it. What began as possibly only a poor choice of space has ended in a lot of deciet, lies and mudflinging, and ended with SSI clearly showing exactly who they support (and are supported by). I do not agree the choice was that hard when it came to working for or against U'K, after all do CVA ususally come hunting non-U'K alliances outside Providence? No they do not. However apparent power is very attractive to those who live in fear and SSI's choice has been made. Our terms have been made known, as have our goals and priorities.
O Thief The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.15 13:32:00 - [72] An interesting development has taken place. It would seem that the slaver pets within SSI are also allied with Goonswarm, and have granted them docking rights in their outpost, and jointly camped gates with them. Given that -A- are currently involved in a bloody territorial war with Goonswarm, perhaps I was mistaken when I stated earlier than -A- would have no political interest. We have naturally shared this intel, and look forward to seeing what other measures SSI might try to use in order to suppress our activity. They clearly do not understand U'K if they think such actions will prevent us from ending the profitable use of their space. We look forward to more fights in the name of freedom!
Il Morte	Posted - 2009.01.15 14:16:00 - [73] Edited by: Il Morte on 15/01/2009 14:17:42 I must admit that although I may not agree totaly with the methods being used here. I do seem to be growing a little respect for UK and their ideals. Catch definatey sounds like it is getting interesting I may have to go down there and pay it a visit. Two things that struck me quite interesting was Goons working with SSI, and Karn talking about fence sitters. I guess everyone's definition of a fence sitter is different. My thought on it would be someone who waits to see who is going to be the more powerful and win and then joining that side. A group that is neutral or doesn't want to get involved to me is not a fence sitter. Also sometimes our own actions cause different results than we want i.e. attacking SSI will force them to be friendly and seek aide from your enemy CVA. I still would like to hear from the other side on this.
zoolkhan Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.15 14:20:00 - [74] Originally by: Conlin Originally by: Kelban Kevar lets see were do i start as far as i know my allaince does not support slavery basicly cause we dont roleplay and as far as cva slpyh and the rest of providence coming down to help out that would be because your trying to oppress my allaince in to being slaves for you when you ya self are slaves and pets of -a- we came out as neutral party to a place that was unclaimed we did our own logistics and building of everything we have with out help from any one ....there were no diplomate contact with us by you guys at all cpt you you showed up and started shooting my ppl.your then drove us to get closer ties with the the very ppl you dislike with ya constant attacks and you then fall back on ya rp to justicify it as attacking slavers no sir if any one is at fault it is you and ya epic failed rping.and farther more you did not run 2 jumps away as we had scout at the station system belonging to -a- you sir ran all the way back to curse and now you spout off in here nowing not many ppl will read it cause is a uk thread good day you and yours thugs,terrorist and slaver wanna be's I am confused as to who you are trying to dupe the most , the cva slavers & their pets or us ?. You came to catch threatening myself anf my comrades with bold tales of how you will crush us before a shot was fired in anger . You bragged you took the system sov from the sylph alliance , " we stole it and sylph did nothing to stop us !" , we fought them for it !". Then you call on them to save you ?. You begged us for friendly standings between our alliances , offering us Ice & free passage , something we already have . Who's more the fool here ? , you for thinking we would fall for your lies , or the slavers who protect you when your future plans are to backstab them ?. You are out of your league Kelban . To the Audience that is affected. Conlin is leaking information here that we usually dont leak to public. However, we can prove what he said. The logs are stored safely and we can actually proof that SSI is not worth the "loyalty" of the "citadel" community. If you (addressing CVA,Sylph etc) keep your hands out of it, we will basically be cleaning your backs from a parasite. If you not keep your hands out of it, it will take us a bit longer;) but we dont mind a good fighting, you know that this is not the reason why i type it. recruiting -forum
Karn Mithralia Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.15 23:11:00 - [75] Edited by: Karn Mithralia on 15/01/2009 23:11:13 You raise a valid point Il Morte, and from an entirely objective veiw point I agree. However the benefit of hind-sight often shows that what was once a neutral stance to be in effect a fench sitting action under the guise of neutrality. It takes the rare and brave few to choose to side with the under dogs after a period of neutrality, to choose principled action over personal saftey and the ability to line ones pockets with isk.
Hardin Amarr FI-FOE Freedom of Elbas	Posted - 2009.01.16 10:58:00 - [76] It was exactly this philosophy which ended up with Ushra'Khan alienating pretty much every neutral in Providence and driving them into the CVA camp. It seems the terrorists have not learned their lesson and look set to repeat the same mistakes again. Time will tell I suppose! ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services Advert
Conlin Gallente Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.16 11:08:00 - [77] Edited by: Conlin on 16/01/2009 11:08:44 Originally by: Hardin It was exactly this philosophy which ended up with Ushra'Khan alienating pretty much every neutral in Providence and driving them into the CVA camp. It seems the terrorists have not learned their lesson and look set to repeat the same mistakes again. Time will tell I suppose! Time will tell Hardin !. SSI decidely began hostilities from the very first day demanding we stopped entering their systems before any shots were fired . So I would like to ask where have we alienated ourselves ?, SSI knew not who we were , in fact their whole understanding of sovereignity in and around of Catch at the time of their move to the area not only confused us , but they were more confused of the whole situation they had presented themselves with . For several months the few systems between Catch and Provi were empty , until one day on my daily travels to Provi from the Curse Regions I was met for the first time with SSI . Who proceeded to make threats . If they had taken the course of diplomacy from the start , instead of hostile threats then they wouldnt be in the predicament they currently find themselves in . So yes Hardin , time will tell !.
Hardin Amarr FI-FOE Freedom of Elbas	Posted - 2009.01.16 11:52:00 - [78] Edited by: Hardin on 16/01/2009 11:53:41 Well I am not going to get in a circular discussion with you terrorist. As I have not been in space myself recently and do not have full access to all the available intelligence I simply a mere observer to these events. It is therefore just my 'impression' from GalNet that UK's diplomatic skills are once again lacking and that you seem to be repeating old errors. But then again you are terrorists and murderers so I suppose that is to be expected and even (from a CVA perspective) to be welcomed ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services Advert
Conlin Gallente Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.16 11:58:00 - [79] Originally by: Hardin Well I am not going to get in a circular discussion with you terrorist. As I have not been in space myself recently and do not have full access to all the available intelligence I am a mere observer to these events. It is therefore just my 'impression' from GalNet that UK's diplomatic skills are once again lacking and that you seem to be repeating old errors. But then again you are terrorists and murderers so I suppose that is to be expected and, from a CVA perspective, welcomed [] If you have no intention of getting into a circular discussion slaver , and as you have already stated no intelligence on the matter at hand , then why bother to open discussions in the first place till you have all the evidence at hand ?. Is this another attempt of "Hardins Spin !!" ?. The errors seem to be of your own making slaver , be wary of opinions till you gather what necessary intelligence is recquired .
Hardin Amarr FI-FOE Freedom of Elbas	Posted - 2009.01.16 12:48:00 - [80] Originally by: Hardin It seems the terrorists have not learned their lesson and look set to repeat the same mistakes again. Time will tell I suppose! Simply reading this discussion and other recent GalNet debates in which some UK members have contributed is enough to get an 'impression'. If I had written an epic tome condemning the failings of UK's diplomatic policies then maybe some deeper research might have been needed but as I was simply expressing my 'impression' and have not even tried to claim some amazing insight then I can't see what you are getting so tetchy about terrorist. Whilst I know that UK have to try and undermine my credibility with accusations of spin at every opportunity the fact is that I simply tell it as I see it. Honesty is the best policy in the long run! ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services Advert
Poreuomai Minmatar Mirkur Draug'Tyr Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.16 13:07:00 - [81] I wonder whether CVA's anti-pirate stance extends to neutrals who aggress U'K?
Hardin Amarr FI-FOE Freedom of Elbas	Posted - 2009.01.16 13:46:00 - [82] Of course not. You are enemies of everyone building prosperity and civilisation in Providence. Any neutral who decides to engage you has our blessing. Of course we don't force them to shoot you but your murderous acts against neutrals in our space means few would probably restrain themselves. We do not classify neutrals as pirates simply because they shoot terrorists! That would be kind of nonsensical... ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services Advert
O Thief The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.16 14:37:00 - [83] Originally by: Hardin Of course not. You are enemies of everyone building prosperity and civilisation in Providence. Any neutral who decides to engage you has our blessing. Of course we don't force them to shoot you but your murderous acts against neutrals in our space means few would probably restrain themselves. We do not classify neutrals as pirates simply because they shoot terrorists! That would be kind of nonsensical... Not nearly as nonsensical as your contradictory statements, my dear slaver. Firstly, this is not about Providence. What goes on in Providence is a different matter to the events of Upper Catch. It is an seperate sphere of influence. What concerns the U'K is therefore the 'spilling over' of slaver ideals from that most savage and cruel of regions. The fact of the matter is that the actions of the CVA and Providence residents forced the hand of U'K in relation to abandoning NRDS in that region. The CVA ran gangs against the U'K in which neutral pilots fired upon us. We had no choice. And the CVA set that tone, not us. We have a clear, stated goal in Catch - that of harrassment, guerilla operations, and the denial of economic activity. It is focused, brutal, and highly effective. The standard repsonse of Providence residents to such threats is to form a large fleet, and slowly move in our general direction. And yet that almost comedic response is completely ineffective to our approach in this campaign. Indeed, such a 'predictable' response is not only ineffective, it is entirely counter-productive since it requires up to 100 pilots to abandon their normal activities in pointless excursions, taking several hours each day and achieving nothing. We fight when the odds are even (and have yet to lose a significant engagement in our campaign), we retreat into the shadows in the face of significantly greater numbers. But we do not go away. The 100 man fleet tires and moves away, and like oil over water we creep back and infest the area once again. We are not here to claim space, we are not here to invade Providence. The objective is focused and simple - the friends of slavers shall not know peace in Catch. They will be removed through a war of attrition and space denial. This is not conventional warfare, and it cannot be stopped. There can be no victory here for the freinds of slavers. But they do have a choice.
Algey The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.16 14:47:00 - [84] Originally by: Hardin Of course not. You are enemies of everyone building prosperity and civilisation in Providence. Prosperity built by the hands of slaves, those who labour for it but never receive the benefits. That is not civilisation, and it is not tolerable.
Conlin Gallente Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.16 15:18:00 - [85] Originally by: Hardin Originally by: Hardin It seems the terrorists have not learned their lesson and look set to repeat the same mistakes again. Time will tell I suppose! Simply reading this discussion and other recent GalNet debates in which some UK members have contributed is enough to get an 'impression'. If I had written an epic tome condemning the failings of UK's diplomatic policies then maybe some deeper research might have been needed but as I was simply expressing my 'impression' and have not even tried to claim some amazing insight then I can't see what you are getting so tetchy about terrorist. Whilst I know that UK have to try and undermine my credibility with accusations of spin at every opportunity the fact is that I simply tell it as I see it. Honesty is the best policy in the long run! If it was honesty is the best policy slaver , I would hope the next time you would get some intel on the ongoing incidents in Catch . Its a poor man who opens his mouth with criticism before the facts are before him . Your attempts of spin are renowned within , and outwith U'K Hardin , the more you say , the more that hole you keep digging gets deeper
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2009.01.16 15:54:00 - [86] Originally by: O Thief Not nearly as nonsensical as your contradictory statements, my dear slaver. And not nearly as contradictory as claiming to be opposed to slavery whilst having a senior member who attends ***tail parties hosted by someone with a record of not only owning slaves but mistreating them as well. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.*
Karn Mithralia Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.16 23:19:00 - [87] Edited by: Karn Mithralia on 16/01/2009 23:25:03 Karn laughs long and loud Ahh slaver Blake you are like a long, tedious and broken holo-reel stuck on repeat. Or perhaps a small dog with its teeth stuck in someoneÆs pants. I gather you're referring to the party I didnÆt attend, hosted by a reformed slaver holder who released 1000's of slaves into my care as part of her invitation to attend? As for honesty - Hardin you're even more entertaining than Rodg. Take a look at your posts here and see how you bury the simple truth of the matter. You crap on about peace and civilising Providence but seem to have conveniently forgotten the war that drove us freedom lovers out of Providence, a Providence we settled, civilised and encouraged (non-slaving) neutrals to live in. Much like yourselves with the obvious exception of what we stand for. As for driving fence sitters to you, note the parties discussed here (Sylph and SSI) aggressed us first. We refused to do Sylphs dirty work for them by shooting your enemies so they opened up on us and supported you. We wished to pass thru SSI's space purely as it's on a pipe to your space and they fired on us in an effort to stop our transit, purely for the sport I suspect. As Conlin says you really should do some research on your new allies. Seems clear to me slaver that they made their choice through little effort on our behalf. Yes our diplomatic stance turns some people against us, simply because we stand defiantly against slavers like you and your alliance CVA. Because we don't agree that turning a blind eye to what sugar tongued tyrants like you believe in is worth all the isks in the cluster, and we don't believe siding with the larger force is the right thing to do when that force stands for what yours does, even if defeat seems the other alternatively. Of course you will always ignore these simple realities and publicly tone down or fail to admit your slaving ways for one simple reason - you know if you were bold and honest about it you'd lose support. I have more respect for your younger members Hardin than I'll ever have for your worm tongue. At least they aren't afraid to post on this summit what it is CVA stands for.
Mister Builder SSI-Holding's SYSTEM SHOCK INITIATIVE	Posted - 2009.01.17 02:26:00 - [88] you was agresed first wich is a highly unliky story was cause you shot at us while in prov and stuff if you wanted to talk peace you should have but you didnt you just kept attacking us non-stop we came to catch to do our own thing and you attacked first then you hide behind role play wich we dont do you just keep forceing us more and more into tough situations as far as goons go were not blue to the swarm you can ask them yaself the one you saw is a ex allaince mate that come out to see what was up.and you say we played both side no we didnt wanna get involed you either of yours all wars as we were not big enough to do so you attack and attack driveing us into the arms of ya enemys we came in peace but you apparently didnt want it.aand why were on the rp subject that fights slavery why is it then you seem to wanna make slaves of your our
Garreck Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.17 03:44:00 - [89] Originally by: Karn Mithralia We refused to do Sylphs dirty work for them by shooting your enemies so they opened up on us and supported you. Hrm. Much of what you address (indeed much of what this thread addresses) is simply the fundamental differences between Ushra'Khan and CVA; from stance on slavery to foreign policy to even tactics. In general I'm happy enough to stay out of it. Years of going 'round and 'round in public discussion haven't budged either side by even the smallest measure and I'd rather not waste my breath. However, after calling Hardin a worm tongue, the above issue needs addressed. You did not "refuse to do Sylph's dirty work." You directly aligned yourselves (in the face of CVA pressure) with pirates and troublemakers-in-general who, when they were not helping you against CVA attack, preyed upon Sylph. Rather than focusing your new allies' efforts against CVA (by calling them off of Sylph) and taking advantage of a fairly obvious diplomatic opportunity to move Sylph Alliance off of the fence and into your camp, you chose to dance around the issue of piracy and make vague "enemy of my enemy" statements to justify keeping forces arrayed against CVA that you likely hoped could stave off our offensive. To those who remember such diplomatic blunders, the situation in Catch looks much the same. Time will tell. Either way, I'm personally happy to concede that CVA doesn't have the most keen perspective on the situation. I just couldn't let all this "Hardin spin" talk continue in light of the above spin concerning the original falling out between Sylph and Ushra'Khan.
Karn Mithralia Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.01.17 04:39:00 - [90] Edited by: Karn Mithralia on 17/01/2009 04:44:52 A fair response in many ways Garreck but you are wrong on Sylph, we go off topic, but IÆm enjoying the reminiscing ... During the period in question, all but one of our allies (I'm sure you can guess who), held fire on Sylph at our request, as we encouraged all our allies, even known æpiratesÆ to respect neutrals in our turf. We in return did not interfere when they met Sylph on the battlefield, being very much of the mind that people need work out their own differences where possible. Sylph certainly had the numbers to handle this single threat alone. Behind the scenes, Sylph had a territory dispute going on with us over some minor system during which they took sov from us without warning. Tension mounted and some mercs then mysteriously turned up to take pot shots at us while gripes rained down from Sylph leadership about the fact we wouldn't refuse docking rights to people we had blue, and had blue since the days we fought beside ISS against IAC. Eventually as CVA applied pressure and everyone in Providence was scrambling to choose a side, Sylph opened up on us alongside the mysterious mercs while, I hope you note, we still had Sylph neutral. The rest as they say is history. So no, itÆs not a clear cut case of us driving them into your loving arms. Seems to me Sylph played the field to their advantage and succeeded.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.