Hex works [19 th August - 14 th November] Christianity and Islam. If we were to see that there is really no difference between Islam, J udaism and Christianity, then there will be a unified church! I magine the good that would do? I propose something else. When you say you are one of the religions, why not just say you are religious? If you say merely that you are religious, then you would be leaving the differences at home. If you were to combine all the religions, then they would stop many of the misleading details about each one. If we were to have a unified church, then there would be no more Quakers in the uk throwing stones at the homes of other religions neighborhoods. Or, of course... They could say that all gods are different gods. This will lead people away from arguing about what god wants, and into the realm of trying to do what your god wants, rather than someone else's god. I would like to point out that Islam is not as organized as Christianity, and therefore we see lots of arguing about what goes on in there. I suggest that there be a pope for the Muslims as well, maybe somewhere in Saudi Arabia? This 'big guy' could easily say that this extremist nonsense must stop, and then there would be less bloodshed and misery. I find that as long as people argue about religion, or, the Arabs stay 'offended' by the west, there will be no real peace. If one clever man once said that they are the same god, he put out a fire. That fire has come back full circle. I doubt that the same god would say different things to different people, saying these things are right, so they must be different gods. So, seeing as how Muslims want to have their religion superimposed onto the world, I suggest a new idea... If they are different gods, saying different things and having different prophets, then they need to find some middle ground. If there are similarities between what is right and wrong, and it makes sense to the people, what is right and wrong? .ft Quote by: http:/ / en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Child_ marriage Child marriage and child betrothal customs occur in various times and places, whereby children are given in matrimony - before marriageable age as defined by the commentator and often before puberty. Today such customs are fairly widespread in parts of Africa, Asia, Oceania and South America: in former times it occurred also in Europe. So, as you can see, even white people liked the idea of child marriage for a while in Europe. If the Europeans were into it, and this fad had to do with kings and queens, or princes and princesses, then I guess that it must be okay. But enough about marriage! What else finds similar footing between Arabs and Christians? Well, the role of a woman is thought to be in the household and with the kids. If you look to the conservatives of the world - the 'white' world - you will find that although this is not the law, the women often end up in the household after they marry because they want to look after things there. It is not law in the Arab world with regards to Pakistan and I ran and the likes of those, but it is in Saudi Arabia I think. This law builds families! If the woman feels pressurized into getting married, or staying with her parents until whenever, then they will be encouraged to marry as soon as possible. This means that women will find their place, as it is natural to find this place. If you observe all conservative societies - the societies that people vote for, or to belong to - then you will find that this is common and realistic. Of course you could say that stoning people to death is not okay. But then I ask, what is the death penalty? We have far more people dying of violence and crimes in the western world than the near east. Then you could say that they protest too much! Well, if you look at the rest of the world, it is educated people that do not sink to the level of violence and then just don't want to get their hands dirty. If you look to Africa china, Asia, South America - they all get in there and get dirty. So, maybe you should ask not why they do it, but why don't you do it? I find this is apathy, as there are clearly more criminals in the west than in the near east, more gangs, more violence. Wouldn't you blame the people behind the war? That is the leaders back in the near east. Wouldn't you blame the people supporting the war? Think of that like Americans that say on television interviews they support the war... War has become, in our day and age, something that is neither correct nor incorrect. But, in the liberal media, you find it is incorrect, and in the right wing media, you find it is correct. So, if the USA wants another war, they should vote for Romney, yes? If they want the liberals to clean up the mess, then they should vote for them? Wouldn't you blame a person waving a flag at a rally? If Americans come out and support the war, surely the near east will view them too as an enemy? I doubt it will come down to suicide bombings in America, but, if they were to send money back home to fund the war, surely they would be tools of the war? If Americans sent money to the state through taxation, and that funded the war, and then they also enlisted to fight the war, then they are the enemy. Like I said previously, the Muslims send money home to fund the war of terror. Someone was jailed for it too! That report is here on this forum somewhere, I cannot remember where... But, are all Americans fighting the war on terror? Is this just a war between the state and the Afghans? If Americans wanted the war to stop, they would march. I have seen them marching for lesser things, and when it comes to human life, life set to their trust by soldiers, the people have let the country down. The country has let the people down too, as by engaging in this war, they have spent money and thrown soldiers into a dangerous area. Now, if health care is so important, why isn't it shared with the poverty stricken? I bet in the Arab world they would share the money with the poor? Let's speak of another hypothetical? In the near east, it is common for people to send money to their families. We never hear of that in the west, do we? That means the Arab world cares for them a lot more than the west. In the west people don't share at all, do they? In the hear east, they share a lot! This means, culturally, that the near east is more charitable than the Christians. If the west was to send money to Africa, then they want something in return, like outsourcing. If the outsourcing goes wrong, they just up and leave. No compassion. That is what I am talking about, compassion. People throwing their lives on the line to bomb the Americans out of the near east, not paying someone else to do it. Not watching as social security goes down so that a lot of war veterans are broke when they come back... So, this religion is not to blame for the war. The religion shows us that they love human life and charity, nearly all engaging in it. Time machine. Or, we could take my machine that reaches the fourth dimension, and then find a way to move you through it. M Quote by: me If we actually want to enter the fourth dimension, we need some way to actually open it up for us. This could be done by splitting an object into length and breadth, and then giving it depth. To explain this properly to you, we could take a blanket hung on a line, and then stretch it from end to end, and top to bottom, and then pull it from each side of it, like making a blanket - two dimensional - look like a 'room. 1 Maybe we could pull it in the centre on each side and make it three dimensional? This means the space inside the centers would be the fourth dimension! Using lasers, we could focus two of them on the same place, and then make them bisect there. The thing is, they will be going into each other, but I can see no problems yet... Then we could load them with positive ions and watch them meet up... with the force behind them, they would push each other away, so, maybe the 'force 1 could push them apart and make a new object in the centre of it? This would mean 'filling the gap 1 or, making a fourth dimension all the way down the beam of the laser. Then we could heat the lasers so that they make it like a squishy door from star gate? Okay, so we also need to make the laser beams very large in height and width. The depth will be where we stick the stuff we want to go through the 'star gate! 1 As the area fills, we will be able to set up a video recorder and then film what happens and what weirdness lurks inside the fourth dimension, as it is actually within the third dimension, literally, if you understand my blanket idea. Or, we could use one wide laser onto a mirror. Then we could see the area inside the laser - where it reflects - become filled as if it were the fourth dimension? Maybe instead of using positive or negative forces to create resistance, we could use particle annihilation? There must be a way to literally open a door to another dimension... Maybe anti matter? So, we can open a doorway to the fourth dimension. If this is the case, and I am sure it is, then we can move through the fourth dimension, which people say is time, but which is proven to be actually another dimension of depth. Well it looks like another dimension of depth... So, to travel through time we need to add another dimension of length and width, so that the whole thing will be 'doubled 1 , and then maybe we can move around inside there, close it up, and see where it leads? Budget for South Africa With the state of things in South Africa and also acknowledged by media - although I cannot find where - there seems to be a horrible mindset in South Africa from the black community. They think that education will grant jobs, but overinvesting in education leads to no job creation - we have people sitting around with grade twelve or more and no jobs. This means that we need more jobs and money needs to be spent on that. Then the gdp produces dividends, and everyone gets more money. If the anc was to do some math, they would quickly sell eskom [the power utility] and telkom [the telecommunications utility]. I bet they would receive more in taxing them, and the cumulative interest on selling the two than they are now? Let's work it out! Let's say that there are fifty million people in the country, and they all use phones from telkom. Let's say that there are business calls from each business to others? That would mean that they might use the telephone for half an hour a day, let's say, as I am sure it is way more than that, but this is my style of min-maxing where we use totals over the or under the expected numbers, allowing for lee way to emphasize our points. So, let's say that forty nine million people use the phone for half an hour a day, twenty days a month. That means that there are [fifty million,] times by [half an hour] = one hundred million hours on the phone. This comes to, at let's say one rand a minute, one hundred million rand a month. Now, if you sold telkom, and received no money for that, you would collect forty five percent of that amount, coming to forty five million rand a month. This is a loss of fifty five million rand a month, but, then you do not pay for expenses of running the business! That, with our culture of defacing the infrastructure whenever we are unhappy, could come to quite a bit. Then you can also fire the loose ends of the state that eat up money based on the infrastructure of the telkom dividend. This could all be quite a lot of money. Remember that most of the country is not connected to telkom, and that it is an expense to connect them. Then, there is the issue of power delivery. Let's say that they too, for no real figures are needed, collect one hundred million rand a month by selling power to people. This will come off as also nearly half of what they are making now, so it is not a big incentive, but, power is also stolen in this country. Now, add the selling prices of each utility, and then put that into job creation, at one million rand per facility, and one hundred people hired per plant. Then add to that all the commercial 'hedges' that crop up on top of that, and you might nearly have everyone employed, all at once. That means that everyone ill be happy, but... the anc is not in it to deliver to the people. They want to make sure they rule unopposed for the rest of time, and delivering jobs to the people means that they might be looking for more in the way of reliability, which would mean voter education. The role of any government, first and foremost, is voter education, as that preps up the state to deliver to the people. This is not the case in Africa, and South Africa is no exception. If you were to sell those utilities, you could build at least two hundred factories, leading to twenty thousand jobs. Then you stack on all the commercial sides of marketing these goods, and the results would be staggering. Star gate. If we consider we are using a mirror to simulate the fourth dimension, and we were to mirror ourselves, by adding three more dimensions, we would have two of us in this simulation. Then there might be a whole duplicate of ourselves as soon as we enter, maybe we will be able to interact with objects too? Looking for objects in the next whatever dimension would be easier if we went in there with something that attracts life, like water? Maybe we could speed up the molecular interactions in this 'world? 1 let's speed up the lasers going into the mirror, somehow, however you do that scientifically, and watch things like apples ripen faster, maybe even planting seeds into soil in this dimension? This would solve the price of food, and end world hunger... Magic explained Let's think of more old wives tales and see how they will be naturally explained? If we were to observe the traditional spell, we need to draw a pentacle on the floor. This means that we are symbolizing something, something that is understood by a spirit or god or something, or something else? If the pentacle was to channel something into the person, then why not observe what makes the pentacle up? It has five points to it, and you stand over it. Some have protective circles around them, some don't. Maybe it works off of your imagination? If that is the case, then there is natural energy coming from your mind to electrify and charge the 'spell', and that means, that, with enough energy, we could simulate nearly anything! So, do we charge the person, the mind, or the symbol? If we were to put a lot of energy into the person's nervous system, then we could charge the spells. Maybe the symbol is there to channel power into the person? If we charged the symbol, or, added electrons to the area, we could add energy to the spell. Or, maybe we could use a machine, hopefully... If the person could think of the thing they want to happen, and the machine was to capture and mimic this 'thought,' then charge it with electricity, naturally through wires and stuff, then we could maybe charge a spell. The problem remains though, what could we possibly wish for? We have food, we have love, and we have medicine. Would still be fun to do though? If you were to look into the cosmos, you would see that everything is 'fate based.' Seeing as how everything is destined to happen, and knowing the happenings means that they were never going to happen anyways, due to your response to them - like a heart attack being avoided by eating and exercising correctly - there is nothing other than determinism. Now, when we say the knife will fly, as is done at some particular satanic events, then the knife was always going to fly then due to something natural in the going's on of the world. Like making people levitate. If Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levitation_ (paranormal) The only somewhat compelling and thorough case of controlled scientific tests performed recently were those of Nina Kula Gina, a Russian "psychokinetic", in the 1960s. She demonstrated the power to levitate small objects repeatedly in conditions which satisfied Russian, Czech, and American scientists,  although she never levitated herself She levitated objects such as table tennis balls, wine glasses, and matches in conditions engineered to make the use of hidden magnets, wires, and similar "tricks" seem impossible. But these feats are commonly reproduced onstage by illusionists, and scientists can be fooled by tricks of skillful illusionists — as was proven by James Randi's Project Alpha in 1979. In fact, Kula Gina's use of a stick was actually photographed by parapsychologists. As you can see, it has already been proven. If you were to believe that these things were to move non magically, then you must believe in extremism, as they were always going to move, due to fate, due to the 'spell 1 to move them. There is no such thing as magic, only what we cannot explain yet. Don't you agree that science is magic? If you were to observe the use of materials in spells, they intertwine to graduate to the natural reactions of those things in 'a working web.' If you were to get things to work together like that, for example, flames and wood, or wheels and axels, then you get to the beginning of the workings of the total human body... If the body is so amazing that it can hear things and see things, and you must admit that is pretty magical, then how hard is it to believe that the human mind can, with elements we have not identified yet, bond things together to form spells? That would be like telling your arm to move, or, telling your candle to warm someone's heart. This is possible as I have explained it so far? Not? Well, if we do not understand the total workings of the mind yet, then observe that the mind can project itself. How about seeing things you make up? What about making up pictures of something you have not seen, but imagine in your mind? It Quote by: http:/ / en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ 1 magination Imagination, also called the faculty of imagining, is the ability of forming new images and sensations when they are not perceived through sight, hearing, or other senses. Imagination helps provide meaning to experience and understanding to knowledge; it is a fundamental faculty through which people make sense of the world,  and it also plays a key role in the learning process.   A basic training for imagination is listening to storytelling (narrative),   in which the exactness of the chosen words is the fundamental factor to "evoke worlds".  It is a whole cycle of image formation or any sensation which may be described as "hidden" as it takes place without anyone else's knowledge. A person may imagine according to his mood, it may be good or bad depending on the situation. Some people imagine in a state of tension or gloominess in order to calm themselves. It is accepted as the innate ability and process of inventing partial or complete personal realms within the mind from elements derived from sense perceptions of the shared world. [Citation needed] The term is technically used in psychology for the process of reviving in the mind, percepts of objects formerly given in sense perception. Since this use of the term conflicts with that of ordinary language, some psychologists have preferred to describe this process as "imaging" or "imagery" or to speak of it as "reproductive" as opposed to "productive" or "constructive" imagination. Imagined images are seen with the "mind's eye". Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%27s_eye The biological foundation of the mind's eye is not fully understood. FMRI studies have shown that the lateral geniculate nucleus and the VI area of the visual cortex are activated during mental imagery tasks. [ I have read briefly about this thing, and believe I know where hallucinations come from. All people have hallucinations at some stage, and some suggest that is an error in the brain. But, what if this error is actually a success? What if it is the brain working properly? I n machines we have errors, but, those are machines - we are human beings - why would we have errors? If the brain can see things like pets sitting in rooms as we enter, maybe it is due to a mental projection from the pet? If we can imagine things behind walls, and it turns out to be utterly fruitless, we are sure the brain is still working, yes? Now, if the brain is able to make pictures, and we are sometimes seeing 'pictures' out of context, maybe it is supposed to happen? Imagine the pet projecting itself into the room? I magine your emotions coming into play and fear gripping you as you enter your child's room and see a big dog sitting there, thinking that the local Rottweiler has taken up residence in there? Then the fear will grip you and then you might hallucinate! It Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%27s_eye Furthermore, the pineal gland is a hypothetical candidate for producing a mind's eye; Dr. Rick Strassman and others have postulated that during near death experiences (NDE's) and dreaming, the gland might secrete a hallucinogenic chemical y N,N-Dimethyltryptamine x (DMT) to produce internal visuals when external sensory data is occluded.  However, this hypothesis has yet to be fully supported with neurochemical evidence and plausible mechanism for DMT production. Now, as we can see, the brain makes hallucinations? Why would the brain cause hallucinations? Is this some defect or a part of evolution? Will the mind be programmed to fail? I doubt it! It is probably a way to get the magic working! Hallucinations would be, in my opinion, the simplest form of magic, yes? They have no real meaning, but the brain is programmed to receive these images, so, what if the brain is programmed to feel other things? We are familiar with tension - you can sense it. This is not a normal sense, but rather some form of sensing the atmosphere of the area or people you are with. If you can "cut the tension with a knife," then surely we are supposed to feel this too? If we are supposed to feel it, and it bears nothing to do with evolution, as we do not need it and the body would not produce things it doesn't really need, then maybe we were programmed to receive these things from a god? So, what can we use this minds eye for? Can we unlock a photographic memory? I suggest not yet, as we have too much 'noise 1 going on in the brain. Can we steal images from other people? This would do wonders for world security and the seeking of truth, yes? I suggest we examine the mind's eye some more. If the world were to all focus on the same image, that image will become a constant for the time being. When the individual looks at the mind's eye, then looks at the reality, there is almost certainly a change, unless they all agree on things before hand. If the minds eye really is useless, then what the hell do we do with it? Why is it there? If we were to change something to look like our mind's eye, like imagining a new plant in the garden and then planting it, then the minds eye can be quite useful, yes? So, is this the limit of our mind's eye, or can we harness it for more profitable purposes? I magine we could change things by just picturing them that way? Well, that is what magic is all about - you want something, you imagine it, it comes to you. If you were to be able to do as I would like to believe we could do, the possibilities are limitless! If we could imagine ourselves with food, and food would come to us, or cars, or anything, the economy would collapse, but everyone wouldn't need it! So, let's explore the beginnings of this idea? The way to make a hallucination, I would imagine, is to have a knowledge base. This means, the older you are or the more you remember, the better you will be at 'sculpting' pictures for yourself. You will have learned what a typical person looks like, a car, a mountain, and so forth. Then you will be able to realistically use your imagination. The pineal gland is the first candidate for casting the mind's eye, so we should start there. H Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pineal_gland The pineal gland (also called the pineal body, epiphysis cerebri, epiphysis, conarium or the "third eye") is a small endocrine gland in the vertebrate brain. It produces the serotonin derivative melatonin, a hormone that affects the modulation of wake/sleep patterns and seasonal functions.   Its shape resembles a tiny pine cone (hence its name), and it is located near the centre of the brain, between the two hemispheres, tucked in a groove where the two rounded thalamic bodies join. Apparently, this is situated in the centre of the brain, so, it is not influenced as any motor functions, as motor functions go right or left, and then the centre could be the meeting point for motor functions. Now imagine that the centre of the brain is the meeting point for right and left, and combines all thoughts and actions and stuff like that? Where else would the magic come from? We can control, apparently, the emotions of another with love spells, so, and if the centre of the brain is located there to get the shortest route to all areas of the brain, then it is the meeting point, maybe, where everything is translated. If this is where things get translated, then maybe this is where they get encoded too? Imagine thinking something, sending it to the pineal gland, omitting this somehow to another, then their pineal gland receives it and decodes it for the brain? Wouldn't that make sense, if magic is real at all? I focus on love spells because there is so much written about them. If one of them or a lot of them or all of them work, then this is a good place to start. Now, how do the signals travel from person to person? Well, first let's look at the pineal gland some more... IfQuote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pineal_gland Dr. Rick Strassman, while conducting research on the psychedelic dimethyltryptamine (DMT) in the 1990s at the University of New Mexico, advanced the controversial hypothesis that a massive release of DMT from the pineal gland prior to death or near death was the cause of the near death experience (NDE) phenomenon. Several of his test subjects reported NDE-like audio or visual hallucinations. His explanation for this was the possible lack of panic involved in the clinical setting and possible dosage differences between those administered and those encountered in actual NDE cases. Several subjects also reported contact with 'other beings 1 , alien like, insectoid or reptilian in nature, in highly advanced technological environments where the subjects were 'carried, 1 'probed, 1 'tested, 1 'manipulated,' 'dismembered,' 'taught,' 'loved,' and even 'raped' by these beings' (one could note the strong similarities of these bodily tests/ invasions in other psychedelic experiences throughout time, outlined in Graham Hancock's "Supernatural" ). Basing his reasoning on his belief that all the enzymatic material needed to produce DMT is found in the pineal gland (see evidence in mammals), and moreover in substantially greater concentrations than in any other part of the body, Strassman ( p. 69) has speculated that DMT is made in the pineal gland. So, magic, as I understand it, has something to do with this dmt stuff. If we were to inject this into a willing being they would surely hallucinate, yes? Well, we can do that at any time, and be sued for it, but for now, let's look at the way dmt comes from one to another? If Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pineal_gland Numerous spiritual philosophies contain the notion of an inner Third Eye that is related to the ajna chakra and also the pineal gland, and to which is attributed significance in mystical awakening or enlightenment, clairvoyant perception and higher states of consciousness. This idea occurs historically in ancient, central and east Asia; and also in contemporary metaphysical theories relating to yoga, Pagan religions, and New Age spiritual philosophies. IS Quote by: http:/ / www.multidimensions.com/ Conscious/ con_thoughts_choose.html The pituitary and pineal glands (the sixth and seventh chakra) allow the switch from AM (amplitude modulation) to FM (frequency modulation). A FM radio is a metaphor for receiving messages from the dimensions above the third dimension. With frequency modulation, the messages are received on the different octaves of carrier waves that come from the different dimensions. The pituitary gland (sixth chakra) acting alone can receive messages from the fourth dimension and up to the threshold of the fourth dimension. In order to receive messages from the fifth dimension and above, the crown chakra must be open. Once the rising Kundalini has joined the essence of the pituitary gland (sixth chakra) with that of the pineal gland (seventh chakra), the Third Eye can be fully opened and activated. Then our perceptions become expanded to encompass the fifth dimension and beyond. Our pineal gland receives messages from the higher dimensions via the crown/seventh chakra and then sends them on to the pituitary gland. The pituitary gland can then "project" this message onto the mind screen of the Third Eye so that our visions can be consciously perceived with our inner senses. The pineal gland now is a receiver of information too! Could it be a transmitter? Could the dmt be broadcast to another? Could love spells be real? All we need is lots of dmt, or something that produces it. For this to take place, we need to build an 'organ' that gets fed the chemicals to make dmt, or build an 'organ' that will produce this chemical. The minds eye is also a chakra, relating to magic. If we could give someone a lot of this chemical without harming them - they might go on some great trip though - it should amplify their own magical power. IS Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyltryptamine N,N-Dimethyltryptamine (DMT or N,N-DMT) is a psychedelic compound of the tryptamine family. Its presence is widespread throughout the plant kingdom.   DMT occurs in trace amounts in mammals, including humans, where it putatively functions as a trace amine neurotransmitter.  It is originally derived from the essential amino acid tryptophan and ultimately produced by the enzyme INMT during normal metabolism.  The significance of its widespread natural presence remains undetermined. Structurally, DMT is analogous to the neurotransmitter serotonin (5-HT), the hormone melatonin, and other psychedelic tryptamines, such as 5-MeO-DMT, bufotenin, and psilocin (the active metabolite of psilocybin). When ingested, DMT acts as a psychedelic drug.  Depending on the dose and method of administration, its subjective effects can range from short-lived milder psychedelic states to powerful immersive experiences; these are often described as a total loss of connection to conventional reality with the encounter of ineffable spiritual/alien realms.  Indigenous Amazonian Amerindian cultures consume DMT as the primary psychoactive in ayahuasca, a shamanistic brew used for divinatory and healing purposes. Pharmacologically, ayahuasca combines DMT with an MAOI, an enzyme inhibitor that allows DMT to be orally active.  It is said that eating fruit will boost your 'manna' or something... and eating meat will diminish these chances. It is said that getting too much of this, while it is considered to have healing properties, will send you on a 'trip' of some sort. Now I got to ask you, why would the body produce this thing if it is not supposed to be there? They say plants produce it readily, and there are legends of plants being devoured by magicians as they cast spells. Or I have heard of it anyways... So, if the plants get devoured by casting spells, and they produce something that sends us on a 'trip', we should think, isn't this supposed to happen? Do older people have more dmt? I have heard of older mages being able to cast some real magic - maybe they boost production of this chemical while they are young and eating correctly? Maybe it gets used up? They say you feel closer to each other when you do dmt. They say that you have visions and feel alien to the surroundings you are in, or feel you are somewhere else entirely. If you were to have dmt in your brain, you will trip, so, I remember there being a legend of holding your hands certain ways - somatic for magic. Surely a dirty old mage full of plant oils or whatever would feel better if they were holding a sack of dmt, or, had it injected into their finger tips? Maybe this would bear fruit? Democracies in the near east Look, the point is that people are getting arrested for demonstrating in the west too with the occupy movement. Think of china too, they also have reduced freedoms and go to jail for misdemeanors... The topic is about why we need to, or don't need to, encourage democracies in the near east. The first factor should be, is it better for the west, or is it better for the people? Obviously democracies are better to work with for the powers that be, but are it what the people want, or, will serve them better? They should vote on it. We should encourage democracies, because, it benefits the first world. Giving the people freedoms they don't care too much for isn't going to do anyone any good. I say that because people cannot eat rights. People cannot get houses because of rights. They can though march and have an open media. Has anybody ever thought about what rights actually are? I magine a world where the women wouldn't be able to work or drive - would it be that bad? I magine a woman staying home for the sake of their kids, and they still meet their bills. Think of the west, where most women have jobs if they need one - why do they need jobs? The state of living demands it, whatever that might be... So, seeing as how the woman doesn't need jobs, they are not denied rights. Nothing bad is going to happen. If it was a problem, then they would protest somehow, complaining over the phone to the first world. I wish I could hook each and every woman's rights person up with one of these women, and see how they don't mind at all. I suppose when you are young you can travel, so, why don't we hear of people defecting from this place? No women are running away after leaving school - they watch television where women are allowed so many freedoms! Eastern Europe would be flooded with people seeking asylum, and India, and Africa. If women were so unhappy, they might commit suicide. Why don't they? They embrace their religion and their families, which show that they accept the way things, are... More futuristic power sources. If we were to take a tandem accelerator and produce positive voltages out the back of the 'thrusters', they would form little explosions like in my take on sonic engines, and produce a ripple that will drive the craft forwards. This could happen very quickly, but not so quickly that it wields the whole vessel out. The way I see it, anti matter is attracted to matter, so, firing antimatter out the front of the craft will also prove a great accelerator, as there is always save for the edges of the universe, matter to be accelerated towards. If we were to try to use classical nuclear power, we could power an accretion disk. This disc would probably take the energy from the star and then power itself, but, as we know, all energy changes forms and exceeds post form eventually, so the disk will have more power than the star did. TO do this, we should use a little star in the chamber and then have it drawn out into many accretion disks, making it less volatile with each disk. This will mean that the acceleration in power will become more in effect. I have never been one for formulas, but I will try to explain in layman's terms... If the disk draws power from the star, it will lose some as it draws the 'spindle' in. If there are disks at every junction, nothing will be lost. If there are disks at each junction, then the acceleration of force will mean that each disk actually consumes a bit of each other, leading to a bigger disk with the star completely depleted. This will basically transform the star into a spinning disk, but, how is this better? Well, I was hoping to make it like wind power, where the spinning disk could lead to more basic mechanics. Would that be possible? I hope so. What about if we were to capture and compress light? If we could build a container that allows light in, without letting light out, it could become super hyperactive inside there, and contain most of the energy while exposed to the sunlight. If we can build a solar panel, then this must be possible too! If we could let it inside a 'disco ball,' one that has one way glass, it could bounce around inside there forever, with the overlapping solar power producing light being forever captured. Job creation Job creation in Africa at the moment, as I heard on cnn, is led by a trend of entrepreneurship. It seems the trend to get networking and internet savvy is growing and that leads to people making their own way? If they were to all get jobs like this, they will see their businesses grow if run properly, and then they will employ more people. This will lead to competition between the newer businesses and the established businesses. The edge the new businesses have is that nobody has gotten greedy yet. Imagine the boss, sitting at home. He doesn't care what is going on, he just wants to go yachting or buy up some stuff for his family! This greed and distant approach from the big boss, when compared to the small businesses boss, who is still passionate with his company, as he is intimate with the workings of it, always worrying, means that he will have a hands on edge that the big boss does not have. I cannot find that story anymore, but I think it was on the seventeenth of September on cnn. Afro something it was called. So, we have a lean new business coming out with no overheads, and we have a stagnating giant with lots of bonuses to pay. Another thing is that they will not take anything for granted and then will be a more competitive. On the wars Desmond tutu, a guy living here in South Africa, wants to throw Blair in jail. Or at least see him tried for his 'crimes.' They allege that America and England attacked I raq to get rid of saddam Hussein. They allege he had big bad weapons he shouldn't. If a cop get's a warrant to go to someone's house and look for evidence, and they look for let's say drugs, because they know he is a drug dealer but hasn't been caught yet - let's say they bought drugs from him? - And they don't find drugs, is it right to plant drugs on him to see him in jail? On the other hand, if someone has drugs, and has sold them - say they beat people up and killed for drug lands - then are they guilty? I think Blair and bush are perfectly justified in their deeds and the war they led. Apartheid I didn't do history in high school though, so I may not know as muchas I would if I did. The country South Africa was colonized by the Dutch at first, then fought for and won by the British. The natives here had their land taken for a few rifles and ammo, and then they all ended up in the squatter camps. What I would like to point out though, is that all buildings are property of the crown, and not theirs. They didn't build it, but they claim it. All they were doing was digging up bulbs all day long and hunting zebras for food, and then this came along. Of course, you could say that the ideas should have been shared? If that is the case, then the land is rightfully theirs and may be seized by the natives - who can stop them? If you want to look at it that way, that is politically correct, yet when it comes to the nitty gritty, the natives were better off without the things the whites brought them. Now most of them cannot afford bread, so, instead of hunting zebras, they march in the street demanding food and money. What does it mean to be colonized? A lot more moaning and demands it seems! The release of nelson Mandela saw the freedom from apartheid, and then the black people started spending money on stupid areas of state. For example, we needed more dams and power, and they bought a few submarines. They are building mass produced poor houses, rdp houses, and the people don't want them anymore. They demand better houses. Do you have anything like that anywhere else in the world? I conclude that with wisdom comes more silence, as they realize they cannot have these things immediately. Of course, with our government, they all want to promise things they cannot deliver, and they still sing songs of freeing Mandela for support from the natives, who are hard assed and vote for more native ruler ship. If, however, they voted for the 'white crown party,' they would be far better off. This party would want to provide for all its citizens and stuff, and not just ride the freedom songs in the locations for more votes. So, we were a happy place, then came the Dutch, it was still okayish, then came the English, and then the people started moving to the cities looking for basic life sustaining things. If it were not for that, there would be no poverty! If we could get the natives to do the sensible thing, and move out of the shanty towns back into the wilderness, where zebras abound, then there would be more peace, and more progress domestically in the states and citizens eyes. There is evidence too of the first human being here! The skull of the first woman was discovered here in Cape Town, and they say that this was evolutions latest craze. Then there is the lack of religion here, so they took to Christianity quickly. There were a few witch doctors, but they couldn't square up with the missionaries. The way of the west has been over the south, and the south is looking up to unattainable things under African leadership. There were freedom wars here in South Africa, well, freedom fighters, and they are still the ones claiming presidency in the house. I ask you, what does fighting for freedom have to do with leading a country? Recently, the arch - Desmond tut - had invited the Dalai Lama here for a birthday event, but, they refused to issue the lama with a visa, as they all support china. Well, I mean, are we now a Chinese colony?! Belief in god That sounds like populism. Here you find yourself on the minority - not believing in god - proclaiming the views of the forum - that the majority here are atheists. I find that the only way science can evolve is through disagreement. If you agree that the world is flat, well, who cares? It terrifies seamen and everything! If that isn't populism, then religion could be. Who cares if you worship a god? Does he care? He says he cares, allegedly. I believe in god because I have seen thing through the nature matrix that proclaim the spiritual, well, that is why I believe in spirits, as they guide the flying insects for spells, and all and all. Why not believe in a god too? Hell we got oudjie boards to speak to them! I know that might be a petty claim, but it does move, and the only way to see it for you is to do it by yourself - no more of this people moving the glass! Well, I just cited some sources on another thread, but I will try to cite something else for us to debate? Well, I just looked over the entry "J esus Christ" on wiki, and they have a lot of sound facts from real scientists. These scientists though were drunk on spirits and promises of after lively enrichment [theism] and therefore could have twisted the facts. Do you twist the facts on your own code to promote your own ideas? When you brood, do you lie to yourself? Maybe it is too difficult to understand and you dismiss the idea of god? Or the afterlife? Anyways... if Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus Scholars have correlated the New Testament accounts with non-Christian historical records to arrive at an estimated chronology of Jesus 1 life. So a lot of money is being spent to prove that J esus lived, or not. They could all sell books about a hoax, but we haven't heard of any. Heck people - studied scientists of various fields - all agree that that this has happened. In Matthew 28:11-15, to explain the empty tomb, the Jewish elders bribe the soldiers who had guarded the tomb to spread the rumor that J esus 1 disciples took his body. So there is evidence of rejection from the J ews, who were rich? They say these things, then they point out that there is a lot of resistance from accepting J esus right from the off! They also say that there were many letters from believers. Did they make any money directly? Hell, his mother may have set the whole thing up to look good, but, with twelve apostles and an army of Jews and pagans, who would listen? Something must have happened; someone must have seen something for this to be accepted! HQuote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_martyrs John the Baptist was beheaded by Herod. (Note: John the Evangelist according to legend was cooked in boiling hot oil but survived. He was the only one of the original twelve Apostles who was not martyred). So, it goes on the kings records that this happened, and then defied him! Really? He just let that get out? Maybe it was a legend? Maybe this is a vicious lie? Maybe the scholars have examined the Egyptian accounts, and already come to a conclusion that they are not out to make a name for themselves as a hoax and all that, and it really happened? Well, if you were to take your horror scope, how did it come to be in effect regardless of whether people could see the planets or not? They are tuned tot he planets, and I suggest the spirits told these people how it worked, and, they also had fine tuning in those days. The message has been lost along the way, but these energies are out there. By the way, have you read my magic explained thread? Minor work is a recent convert! There you will see first hand how spirits 'occur. 1 Now, as I told black sheep, there is evidence of miracles for the apostle John, recorded by Egyptian authorities, there was the story of the resurrection of Christ, and there was also evidence of something that attracted followers to Jesus. Nothing new, Horus also did that. The thing is, Christianity has spread so far and wide because the young rabbi that challenged authority was accepted into that authority and a church for him erected in Rome. I think that is because enough roman authority figures - reliable witnesses for the Romans - saw an earthquake and saw him raised again. We have letters compiled in Rome by wise men that saw what he was doing was good, as they all agreed that what happened. Do you really think that pagan Rome would accept that there was only one true god, and that they would now have strict rules to abide by? In using common sense, I will elaborate. I am not talking about the miracle being that he resurrected Christ; I am talking about the apostle that was burned by oil and survived. This sort of thing needs common sense. These Egyptians worshipped Horus, but, upon seeing this new evidence of god, a new faith was helped be born. The news, from Egyptians, to the rest of the world, came about. The miracle of Christ being resurrected is about people seeing him after his death and writing letters about it. If they didn't see him, and they had names behind them, why would they write is as fact? I don't know how that came to be a widespread story, but, if the only people in the court are Egyptian, and the person being burned survived and did not get hurt at all, and then was beheaded, that means only Egyptians could have told of the story, yes? http://ecole.evansville.edu/glossary/johntheo.html if Quote by: http://ecole.evansville.edu/glossary/johntheo.html ... During the reign of Domitian, John was taken to Rome to stand trial for his faith. Legends recount a to martyr the apostle in boiling oil, from which he miraculously escaped. OK, sorry, it was not an Egyptian like I thought; I must have gotten the apostles mixed up! Whoops! OK, so, you got this guy going to Rome to be killed, they then release him to become bishop. What happened? They say that he was smothered in boiling oil, and he survived. Then the whole of Rome became Christian. This rabble must have had a pretty good story for them to get by like this. And, there was support for them immediately after jess's death because of the miracles they had seen done. People were likely as skeptical as you are, yes? Or, what? Well, what sort of rabbi claims all these things and does not deliver? Any news of these things would be brushed off unless there were witnesses to them. Imagine a rabbi claiming all these things with nobody to back it up? Am I clutching at straws here, or, do you think that what I say has some merit? Confirming the gospel accounts of miracles would be, for a roman, hard to do. But, in fact they were persecuted for this magic! H Quote by: http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/historicalev.htm Suetonius also wrote about the persecution of Christians during the reign of Nero. "The Christians were punished; a sort of men of a new and magical superstition." His criticism of the early Church affirms that this was a "new" religion that had recently appeared (in confirmation of the Gospels and the book of Acts). Furthermore, his reference to "magical superstition" confirms that the Christians were known to produce miracles and healing. The new faith of Christianity was based on the resurrection of their Messiah J esus of Nazareth which would certainly qualify as a "magical superstition" to a pagan Roman historian. It does matter if there is a god or not, as then there might be a heaven or not, or, hopefully there is a heaven with or without god. Then hopefully there would be a hell for all those that would kill others! I believe all religions were created by studying the planets, and, hold that the aliens came here to tell us from early long ago. They taught us to count, how to speak, and provided us with fundamental teaching of magic, as there is magic, and that doesn't come about randomly in a short space of time. I would like to supply evidence for this in the idea I have we were taught to speak. If we could make a language like English from Neanderthal times, how long would it take to get to a credible level? Before a language can be credible, it must be accepted in more than one village, yes? Maybe a few like about twenty villages? Let's look for some evidence then? HQuote by: http:/ / drsaraheaton.wordpress.com/ 2011/ 02/ 20/ how- long-does- it- take- to- learn-a- new- language/ There are many ways to define "fluency". If, for the sake of argument, we consider fluency to be the same as being an "expert" in speaking a language, then a learner may well invest 10,000 hours in their language studies to attain fluency. People will shake their heads when they hear that. No one wants to believe it really requires that much work. Let's look at some different scenarios: Scenario #1: One 3-hour adult education course per week x 8 weeks = 24 hours Scenario #2: One year of language learning in school = 4 hours per week x 12 weeks x 2 semesters = 96 hours Scenario #3: 1 year of consistent, dedicated self-study (or homework) at 1 hour per day = 365 hours Scenario #4: One year of total immersion in the new language (Assuming that in a 24-hour day, we allow 8 hours for sleeping per day) = 16 hours per day x 365 days = 5840 hours If we use Gladwell's of 10,000-hour rule, here's how long it would take to achieve "expert ability" in a foreign language: Scenario #1 - Adult education classes -416 courses of 24 hours per course. If you did 2 courses per year, you'd need 208 years to become fluent Scenario #2 - Foreign language studies at school - 96 hours of classes per year = 104 years to achieve fluency. Scenario #3 - Dedicated self-study - An hour a day, every single day of the year = 365 hours per year = 27 years Scenario #4 - Total immersion - Approximately 2 years As you can see, it takes a long time to learn a new language with having it made available for study from a good source. What sources did the Neanderthals have? They seem to have gone from primitive cave paintings to complex languages like Arabic or Egyptian, or even Latin in a very short space of time. What I hope to do here is convince you that we were taught these languages at some stage. Where are the in between graffiti on caves? Where is the process of learning it? Where is the invention of ink? II Quote by: http:/ / en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ 1 nk Many ancient cultures around the world have independently discovered and formulated inks for the purposes of writing and drawing. The knowledge of the inks, their recipes and the techniques for their production comes from archaeological analysis or from written text itself. The history of Chinese inks can be traced back to the 23rd century BC, with the utilization of natural plant (plant dyes), animal, and mineral inks based on such materials as graphite that were ground with water and applied with ink brushes. Evidence for the earliest Chinese inks, similar to modern ink sticks, is around 256 BC in the end of the Warring States Period and produced from soot and animal glue.  The India ink used in ancient India since at least the 4th century BC was called masi, and was made of burnt bones, tar, pitch, and other substances.   Indian documents written in Kharosthi with ink have been unearthed in Chinese Turkestan.  The practice of writing with ink and a sharp pointed needle was common in early South India.  Several Buddhist and Jain sutras in India were compiled in ink.  In ancient Rome, atramentum was used. In an article for the Christian Science Monitor, Sharon J . Huntington describes these other historical inks: This means, young earth creationists seem to have the exact time period of the supposed creation of human beings linked to the date of the supposed aliens coming to teach us. Is this coincidence? it Quote by: http:/ / www.smithsonianmag.com/ science-nature/ A- Salute- to- the- Wheel.html The first wheels were not used for transportation. Evidence indicates they were created to serve as potter's wheels around 3500 B.C. in Mesopotamia— 300 years before someone figured out to use them for chariots. Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scienc. ..#ixzz2Bf6s5n5R As you can see, the wheel was invented around 3500 be. This is a little out of the way of the bible's indication of first times, but, it is close. Why does it get invented then? Why did it take so long, if we were all Neanderthals, and then suddenly jump to today's progressive science rates? HI Quote by: http:/ / www.buzzfeed.com/ fj el stud/ oldest-buildings-in-the-world These free-standing structures were all used as religious temples, and are the oldest of their kind in the world, constructed between 3,500-2,500BC, also over 5,500 years ago. As you can see, the oldest buildings in the world, of which I chose the oldest, spans back to 3500 BC. These temples at Malta are the oldest buildings on earth. Now according to evolution... UQuote by: http:/ / wiki.answers.com/ Q/ Who_ was_first_ human_ bornonearth The first humans (Homo sapiens Neanderthals) are believed to have evolved from Homo erectus approximately 500,000 years ago. Meaning that we had like five hundred thousand years to make a building, ink, or the wheel. Why did it take so long? My reason remains that we were taught these things by aliens, and they taught us astrology, and that is where the gods come from, so while it doesn't matter that much, there is aliens and they believe in gods too. Developing a global utopia If we want to see the world doing well, we need to base our spending on third world nations. This will develop them, and in turn these newly developed nations will import global goods, there by paying back two fold. If the world had a good standing on policies, then they would see to it that everyone has a job. All the money going to china now makes them import goods from the west, as now they have more. This I used to think of one dimensionally, but it is two fold progress. These now developed Chinese can import goods from the west, employing more people. If everyone has money, then there is les poverty. If everyone has a place, then that is good, yes? Bringing prices down is important. The west should purposely reduce the value of their money. I nstead of having one in three people buy your goods, let's hope for two in three. There is still a killing to be made! If the currency is reduced, then they will all go up together, as people will be buying cars manufactured from the nearest place and so forth. Devaluing the currency is very important. Of course, we need also to make sure that the world is slave free. I n the east there are a lot of slaves, even by old day's comparison. If they were to be set free though, they would have no where to go. To keep this Utopia on track, I propose that a lot of land be given to destitute people and they may then farm in these areas. This will be subsistence farming, and then they would be fed. Coming up with electricity and other things for their pleasure would mean that they would need to provide money for the service. To provide money, they could take what they have saved from welfare, and provide luxuries for them. This will mean that they get running water and electricity, but still cannot afford cars and things. I suggest roads and busses would do the trick - state paid for of course. More youth serum If we were to observe some fish and reptiles, we would see that they might live for extreme lengths of time. If we were to find a cure for cancer, it would help a lot. So, without further a due, I will try to Cancer occurs when people have too much cell division. I conclude that they have the wrong cells dividing, or, have them dividing incorrectly. If we were to have a lot of money to spend on this, I would suggest that they drain the body of all the incorrectly dividing ones, and replace them with the cells of someone much younger and healthier. Of course, that could be very hard to identify these cells. How do you even find a cell? All these cells are in the blood and on organs, so, maybe we need to replace all these things? I suggest inserting a whole lot of needles and draining the body of all the cells it has, while inserting new cells into the body until it stabilizes, cancer free. If we were to just drain the part of the body where the cancer resides, then we would cure cancer. Stick the needle in, suck it dry, grab a bag o blood and replace away. Now, to get the body to stay young, we need to randomly drain other areas of masses of cells. Then we give them young cells and make sure they keep dividing. I sn't fascism the answer? I find that fascism is the answer to the world's needs today. Look what happened to Germany - they were the force to beat. I am not talking about conquering the world; I am talking about strong values to the people of your country. I am not talking about stopping crime, I am talking about having such a civilization that crime just peters off. We could talk about what has happened, or we could model any country onto this ideology. The feeling I have at the moment, is that it is a combination of social values of the right or conservatives, and a lot of socialism. Would I be right? I haven't researched it yet, but am about to, and hope to be right! I have always believed that the state is the parent and the people that vote for the parent, has authority over them and tells them what is right and wrong. I also find that issues such as the death penalty, abortion and gay marriage are not important - they can have them or not have them. It doesn't stop the country dead in its tracks; it doesn't hurt anyone outside of those involved, and so forth. So, owing to my view of fascism as being a combination of right wing and social values, I am sure that a lot of people will have opinions whether as to what to say. If you will first look at communist North Korea and compare them to America... As is obvious, North Korea is poor, but still manages. America is wealthy, and people complain. If the wealth attributed to America was flung into communism, socialism or fascism, it is designed to grow. This means that people will maybe be told where to work, there won't be a lot of minority rights, and then there won't be a lot of personal freedoms either. So, is the state responsible for your lifestyle? Let's think of all the things that you need freedom to do? Can you, in North Korea, which I suspect is vastly stricter than fascist countries, row a boat, blow bubble gum, possibly have freedom of the press and own a gun? J ust what is freedom? Would you be giving up that much? Now, what does fascism bring? Well, it is possible, owing to historical evidence, that we could have free holidays. Then there is the case of social welfare, trying to improve the rights of the lower classes. As time marches on, the people that subscribe to fascism do not face the same isolation, sanctions or lack of economic growth that is seen in North Korea. Are soldiers happy? I say that living in a country where the country is bigger than the individual is like living in the army - without the rigors of it. Soldiers get party time... Now with the economic planning, as long as the state does it properly, in that they want to be a part of a working country, it will work. How would this interfere with you being your own boss? The state says what you may not do, and seeks to police it like anything else. If you choose to go mountains biking, well for you! There is no loss of identity with this, you will still have your friends and family, you will still be able to eat beef, and you will still be able to change channels. There were no marches in Italy and Germany while it was going on. If there had been some resistance it would have created a civil war! Well, if this leads to a break in society, then it must be dealt with. Would you say the klu klux clan is different from your idea about Jews? They also are racist, but, they also have an ideology and such. Would stamping out the bringer of the disease save the ship? Off with the rats heads! If dissent appears, it must be presented in a court of law or be stamped out. There in the court they may be able to show how it is not against the ideals of the nation nor their peers. Look at the occupy movement? They were also dealt with. [I do like them though, are they still going?] I nfighting is broadcast to the people under this ideal. The fights help present the whims of the dissenters in a credible light. In setting something up, there needs to be something done to preserve it. If you chop and change like a pendulum, then there is no place for your ideals, as you probably will change them again. If people vote for fascism, then they get fascism, with all the promises they made, kept or not. Laws need to be forced on people. If there is a debate, bring it to the court. If enough people bring it to the court, then it is considered. If one guy comes in and complains about not owning a gun, should all people be allowed to carry guns? This is subjugation, but, if you were to look at the state as the parent, and the people as the teachers presenting ideals for their children, what then? I don't care about the Catholic Church much, as I am pagan, but, if they cover things up, this is normal in all societies. The fact you are hearing about it means that there is freedom of the press, and protecting your supply line of votes is important. All scandals are bad! They have a drive to present these cases and make a name for themselves. If all the drivers over fifty said they didn't mind red light cameras, whatever that is, it doesn't matter. If it protects even one person from death, that is enough. Some things do not need to be popular to be presented in a good light, by a lawyer always asking questions and trying to get ahead. If infighting happened all the time, that is good. Unity is not needed. If the people at the top all branch out and the state collapses, then new people replace them under the president. The president talks to the people, and then they talk to him. Okay, I got my words mixed. I meant this controversial bunch of people that were dealt with in a way that will never be done under my ideal 'fascism.' Where would the military get involved in the affairs of ordinary everyday life? They would only get involved when someone tries to harm someone else, and then usually it is the police that do the intervening. Of course under my fascism, there will be no military and only police. I find that the feeling of being a part of a big family, where the people are all mindless brainwashed happy zombies is far more comely. Have you ever been in an atmosphere like that? Have you ever been to a rave? That is why people go back, to feel the love. I magine a world where the people are all just talking to each other like they are close family? I magine a world where the people are all euphoric for no reason? The mind numbing trance, thumping out over the airwaves that we hear today under the right conditions will help with that. I say that there will be no coups as the soldiers won't be there. I advocate only defensive police stations, as I have on this forum for some time. No army. No military expenditure. If there is abuse of power somewhere else, gather the police and set them to it. All action happens in cities anyway - rather have a police person out there than a trained solder any day! No, really, think of Mardi gras then? Everyone there is in a good mood. This is what fascism does; it puts people in a position where they feel like they belong to a nation, a big body of people. Think of North Korea, there the people are extremely happy, surveys cover that. Even foreign news focuses on them wanting to be good for their leaders and country! They could use any music. The people like to do as they please, unless they please to do as they want others to tell them to. This is prevalent in second world societies, where people do as god tells them to. See? This dominates the civilized world, except in Asia. There they had communism, and there was no revolution because the people were happy. The only reason Russia wanted out of communism was because they saw so much freedom on TV, and now the country is poor. Think of the same sort of values imposed on them, made them richer, yes? Now, if you brainwash your people to love each other, and do as the state tells them, what does the state tell them to do? It tells them work hard, love their families, and relax every now and then, usually to see them attend political rallies for an hour or two to make them feel important. What is wrong with that? Watch all the Nazi propaganda online. They were excellent at selling themselves. I remember women reaping the corn in the fields, all too then popular music and all doing it uniformly with a zest that suggests much enthusiasm. To do something like that? Hell, maybe they are of a different life form or something... Well, with women absent from work, they could always make a way in life. If Hitler was a better economist, things would have gone better. He is gone. What remains is a policy like they have in North Korea, where they are totally self sufficient. True they are losing money, but they still keep everyone fed. Bringing some policy like this to the west would sea country with great wealth maybe become self sufficient. They tried this in America too I hear... it Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_North_Korea This system had also been attempted in America with little success. In Nazi Germany, however, it appears the system was more successful. So, it is a popular system, and has not yet been successful properly. Maybe with some more economic tweaking it will be? I find the morale of the people to be more important than freedoms that they enjoy today. I am all for brainwashing people to support the state in all forms, as this will lead to a happier country. You don't need to be happy when you are brainwashed to think you are. You don't need rights that you don't use. You do need the economy to go well like is planned. Brain washing is great. It happens in the USA all the time! The media and other outlets brainwash the people. The only reason you don't find brainwashing in Europe at all is because of an unknown factor. You do not need rights you don't use. Please name some rights that the state would remove? The gays, J ews and gypsies will no longer be set upon by the police. That is an old style. As long as you have enough, this is ideal for the poor, who need a lot more. The state will be visible in what they have. How can one thousand people having a lot more than can spend are justified other than seeing them spend the money into an economy, stimulating it, or sticking it in a bank where people can lend it? Yes brain washing is good. Look at America. They are all brainwashed to believe their society is better and more patriotic. Look at how feverous they are with their flag and war veterans. If you look at the rest of the politics forums, you will also get the feeling of a polarizing brain washing for or against this or that party, or for this or that party. If you look at the rest of the world, mind you, you will also see brainwashing by this or that entity, and, the people are not well off but still say that this or that makes them happy. If though you put aside politics, and look into the home lives, you will see them happy there too - life is what you make it. I said that J ews and gays are not out of the plan because this is against reforming them. If they do not need reforming, then there is no problem, and no they do not need reforming, as it is not Nazi Germany. Keeping this in check will be a nobody gets left behind theme, where they all work together to overcome prejudice. Looking at Africa, there is lots of prejudice at these people. There is, in the first world, a much more tolerant way of life subscribed to these people, if it needs to be called tolerance at all, if not rejoicing at their existence. Why would fascism change this? No, like apartheid. This is where they get given houses in same colours places, but, this will not be based on race. This will be done subtly, where propaganda is spread all through the country where they say Hamburg is for the J ews - they love J ews there! Yes, where the state lends money out, and gets it back with interest. If the rich have all the money, then they can only spend it on this or that, as stocks are the only way to see your money grow properly. Nobody likes to sit back and collect 0.5 percent interest a month! Everybody ploughs into stocks, and then they create jobs. I do not believe the recession has made that very easy, but, once we are out of it, everyone will be expanding, leading to more jobs. Of course with a planned economy, the leaders, who are supported by people with jobs, usually, that they have made for the people, get by delivering more jobs. The social norms may vary from country to country, but if you look at it with my bias you would say they are brainwashing them. On your side you say that they are not brainwashed. Any attempt to sell yourself to people is also brainwashing. It is natural. I don't understand why you say it is prejudice. Have you ever done any research into this? I cannot find anything myself, but it stands to reason that people are happier with people the same as they are, be it musical tastes, skin colours, finances, or culture and religion. Having a planned economy that is planned by people that are voted into power will ensure that they keep the promises they make, or lose the votes next time around, naturally. Prejudice happens all the time. It is impossible to live without. You judge someone before you meet them based on the way they walk up to you. It is impossible to live without. It doesn't even need to be good or bad, but, the same. If you personally like to be around people different to yourself you are not looking for people you have something in common with, and, lacking anything in common, you disagree. Taking all forms of natural hostility out of the equation and leaving you with only like minded people in your vacinity is good. History has shown that it did not work, but people, and leaders, are different now. If it didn't work why was it voted back in? The majority makes the way the country is run. This is true in every country that holds elections. If there is someone that is unhappy, then they can move out to the country and live there. This is possible because property is cheaper out in the country. Say that person has to work to support themselves? Well then they can take their knowledge of the world with them and become a self made person. Can you give me an example of how you will be unhappy if you don't want what the state wants? The state will drum it into their heads that they are part of something bigger - the country - like patriotism or being in the army. They will not be able to argue as they will see this as breaking the law - a family discussion is not arguing, but, if they were to argue in the work place as to whose responsibility things are, the work will sort it out. Arguing against the state is illegal outside of a court of law - no marches, only petitions. The freedom of speech issue is solved when they petition the courts. They may not print things that are against the law, as this only serves to enlighten people, and enlightened people are volatile when they may want to march. They may petition the courts for anything, and, with so many people not committing crimes, there will be ample time to deal with it. Freedom of speech is overrated as it only serves to enlighten people - curiosity killed the cat, assange is a public enemy by bringing down the house of cards that was the governments of so many countries by pointing out they have problems. That is nobodies business! If the state is trying to torture someone, the people must not know, but then again, torture is illegal and a person inside the criminal works might lodge a complaint, and will do depending on the society, not the government. There will be no punishment, but rather correction. This can be done like anger management. A petition is where a lot of people sign the same piece of paper to represent their views on how the law should change, or whatever. An enlightened people? Enlightened people go to college. If the people were to know that the state has had an outbreak of swine flu, there is panic and it makes it harder for the state to clean up. If, on the other hand, they hear that Goldman Sachs has lost a lot, the market might crash. That takes food off the table for a lot of people! There will be less crime because the state sees to it that every household has a job, and females are usually not criminals. Well, with torture, the state will do as it will, within the law, as there are good people in the legal system. Any short comings of the people in the legal system are a reflection of the society they belong to. So in Russia, there would be a lot of this, and in England, there would be hardly any. The society is either 'secretive, 1 or 'extroverted. 1 If they are used to standing up to do the right thing, it goes to the courts, and we see where it goes from there. With regards to your first two statements, yes, this is a western state. Conservatives write off half the country in election 2012 The smart people they are talking about is the more wealthy, the people that have an education, and stand to lose more through taxation. If you think of stereotypes, and I guarantee you they exist, the typical small town is dedicated to republicans, and the bigger cities are all democratic towns. So, if you want to see what he really means... As we can see, there are far more areas that have less people in them, and, winning the election for the electoral college means that you need to win 'states' and not 'population.' The vast majority of 'rural' people will vote for the goop, as they tend to look after them with their policies it seems, or so I hear. In the big city you still find 'lower class people', people that do not have an education, like I mentioned, are the majority. They are trying to make people think if they are among the half that seems to be more distant from the privileges of the wealth. These people know that they have promised to look after them, and, seeing as how that is where their votes come from, they will. 1. I think that lies suck ass. How has Romney lied? He more likely has avoided some questions, and that is legal. Of course it is not popular with the people, and that leads to a remote personality with them. If he were to answer these questions, you would find him corrupt. So what? If he steals a little here or there, yet provides a great way of life for the country, then he is doing a good job. He has not had a chance yet, but, let's looks at what he has done as senator? If Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governorship_of_Mitt_Romney As governor, Romney presided over a series of spending cuts and increases in fees that eliminated an up to $1.5 billion deficit He signed into law the Massachusetts health care reform legislation, which provided near-universal health insurance access via subsidies and state-level mandates and was the first of its kind in the nation. During the course of his term, his positions or rhetorical emphasis on several social issues shifted more towards American conservatism. As you can see, he likes to reduce deficits, and also has a health care plan. This could be good, no? HQuote by: http:/ / en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Governorship_ of_ Mitt_ Romney#Unemployment_ and_ new_ j obs_ creation Job growth in Massachusetts rose at a rate of 1.5 percent (compared to the national average of 5.3 percent), placing Massachusetts 47th of the 50 states in new job creation over the course of Romney's term.  The annual rate of job growth was improving by his last year in office, moving Massachusetts up from last place nationally to 28th.   Economists note that governors generally have relatively little impact on their states 1 employment numbers, good or bad, as these are dominated by forces beyond their control. [ As you can see, he improved a stagnant economy, even though forces "were out of his control." Maybe he is lucky? You in the USA could use some luck! H Quote by: http:/ / en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Governorship_ of_ Mitt_ Romney#Unemployment_ and_ new_ j obs_ creation However, some business leaders said Romney's policies that increased fees and corporate tax revenue drove up business costs and may have weakened job growth.  As you can see, he likes to tax the rich, while still... St Quote by: http:/ / en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Governorship^ of_ Mitt_ Romney#Unemployment_ and_ new j obs_ creation Romney also personally intervened to help attract to the state, or maintain within the state, several large employers, such as Bristol-Myers Squibb and the Gillette division of Procter & Gamble. So, can he provide jobs, like he promised to? Maybe he is concentrating on other things first, as he is sure, due to having a way with big companies, corrupt or not, he serves the people well. Obama is a good speaker; this guy is a good businessman! What do you value? They do vote based on emotion! They are led by the emotions they feel when they hear Obama speak, and only tune in if they think something like that guy that always says change we can believe in is on. The middle class is very apathetic to the needs of the many, seeing only fathering their own position as being something to believe in. This is true for all voters; it just happens though that the majority they need happens to be poor and desperately trying to improve their position. Why the world doesn't hate Muslims. All the Muslims I see here in Cape Town, and there are a lot of them, is peaceful people going to mosque or from it. I think the Muslim world that demands respect is like very 'patriotic. 1 How would you like them making fun of Obama? I am sure there would be some dissent and burning of embassies, with many satirists going as far as to publicly denounce them. You cannot blame the poor for the views of the whole country. If you went to visit the cities in Iran, then you would see it is not a lot of mindless bloodlust that encapsulates the region. Remember that guy that burned a Quran? I am sure there would have been many more, to get on television! That is why the world hates Australians! J ust kidding. Because it upsets people. If you had not a lot going on in your life, you would also be more in touch with god. It is not the rich people that do these things. It is only the poor and very religious. Do you want to know how these things get out of hand? Well, if you gather to protest, sometimes youths get excited. This leads to throwing fruit. Then someone wants to upstage them, and they throw a... eventually... hands grenade. You see, this is quite normal. Compare yourselves to Europe, and then you will see that America is just like South African white people - apathetic. The only marching I have seen recently is the occupy movement. That is still going though, but they also chant for change or whatever. If you look into it, the French have lots of riots and stuff because the people get their religion or leader insulted or whatever. Look what happened in china about some island? That is a different mentality too! Are they Muslim? If you look at it from beginning to end, it is just people getting excited. These people are different to Americans because they care more about their figures of authority. Now, let me tell you like this... If you hear someone shouted at your child at school, you would likely confront them, yes? If you just let it slide, is that good parenting? If you were to be a police person, and you hear about someone insulting older people, you might think it is your duty to get involved? If you were a gangster, and someone insulted you, you would shoot them, yes? [Okay, never mind that one!] If you were a little boy, and someone said that your father molested little girls, you would likely take offence, yes? These things happen in America every day! Things get out of hand there too. Now, look at some figures... Okay, I cannot find the figures I found last time, but, the domestic violence I found there was way less than in America and the rest of Europe. I wish I could to show you. I did find murder rates on wiki, and it said... I hope you can see that, it is just because the Americans don't love J esus they don't get offended. They get offended when someone does insult people close to them, or themselves that is... Americans are apathetic. When you care about something, you tend to care to a point, and then you get excited headhunters, and so forth. If there is more murder in amebic than the near east, then why are you fretting about riots? Rioting is better than killing people. When someone mates with an eleven year old boy, it is accepted by the majority because that boy is already sexually active. This happens at the age of about eight I hear. If it is natural, then why do you oppose it? I bet you only started this thread because the Muslims like to burn embassies and riot when they are offended? Well, if they are sexually active, then it is fine. If you compare it to the west, they are just reaching for the conservative demographic by making it sixteen, as then they are supposed to know about consequences of teen mothers and all that. Okay, you say the word rape like it is violent. A six year old is probably very well looked after, and, will be eased into sex gently. If the parents see no problem with it, and they love their child, then why would they think poorly of themselves unless it was obvious to feel poorly of yourself? If you as a parent see the child being hurt, you will likely throw the man out of your house. I take it these 'crimes' are only committed by men, yes? Well, if the child is not hurt then there is nothing wrong here. 11 Quote by: http://www.themediaproject.com/facts/development/ lifecycle.htm Sexuality in children ages three to seven— Preschool children are interested in everything about their world, including sexuality. They may practice urinating in different positions. They are highly affectionate and enjoy hugging other children and adults. They begin to be more social and may imitate adult social and sexual behaviors, such as holding hands and kissing. Many young children play "doctor" during this stage, looking at other children's genitals and showing theirs. This is normal curiosity. By age five or six, most children become more modest and private about dressing and bathing. Children of this age are aware of marriage and understand living together, based on their family experience. They may role-play about being married or having a partner while they "play house." Most young children talk about marrying and/or living with a person they love when they get older. School-age children may play sexual games with friends of their same sex, touching each other's genitals and/or masturbating together. Most sex play at this age happens because of curiosity. If children play house with each other at this age, then the children are ready for sex. There is nothing wrong with having sex with young children that are sexually active, but it is thought lowly of. I am sure that someone that curses people deserves to be burned. The victims are also part of some majority, somewhere, be it as simple as male and female. I am not saying that cultures make things right, I am saying, you, if you were brought up there, you would have the same values, guaranteed. The environment makes it so. 11 Quote by: http://facts.randomhistory.com/child-sexual-abuse-facts.html 1. in the United States, approximately 1 out of every 4 girls and 1 out of every 6 boys is sexually abused, a 2. Seventy to 73% of child sexual abusers report experiencing sexual abuse in their own childhood's 3. Approximately 60% of sexual abusers are known to the child but are not family members, such as family friends, babysitters, or neighbors' 4. Approximately 30%) of sexual abusers are family members, such as fathers, mothers, brothers, uncles, or cousins' 5.1 1 is estimated that less than half of all sexual assaults on children are reported to the police's 6. According to the APA, women are the abusers in about 14%o of cases reported among boys and 6%o of cases reported among girls' 7. A man in Melbourne, Australia, raped his daughter every day for 30 years from the 1970s until 2007. He fathered her four children, all who had severe birth defects. An Austrian man, Josef Fritz, kept his daughter imprisoned in a basement for 24 years and fathered seven children with herb 8.The World Health Organization reports that 150 million girls and 73 million boys under 18 experienced forced sexual intercourse and other forms of sexual violence globally in 2002. p 9.While the murder rate for minors is twice as high in low-income countries than in higher income countries, sexual abuse in the home is found in all countries. In many industrialized countries, as many as 36%o of women and 20%o of men said they have been the victim of sexual abuse as children, mostly within the family circle's 10. According to WHO, 1.8 million children are involved in pornography and prostitution. Over 1.2 million children have been trafficked Males, especially children, are less likely to disclose abuse than females 11. Girls are more likely to disclose sexual abuse than boys' 12. Francis Phillip Tillie, a 78-year-old convicted child molester who faced hundreds of molestation counts involving young girls, underwent surgical castration in order to be released from prison on parole. He had to pay for the surgery himself 13. The generally lower rate for male sex abuse may be largely inaccurate due to underreporting. Because men are traditionally encouraged to be physically strong and competitive, male victims may be more hesitant to report sexual abuse because they feel they are "less of a man."H 14. Child sex abuse includes body contact, such as kissing and oral, anal, or vaginal sex. Sex abuse can also include "flashing" or showing private parts, forcing children to watch pornography, voyeurism (trying to look at a child's naked body), pressuring children for sex, having sex in front of children, and exploiting children for pornography or prostitution's 15. "Child-on-child sexual abuse" occurs when a prepubescent child is abused sexually by another child or children. Often, the child perpetrator has been sexually victimized by an adult previously. "Inter-sibling abuse" occurs when one sibling molests his/her own sibling's 16. Nineteen percent (375 million) of the world's children live in India, which is the largest number of minors in a country. India also has the world's largest number of sexually abused children, an astonishing 69%o, or 276 million children.j 17. According to the World Health Organization, an estimated 100-140 million women and girls around the world have been victims of female genital mutation, including 92 million in Africa, f 18.1 n his book Dirty Diplomacy, Craig Murray claims that the president of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, tortured and raped children in front of prisoners to make them offer false confessions, e Disabled children are at higher risk for sexual abuse than non-disabled children 19. Researchers note that some disabled children may not be able to distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate touching of their body, which leaves them particularly vulnerable to sexual abuse, e 20. Children living with a single parent or a parent living with an unmarried partner are most at risk for child maltreatment, which is over eight times the rate of children living with married biological parents, g 21. South Africa has one of the highest rates of child abuse and baby rape. Researchers report that the belief that sexual intercourse with a virgin will cure a man of AIDS has led to such high numbers. It is estimated that every one out of eight people in South Africa has AIDS. An estimated 40,000 children in South Africa are infected with HIV each year.h 22. Child abusers often do not use physical force but instead "groom" or use manipulative tactics, such as buying gifts, arranging special activities, exposing children to pornography, and roughhousing to keep a child engaged with and often confused about the abuser's motives, g 23. Researchers report that the vast majority of sexually abused children do not grow up to be offenders and that the "cycle of sexual abuse" does not fully explain why a person would molest children. g 24. Only a fraction of abusers are caught and convicted for their crimes. Most of those who are caught are eventually released back to the community, albeit under probation or parole supervision. e 25. Children who are victims of sexual abuse can suffer many serious health effects, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, eating disorders, somatization, neurosis, chronic pain, sexualized behavior, learning problems, animal cruelty, self-destructive behavior, suicide, antisocial behavior, sleeping difficulties and/or nightmares, angry outbursts, not wanting to be left alone, and further victimization into adulthood. However, not all victims show behavioral changes, c 26. Africa has the highest prevalence of child sexual abuse (34.4%). Europe has the lowest rate of abuse (9.2%). America and Asia have rates between 10.1%) and 23.9%o .h 27. Sexual abuse, or any kind of abuse, negatively and permanently affects the physical development of a child's brain. These physical changes result in psychological and emotional problems in adulthood, q 28.Women who were sexually abused as children reported significantly lower SAT test scores than women who were not abused, g 29. Children may not reveal sexual abuse because they feel shame or guilt, they worry no one will believe them, they fear being removed from their home, and they or their family may have been threatened. Very young children may not have the language skills to report the abuse or may not understand they are being abused, g 30. Approximately 23% of reported cases of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by individuals under the age of 18. e 31. According to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, 63,527 children were sexually abused in the U.S. in 2010, a drop from 150,000 in 1992. While some researchers were surprised that the recession did not cause more cases of sexual abuse, others note that the drop may reflect methodological changes of counting reports as well as lower levels of abuse, g 32. Most children do not tell anyone they have been abused, and those who do tell often have to tell several people before any action is taken, q 33. Not all pedophiles are child molesters, and some child molesters do not meet the clinical definition of pedophile. Pedophilia is a clinical term that describes a person who has had repeated arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors related to sexual activities with children for at least six months. Pedophiles do not necessarily have to act on their urges. Child molesters have the same attraction to children, but they act on their urges, g 34. Child pornography is one of the fastest growing Internet businesses, increasing at an average 150%o per year for each of the last 10 years. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) reports that it has reviewed more than 51 million child pornography images and videos, o 35.There is a clear link between possession of child pornography and the actual violation of children. The NCMEC estimates that 40%o or more of people who possess child pornography also sexually assault children. o 36. Of the arrests for the possession of child pornography during 2000-2001 in the U.S., 83%o had pornographic materials of children between ages 6 and 12, 39%o had material involving children between ages 3 and 5, and 19% had material of toddlers under the age of 3 or infants, g 37. Approximately 1.3 million children in America are sexually assaulted each year. There are an estimated 60 million survivors of childhood sexual abuse in America, e 38. Researchers estimate that 20 million Americans have been victims of parental incest as children, e 39. A 2004 study revealed that 9.6% of public school children, accounting for 4.5 million students, have experienced sexual misconduct, from being told sexual jokes to sexual intercourse by educators. Offenders include teachers (18%), coaches (15%), substitute teachers (13%), principals (6%), and student counselors (5%).g 40. Researchers stress that it is crucial to respond in a supportive manner if a child discloses abuse. Children who disclose abuse and receive a negative reaction or no reaction at all suffer more from general trauma symptoms, dissociation, and PTSD than those who had supportive responses, e 41. Ninety-five percent of molested children know their molesters. k 42.The 1992 film The Boys of St. Vincent is a docudrama based on real events about sexual abuse at a Roman Catholic orphanage and its cover up.e 43. Most child sex abuse offenders are 10 or more years older than the victim. More than half of child molesters are under the age of 35. e 44. Between 250,000-500,000 child molesters reside in the U.S. today. n Pedophiles are often likable, friendly, engaging, and frequent events that children attend 45. Male offenders who abused girls have an average of 52 victims each. Men who molested boys had an average of 150 victims each.e 46. Child molesters come from all backgrounds and social classes. However, most molesters (1) are male, (2) work in an environment surrounded by children, (3) befriend the parents first and then gain the child's trust, and (4) attend events such as sports, camping, and video arcades, e 47. Gerald Arthur "J erry" Sandusky, famed Penn State football assistant coach, was arrested in November 2011 and charged with 40 counts of sexual abuse of young boys. The choice of his attorney, Joe Amendola, has been questioned because Amendola himself impregnated a 16-year-old in the 90s. I 48. U.S. researchers have found that women who were sexually abused as girls repeatedly have a 62%) percent higher risk of heart problems later in life compared with other women who were not abused. Much of the risk was related to coping strategies, such as alcohol abuse, overeating, and drug abuse, c 49. Up to 20,000 children were sexually abused by 800 Roman Catholic workers in the Netherlands since 1945. e 50.1 n November 2011, Christopher J arvis, a Catholic Church pedophile abuse investigator, admitted to possessing, making, and distributing indecent images of children. Hired by the church as a child safety coordinator in 2002, he had more than 4,000 images of primarily boys, including rape, from ages 10-12 on his camera memory stick and laptop. g 51.The Society of Jesus' Pacific Northwest unit and its insurers agreed to pay a record $166.1 million to about 470 people, mainly Native American children, who were sexually and psychologically abused as children by Jesuit priests from the 1940s to the 1990s. The settlement was the largest settlement by a religious order in the history of the world, g 52. The Catholic pedophile scandal in the U.S. broke in 2002 when it was reported that many leaders of the archdiocese had moved priests who had abused minors to new parishes rather than reporting them or defrocking them. The scandal has involved almost every US Catholic diocese, including 4,400 priests and 110,000 children who were abused between 1950 and 2002. g 53. The 2010 documentary Dancing Boys of Afghanistan reveals a custom prevalent in the area called bacha bazi (Boy for Play) where men buy young boys from impoverished families for sexual slavery. The young boys are forced to dress in women's clothes and dance before being taken away by men for sex. One warlord reported having over 30,000 boys over 20 years, though he was married and had two sons. Some scholars note that repression of sexuality and widespread gender apartheid in the region contributes to homosexual pederasty, g 54. Child marriages are legal in several countries. For example, in Yemen, more than a quarter of girls are married before the age of 15. As recently as 2010, a 12-year-old child bride in Yemen died from internal bleeding following intercourse. Additionally, it is not uncommon in Saudi Arabia for a 12-year-old girl to be married to an 80-year-old man.i 55. According to the FBI, approximately 1 in 10 men have molested a child, with little chance of being caught (3%). Additionally, the FBI estimates that a child has almost a 25%) chance of being molested, n 56. The FBI estimates that there is a sex offender living in every square mile in the United States, n 57. According to Dr. Herbert Wagemaker, an estimated 4% of the population suffers from sexual attraction toward children, g 58. The re-arrest rate for convicted child molesters is 52% .g 59. Prison inmates are more likely to assault fellow prisoners who have been convicted of sex crimes against children. Many inmates refer to molesters as "dirty" prisoners and that assaulting or killing them is doing a service to society. In the prison hierarchy, snitches and molesters are usually the most hated, m 60. Most sexual assaults are committed by the same race as the victim. An exception to this is Native Americans. Those who commit a sexual crime against Native Americans are usually not Native American, k 61. There is just a small subset of child sexual abusers who are exclusively attracted to just children. A majority of people who abuse children are or have been attracted to adults as well.k 62. Classic signs of sexual abuse include odd injuries, ripped clothes or underwear, depression, alcohol and drug abuse, hyper-sexuality, withdrawal, exceptional fear of a person or certain places, unreasonable fear of a physical exam, drawings that are scary or that use a lot of black and red, and attempts to get other children to perform sexual acts.q It is crucial to be nonjudgmental if a child discloses sexual abuse 63.1 f a child reveals that he or she has been sexually abused, it is crucial that adults listen non-judgmentally to the child and report it immediately. If the abuse is within the family, report it to the local Child Protection Agency. If the abuse is outside the family, report it to the police or district attorney's office. Parents should also consult a pediatrician and a child/adolescent psychiatrist. It is important the child understands that the abuse is not his or her fault. A child should never be blamed for the abuse, q 64. Parents can help prevent sexual abuse by educating themselves and their children about what sexual abuse is and by staying alert to the classic signs of sexual abuse. Parents also need to teach their children about the privacy of body parts, listen to their children, and be aware of where and with whom their children are spending their time.q As you can see, there is far more child porn, sexual abuse and the like in the usa and west too. Was Lincoln a great president? The myths build up as the people that are in the news, especially foreign reporters, love the dems. This is why he enjoys such a good story, the dems stick together inter continetally, while the republicans tend to be out for themselves. If, on the other hand, it became so that the conservatives from across the pond were to also stick with the news related on the republicans, especially in a good light, it would become popular. I find at the moment, that it is politically correct to be democratic. If there was a greater indicator, it would have to be awesome compared to intercontinental world news. If the news portrayed the conservatives in a better light, then it would propser. Issues like abortion, gun control and gay marriage all lead to this dim light being shone on the conservatives of america. I suggest a two way communication between the countries of the world to try to make the conservative way of life more politically correct, but can it be? If the issue of abortion was taken to the catholic church in rome, the church would attend functions and hearing where they would back up the abstinence from sex before marriage, and that would go down well with the conservatives everywhere, bringing them together. I am aware that tourists are not allowed to vote on american political affairs, but, the kids ask questions, the parents must be politcally correct, they ask at school, and the teachers need to be politically correct. All of this leads to a culture where the gop is vilified from an early age with the voters. They need something new, something to bolster them and make them the politically correct party! To do this they need to get word to the church, then to the police! The police will say that the use of force to protect yourself, because they carry guns, might be useful. Interviewing republican police chiefs, this would bolster the image of the conservatives in the usa. Then they could also show how children should not grow up with two parents the same sex. You cannot take away from feeling aliented, hating thier parents for things, and not respecting thier parents! If, logically, you can get married, the next step is to see the inclusion of children. The church could pump this story, and then romney and co could be clapped for or something. Being politically correct - political correctness. I have found this forum has people that are politically correct, and ones that strive to be different. I myslef tried to be different, then found solace out there with my debates seeming to be right - well to me at least. So, what does it mean to be politically correct? Is it the obvious stance on any issue? Is it affected by humanitarian laws? Who tries to be different for the sake of debate or to put a fire out? Often i find the politically correct people point out the obvious, so, is this all they can see? Is it obvious? What does it mean to be obvious or politically correct? If the political correctness was in keeping with the way things are, then they would be 'regressive, 1 you could say, but i find that political correctness often falls on the progressives - the democrats. Also, if you were to read a comic book, for example, or a school text book for a better example, you would find it very 'soft. 1 So, i find political correctness very soft form of defence or justification for anything, trying to make your opponent feel like he or she is on thier own? I find this to be like populism. What say you? The day the politicians become politically incorrect will be agreat day indeed. Say what you mean and mean what you say. The way people pour over correctness in their speaches is pathetic. Then you see the stress on their faces as they see other world leaders and fancy that the only reason they are there is to see them being able to change things with a power rush and for the money. J ust what does someone want when they want to be president? What do they hope to see happen in their lives? Nobody has ever asked them that before, and i figure that will be one tough question to answer! If they say they want to better their fellow man, and yet they do not give all their money straight to charity, would be a fail. Another fail would be to say that they want to bring about change. Whatg is the best way to find out what someone wants when they are running for president? Well, sit in bed and ask yourself what you would want, then think they have drives just like you! Fisheries to feed the masses I find that the food problem the world faces could be remedied by building more fisheries. Give a man a fishing rod and he rapes the oceans, give a man a fishery and he feeds more people than himself. I suggest that charities that buy raw porridge for the masses invest in some fisheries - these will produce, in any climate, anywhere, enough food for people to eat. Without the threat of predators the fish will quickly populate the entire fishery and be able to feed the masses. I found a paper on shrimp production, and would like to point out that that will feed many with a great taste! What i propose is not to have the tanks on dry land, but rather have the tanks in the ocean. This will mean getting the temperatures and ingredients right will not be a factor, as they are in natural seawater. I propose a 'cage' where all the shrimp can breed and eat poop or whatever and then they will be able to feed many. Then there is the idea that other fish can also feed people. Stick them in the cage too! Now, this could be incredibly cheap if they grew faster! If we want fish to grow faster If the fish grew faster, then there would be enough to give away if they grew enough. Let me try my hand at making fishies grow faster? They say calories make people grow faster, so, we should give the fish the right sort of foods. Give them much more foods too, but not enough to kill them. So, i suggest that we load the food with worms, worms that make you hungry. Then the fish will eat the worms, and be hungry forever, always eating and stuff. Or, you may observe the Chinese way of doing things... If Quote by: http:/ / www.chineseop.com/ cuisine/ What-is-it-about-Chinese-food-that- keeps-you-hungry-.html but it isnt hunger and you should drink water instead of eat more So in Chinese food, you find that you get hungry the more you eat. I would also like to see more salt in the water, as, it will make them thirsty and then they will eat more, mistaking thirst for hunger, as they do not drink, do they? Well, how do we feed the hungry then? Chickens and eggs? Let's try that! If we were to artificially grow chickens so that they all come out female, with like one male, then there would be more eggs! Maybe that will bring down the price of eggs? Okay, that has already been done in 1997 and was patented! Oh well... Why not look to pidgeons? We have enough of those! Why not grab all the eggs we can from thier nests, a great endeavour that will cost quite a lot of money and create temporary jobs for people, and then eat them? Back to fish. I am sure that fish grown in a fishery would be okay to eat, even if they are thinner or whatever. If we could find something else to make them grow faster, or... we could use nano technology to copy the chemical makeup of a fish egg and spurt them out! J ust like that, over and over until there are more fish than we need! Release them into the wild, or something, and then feed them. This will require some work i would presume, but unfortunately i don't know where to look! We could then grow fruit and other things to eat, like beef, from nothing but a bunch of cheap chemicals! 1. What we need is biomass that we can change to food. I n biomass, we need something plentiful, so, algae from the sea could do it. I am sure with the level of nanotech and molecular biology today we can do this soon! H Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_biology One of the most basic techniques of molecular biology to study protein function is expression cloning. In this technique, DNA coding for a protein of interest is cloned (using PCR and/or restriction enzymes) into a plasmid (known as an expression vector). A vector has 3 distinctive features: an origin of replication, a multiple cloning site (MCS), and a selective marker (usually antibiotic resistance). The origin of replication will have promoter regions upstream from the replication/transcription start site. This plasmid can be inserted into either bacterial or animal cells. Introducing DNA into bacterial cells can be done by transformation (via uptake of naked DNA), conjugation (via cell-cell contact) or by transduction (via viral vector). Introducing DNA into eukaryotic cells, such as animal cells, by physical or chemical means is called transfection. Several different transfection techniques are available, such as calcium phosphate transfection, electroporation, microinjection and liposome transfection. DNA can also be introduced into eukaryotic cells using viruses or bacteria as carriers, the latter is sometimes called bactofection and in particular uses Agrobacterium tumefaciens. The plasmid may be integrated into the genome, resulting in a stable transfection, or may remain independent of the genome, called transient transfection. In either case, DNA coding for a protein of interest is now inside a cell, and the protein can now be expressed. A variety of systems, such as inducible promoters and specific cell- signaling factors, are available to help express the protein of interest at high levels. Large quantities of a protein can then be extracted from the bacterial or eukaryotic cell. The protein can be tested for enzymatic activity under a variety of situations, the protein may be crystallized so its tertiary structure can be studied, or, in the pharmaceutical industry, the activity of new drugs against the protein can be studied. As you can see, we can make vitamen supplements for the hungry. I remeber in movies sometimes the people eat tablets instead of eating real food, so, if we can make this mass produced, it will become cheap. Maybe food will become free for people? This is a human right so i suggest that the united nations or whatever invest and pressurise to get this going. Or, of course, we could try to find a way to make something else, also biologically tuned, to become real food. As you can see, there is a case for making dietary supplements compulsory. This can be funded by social welfare in any country, and then will result in less welfare being paid out for food, which is already given. If all the charities combine, they can feed everyone easily. It will cost like a million rand or a hundred thousand dollars to build one factory, and then churhc out the stuff, bought in bulk, and creating a competitive market for supplying these drugs to the people. Maybe there is a way to make a seed of some sort that only grows seeds instead of fruit for three generations or so? That would mean a hell of a lot more trees of fruit to eat! If we were to observe the composition of food stuffs, we should be able to simulate this with science! If we were to chemically make foodstuffs out of chemicals and biomass, then we could produce food on a conveyor belt. All we need to do is to take the food stuffs and then stick chemicals into them and then make sure it is edible. This could industrialise the food industry. I am talking about porridges with lots of nutrients in them, or drinks, and the like. We could do this without wheat too. We just need something to collect all the 'fluids' before they become solids again, and then package them. I suggested in another thread we artificially make honey from pollen, so, if we were to take a flower of any sort - and they grow quite freely - we could make something out of the pollen. This would make for a tasty meal! All we really need is the chemical formula and water. J ust what is the chemical composition of food stuffs? It sure goes faster than growing them, and this adds cost to it. If there is no wait time then there is no cost, really, except for the chemicals and water. It says that any plant contains starch - the wiki... H Quote by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starch Starch or amylum is a carbohydrate consisting of a large number of glucose units joined by glycosidic bonds. This polysaccharide is produced by all green plants as an energy store. It is the most common carbohydrate in the human diet and is contained in large amounts in such staple foods as potatoes, wheat, maize (corn), rice, and cassava. As you can see, one of the most important ingredients to make sugar is easily and abundantly available. Some plants grow very fast, like weeds - imagine finding a use for weeds? This means we can drop the price for foods to such a level that they can be free. The state could buy up all the factories required and feed the people and increase taxation on the classes. This increase would see about one percent more to the lower classes, and the need for welfare will diminish greatly. If we throw out dafodill seeds everywhere on a farm, we will see them growing freely and abundantly, and, very quickly. Then we strain them or whatever and make the chemical stuff for our water, which is very cheap anyways, and then we can feed everyone. Of course natural farming will continue, providing to the middle and upper classes i guess. If the poor had access to free food, maybe everyone would eat it too? This will kill the farming sector, but then they can get jobs in the factories? Self defence Self defence is wrong. There should be more police, as they carry out the law properly. If there was a guy running around with a gun pointing it at people he thinks are going to assualt him, and he accidentally shoots off a round, it could kill someone. If, on the other hand, they were mugged, or thier house possessions stolen, then they would see the lesser of two evil prevail. That means it is up to the state to supply people with enough jobs so that they don't have to see crime stats soar. If you are a victim, insurance covers it. Think like you are in a bank and there are robbers. If you stand up you might get yourself and others killed, but, if you just stay down, you see the police do thier jobs and then they will see insurance cover it. If you want to be a hero, don't. Everything is covered by laws to protect the victims, be a victim. When it comes to rape, carry a silver bullet with you. This is not like shooting anyone, and, it is not a crime punished by a crime. Well, that is the fault of the people in the police force. They do not speak for the whole police force. Try this analogy, pupils, teacher, prefects. What is wrong with that? If sometimes something freaky happens, well, then you should not draw on one example for the sake of the whole debate when there is as we speak a policeperson doing thier jobs. Violations Well, if you were to pay for health care, for example, then what is a life worth? If life is priceless, then all the money will go into healtch care, even to pay for those major ops for a new heart for diabetes or something. If life isn't worth that much, and I reckon it isn't, then it would be worthless, as we have too many people already. If they woke up dead then that would be good. Well back then people banded together to make a way in life, you didn;t consider it poverty because the people were not complaining you could say, and the standard of living was enjoyable. As soon as you get modern cities then people flock to them and don't see a way out of poverty without stealing or getting a job. You may say that poverty is the natural state of man, but, i suggest that having some worth would see that done with. If there are four people in a society, and one grows food and the others do odd jobs, then there is some semblence of equality with each other. This is the way of the 'homelands' here in africa, and these people are actually living in poverty, as, they do not have access to health care, clean food, or other services. These are a human right i think. You sound hedonistic in your idea that the natural state of man is poverty, and, i suggest you go out to these areas to see for yourself what a terrible way to live it is. Which way to go? Tax cuts spur growth as the taxes that are taken in, are still taken in at various places in the exchange ordeal, and, they allow the money to circulate quicker, as, being cheaper, they switch places quicker and then more taxes are collected on more goods. But, each interval that they pass through, they pass through a few more in the same amount of time. Let me explain... If there is one thousand dollars, and there is a tax rate of fourty percent, then that travelling thousand dollars gets a shorter life before it is all inside the states hands. The thousand dollars loses four hundred dollars at the first exchange, leaving six hundred dollars, then at the next 'stop', where it is travelling, it loses $600 - 40% = 240 dollars, as you can see, the money only travles like two more spaces and then is kept as change. It has enriched about four parties, yes? Now, if your tax rate is ten percent, then it travels to many more parties allowing for them to do business before all the money is back in the hands of the state. The state still collects all the same amounts of money, but the people benefit more. If you lower taxes, you will see the state collect less money, this means less infrastructure to develop around of. If the state has more money coming in faster, through high tax rates, they have more money to spend. This also means money going to social security, so that is at least good, because it provides money for the elderly to spend or give to their children one day. If the state has more money for infrastructure, then more develops around that. More employees or more money coming in means that the state has more to spend on things, so it goes out from the state, and gets rolled with the developers or suppliers of the state, and then there is more money. Better solar power. I heard about how this works, and it could be done better if you ask me. The traditional way a solar cell is powered is with fluids under a mirror or like thing, and then the fluids heat up. This reminds me of combustion, but, do we really need combustion to work with everything we do power related? There must be a way to streamline this so as to make it easier... So, if the fluids get heated up, why not use some sort of metal under the panel? Why not take the panel away? Why not expose a metal object to the direct sunlight and then watch it heat up? Maybe it is because metals heat slower than fluids? How can we speed and boost this up? If we were to expose a solar panel to the sunlight, the mirror accentuates the light coming in and then makes it hotter. If this were the only way to use solar energy then this isn't very effective. I have a feeling there is a better way to use sunlight... Recently in my space ships thread, i suggested letting the light come in a one way mirror, and closing it off in there. This, with a regualr set up for a solar panel, would see the light bounce around inside the panel or chamber and then escalate into something greater. The light would heat, reheat, and continue heating the fluids inside the panel, but, that might lead to the fluids melting the container! So... I suggest we use it with metals. Place the metals under the solar panels and then let it reverberate under the closed off panel chamber and make it a lot hotter. The thing is, this will melt the metal too! So what do we have that doesn't melt? Using our new technology could prove costly. Maybe what we need is a redone combustion engine sort of thing? The water gets heated, spins the normal things in an engine, then with a miniscule amount of the energy produced, we re cool the water vapor into water? We could use combinations of water, metals and fluid to get this thing going in the right direction. Actually, come to think of it, if you were to look at a normal light, isn't that like a 'star? 1 It gives off light, but hey so does a candle... if we were to observe the similarities between the candle flame or campfire, we could maybe find a way to tap into fusion power through the simplest of things? Okay, so a star gives off massive amounts of energy and radiation, while a fire only gives off a tiny bit of heat. If we were to observe the atomic structure, surely lighting some or other compounds will result in the same thing maybe? How about lighting napalm? If we were to light napalm, then it would burn for quite a while. Then while it is burning, we take the fluids of the solar panel and insert them into the fire. Then, we try to get it burning super hot, like a star, as i guess the only difference is in the heat produced, we need to contain the heat though, so maybe a non carbon based substance like nitrogen four could be used to insulate it, the only problem being that that is not a conductor. So, i reckon we make a chamber and then throw all sorts of heating stuff into it, like napalm, and then watch the fire burn and absorb the heat the same way as a nuclear device does. Or we could find a better way to make stars? How do we make a star? How do we contain a star? I suggest that the only difference between making a star come into being is the stuff burning within the star. So, we get all that goodies together, and light it! This will result in the same stuff as nuclear fission? Freedom of speech. I find freedom of speach important for some reasons and drastically destructive for others. The other day i was feeling down and decided to look for a suicide path. I found a lot of sites on the subject, there they tell you how to kill yourself quickly and quitely. This is freedom of speach at work! Then, imagine someone with a lab researches how to make an atom bomb? With the level of internet freedom, and enough credit limits to sign onto the right sites, the person could well, make an atom bomb, yes? Can you see how this can harm people's futures? There are no good points to it, except the concept of people have a right to know. Now i agree that people have a right to know about their leaders, but wouldn't it be better if some things remained a mystery? Are you saying that everything should be free to be spoken? What about a scandal? That damages the images of all concerned, yes? How about being free to say that murdering black people is okay? that is hate speach, but the line is thin between, yes? If it came down to reporting that the markets have crashed, or not, then would it be wise to report that they have, knowing it will cause panic? What is a right to know? How can anybody have a right to know, but still pay for college education? Morality is objective, they just have different levels of liberty. Anything against society is immoral, anything for society is moral... Well, we need common ground, and solid reasoning, i think i have supplied both. The difference between cultures comes in liberty regarding the level of freedom or restrictions of those rights. What is moral from one culutre to the next is basically on common ground. If morality varies from culture to culture as you say, then why is there common ground with laws? All laws are the same from culture to culture, except where they regaurd rights, and that is down to liberty. If the common ground is found to benefit soceity, please explain to me why it is not, instead of just saying "no it is not." That is what i meant, the soceity they further is their families or others like friends, or it is immoral. All laws are the same, with varying degrees of punishment or leniency, and, can you name for me some that are not? I say it comes down to liberty, let me explain... For example, in saudi arabia women are not allowed to drive, this keeps with the male notion that women should rather not drive, and the men in saudi arabia makes the laws, this comes down to varying levels of liberty, yes? Can you name for me one thing that is illegal somewhere, and legal somewhere else, without it being down to interpreting liberty? So, if saddam hussein was to go to wiki pedia and get the right things to make an abomb with, say it was free to talk about, then that would be anything but bad? Okay, ignoring the prospects of freedom of speech on nuclear weapons, hwo about knowledge of where to buy drugs, where to find prostitutes, and knowledge of how to make nail bombs? Think of the anarchists cookbook - that was legal! How about knowledge of how to open locks with a safety pin? This will lead to more break ins... Basically, if you were to have all these things common knowledge, amoung the others, and there are far more instances of where the knowledge should not be known, there is some serious need of getting this out of the public knowledge. So you think speech should be free? Well, if it were, it would harm certain entities, the public doesn't need drugs or alchohol for that matter, as it is a poison, all drugs are poison, as they attack your system and make you feel a certain unnatural way becore you recover, and if you have too much poison, you will die, for sure. If someone set up a website selling drugs, that would be illegal and should be shut down. How about a site selling child slaves? That would also rely on freedom of speech, yes? Look, i am not against you knowing how the state is spending money, i am against you knowing where to buy kids on the internet. Having the knowledge of these things on the internet is like promoting them, no? But as you said, illegal things will remain illegal, so anything illegal spoken about would be right, under the freedom of speech... MtQuote by: http://wiki.answers.eom/Q/What_is_harborinq Harboring is usually charged when a friend or relative of a known criminal is found to have been helping or hiding that person. There are many ways to interpret the usage but for example: If the police knock on your door and ask for your husband (who just escaped from prison) and you tell them you have not seen him, close the door and go back to the kitchen to resume your coffee and chat with him, you could be charged with harboring. Harboring a criminal is a crime under both federal and state statutes and a person who harbors a criminal is an accessory after the fact. HtQuote by: http://www.ehow.com/about_5558578_penalty-not-reportinq-crime.html In nearly all justice systems, the main firepower is reserved for the lead offender in a crime; however, those who help that person escape punishment by concealing facts are not forgotten. Under the American system, failure to report a crime can amount to an offense in itself, depending on the circumstances. Certain professional employees, such as counselors, day care and social workers or teachers, are held to a higher standard if they fail to report abuse or neglect. Doctors and nurses must report unusual behavior, such as when a wounded person requires emergency care. In drawing these distinctions, the system seeks to protect the public and hold passive participants accountable, too. Read more: Penalty for Not Reporting a Crime | eHow.com http://www.ehow. com/about_5558578_pe...#ixzz2A9hj5466 I got the proper citation now. Subjectivity is the absence of value. Seeing as how you can have an estimate, and it is a best guess, it is objective i think. All rights are about laws being put into practice. It is common to have murder and theft illegal, but woen driving? Well, if the women could drive without having the problem of maybe looking in the mirror to adjust makeup, then it would be safer. Then again, the men could be scrathcing their balls! As it happens, in saudi arabia, it is illegal for women to drive and yet legal for ball scratchers to drive. It comes down to liberty for each specific case, and in a man's world, while women can drive, it is not highly thought of. To make it legal, it would need to be a woman's world, or, an equal world. If the world were equal, then there would be equal liberty. Racism Being racist only comes into play with age and experience. When we watch children play, they all seem to get along, but as we start seeing that our parents are racist, and older kids are racist, then people identify with racism as if it were thier mantra, from fear or whatever. Is this wisdom though? People like dark lord abc might say that it is genetic the difference, but the difference is what we see when we look at people, or look up for guidance, as everyone that is older is someone that people that are young want to be like, they take on their habits. So, it is a relay culture at play. The best way to get people to stop being racist is to kill all the settled people! J ust joking, but that would work out well. This relay culture of hating blacks and whites is only inherited and does not come about naturally. It comes from a time when they were slaves and masters, then they got freed, then they were still looked down on monetarily and socially, for some reason. If you want to get rid of racism we should all ask each other what it is we really don't like about that race? Then listen. The amount of bs coming out of our mouths is quite ridiculous! It is all things we have heard or learned, then we will just be repeating what others expect to hear, so as not lose our place in that place of culture. Of course, if we were honest with each other, we would say something like that's all a stereotype or something. ANother problem is when we look for problems with other races to justify our hate. If we were to be honest, we would say that all people have these problems, but, when we speak without thinking, we would say these problems should be expected from that race. Honesty is all you need.