>> But nearly no-one ask: Why do young men get so despaired in their
>> lives, that they bomb themselves away? Why are they so disappointed
>> about our world, about their future in this world that they hope
>> for salvation in a promised heaven?
> 
> This is something I've never figured out.
> 
> It's apparently no secret that the Muslims want us dead. But I
> haven't got the vaguest idea *why*.

Okay, you already oversimplicate it. :-(

It has nothing to do with Islam. Religion is just a vehicle to carry an
oversimplied message. Why simplified? So it can be understood by people
without education.

As always: It is much easier to blame other people for own misery. That
principle works exactly the same "here" (in Western Europe and Nothern
America) and "there" (the Eastern Hemisphere, the Muslim world etc.)


The only way to overcome such thinking is: education and enlightenment.
But instead of investing in schools and universities we "invest" in
armament and support apologists of stupidity, not only in Muslim
countries, also in our own ones. :-(


If you want to understand the native people in Iraq or Afghanistan:

Imagine, you have to grow up a land where some foreign troops would have
occupied your country? If they would behave arrogantly like "world
sheriffs", kill native people here and there without regard whether they
are men, women, children? If you and every friend you still have would
have victims of the war in his own family. People who are dead or
severely wounded by a war you don't understand, a war that you didn't
have begun. Of course, due to war there is no regular economy, no jobs
for your parents. You just don't know how to survive the next weeks.

And due to war there is also no regulary school for the pupils, since
many many years. The only bit of education you received in your whole
life you got from your local religious leader or from local combattants
that also won't tell you the truth, but you have absolutely no chance to
figure that out. You trust them, because there is nothing else to trust
in your little war world.

But they tell you: "If you want to take revenge for your father, your
dead uncle and your injured niece, just come with us and we will give
you to eat and to drink and if we all fight together we will chase away
that bad occupiers and free our country!"

Wouldn't you join them? Especially if the other option would be the fear
that you (and your family) would be suspected to be a collaborateur and
your little brother is killed next day? Of course, you will!


And last, but not least:
Neither the native people in Iraq nor in Afghanistan had a choice
whether they want to live in a battle zone for their whole life. But the
foreign troops ompletely consists of volunrary(!) figthers. Isn't it
understandable that the natives just dislike them already just for that?


Lars R.

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:50:35 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 23/12/2013 6:10 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Well, yes, exactly.  My wife and I had a discussion about this (she's a
>> big comics geek), and the thing about Superman is that he's supposed to
>> be the embodiment of "American Exceptionalism" - a high standard that
>> we strive to achieve.  By murdering Zod, though, Nolan lowered the bar
>> for that standard.
> 
> IIRC from my youth. Superman had never killed anyone. He always
> delivered them to Justice.
> Bad show, that man.

Yep, that's Amy's recollection as well.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 07:09 PM, Lars R. wrote:
> And last, but not least:
> Neither the native people in Iraq nor in Afghanistan had a choice
> whether they want to live in a battle zone for their whole life. But the
> foreign troops ompletely consists of volunrary(!) figthers. Isn't it
> understandable that the natives just dislike them already just for that?

...so what you're saying is, harassing anybody and everybody who is or 
appears to be Muslim is the most effective way to end this sad state of 
affairs, which is why major world governments are currently doing 
exactly that?

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 6:01 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 11:22:10 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>

>> Or if you live in a media vacuum. :-)
>
> Well, some people do manage to avoid spoilers for a while, so I thought
> I'd be courteous. ;)
>

You are right, of course.
But even I heard about the ending.


>> Sorry, it was a TV play. Every now and again a drama budget is spent on
>> drama.
>
> Well, yeah, but even still - the development process is similar to actual
> theatre productions.
>

There is an obvious difference between drama and the usual.

> No, not taking it personally at all - over here, there is a rather strong
> belief that people get the punishments they deserve.  Which is odd,
> because just as with Walt in BB, it's rarely the case.  Justice wouldn't
> have been death, it would've been a long time in prison, knowing his
> family hated him.
>
> But don't forget that we don't expect the wealthy to pay for their
> misdeeds either.  We call people who get to a position of wealth and
> power who get away with stuff "successful".  Makes me sick.
>

We will have you singing the Red Flag, yet. ;-)


>>>
>>>
>> It is a collective noun.
>> The different branches are singular.
>
> Exactly what I was saying.  One might be talking about a singular "math
> branch."
>
Exactly! Then you should call it Arithmetic (not, "you do the math."), 
Geometry, Trigonometry etc.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 6:01 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I'm not. I don't want to think of Jim wearing his waistcoat with his
>> >kecks around his ankles. Let him keep his dignity and his braces.:-D
> Makes a note of another tool to punish Stephen with.;)

In your own time. My lively lad.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 20:59:16 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 23/12/2013 6:01 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> Or if you live in a media vacuum. :-)
>>
>> Well, some people do manage to avoid spoilers for a while, so I thought
>> I'd be courteous. ;)
>>
>>
> You are right, of course.
> But even I heard about the ending.

:)  Yeah, it probably is pretty well known by now.

>>> Sorry, it was a TV play. Every now and again a drama budget is spent
>>> on drama.
>>
>> Well, yeah, but even still - the development process is similar to
>> actual theatre productions.
>>
> There is an obvious difference between drama and the usual.

Yep.

>> No, not taking it personally at all - over here, there is a rather
>> strong belief that people get the punishments they deserve.  Which is
>> odd, because just as with Walt in BB, it's rarely the case.  Justice
>> wouldn't have been death, it would've been a long time in prison,
>> knowing his family hated him.
>>
>> But don't forget that we don't expect the wealthy to pay for their
>> misdeeds either.  We call people who get to a position of wealth and
>> power who get away with stuff "successful".  Makes me sick.
>>
>>
> We will have you singing the Red Flag, yet. ;-)

LOL.  Then I'll be hauled before a McCarthy-era panel to prove that I'm 
not a communist or something.

>>> It is a collective noun.
>>> The different branches are singular.
>>
>> Exactly what I was saying.  One might be talking about a singular "math
>> branch."
>>
> Exactly! Then you should call it Arithmetic (not, "you do the math."),
> Geometry, Trigonometry etc.

--- snip ---

math, n.3
View as: Outline |Full entryQuotations: Show all |Hide all
Pronunciation:  Brit.	 /maθ/ , U.S. /mæθ/
Forms:  18– math, 18– math. (with point).
Etymology:  Shortened < mathematics n. (probably originally as graphic 
abbreviation). Compare later maths n. and French math (1880).
N. Amer. colloq.
 
  Mathematics (esp. as a subject of study at school or college).
Cf. maths n.   (the usual British colloquial abbreviation).

--- snip ---

Seems the OED accepts the Americanised version as well as the British 
version. :P

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> And last, but not least: Neither the native people in Iraq nor in 
>> Afghanistan had a choice whether they want to live in a battle zone
>> for their whole life. But the foreign troops ompletely consists of
>> volunrary(!) figthers. Isn't it understandable that the natives
>> just dislike them already just for that?
> 
> ....so what you're saying is, harassing anybody and everybody who is 
> or appears to be Muslim is the most effective way to end this sad 
> state of affairs, which is why major world governments are currently
>  doing exactly that?

I don't know _why_ a certain government does this or that. But it seems
cynical but completely logical foe me: if you're the leader of a
weapon-exporting country, you must ensure that there are always anough
conflicts and wars in the world to bring enough orders for your local
military industry.

And to do this, you should calm down your own citizens so they don't
disturb your pervert game. And how to do that: Keep them dumb (e.g. by
shorting a broad education in your population), tell them again and
again your lies that you're fighting a common enemy, until even the last
one in your country beleave it without doubt. (And only a few remind
that your current "enemy" was bred by yourself some years ago. History
repeats itself.)


To make a long story short: Neither "the Islam" nor "Al Qaeda" nor any
other so called "terrorism network" is the real problem. The real prblem
is the greed. The greed that prevent effective actions for more
education and enlightenment in the world, not only in the so called "3rd
World".

Dumb, lazy and inert people are much easier to govern than intelligent,
well-educated and discerning people.


				Lars R.

Post a reply to this message

Lars R. <rou### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> And to do this, you should calm down your own citizens so they don't
> disturb your pervert game. And how to do that: Keep them dumb (e.g. by
> shorting a broad education in your population), tell them again and
> again your lies that you're fighting a common enemy, until even the last
> one in your country beleave it without doubt. (And only a few remind
> that your current "enemy" was bred by yourself some years ago. History
> repeats itself.)

You do realize that many muslim terrorist attacks have been executed by
muslims who had lived and studied for years in a western country, some
of them even having a higher education?

It's more than just education. It is very much about the religion and
its indocrination.

I think that a very good demonstration of this is that recently a poll
was performed in the UK, and one of the questions was about homosexuals.
From the about 500 muslims that participated in the poll exactly 100%
opposed homosexuals. Many of these muslims had been born in the UK and
had studied there all their lives.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 23/12/2013 9:48 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Seems the OED accepts the Americanised version as well as the British
> version. :P

Sigh! You have worn me down. Maths it is.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 15:56:15 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 23/12/2013 9:48 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Seems the OED accepts the Americanised version as well as the British
>> version. :P
> 
> Sigh! You have worn me down. Maths it is.

;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message