To: geode00 who wrote (148954 ) 12/3/2008 3:43:50 PM From: one_less Respond to of 173976 Nonsense ... now you are beyond stupid and are just foolishly making up false allegations, probably to provoke the decent posters who read this thread but who knows what insideous purposes you harbor. It is certainly, however, a childish way to get attention, assuming you are a grown up. I have posted plenty on terrorism and nothing close to your attributions. ============= For example (quoting self): "A terrorist is a person who intends to harm innocents in order to bring a negative effect on his enemy. A terrorist group encourages some or all of its members to use this strategy. The strategy works when you let it. Terrorist events disorient societies by spreading fear among friends, families, or similar others who could be targeted. The fear is exacerbated by the fact that we have no way of knowing who will be hit, by whom, how it will occur, when or where to expect the attack. When the terrorist is ghost like it adds to the scary effect through fear, suspicion, disorientation, etc. The cumulative effect of not knowing the source or where or when it will surface, but that the event could be devastating, is a paranoid psychosis that is contagious. The worst thing we could do is to act out our paranoid psychosis by attacking innocents who look like the ghosts. The smartest thing we could do would be to bring the innocents into our circle by declaring the terrorists to be a common enemy. So only the ghost like terrorists remain on the outside, then they have no place to hide and their camouflage becomes transparent. Terrorist is the perfect word for what they do. Who they are affiliated with by history, culture, ethnicity, or demographic is irrelevant except as a means to gather intel." ======= and ======= "Global society has evolved. When Western thinkers began establishing Nation States, it was believed the state was not greater than the individual, but they neglected to consider the predicament of individuals who are not members of our/their particular state, so they dismissed the thought. They dealt with it this way... Individuals or political entities outside the geographical borders of a state were alien with regards to the interests of a state and its members. As the world has been shrinking, there is no longer an ‘over there;’ at least in the sense we once used that term. Cultures have clashed, blended and meshed. Now we are more inclined to consider membership in the human family regardless of geographical circumstance. An easy question in the past now gives you pause. For example: What, among modern thinkers, would we say makes an American person’s life more precious than someone as remote as a Fiji Islander? The answer is 'nothing' but we'd probably prefer not discuss it at all. Nation states no longer represent secure and sovereign culture. In modern times we need to reconsider the plight of individuals in the world. We need to consider the individual in light of powerful government entities in the world and ask the question, “Is any government or are all government entities put together more important than the individual liberties and freedom of one individual on the planet?” If the answer to that question is yes, then you have justification for a terrorist act or torture against innocents to further your government entity’s political agenda. If the answer to that question is no, then you have justification for opposing any government entity or agenda that denies individual liberty, or the autonomy of a group of individuals. There is no middle ground, or other grounds, left for responsible people. no islands, no colonies, no foreign interests, no where, no place, no excuse."