RoR: Forum

Celeste, thanks for posting this. George Cordero wrote an article around this topic and that discussion got hijacked.

People are not talking about this very much. I think a major U.S. city will get blown apart with a dirty nuke and then all hell will break loose. Maybe that will wake people up (apparently 9/11 wasn't big enough). Hopefully it won't be too late.

The rosier scenario is that the whole thing is a big game. Our government knows exactly what bin Laden and his crew are capable of and they are watching his every move. That for some unknown reason they like having bin Laden around. So this guy Kroft interviewed is just a nuisance for the government because he thinks he knows but really he knows nothing. No, I don't believe that but it wouldn't shock me if certain government people know more than we do.

Post 1

Monday, August 22, 2005 - 11:22pm

As to the interview itself, there is the typical attitude that "what! you mean you'd really consider killing an Arab prince?!?!?!!!! Are my ears deceiving me?!!!?"

That's the attitude that convinces me that I'm a space alien. The guy says plainly, "Hell yeah I'd take the prince out in heartbeat" and he is painted as a weirdo for it. America is becoming a country run by the wusses. All the politically correct/feminist/kinder gentler bullshit has pushed the tough guys out of the mix. I'm not sure this country can fight a real war any longer. They weren't allowed to fight Vietnam and the wusses are in much higher positions of power today than they were in the 60's and early 70's.

Post 2

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:23am

Well, this country is also significantly owned by Saudi oil money... particularly the media. There is a powerful organization called CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) that has this entire country under its litigious boot, if ever anything less than positive is ever said about Islam in any way.

In Australia, they have even created legislation making it illegal for anyone to say anything derogatory about Islam in any way.

Post 3

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 5:52am

Celeste has mention CAIR. Robert Bidinotto edited an article about them for Capital Research right before he left to come to work at The Objectivist Center. The article is by Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chada. The article is very detailed and most illuminating. Here is a link.

http://www.capitalresearch.org/news/news.asp?ID=331&t=6

Bill

Post 4

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 8:12am

Bill,

Yes... CAIR is most definitely a huge issue. Thank you so much for posting that link.

Post 5

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 9:53am

Celeste Norcross wrote: "Well, this country is also significantly owned by Saudi oil money... particularly the media. There is a powerful organization called CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) that has this entire country under its litigious boot, if ever anything less than positive is ever said about Islam in any way."

I was going to be clever and sarcastic about how the real enemy used to be the Anti-Defamation League and the Communists and the Bidlerbergers with their Council on Foreign Relations and before them the Catholics and the Masons and before them the Jacobins and the Tories. I was going to make a clever quip about this Christian cleric who advocates killing: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robertson.chavez/index.html

Instead, I will just leave the above as a warning (and a celebration) that life is complicated.

"How can we account for our present situation unless we believe that men high in this government are concerting to deliver us to disaster? This must be the product of a great conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any previous such venture in the history of man. A conspiracy of infamy so black that, which it is finally exposed, its principals shall be forever deserving of the maledictions of all honest men.�What can be made of this unbroken series of decisions and acts contributing to the strategy of defeat? They cannot be attributed to incompetence.�The laws of probability would dictate that part of�[the] decisions would serve the country�s interest." Sen. Joseph McCarthy, quote in The Paranoid Style in American Politics, by Richard Hofstadter. Reviews:
http://www.nationalism.org/patranoia/hofstadter-paranoid-style.htm
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/HOFPAX.html
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/304kwnat.asp

I am neither surprised nor appalled that terrorists have been affiliated with CAIR. Remember that the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was blown up by right wing superpatriots. It would be very easy to show links between the Aryan Christian fanatics and the Objectivists through the Libertarians and the Republican Party.

The empirical fact is that the statistical distribution of personalities places sociopaths in every large group.

Post 6

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 11:00am

You need to learn something about Muslims. If you think reading the Koran is knowing anything think again. Unless you know the hadith you don't know Islam.

Post 7

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 11:13am

The empirical fact is that sociopaths are much more attracted to certain groups than others, because the "value" systems of certain groups are much more sociopathic than other groups.

Waste your typing energy, Michael. I'm not buying it... though your slick salesmanship is eerily impressive.

Post 8

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 11:16am

Robert,

That may just be the smartest post I've seen in months. You must read the Hadith to know what Islam really has in store for the entire human race.

Post 9

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 11:58am

Celeste,

Who are you? Looking over your posts, you've hardly mentioned a thing about yourself. Is there a real person in there or are you just a proselytizing machine? Maybe people would be more sympathetic to your words if they knew something about you, other than that you're extremely cynical.

Sarah

Post 10

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:46pm

Sarah,

Anyone who places my personal details as highly, or higher, than the content of my comments is nobody whose "respect" I want anyway. And if that includes you -- which apparently it does -- then so be it.

And since I haven't divulged any gossipy tid-bits about me, then by your logic there must not be any "real person" "in here"... so I guess since the only other stated option you gave is the false option of my being a "proselytizing mechine", then that must be what I am.

*beep, clank, whirrrrr, click*

(Edited by Celeste Norcross on 8/23, 12:56pm)

Post 11

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:03pm

Celeste,

You've got a nice habit of reading into things don't you. I'm not saying that personal details are more important than content, but they can influence others' reactions to you. Pounding away on a single topic can wear anyone's patience and if you're just a name on a screen there's less motivation to listen.

As for respect, yes the person matters to me. Perhaps even more so than content. I'm willing to befriend a person holding a philosophy I despise if that person shares my "sense of life." The people of SOLO are more important to me than the ideas when it comes to my participation. If everyone here was an ass I'd have no reason to stick around. As it is, only most people here are asses, so here I am. :)

Sarah

Post 12

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:05pm

Celeste,

You certainly missed the sense of humor programming. Perhaps it will come in v. 2.0?

Sarah

Post 13

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:10pm

As for respect, yes the person matters to me. Perhaps even more so than content. I'm willing to befriend a person holding a philosophy I despise if that person shares my "sense of life."

My posts reveal my "sense of life" clearly enough.

My "sense of life" is that I'm not wearing a burka, ever. My "sense of life" is that I'm going to get a world that doesn't revolve around the worship of childish cruelties and noble, camouflaging pretenses, or die trying.

Beyond that, I don't like to mix much... and I fight like a savage to protect that right. Whether you or anyone else likes it or not.

Post 14

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:15pm

You certainly missed the sense of humor programming. Perhaps it will come in v. 2.0?

A sense of humor is a luxury for those who feel sufficiently safe. As our reality is not currently a remotely safe one, why you're pushing humor over the dissemination of important truths, and the taking of those truths seriously, is troubling.

Post 15

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:17pm

Sarah said:

Celeste,

You've got a nice habit of reading into things don't you.

Sarah, you nailed it. Celeste seems to have a reading comprehension problem. But that in itself is not the real problem. It's here attitude; she's just plain nasty.

But, the final straw for me is when she said of something that Robert Davison wrote:

That may just be the smartest post I've seen in months.

That's it for me; one more fool I refuse to suffer.

Glenn

Post 16

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:22pm

Celeste,

Fair enough, but you may want to stop blaming everyone else for you acting in a... less than hospitable manner.

Sarah

Post 17

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:29pm

It's strange how Glenn can point out that I said this to Robert Davison:

That may just be the smartest post I've seen in months.

which is obviously an example of my being quite complimentary and nice,

while at the same time saying this about me:

But that in itself is not the real problem. It's here attitude; she's just plain nasty.

How can he say that my attitude is "just plain nasty" in one post, when he himself points out in that very same post that I've given a huge compliment to someone?

How can an honest person say that someone can be nasty and not nasty, in the same post?

The only truthful way to reconcile that contradiction is to conclude that he is not honest.

Glenn, I'm quite nice to those with integrity. Don't believe me? Try me.

Post 18

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:33pm

you may want to stop blaming everyone else for you acting in a... less than hospitable manner.

And you might want to stop re-writing history so you can blame me for causing this all.

I had never heard of you, before your first untruthful and rude posts to me. Is this some kind of hazing process I'm supposed to tolerate and not defend myself against?

As I said before, I'm not here to be part of some Greek fraternity or sorority hazing process. I would not have expected an Objectivist site to employ such tactics.

Post 19

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:33pm