Naderites will break the Democratic party completely.
See, Democrats now are not an ideological party; it is more like a marriage of convenience between very different groups (it can be said about Republicans to much lower extent).
Why do I consider it the worst thing possible? Because it will break Republican party either.
Nader is a leftist fanatic, he is a fundamentalist that will never attract enough supporters to become part of the mainstream.
Thus, significant amount of moderate democrats will be willing to make a centrist party. That will lead to many moderate republican willing to lose the conservatives and join them under the direction of, say, John McCain and Joe Liberman. The new centrist party will easily capture 60% of most votes.
It might work in a parliamentary democracy, but in the US it will lead to one party getting in power forever. Stagnation is never good, I can tell you that like someone who lived in Soviet Union.
Democrats (and especially Naderites) are advocating a nanny state; they want to take any possibility you hurt yourself or others by removing your freedoms.
Nader in nothing more but a trial lawyer disgiused as a human being. What he advocates is even more money squandered by the kangaroo courts that are used by lawyers to enrich themselves.
Republicans and Libertarians have more hands off approach (with the exception of the extreme right who try to inflict their moral values on everybody). They advocate personal responsibility versus "It all is not your fault, it is some evil corporation".
Here are my articles that show what is happening to the US because of the leftist influence:
http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/barbar.html
http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/victim.html
http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/civilwar.html
(the hosting seems to be down now, but it will come up eventually).
P.S. Your line of thinking is EXACTLY Nader's line of thinking; it is his goal to destroy Democratic party and become "the new left". However, it is one of the worst things that might happen to the US.
>My very existence doesn't fit your limited view of the World.
Not like that.
>Therefore, there can only be two solutions. Either I do not exist as I am describing myself to you (therefore I am lying to myself or I am lying to you),
Good possibility of you unknowingly lying to yourself (or, more precisely, your subconscious distorting your self-image). Russian proverb states that one can see a straw in somebody else's eye and not notice a log in his own one. This is because mechanisms of psychological defence distirts your issues and the truth so that you can cope with them. This is why I have much harder time seeing my own issues in the realtime even after four years of spiritual studies.
And Guilt is a very treacherous thing; you might have one without actually feeling guilty. I have met a lot of people with htis program who were not feeling guilty, but it was guilt nevertheless.
>OR it's your own view of the World and your own righteousness which is limiting your view of the World (and therefore I can not even begin to convince you). In the end, this is your own decision to make, I can only say so much.
My view of the world has nothing to do with it. It is just my hunch about what is going on inside you. I don't want to argue, it is just an information that you might use to your gain. It is purely subjective, but I usually do not make mistakes with that; I'm something in between natural born and born again psychologist;-).
>I don't trust Memri, I think they slant their coverage.
I don't think so. I have had some reference by reading some of these articles in non-MEMRI versions (not in English).
>I've seen awful anti-Muslim coverage in english editorials in the US as well, but they're not all that frequent. If I compiled them like Memri has done, you would think that everyone in the US despises Muslims.
This was not a coverage that accused Muslims in drinking the blood of Christian infants, like Muslim do about Jews resurrecting the dirty European medieval myth...
>Egypt can say whatever they want, Bush took sides in the Israeli-Palestianian debate long ago.
It is no fucking debate, it is a war! and Bush made a CORRECT choice.
>But look at how they act. Egypt sent their foreign minister to Israel to speak with the Israeli cabinet. He was attacked by a group of Palestinians who cursed him, threw shoes at him, and called for the resumption of Jihad in Egypt. Egypt sounds far more moderate then, don't you think?
How they act? Ask for who they act, and what were the results? They try to APPEAR a "peacemongers" to the West, but in reality they haven't achieved much because it was not their goal, just a lip service. They were not able to convince Palestinians to stop terror; they give a blind eye to smuggling of weapons from their territory to Gaza; they have recalled their ambassador from Jerusalem et al.
>The Muslim brotherhood, to my knowledge, didn't tell people who to vote for, but they did enjoin their followers to support religiously conservative candidates.
What is the difference?
>I fail to see the issue here, I thought a large portion of Americans voted for Bush because it was 'sinful' to vote for a pro-choice candidate.
It was more of their personal choice.
What you fail to understand is that EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT. I mean my basic reactions are different from yours, and an Arab or a Chinese is different from either (but they are much closer to each other because they both are from a completely hierarchical society). In this in the West everyone still decides for himself. In the East it is completely different.
If you GET this difference, your understanding of the world will jump tenfold. You'll be able to understand why Chinese were so stubborn in the story with air collision, you'll understand why most Chinese or Hindi employees prefer to talk to you directly instead of going to the boss or criticizing you in the meetings et al.
This is one more article of mine that explains a lot about modern "civil war" in the US and some of the causes of Israeli-Palestinian conflict not finishing yet: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/civilwar.html
>So I'm a leftist idiot? What do you draw that conclusion on?
2 things. First, the way you talk about Bush and the US policy. Second, the way most of your ideas have an underlying thought that everyone is the same. This simplification is typical for brain-dead leftists because they use the left, logical side of the brain too much.
>I'm not, BTW.
Are you a scientist then?;-)))
>And how are you bi-cultural?
I live in the US, but I was brought up in different country and culture.
>Yes, I would like some links or sources you can refer me to.
Start with Konrad Z. Lorenz's "On Aggression" ( http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0156 687410/qid=1077609607/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/103-306963 2-8823857?v=glance&s=books ), you'll be able to find it in a library. This book will give you some underlying principles even thou these in power has vilified it and his ideas. I was lucky to find some articles in my native language by a scientist who was able to develop these ideas further and explain a lot of how humans, states and societies operate.
Then read this: http://www.geocities.com/protopop_1999/treatise.h
These explosions in Saudi Arabia were most probably made by their secret service in order to use it as a pretext for a crackdown on terrorists and islamists.
It was one of the effects of the Iraq war that I've predicted in my article that is linked here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=97775&cid=8357 310
Governments' power has declined because of NAFTA and WTO (they can't even make a tariff without getting slapped), but it still can do a lot.
My guess is that if Bush starts druilling oil in Alaska, the dollar will fall (I hate the idea of drilling there though).
The exchange rate reflects different problem. In any economy that depends a lot on foreighn trade there are experters and importers. Exporters prefer weak national currency whether importers prefer the strong one.
Most of Clintanomics was in raising this exchange rate and trading cheap foreign-made goods for jobs going out of the country. consumers thrived because of the first and some people suffered because of the second.
Trying to rationalize, I'll tell: 1) One that does not move us towards certain outcome. The goal for the President is to: - Curb the bastards at law ( www.triallawyersinc.com ); - Change the exchange rates with China and India in order to make American economy more competitive; - Move the troops out of Iraq, but AT THE RIGHT MOMENT and RIGHT WAY. If you do it wrong way, you can get long-lasting negative consequences (as Israel learned after running from Lebanon).
2) Kerry looks too much of a populist. He might not be able to do what needs to be done but what the population does not understand.
Other candidates - Dean is leftist, Edwards is a trial lawyer. Others most people haven't heard of;-).
> Ok, I am curious as to who got ridiculed and when. US ambassador to who and when?
US ambassador to Egypt (they moved him since).
http://www.memri.org/ is a pretty good site for translations out of Middle Eastern press.
>I mentioned the US government supporting free speech to point out its hypocrisy. If they can't print this stuff, then Egypt gets bashed for its lack of free speech. If they do print it, then Egypt gets bashed for not leashing reporters. You're not making sense here. What about when all the newspapers in the US poked fun of Saddam? Is that hypocrisy if they can't do the same for Bush? Remember, Bush did quip "There ought to be limits to freedom." And he wasn't laughing after saying it.
I hope you're intelligent enough to understand the difference between free speach and orchestrated media campaign. Just look at the facts: Egypt media is full of anti-Israeli bias to such extent that even after supposedly 20+ years of "peace" they hate Israel's guts. combine this fact with the fact of them arming themselves to the teeth, and you might understand that Mubarak is preparing his country to the eventual war with Israel.
>And don't strawman the topic here, who votes how their mullah tells them to vote? Name one group of people, and I'll show you that it hasn't happened yet. Not the Taliban, not Iran, definately not Iraq. The only people in question who voted as told were under Saddam Hussein's regime.
Haven't you heard about Muslim Brothers in Egypt (from the top of my head)? Mubarak even needed not to let many of them to vote in order to stay in power.
>And why would I trust a/.er opinion on oriental cultures?
Because you're a leftist idiot, and I know a lot;-). Seriously, you don't need to trust anyone. Many leftists (Chomsky, Nader et al) have a very distorted interpretation of life, and nothing can convince them.
You might easily ignore the fact that I'm bi-cultural, that I've read A LOT, that I base my opinions on understanding individual and mass psychology.
Thus, I can just give you links to a couple of books about Arabs (if we're at it) written by serious researches and a book that is a must read for everyone who wants to understand the society.
If you read Conrad Lorenz's "On Aggression" for the theory and "Savage Nation" as an example, you'll understand that the extreme rightists do not use guilt; their primary program is just "Us versus them". Leftist use this program too (calling themselves as one with a conscience;-), but it is only their guilt-inspired psyche tells "You need to be impecable" (the way their guilt understands it).
Rightists just say "You're not one of us".
And Chomsky REALLY is self-hating Jew. As someone who is Jewish, I know this type very well... It is a good example of whatever I said about guilt - many Jewish kids can't rationally explain hatreds towards them and thus assume this guilt...
> So you're saying that Egypt should take the bribe money we are giving it, and shut up?
They are supposed to have some respect, and not ridicule the ambassador's religion.
> Not all the media is state-controlled. Censorship maybe, but definately not all the papers are state-controlled.
Unfortunately, it does not work the way you think. I've lived in soviet Union and Russia, and I know how it is done. And Egypt has press controlled much more tightly than modern Russia.
>Egypt has a right to free speech. Isn't that one of Bush's stated reasons for war, because they had no rights?
If you believe that everything government states is truth and ALL that government really thinks, I feel sorry for you.
Government is like Java Sandbox for most of the population; it isolates them from whatever really happens in the world in all of its gory details.
>Besides, I don't care how much you think they should fawn over us, if you see something wrong, speak out. What, do you want them to cover stories up? The people there have a right to know that there are no WMDs. Perhaps this 'dung' as you call it could just be ugly truth about ugly leaders and ugly decisions to war.
This is a bunch of leftist BS. Why - because you try to project some Western principles into the society that is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and expect similar reaction from people who are completely different.
Imagine people who vote the way their mullah says them to vote; imagine people who don't think and don't have their own opinion. Imagine them who assume whatever some leader puts into their heads, and you get the picture of a typical person from what can be called a traditional civilization. (find/. topic about cultures and how it affects software development teams, and read what they write about oriental cultures).
> You can't take something that works on an individual level, and extrapolate it to explain behaviour of a group of people. If you can even begin to criticize Chomsky's work, you must surely know this.
Yeah? Similar causes cause different people behave in a similar way. The amount of different types of subconscious programs is limited (unlike the amount of different manifestations of even a single program).
Stupid troll, you know nothing about the Chinese society.
These techniques were for the aristocrats only, and it is your luck that you can read about them in a book that you can get from a regular bookstore.
However, you're so dumb that you won't use this opportunity to improve yourself.
And here about the causes of the overpopulation: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/civilwar.html
Their culture has not shifted towards the K-strategy yet. Actually, it has pretty much shifted because of the Communists' policies, and current growth happens not because of the fertility rate but because people live longer.
Another couple of dosens years, and the population there will start slowly shrinking.
The article was written in fall of 2002, before the war.
BTW, Saudis has also made some steps to crack down on the anti-American propaganda.
One other offender is the Egypt. They get $2bln+ each year, and still their state-controlled press puts tons of dung on the US, on some of the officials (like Colin Powell and then US ambassador who was Jewish) et al.
The reason for that is that Egypt, while formally democratic, is not really democratic at all.
One problem with the modern American mentality (as I find it) is inability to think long term.
It looks like fscked lawyers affected not just the corporate policies (where blowing a couple of thousand employees after a bad quarter is pretty much necessary in order to avoid getting sued by vultures like this: http://www.wfu.edu/users/palmitar/Courses/SecReg-P almiter/Handout/Articles/Elkind-Lerach-King-Dead.h tm ).
As someone who likes psychology and knows it pretty well, I can tell you what is wrong with Chomsky and his ilk.
It is called GUILT.
As one psychotherapist put it, "Guilt is a form of delusions de grandeur. It states 'Everything is happening because of me'. This is the line a child assumes when something goes wrong in his surroundings - like, for example, when parents are fighting all the time et al".
When one has guilt, he starts projecting it towards anything that can be equated to him like his country et al. From outside it looks like a highly moral person judging imperfections of the world, but inside it is a little boy whose subconscious patterns want him to be "bad" while he wants to prove that he is not bad.
This thing is one of the two biggest foundation of leftists' state of psyche. Hence constant bashing of the US and Israel or claiming that the Western world is supposed to "share its wealth". Hence all of the attempts to inflict this guilt on the rich for them being rich.
1. TASS news - there was a collision in the orbit between Soviet and Chinese spaceships. Two cosmonauts have died on the Soviet ship; three cosmonauts and twenty two stokers/firemen died on the Chinese one;-).
2. China has launched a new satellite. Two thousand people strained themselves during that launch;-).
While this message sounds like a flaimbait, it really isn't. I personally admire Chinese civilization, and hope that the West will adopt a bit more than just Chinese food. For example, qigong and Daoist sexual techniques.
Slashdot Mirror
Naderites will break the Democratic party completely.
See, Democrats now are not an ideological party; it is more like a marriage of convenience between very different groups (it can be said about Republicans to much lower extent).
Why do I consider it the worst thing possible? Because it will break Republican party either.
Nader is a leftist fanatic, he is a fundamentalist that will never attract enough supporters to become part of the mainstream.
Thus, significant amount of moderate democrats will be willing to make a centrist party. That will lead to many moderate republican willing to lose the conservatives and join them under the direction of, say, John McCain and Joe Liberman. The new centrist party will easily capture 60% of most votes.
It might work in a parliamentary democracy, but in the US it will lead to one party getting in power forever. Stagnation is never good, I can tell you that like someone who lived in Soviet Union.
Democrats (and especially Naderites) are advocating a nanny state; they want to take any possibility you hurt yourself or others by removing your freedoms.
Nader in nothing more but a trial lawyer disgiused as a human being. What he advocates is even more money squandered by the kangaroo courts that are used by lawyers to enrich themselves.
Republicans and Libertarians have more hands off approach (with the exception of the extreme right who try to inflict their moral values on everybody). They advocate personal responsibility versus "It all is not your fault, it is some evil corporation".
Here are my articles that show what is happening to the US because of the leftist influence:
http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/barbar.html
http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/victim.html
http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/civilwar.html
(the hosting seems to be down now, but it will come up eventually).
P.S. Your line of thinking is EXACTLY Nader's line of thinking; it is his goal to destroy Democratic party and become "the new left". However, it is one of the worst things that might happen to the US.
>My very existence doesn't fit your limited view of the World.
;-).
Not like that.
>Therefore, there can only be two solutions. Either I do not exist as I am describing myself to you (therefore I am lying to myself or I am lying to you),
Good possibility of you unknowingly lying to yourself (or, more precisely, your subconscious distorting your self-image). Russian proverb states that one can see a straw in somebody else's eye and not notice a log in his own one.
This is because mechanisms of psychological defence distirts your issues and the truth so that you can cope with them. This is why I have much harder time seeing my own issues in the realtime even after four years of spiritual studies.
And Guilt is a very treacherous thing; you might have one without actually feeling guilty. I have met a lot of people with htis program who were not feeling guilty, but it was guilt nevertheless.
>OR it's your own view of the World and your own righteousness which is limiting your view of the World (and therefore I can not even begin to convince you). In the end, this is your own decision to make, I can only say so much.
My view of the world has nothing to do with it. It is just my hunch about what is going on inside you. I don't want to argue, it is just an information that you might use to your gain. It is purely subjective, but I usually do not make mistakes with that; I'm something in between natural born and born again psychologist
>I don't trust Memri, I think they slant their coverage.
...
;-)))
I don't think so. I have had some reference by reading some of these articles in non-MEMRI versions (not in English).
>I've seen awful anti-Muslim coverage in english editorials in the US as well, but they're not all that frequent. If I compiled them like Memri has done, you would think that everyone in the US despises Muslims.
This was not a coverage that accused Muslims in drinking the blood of Christian infants, like Muslim do about Jews resurrecting the dirty European medieval myth
>Egypt can say whatever they want, Bush took sides in the Israeli-Palestianian debate long ago.
It is no fucking debate, it is a war! and Bush made a CORRECT choice.
>But look at how they act. Egypt sent their foreign minister to Israel to speak with the Israeli cabinet. He was attacked by a group of Palestinians who cursed him, threw shoes at him, and called for the resumption of Jihad in Egypt. Egypt sounds far more moderate then, don't you think?
How they act? Ask for who they act, and what were the results? They try to APPEAR a "peacemongers" to the West, but in reality they haven't achieved much because it was not their goal, just a lip service. They were not able to convince Palestinians to stop terror; they give a blind eye to smuggling of weapons from their territory to Gaza; they have recalled their ambassador from Jerusalem et al.
>The Muslim brotherhood, to my knowledge, didn't tell people who to vote for, but they did enjoin their followers to support religiously conservative candidates.
What is the difference?
>I fail to see the issue here, I thought a large portion of Americans voted for Bush because it was 'sinful' to vote for a pro-choice candidate.
It was more of their personal choice.
What you fail to understand is that EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT. I mean my basic reactions are different from yours, and an Arab or a Chinese is different from either (but they are much closer to each other because they both are from a completely hierarchical society). In this in the West everyone still decides for himself. In the East it is completely different.
If you GET this difference, your understanding of the world will jump tenfold. You'll be able to understand why Chinese were so stubborn in the story with air collision, you'll understand why most Chinese or Hindi employees prefer to talk to you directly instead of going to the boss or criticizing you in the meetings et al.
This is one more article of mine that explains a lot about modern "civil war" in the US and some of the causes of Israeli-Palestinian conflict not finishing yet: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/civilwar.html
>So I'm a leftist idiot? What do you draw that conclusion on?
2 things.
First, the way you talk about Bush and the US policy.
Second, the way most of your ideas have an underlying thought that everyone is the same. This simplification is typical for brain-dead leftists because they use the left, logical side of the brain too much.
>I'm not, BTW.
Are you a scientist then?
>And how are you bi-cultural?
I live in the US, but I was brought up in different country and culture.
>Yes, I would like some links or sources you can refer me to.
Start with Konrad Z. Lorenz's "On Aggression" ( http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0156 687410/qid=1077609607/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/103-306963 2-8823857?v=glance&s=books ), you'll be able to find it in a library. This book will give you some underlying principles even thou these in power has vilified it and his ideas. I was lucky to find some articles in my native language by a scientist who was able to develop these ideas further and explain a lot of how humans, states and societies operate.
Then read this: http://www.geocities.com/protopop_1999/treatise.h
These explosions in Saudi Arabia were most probably made by their secret service in order to use it as a pretext for a crackdown on terrorists and islamists.
7 310
It was one of the effects of the Iraq war that I've predicted in my article that is linked here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=97775&cid=835
He is one of the examples that prove the point about leftists being brain dead regardless of their academic performance.
Governments' power has declined because of NAFTA and WTO (they can't even make a tariff without getting slapped), but it still can do a lot.
My guess is that if Bush starts druilling oil in Alaska, the dollar will fall (I hate the idea of drilling there though).
The exchange rate reflects different problem.
In any economy that depends a lot on foreighn trade there are experters and importers. Exporters prefer weak national currency whether importers prefer the strong one.
Most of Clintanomics was in raising this exchange rate and trading cheap foreign-made goods for jobs going out of the country. consumers thrived because of the first and some people suffered because of the second.
Libertarian or not, one can tell some stuff (or produce a certain thoughts) not knowing what is its foundation (Guilt, Judgement et al).
And the point is not in you liking or disliking Chavez; point is in you accusing Bush.
Frankly speaking, it is just a hunch.
;
;-).
Trying to rationalize, I'll tell:
1) One that does not move us towards certain outcome. The goal for the President is to:
- Curb the bastards at law ( www.triallawyersinc.com )
- Change the exchange rates with China and India in order to make American economy more competitive;
- Move the troops out of Iraq, but AT THE RIGHT MOMENT and RIGHT WAY. If you do it wrong way, you can get long-lasting negative consequences (as Israel learned after running from Lebanon).
2) Kerry looks too much of a populist. He might not be able to do what needs to be done but what the population does not understand.
Other candidates - Dean is leftist, Edwards is a trial lawyer. Others most people haven't heard of
> Ok, I am curious as to who got ridiculed and when. US ambassador to who and when?
/.er opinion on oriental cultures?
;-).
US ambassador to Egypt (they moved him since).
http://www.memri.org/ is a pretty good site for translations out of Middle Eastern press.
>I mentioned the US government supporting free speech to point out its hypocrisy. If they can't print this stuff, then Egypt gets bashed for its lack of free speech. If they do print it, then Egypt gets bashed for not leashing reporters. You're not making sense here. What about when all the newspapers in the US poked fun of Saddam? Is that hypocrisy if they can't do the same for Bush? Remember, Bush did quip "There ought to be limits to freedom." And he wasn't laughing after saying it.
I hope you're intelligent enough to understand the difference between free speach and orchestrated media campaign. Just look at the facts: Egypt media is full of anti-Israeli bias to such extent that even after supposedly 20+ years of "peace" they hate Israel's guts. combine this fact with the fact of them arming themselves to the teeth, and you might understand that Mubarak is preparing his country to the eventual war with Israel.
>And don't strawman the topic here, who votes how their mullah tells them to vote? Name one group of people, and I'll show you that it hasn't happened yet. Not the Taliban, not Iran, definately not Iraq. The only people in question who voted as told were under Saddam Hussein's regime.
Haven't you heard about Muslim Brothers in Egypt (from the top of my head)? Mubarak even needed not to let many of them to vote in order to stay in power.
>And why would I trust a
Because you're a leftist idiot, and I know a lot
Seriously, you don't need to trust anyone. Many leftists (Chomsky, Nader et al) have a very distorted interpretation of life, and nothing can convince them.
You might easily ignore the fact that I'm bi-cultural, that I've read A LOT, that I base my opinions on understanding individual and mass psychology.
Thus, I can just give you links to a couple of books about Arabs (if we're at it) written by serious researches and a book that is a must read for everyone who wants to understand the society.
Your accusations of Bush about Venezuela might be a manifestation of this guilt; it reads like "Look, what our country is doing! We (I) are so bad!".
As for me, I think that Chavez with his populism, unpredictability and pro-Arab stance better be out.
If you read Conrad Lorenz's "On Aggression" for the theory and "Savage Nation" as an example, you'll understand that the extreme rightists do not use guilt; their primary program is just "Us versus them". Leftist use this program too (calling themselves as one with a conscience ;-), but it is only their guilt-inspired psyche tells "You need to be impecable" (the way their guilt understands it).
... It is a good example of whatever I said about guilt - many Jewish kids can't rationally explain hatreds towards them and thus assume this guilt ...
Rightists just say "You're not one of us".
And Chomsky REALLY is self-hating Jew. As someone who is Jewish, I know this type very well
They will relocate their headquarters to Iran and operate world terrorist networks named Al-BSA and Al-RIAA out of there.
It looks like it was your picture featured on the goatse.cx website ;-))).
>which is easily circumvented by Iran's webmasters and geeks
It looks like a plot by reformers to circumvent the whole "Guards' of the Islamic Revolution" Draconian restrictions.
> So you're saying that Egypt should take the bribe money we are giving it, and shut up?
/. topic about cultures and how it affects software development teams, and read what they write about oriental cultures).
They are supposed to have some respect, and not ridicule the ambassador's religion.
> Not all the media is state-controlled. Censorship maybe, but definately not all the papers are state-controlled.
Unfortunately, it does not work the way you think. I've lived in soviet Union and Russia, and I know how it is done. And Egypt has press controlled much more tightly than modern Russia.
>Egypt has a right to free speech. Isn't that one of Bush's stated reasons for war, because they had no rights?
If you believe that everything government states is truth and ALL that government really thinks, I feel sorry for you.
Government is like Java Sandbox for most of the population; it isolates them from whatever really happens in the world in all of its gory details.
>Besides, I don't care how much you think they should fawn over us, if you see something wrong, speak out. What, do you want them to cover stories up? The people there have a right to know that there are no WMDs. Perhaps this 'dung' as you call it could just be ugly truth about ugly leaders and ugly decisions to war.
This is a bunch of leftist BS. Why - because you try to project some Western principles into the society that is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and expect similar reaction from people who are completely different.
Imagine people who vote the way their mullah says them to vote; imagine people who don't think and don't have their own opinion. Imagine them who assume whatever some leader puts into their heads, and you get the picture of a typical person from what can be called a traditional civilization.
(find
> You can't take something that works on an individual level, and extrapolate it to explain behaviour of a group of people. If you can even begin to criticize Chomsky's work, you must surely know this.
Yeah? Similar causes cause different people behave in a similar way. The amount of different types of subconscious programs is limited (unlike the amount of different manifestations of even a single program).
Stupid troll, you know nothing about the Chinese society.
These techniques were for the aristocrats only, and it is your luck that you can read about them in a book that you can get from a regular bookstore.
However, you're so dumb that you won't use this opportunity to improve yourself.
And here about the causes of the overpopulation: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/civilwar.html
Their culture has not shifted towards the K-strategy yet. Actually, it has pretty much shifted because of the Communists' policies, and current growth happens not because of the fertility rate but because people live longer.
Another couple of dosens years, and the population there will start slowly shrinking.
The article was written in fall of 2002, before the war.
BTW, Saudis has also made some steps to crack down on the anti-American propaganda.
One other offender is the Egypt. They get $2bln+ each year, and still their state-controlled press puts tons of dung on the US, on some of the officials (like Colin Powell and then US ambassador who was Jewish) et al.
The reason for that is that Egypt, while formally democratic, is not really democratic at all.
One problem with the modern American mentality (as I find it) is inability to think long term.
P almiter/Handout/Articles/Elkind-Lerach-King-Dead.h tm ).
It looks like fscked lawyers affected not just the corporate policies (where blowing a couple of thousand employees after a bad quarter is pretty much necessary in order to avoid getting sued by vultures like this: http://www.wfu.edu/users/palmitar/Courses/SecReg-
The entire Iraq war was about messages, especially to Saudis.
Here is my take on it: http://sqft87.pisem.net/tiger/iraq.html
You don't always go and beat the crap out of ALL the bad guys to get your point across.
Does it mean that the new system has allowed them to lay off some of its employees?
Another effect of the "Curse of efficiency"...
As someone who likes psychology and knows it pretty well, I can tell you what is wrong with Chomsky and his ilk.
It is called GUILT.
As one psychotherapist put it, "Guilt is a form of delusions de grandeur. It states 'Everything is happening because of me'. This is the line a child assumes when something goes wrong in his surroundings - like, for example, when parents are fighting all the time et al".
When one has guilt, he starts projecting it towards anything that can be equated to him like his country et al. From outside it looks like a highly moral person judging imperfections of the world, but inside it is a little boy whose subconscious patterns want him to be "bad" while he wants to prove that he is not bad.
This thing is one of the two biggest foundation of leftists' state of psyche. Hence constant bashing of the US and Israel or claiming that the Western world is supposed to "share its wealth". Hence all of the attempts to inflict this guilt on the rich for them being rich.
Nope, they just come to Oracle to find out whereabouts of criminals ;-).
These are really old.
;-).
;-).
1. TASS news - there was a collision in the orbit between Soviet and Chinese spaceships. Two cosmonauts have died on the Soviet ship; three cosmonauts and twenty two stokers/firemen died on the Chinese one
2. China has launched a new satellite.
Two thousand people strained themselves during that launch
While this message sounds like a flaimbait, it really isn't. I personally admire Chinese civilization, and hope that the West will adopt a bit more than just Chinese food. For example, qigong and Daoist sexual techniques.