Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JPR who wrote (6232)	9/2/1999 4:18:00 PM
From: Mohan Marette	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12475

On Particle Physics and International Politics. Ban on Indian Scientists Harms USA Too, American Conference on Scientific Freedom Is Told An excerpt from a speech Dr Paul D Grannis delivered at a scientific conference on scientific freedom and national security in Washington on Tuesday, August 31. It was organized by the American Association for Advancement of Science. ............................. "In a wider sense, such restrictions are antithetical to the conduct of open scientific inquiry and the search for fundamental knowledge, as developed over the past hundred years by the United States and other nations. We know of no precedent for limiting the participation in basic, non-security-related scientific experimentation, or in the diffusion of knowledge that derives from it. We believe that attempts to restrict such basic science collaborations as an adjunct to political and security considerations are counterproductive, are demeaning to the image of a free and progressive society, and are ineffectual as a diplomatic tool. They damage the United States's ability to participate in worldwide scientific activities.".... 216.32.165.70

To: JPR who wrote (6232)	9/2/1999 6:43:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Respond to of 12475

Eating non-vegetarian food invokes 'dirty dreams'. Pritish Nandy of the Shiv Sena once wrote some nonsense (which, I guess, makes him a "literate saffron-langot bigot") about how the killing of stray dogs will make people violent towards other people. The idiot got ROYALLY RAMMED by the following response : It seems Mr Nandy cannot distinguish between people and other animals, nor between humane and inhumane ways of animal control. (http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/aug/19nandy.htm) Public policy, however, can and must make both distinctions Surely it is far more sensible and humane to spend government money on sterilisation programs than on killing programmes. Surely there are humane and inhumane ways to end the life of stray dogs. And surely dogs that are not strays but pets of poor families should not be taken away and killed. But to say that all culling of stray dogs is monstrous violence that is bound to rebound and promote a violent mindset among people is nonsense. If Mr Nandy actually believes that, he is nuts. People all over the world kill and eat various animals without killing and eating people! We are capable of drawing distinctions, and violence against animals does not necessarily produce violence against people. Conversely, Hindu prohibition on killing animals has never stopped ostensibly devout Hindus from killing people! India's long history of communal violence proves that beyond doubt. So if Bombay needs to destroy stray dogs -- not family pets, but strays -- then let it do so, but humanely. Further let India think of those strays as a potential source of income. Some of India's neighbours eat dogs. Perhaps India can kill strays humanely and butcher them for refrigerated transport to meat markets in its neighbouring countries. The profits could be used for sterilisation programs for unwanted animals throughout India.