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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (219882)	2/20/2007 10:20:56 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

FrontLine has a good series they are running on PBS right now... News War: Secrets, Sources & Spin pbs.org

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (219882)	2/20/2007 11:44:47 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

Mary, my reasoning and data are impeccable. I note you don't point out anything wrong with them. And, you misunderstood my comment about what attracts women. Somebody else made the claim about women attracted to violent gangsta types. Mine was about "strong" men. I didn't mention that they are violent in an other than approved way when they are attracting women [such as being a big-deal sports star]. I believe the research which says women like considerate, polite, intelligent, muscular with good looks further down the list of desirable attributes than men mention for women. Being violent does NOT rate anywhere near the top, or even on the list for women. Not that I can remember. But by selecting charming OJ Simpson types, they get the knife in the throat when the chips are down and the pressure comes down and the animal instincts are turned loose. <Could women be attracted to OJ for possibly a number of other reasons like he was an outstanding athlete, a famous television star, a multi-millionaire, and lived in a fabulous house in a very exclusive neighborhood? > Assuming OJ was [is] as attractive as we are presuming by using him as an example, my guess is that his apparent charm, good manners, likes children, are important aspects at the top of that list. His violence is part of the package - he didn't get to be a top grid iron player by being a pacifist. Women, whose primary job in life is sorting the wheat from the chaff in males, do a bad job a lot of the time. They should be fired! Unfortunately, these days, in the welfare statist countries, those useless women are REWARDED and preferred as breeding stock by governments and those women choose males who will perpetuate the attempted reversal of nature with their offspring, [which will fail, causing a LOT of suffering in the process]. You can tell that there have been, over umpty thousand years, women attracted to violent men. Men have ensured their choice is limited by the survivors of male vs male violence being successfully violent, but women for the most part do the choosing of spouse. With contraception, synergistic wealth creation instead of found wealth conquest, and voluntary relationships rather than genocidal male vs male conquest [resulting in Genghis Khan being vastly reproductive], the world is undergoing an amazing transformation. Only 150 years ago in NZ, Maoris conducted cannibalistic genocidal conquest of other tribes. Now, there isn't much call anywhere on Earth for tribally genocidal conquests [Rwanda and a few other genocides in the 20th century notwithstanding]. There are stupendously vast transitions afoot, including the biggest of all, the levitation of consciousness out of the biosphere into the telecosmic realm. Genetic engineering and eugenics will be getting a big turbocharging too. Eugenics never went out of fashion, just the word and who did the deciding on who does the breeding. Adolf and co tried to be in charge for a while, but the decisions have reverted back to women, who have continued eugenics programmes with great enthusiasm. Mqurice