(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Hex Works of Brett Nortje"

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, [citation needed] 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, [1][2][3] and it also plays a key role in 
the learning process. [1] [4] A basic training for imagination is listening to storytelling 
(narrative), [1] [5] in which the exactness of the chosen words is the fundamental factor to 
"evoke worlds". [6] 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. [3] 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. [1] [2] 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[28] 
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" [29]). 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 ([28] 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. [3] [4] DMT occurs in trace 
amounts in mammals, including humans, where it putatively functions as a trace amine 
neurotransmitter. [5] It is originally derived from the essential amino acid tryptophan and 
ultimately produced by the enzyme INMT during normal metabolism. [6] 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. [7] 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. [8] 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. [9] 

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. [5] 

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. [2] [6] Indian documents written in 
Kharosthi with ink have been unearthed in Chinese Turkestan. [7] The practice of writing with 
ink and a sharp pointed needle was common in early South India. [3] Several Buddhist and 
Jain sutras in India were compiled in ink. [4] 

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. [39] The annual rate of job growth was improving by his last year in 
office, moving Massachusetts up from last place nationally to 28th. [39] [40] 

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. [36] 

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.