Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 16 Oct 2006 16:37 On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 19:46:07 +0200, David Brown <david.brown(a)hesbynett.removethisbit.no> wrote: >John Larkin wrote: >> On Mon, 16 Oct 06 10:03:33 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> In article <2925j2dlsd2jau4crqchld5e7filit9481(a)4ax.com>, >>> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 13:51:15 +0100, Eeyore >>>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>> >>>>>>> You had an implication that they are not as dangerous with a crude >>>>>>> bomb than with a sophisticated bomb. >>>>>> Well, the fact is, they probably aren't. Their weapons are probably >>> fairly >>>>>> crude, and their delivery systems are probably extremely crude and may >>> have >>>>>> to rely on something decidedly low-tech, like sailing it into New York >>>>>> harbor on a 35' yacht out of Cuba or some small, under-the-radar Caribbean >>>>>> island. This would still be very dangerous, don't get me wrong. However, >>>>>> it's inarguably more dangerous to deliver a sophisticated >>>>>> fission-fusion-fission device by a ground-launched missile from their own >>>>>> country. >>>>> You'd have to conceive of a situation where N Korea could benefit from such >>>>> action for it to make sense though. >>>>> >>>>> Since the likely result would be 'wiping N Korea off the map' it really >>> wouldn't >>>>> be very much in their interests to do this ! >>>>> >>>> If Kim is a crazy as Mao (and he's probably a lot crazier) >>> I don't think Kim is crazy. I think he has to prove that he >>> is as big a god as his father. Being on equal footing (IOW >>> having and wielding nuclear bombs) with the rest of the >>> world powers is necessary to keep his god image up. We >>> are dealing with a different kind of religious fanaticsim, I >>> think. >>> >> >> Anybody who would beat, torture, and starve to death millions of his >> own subjects qualifies for my definition of crazy. Your standards may >> vary. >> > >What about leaders that beat, torture and kill hundreds of other >country's subjects, and reserve the right to do so to their own >subjects? Given that virtually all experts agree that torture has >almost no value in obtaining useful information or intelligence, its >only use is for revenge or as a deterrent. Is there a line drawn >somewhere saying a little torture is okay? > >Anyway, there is a big difference between being evil, ruthless, >sadistic, or otherwise inhumane, and being crazy. I attribute a lot of >the trouble the USA has with dealing with terrorism and other unpleasant >behaviour to a tendency to assume that anyone who doesn't see the USA >and the American way of life as the pinnacle of civilisation as "crazy", >rather than trying to understand their point of view. The pinnacle of civilization, and I hope we get it some day, is a universally agreed definition of human rights, and mechanisms that ensure that everybody gets them. Torture should obviously one of the things we are protected from. Sitting and bitching don't get us much progress in that direction. John
From: John Larkin on 16 Oct 2006 16:39 On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 12:21:16 -0700, Jamie <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_(a)charter.net> wrote: >> Some cultures worship death. Yuk. >> >> John >> >maybe death is a better alternative in those >cultures? Only for the ones who prefer it. Most people want to live. John
From: John Larkin on 16 Oct 2006 16:40 On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 18:54:27 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >"Jamie" <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1lpa_(a)charter.net> wrote in message >news:bjOYg.9$GM7.6(a)newsfe04.lga... >> John Larkin wrote: >> >>> Some cultures worship death. Yuk. >>> >> maybe death is a better alternative in those >> cultures? > >And which cultures would those be, that worship death? The ones that crank out suicide bombers. John
From: John Larkin on 16 Oct 2006 16:48 On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 06:10:12 GMT, Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote: >Evangelicals in the US account for some 30% of the population. Of >those, the really scary crazy ones are a significant subfraction. But >a potentially very dangerous portion. > >If you wanted to visit here, I'd easily drive you to a few huge places >where they have their own special "schools" and fenced homes areas and >I'm pretty sure you'd leave here uncontrollably shaking and preparing >yourself for a coming Armageddon. > >It's enough serious that it cannot be ignored as an influence and it >really needs to be nipped, somehow. > >Jon > Oh relax. The USA has always had a healthy share of loonies, Theosiphists and nudists and communists and hippie communes and golfers and gun nuts. Do you propose to "nip" people who don't vote to your liking? John
From: John Larkin on 16 Oct 2006 16:49
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 18:06:04 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Larkin wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >Jonathan Kirwan wrote: >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >JoeBloe wrote: >> >> >> >> All of Islam (read the moslems) believe that all others that are not >> >> >> moslem are "infidels" and that killing them is not, nor should not be >> >> >> a crime. >> >> >> >> >> >> I have a problem with that. Do you not have a problem with that? >> >> > >> >> >If it was true I would have a problem with it. It's simply not true though. >> >> >Do you really believe that nonsense ? >> >> > >> >> >Graham >> >> >> >> Sometimes I don't think Europeans understand the religious atmosphere >> >> here in the US and probably no imagination for the extreme reaches of >> >> it or how it actually influences politics here. I have a hard time, >> >> too, so here is a page that paints one of the extreme but important >> >> influences: >> >> >> >> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/12/105122/66 >> >> >> >> In the latter part of it you will see how "thinking" is blocked and >> >> dismantled. >> >> >> >> Imagine living in the middle of this. I do. >> > >> >It's insane. It's gobbledegook. >> > >> >I can't even relate to this. It's like a bad dream. >> >> No it's not. It's diversity, pluralism, and democracy. We have a >> Constitution and courts to enforce the rules of the game, and then we >> play it. > >It's still quite mad. Matter of opinion. I mostly enjoy it. John |