Re:Best examples of heresy I can think of
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 1
1) Assuming that your evidence is correct, it doesn't prove complicity. It is possible that the Israeli intelligence services couldn't share the information without compromising a source. Maybe they did share it, but US intelligence services didn't act on it or missed the significance -- it wouldn't be the only information that was overlooked.
It is interesting to hear such evidence, but it does not prove that Israel was involved or complicit in the attack. It would be possible for the intelligence services to instruct their embassy to warn Israeli interests like companies and citizens/expatriots of an attack, but the embassy has no obligation to warn the whole of NYC (in fact, they would be rebuked for short-circuiting the proper procedure).
2) I have to say that I concede most of your points on this -- certainly the War On Drugs has been of dubious benefit and caused a great deal of damage to society. However, drug like alcohol and tobacco are more likely accepted because of their long history in our society than because of any great conspiracy -- drugs like heroin, cocaine and amphetamines are relatively new, and are not harmless either.
My biggest disagreement with the genocide argument is about intent. The War On Drugs started as an attempt to appease the middle class who were worried about their kids doing drugs. Before that policy, Nixon actually introduced generous and effective rehab programs for heroin addiction. I don't think that the anti-drug policy is really a deliberate attempt to eliminate blacks or Hispanics and that the use of an emotionally-loaded term like "genocide" is an attempt to push an agenda of drug decriminialisation by emotional blackmail rather than reasoned debate.
3) Actually 'Feminism' something like 13% of America's history, and some aspect of it like suffrage (the right to vote) have been around since the beginning of the 19th century. I concede that there are physiological differences between men and women, but the fact that women have been working effectively in so many occupations from process work to corporate accountancy should indicate that the overall difference is small.
The notion of family as an atomic unit is itself quite new. Children used to be raised not just by their parents but by their extended family as well, and were expected to be independent much younger than they are today.
Women are only 'required' for child rearing until the child is weaned. From that point on, the child can be raised by their father or indeed a grandparent, aunt/uncle, etc just as easily as their mother. A working parent is not necessarily a bad parent; family breakdown (ignoring extreme cases like abusive family) occurs when one or both parents (or other carers) become too involved in their careers and/or other interests to spend time with their children. The social pressure for people, whatever their gender, to devote themselves so fully to their jobs is what is really destructive to families, not the fact that women are allowed to be employed.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Assuming that your evidence is correct, it doesn't prove complicity. It is possible that the Israeli intelligence services couldn't share the information without compromising a source. Maybe they did share it, but US intelligence services didn't act on it or missed the significance -- it wouldn't be the only information that was overlooked.
It is interesting to hear such evidence, but it does not prove that Israel was involved or complicit in the attack. It would be possible for the intelligence services to instruct their embassy to warn Israeli interests like companies and citizens/expatriots of an attack, but the embassy has no obligation to warn the whole of NYC (in fact, they would be rebuked for short-circuiting the proper procedure).
2) I have to say that I concede most of your points on this -- certainly the War On Drugs has been of dubious benefit and caused a great deal of damage to society. However, drug like alcohol and tobacco are more likely accepted because of their long history in our society than because of any great conspiracy -- drugs like heroin, cocaine and amphetamines are relatively new, and are not harmless either.
My biggest disagreement with the genocide argument is about intent. The War On Drugs started as an attempt to appease the middle class who were worried about their kids doing drugs. Before that policy, Nixon actually introduced generous and effective rehab programs for heroin addiction.
I don't think that the anti-drug policy is really a deliberate attempt to eliminate blacks or Hispanics and that the use of an emotionally-loaded term like "genocide" is an attempt to push an agenda of drug decriminialisation by emotional blackmail rather than reasoned debate.
3) Actually 'Feminism' something like 13% of America's history, and some aspect of it like suffrage (the right to vote) have been around since the beginning of the 19th century. I concede that there are physiological differences between men and women, but the fact that women have been working effectively in so many occupations from process work to corporate accountancy should indicate that the overall difference is small.
The notion of family as an atomic unit is itself quite new. Children used to be raised not just by their parents but by their extended family as well, and were expected to be independent much younger than they are today.
Women are only 'required' for child rearing until the child is weaned. From that point on, the child can be raised by their father or indeed a grandparent, aunt/uncle, etc just as easily as their mother. A working parent is not necessarily a bad parent; family breakdown (ignoring extreme cases like abusive family) occurs when one or both parents (or other carers) become too involved in their careers and/or other interests to spend time with their children. The social pressure for people, whatever their gender, to devote themselves so fully to their jobs is what is really destructive to families, not the fact that women are allowed to be employed.