nova_satori

for once I agree with Mr. Read. Airlines have so much crap they have to deal with, referencing every passenger with electronic databases is the last thing they can afford. Airlines are out to make money and fly planes, not run spy agencies.

There is no freedom of religion in public schools. The first amendement stops any government funded program from allowing religion, on the grounds that it is enforcing a national langugage. Seperation of church and state? it seems fair that any program receiving federal funds/state funds must be governed by the same laws. Somethings are not worth the cries from the insane fundementalists in challenging. Concessions sometimes must be made, even if they are shaky in the face of the constituion. I say, get rid of all religion in schools, cept the pledge of allegiance, because that is already a lie, and we don't need to expose it any more. It's more of a US symbol then actual religion Republic? Where republic you mean represenative plutocracy. Indivisible? That's not true, it's already happening. Liberty and justice for all? You mean some, and some you mean those with money.

Then what are we? So we did not evolve from the same thing everyone else did? Even though we share 99.9% of our DNA with Chimps, we are not animals and they are animals? It is relevant. in the grand scheme of genetics, we are animals, actually, we are simply products of billions of chemical reactions. Did you fail biology? Or simply reject the notions that have existed since the beginning of recorded history? If you think you're better because of .1% of ur DNA, then you're ridiculous. Primitive and guileless? So the langauge of dolphins and whales is primitive although it does the same thing as ours? Does the clans of apes that resemble our own count as primitive? How about the extremely complex hunting tactics of animals around the world, are they guileless? Does it matter? Does it make ALL the difference that we have the most complex minds, that we are no longer animals? Killing is right? Ask the right-wing here, they seem to condone genocide without much thought, or any. Actually, you're wrong. You share 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999% of your DNA with unborn babies. You're a nut if you think you're better then the rest. So, we are not animals? We NEVER evolved from ANY animal species, ALL biology classification is wrong? Definition in biological classification. Humans fit into Kingdom Animalia. Science Lies, ALL LIES!!! LIES I TELL YOU!! LIES!!!! Are you a creationist?

Capitalism requires massive government supervision. Socialism requires huge amounts of money to be constantly pouring on. Thus, there are no true socialist countries Communism will never work with humans. Humans are far too greedy for it to work.

FastNed: Do you know how many senators' and congressmens' childrens are in the military? (hint, the number is double digit, do you know how many senators and congressmen there are?)

So only things in my lifetime have any relevance to anything? So does that apply to 80 year olds in the Middle east that hate the US? Because 63 years of their lives have nothing to do with what they feel? Religion is simply the method they use to attack. it does not mean it is the sole basis. You people seem to think that America is entirely blamess and is a noble and ethical country. Now I know why pro-education activiests are pushing for required US history. It's obvious you didn't get it. Well, the odds of it happening after we attack are much higher. We've opened a country up to thousands of extremists, destroyed a force guarding porous boarders, allowed for "if there WERE ANY WMD AT ALL" to easily be removed. You right wingers have caused what you wanted to stop. And that is why you are the average American with poor education, a lack of US history, a lack of simple human interactions and everything else rational people have. Actually, your statement is unamerican. The heavily right-winged Teddy Rosevelt made a comment saying it was "unamerican not to question the government." Transalation of your comment: Anyone who disagrees with me, doesn't think that we should explore alternatives, and can think for themselves deserves death."

How exactly does killing arafat help the Isreali cause? The death of Arafat at the IDF's hands will become a huge beacon to the middle east. Thousands will come to help palestine evict Isreal from "palestine lands." (even though they should bring that up with Britain) You think they had it bad before? When they have thousands of recruits willing to sacrifice themselves every day, Isreal will fall. 365 bombings? Conservatives and their inability to see anything beyond the propaganda of their country. Millions of people don't fly to a living leader. Millions gather around the fires of the memories of a martyr. Does that mean that killing him and igniting the fires with pure hydrogen is better?

List Of Bush's "Atrocities" Yes, they are all proven. It's pretty funny.

You've Got To Be Joking Are they serious? That would be worse then simply exileing him. A martyr, exile or a prisoner in his own land? I pick prisoner....

Getting back to this. Deranged because I don't think of myself on a higher plane of existance then the rest of the creatures we share 98-99.9% of our DNA with? Humans are animals by definition. Unless you'd like to say that language is wrong, and humans are some sort of insect or different classification. Plant Kingdom? Fungi? Protoza? The very nature of Humans is of arrogance and greed. People, not wanting to see themselves as "primitive" like apes, want to think of themselves on a higher level. One granted with God given rights. Humans have no rights. Basic rights do not exist anywhere but in the mind of arrogant humans. The three inalieable rights of humans are lies, well, two are and the other is a mere fact of life. I pity you if you think you are better then the rest of the life on the planet. We all evolved from the same thing. Does that make us better? Or simply luckier? Self-loathing? Or comming to terms with the things most people hate to think about because they transcend their current level of thought? Actually, it's just the strongest being who places the rules that are adventageous to himself. That's if you believe in Thraysmacus's definition of Justice. Whether or not people follow rules out of inner belief, or fear of death, they are still being ruled by the stronger. How does that differ from the many humans who commit the same acts? Are you sure they cannot consider? have you spoken to one recently? (sorry true skepticism is taking hold) Even though we have our differences, other animals have large difference too, but we still consider them animals. I bet my school is better then your's. I bet my schools' faculty has earned far more awards then your faculty has. I bet my school has sent more kids to ivys then your's. (unless you go to exeter or andover, but I highly doubt that). In 4 years, 114 kids have went to Ivys. Can you match that? Commuist? If that was so, why does the nation's leading education services constantly award presitgious recognizition to teachers at my school? Why does the name, when brought up thousands of miles away, instantly command respect from the educated? Why is my school in the top 10 high schools in the nation? If you're going to insult my on my education, you should know at least a bit about it. Just to poke more holes in your arugment, there are lot of right-wing moderates teaching with disctintion at my campus. So thus, under your logic, right-wingers are communists? Go Here If You Think I'm Lying

Communist? Doubtful. Morals? What morals exist today? Ethics? Laughable. Laws, perhaps, but on the basis of punishment, the way animals learn not to do something. Are you saying Humans aren't animals? Just because we are at the top of the current evolution scale does not mean we are not animals. ....Humans do this ALl the time. There is no difference. We share 98.9% of our DNA with STARFISH. 99.9% with chimps. Does that .1% make us moral agents?

More people for Craig to Kill!!! That's a great way to write any and all opposition. If they don't hold your opinion, they they are wrong and immoral! I guess these people fall under immoral and wrong eh? Another Immoral and wrong site, because right-wings are ALWAYS RIGHT NO MATTER WHAT! All False Right? Kill ALL NON-RIGHT-WINGERS!!!! More Bad people! What? This was brit site, it can't be right! More lies eh Craig? Why believe this, leftist are never right in anything beacuse I say so! Can you disprove that this will happen? Many US companies would LOVE to do what I have described.

Actually, with a intersting talk with my friend about your views, i'v come to the same conclusion. 3rd world countries should have free trade on everything. That way, the 1st world can sell goods at under market costs. Destroy 3rd world industies. Make the people depenent on their goods. Then slow start to take over the political scenes via loans and heavy handed economic threats. Then because of their lack of ability to pay back the loans, we can confiscate their lands and all their goods. Then we can sell their people into slavery, make ourselves even richer. After that, we sell whatever remaining goods they have left, increasing our bottom line. After we have completely ravaged their land, exploiting all the natural resources, we can then make their lands chemical dumping grounds, saving costs on enviromental clean ups. FREE TRADE IN ALL 3rd world countries! I like being a right-winger for a few minutes.

How exactly do countries with weak industries compete with countries that can pour out huge amounts of goods with little cost? There will be astronomical trade deficits. The 3rd world countries will be forced to take huge loans from the corrupt IMF, on top of loans they can barely pay off now. Inflation will be rampant. Economies will collapse. This is what you want? How can a country compete when goods from other countries come flooding in like the tide, and the original country cannot even break even at the same prices? What you propose in the economic collapse of many of the third world countries. Do you understand how world economic works? Do you understand the current situation in 3rd world argiculture competing with the bread basket of the US?

You cannot win a war aganist a concept. Not exactly. If the US pulled out of Saudia Arabia after desert shield, probably none of this would be happening. That would have been the easiest, cheapest, most efficent way to stop this war. However, that is never the path the US takes. If we really wanted to help people, we would have freed Iran. They live under far worse rulers. However, they have less oil. *shame on the US* Coalition of the bribed, and extorted? However, we are creating more then we are removing. Kill one, three appear. you WILL LOSE. What are you talking about? Since when did US interest and right thing ever meet?

without tarrifs, the first world would destroy the economies of the third world. Look at the current protest aganist the WTO on the subsidaries France, US, Germany, britain and other first world countries give to their farmers. The third world cannot compete with government handouts, even WITH tarrifs. If this is your way to conquesting countries without armies, it would work. Is it ethnical to starve millions of farmers in your pursuit of the bottom line?

Let's have some fun with polls and pollers from across the world. Has bush lied about WMD? Americans' informed, don't make me laugh Idiot Americans have no idea about China's strength Alright, I'm with the right-wing here. Once. Ties to corporate scandals? I think so! Majority of these voters are non-americans Pro-bush? hardly. International pollers are far more intelligent More Bush bashing!

Socialist? Can you prove this? Simpleton? Such as the right-wing, KILL THEM ALL NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE BECAUSE THEY DISAGREE? If anything, you are the simpleton. I see the complexities in deal with the rest of the world. The right-wing would rather just shove everything aside and abandon all finesse. Thus, because I don't hold that view I am a simpleton? The US is stupid? The country itself has no intelligence. The people yes. However, stupid being relative requires a comparison. US public tests scores from k-12 cannot even compare to the counterpart test scores from Europe and Asia. When asked to find Isreal, Afganistan and Iraq, the majority of the average americans cannot even find it on a map. Jay leno have fun with this, going out on the streets of New York, 8 out of 10 Americans did not even know their own pledge of allegiance. Many creationists in America believe that "christian science" lol, works in tandem with physics and chemistry. Now please tell me how intelligent, informed people do such things. The average american is a babbling idiot. The few intelligent Americans are outnumbered by ignorant, arrogant fools. International force? Such as bribery and extortion? The coalition of the willing should be renamed, coalition of the bribed the cocered. The US's self-interest got itself into this mess. It's certainly not going to get it out. Moral vision? When someone bombs a city, it's called terrorism, when the US does it, it's called "moral clarity." When people kill civilians, it's called terrorism. When the US does is, it's called colateral damage. When a Arab or a Muslim fights for this freedom, it's automatically called terrorism (i've spoken with Palestines, Iranians, UAE, and one Iraqi, they all agree), when America does it to subjugate an area for its own self interest, its called freedom fighting. Bush's moral vision was to move the scrutiny from the economy, to a war. Not liberate people. If that was true, we would have done to the Iranian people. They plight is far worse than the Iraqi peoples'. But they have less oil. HMMMMMMMMM.

Equal in your opinion or equal in their opinion? Who's opinion is correct and why? However, you still haven't answered who gave you the right to decide what is right and wrong. Bull. Humans have no rights. We are animals. Do animals have any rights in the wild? "Rights" are man's pathetic attempt to make him seem better than the rest of the world's creatures. Now, before you talk about life, liberty and the pursuit of happines, i'll cut you off before you even start. Life? Does a man drowning in the middle of the Pacific have a right to life? Does the ocean observe his right to life? Liberty? Liberty is never free. It must be paid in blood. How does paying for something make it free? Pursuit of happiness is not a right. It is a simple fact of life. Everything has the ability to pursue happiness. Whether or not the find it is irrevelant, a rat to a blue whale can pursue happiness.

My question is: Who gets to decide what is right and wrong and who gave you that right?

Let's have a clear definition before we keep aruging. (usually it's good to define the term you're argumening over) Main Entry: cap·i·tal·ism Pronunciation: 'ka-p&-t&l-"iz-&m, 'kap-t&l-, British also k&-'pi-t&l- Function: noun Date: 1877 : an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market How does one lower prices in capitalistic way of business? Often by cutting workers, "illegal" dumping, tax evasion, sweat shops, fuzzy math, bribing officials.... Ask Nike, Enron, many Chemical and oil companies... they are perfect examples of capitalism as a unethical practice. However, capitalism is neither ethnically correct or ethnically incorrect. We are both wrong. It is simply a system. Communism is a perfect example. True communism under a beneficial leader would make life better for the whole. Soviet communism, well, we all know where that went. It is how the system is manipulated that defines how it looks on a society. Capitalism under the pre-regulation and pre-major business law America was unethical. Dangerous working conditions, unheathy working hours, massive eradication of wild species, low wages for hard work, bad sanitation, and lots of swindling. However, today's unethical capitalism is still rampant. One story is of a chemical plant. A breach in a container contamineted a batch of ethylene. Instead of containing and moving it for proper care, the plant simply let it burn. The huge flame blelched huge amounts of smoke visible for hours in the Dallas sky. The amount of contamiants released that day was more than the city's cars pollution output for a month. It was simply easier to harm the population then spend the money to properly dispose of the waste material. Was this legal? Yes, due to the huge amounts of money that the chemical companies poured into one Texas's governer's election fund. He pushed for weak pro-enviromental laws. Another story: Eletric companies, large donators to the Bush adminstration's election funds no longer have to install cleaning scrubbers on their stacks if renovations cost less than 20% of the plant's worth. The clean air act is being tossed out the window via the Bush Adminstration in favor of the chemical and eletric companies. favors for friends ream the general public. I'd rather spend more money on electricity then breath huge amounts of contaiments and die 20 years earlier. Not to mention medical bills for respirotory problems. Medical costs will skyrocket, as well as insurance. There are stories like this all over the world via capitalistic companies. The system itself has no moral or ethical leaning.

if any of it was true, why aren't we all behind bush on WMD and Saddam-Al queda Links?? If any of it was true, no one would be contesting the evidence. Obviously, since none of that is happening, the evidence MUST be far less concrete then the right-wingers like to pass it off to be. Blair is a different story, he's actually useful to the world. The EU needs him for his vision. Bush on the other hand....

Jealousy. What a simple answer to such a complex answer. if only it was so easy.

but nevertheless, it's a nice thought

of course. Powell is my favorite politican in that Adminstration. And I like his doctrine of war, makes sense. However, the point was to show that America is not innocent.