Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: MassiveProng on 22 Mar 2007 19:17 On 22 Mar 2007 05:34:44 -0700, "Winfield Hill" <hill(a)rowland.org> Gave us: > > Sorry I missed the breaking of the 17000 barrier, but 17500 is > just 10 posts away! This thread also started Sept 30 last year, > so in 10 days it'll have been 6 months. Good show! You could be a bit more retarded... not sure how though.
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Mar 2007 05:57 In article <21ee6$4602bef8$4fe7549$11785(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> In article <54b9f$46016a49$49ecfdb$3436(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >> "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>>>In article <MPG.2069abdf39337b7f98a1a5(a)news.individual.net>, >>>> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: <snip> >>>>He fired through the window. (He opened it before he fired.) >>> >>>I expect to do the same next fall. >> >> >> What's going to be dinner? > >Dinner? Quite a few dinners. White tail. That's how my brother feeds his family. > >Locally they get about $100 to butcher and pack the >whole thing. I'm not up for all that when experts do >it faster and better. Yea, that's a good price. My brother also them grind up a bunch for chili. /BAH >
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Mar 2007 07:21 In article <sazMh.19$25.108(a)news.uchicago.edu>, mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >In article <2a614$460283f9$4fe7109$10420(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> writes: >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> In article <1ae0f$45f817db$4fe71d4$28690(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>> "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: <snip> >>When you get a chance, read Gogol's "Dead Souls" which >>is precisely on point. >> >I'll second this recommendation. Can add to it Gogol's "Revisor" >(translated to English as "Inspector General", I think). Noted. Thanks. ISTR that there was a book by an author of that name at the dump. I can't remember if I rescued it or left it. I'm dumping garbage today and I'll look for the author's name. >> > I'm not going to explain this one very well. I suspect >> > this kind of behavior is a result of totalitarianism. >> >>There's a popular line of reasoning that holds that there's >>nothing wrong with violating laws and morality so long as >>you don't get caught. It is universal across all cultural >>systems. It could be that totalitarianism fosters more of >>this conduct than other systems. The greater the risk the >>greater the rewards? > >It is rather "no risk, no chance of reward". These are systems where >the general sense is that honest work will get you precisely nowhere. >Advancement is only possible by playing the system (knowing connected >people or people who know such people) or tricking it. Right. And that's why I think no socialist nor "equal for all" type of economy would ever work long-term. >The Poles had, for hundreds of year, a folk saying to the effect that >"with patience and diligence, people acquire wealth" (it rhymes in >Polish, couldn't make it happen in English). But, after just few >years of Communist rule, in the 50s, a new version of the saying >appeared, as "with patience and diligence, people lose their health". >that pretty much says it. I think the first commodity to go is food but I don't understand why. The farm community I'm reading about grows their own food but the author keeps harping about how poor the meals are and how there is never enough food. This makes no sense to me... but I haven't finished the book. He never says what they do with the food. His income figures imply not much is sold. I have to assume that even though he lived among them, he overlooked important details that only a farmer would notice and be missed by anybody who came from a middle class town background. Oh...I assumed he was telling the truth and was talking about a real kibbutz even though he says he is hiding the real identity. Thanks. Writing this post up made me look in the mirror and see that pesky naive hat I was wearing. /BAH
From: mmeron on 23 Mar 2007 13:26 In article <eu0a9t$8qk_001(a)s798.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >In article <2a614$460283f9$4fe7109$10420(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> In article <1ae0f$45f817db$4fe71d4$28690(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>> "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: >> >>>>The answers we've seen over the months seem to me in >>>>retrospect to have been rather linear with a lot of >>>>semi-concealed "they're just like us" worldview. With >>>>that premise being wrong, all that follows is as well. >> >>> hmmm...I don't think that is the key but it is an important >>> ingredient. >> >>It is the starting point for understanding. IMO if >>someone doesn't "get" this, they don't have any chance >>at all. > >Sure. I'm working on the part that comes before the desire >to understand appears. :-) This seems to be the affliction >of a great number of people...or I've just begun noticing :-(. >> >>>>Dammit, we don't even appreciate the difference between >>>>the Russian mind (semi-oriental) and ours. The US and the >>>>CIA have, for many decades, been accused of all sorts of >>>>underhanded stuff. Still, no one has tied together >>>>anything like the recent anti-leader dieoffs we can >>>>clearly see happening. Factually we consider the Russians >>>>"just like us" and clearly they're not. >> >>> I've done some reading to try to figure out their mindset because >>> part of the Middle East mess invoved that mindset. I'm currently >>> reading a book about a kibbutz; I was floored because I did not >>> know that USSR was used as a model and admired very much in >>> the beginnings of the social experiment. I had not figured out >>> the ramifications of USSR "supporting" Israel in the beginning. >> >>Until Israel became part of the cold war gambits. > >I've done some reading about that. The time I'm reading about is >in the 1950s. And it doesn't help that the author is both male >and seems to be enthralled with the socialist concept, and a >city slicker. For instance, he seems to think that their work >day from 6ish to 17:30 was a long day for farm work. He should >have visited some US farms. > >What doesn't make sense is that these people admired the Russian >philosophy. If some of the group came from Poland, or talked >to people from Poland and/or Russia, I don't see how they >could admire Stalin. >> You've a "time frame failure" here. These people came from Poland during the 20 and 30s. Way before 1945 and the Russian occupation of Poland. It was very common for young people from all places that didn't get a direct taste of Soviet rule to admire Stalin at that time. Especially young people from the inteligentsia. >>>>The middle eastern >>>>mindset is still another sort of critter yet. >> >>> So far it seems like there is a mish-mash of cultures >>> there. Nazism is still an influence, too. >> >>The operative word is primitive. > >Is that the word for it? > >> Consider the importance >>of symbolism and ritual in German Nazism in its day. > >I am amazed at that kind of stuff. > >> >>>>I've personally known some Russians, and they were very >>>>nice. But where power, money, and their natural habitat >>>>are concerned, things are rather different. >> >>> In my small observances, it was an honorable thing to do >> > cheating. >> >>When you get a chance, read Gogol's "Dead Souls" which >>is precisely on point. > >OK. I've got it on my long list. And I've got your recommendation >written down, Mati. > > >> >> > I'm not going to explain this one very well. I suspect >> > this kind of behavior is a result of totalitarianism. >> >>There's a popular line of reasoning that holds that there's >>nothing wrong with violating laws and morality so long as >>you don't get caught. It is universal across all cultural >>systems. It could be that totalitarianism fosters more of >>this conduct than other systems. The greater the risk the >>greater the rewards? > >I consider it a function of basic survival. It you don't >cheat, you don't get basic things such as food, plumbing, >and clothes. Exactly. Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, meron(a)cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
From: nonsense on 28 Mar 2007 14:20
mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: > In article <eudhu8$8qk_002(a)s970.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>In article <eXUNh.7$25.85(a)news.uchicago.edu>, mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>> etc. >>>>>>>Yes, exactly. Humans will go to enormous lengths to deny evidence >>>>>>>conflicting with their beliefs. The Western European intelligentsia >>>>>>>denied all evidence of Stalin's brutality after WWII, and there was >>>>>>>plenty of evidence present. >>>>>>Eleanor Roosevelt seems to have helped promote that rosy picture. >>>>>Yes, very much so. >>>>I still haven't figured her out. >>>Well meaning and extremely naive. >>Yea, I need to read more about her time spent in the UN. I want >>to see how much influence her attitude had with its welfare >>attitude to the Third World. > Hmm, good question, worth studying. We have only to look at the robber barons of the US and the history of United Fruit in order to understand how and why the next generation of the wealthy acquired the values they did.[1] By comparison, theoretical socialism looked pretty good to them. But then, they had never worked an honest day in their lives, having no understanding how the wealth they enjoyed was created, let alone how to actually improve the economic environment without destroying it. The lessons of 1929 did not take among them, it required more practical people to change the economic landscape to prevent repetition. Eleanor was only one voice among the many impractical ideologues of her age. "We need a change" wasn't new at last fall's US elections. People are generally raised with the nagging lesson in the back of their minds, "Leave the world a better place." For the most part they're incapable of that sort of significance. We see it here in sci.physics as well, with some people wanting change for its own sake without understanding the underpinnings of why the present theories work, perhaps where a tweak might lead to progress. Eleanor was no different. For extra points: How different was the Eleanor ideology from today's "We have mistreated those poor Muslims for a long time so they were forced to attack us. Now we need to be nicer to them and they'll come around and be nice to us."? [1] Europe's colonialism was just beginning to cost more than it helped mother countries, except, of course, the gold and diamond mines of South Africa. Banking and investment had destroyed Europe's feudal system in the prior century. The peasant class, which despite many valid complaints had over generations becomes used to being looked after from cradle to grave, wanted better conditions. The masses had eager ears for the socialist theory being spread among them by well wishers. The benefice of socialism rivaled their feudal serf status with many promised improvements over the past. |