Willie71

Israel is known to be treating the Palestinian people quite poorly. The occupation in the Gaza Strip is pretty brutal. The threat against Israel is quite small, looking at it objectively. It's amped up to intensify the fear mongering to justify war.

I am going to have to do more reading on areas of the world not in the news much. Israel is becoming quite the war mongering oppressive state. American News and politicians are in love with Israel, but in Canada, our leaders for the next election are making comments on possible boycotts. There is a petition in Britain I believe, with 40,000 signatures to bring Netanyahu up on war crimes. It would be political suicide to discuss this as a politician in the U.S.

He came up with a plan, but it's pretty much nonsense. It would result in international discord, possible sanctions against the U.S., and dismantling the positive US/Mexico trade relationship. You can watch it here: https://www.tytnetwork.com/2015/08/18/trump-lays-out-mexican-border-wall-plan/

Uneducated people may hold many ideas that more educated people hold. However, uneducated people may hold ideas that educated people have proven to be false, such as the idea that immigrants commit more crimes, and take more out of the economy than they bring in, policy would be based on erroneous information. Uneducated people don't have to be dumb, but it's harder for educated people to stay dumb, well, with all that exposure to evidence and books and stuff.

Nope. Not what I'm saying at all.

Trump's popularity has been looked at. Two ideas jump,out. First, Trump's largest support comes from people without post secondary education. Only 8% of trump supporters attended college. So it's high school grads and high school dropouts(mentioned specifically- I don't remember the %.) and secondly, his language in the debate was evaluated at grade 4. A previous speech was grade 3. He's appealing to the low hanging fruit. Kasick was grade 5. Paul was grade 9 IIRC. Trump's solutions fit with a simplistic worldview, one that doesn't understand why these black and white solutions can't work. They are appealing to mysogynists, and bullies. With the deformation (not reformation) of education in the U.S., the south in particular, we are more likely to see support for these ideas in future, not less.

Center, and center left exist independent of the misuse of the terms by the American corporate media. I've looked at the economies of a lot of countries in the developed world, and saw two major trends. Center left governments did better overall. Secondly, and government in power more than 10 years became corrupt, and tanked the economy. It's hard to find exceptions to those two themes. Bernie Sanders is center left. He's not a communist, or a Soviet Union type socialist. He's a European/Canadian type democratic socialist.

http://www.lousycv.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/divide-and-conquer-left-vs-right.jpg

There aren't any is the short answer. In Canada, Harper has been trying to Reaganize our country, and the results are disastrous. In Alberta, the provincial Conservatives destroyed the economy, let the infrastructure crumble, and wasted decades of oil revenues, to the tune of massive debt. Giving the big corporations handouts paid for by the populace doesn't work out well for the majority. Don't get me wrong, bloated leftist regimes can do damage as well, but the sweet spot seems to be the centrist/center left position.

Getting rid of ISUS now that they exist us nearly impossible. How do we get rid of the Westborough Baptists? Fear and angst are the recruitment strategies. Work to decrease the number of people who fear the U.S. Bombing is the opposite of what you want to do. Recreate a modern Marshall Plan is where the evidence is.

Clinton's last video was almost perfect. It was very well done. If those are her actual policies, and not empty promises, she would have my vote if I was American. She didn't mention foreign policy though.

The bible is vague and contradictory regarding heaven. There is no consensus. I was raised catholic, but outgrew it. They talk of eternal bliss. It's vague and contradictory on hell too. It's not clear if the soil is moved directly to heaven, he'll or purgatory, or if the soul waits with the body until judgement day. The texts are interpreted differently by different groups.

My concern with Clinton is she is hawkish, and contrary to her presentation, has strong alliances with the big banks. She is reasonable on social issues, health care, and immigration. The republicans seem to be out republicing each other to see who can cut more socially, hate muslims more, hate homosexuals more, and encourage a christian theocracy more. Rand seems the least offensive, but in comparison to a centrist position, let alone liberal, he is extreme. He's just not as extreme as the other right wingers, who are entering right wing fascist territory. If a republican president is elected (other than Rand), the U.S. will become an imperialist fascist theocracy. This is scary to me.

Tesla is developing a car that should come in around $40,000. It's a few years unit from what I understand, but it's a big goal for the company now. They also released their patents, to encourage development of electric cars by other companies, with the not so selfless strategy of establishing their technology as the standard.

Doesn't the NSA have spy cams everywhere? Maybe Americans can tap into those cameras like they do on CSI.

My understanding is the report on 9-11 was deemed nothing more than fraudulent propoganda, used to justify the wars in the region. The Wiki article you linked discusses that evidence. A report by a bunch of warmongering neo-cons is not the most trustworthy source.

Watching Fox News has been shown to leave people more misinformed than not watching the news at all. Most skeptics wouldn't trust MSNBC, or any other corporate news source either. It's funny how people repeat the conservative talking points, which are fed directly to Fox and the like, yet claim the don't partake those sources. I am aware you only denied Fox, but the corporate media is so full of BS that it really is just fiction. Ali khamenei did issue a fatwa against nuclear weapons according to wikipidia. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Khamenei Wiki can't always be trusted, but they are generally not completely inaccurate. In recent years, there has been a review process which has removed a lot of the BS. The main reason it's unlikely that either side will use nuclear weapons in the region is that the end times prophecies require the region to be there to come true. We're dealing with people who believe in those prophecies, and have been fighting for centuries to secure those lands for their prophecies. Money comes into it too, and destroying the land destroys the resources there, and the ability to access them. Nuclear war is no more likely now than it was with the soviets a few decades ago.

I think you watch too much Fox News. You are repeating their uninformed talking points. For the record, the only nation that has ever used a nuclear weapon is the US. By your reasoning, they are the worst offenders in the world. Secondly, for the record, Iran had nothing to do with 9-11. It was the US ally Saudi Arabia who did it. This resulted in no retaliation, no sanctions, nothing against Saudi Arabia? Why is that?

How about having the police treat black people like people instead of abusing and killing them? That's the logical place to start, not with having the victim take responsibility for being abused. We don't tell women to stop antagonizing their abusers either. Fixing police abuse is the responsibility of the police administration, and if they won't fix it, the government needs to step in and fix it.

When people have not been subjected to corruption, they assume that cooperation would result in a more moderate response from the police. However, there are even more stories and videos of blacks standing in a mall, walking down the street, pulled over for a questionable traffic violation, or driving a car nicer than the cops think a black could afford etc. being beaten, arrested without due process, held in jail for weeks or months, and yes killed making cooperating as risky as running away. In a moment of panic, running away at least gives you a chance to avoid the abuse if you are lucky. There are a number of psychological, sociological, and anthropological studies that show the seemingly odd responses such as a crowd submitting to a small number of captors, or a single individual fighting against what appears hopeless. Running actually makes more sense than it seems on the surface.

I'm not sure what you are trying to get at here. Can you clarify, give some examples?

In a number of states, the rapists get visitation rights. It's bizarre.

I think the only possible solution is for a retrofit that would allow mission control to override the pilot. If a terrorist attacks a control tower, same problem as a terrorist overriding security inside or outside the cockpit. The problem is, no matter where the last override it, that is the place the terrorist would focus on. It would be more difficult to take over a control tower than a single plane, simply based on available security.

I have engaged a discussion on this topic on another forum. I will copy/paste some of my comments. I am a Psychiatric Nurse with two decades experience in Forensic Psychiatry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_killer In North America, it is more likely that a white male is going to be a serial killer than other groups, if only for the reason that there are more white males per capita. Mass murderers are most likely to be white males, making up over 70% of the mass murderer population. How about this: http://bossip.com/698648/race-matters-s ... ial-group/ While the majority of all violent crimes are perpetuated by men, American mass murders in particular seem to be the territory of white men. The Encyclopedia of Murder and Violent Crime writes that, “Compared with assailants who kill but one victim, mass murderers are overwhelmingly likely to be male, [and] are far more likely to be white,” and the numbers prove it. According to Wikipedia, 75% of the rampage killings on US record were perpetrated by white males, as were 71% of massacres in schools, and 60% of workplace rampages – a seriously disproportionate number for the number of white males that make up the general population. Clearly, there is more at play here than the advantage of opportunity. Historically, the focus on serial killers and mass murderers has been on the individual motives for the crimes, and little on the overarching trend. It’s plausible that the elevated social status of white males combined with isolation, desperation, opportunity, and mental illness has led the white men who have gone on rampages to make their pain felt by those around them in a very violent way. Of course, it isn’t just male privilege that makes men more prone to violent crime than their female counterparts. From the time they are toddlers, men are socialized to express their emotions through violence. Western culture – and especially American culture – teaches boys that emotional intelligence and expression is worthless and effeminate, and that the acceptable masculine response to anger, sadness, and/or frustration is to act out physically. If this mentality is particularly deeply rooted in an individual man, he may find it incredibly difficult to form an emotional support system, leading to more self-inflicted and outwardly motivated violence among men. Feel free to dispute anything I have listed, or discussed. Its an interesting topic, and even working in the field for many years, I know there is a lot more to be learned about the human mental state that causes these situations, and if there is any way to prevent them from happening. What I do know is that this is an atypical atypical type situation. Being depressed or suicidal is not the likely cause.

I received the Carrier book yesterday, and started reading it. My initial impressions are that its a balanced look at the evidence for and against both the historical, and mythological jesus. There is an interesting discussion regarding the weakness of the consensus position that Jesus was real based on outdated methodology that hasn't been challenged. He notes many exaggerations in claims by the mythical camp as well. I'll post more as I keep reading.