FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics » Particle
Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 12 of 12 [177 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, ..., 10, 11, 12
Author Message
Bill Ward
science forum beginner


Joined: 05 Aug 2005
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:33 am    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:17:05 GMT, mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
wrote:

<snip>
Quote:

It appears, unfortunately, that you've soaked only too well the
nonsense that is taught to kiddies in our culture, how "good people"
are those who act for what they believe in while "bad people" are
selfish, caring only for personel profit. So then, when you encounter
people whose actions, though apparently motivated by a belief/ideology,
you view as "bad", you rationalize your cognitive dissonance away by
stating "oh, they don't really believe in this, they just pretend to
do so in order to grab power". This is infantile nonsense. Good/bad
and selfish/selfless are orthogonal dimensions. The nun who goes to
work with leprosy patients in some hellhole in central Africa, for the
glory of God, and the nut who bombs abortion clinics, also for the
glory of God, are both selfless, willing to sacrifice their well being
and even their life for an idea. Idealism is not inherently good,
neither inherently bad, it is a motivating force (a very potent one)
and the results depend on the way in which the force is used. True,
there are people who use pretend idealism as a tool, to acquire power.
there are also people who sincerely believe their ideology, and
acquire power so as to advance this ideology (and these are the most
dangerous). If you'll take the Nazis for example (an exemption fro
Goodwin's law is in order, IMO, since this is relevant), there is no
doubt that there were many there for whom it was just a matter of a
cynical power grab. There is also no doubt that for many, including
many of the top ones, it was a deep and sincere belief. Joseph
Goebbels and his wife, for example not only committed suicide in the
bunker in Berlin (which could be rationalized away by saying "hey,
they knew they're gonners anyway") but took their kids with them, not
being able to tolerate the idea that the kids will grow up in a world
where Nazism doesn't rule. If you think this is not an act of true
believers, then I don't know how you would define one.

Of course, when confronted with such actions and still not willing to
admit that these people believe in what they're doing, we've always the
next rationalization available, namely "oh, they're just crazy". But
that's an empty phrase. All it means is "their worldview is so
different from ours that there is no room for coexistence between the
two". Sure. That's why they need to be eradicated, else they'll
eradicate us. But it in no way means that they don't truly, sincerely
believe in what they're doing and, in fact, it would've been a very
dangerous assumption to think that this is the situation. You cannot
deal with reality by trying to rationalize it away.

Thanks, Mati, that's one of the best summaries I've seen.
Truth is not always beauty.

Regards,

Bill Ward
Back to top
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
science forum Guru


Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 434

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:41 am    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

In article <44bf22f2.127909140@localhost>, bwardREMOVE@ix.netcom.com (Bill Ward) writes:
Quote:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:17:05 GMT, mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
wrote:

snip

It appears, unfortunately, that you've soaked only too well the
nonsense that is taught to kiddies in our culture, how "good people"
are those who act for what they believe in while "bad people" are
selfish, caring only for personel profit. So then, when you encounter
people whose actions, though apparently motivated by a belief/ideology,
you view as "bad", you rationalize your cognitive dissonance away by
stating "oh, they don't really believe in this, they just pretend to
do so in order to grab power". This is infantile nonsense. Good/bad
and selfish/selfless are orthogonal dimensions. The nun who goes to
work with leprosy patients in some hellhole in central Africa, for the
glory of God, and the nut who bombs abortion clinics, also for the
glory of God, are both selfless, willing to sacrifice their well being
and even their life for an idea. Idealism is not inherently good,
neither inherently bad, it is a motivating force (a very potent one)
and the results depend on the way in which the force is used. True,
there are people who use pretend idealism as a tool, to acquire power.
there are also people who sincerely believe their ideology, and
acquire power so as to advance this ideology (and these are the most
dangerous). If you'll take the Nazis for example (an exemption fro
Goodwin's law is in order, IMO, since this is relevant), there is no
doubt that there were many there for whom it was just a matter of a
cynical power grab. There is also no doubt that for many, including
many of the top ones, it was a deep and sincere belief. Joseph
Goebbels and his wife, for example not only committed suicide in the
bunker in Berlin (which could be rationalized away by saying "hey,
they knew they're gonners anyway") but took their kids with them, not
being able to tolerate the idea that the kids will grow up in a world
where Nazism doesn't rule. If you think this is not an act of true
believers, then I don't know how you would define one.

Of course, when confronted with such actions and still not willing to
admit that these people believe in what they're doing, we've always the
next rationalization available, namely "oh, they're just crazy". But
that's an empty phrase. All it means is "their worldview is so
different from ours that there is no room for coexistence between the
two". Sure. That's why they need to be eradicated, else they'll
eradicate us. But it in no way means that they don't truly, sincerely
believe in what they're doing and, in fact, it would've been a very
dangerous assumption to think that this is the situation. You cannot
deal with reality by trying to rationalize it away.

Thanks, Mati, that's one of the best summaries I've seen.

Well, thank you.

Quote:
Truth is not always beauty.

Indeed. It is what it is, not what we wish it to be.


Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Back to top
jmfbahciv@aol.com
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:49 am    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

In article <n9uvg.29$25.833@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
Quote:
In article <e9l85h$8u0_001@s997.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <nNvug.2$25.230@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e9d8ta$8qk_001@s850.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <Scvtg.29$45.1693@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
snip
snip


Quote:
Makes perfect sense, that's the intelligentsia's justification for
their claim to supremacy, "these commoners, they're like children,
without us they'll be lost".

I beleive that is a direct quote. :-)

It might be:-) I know the style, my family was Eastern European
intelligentsia.

Sounds familiar?

In Massachusetts and female? Are you kidding?!

I was thinking more along the lines of Massachusetts Democrats.

They are still trying to shove it down my throat. The poor
babies have been side-tracked a little bit. The bad news
is that Kennedy and Kerry aren't taking part in the
distraction.

You mean the Bid Dig, I gather.

Right. Now these types are complaining that the governor didn't
_talk_ about the problem enough. Instead he stopped yapping and
started to do what he legally could (which was almost nothing).
These liberals are also promoting the fiction that the governor
hasn't done anything, including flapping lips, for the past two
years. Yet their news has reported the mess at least once a week.
Another instance of abject stupidity. What is worse, people are
repeating the lie rather than remembering what has really happened.
Now the governor has legal control on teensy little piece of the
project and he's doing something about it just like any businessman
would. But nobody is noticing this one.

<snip>

Quote:
There are still
states fighting over border definitions. The difference is
that they hire lawyers instead of soldiers and use weapons of
words rather than bullets.

And this difference is called *being agreeable*. Because in
principle, when the words and the lawyers failed to deliver to you
what you want, there is in principle the next option, which is use
bullets. Yet, since the Civil War this didn't happen.

It's easier to send your pet lawyers to court than convince
your men to kill the guy in the next state who is supplying
your raw material.

It is easier, till you lose in court. Keep in mind that half the
po=eople going to courts lose.

<grin> Not if the court case goes on in perpetuity. I can't recall
which two states...New Hampshire and Maine (I think) are still
discussing a boundary issue.

Quote:
I think the reaons the US' worked is because everybody who
did come to the US had a high intolerance level of being
told what to do with themselves. We're still allergic
to that.

That's not good enough. The Greeks had ample measure of this. It is
the right medicine to prevent establishment of tyranny but, by itself,
it can have just the opposite (and equally detrimental) effect, this
of disintegration.

But the Greeks were not all inclusive. The people who did the
real work didn't have a say...did they?

In a society where fighting was common place, the soldiers were "the
people who did the real work". And they had enough to say. No, it
wasn't the absence of all inclusiveness that tore Greece, it was the
high percentage of "my way or no way" people.

I wonder if this has to do with geographic divisions. If the
organizations are small in area, like towns, with no recognized
higher authority, like our states or nation, I can see how that
would happen. I don't know; everything gets complicated.

/BAH
Back to top
Dirk Bruere
science forum addict


Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 62

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:35 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

bill wrote:

Quote:

But... one thing to note is that there is not 1 non-muslim
country that has not been targetted by muslim terrorists this decade.

Actually, the vast majority of non-Muslim nations have not been
targetted in any way. Unless, of course, you count petty crime by
someone nominally 'Muslim'.

Dirk
Back to top
bill1
science forum beginner


Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 46

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:07 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
Quote:
bill wrote:


But... one thing to note is that there is not 1 non-muslim
country that has not been targetted by muslim terrorists this decade.

Actually, the vast majority of non-Muslim nations have not been
targetted in any way. Unless, of course, you count petty crime by
someone nominally 'Muslim'.

Perhaps I should have said not 1 country of significance. granted
borneo and lichtenstein haven't been targeted, possibly because they
are too small.
However, the list of countries that HAVE been targetted includes
every country that is of significance in world affairs. including a
lot of countries with pretty frosty relations with the us.
Back to top
Dirk Bruere
science forum addict


Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 62

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:25 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

bill wrote:
Quote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
bill wrote:

But... one thing to note is that there is not 1 non-muslim
country that has not been targetted by muslim terrorists this decade.
Actually, the vast majority of non-Muslim nations have not been
targetted in any way. Unless, of course, you count petty crime by
someone nominally 'Muslim'.

Perhaps I should have said not 1 country of significance. granted
borneo and lichtenstein haven't been targeted, possibly because they
are too small.
However, the list of countries that HAVE been targetted includes
every country that is of significance in world affairs. including a
lot of countries with pretty frosty relations with the us.

A more relevant question, and one that would take more research than I'm
willing to give it, would be:

What nations with a Muslim population exceeding x% have not been subject
to Islamic terrorism?

Dirk
Back to top
lucasea@sbcglobal.net
science forum beginner


Joined: 30 Jun 2006
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

"bill" <ford_prefect42@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1153366522.225273.48390@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
For instance, hitler, stallin, the khmer rouge, or bin laden.
"you are better than everyone else" is an easy concept to sell.
I don't see much of this rhetoric.
I do. Unfortunately, it mostly appear to be coming from my own
government.
I am a US citizen, and I love my country, but not so much that I think
the
First Moron and his so-called neo-con cronies have the right to strut
around
the world forcing our viewpoint down everyone else's throat, all in the
name
of "I'm a 'Mur'can, an' if ya' ain't with me, yer agin' me!" Heck, in
the
First Dodos viewpoint, we're such a great country that we have the right
to
play word-games to ignore the Geneva convention and our own Constitution,
as
long as his puppet Gonzales says it's OK.

Enough of the rhetoric does come from our own. That's a problem.

But... one thing to note is that there is not 1 non-muslim
country that has not been targetted by muslim terrorists this decade.
If it were just the US, I am realistic enough to shrug it off. but it
isn't. it's france, egypt, england, japan, china, russia.

Many of those are considered puppets of Washington, and are part of the
western power structure. Also, I'm not sure the motivation is the same in
all places--I think that assuming so oversimplifies a complex situation.
Take the Chechnyans--I think their issue with Russia is more about
sovereignty and Russia not wanting to let go of old Iron Curtain ties. I'm
not familiar with the attacks in China, so I can't comment there.

Quote:
there just
isn't anywhere that isn't either victimized by or perpetrating
islamo-terrorism. The IRA were religiously motivated terrorists, but
they were at least focused on england.

I think that is a bit disingenuous. They were motivated by exactly the same
thing that motivated the American colonies--the desire for sovereignty.
Their religious difference with England may have provided impetus to that
drive, but I don't think they're religiously motivated in the same way that
conservative neo-con Christians and Muslims are. Now that England has
agreed to back off, the Irish situation has improved dramatically.

Quote:
and the "great satan" crap does
come from a great deal of muslim mouths.

and
from there "we should kill all the inferiors" is even easier. after
that, the pure enjoyment of killing takes over.
But the message isn't about inferiors.

I know this isn't what you're talking about, but that's exactly what the
neo-con message is about. We're so much better than those evil Muslims,
that we can lock them up on an island 90 miles offshore and throw away
the
key...even though most of those locked up have not a shred of evidence
against them, and most of them probably had nothing to do with any acts
of
terrorism. Yeah, we're letting some of them go now...after having taken
three years of their lives without so much as a "so long and thanks for
all
the fish." How's that for a human rights record??? And we're so much
better than them damn' queers that we can refuse to allow them the single
most basic right that most cultures hold sacred--a family. And
Christians
are so much better than athiests, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, etc., that they
can
shove symbols of the Christian religion down everybody's throats
whenever.
The list goes on, but at heart, it's all about proving to various groups
that are different than us how much better we are than them.

I agree that that message is being broadcast. The truth is that
we are NO better than the muslim world, in many ways, their culture is
much stronger and better than ours. however, the shrub's message that
"they hate our freedom" is not totally off the mark.

I think it's a load of crap thrown up by the First Toadbrain to rally the
his redneck neo-con religious-right 'Mur'can power base. It's too pat, and
it badly oversimplifies a complex situation--and completely abbrogates our
responsibility to behave like good world citizens. In reality, I suspect
it's much closer to the truth to say that they hate the fact that our values
are being shoved down their throats. I believe there are universal
motivators in human behavior, and I know that I would resent the hell out of
the US government if I lived elsewhere. It may have blossomed to more than
that in the past couple decades, but I think that was the basis of it. And
again, I come back to my deep desire to see my government behave in such a
manner that they don't foster such resentment.

Quote:
Read the koran. This is exactly what is demanded in every line of
it.

Might want to look in the mirror. That statement says more about you
than
it does about the Koran. As most religion is based on allegory and
analogy,
much of it can be interpreted in any way the reader chooses. And it
appears
that you choose to blame the Koran for terrorism, rather than understand
why
there is so much Arab resentment of US foreign policy. Sure, some of the
Koran can be interpreted as sanctioning violence...but so can the Old and
New Testaments of the Bible--you know, that great tome that the neo-cons
use
as their justification for treating Jews, atheists, Muslims, gays, etc.,
badly. An eye for an eye, eh? That sure sounds to me like it condones
violence.

It is a condoning of violence. however, the old and new testament
are conflicted on this. the new testament is pretty peaceful, the old
is violent as s**t. in Islam, the "new testament" is the koran, which
dictates "god's law" of acceptable behavior and sets down all the evils
we see.

Well, I'm not a student of Islam, I'm just basing my say on what a couple of
peaceful, level-headed and open-minded Muslim friends of mine have told me
about the Koran and the Islamic situation in the world. Unfortunately, I
don't read Arabic, so I the only thing I would really be qualified to
comment on (and I suspect this is your situation too) is the particular
slant that a translator has given to a particular English translation.

Still, whether or not the Koran condones violence, we have no control over
that. What we do have control over is our own behavior, and we have to take
responsibility for its effect. Making other excuses only serves as a
smoke-screen to abbrogate our own responsibility to be good world citizens.

Eric Lucas
Back to top
Richard Herring
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 19 May 2005
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

In message <1153404477.672133.180780@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, bill
<ford_prefect42@hotmail.com> writes
Quote:

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
bill wrote:


But... one thing to note is that there is not 1 non-muslim
country that has not been targetted by muslim terrorists this decade.

Actually, the vast majority of non-Muslim nations have not been
targetted in any way. Unless, of course, you count petty crime by
someone nominally 'Muslim'.

Perhaps I should have said not 1 country of significance. granted
borneo and lichtenstein haven't been targeted, possibly because they
are too small.

Borneo is the world's third largest island, and contains (parts of)
three distinct countries.

HTH.

--
Richard Herring
Back to top
bill1
science forum beginner


Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 46

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:33 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

Quote:
I am a US citizen, and I love my country, but not so much that I think
the
First Moron and his so-called neo-con cronies have the right to strut
around
the world forcing our viewpoint down everyone else's throat, all in the
name
of "I'm a 'Mur'can, an' if ya' ain't with me, yer agin' me!" Heck, in
the
First Dodos viewpoint, we're such a great country that we have the right
to
play word-games to ignore the Geneva convention and our own Constitution,
as
long as his puppet Gonzales says it's OK.

Enough of the rhetoric does come from our own. That's a problem.

But... one thing to note is that there is not 1 non-muslim
country that has not been targetted by muslim terrorists this decade.
If it were just the US, I am realistic enough to shrug it off. but it
isn't. it's france, egypt, england, japan, china, russia.

Many of those are considered puppets of Washington, and are part of the
western power structure. Also, I'm not sure the motivation is the same in
all places--I think that assuming so oversimplifies a complex situation.
Take the Chechnyans--I think their issue with Russia is more about
sovereignty and Russia not wanting to let go of old Iron Curtain ties. I'm
not familiar with the attacks in China, so I can't comment there.

In many cases that is understandable. However, in many cases it
isn't. It does oversimplify a complex situation, however, we can sit
and debate how complex it is for the rest of our lives, and neither we
nor anyone else will ever reach a consensus. There comes a time to
stop debating and start killing. When exactly is that time in your
mind? in mine it is when it becomes obvious that someone is going to
die. at that point, it's them or you and generally, I prefer to make
it them.

Quote:
there just
isn't anywhere that isn't either victimized by or perpetrating
islamo-terrorism. The IRA were religiously motivated terrorists, but
they were at least focused on england.

I think that is a bit disingenuous. They were motivated by exactly the same
thing that motivated the American colonies--the desire for sovereignty.
Their religious difference with England may have provided impetus to that
drive, but I don't think they're religiously motivated in the same way that
conservative neo-con Christians and Muslims are. Now that England has
agreed to back off, the Irish situation has improved dramatically.

Terrorism is a description of methods, not motivations. Any
non-uniformed covert group who exclusively attacks civilian targets for
the sole purpose of creating political/media responses is a terrorist.
if they attack military targets, they are guerilla fighters, if they
attack civilian infrastructure with the intentions of damaging
industrial bases, they are guerilla fighters. If they blow up cafes,
they are terrorists.

Quote:
I agree that that message is being broadcast. The truth is that
we are NO better than the muslim world, in many ways, their culture is
much stronger and better than ours. however, the shrub's message that
"they hate our freedom" is not totally off the mark.

I think it's a load of crap thrown up by the First Toadbrain to rally the
his redneck neo-con religious-right 'Mur'can power base. It's too pat, and
it badly oversimplifies a complex situation--and completely abbrogates our
responsibility to behave like good world citizens. In reality, I suspect
it's much closer to the truth to say that they hate the fact that our values
are being shoved down their throats. I believe there are universal
motivators in human behavior, and I know that I would resent the hell out of
the US government if I lived elsewhere. It may have blossomed to more than
that in the past couple decades, but I think that was the basis of it. And
again, I come back to my deep desire to see my government behave in such a
manner that they don't foster such resentment.

I am not sure that's possible, nor am I sure that it is even
mostly the doing of the government. our brodcasts do not care about
borders, our "aid agencies" fight to "Help the women out of their
oppression", our oil companies buy their oil, and our soldiers and
tourists set foot on their holy ground. there isn't any way of
stopping any of these things. Our government has been acting
heavy-handed, but that isn't the only problem, or the only cause of
their anger.

Quote:
Read the koran. This is exactly what is demanded in every line of it.
Might want to look in the mirror. That statement says more about you
than
it does about the Koran. As most religion is based on allegory and
analogy,
much of it can be interpreted in any way the reader chooses. And it
appears
that you choose to blame the Koran for terrorism, rather than understand
why
there is so much Arab resentment of US foreign policy. Sure, some of the
Koran can be interpreted as sanctioning violence...but so can the Old and
New Testaments of the Bible--you know, that great tome that the neo-cons
use
as their justification for treating Jews, atheists, Muslims, gays, etc.,
badly. An eye for an eye, eh? That sure sounds to me like it condones
violence.
It is a condoning of violence. however, the old and new testament
are conflicted on this. the new testament is pretty peaceful, the old
is violent as s**t. in Islam, the "new testament" is the koran, which
dictates "god's law" of acceptable behavior and sets down all the evils
we see.
Well, I'm not a student of Islam, I'm just basing my say on what a couple of
peaceful, level-headed and open-minded Muslim friends of mine have told me
about the Koran and the Islamic situation in the world. Unfortunately, I
don't read Arabic, so I the only thing I would really be qualified to
comment on (and I suspect this is your situation too) is the particular
slant that a translator has given to a particular English translation.

I have such level-headed muslim friends as well. and I also know
christians who can cite biblical scholars who can explain exactly why
the bible does not say what it says. the koran has been translated
many times by people from differing backgrounds and with differing
beliefs. to blame "slay the unbeliever wherever you may find him" on a
translation issue is ludicrous, especially when it appears across ALL
translations.

Quote:
Still, whether or not the Koran condones violence, we have no control over
that. What we do have control over is our own behavior, and we have to take
responsibility for its effect. Making other excuses only serves as a
smoke-screen to abbrogate our own responsibility to be good world citizens.

One of the responsibilities of a good citizen is to kill when the
situation mandates. when war is declared, as it was LONG ago, to fight
until 1 side or the other surrenders. that has not been done. we
gave peace a chance, now it's time to give war a shot.
Back to top
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
science forum Guru


Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 434

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:54 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

In article <e9njj6$8qk_001@s887.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
Quote:
In article <n9uvg.29$25.833@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e9l85h$8u0_001@s997.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <nNvug.2$25.230@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <e9d8ta$8qk_001@s850.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <Scvtg.29$45.1693@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
snip
snip

Makes perfect sense, that's the intelligentsia's justification for
their claim to supremacy, "these commoners, they're like children,
without us they'll be lost".

I beleive that is a direct quote. :-)

It might be:-) I know the style, my family was Eastern European
intelligentsia.

Sounds familiar?

In Massachusetts and female? Are you kidding?!

I was thinking more along the lines of Massachusetts Democrats.

They are still trying to shove it down my throat. The poor
babies have been side-tracked a little bit. The bad news
is that Kennedy and Kerry aren't taking part in the
distraction.

You mean the Bid Dig, I gather.

Right. Now these types are complaining that the governor didn't
_talk_ about the problem enough. Instead he stopped yapping and
started to do what he legally could (which was almost nothing).
These liberals are also promoting the fiction that the governor
hasn't done anything, including flapping lips, for the past two
years. Yet their news has reported the mess at least once a week.
Another instance of abject stupidity. What is worse, people are
repeating the lie rather than remembering what has really happened.

Most people have the attention span of gnats and their memory of
remote past ("remote" meaning more than few weeks ago) is kinda hazy.

Quote:
Now the governor has legal control on teensy little piece of the
project and he's doing something about it just like any businessman
would. But nobody is noticing this one.

Of course they don't. Surprised?


Quote:
snip

There are still
states fighting over border definitions. The difference is
that they hire lawyers instead of soldiers and use weapons of
words rather than bullets.

And this difference is called *being agreeable*. Because in
principle, when the words and the lawyers failed to deliver to you
what you want, there is in principle the next option, which is use
bullets. Yet, since the Civil War this didn't happen.

It's easier to send your pet lawyers to court than convince
your men to kill the guy in the next state who is supplying
your raw material.

It is easier, till you lose in court. Keep in mind that half the
po=eople going to courts lose.

grin> Not if the court case goes on in perpetuity. I can't recall
which two states...New Hampshire and Maine (I think) are still
discussing a boundary issue.

Again, this can only exists when the intrinsic agreement not to resort
to other means exists.
Quote:

I think the reaons the US' worked is because everybody who
did come to the US had a high intolerance level of being
told what to do with themselves. We're still allergic
to that.

That's not good enough. The Greeks had ample measure of this. It is
the right medicine to prevent establishment of tyranny but, by itself,
it can have just the opposite (and equally detrimental) effect, this
of disintegration.

But the Greeks were not all inclusive. The people who did the
real work didn't have a say...did they?

In a society where fighting was common place, the soldiers were "the
people who did the real work". And they had enough to say. No, it
wasn't the absence of all inclusiveness that tore Greece, it was the
high percentage of "my way or no way" people.

I wonder if this has to do with geographic divisions. If the
organizations are small in area, like towns, with no recognized
higher authority, like our states or nation, I can see how that
would happen. I don't know; everything gets complicated.

There is no doubt that the geography of Greece had a lot to do with

it. Mountainous country, no clear and easily controlable routes, all
of this favors a fragmented polity. It is no accident that all the
early empires were "river empires".

And yet, Rome, starting with similar predicaments (just check out the
geography of Italy) managed to forge a unifed and stable empire, not
only accross Italy but all around the Mediterrenean. Do you realize
what it means keeping as a single entity an Empire peopled with
Mediterreneans, of all people? That's the ultimate cat-herding act,
never to be equalled or surpassed in history.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Back to top
jmfbahciv@aol.com
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 12 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 11:00 am    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

In article <1153409594.502197.185340@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"bill" <ford_prefect42@hotmail.com> wrote:

Quote:
I have such level-headed muslim friends as well. and I also know
christians who can cite biblical scholars who can explain exactly why
the bible does not say what it says. the koran has been translated
many times by people from differing backgrounds and with differing
beliefs. to blame "slay the unbeliever wherever you may find him" on a
translation issue is ludicrous, especially when it appears across ALL
translations.

Let my try to clarify my knowledge of the use of that term
unbeliever. Within the context of the time when the Koran
was written, unbeliever were those people who worshipped
idols and did not include Jews nor Christians because their
religions were direct descendents from Abraham's religion.

Is this wrong? Remember this when the Koran and its rules
were written, not how it was interpreted later. The goal
of these writings was conquering the upper Arab peninsula
and a method to gain central control of the tribes. In
addition, instead of tributes going to the local idol gods,
the wealth was redirected to Medina.

/BAH
Back to top
Gordon
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 12 May 2005
Posts: 115

PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 1:34 pm    Post subject: Re: Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure Reply with quote

On Fri, 21 Jul 06 11:00:29 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Quote:
In article <1153409594.502197.185340@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"bill" <ford_prefect42@hotmail.com> wrote:

I have such level-headed muslim friends as well. and I also know
christians who can cite biblical scholars who can explain exactly why
the bible does not say what it says. the koran has been translated
many times by people from differing backgrounds and with differing
beliefs. to blame "slay the unbeliever wherever you may find him" on a
translation issue is ludicrous, especially when it appears across ALL
translations.

Let my try to clarify my knowledge of the use of that term
unbeliever. Within the context of the time when the Koran
was written, unbeliever were those people who worshipped
idols and did not include Jews nor Christians because their
religions were direct descendents from Abraham's religion.

Is this wrong? Remember this when the Koran and its rules
were written, not how it was interpreted later. The goal
of these writings was conquering the upper Arab peninsula
and a method to gain central control of the tribes. In
addition, instead of tributes going to the local idol gods,
the wealth was redirected to Medina.

/BAH

Koran Sura 5:56 O Believers! take not the Jews or Christians as

friends. They are but one another's friends. If any one of you
taketh them for his friends, he surely is one of them! God will
not guide the evil doers.


Koran Sura 5:62 O ye who believe! Take not such of those who
have received the Scriptures before you, as scoff and jest at
your religion, or the Infidels, for your friends. but fear God if
ye are believers:
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 12 of 12 [177 Posts] Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, ..., 10, 11, 12
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Fri Jun 23, 2017 10:28 am | All times are GMT
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics » Particle
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts The ultimate 3ality Relativity 0 Wed May 21, 2008 10:53 am
No new posts The ultimate 3ality Relativity 0 Wed May 21, 2008 10:52 am
No new posts www.laloorabri.com "ULTIMATE DATING SITE" laloorabri1@gmail.com Math 0 Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:44 am
No new posts Nanotechnology Sensitization Program nstcchat@yahoo.com Electrochem 0 Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:52 am
No new posts Nanotechnology Sensitization Program nstcchat@yahoo.com Analytical 0 Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:52 am

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: Electronics forum |  Medicine forum |  Unix/Linux blog |  Unix/Linux documentation |  Unix/Linux forums  |  send newsletters
 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1036s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0579s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]