 | | Re: It's scarier if he actually believes his own nonsense.
|
|
It would seem to me that the problem with apocalyptic beliefs is that they may tend to inspire the fulfillment of the prophecies upon which they are based. If the apocalytpic visions could be taken as a metaphor for wanting a better world, then I (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's scarier if he actually believes his own nonsense.
|
|
(...) Idunno, is Britain a more secular society? Not officially of course, the state and the church are the same vs. separation of church and state, but in practice? Many do want that "God Bless America", but in Britain some like to think that God (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) this isn't a discussion about economic systems.. but if i recall correctly, Iran is feeding, clothing, and housing most its people.. any other economic information is arguable at best. the Economist, i assume.. i don't nor plan to read it (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) **snip** (...) A careful distinction must be drawn here, because "bias" is a label thrown around here somewhat indiscriminately lately. Is The Economist biased against economic systems that don't work, or is The Economist biased against (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's scarier if he actually believes his own nonsense.
|
|
I am glad you posted this, I was just listening to a British author who recently wrote a book that explains Blairs involvement in this war, I can't recall his name. He basically layed out what this article displays. The UK tends to be a much more (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's scarier if he actually believes his own nonsense.
|
|
(...) Well, if we absolutely must have a mad theocrat in office, I'd certainly want the mad theocrat with God on his side. Pity that the rock of W's faith wasn't sufficient to keep him on the straight and narrow in 1992, fully 6 years after his (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) Which of course has no bias... (...) But NPR is not biased toward the US, if anything, it's biased against, and has the same information, so what IF the Economist is biased in favor of economic systems that actually work and against ones that (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | It's scarier if he actually believes his own nonsense.
|
|
(URL) showing that article to my SO, she asked if I thought Shrub actually believed this stuff or if he was just trying to gain greater access to a particular constituency group. My answer? See subject line. -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) the most basic element of democracy is that the people decide how they want their government to work. in 1981, when US backed Saddam invaded their country, people signed up en masse to give their lives for their country. Of course, it is easy (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Iran: For peace in the region? No! For a piece *of* the region...
|
|
(...) Er, whoops. I'm an Economist subscriber (print edition) so it's no cost to me. But the point of the article, and the diagram in particular, is that Iran is more of a theocracy that has some elected (but basically powerless) appendages, than a (...) (21 years ago, 7-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
