Test123
Breaking News
Comcast Close To Buying NBC
I’m not sure when you cross the threshold, but this sure sounds like a war of some sort – civil or otherwise
Grisly attacks and other sectarian violence unleashed by last week’s bombing of a Shiite shrine have killed more than 1,300 Iraqis, making the past few days the deadliest of the war outside of major U.S. offensives, according to Baghdad’s main morgue. The toll was more than three times higher than the figure previously reported by the U.S. military and the news media.
Kristy Sanchez-Trujillo
T-Mobile Outage
T-Mobile
Megan Gale
Sylvie Van Der Vaart
Clash Of The Titans
Ashley Neufeld
Afton Williamson
Kyrstin Gemar
Tesla Coil
Xperia X10
Cany Vossough
Reza Vossough
Ninel Conde
Julia Louis Dreyfus
Guardians of Childhood
Botox
Chase Utley
Prince Of Persia Sands Of Time
Cherokee
Christopher Lee
Prince Charles
Prince William
Prince Harry
Cleveland Browns
Ernie Accorsi
Reina Flynn
Reid Gray
Cole Hamels
Brett Myers
Quinn Gray
SEPTA
Burlington Northern
Star Wars The Old Republic
Nightmare On Elm Street
Gerard Butler
Amrit Dhaliwal
Louise Linton
Gwen Stefani
Curtis Lavelle Vance
Anne Pressly
H1N1 Vaccine
Melody Ross
Oasis Of The Seas
Disney Cruise
Selita Ebanks
Anthony Sowell
JJ Redick
Axe Body Spray
Christopher Walken
Dragon Age Origins
Oliver: I feel so helpless. Those poor people. They say there will be a bloodbath if we pull out. But look what’s happening now. And the people who have caused all this don’t give a shit.
i can’t hear it
the sound of a pin
dropping (not dropped)
not hitting bare
brass floor flying
forever thunderstrikes
in the distance but not
too distant since we know
it’s raining our driveway
bare but our neighbors
have told us and we’ve heard
these strikes before today
underestimated the sounds
of the wind the footsteps
the wandering souls lined
up like proud soldiers
scared of what might face
them or what they might
face in their time of need
in their country’s time
of need what are they doing there?
jumbled words know not their
intended path flying through
the air planes circling landing
strips waiting to land the prize
merely another day a sunset
a lifetime of memories which
is all that is left for one
boy his father in tower 2
told to stay in his office
the woman with the book
and her stale green stare
visible through the void
eliptical patterns the explosions
remind me of thunder the dust
like gray clouds
in the distance but not
too distant since we know
it’s raining our driveway
bare but our neighbors
have told us and we’ve heard
these strikes before
This is the type of thing that all along has had the most potential to scr*w up the neocons vision of a democratic, modern Iraq. Oliver’s partisan pandering aside, it does show there are still fundamental divides. The jury is still out, but this type of event is a setback for the Admin.
Dugger though
Dugger,
So now it’s “partisan pandering” to recognize the deaths of upwards of 1300 civilians in as little as three days?
I’ll ask you then, do you consider it “partisan pandering” every time the Bush administration evokes the horrible deaths that occured on 9/11? Or is that just good politics?
I hate to say it, but sometimes, I think people just will not settle down until they’ve been bled. Think Europe circa 1900. All that nationalism was headed for a war. They weren’t going to stop until they’d had it.
America circa 1850’s.
Etc, etc. ad nauseum.
I think that this is the state of iraq, and maybe much of the arab world.
And I gotta be honest…I’d rather they fought each other than fought us.
Still, it would be an interesting study is politics to see if you could find a way to let people fight, but do it in such a way that only the violently inclined would fight, and minimize the horror to the civilians and those who did not want a war.
I doubt it. But thats probably what we should be looking at, rather than preventing a civil war entirely. Its going to happen. I’ve been saying its going to happen since early 2004. There is to much tension there. Three plates are straining against each other, and the rumbles won’t cease until theres been a release. And unfortunately for everyone involved, that is going to mean blood. And probably lots of it.
There has been some encouraging gestures of unity between Shia and
Sunna leaders to end the strife.
Unfortunately, the fever is high among the masses, and they don’t
need much incentive to renew the blood lust.
I know I am sounding repetitive, but this sort of tribal enmity is deep
in the genetic memory of these people.
It was wrong headed to begin nation building in this culture when rapid
change and acceptance of the responsibilities inherent in a democracy
was needed in order to succeed. Perhaps in twenty or thirty years they
will acheive a semblance of democracy. But that will be preceded by
a scary civil war. But then, many of us knew that. Didn’t we?
My friend s daughter is being deployed to Iraq. This is just terrible and senseless, but it is being replayed all over our country. I am sick about this, because I have no power alone to do anything about it. Together we can make a difference. Now that Bush s approval rating on the handling of Iraq is only at 30%, we need to push Murtha s plan:
To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.
To create a quick reaction force in the region.
To create an over- the- horizon presence of Marines.
To diplomatically pursue security and stability in Iraq
The people need to speak up against continuing this war. It is over. Iraq is close to or in a civil war. A civil war is not our fight. Please write to everyone you can think of and push them to end this madness. We need to bring our troops home before we lose anymore of our true treasure our men and women.
BTW;
Remember the other blood bath? You know, the one NOT being covered
by the bleeding heart , liberal-bias Media?
It seems the slaughter in Darfour has spilled over into Chad because
the murderers have been emboldened by the lack of response from
the civilized world. Do you think maybe some of it could be quelled
if we sent a few fighters and bombers their way?
In addition;
Where is the outrage in the super-righteous, overly self-important
blogosphere?
For every Darfur, there’s a tsunami, or earthquake. Where is the outrage ?
Depleted. Exhausted. Scattered. Leaderless. Lost.
The earth is a bi-i-ig planet. This decade, the neo-cons chose Iraq to conduct their obsessive-compulsive social-experiment in nation-building. Wouldn’t be the first time 500 years of world history were put into motion on somebody’s whim.
“The jury is still out, but this type of event is a setback for the Admin.”
Yes, of course. It won’t be a disaster until the bodies stack up to our noses.
I caught that too frame, a bloody civil war is breaking out and the first thing he says is that the administration could suffer. Gee, I guess that is more important than the people who will be slaughtered, right?
Afterall, we have to keep our eye on what’s really important in all this: Bush’s legacy.
The question you must ask is: Was the price of preventing this — allowing Saddam Hussein’s reign of terror over 25 million people to continue?
I mean that seriously; I am not pushing for a “Yes” answer. Things might have been much worse, had Saddam been deposed by a coup. Things might have been much worse, had Saddam died. Things might have been much worse, had the United States never been involved.
Now, the future matters. The fantasy of “genetic memory” aside, this is a religious conflict that has been both peaceful and violent, since the 8th Century. Like the “Hundred Years War” may be the model for what is happening here: This may ‘go into remission’ and then start again 5, 20, 50 years from now.
I understand the sorrow and grief of the sincerely concerned, as well as the celebratory attititude of the “Anti – Bush Faithful”. But I would wait at least a few weeks before even attempting to form an opinion about these events.
Ah, nothing quite like alternative history lines, would-have-beens, could-have-beens, and should-have-beens.
If the oppressed threw off their tyrannical leader, and then fell to bloody civil war in the power vacuum, then the United States — having stood off — would at least have had a clean conscience and the morbid fascination of watching a country become a failed state.
As it is, the United States threw down the tyrannical dictator and failed to maintain order which led to the failure of security in the country which led to the failure to repair vital, civic infrastructure which led to the failure of democracy to grow which led to the failure of a peaceful nation living in comity with its neighbors.
That’s it: one failure after another.
Frank,
Exactly right. How bad would the alternative have been. But more than that, what if, just what if, Iraq stabilizes and becomes a Mideast democracy. Their citizens prosper more and advance far beyond their more backward neighbors. What if then, Iraq’s success then spurs peaceful, modernizing revolutions in Syria, Iran and Saudi. IE what if Iraq fixes the worlds greatest trouble spot. How many millions of lives will this action with our painful now 1300 deaths have saved. That is what the neocons believe could happen. Of course, there is a darker flip side. If that were to happen, history would view Bush as a great president and I would not feel so awkward about being the mind numbed Bushbot cultist i am.
Dugger
“How bad would the alternative have been.”
So the conservatives who once proclaimed themselves serious adults who act on reason and facts have now surrendered to the easy charms of speculative fiction. Everything looks wonderful if you can imagine a horrific alternate history that “might have been” and combine it with a wildly optimistic fantasy of what “may yet come.” The trick is that you have to completely ignore present reality and the trends of the immediate past that got us here.
This isn’t like the Battle of the Bulge, guys, a set back after a series of hard won victories. The latest explosion of violence in Iraq is the latest evidence of an upward trend of terror that began three years ago. Which is to say that this is not some isolated incident that the left is blowing out of proportion. Indeed, conservatives who still support this war, such as yourselves, have been forced to remove any and all acts of violence in Iraq from their immediate context, in order to continue entertaining fantasies of rose petals and Bush statues in Baghdad. It really is getting sickening.
How many millions of lives will this action with our painful now 1300 deaths have saved.
Not that I want to encourage your little “what if” scenarios, but given some reports, we’ve got upwards of 100,000 civilians killed since the invasion began. So…try not to forget.
“Was the price of preventing this allowing Saddam Hussein s reign of terror over 25 million people to continue?”
In answer to your question, Frank, why do you think that Hussein’s reign of terror is even over? The vast majority of the insurgents are made up Hussein loyalists and other Sunnis who want back in power. They are continuing the policies of terror that Hussein inaugurated. The right prefers to think of the insurgency in terms of outside agitators and terrorists because it allows them to ignore the fact that we are still fighting the same Baathists we were fighting on the first day of the invasion. But if you can ignore the fact that the Hussein’s supporters are still fighting us on a daily basis then you can play stupid rhetorical games like asking “Was it worth it to end Hussein’s reign of terror?”
Frank, the reign of terror continues in a different form. We haven’t ended it. Indeed, it has only gathered in intensity and violence with the addition of outside agitators and a general lawlessness.
Hey, it could happen.
Let’s go ahead and throw the dice. Heck, it’s not like we have anything to lose.
Asking how bad the alternative would have been is meaningless. Save it for a lost episode of Sliders. The alternative is dust, the reality is now, and the reality is that the only projection that came true was the easiest one to make–that the United States military, if it invaded Iraq, would successfully oust Saddam.
The rest of the projections? Well, that’s what happens when the people in charge don’t think ahead.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on a sec. You mean we didn’t have to invade? But, I, wha? Oh screw it, too much thinking. RAPE ROOMS, RAPE ROOMS, RAPE ROOMS. Now I feel good.
Frank, instead of doing their thinking for them you might wonder how terrorized the majority of Iraqis feel now vs. under Sadam. Polls are out there. You may be surprised that most would like to return to the stable ‘authoritarian’ days when they had no terrorist attacks, but they did have teachers, hospitals, electricity and running water. Also about 80% want US troops out now. They just don’t know what’s good for them! I think we are all grown up enough to agree that Sadam Hussein was a really bad guy but this isn’t a comic book. Real people are suffering and dying, women and kids, not just soldiers, police and insurgents. It just seems way too easy to sit here in Fortress America and lecture them on what they ought to do. As an aside its been very interesting to see how fast the ‘we had our civil war and it didn’t hurt us too bad… maybe its a good thing all this bloodshed, sort ‘em out…’ talking point has gotten out there. So now we invaded to oust Sadam so they could get their civil war over and done with and…. Huh? WTF are you folks smoking? You guys really screwed the place up and now you’re figuring out how to blame it on the Iraqis themselves. I guess they just couldn’t handle American democracy.
Suddenly, liberals are living in the now?
Will wonders never cease?
First, they’re more conccerned about (port) security than conservatives, and now they’re pessimistic about the future…
What happened to the tried and true formula: The best way to fix a mess is to throw more money at it?
Or is that only for domestic problems?
Your other face is showing.
Frank;
This digresses just a bit, but must be said in response to the familiar
brand of tobacco you use in your pipe.
When birds fly south for the winter, or squirrels store nuts for the winter,
this is not reasoned but instinctive behavior. Instinct is just another
word for ‘genetic memory’.
I guess education alone is not the answer to ignorance.
You know, I’m probably going to hear about how the animals have instinct
instilled by the Creator and that it is not learned.
Do you play golf, Frank?
You may know there are a lot of things to remember when you are first
learning. With much practice one finds it possible to go on autopilot with
all the complicated angling and muscle control becoming ’second nature’
That’s called ‘muscle memory’, a distant cousin of ‘genetic memory’.
Any questions?
This is getting scary:
Continuing Sectarian Violence Kills 68 in Iraq
Has anyone seen those goalposts?
Cleo, both of your comments are either way off point (and I am being charitable) or totally off the wall.
Do you really think that Sunnis and Shuiites possess some “instinct” that makes them enemies? Are you kidding?
Have you never heard of the incident at Karbala? This is where the Sunnis and Shuiites became separate, and bitterly opposed sects: nothing genetic, automatic or instinctive about it.
See here:
http://www.rafed.net/towns/english/karbala.html
It may stun you and your left – wing colleagues to know that I wrote a 10 page paper on this split, called “The Road to Karbala” about 10 years ago for a Guided Independent Study on the Middle East. I wrote 10 papers. Each one got an “A”, and I got an “A” for the course.
You are 100% wrong, and I am 100% right.
You know, it’s not about predetermined behavior, it’s about propensities.
Habits are deeply learned behaviors that have some transmutation
from generation to generation. You have children; Haven’t you noticed
they exhibit behaviors that are demonstrated early (less than 12 months)
which could not have been learned?
Genetics is not limited to physical characteristics. If you have not
observed this phenomenon first hand, I would be incredulous.
Perhaps you have observed and made another determination.
Regardless, genetics is a powerful force of nature, and opinions,
attitudes and beliefs cannot be seperated from the matrix. No matter
how hard you try.
End of lesson.
Haven t you noticed they exhibit behaviors that are demonstrated early (less than 12 months) which could not have been learned?
Yes, but those behaviors don’t include hunting down people of other religious sects and killing them.
Cleo, I was born on a Thursday, but not last Thursday. C’mon.
You’re talking pure Lysenkoism
http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/SM_tsn/ch1s4.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/military-culture.htm
Frank;
Lysenkoism?
Your brittle notion of a simple world that can be explained in Plain wrap,
language discount and cut-rate prices has a charming quality, rather like
a beautiful baby who at six months has us all giddy. What if you came
back 10 years later and the child had not developed beyond the
physical size of a six month old.? Your ideas have been set in stone,
and there’s no movin’ ‘em. But I’m movin’ on.
“Suddenly, liberals are living in the now? Will wonders never cease? … What happened to the tried and true formula: The best way to fix a mess is to throw more money at it?”
WTF are you talkng about Frank? Falling back on stock cliches that you’ve been dragging around with you since 1964 whenever you can’t face reality is one thing, but clearly you’ve just been reduced to nonsensical jabbering.
Liberals don’t live in the now? Uh?
And as for your point about throwing money at a problem, what do you think Bush is doing in Iraq? Have you seen the deficit lately? Bush doesn’t have a plan, he’s just pouring billions of dollars into a sinkhole — including money well spent on local PR/propaganda efforts — while refusing to acknowledge that there’s a serious problem.
Stick with the tried and true Frank: When the facts turn against you, blame the liberal media.
Bush’s plan, Starve the Beast! War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery! Bring ‘em on!
Cleo, you can be as stubborn as you choose to be. If anyone’s ideas are set in stone, they are yours. If you don’t want to budge from your “they can’t help themselves, it’s in their blood” position, then don’t. Your “references” don’t refute my point. Neither do your incomprehensible metaphors.
frameone: That non – answer was non – impressive.
Frank;
Projection of your inflexible thinking onto me is a tacit admission of
your stubborn nature. You probably missed this graph;
“Avarice for leadership, and keen sense of emulation often resulted in bitter tribal warfare despite descendency from one common ancestor. In this regard, the continued bloody conflicts of Aws and Khazraj, Abs and Dhubyan, Bakr and Taghlib, etc. are striking examples.
“Inter-tribal relationships were fragile and weak due to continual inter-tribal wars of attrition. Deep devotion to religious superstitions and some customs held in veneration, however, used to curb their impetuous tendency to quench their thirst for blood. In other cases, there were the motives of, and respect for, alliance, loyalty and dependency which could successfully bring about a spirit of rapport, and abort groundless bases of dispute. A time-honoured custom of suspending hostilities during the prohibited months (Muharram, Rajab, Dhul-Qa dah, and Dhul-Hijjah) functioned favourably and provided an opportunity for them to earn their living and coexist in peace.”
The links were not meant to be comprehensive. I thought maybe your
penchance for Googling would inspire you to do your own research on
the subject.
Perhaps you did and found the above representative of the facts and
couldn’t find contrary info. That would explain your return to attacking
my wordsmithing as ‘incomprehensible’.
Non-answer? What was the question?
No. You’re wrong.
The propensity to solve conflicts with violence first is exacerbated by
the cultural reinforcement of the genetic predispostion. I don’t care
how many books you’ve read.
If this counseling degree you are seeking does not have some core
courses on theories of genetically ascribed behavior, then I would
wonder what value it has. Perhaps your studies should include
the following subjects which are far from the looney UFO, Men in Black
and ‘Sasquatch’ derogations. Trade up from the 20th century, Frank.
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/behavior.shtml
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11715043&dopt=Citation
Cleo,I already told you I did my research on this about ten years ago. What do you think has changed? I didn’t run yo Google — I didn’t have.
If I remeber correctly, the ten reports were:
I. Middle East: Culture and Civilization
II. Islam
III. The Crusades
IV. The Black Death
V!. The Spanish Bridge
VII. World War I
VIII. Up from Colonialism: Algeria and Egypt
IX. Iran versus Iraq
X. Israel versus Palestine
Something like that
This was pre – Internet, when your research was done from books and journals — remember those?
You’re wrong.
No matter how long the people of the Middle East have been tribalistic, it is not genetic, or instinctive, it is anthropological, i.e., learned after birth.
The Islamic Empire was well unified from about 1200 to 1800, when the Ottoman Empire began to totter.
Frank;
While the above comment awaits moderation, perhaps you could
entertain me with information that disproves my ‘genetic memory’
error.
Cleo, genetic predisposition is related to the most basic of tasks and feelings. For example, striking a person in anger might be instinctive. A conservative striking a liberal in anger most certainly is not.
Maintaining the integrity of the tribe might be an ancient tradition. It is, nonetheless, a tradition, i.e., something that is passed down by learning.
When a baby cries a new mother’s breasts will leak milk. She will not “instinctively” hop into her Chevy Nova, and ride out to the Piggly Wiggly.
Why don’t you stop trying to insult me, go find out what in the hell you are talking about, and come back later.
Let’s look at some of your “material”:
In humans, some behaviors run in families. For example, there is a clear familial aggregation of mental illness.
Absolutely. From generation to generation, in each and every family member, each having the same mental illness?
Of course not.
Drosophila: genetics meets behaviour.
Oh, yes, those complicated, sophisticated fruit flies. We behave exactly like them. In fact, I was in a fruit fly shopping mall the other day. Parking was, naturally, extremely difficult, because it stood only 18 inches tall.
Cleo, how many ways can I say you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. Every single behavioral course I’ve ever taken brings up the idea of “nature vs. nurture.” It is clearly understood by almost everyone but you, I guess, that humans are distinguished from almost every other living thing by the FACT that there is very little of an instinctive nature in their behavior.
The closest thing to “genetic memory” is Jung’s idea of ‘collective unconscious,’ and it doesn’t refer to genetic memory. It refers to ancient archetypes: things that frighten us and confuse us from the ancient past of our ancestors.
As it says in the World Book Encyclopedia of the Internet WikiPedia: Genetic memory is a device used in science fiction but it is not scientifically proven to occur in human beings.
You are way out of your league, my friend. “Some core courses on theories of genetically ascribed behavior,” indeed. For what I’m paying, I haven’t got time for “Art Bell” junk science.
By the way, have you ever taken a “core course” in Anthropology?
Have you ever read Mood Genes,by Samuel Barondes?
Check it out…
Frank;
If I remember correctly, you also regard the theory of evolution as
‘fantasy’, and there’s the rub for our dear traditionalist who regards
the emerging science of epigenetics as ‘pseudo’ primarily because
it threatens that brittle worldview.
http://www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/savant/genetic_memory.cfm
The Pope is no longer the only authorized purveyor of knowledge in
the world, Frank. Galileos everywhere continue to challenge the
status quo, which you so desperately cling to. Steam engines no
longer have a place in the world, except as a curiosity. If locomotives
continue to be your preferred mode of transportation, you will assuredly
arrive late for your appointment with destiny
Cleo, don’t tell me you’re pulling out the old “They all laughed at Christopher Columbus” routine.
You know, “It’s ridiculous to you now, because you’re not forward thinking enough, but someday, I’ll be be proven right, and you’re going to feel foolish.”
I was reading about Penfield and Gazzaniga as far back as the mid – 70’s. Gazzaniga wandered off the scientific reservation years ago. There’s a kernel of truth, but nothing like you’re talking about — like Julian Jaynes (I know you’ve heard of him, right?)
You’re talking to me about evolution, and saying (erroneously) that I called it fantasy. Everyone here said it was “science” because there evidence behind it, and evidence to back it up. Now I’m saying that “genetic memory” is a crack – brained theory, and you’re saying, “Someday we’ll find out it’s true.”
All this because of your pig – headedness in refusing to back off your Omar Sharif / Anthony Quinn “Sheik” stereotype of ancient Arab feuds, and now you’re trying to support it by saying it’s genetic.
You can go get 100 links, and all of them in their totality wouldn’t support the notion of a genetically driven tribal conflict. Not 100 — not 1000.
It ain’t so.
Talking down down to me is just making you look more and more foolish.
Locomotives, indeed…
Gazzaniga and Penfield were early pioneers in the “left brain vs. right brain” area. That area of study didn’t turn out to be as promising as they thought it would be, and Gazzaniga moved on, as I noted above, “off the scientific reservation.” (See Oliver Sacks as the new kid on the block, when it comes to anomalies of the Brain.)
But what the hell do I know, I’ve only been studying human behavior, formally and informally, for forty years, and actually worked in the field for ten years. You’ve been studing it way longer than that, right, Cleo?
Let me how you make out in that anthropology course, and tell me what you think of Mood Genes when you’re done.
“mood genes’ seems to be primarily about manic-depression in the cause/
effect of genes vs behavior. I have not read it, but it is well reviewed.
Jaynes and Gazzaniga are creative thinkers who seem to have latched
onto Hindu Cosmology (Atman and Brahman) which defines ’self’ as
a construct as stable as a puff of smoke from a cigar. The true ’self’
is more like an “Oversoul’ whose existence is not provable using emprical
science as the rule of thumb, but neither is anything else provable.
(see below)
They are brilliant minds taking one posit and extrapolating a string of
subsets to form their conclusions. You are comparing the Human Genome
Project to them?
There is nothing new about the brain’s role in producing responses due
to chemicals released or not released. There has been much research
done to suggest that the brain is little more than a very prolific
gland, but I do not embrace that view. The brain is more than that,
but it is only my opinion. If you are interested in such subjects, you
should read; “Programming and Metaprogramming the Human
Biocomputer” By Dr. John Lily.
As for what is provable by human standards of ‘proof’ I have a challenge
for you which no philosopher has dared try since Descartes wrote the
line “I think, therefore, I am”. A Cartesian cop-out. He IS because
he says HE IS.
If you care to, impress me with your thinking and writing skills, please
convince me and the scientific world that you exist, Frank.
Make it easy on yourself and prove that a tree exists, or your
5th floor apartment. Take your choice.
There is much that is mysterious in this world, but only the bold,
heuristic thinkers give us a glimpse of the truth before it can be
discursively ‘proven’.
3 of last 5 posts ‘moderated’
Incredible.
So now you’re a “bold, heuristic thinker.”
Get over yourself, You’re grasping at straws, because you are fighting from adownhill position.
I have a better challenge for you, and easier: Demonstrate, with a ‘preponderance of evidence’ (not because you say so, that the tribal [sectarian] warfare in Iraq has a genetic basis. That was (and has been for some time) your contention.
I’m done until you demonstrate that. Everything else is Bravo Sierra.
BTW;
Let’s agree not engage in the future. It is a fruitless endeavor.
I was not referring to myself, but I sense the usual agitation at having
to back up your ideas;
‘While the above comment awaits moderation, perhaps you could
entertain me with information that disproves my genetic memory
error.”
I issued the first challenge which is unanswered, except for the
derogatory delcarations.
I’m sure you’ll run for the “incomprehensible metaphor” dodge.
At least you are consistent in your intransigent and fossilized grey cells.
Right, Cleo, when you’re wrong, it is better not to engage. You should have realized that about 48 posts ago.
Derogatory declarations, my ass. You’ve been talking down to me for days, you phony.
Time for you to back down, because you are W – R – O – N – G.
Incidentally, Captain Tomorrow, if you don’t realize that I annihilated your stupid idea, several posts back (Mar 1 2006, 9:57 PM), then you haven’t been reading.
Sophist Claptrap, O’ small minded one.
Try reading that isn’t recommended by Phyllis Schafly.
Just like you, she focuses on microfacts then bloviates to the
broader “conclusion”;
“Continued censorship of criticism invites additional fraud, so evolution has suffered more embarrassments than any other scientific theory. The Piltdown man was a lie taught to schoolchildren for decades, even featured in the John Scopes Monkey Trial textbook, and only five years ago a dinosaur-bird fossil hoax was presented as true on the glossy pages of National Geographic.”
http://www.townhall.com/print/print_story.php?sid=14069&loc=/opinion/columns/phyllisschlafly/2004/12/27/14069.html
“Many textbooks feature pictures of giraffes stretching their necks to feed high off of trees, but genetics and observed feeding habits disprove that as a basis for evolution of their long necks. Moreover, the striking beauty of the colored pattern on the giraffes illustrates that design, not merely usefulness, is what animates our world.”
Just like you, when it’s convenient and fits the accepted world view,
Schafly champions genetics.
Remember; 500 years ago it was ‘true’ that the earth was flat and all
who claimed the earth was not the center of the universe were at
risk of being burned at the stake. These are good companions for
the knowledgeable, but still tragically ignorant, Frank D’s of the world.
And I thought you followed every breath Phyllis takes.
Phyllis Schafly wrote about genetic memory? Do tell.
You’ve gone from helpless to hopeless to pathetic
BTW;
You have to build your own case before you can ‘demolish’
another.
Have some Senokot and try again.
Cleo, give it up — you lost two days ago.
You have averred on a number of occasions (several threads) that tribal / sectarian warfare was “genetic” and “in their blood” and similar terms. I responded several times that you were incorrect. You have yet to make a cas that this was so; you just keep repeating it.
It is up to you support your contention, not me.
I say it’s false, I have said why I think it’s false.
You say it’s true, but you have not made your case. Make your case, or don’t. I don’t care.
I have never made the case that tribal warfare was genetic.
Tribal warfare is the outlet for culturally closed societies where
violence is a first option in dealing with conflicts.
The propensity for violence plus the cultural norms which
reinforce that tendency is what is genetic. They attack
their enemies in an order based on how close the source
of conflict is to their gene pool. Tribal enmity stems from
the xenophobic suspicion of ‘outsiders’. A second cousin
is an outsider compared to a first cousin, and so on. Foreigners
are on the outside fringe of ‘outsiders’ and thus there is
cooperation amongst countrymen who temporarily unite
to eject the common enemy.
They share no deviant gene to distinguish them from any other
race. All races have a duality in their rejection/fascination with
violence. Theirs is just a bit more primitve because it has been
socially condoned and sometimes encouraged to a greater extent
than western civilizations.
That does not change the fact that ‘genetic memory’ (as you
reference with Jung’s Archetypes) ties ancient human behavior
and it’s violence to modern day man, regardless of race.
I should have been listening to your signals, without verbatim
language, that this is a racist notion. It would be if I were saying
that violence was the province of Arabs to the exclusion of some
other race. No, it is something shared, but with different social
controls.
awaiting moderation………..again…………………….and again……………..
*crickets*
Typical
Fine and dandy… We’ll let it go at that. I wasn’t even hinting that it was “racist”. I was trying to get you to see that it wasn’t hereditary. A tradition going back to pre – Biblical times, yes. An anthropological outcome of desert life, probably. Hereditary, no.
Peace?
Frank;
Peace be unto you.