Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
  
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
 RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to kudo)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kudo
historically speaking, the middle-east was the world leader in everything back in the days when islam was truly applied and practiced, it was the golden age!
How can you accuse others of having been brain washed, when raised religiously yourself.
The whole of neo-con manipulation in the US and western world, as systematical as it is, still appears like liberalism compared to the obtrusive brain wash in an average muslim upbringing. Where the random and indiscriminate world view of ancient boorish male minds are insulting god´s sapience, by claiming that it was his awkward opinion that they dictated.
How much intellect and wordly reasoning do you need to realize that a wise spirit would never yield indiscriminate and flippant clichés in a row and insist on your following; inquiring of you beforehand to not question at all, but blindly obey and be controlled through sneaky feed of pangs and crude threatenings.
Making priority before all of your submissiveness, instead of the human speciality of understanding and the ethical premisse of omitting injust to fellow men and creature. Requesting out of all a personal resignedness that only simple minds insist and feast on.
The unscrupulous tradition of manipulating offspring with that kind of methods from early age on ( instead of leaving them alone, for them to decide themselves when of mature age, in the ways a fair and integer mind would procede) guarantees the intellect refuting devotion that you guys display here, like with that bold contradiction above.
Please note that the advance in the Orient was there already thousands of years before islam was patched up from preceding religions.
And it was in no way bound to the new religion that urbanisation was taking a leap and with it the wordly and scientifical progress.
It was not that any progressiveness was induced through such religion ( - and how in the world could it? Read up on its dogma, look around in the muslim world and understand the inherency of fustiness already), but in the opposite: The fact that it was practised only loosely allowed the continued progressing of wordly conditions over the first 400 years of islam.
After that, with the overtaking of the orthodox fraction and the morphing into absolutism and despotism the muslim world has stagnated and been outdated since more than 1000 years.
If islam was so congruent and scientifical then why don´t you abstain from the distained infidels´ modern achievements and see what you will be left with?
Living in the way of thousands of years ago after all would enable plenty of time to think things over for once.
Instead of telling rational minds to do their homework, you might realize that you are neglecting ratio on behalf of pathetic personal romantism.
You are not engaged in recognition and exploring but stuck with petty personal inanity. The fear of facing how one has been raised with incongruency and arbitrariness. The infamous carelessness of indoctrinating little children, notwithstanding how the immature be at your mercy, and how it will be forced to stick to your pathed bias, for solidarity at least.
As the alternative being the trauma of irresponsibility and flippancy of a surrounding that has been busy with confirming its questionable ways instead of with the fragility of their dependend children, and the corresponding grace to let them grow up and decide for themselves whether wanting to pursue rationality or ancient irrationality.
In a fair and modern world, it would be forbidden by law to manipulate the immature with arbitrariness.
If you have the intellectual balls: Wait until offspring be at least 18 years old.
But winning them over for your personal believing heritage wouldn´t be as easy then, would it.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 7:29:11
 |
|
Ron.M
Posts: 7051
Joined: Jul. 7 2003
From: Scotland
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to elroby)
|
|
|
quote:
If you spent as much time practicing as you do posting here your level would vastly improve.
LOL! I was thinking that too!
Kudo, you seem to have no problem in expressing your thoughts in writing.
I can't see what your problem is with having to fulfil extra-curricular essay projects in your Engineering course.
When I was at Engineering college we too had a couple of non-Engineering classes eg Economics, Sociology, Philosophy...
Sure, they were a bit BS, but it was a break from Math etc with some hardcore Engineering students even using the opportunity to have a sleep at the back of the class. 
I saw a TV program about interviews for applicants for Medical school.
The interviewers said that they weren't so impressed by applicants stating their interests as purely medicine related, but were looking for "well-rounded" people with diverse interests such as sports, travel, music, literature, science, politics etc as they made better Doctors.
cheers,
Ron
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 8:15:19
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to XXX)
|
|
|
quote:
But it is simply part of the western hypocrisy to act as if they would care about victims of oppression when it is actually their economical and political aims which make them oppose against some countries and others not
Deniz,
I suppose you think it was actually "economic and political aims" that was the reason the United States and Europe intervened against Serbia in 1999 when Serbia was committing ethnic cleansing against the Muslims of Kosovo. And before that in 1995, when the U.S. and Europeans intervened to stop the Serb-sponsored killings of Muslims in Bosnia. The Muslims in both cases were certainly victims of Serbian oppression, and the West intervened against Serbia to stop it.
But, of course, Deniz is much more knowledgeable about these affairs, so I guess we can assume that, using Deniz's rationale, the West intervened in order to exploit the vast reserves of oil that lie under the Balkans which are today enriching all those Western oil companies that have derricks in every part of Kosovo and Bosnia. And, of course, let's not forget the vast reserves of precious metals that the West is exploiting in these areas by mining and enriching Western companies.
Boy, some of us sure are blind to think that the West intervened to save Muslims from oppression by Serbs, and not to exploit all those vast riches in the Balkans that are keeping our Western economies afloat.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 10:51:05
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to XXX)
|
|
|
quote:
Serbia...just LIKE Iran, [is] very unpopular among the governments of the west, with its efforts to create an autonomous state of its own, which does not share political aims of the west. Or would you consider Serbian nationalists to be pro-american?
You are so transparently doing anything you can to avoid granting the West credit for doing any good in the world, Deniz, including deliberately omitting any reference to inconvenient facts that would weaken your rant against the West. For example, you (not very artfully) state that "Serbian nationalists" do not "share political aims of the West." That is a real howler, Deniz.
If you consider as "not sharing political aims of the West" the Serbian massacre of 7,000 Muslims in Srebineca, Bosnia in 1995, and their relentles killing of Muslims in other parts of Bosnia, as well as the Serbian oppression and ethnic cleansing of approximately 200,000 Kosovar Muslims in 1998-1999, then I would agree with you. Those massacres, ethnic cleansing, and relentless oppression of Balkan Muslims by the Serbs certainly were not "political aims shared by the West." That is why the West intervened against Serbia, in order to stop the oppression aimed at Muslims.
I note that your post utterly failed to acknowledge this Western intervention on behalf of Bosnian and Kosovar Muslims. I can only conclude that to do so would be too painful and inconvenient for you, as it would destroy your carefully constructed narrative of the West as the evil oppressor.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 13:26:41
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to mezzo)
|
|
|
quote:
Bill you seemed to affirm that the NATO and ONU intervention had stopped the massacre. However the 1995' Serbrenica genocid occured under the ONU protectorate of the city...
You are absolutely correct, Mezzo. The massacre of 7,000 Muslims by Serbian forces in Srebrineca occurred while they were under the so-called "protection" of UN forces. That the UN forces did nothing to stop it was shameful. But it was, in part, that massacre that prompted the United States and other European forces to finally marshall the political will to intervene to stop the Serbian oppression and slaughter, and it resulted in the "Dayton Accords" that cobbled together a plan for a Bosnian Federation free from Serbian aggression.
Your point is well-taken, but I do not think it detracts from the fact that the Western intervention was humanitarian in nature, not, as has been suggested in other posts, for "economic and political" gain.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 14:32:10
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to kudo)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mezzo
Bill you seemed to affirm that the NATO and ONU intervention had stopped the massacre. However the 1995' Serbrenica genocid occured under the ONU protectorate of the city...
The intentions were commandable, but certainly also very late in time. And I'm really septical about your statement that the western intervention has stopped anything there. Slow it down certainly, but i'd not say stopped...
I agree.
The point with Yugoslavia was that it was a relatively well infra structured and educated country, with a considerable potential of economically challenging the EU establishment, the minute that modern production means would had been introduced.
The conditions there obviously tempted the western mafia for agent provocateur instigation for inciting ethnic conflicts, the following profits of weaponry sales and final orders under the cover of pacification.
After all, the main investments will routingly be shouldered by EU states budgets, which commonly grants little to no haggling / dream margins and massive misuse of funds; and in the end Yugoslavia has definitly been thrown back off its economical potential of before the fire raising.
Looking at things on that level will favour Deniz´ claim, according to which western international policies never actually cared about religious or local injust. And he is right with pointing to that it has been US foreign policy that awoke an originally fading islam and especially its fanatism.
Just as with pointing to approved islamic countries like Saudi Arabia despite their dictatorial and arbitrary reigns.
If wanting to view that religion ( or any other, for that matter) it must be done soberly in sight of the exclusive object. After all, its backwardedness is no result of western propaganda, but sad and harmful truth of its own.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 14:43:55
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
The point with Yugoslavia was that it was a relatively well infra structured and educated country, with a considerable potential of economically challenging the EU establishment, the minute that modern production means would had been introduced.
The conditions there obviously tempted the western mafia for agent provocateur instigation for inciting ethnic conflicts, the following profits of weaponry sales and final orders under the cover of pacification.
Western "agents provocateur" had nothing to do with inciting ethnic conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, Ruphus. The potential for conflict among the various ethnic and religious groups had always existed, but they were kept submerged by Tito, who was the only leader with the ability to keep Yugoslavia together. When Tito died, the ethnic and religious tensions emerged. These ethnic and religious tensions were exploited, not by Western "agents provocateurs," but by one man, Slobodan Milosevic, who almost single-handedly instigated and carried out the Balkan wars, massacres, ethnic cleansing, and assorted other atrocities in a bid for absolute Serbian dominance in the region.
Milosevic was hardly a tool of Western "agents provocateurs." He needed no incentive to provoke such wars, cleansing, and atrocities. It was his plan from the beginning. The West's intervention saved many people in the Balkans from a cruel fate that would have been theirs, had Milosevic been allowed to continue his aggression.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 15:03:13
|
|
XXX
Posts: 4400
Joined: Apr. 14 2005
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to BarkellWH)
|
|
|
Bill, are you aware that Milosevic and his ("communist") fellows had in mind to create a Serbian state which would be pro-russian and anti-american in its whole setup? And that all negotiations before declaring the war were about the crucial point whether he will or will not give up his plans to create such state with HIS people as rulers and not Albanians, and whether he will accept an american intervention (ie by having american troops in his neighbourhood.), which would negate his plans? Obviously he did not accept that. Therefore he needed to be drawn back, therefore his ethnic cleansing became a disturbing appearance, because it negates the american/european view which says he is not allowed to rule that piece of land, at least not alone. Because his plans would lessen the influence of america and europe in that region, they decided to not let that happen. You see, its not the ethnic cleansing itself that made the NATO move (if at anything it was the trigger, not the reason). Whole africa is an ethnic cleansing. It was what the cleansing - which is not a "political aim" but an action, that has the aim to remove any forces that could oppose a Serbian state - was standing for: as a negation/provocation of western pre-dominance in that region. Im pretty sure, even if there had been no violence at all from his side, they would have declared war to him anyway, because they cant let happen that this region could turn into anti-US or anti-EU policies.
By the way, if youre counting corpses, which i always find a bit shameful at this point, could you do me a favor and count the corpses that died in that war, too?
_____________________________
Фламенко
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 16:13:06
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to XXX)
|
|
|
Deniz,
I think you are an intelligent individual with whom I would enjoy having an evening's conversation about politics, economics, and history, over a couple of bottles of wine, of course (preferably Chilean Merlot).
I must say, however, that your last post reads as if you studied the history of the Balkan Wars of the 1990s, and the U.S. and European (NATO) interventions, in an alternative universe. There is simply no correlation between what you wrote and the actual decisions made that led to Western intervention. In fact, many historians and commentators would argue that the West waited too long to intervene. No one wanted to get involved with that mess until Milosevic's wars, massacres, ethnic cleansing, and other atrocities became too much for the West to stand by and let it continue, particularly as it was in Europe's "back yard," so to speak. That Milosevic aligned himself with the Russians had nothing to do with the intervention. It was a unique case where the West's intervention was based on humanitarian grounds, not national interest.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 17:12:51
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to kudo)
|
|
|
Hi Bill,
You sound as if Tito managed to somehow artificially keep the ethnics together. That´s indeed the official after-the-fact interpretation of the west, but a myth nontheless.
However, with noone on earth able to succeed with forcefully arranging such, I don´t recall any forced arms keeping the ethnic groups from infesting over each other. Not under Tito nor yet after him, for a while.
There have been so many examples of stirring up ethnicities against each other for capitalist strategies, and progroms right under the UNO´s nose without interference, and sometimes even with the UNOs instigation ( Ruanda before all ) that we shouldn´t really fall for oh so decent interpretation of "humanitarian grounds" anymore.
Even the regular humanitarian routines like development aids to date have served for not much else than privatising states budgets and donations on detours, and pathing ways for global players abroad through bribe that was originally raised from western tax payers.
So, humanitarian motives ... A phenomenon among the people, but not their corrupted and sheming representatives and their actual aims and actions.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 18:42:02
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
Ruphus,
Regarding Tito, he WAS the force that held Yugoslavia together. That is not an "after the fact" Western interpretation, it is THE fact, recognized not only by Western historians, but by Central European and Slavic historians as well.
Regarding your observations on Western motives for intervening in the Balkan Wars of the 1990s, with all due respect, you appear to want to re-write history to conform to your preconceived ideological narrative of a Capitalist West rapaciously and greedily taking advantage of opportunities to intervene for the sake of plunder. Your preconceived notions and ideological narrative must be revised, Ruphus, because they do not hold up under scrutiny. The West gained nothing materially by intervening in the Balkans. It's intervention did save whole populations, primarily Muslim, from further ethnic cleansing at best and from suffering more massacres and killings at worst.
Too bad we live so far apart. Just as I wrote to Deniz, it would be a lot more interesting if we could discuss these things over a couple of bottles of wine, preferably Chilean Merlot.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 19:08:06
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to Richard Jernigan)
|
|
|
quote:
Hurrah for the internet, safeguarding our right to be wrong.
Or right, as the case may be.
As I mentioned to both Deniz and Ruphus, assuming we are all gentlemen (and I do make that assumption), how much more interesting it would be to have these discussions and debates in relaxed surroundings sharing a couple of bottles of good Chilean Merlot (or Cabernet), perhaps with a guitarist playing a Zambra in the background.
Cheers,
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 20:42:11
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to kudo)
|
|
|
Don´t need the "insulation of the internet" to be straight.
I have had countless discussions with believers in the Okzident and am having such in the Orient as well.
Sometimes, like with the last case, you can see how the counterpart is coming to his limits, and to aggression, as he fears superiour punishment just for listening to critical pointers. Supposed to keep their ears shut or leave the room, which is what many do. ( Had a case of someone after discovery of his daughters visual impairment, thinking that to have been punishment for his mere listening to rational objections.) After all, in a supersticious environment people e.g. hide away handicapped children, as they would have to expect rejection, with people thinking such blow of fate to correspondingly be a scarey, egocentric and vain spirit´s cruel way of punishment for disregard of his holy being.
In place of internet or whatsoever insulation there much rather exists a severe threat to wordly minds where I reside, and one would much better keep shut than trying to make people think.
I must be totally crazy with the risking of life-threatening scenarios.
Sometimes however it can turn out amusing, like with mentioned last case, when me in the end asked the person to then please explain to the women in the room ( including his wife ) why they were to be inferiour to man.
And this guy really started trying, while I laid back and let the women shred his arguments into pieces. |O)
Sure, you always risk to be denounced to cleansing instances and people have disappeared for much, much less ...
And yet, it still makes me grin to imagine how this guy might have experienced his formerly submissive wife after that evening.
From what I heard later on he wasn´t really fond of that event, obviously preferring to keep his ressentments against the other gender latent.
Who knows, he might end up washing the dishes now, hehehe.
Bill,
Past and present have overly demonstrated to us: It´s all fassad and masquerade. There is no sincerity and no philanthropy with established representatives and their industrial principals.
You want to keep humane premisses and democracy in existence, but there is none.
The cold dollar and privilegeds´ fastest ways of obtaining it are what reigns behind national and international policies.
People increasingly realize that. I see it steadily growing in newspapers letters to the editor.
Yugoslavia is erased potential of competition.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 21 2012 22:04:21
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ruphus
Don´t need the "insulation of the internet" to be straight.
I can't recall a duel among my acquaintnace over religion or politics in my lifetime. I can recall Judge John Onion of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals saying at my parents' dinner table, when I was a university student, that up until that time no one had ever been convicted in the state of Texas for killing a man he found in bed with his wife.
I can remember a good number of fist fights, several knife fights and two gun fights among my acquaintance, over insults. I come from a prosperous, educated and well connected stratum of society, but I called out more than one person to a fist fight over matters of personal honor.
"Anglos" used fists or guns. Among my Mexican American friends, knife fights seldom resulted in anything other than a few scratches. The intent was to determine who would back down and apologize. Usually, serious injuries resulted only from miscalculation, accident or loss of temper.
Manners have changed radically over the last fifty years. I think it's a lot harder to insult somebody, and fights are much less likely even if someone succeeds.
I heard one of my favorite stories from my great-uncle Custis Lee Jernigan, named after his cousin, the only son of Robert E. Lee. If I have posted it here before, I apologize.
Uncle Tuss and his older brother William Walter Jernigan were riding horseback on the Natchez Trace in Mississippi. Uncle Wat was notorious for his hair trigger, violent temper, a trait he shared with my great-grandfather. We kids were very careful in Wat's presence, though we ridiculed him behind his back.
Uncle Tuss said, "In those days the Trace ran through uninhabited woods in places. In one of those places a stranger fell in with us. Unfortunately, he and Wat fell to discussing politics."
"I never carried a sidearm, but I had a shotgun in a scabbard under my leg. I backed my horse, pulled the shotgun and covered them both. I said I would shoot the first one that drew his pistol. They simmered down a bit and we rode on."
"By and by we came to a tavern and went in for a glass of cider. The stranger had come to be downright polite, and introduced himself. Wat was still so mad he couldn't remember his own name."
Tuss told the story in Wat's presence. Tuss was a witty and cheerful man, but I don't think anyone but one of Wat's brothers would have risked the exaggeration in front of Wat.
The ride along the Natchez Trace would have taken place within 35 years of the end of what Wat called "The War Between the States"--the Civil War. The South had only recently emerged from military occupation by the North. Both politics and religion could lead to fatal confrontation in those days. In my childhood and youth I was well acquainted with men who lived through those times.
Ruphus, I would gladly entertain you in my house. But I wouldn't take you to a bar in Texas, or many other states in the USA, for that matter. People here are tolerant of differences politely expressed and not pushed. Confrontation can still start a fight.
I repeat that I am grateful to the internet for encouraging people to express widely divergent viewpoints without pulling any punches.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 22 2012 5:28:01
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to kudo)
|
|
|
Richard,
I assume you know that around here tolerance on such matters must be at least as fragile as in the Bible Belt of the US, and worse even, life threatening due to officially encouraged and executed policies.
You must also know that I am not confronting people with rational aspects all the time. Only if something radically retarded is uttered will I mention sober concerns of the matter. And usually only if the person pretends to be generally open for consideration of rational investigation / hence invite me too, will I go further into common understanding of ethics and proportionality.
I have to say however that yes, from the bottom of my heart, I am absolutely of the opinion, that in the age of over 2000 years after Christ and correspondingly high potential of ratio and standards, people should have long, long since reached to a minimum of coherence and pragmatism.
Let alone the cruel attitude of fancying the clearing of anything through physical means.
It is an absolute shame that physical fighting and killing is still as common among men in the third millenium. How much further than that had already the ancient greeks reached to thousands of years ago. And some of remaining indigene cultures give reason to assume that peaceful being and civilzed controversy to have been gained even long before the ancient Greeks.
After all, only congruent in respect of cognitive potential.
As mentioned before, we are on the chimpanzee path instead of on the bonobos´, and it makes for an ashamingly stupid status.
I have never been out to provoke anyone when I was fully trained, and I am not today with all the manly nonesense vastly behind me.
But mind sets that do not want to expand and to know ( three monkeys) should at least get a subtle notion of that there is something fundamentally wrong. For certain as long as their way of life means harm to thirds, and that is what is with orthodox religious´ traditional practice.
With us however just standing by watching, and entertaining a false attitude of "tolerance", we do deliver deprived to the cruelty and injust of backwardeness. And that is just not correct and inhuman to do.
It is the crime of passive witness.
So, we have come to the common understanding that measures against circumcision mean no undue interference, right?
And just so, you see, it is with any traditional injust, from vicious misconceptions of dealing with youngsters, just as with indifferent and torturous dealings with creatures.
Thelike must not be "tolerated" on cost of the victims.
This is the reason why I am having an overwhelmingly hard time with keeping shut and my personal security at safe.
I am no comfy sheep and will likely never be. Just can´t help it.
- Give me that Don Quichotte avatar.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 22 2012 10:48:01
|
|
gbv1158
Posts: 410
Joined: May 29 2009
From: Italy
|
|
RE: Ahmadinejad's Bodyguards (in reply to XXX)
|
|
|
quote:
Why conspiracy? You can find all these infos in any news: Im just saying the west, who is the main critic of islamic countries - thats why i am picking on them and not because i think it is inferior or superior - has economical and political aims. These aims are threatened by some countries, and some others not. Those countries perceived as an opposing force are to be fought back. Economically (embargo), politically (reject decisions). Because these things are not nice, they need some reasoning, to even get people like you - who maybe really care for oppressed people - to get them supporting a war or other steps in diplomacy. But everybody knows that proposed reasonings like "freedom, democracy, humanity" are not the real reasons. But they serve very well to explain an audience why you have to bomb several countries. Because the audience shares the opinion that their country is the most free and most human one - and western countries do agree with each other mutually in that, hence "western" values - while bombing down cities to ashes (edit: i hope you catch the cynicism here). It feels better to "fight for freedom".
I agree with you Deniz....and have to say that so many people here in Italy have the same idea about how this things go.
Anyway, guys, I still believe that we need to exchange our thougths and axperiences with FULL respect of each other, because NOBODY has the truth in his mouth.
ciao
giambattista
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 22 2012 11:15:19
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.109375 secs.
|
Printable Version
