What would it take for Russia to be #1?
Posted 18 April 2004 - 11:41 PM
Yes, Romans were unable to subdue Baltic Germans and Baltic Slavs, although exist documents that they tried. Romans fight as a infantries in centuries going closely with lines. Lines were like fully automatic; one, two and 10 of them push knifes in enemies from down of stomach to up of the heart.
But Romans were ***dead men walking ***against horse riders. We Slavs, really have to be thankful for to Iranian Scythes who brought to us horses and knowledge of iron production.
Posted 19 April 2004 - 12:59 AM
So what one can expect from John Kerry as a president?
Posted 19 April 2004 - 01:42 AM
I'd argue that, such as stated in the article, Justice is in the eye of the beholder and so no single political system would address the needs of all. Yet we can say there's more Justice in, say, Scandinavia than America. And how is it that some well intentioned--as well as many not so well intentioned--people reject any such "socialist" option?
Well, this is what I think: WE SHOULD PROVIDE OPTIONS so different people can fulfill their own idea of Justice, providing Capitalist options as well as Socialist options. Let the people "vote with their feet."
But how can we reach such democratic ideal? Is it the Spartacus way or the Jesus way? Judging by the results, neither one stopped the Roman Lion. Is it something less violent than Spartacus and less passive than Jesus?
Human Conceptions of Justice
God commands us to do justice, yet since the time of Plato the western mind has struggled to define justice, let alone achieve it.
Part of the reason is that we have been chasing the wrong dog. Human justice is not divine justice. The two differ in almost every important aspect. Until we grasp the differences between the two, and align ourselves with the divine, we cannot please God, we cannot walk with him, we cannot preach the true gospel, we cannot fulfill the purposes of our lives and the church in the world.
But wasn't Jesus concerned with social issues? Yes, of course. Yet Jesus did not abolish poverty, rail against the unequal distribution of wealth, or even condemn the more pernicious effects of racism and sexism. Instead, He called each of us to love God with all of our being, and to love each other as we love ourselves. (He even commanded us to love our enemies--the ones who oppress us unjustly.) Why? Because God is interested in something far more important than forensic justice. If Jesus- only goal was to abolish the institution of slavery, he would have called for its destruction. But God was less interested in freeing the slaves of Rome than he was in freeing the slaves of sin. By calling each of us slaves to sin and offering freedom from it, Jesus is sending a more powerful and transformational message that we all were designed for freedom from all forms of sin, including owning slaves and being owned as a slave. Spartacus sought freedom from slavery, and won his freedom (temporarily) through force and the destruction of his masters. But both Spartacus and his slave masters died in sin. To what eternal advantage? Christ offers us freedom from sin which is an offer, if we took it seriously, that would free every slave from both human and spiritual bondage both now and forever. You and I would demand that slave owners give up their slaves; Jesus makes the wholly uncoercive offer to the slave owners: Become my Slave, and in so doing, free yourself. (Even as I write these words, something in me is repulsed by the idea of not exercising force on behalf of the oppressed, which reveals to me that I have more of Judas Iscariot in me than I care to admit.)
Concluding the Matter
I am of the already/not yet school. I believe that Jesus inaugurated his Kingdom when he first came, and that it will be fully instituted as he rules and reigns on earth during the Millennium and beyond. In the interim--in the long shadow of expectation and struggle--we are called to continue what he only could begin, and what he alone can complete. He has left us here to struggle with the issues of justice and mercy so that we might exercise them rightly when he does return, and in the process, become more like him. We can only do this by the counter-intuitive movement toward humility. We must resist the temptation of power to achieve justice. Apart from God, our pride compels us to force others to be good--something God himself never attempts. Humility forces us to acknowledge that it is we who are not good, and thus extend mercy to those who oppress us. Humility empowers us to do justice and love mercy. It enables the gospel in us and through us. Any gospel--liberal or conservative--that does not enjoin us to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly before God is a false one.
Posted 19 April 2004 - 02:03 AM
Spanish little lion did mean to pull out of Iraq. Many more may follow. Will the Big Lion be left alone? Can he fight all other predators at once, or is it that the little animals have finally decided to fight him? Will something terribly good/bad come out of it?
Such a rare occurrence...
"What Zapatero did is keep his word, which is rare in this country. For the first time, we have come across a politician who keeps his word," Labordeta told the news agency Efe.
Posted 19 April 2004 - 02:21 AM
Private commandos shoot back on the Iraq firing line
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Ex-military commandos armed with M4 rifles are fighting insurgents in Iraq (news - web sites) as part of a private contracting force, many of them hired by the US-led coalition, raising some deep concerns.
About 15,000 personnel from private military firms (PMFs) were operating in Iraq, making them more numerous that even the biggest US ally, Britain, estimated Peter Singer, author of "Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry."
The dangers of the Iraq operation net other non-combatant contractors.
At least seven contractors for Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) have been kidnapped in Iraq.
Through KBR, Halliburton has a huge contract to support the army with everything from catering to construction, and a separate contract to help rebuild the oil industry.
The company, once run by Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites), was named this week in a purported statement by Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden (news - web sites).
"We must take into consideration that this war brings billions of dollars in profit to the major companies, whether it be those that produce weapons or those that contribute to reconstruction, such as the Halliburton Company, its sisters and daughters," the statement said, according to the BBC Caversham monitoring service.
"Based on this, it is very clear who is the one benefiting from igniting this war and from the shedding of blood. It is the warlords, the bloodsuckers, who are steering the world policy from behind a curtain."
Posted 19 April 2004 - 02:27 AM
Soros is really flexing his economic muscles. He is contributing heavily to Bush's defeat in the next election, I believe.
He seems to think he knows what's best and is paying to see it happen.
Since the Rothschilds and Warburgs started lending money to Monarchs and Napoleons to fight their wars they have been calling the shots. Borrowing money does lead to loss of sovereignty.
When government and the Law becomes philanthropic it begins a downward spiral.
Justice and government are the concept of collective force to ensure safety of person and property.
There would certainly be no wars if love were the prevailing emotion per Jesus. However, the baser emotions of greed, power and lust are a part of us and can never be righted without the force of Spartacus. Love cannot be enforced and it is sadly lacking today. But is it not the normal human condition? Has it not been lacking throughout our history? One would think that the progress of civilization would improve it's scarcity. We do not seem to have progressed in this area. Our social sciences betray us, I believe, and treat us as any other animal, which we are not.
Posted 19 April 2004 - 03:40 AM
Justice and government are the concept of collective force to ensure safety of person and property.>
Ok, I think it takes a distinction between Bad Laws and Good Laws. In America, to bring this issue home, you have pretty lawless roads except for speed, which results in the ridiculous top speed of 75mph or so. You get 300hp vehicles but both bad laws and anarchic driving behavior makes it illegal and unsafe to go faster.
'Most of such speed limits are set not by appropriate traffic-engineering surveys but by bureaucracies targeting motorists for profiteering and excessive taxation. The current state of affairs actually "permits" government bureaucracies and insurance companies to penalize citizens for being safe!'
I think though Good Laws in Germany--like the one penalizing giving the finger to other drivers--which in turn encourage good social behavior, can indeed bring wonderful results, say, like safety and a 212mph top speed...
"Mr. Speaker, my subject today is whether America is a police state. If we are, what are we going to do about it? Most police states, surprisingly, come about through the democratic process with majority support. The masses are easily led to believe that security and liberty are mutually exclusive, and demand for security far exceeds that for liberty. Our government already keeps close tabs on just about everything we do and requires official permission for nearly all of our activities. One might take a look at our Capitol for any evidence of a police state. We see: barricades, metal detectors, police, military soldiers at times, dogs, ID badges required for every move, vehicles checked at airports and throughout the Capitol. The people are totally disarmed, except for the police and the criminals. But worse yet, surveillance cameras in Washington are everywhere to ensure our safety. Like gun control, people control hurts law-abiding citizens much more than the law-breakers. Centralized control and regulations are required in a police state. Not only do we need a license to drive, but we also need special belts, bags, buzzers, seats and environmentally dictated speed limits. Or a policemen will be pulling us over to levy a fine, and he will be toting a gun for sure. Let's reject the police state."
?Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, MD (R-TX, 1988 Libertarian Party candidate for President), speech in House of Representatives, United States Congress, "Are We Doomed To Be a Police State?" June 27, 2002
Posted 19 April 2004 - 04:22 AM
And here's the thing, the "contractors" are starting to leave town too. That very word muffles one's responses, doesn't it? A contractor sounds like somebody you'd hire to put siding on your house or build those bookshelves in the den. And, of course, some of the "contractors" in Iraq are exactly that. This is, after all, where privatization in Iraq meets the Bush privatizing economy back home and men driven out of work here find themselves driving to work there for tantalizing sums under what turn out to be the most dangerous of conditions. But many of the "contractors" over there, the "security guards," are simply out-and-out mercenaries -- a word that seems to have been ripped from American media dictionaries now that being a "mercenary" means being in a $100 billion boom business largely connected to the Pentagon. Maybe you just don't call the "Silicon Valley" economic miracle of the armed early years of the 21st century by a name associated with all manner of evils.
Posted 19 April 2004 - 11:47 AM
in the name of Tony Blair, but pathetic non-the-less. He reminds one of someone who tastes someones cooking and speaks words that dont match the sower look trying to be nice.
But what the difference between these puppets and Georgie boy Sorow going around buying democracy?
Closely followed by the example of Kerry trying to sound like he is
throwing down the gauntlet on Bush with thundering rebuke
for lies and crimes against humanity, why doesnt he just settle for
exposing Bush for being late for a meeting or something just as heavy?
Odessa could have been something more far reaching and cumming. We know that Nuremburg was a shame like Milosovic in the Hague. We know that the likes of Grand-dad Bush who was a Nazi supporter and others with Wall St and Jewish connection were untouchable (as warloeds and bloodsuckers),
so why should top brass SS be worried, they all had one thing in common. They knew too much.
So arange an escape to silence. The psychological disposition of having escaped guarantees silence. But I wouldnt discount the posibility that some or many may have played a role in a new world of intelligence (CIA, KGB, MOssad) and then there is the development of the intermingling of international crime-intelligence- banking and now we can add terrorism. These guys wouldnt be out of place, they could be assets.
Romans didnt subdue the British either
Thanks for the direction to the article Pliny.
Re mercenaries/private armies in Iraq, checkout:
"Marshall" Paul Bremer, is a member of the CFR, illuminati types,
and is/was managing director of Kissinger&Assoc, Foreign Policy.
A snip from an article in the telegragh:
"Senior British commanders have condemned American military tactics in Iraq as heavy handed and disproportionate.......part of the problem was the American troopsviewed Iraqis as untermenschen - the nazi expression for sub-humans...."
Here's another quote froma journalist, from the Herald tribune:
" So long as America and Israel act like siamese twins joined at the brain...."
Interesting snips on justice: reminds one of the advice to take the mote out of ones own eye before trying to get/help someone else to take a splinter out of their eye. Comes down to personal responsibility for ones self not someone else- working from the individual upwards to create a better society.
The internationalists - from Communists/capitalists/todays globalists/UN all want to solve mans problems from the top down.
The only part of their policies that effectively achieve this is: dead people cause no problems. That is the only part that needs to start at the top.
Posted 19 April 2004 - 11:58 AM
The animal was cute , little, fluffy puppy, who was actually shocked when the teacher depressed the levers on the shock box. As shock administration increased, the puppy reactions became more intense.
The results for male and female subjects
Posted 19 April 2004 - 02:14 PM
<The essence of Mel Gibson's Passion!>
I think the only passion at play here is the Passion for Money... Hollywood also embraced Spartacus--which became another money-making movie.
We can say there's a parallel between Spartacus and Jesus: Both chose to fight Evil represented by the same Roman Lion. That's the Eternal Message I see in both: You have to fight Evil, by whatever name it goes...
Posted 20 April 2004 - 03:12 AM
The Passion for Money--having the money to spend--can sometimes produce good movies. Probably good causes make good money.
One of those which influenced me quite a bit into doing something was "The Mission." Based on historical facts, it presents the dilemma of nonviolence vs. violence and shows all the conflict that went into my writings: the little animals creating their cooperative Utopia; the Lion, fearing competition, cracking down on them. Funny, my in-laws live in that region that now has become one of the poorest in the world. Mission accomplished for the lion...:mad:
One thing you see in Hollywood is that they mostly attack some lion distant in time and space. It's OK to attack Rome, Spain, etc, in some fundamental way, but not America or her partners in crime. Sometimes it does attack America but it's only because it's a good story and so it can make good money, and because it's presented as a problem with some particular corrupt individuals, not as systemic problems. And even in such cases, the enemy is so much worse. Money takes priority over politics. That particular movie attacks the partnership-in-evil between Portugal, Spain and the Vatican... But you can always connect the dots and see the common thread among all lions, past and present...
Summary: A heartwrenching film of mesmerizing beauty........
What can one say of "The Mission", but that it is one of the most beautifully photographed films I have ever set my eyes on. I first saw this epic film in 7th grade and it still haunts me to this day. If you are a lover of historical films this is a feast for the eyes. It is also very sad because it shows you the demise of the native American peoples of Central and South America as a result of colonial Spain's conquests. Robert de Niro and Jeremy Irons give great performances here as Jesuit priests that yearn to save and teach the Indians. Nominated for 7 Academy Awards and winning for Cinematography this film is a treasure that should be seen by everyone to remind us of how imperialism destroys civilizations and the beauty of other cultures.
Posted 20 April 2004 - 04:35 AM
You still think democracy exists, Woj? The incumbent President of Spain did not lose the election because he was voted out. He lost because he did not support the EU.
I saw The Mission a couple of times, defintiely nice cinematography, and one of those stories filled with the beautiful sadness of life. One has to ask where the South American immigration department was?
It is certainly a travesty to enforce a culture upon another. Gosh! Things haven't changed in all these years, ay?
Posted 20 April 2004 - 08:07 AM
You still think democracy exists, Woj? The incumbent President of Spain did not lose the election because he was voted out. He lost because he did not support the EU.******
Pliny; I think that democracy is low life, but I still glorify democracy in that case because it permits to remove from Spain individual, who is even lower low life than democracy. Aznar
Posted 20 April 2004 - 08:19 AM
Does demise of the native American peoples of Central and South America as a result of colonial Spain's conquests makes you sad when demise of native American as a result of English Quakers in North America makes you happy?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users