Readers’ Responses to Our Question (100)

Payday loan
[url=http://groups.msn.com/bestpaydayloan/]payday loan[/url]

PORQUE OS JUROS ALTOS NÃO SÃO ANALISADOS PELA IMPRENSA ?

Como é impressionante a omissão da imprensa em relação aos juros pagos ou a pagar anualmente pelo tesouro nacional e que consomem mais de 7% do nosso PIB E QUE CORRESPONDE AO MONTANTE DE TODAS AS RECEITAS DAS EXPORTAÇÕES FEITAS PELO BRASIL, EM 2007.

Até nos comentários , em linguagem bem tecnocratica, tentam confundir os brasileiros, mostrando que juros altos é uma decorrência do aumento nos gastos do governo com Aposentadorias e com o funcionalismo públco. O que não é verdade. A verdade, quem ninguem quer mostrar,são os juros pagos pelo governo e que estão em patamares da irracionalidade ou de qualquer justificativa honesta. E o que mais preocupa é o Vice Presidente da república, Dr José Alencar, em entrevista, considerar o governo impotente para tomar a decisão de redução na taxa selic. O país não elegeu banqueiro para priorizar a utilização das receitas do Tesouro,em pagamento de abusivos juros. A falta dessa providencia que estimula a especulação financeira, está custando ao país (ao povo)um custo de mais de 60 bilhões de reais anuais e com uma série de privilégios. Se o governo não pode determinar as reduções nas taxas de juros, quem afinal tem poderes para materializar essa providencia ?. Não tem outra resposta, só mesmo o Chefe Supremo da Nação. O Estado, cujo poder emana do Povo, é maior do que qualquer cartel financeiro nacional e internacional.

Sobre os gastos com pessoal e com os benefícios do INSS, não existe anormalidade, levando-se em consideração que durante décadas o Governo se dedicou a avalizar a concentração de riquesas, ampliando a pobreza e a indigência em nosso país.

Os gastos da previdencia, praticamente empatam com os gastos na rubrica de juros, em relação ao PIB ( 7%). Só q os juros estão beneficiando uma minoria de especuladores, que só concentra riquesas, enquanto as despesas c/ a previdencia atendem direta e indiretamente às necessidades mínimas de mais de 30 milhões de brasileiros que alavancam a produção, o emprego, a renda e o consumo. E as receitas da previdencia estão praticamente empatando com as despesas, além da sua indiscutível e imensurável dimensão social.

E quanto aos gastos com pessoal , indispensáveis para o funcionamento da máquina burocrática do Estado e que consume 4,5% do PIB, esses recursos tem ainda a vantagem de ser colocado em circulação e movimentação da economia, gerando mais produção, empregos, renda e consumo. Antes não havia transparencia maior para esses gastos que eram camuflados através das Ongs e das terceirizações irresponsáveis que acarretavam clientelismo e corrupção.

Tentam, sempre, nos comparar com outros países e economias da america latina , sempre nos nivelando propositalmente por baixo, com relação às despesas públicas , esquecendo as peculiaridades de cada país e que devem ter uma infinidade de camuflagem em suas contas e nas execuções orçamentárias. É bem melhor encararmos as nossas verdades do que ficarmos sempre mirando na realidade e nos exemplos dos outros, para acobertar ou justificar os erros que cometemos.

Ainda sobre a comparação do Brasil com outras nações de primeiro mundo e da america latina, porque não identificar, nas matérias jornalisticas, os ágios que esses países pagam acima da inflação para a rolagem de suas dívidas.

E os recursos que aquí estão faltando para a melhoria na educação, na saúde, no saneamento básico, nos transportes urbanos de qualidade, na construção de ferroviais de norte a sul, leste e oeste, para atender um desenvolvimento nacional sustentável, não é culpa que querem transferir para os gastos com Pessoal ou com os benefícios pagos pelo INSS, MAS A CULPA É DOS PAGAMENTOS DE JUROS ANUAIS, OS MAIS CAROS DO MUNDO, para a rolegem de nossa dívida.

Não precisa ser matemático para mostrar essa verdade. Com um Superávit Primário que pode chegar a 4,2% do PIB, algo em torno de 100 bilhões de reais, esse montante não será suficiente para pagar os juros devidos pelo Tesouro Nacional em 2007. Faltarão ainda mais de 60 bilhões de reais para o pagamento desses encargos financeiros . E esses recursos, por falta de disponibilidade do Tesouro serão automaticamente acrescentados à nossa divida interna e externa e o país continuará pagando juros sobre juros. E ainda não sabemos em quanto monta a dívida do Banco Central que será assumida pelo povo, através do Tesouro Nacional.

Portanto, faltam informações completas e sinceras sobre os prejuízos que os juros estão causando ao Brasil.

E hoje, primeiro de janeiro, a imprensa já começa a dar vasão às sugestões dos palpiteiros sobre a Bovespa e sobre o aumento da inflação, sem nenhuma fundamentação científica, racional e real. Compete, nesse momento, como medida preventiva, a CVM agilizar uma varredura nas contas ativas e passivas de todas as empresas ( não são muitas) que tem os seus papéis negociados em Bolsa, para dar transparencia absoluta aos investidores. As Contas Ativas e Passivas desses empresas de capital aberto poderiam ser compulsoriamente disponibilizadas na Internet, sem as maquiagens,mas com informações contábeis reais e o histórico de suas vidas nos ultimos cinco anos.

No entanto, devemos reconhecer que a sensibilidade do presidente da República, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, para viabilizar e concretizar os programas sociais de Governo, teve o mérito do crescimento do PIB, da estabilidade inflacionária e da melhor distribuição das riquesas produzidas pelo País, reduzindo sensivelmente a indigência e a pobreza e ampliando a classe C. O Ano de 2008 será bem melhor do que foi 2007, se o presidente da república fizer uma reflexão bem profunda sobre os males que a selic está causando ao Povo Brasileiro e para a materialização de projetos prioritários.E sabemos que o presidente está ao lado do POVO e basta agir na sua defesa, como sempre o fez.

PORQUE OS JUROS ALTOS NÃO SÃO ANALISADOS PELA IMPRENSA ?

Como é impressionante a omissão da imprensa em relação aos juros pagos ou a pagar anualmente pelo tesouro nacional e que consomem mais de 7% do nosso PIB E QUE CORRESPONDE AO MONTANTE DE TODAS AS RECEITAS DAS EXPORTAÇÕES FEITAS PELO BRASIL, EM 2007.

Até nos comentários , em linguagem bem tecnocratica, tentam confundir os brasileiros, mostrando que juros altos é uma decorrência do aumento nos gastos do governo com Aposentadorias e com o funcionalismo públco. O que não é verdade. A verdade, quem ninguem quer mostrar,são os juros pagos pelo governo e que estão em patamares da irracionalidade ou de qualquer justificativa honesta. E o que mais preocupa é o Vice Presidente da república, Dr José Alencar, em entrevista, considerar o governo impotente para tomar a decisão de redução na taxa selic. O país não elegeu banqueiro para priorizar a utilização das receitas do Tesouro,em pagamento de abusivos juros. A falta dessa providencia que estimula a especulação financeira, está custando ao país (ao povo)um custo de mais de 60 bilhões de reais anuais e com uma série de privilégios. Se o governo não pode determinar as reduções nas taxas de juros, quem afinal tem poderes para materializar essa providencia ?. Não tem outra resposta, só mesmo o Chefe Supremo da Nação. O Estado, cujo poder emana do Povo, é maior do que qualquer cartel financeiro nacional e internacional.

Sobre os gastos com pessoal e com os benefícios do INSS, não existe anormalidade, levando-se em consideração que durante décadas o Governo se dedicou a avalizar a concentração de riquesas, ampliando a pobreza e a indigência em nosso país.

Os gastos da previdencia, praticamente empatam com os gastos na rubrica de juros, em relação ao PIB ( 7%). Só q os juros estão beneficiando uma minoria de especuladores, que só concentra riquesas, enquanto as despesas c/ a previdencia atendem direta e indiretamente às necessidades mínimas de mais de 30 milhões de brasileiros que alavancam a produção, o emprego, a renda e o consumo. E as receitas da previdencia estão praticamente empatando com as despesas, além da sua indiscutível e imensurável dimensão social.

E quanto aos gastos com pessoal , indispensáveis para o funcionamento da máquina burocrática do Estado e que consume 4,5% do PIB, esses recursos tem ainda a vantagem de ser colocado em circulação e movimentação da economia, gerando mais produção, empregos, renda e consumo. Antes não havia transparencia maior para esses gastos que eram camuflados através das Ongs e das terceirizações irresponsáveis que acarretavam clientelismo e corrupção.

Tentam, sempre, nos comparar com outros países e economias da america latina , sempre nos nivelando propositalmente por baixo, com relação às despesas públicas , esquecendo as peculiaridades de cada país e que devem ter uma infinidade de camuflagem em suas contas e nas execuções orçamentárias. É bem melhor encararmos as nossas verdades do que ficarmos sempre mirando na realidade e nos exemplos dos outros, para acobertar ou justificar os erros que cometemos.

Ainda sobre a comparação do Brasil com outras nações de primeiro mundo e da america latina, porque não identificar, nas matérias jornalisticas, os ágios que esses países pagam acima da inflação para a rolagem de suas dívidas.

E os recursos que aquí estão faltando para a melhoria na educação, na saúde, no saneamento básico, nos transportes urbanos de qualidade, na construção de ferroviais de norte a sul, leste e oeste, para atender um desenvolvimento nacional sustentável, não é culpa que querem transferir para os gastos com Pessoal ou com os benefícios pagos pelo INSS, MAS A CULPA É DOS PAGAMENTOS DE JUROS ANUAIS, OS MAIS CAROS DO MUNDO, para a rolegem de nossa dívida.

Não precisa ser matemático para mostrar essa verdade. Com um Superávit Primário que pode chegar a 4,2% do PIB, algo em torno de 100 bilhões de reais, esse montante não será suficiente para pagar os juros devidos pelo Tesouro Nacional em 2007. Faltarão ainda mais de 60 bilhões de reais para o pagamento desses encargos financeiros . E esses recursos, por falta de disponibilidade do Tesouro serão automaticamente acrescentados à nossa divida interna e externa e o país continuará pagando juros sobre juros. E ainda não sabemos em quanto monta a dívida do Banco Central que será assumida pelo povo, através do Tesouro Nacional.

Portanto, faltam informações completas e sinceras sobre os prejuízos que os juros estão causando ao Brasil.

E hoje, primeiro de janeiro, a imprensa já começa a dar vasão às sugestões dos palpiteiros sobre a Bovespa e sobre o aumento da inflação, sem nenhuma fundamentação científica, racional e real. Compete, nesse momento, como medida preventiva, a CVM agilizar uma varredura nas contas ativas e passivas de todas as empresas ( não são muitas) que tem os seus papéis negociados em Bolsa, para dar transparencia absoluta aos investidores. As Contas Ativas e Passivas desses empresas de capital aberto poderiam ser compulsoriamente disponibilizadas na Internet, sem as maquiagens,mas com informações contábeis reais e o histórico de suas vidas nos ultimos cinco anos.

No entanto, devemos reconhecer que a sensibilidade do presidente da República, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, para viabilizar e concretizar os programas sociais de Governo, teve o mérito do crescimento do PIB, da estabilidade inflacionária e da melhor distribuição das riquesas produzidas pelo País, reduzindo sensivelmente a indigência e a pobreza e ampliando a classe C. O Ano de 2008 será bem melhor do que foi 2007, se o presidente da república fizer uma reflexão bem profunda sobre os males que a selic está causando ao Povo Brasileiro e para a materialização de projetos prioritários.E sabemos que o presidente está ao lado do POVO e basta agir na sua defesa, como sempre o fez.

Ronald. Your kidding us right? Mormons exert complete control over Aramco? You must be a real idiot to believe that. I spent over 30 years living in Saudi Arabia working for Aramco, as a first hand source I can tell you that Mormons don't control anything over there, especially not Aramco. I lived in various Aramco comps and knew some of the mormons working for Aramco. Their group might have had 50 people including all their children. Where are you getting your facts??? Let me guess, The National Enquirer is probably your favorite newspaper. 10,000 mormons in Saudi Arabia is one of the most laughable claims I have ever heard.

Ronald. Your kidding us right? Mormons exert complete control over Aramco? You must be a real idiot to believe that. I spent over 30 years living in Saudi Arabia working for Aramco, as a first hand source I can tell you that Mormons don't control anything over there, esunds and knew of their church groups, they might havepecially not Aramco. I lived in various Aramco compo had 50 people including all their children. Where are you getting your facts??? Let me guess, The National Enquirer is probably your favorite newspaper. 10,000 mormons in Saudi Arabia is one of the most laughable claims I have ever heard.

sale@mp3.com

sale@mp3.com

Before buying generic viagra read this.
I've got new info about [url=http://us-viagra.us]generic viagra[/url] and share with you.

ehwrsla rylnhm jbxqtiu fyxrioupd kpld yxlvcukdp mycspbd

Winners.
First, the Military Industrial Complex in the USA is going gangbusters. Repairs, new toys for the boys, (read lots more bullets), etc. Fortunately for you workers in those companies (not those on H1B obviously) it appears that outsourcing ( read using exploited workers in China ) is not the "American way" when it comes to killing devices. Made in the USA still and loved by all your democratic friends in the ME, like Saudi Arabia.
Second, a larger disconnect between truth and acceptable discourses.
Third, the global demands for equality and universal jurisprudence.
Fourth, one world ecological understanding compared to flat earth, no limits to our life support system faithism.(Not a word, I know...)
Losers.
Unquestioning US cizitens. Power mongers that need unquestioning habituated responses, anyone reading milblogs, hmmm?
Controlled media as the only source of information.
Truth,duty,honour,respect,humility as automatic touchstones of good behaviour and an afterlife of quality.
Globally, it will be seen as a time of enforced unity as we run up against the limits of the environmental carrying capacity. This will include the USA because whether or not I can stomach your business parties of the centre and right, you still are 300 million of my fellow sufferers. We all live on one planet and even though the current UN building is on your land YOU ARE NOT EVERYBODY THAT COUNTS and WE DO NOT ALL THINK OF YOU AS OUR SAVIOURS and THIS IS THE LIGHT OF DEMOCRACY??
Unfortunately, global opinion of the USA today is about as low as it gets. Not even with Viet Nam (the American war it is called in that nation)has the stench of wrongness and hypocrisy so seeped from your collective actions. When will realization of the shame and danger of your Mammon-worshipping truth-hiding elite come home to you?

To Daniel
According to scientists, Homo sapiens cane into being about 40'000 years ago. From the very beginning, man never ceased to delve into the mystery of his origins, nature and the concept of death. Even in the most remote and solitary areas of the planet, it seems man has followed the same existential itinerary as his peers. In his quest to understand where he comes from, his purpose on earth and where he is going, man has been confronted by the mysteries of nature and the search for an explanation underlying the existence of a supernatural force. This force was immediately associated with a divinity taking on various forms and forging local acts of worship or celebration. Thus started the roots of religion.
The number of divinities that have followed each other since the existence of Homo sapiens demonstrates that no single undeniable truth has yet emerged. This does not prevent people from having an unshakable religious belief, a belief that is the cause of the inevitable clash between the various truths.
With the three monotheistic religions, and in spite of the fact that each declares that it is fundamental to love its neighbour, the 21st century is the scene of the worst clash of civilization. As long as each monotheistic religion will declare it holds the TRUTH, the clash will persist, as there cannot be three truths on the same subject..
In spite of the thousands of years of the influence of religion, history, education and access to information, humanity chose violence, individuality and the race to obtain money and power. The only true religion of man is THE RESPECT OF THE OTHER, whilst he will continue to ask himself the following questions :
ìWho am I?î ìWhere do I come from?î ìWhere am I going?î

daniel:

I understand what you are saying and agree with you many of your points. I must differ with you on the gerenal statement that scientists are NOT philosophers. (Many of philosophers have been scientists, and vice versa. Take any Greek philospher, for instance. In fact, that is why the doctoral degree is still called the "doctor of philosohpy"!) However, you must understand that a human does have limited capabilties and is evolving, as we communicate. (Our knowledge of almost anything and everything is increasing, by the day.) Hence, if you expect us to prove the operation of the universe, then you are expecting something that is EXTREMELY difficult, at this time. Will we ever be able to understand the replicate the birth of the universe? Perhaps, in the future. We seem to understand things based on logic, which is most often contaminated by conventional thinking. The issue is that whenever one proposes a "theory," there is always a counterargument to it. Ultimately, we decide which may be the "MOST LOGICAL" through a process of elimination. This understanding takes eons to develop in any creature.

As for religion, personally, I used to be a staunch agnostic(as a engineer/scientist/technologist) and an archconservative (if you can imagine these two paradoxical concepts' coexisting in oneself). However, as I aged (significantly, I must say), I have come to realize that we tend to ascribe and impute the "unknowns" to God and religion. I also realized that we tend to susbume everything that defies "logic" into something with a "religious" perspective, just to make sense of those concepts. Religions, I believe, started out as just a set of guidelines, within which we are expecetd to function and operate. In my opinion, these principles are borne out of the fundamental rule of CONSCIENCE, which is THE GOLDEN RULE. I believe that this is why this singular theme is echoed across ALL religions. Unfortunately, demagogues and religious fanatics have twisted and parlayed the religious teachings into something to benefit only just themselves (at the expense of others, I might add). That is a crying shame, indeed!

By the way, many of the practices (which we think are based on religious beliefs) are really based on "scientific observations" of the ancient and recent past. (I have tons of examples for these, but these would bore many of the readers to death!)

I will look up the OnFaith blog, also.

Ronald Lazar, Coquille, Oregon, USA:

Holy cow, are you making sweeping, not mention seemingly overarching, assertions against the Mormons and the Church of the Latter-Day Saints (LDS)! Do you have concrete evidence to support your comments?

LOSING, perhaps CNN...or maybe you can't fault a network on work of one of it's commentators. Wolf Blitzer just tried but failed to wrest former president Jimmy Carter to the ground...yelling repeated ly over his invited guest, because Carter's new book naming Palestinian Apartheid is, very critical of Israel. Blitzer wouldn't let him talk. Note that Blitzer has been an employee amd member of AIRPAC, the Israeli Lobby. Obviously unbiased on the subject.

...."the Mormons exert almost complete control over the Saudi oil company ARAMCO." ??? What idiocy are we expected to swallow here?

To Zoltan:

From the New York Times (editorial) this morning:

"...It is obvious why Turkey would want to join Europe?s wealthy club. But Europe and all of the West have a lot to gain as well. The prospect of membership is already encouraging Ankara to make needed political and economic reforms, although a lot more needs to be done. Turkey?s admission would be a strong sign that the West truly believes its claims of tolerance and respect for all religions.

As he left Istanbul, the pope said he hoped his visit would bring ?civilizations progressively closer.? The European Union should listen."

Do you believe Turkey should be a member of the EU? Should the standards set by the EU be altered to be more "inclusive"? Even the New York Times admits that "...alot more needs to be done". I would assume the Times is referring to human rights issues, especially women rights.

Mitt Romney's interest in becoming President should be examined closely in light of two facts: The first fact is the LDS Doctrine which states its goals are "to take over America and the world." The second fact is that Mormons already exert almost complete control over the Saudi Arabian oil company, ARMACO.

Although the State Department inexplicably attempts to keep secret the numbers of Mormons living in Saudi Arabia, the fact is that the Mormon Church has been in bed with the Saudis for decades, and exclusively run ARAMCO, both in S.A. and Texas. The actual number of Mormons and their families in Saudi Arabia is a whopping figure now around 10,000.

Romney's success in American politics can not be viewed outside the context of Mormon control of S.A. oil, his religion, and the LDS doctrine of American and global domination. Unlike other candidates with strong personal religious ties, Romney's religious views are also seeded in the LDS' alarming geopolitical goals. The Catholic church is not my cup of tea, but it does not declare itself openly - as does the LDS - to seek to "take over America and the world."

Comparisons, for example, to a Catholic candidate like JFK, fail, because the LDS states its world domination intentions in every action and doctrine of the LDS church. Romeny's highly charismatic approach should not make any American feel safer. The LDS has more financial power and political influence than any other religion in America, as well as Mormons currently acting as special counsels to the Saudi Arabian delegates to the United Nations, and the LDS control of the Office of Secretary of the Treasury more than once.

The LDS tentacles of influence and power inside the USA and globally can not and must not be either discounted or ignored. Vigilance of the LDS' is certainly the business of our press. Insidious charismatic re-branding of Mormons into the "LDS" reminds me of Kentucky FRIED Chicken when "fried foods" became a health concern, and re-branding itself as KFC. The re-branding "Mormon" into the more innocuous-sounding "LDS" does nothing but dress up a determined and dangerous predator in the fleece of a lamb. Romney is the LDS most prominent golden boy, and their great white hope to alleviate fears the LDS, of which many Americans are correctly dubious. Romney's discounting of his own religious views as not being important is a shallow and disingenuous misdirection: a ploy nobody should fall for.

Mitt Romney's interest in becoming President should be examined closely in light of two facts: The first fact is the LDS Doctrine which states its goals are "to take over America and the world." The second fact is that Mormons already exert almost complete control over the Saudi Arabian oil company, ARMACO.

Although the State Department inexplicably attempts to keep secret the numbers of Mormons living in Saudi Arabia, the fact is that the Mormon Church has been in bed with the Saudis for decades, and exclusively run ARAMCO, both in S.A. and Texas. The actual number of Mormons and their families in Saudi Arabia is a whopping figure now around 10,000.

Romney's success in American politics can not be viewed outside the context of Mormon control of S.A. oil, his religion, and the LDS doctrine of American and global domination. Unlike other candidates with strong personal religious ties, Romney's religious views are also seeded in the LDS' alarming geopolitical goals. The Catholic church is not my cup of tea, but it does not declare itself openly - as does the LDS - to seek to "take over America and the world."

Comparisons, for example, to a Catholic candidate like JFK, fail, because the LDS states its world domination intentions in every action and doctrine of the LDS church. Romeny's highly charismatic approach should not make any American feel safer. The LDS has more financial power and political influence than any other religion in America, as well as Mormons currently acting as special counsels to the Saudi Arabian delegates to the United Nations, and the LDS control of the Office of Secretary of the Treasury more than once.

The LDS tentacles of influence and power inside the USA and globally can not and must not be either discounted or ignored. Vigilance of the LDS' is certainly the business of our press. Insidious charismatic re-branding of Mormons into the "LDS" reminds me of Kentucky FRIED Chicken when "fried foods" became a health concern, and re-branding itself as KFC. The re-branding "Mormon" into the more innocuous-sounding "LDS" does nothing but dress up a determined and dangerous predator in the fleece of a lamb. Romney is the LDS most prominent golden boy, and their great white hope to alleviate fears the LDS, of which many Americans are correctly dubious. Romney's discounting of his own religious views as not being important is a shallow and disingenuous misdirection: a ploy nobody should fall for.

To Zoltan from Daniel.

In response to my piece you state that the mystery of life is a beauty to explore and not a problem to solve. That is a nonsensical statement unless of course you are a scientist who simultaneously believes in religion. In other words, you can afford this view if you are not agnostic or atheist. If you are the latter then all is up to man and you do not just blithely state that life is a beauty to explore. In fact you ardently try to solve because you believe that most probably you will be nothing otherwise...

My problem with science, to be exact,—and why I say scientists are devoid of philosophy—is because they indeed are concerned with how things operate (as you state in your piece) and not why, but they never have the courage to state that ideally man should get into position to replicate the birth of the universe as proof of understanding how it operates. Or another example, the taking of evolution as fact and strictly separating it from being based on God or some other intelligent design but then not calling for man to take his evolution into his own hands in an effort to get at deeper patterns in the randomness of life.

I state scientists have no philosophy because really they have no courage of really being scientists. They occupy something of a middle ground where they talk about not believing in God but then never really ask anything of man except maybe, as you state, exploring the mystery and not really attempting to solve it.

As for your attempt to divorce science from technology, and even worse, to act as if philosophy has a say in anything at all today, I find that totally dishonest. Everyone knows the scientific revolution has been a technological revolution like no other. There is a difference between the two, but they cannot be separated as you are trying to do. In fact, is there really a difference? Science wants to understand how, and what is technology other than a consequence of how? And what is the ideal of science other than replicating the birth of the universe as if putting the ultimate in technology into motion?

I think you need to rethink your position. I think scientists need to state clearly their philosophy because they themselves have tirelessly worked toward discrediting all other philosophy and have championed technology tirelessly as well. Today religion is in battle with itself (religions conflicting) and with science. Science cannot sneak about pretending other valid philosophies exist or that it is separate from technology. That last sentence is really all I needed to say...

To understand more of what I mean read the On Faith website here at washpost.com right next to postglobal (go to postglobal button on main site and see on faith next to it). On the last question on the Pope's visit to Turkey posted on on faith I just wrote to a guy named realist on the problems we are discussing. I am posted under my name Daniel (although there I cannot post with a small d as I do with my name here to distinguish myself from other Daniels).

I have decided to post on on faith occasionally for anyone interested in knowing about that..

I am not against science, but science had better be truly honest and an improvement on religion or I will defend religion against it.

daniel
daniel is realy asking some serious questions
1-questioning human morality ?
2-in an increasing technological world ,what will protect human
beings from the increasing technological traps?
3-uncertanity in religion.uncertanity in science .uncertanity in technolgy .uncertanity in securalism.where you get certanity from ?
4-what is morality ? what is the difference betwen morality and religion? where you get morality from?
5-what is the unique major difference between man and the machine,they both got the brain and they speak?
more power to humanbeings if they answer the above .

I have the utmost respect for David and Fareed's thoughts on a variety of issues. My main concern is not the answers that emanate but the questions that limit the thinking and encouage individuals to solidify their thoughts even more than before the question.
The events that caused the question are little understood and POWER even less. In my 77 years I have come to believe (A condition of extreme uncertainty) that the greatest power of mankind is in our ideas that discover truth and create harmony as without harmony we can understand little.
Consider some of the words above; Power, Belief, Truth, Harmony, Understanding and many not used such as Opinion, Intuition and the entire world of words. Playthings really to enable memory, abstractions and the like. But play is the fertile ground upon which mankind rests in our search for advancement and truth. Words are not the reality of our search but tools we use and we should be their master and not their slave. It is as critical to build our abstractions of language as it is for our scientific language. Who dares argue or have opinions with E=MC Squared?
If POWER is to be assesed beyond an electrical transformer or other aspects of science then its dimensions lead to the powerful forces that elevate man above other creatures and to our destruction as well.
There is a reason religious folks use a god as all POWERFUL and reasons why it has failed in today's horrible mess. America became powerful because of the philosophy of our founders, mostly brilliant ideationalists, and power of the future, unless we continue to destroy ourselves, rests in the concept of civilization that formed our nation and our continued growth in ideas leading to yet undiscovered truths.
Who in this world today could conceive and structure a form of government of such harmony and beauty? It is only in ignorance and emotions that destruction can work so rapidly. Go back to Tory and Whig, review the struggle that pits man against man to no availe since sharing the first cave and then the idea of who will have power tomorrow or in a hundred years will reflect the failure of man's design. Man can be a better engineer of his fate than anything a god has done if he chooses. Aye, their's the rub, if he chooses. Forgive me if I suggest that power will go to the ignorant as passion and emotion defecate on intelligence.
When we learn to speak more in the language that created Mozart's "Requiem" harmony will reveal its meaning.

Posted by: Charles Nunnelly Oro Valley AZ USA | December 2, 2006 01:20 PM

I have the utmost respect for David and Fareed's thoughts on a variety of issues. My main concern is not the answers that emanate but the questions that limit the thinking and encouage individuals to solidify their thoughts even more than before the question.
The events that caused the question are little understood and POWER even less. In my 77 years I have come to believe (A condition of extreme uncertainty) that the greatest power of mankind is in our ideas that discover truth and create harmony as without harmony we can understand little.
Consider some of the words above; Power, Belief, Truth, Harmony, Understanding and many not used such as Opinion, Intuition and the entire world of words. Playthings really to enable memory, abstractions and the like. But play is the fertile ground upon which mankind rests in our search for advancement and truth. Words are not the reality of our search but tools we use and we should be their master and not their slave. It is as critical to build our abstractions of language as it is for our scientific language. Who dares argue or have opinions with E=MC Squared?
If POWER is to be assesed beyond an electrical transformer or other aspects of science then its dimensions lead to the powerful forces that elevate man above other creatures and to our destruction as well.
There is a reason religious folks use a god as all POWERFUL and reasons why it has failed in today's horrible mess. America became powerful because of the philosophy of our founders, mostly brilliant ideationalists, and power of the future, unless we continue to destroy ourselves, rests in the concept of civilization that formed our nation and our continued growth in ideas leading to yet undiscovered truths.
Who in this world today could conceive and structure a form of government of such harmony and beauty? It is only in ignorance and emotions that destruction can work so rapidly. Go back to Tory and Whig, review the struggle that pits man against man to no availe since sharing the first cave and then the idea of who will have power tomorrow or in a hundred years will reflect the failure of man's design. Man can be a better engineer of his fate than anything a god has done if he chooses. Aye, their's the rub, if he chooses. Forgive me if I suggest that power will go to the ignorant as passion and emotion defecate on intelligence.
When we learn to speak more in the language that created Mozart's "Requiem" harmony will reveal its meaning.

China has been the big winner in international politics, silently making its way as a global power in an emerging new cold war. The signs are all here, with second and third-world countries allying themselves with China in direct opposition to the US.

Meanwhile, while President Bush is losing the American popular vote, the US is losing the popular vote abroad. It used to be that in the American continent only Cuba dared to form alliances against the US, but now it's the popular thing to do. North Korea and Iran, strengthened since Bush's Axis-of-Evil speech, flaunt their defiance at the US and at the ever-weakening UN.

And who can blame them?

But there is hope for a peaceful existence for the citizens of the US, Venezuela, China, Iran, Israel, Palestine, and Iraq. That hope lies in bold leadership in all of these countries, and an active effort to reform the UN. Right now, though, all we have is opportunistic power-grabbers on all sides and a UN stuck with creating empty resolutions used cynically to bring forth an agenda of destruction instead of the promotion of peace.

The US veto power must be checked, as well as that of countries actively involved in supporting militant organizations. Otherwise, the cycle of violence will continue forever, and the real losers in the global arena will continue to be—as they've always been—the people.

It appears nearly everyone, Baker group included, supports the false hope that if the Iraqi army is given enough training and support, a stable government will emerge.

This policy can not work because it ignores the following facts:

1. Militias represent the true centers of power in Iraq.

2. The current Iraqi government and Iraqi Army are
filled with members loyal to these militias

3. No military, ours included, seems willing and/or able to
disarm the militias. (Can you imagine the bloodshed in
disarming just one of the 23 militias in Baghdad?).

Our emphasis on training and supporting the Iraqi Army is simply adding more and more guns and soldiers to a factionalized civil war.

The Sunni insurgency is too well organized, armed, and battle-hardened to be effectively eliminated. And because all Iraqis are forced to seek protection from one of the various militias, rather than the Iraqi Army and police, the militias will grow in power.

In the end it is simple. Stop wasting our time prolonging the inevitable. We must simply arrange for the sharing and division of power and resources amoung the major militia groups(Shia and Sunni) and power centers.

BobL, VA:

Yes, I am on travel, too, but unfortunately, for business reasons (much to my dismay). (I work for all of you and me!) Sometimes, it is VERY difficult to get even "decent" internet access at my trvael destinations, but such is life. I hope that your parents are doing well. (I am getting there, too, FAST!) On your issues with you computer, I have been there and done that! However, I cannot belive that you drove all the way from Annandale (?), VA to OR?! Wow! You still have a lot of stamina left in you, buddy!

Zoltan, hungarian, Paris:

Your comments are well-taken. I view science as something much more fundamental than technology.

Incredible:

Yes, Jimmy Carter's book is really fascinating, coming from an American statesman, who won the Nobel Peace Prize. There is certainly some merit to listen to his exhortations. I find, in hindsight, that ALL presidents are victims of their politics and "official" policies, while in office. As I have always maintained, we are governed, NOT by politicians, BUT by bureaucrats. Hence, I really do not see significant, meaningful changes in our policies. (Politicians are NOT helping this, either!) I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that George W. Bush would also remembered for some of the good things he has tried to do, although I am sure that many people would disagree with me on this. We tend to be extremely harsh on a sitting president for all of our ills. As they say, it is VERY LONELY at the top. I also read (somewhere that I cannot recall, now) that the Presidency is THE MOST STRESSFUL job in the world.

De Review, Washington D. C.:

You said it. Let us go back to innovating and making money.

Dear Read Up,

It goes without saying that in day-to-day trading the U.S. has been losing value against both the Euro and the Yen; it has been a necessary process of devaluation. But that is no argument against the larger picture. The major currencies in this world are the Dollar, the Euro, the Pound and Yen: that's it. When countries in the world seek a secure basket of stable currencies, these are the big ones they will opt for.

Strictly considering the devaluation of the Dollar, it would make sense for any country to diversify its reserve holdings. Throughout the post war world people either had dollars or gold. Any rational central bank after the introduction of the Euro would have been mad to continue buying dollars when they could diversify holdings into Euro as well.

It may be important to consider other currencies that have been increasing value recently, the Indian and Pakistani Rupee come to mind, but don't expect competition to the hegemony of the Euro or the Dollar any times soon.

http://www.dereviewsite.com/

Dear "under review, above,
Speaking of highly valued currency..the US dollar sank to 133 against the European currency this morning It costs $133 US money to get 100 worth of their money. Japan similarily trending. ETC/

To say that the U.S. has lost "power" is too general. It is true that the U.S. has lost the ability to influence and coerce. But whether or not the U.S. has the ability to influence events behind the scenes is really more a matter of negotiating power. And although the U.S. is heavily in debt, it still has tremendous leverage.

It is in those countries that the U.S. has little leverage over (Iran and Syria) that we have an argument for greater state-integration: through the WTO, etc. With more integration, the more those countries will need what the U.S. can offer, because the bottom line is this: the U.S. is simply the richest and most technologically advanced nation in the world. No other country comes close. It is because of this that our military is supreme, our universities are top tier, and our currency is highly valued.

Europe is just as wealthy, but their institutions (military-industrial, universities, etc.) have not developed to full capacity—and there is no need for them to do so; they can buy what they need from the U.S. (they can buy a great education; they can buy weapon systems, etc.). The same goes for Japan.

The U.S. has lost face recently, that is true, but the U.S. is still the most successful nation-state the world has ever seen. Perhaps we can chalk it up to the peculiarities of the U.S. government and its institutions, but maybe we now know—though we will soon forget—that the U.S. just isn't "made" to establish a footprint on the other side of the world.

The U.S. should stick to what it's good at: innovation and making money.

http://www.dereviewsite.com/

IGNATIUS...FOR WHOM is the Palestine-Israeli morass 'A BRIGHT SPOT'?
Not the Palestinians who daily are brutalized by the now in a hurry
Israelis. (In a hurry because the world is sick of it, and because the new book by former President Carter finally tells the truth about the horrid conditions.

MikeB,

I'm sorry, I didn't know you lived in Oregon. I'm in Ashland. Funny, because I have been reading the fishing reports out of the Medford paper. (Alas, the weather hasn't exactly been conducive to fishing in the last week)

To everyone concerned that I might be anti-technological or anti-scientific, etc. Sorry guys—I am actually agnostic and quite pro-investigation of every sort. I just wanted to get the landscape straight and point out dangers to the progress of science/human thought. We cannot take anything for granted. Will write further in the future on constructing a philosophical outlook for science which will help prevent a backlash by religion. Technology must decisively be more good than evil. Even becoming ambiguous is not good for technology. But can that be accomplished without a moral improvement of mankind? It seems to be certain the both must develop in tandem. And what about some sort of philosophy to counter the dismaying aspects of science, such as no proof so far of intelligent design for evolution? If science is to radically dispense with illusions it must have some sort of philosophy or ask for a certain type of man: one with great psychological fortitude—capable of a life of perpetual uncertainty. But such a man is far from everyone obviously. Much needs to be worked out as you can see...Really, I have nothing against science—on the contrary. I just feel where we stand today is more and more asking for a different type of man. I leave you now to speculate on that matter. Or perhaps I should say it seems we are moving toward the type of man that can not only tolerate the uncertainty of a Godless world, but can tolerate this uncertainty even with the most dangerous and seductive of technologies in his hands...Comments anyone? What type of man is ideal for our coming world?

to daniel:

"I ask these scientists to explain to me clearly what possible objection they could have to any economic or political order [...] for so far as I can tell it makes no sense to even have economics and politics if all is random, destined to be destroyed."

The mystery of life is a beauty to explore and not a problem to solve.

"or if human life exists at all"

Descartes said: I think therefore I am.

"They might have science, yes, but they are devoid of philosophy."

I must challenge that.

Science - which is different from technology - only cares about questions like "how ?" (how do atoms interact, how did dinosaurs die, how stars are formed, ...) and not "why ?". For example, astrophysicists question what happened 1 second after the Big-Bang. Then comes the obvious question: "what happened 1 second BEFORE the Big-Bang ?" Well, science doesn't treat this question simply because it can't. This question is left to religion or philosophy. Which doesn't mean that scientists don't care about that question, but they can't try to answer that in the framework of science.

What you seem to have problems with is technology, and, as I said, that's not science. MP3 players, cars, computer, Internet, ... are independent from science. Yes, some of it started thanks to scientific break-troughs (like the CD uses laser) but have become since a long time independent movements. Actually, technology seems more driven by marketing than science. And "marketing" and "propaganda" are very close concepts.

In the USSR, production was decided by the central politik bureau, and then imposed on the population with heavy propaganda. This propaganda had to give people the will to do things they didn't really need, only to be able to present good figures to the "west". Now it looks to me that marketing does exactly the same (create the desire) with exactly the same tools (big placates, cheap slogans, overused clichés...) for exactly the same reason (economic growth).

That's how the consumer society works. That's how the USSR worked. Look where they are now.

Are there alternatives ? Use Linux, go working with bicycle, read newspapers over Internet from many parts of the world, try to travel to other countries as often as possible, read the old philosophers...

BobL-VA -
You came to Oregon and didn't get in contact with me for a bit of fishing? Shame on you!

Srikanth,

Happy Holidays!

I went to Oregon to visit my parents for Thanksgiving. (80's and not in great shape). I only intended on staying a few days and have been out here almost 2 weeks. Leaving Sat. AM and driving back to Alexandria.

Wasn't smart enough to take my computer with me and had to have my office FedEx it out to me.

Daniel,

Science and Technology has always been a double edged sword. There is a price to pay for everything. I can drive across country in 3 days instead of taking a wagon train and spending 4 or 5 months. The cost: foreign oil, smog, environmental damage and 50,000 American deaths a year. We've always assessed the advantages of the technology against the costs. If the good outweighs the bad we usually go with it. If the costs to the environment and personal safety are too high we have a tendency to shy away from the technology. Even the US built a number of nuclear weapons prior to building it's first nuclear power plant. That's the nature of progress.

BobL-Va:

Where have you been?

daniel:

If I did not know you any better, I would have thought (based on your comments on this forum), that you were a misoneist. As you know, "science and technology" is a double-edged sword and cuts both ways. It is up to us, humans, to utilize for the "beneficent" purposes. Unfortunately, some of our "human" brethren seem hell-bent on using "anything and everything" - be it technology, religion, etc. - for maleficent purposes. As a Xerox commercial, in the recent past, stated: Keep the conversation going!

I wonder if man is losing power over his technology. Life is starting to resemble a grotesque video game: "Avoid the technological traps". We have the internet teasing us with pornography and with potentially getting us entrapped by the police if we are so weak as to contact someone underage for sex; we have food everywhere making us more and more obese; we have the ongoing war on drugs; we have Johnny preferring to watch television over reading a book; we have the current political administration invading a country over fear of weapons of mass destruction...And what do all these things have in common?

We invent technology which dramatically increases our capacity for evil and/or caters to our weaknesses and far more often than not the technology is not to blame, no, the people are to blame that are so evil, weak or stupid to succumb...

But unfortunately that means more and more of us every day—we all gradually get indicted for one reason or other. And those lucky few that successfully navigate this dreadful maze, are they really the best people among us? (Notice I hope that they are to compensate for all the lives destroyed—and why not here mention all the motor vehicle accidents and pollutants spewed into the environment. If animals could speak what would they say?).

The question is where will it end? Is technology going to increase to where we all get bogged down in something or other? What will morality become when we all become loathsome in one another's eyes? Will we turn toward a total destruction of technology? Or will morality be defined as the capacity to master technology, the ability to handle it without bringing out one's evil or indulging in one's weaknesses? Or is it that morality in the technological age means more technology? (Whatever that means).

I just notice a pattern of war on deviant sexual patterns; war on drugs; war on obesity; war on kids not learning in school; war on terror, etc. In all these cases there is no serious reflection on technology. In all these cases the blame falls primarily on people. In all these cases what we have losing are people that get sucked into one technological vortex or other; what we have coming in from the outside is more technology; and the winners are those that more or less successfully navigate the traps—and often the winners are simply those in power and capable of orchestrating a war on drugs or terror.

I question man's grip on technology and all the strategies he uses to avoid questioning technology. Take now all the concern about religion in the world. We have all the atheists, agnostics, scientific types, etc.—secularists in general—blaming religion for a host of problems without once reflecting that religion has existed for millenia and it never stopped man from arriving at this very day. But now today all religion is bad—especially fundamentalism. And why? Because of increasingly powerful weaponry and methods of dispersion of such. And what are we supposed to do about religion? Why, waken the religious from their illusions!—Nothing more! No questions at all such as could it be possible that man should have been better morally prepared for technology before embarking on technological development. Instead of a serious questioning of morality—how we are supposed to behave in a technological world—we have the secularists only wanting to totally destroy the religious illusions,—as if not only have a world with technological traps, but make it a godless world so the grotesque video game of avoid the technological traps only gets more disheartening!

I find it grotesque that science should say things like there is no proof of God, evolution so far as we know is totally random, and the universe so far as we know will simply run down or collapse in a big crunch and the big bang will probably start again after we are destroyed...I ask these scientists to explain to me clearly what possible objection they could have to any economic or political order—or if human life exists at all—for so far as I can tell it makes no sense to even have economics and politics if all is random, destined to be destroyed, etc.——And they wonder why people prefer religion. They might have science, yes, but they are devoid of philosophy.

Take the scientific revolution. We all are familiar with it: Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, etc. But we all are just as familiar with it not being a revolution in the sense of the revolution of a wheel, the completion of a cycle, etc. No! Revolution simply means breakthrough. Fine. We even have many people saying the proper word should be evolution of science. Fine. But here is where it gets tricky: Evolution of science, evolution of human thought in a world bound to Darwin's evolution proper—total randomness? Should I say "fine" here too? Of course not! If scientists want to destroy the illusions of religion and promote technology they had better 1) seriously start questioning human morality and 2) realize how much the entire scientific project depends on illusions—or rather cannot get away from illusions—as religion does. What do I mean by the latter? I mean nothing other than that science has to have a goal, an ideal it projects ahead of itself. Science should aim for a true scientific revolution, which is to say put man in place to where he can literally start the entire universe over again, complete the cycle, as it were, and start it again...otherwise there will never be a true scientific revolution.

But I must be speaking in tongues now. We will continue destroying all religious illusions without at all questioning morality—how such can be continued and developed further—in an increasingly technological world. And why not say it? One day, when finally the last person succumbs to the last technological trap, some bright person will just say why not replace man with machine....

The US is losing power. Not as quickly as much of the world would probably like, but losing it all the same. Although, this loss of relative power is a natural result of other nations (China, Japan, India, The European Community) catching up with us. In many respects they still have a long way to go.

The US came out of WWII with an unnatural balance of power in the world. We took relatively few losses (compared to the rest of the world) and had virtually no home soil destroyed. It was just a question of time before other nations recovered, prospered and collectively would challenge our dominance.

Winners, all the countries listed above along with the oil producing ME states.

It has taken the rest of the world 60 years just to get back to this point. While the world is heading to some form of parity it has at least another 50 to 60 years to go assuming no major wars to achieve anything that resembles parity among the EU, China, India and the United States.

The vandalism of Iraq by the Bush Administration and subsquent election rebuke of these policies while poorly thought out and ill advised will have very few ramifications as to our relative position of power in the world. Bush may have squandered lives, money, and international political prestige, but even he couldn't diminish our position of power in the world.

Iraqi PM al Maliki has set a June 2007 timetable for his government assuming control of security. Rather than December 7, June 6 or July 4 may be better dates to observe the minute of silence suggested by Athiest.

Tom: The mixed message from Bush now appears clearer. Bush did not set a timetable, al Maliki did (but it was probably at Bush's urging.)

And the Cheney meeting in Saudi Arabia may have been a catalyzing event to prompt the timetable the administration had resisted.

Vedapushpa-Bangalore-India:

I am afraid that you have an unduly very rosy picture of our (the U. S.') situation. As the saying goes: The other side of the hedge is ALWAYS greener!

Your comment:

\\It is precisely this fact of "Power plus the Stength of political convictions" that has virtually enabled the US to 'standup'alone against the blind rage of Terrorism and the blinder haze of moral nebulousness all around.//

I agree 100% that our war against the al Qaeda is a VERY righteous and conscientious one; however, if you claim that the war in Iraq (at least, initially) was in the same league, I must say that you have very sadly mistaken. The fact of the matter is that Saddam Hussein was the only stabilizing force (much to my chagrin) in the Middle-East. Now that we have removed him, and where and how are we? Well, we are in chaos, mayhem, lawlessness, anarchy, MORE terrorism, and not to mention, a civil war. The question we (Americans) - not you, because you are not contributing anything to what I would call "battle for our very credibility and survival" - should ask: Is it worth it? My personal opinion is: a resounding "No!"

By the way, why did you NOT include Dick Cheney in your description of the Power and indomitability?! -:))

From a political perspective in Europe, right-now every-body is losing power. The former movement toward more integration came to a halt after the French's and Hollander's refusal of the European Constitution. All the self proclaimed elite got a big punch, and don't know how to proceed. As it looks, Europeans don't want Europe to be a "superpower". Being labeled "cowards" doesn't impress people "over here".

But nobody is really gaining power either. The status-quo of ever going forward and opening our borders to all winds and tides of the world has been killed, but not replaced by a new dogma.

What is coming fast from outside: a new idea about direct citizen participation is gaining momentum: random picking of citizens who then participate in the political decision makings. Apparently, this was done in Athens 2500 years ago. And it makes sense: every modern parliamentary democracy has 2 chambers, both elected and thus not really representing different powers. Especially when both elections are financially backed by the same lobbies. But a random picking of citizens for one chamber would be a real counter-power, one that would be difficult to buy or pressure.

Needless to say that the ruling politicians are not exactly happy about such proposals.

TO TOM W. above: Cheny was SUMMONED to Saudia Arabia, in effect told to get his —- over there. Highly unusual. And that the cranky
crank went over, pronto, shows exacty how compromised we are. How much we need the ME re Iran. He stated a total two hours, the Prince must've been fairly succinct!

So strange. Nothing here about who REALLY is in trouble...Israel.
Neither Europe nor Asia, and certainly not the ME leaders, will help the extricate the US from Iraq unless the savage Israelis are
pushed back to their borders.They've served notice. And Jimmy Carter has a new book explaining exactly how vicious and inhumane the Israeli occupation in Palestine is. (Incredible how we've been lied to by the Times and Post...) And Rice has scurried over there..her first trip since Olmert lied to her face as she stood there, about Lebanon.
Omniously, Israel, having to withdraw and release soldiers, etc ec etc., and with her parasatic hands still around the American throat, is very dangerous. Who knows what they'll try to pull.

It is very obvious that as of now the US - despite the debates as regards the political efficacy of its war on Iraq has retained its political primacy as a Strong Democracy with due powerful weaponery system of Defence and Offence. And - for sure the 'National Stature' of the US has grown stronger in terms of the International Diplomacy count - thanks to the relentless and dedicated political efforts of President Geroge W Bush - the indomitable Foreign Secretary Condoleezza Rice and the Nation's patriotic Fighting Force.

It is precisely this fact of "Power plus the Stength of political convictions" that has virtually enabled the US to 'standup'alone against the blind rage of Terrorism and the blinder haze of moral nebulousness all around.

So one could also say the US and President G W Bush are both the most powerful - and their present efforts are sure to motivate and enable the humanity around to transact in a more genuinely and humanely political manner.

[Ms] Vedapushpa

[social anthropologist]

Bangalore - India - vedapushpa@yahoo.com

Shiloh

You are right, but George seems to be sending mixed messages in that he told Maliki that he wanted to speed up turning security over to Iraq.

A great question that you asked from a previous post follows:

"...At the same time, I am suspicious about Cheney in Saudi Arabia. Is he there to ask for support in establishing staging areas for withdrawl from Iraq while keeping a US presence in the region - or is he there to instill fear in the House of Saud about withdrawl as dangerous to the monarchy?..."

There is an interesting article by Nawaf Obaid (Nov 29, Wash Post) that discusses the regional implications for an early pullout by the US, but what Cheney discussed is anybody's guess.

Athiest: George Bush is not bound to accept the consensus of the Iraq Study Group. His assurances to al Maliki that the US will ("stay until the job is done") ("stay the course")("not cut and run') are not in sync with the consensus of the Baker-Hamilton commission.

December 7 may again be "a day that will live in infamy" if Bush rejects the consensus.

The Iraq Study Group has reached a consensus: American troops shall be pulled out of the combat zones. They are coming home.

Iraq panel to recommend pullback of troops
(The New York Times, 2006 November 29)
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/30/america/web.1130policy.php
————————————————————————————————-
The bipartisan Iraq Study Group reached a consensus on Wednesday on a final report that will call for a gradual pullback of the 15 American combat brigades now in Iraq but stop short of setting a firm timetable for their withdrawal, according to people familiar with the panel's deliberations.

I encourage everyone to spend 1 minute in silence at noon on December 7. Spend the time in commemorating the 3000 Americans who died in Iraq. They served valiantly but were betrayed by neoconservatives who cared nothing about lives of our soldiers.

The United States has temporarily lost its power and influence due to the stupidities of George W Bush and his neocon ideologues. Noone else has the strength to take its place. The US will recover after Mr Bush leaves office.

The EU is a bunch of cowards who were helpless in Yugoslavia and the same today. There is a lot of talk of India/China but I just consider that the latest fad after the "Japanese fad" and "Asian tiger" fad etc.

To Zoltan:

Berkas (or headscarves) are a religious symbol for many Muslims world-wide. To me, that is a violation of their religious freedom. Within French schools, headscarves are outlawed, yet small religios symbols such as a cross are allowed. Again, to me, the French are violating their religios freedom or, at the least, are using a different standard for the Muslim children.

The point for Theo van Gogh is that his freedom of speech was obviously violated by a radical Muslim who took offence to Theo's interpretations of Islamic culture. The killing was meant to instill a fear to speak by others that might question Islamic culture. All the incidents I mentioned are the result of a fear of reprisals or were precipitated to instill a fear of reprisals. Salman Rushdie and Van Gogh are examples of the latter. The West German play is an example of the former. At any rate, freedom of speech is under assault in western democracies, and the response is/will be appeasement and diminishing of freedom of speech and other rights.

Why isn't the Pope a European issue? Regardless, the rioting and killing that resulted from free speech has kept Pope Benedict IX backtracking for damage control ever since.

Many support admitting Turkey to the European Union because it is a domonantly Muslim, secular, democracy that some are afraid could be undercut by radical Islam.

I see the U. S' losing not only power, but also its very credibility in all respects - politics, education, science, technology, economic stewardship, etc.

I see India's and China's leading the global race to be the next superpower - perhaps, not militarily, but certainly, economically. However, one must bear in mind that economy supplants everything. Superpowers of yore - viz., Greece, Rome, Persia, Ottoman Empire, Potugal, Spain, the British Empire, just to name a few - all lost their power because of their inability to chart their own courses, when the going got tough.

The U. S., in my humble opinion, needs to focus SIGNIFICANTLY more on domestic issues, CERTAINLY including defense and national-security matters (however, this does NOT include OFFENSE and playing the "Big-Brother role"). Our (the U. S.') current situation reminds me of the British Empire in its last days. I love my country too much to let it go by the wayside. We must change tack, VERY FAST. I would much rather spend all the money for our own economic development, eradication of hunger and poverty, etc. It is the economy, stupid!

Jonas, Stockholm, Sweden:

Well-said!

MikeB:

I agree with your comment:

"Fanatics of every sort, ignorance, and hatred are winning right now."

Although you and I differ (occasionally, very much) on the delivery and the approach of our "solution," I am beginning to see that you and I want the same thing for our country. I appreciate and admire your comments.

Liz Schwartz, Washington, District of Columbia, U.S.A.:

Just so that you know, I thought that your comments were on point. In any case, the question was so broad that anything and any location can pass muster! :-))

As you can see, GlobalMaven, highwayscribery, Los Angeles, http://highwayscribery.blogspot.com is just teasing you!

Needless to say, your points on Washington, D. C. are quite well-taken. What a shame!

Anju Chandel, New Delhi, India:

I agree with you 100%. Since you are in India, you must be feeling pretty happy; here we are, in the U. S., oblivious to the facts?! Ugh! :-((

Zoltan, hungarian, Paris:

You are funny!

daniel:

You never cease to amaze me. I REALLY, SINCERELY mean that (NOT pejoratively, by any means).

Global Power Barometer

There is little doubt that the US is loosing power and regard around the world among the "neutral" , independent observers, not counting the US haters. Currently, Iran and Syria are gaining power, because they have an uncooperative, stubborn Bush administration by the short hairs. The US with bombers and missiles is fairly powerless against insurgents in Iraq and irregulars elsewhere in the world. The US is powerless to effectively deal with All Qaeda, Hizbulla or Hamas, especially with the latter two being "democratically" elected.
Depending on muscle/force, a long history of supporting dictators and authoritarian governments who do things"our" way, instead of settings good examples, being a real role model for the benefits of Democracy and Freedom, has served us badly as a country. It may have benefited the corporate world and the political elites, but has worked to the detriment of the basic idea of America, as advertised.
The same effect is visible in the economic area, where our "free trade" and protectionist policies have exported jobs, gutted our manufacturing base, protected static, backwards looking corporations, and made us very dependent on far away countries for essential materials and oil. This is well reflected in the policy of mouthing the "strong dollar", while in fact our currency is steadily loosing value, especially in the past six years.
Many knowledgeable peop