• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Bear Bibeault
  • Paul Clapham
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Knute Snortum
Sheriffs:
  • Liutauras Vilda
  • Tim Cooke
  • Junilu Lacar
Saloon Keepers:
  • Ron McLeod
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Moores
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
Bartenders:
  • Joe Ess
  • salvin francis
  • fred rosenberger

To all participants of topics such as 9 11

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5390
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Why dont you find a good place to discuss such issues like this one
http://www.september11victims.com/september11Victims/discussion/default.asp
Yes, I am repeating this link.
If you dont want to discuss this there then why do u want to discuss here?
Let it be Meaningless. Why you want to discuss such meaningful discussion here?
You all have discussed this not only 1,2 or 3 times ... God knows how many times..
Why ???
and David O'Meara , when a post should be deleted OR put a lock ??
 
Sheriff
Posts: 6450
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
<sarcasm>
On a similar note, I find the Word Association thread just terribly out of place. Why don't you all find a better place to discuss such topics, such as http://pub39.ezboard.com/bmeffertspuzzles ?
Then there are the topics asking for relationship advice. That's far too meaningful. Why would you want to discuss that here? You should go to somewhere like http://www.consciousloving.com/forums/ instead.
And why are people asking for legal advice here. That is also too meaningful. This forum is for meaningless drivel. They already have forums for that: http://forum.freeadvice.com/ .
I will followup with a list of what I consider meaningless topics that you can all talk about. Any deviation from this list and I will have no choice but to whine some more.
</sarcasm>
But seriously, if you don't like a topic that has been posted, don't read it. It's that simple.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5390
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Seriously Jason, do you like it, when everytime you try to prove same thing again and again???
So why not make drugs LEGAL. Who do not want it, don't take it. it's that simple.
AW carry on, what fun rapist get in rape only he can know, for others it will remain crime.
[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: Ravish Kumar ]
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1936
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
:roll:
Some serious points indeed, but alas, I will have to ignore them, as they are posted here in the *meaningless* forum!!
 
"The Hood"
Posts: 8521
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Why would he try to prove that he is WRONG .
He just likes to debate. That is what debate is all about.
If I am not mistaken, he would probably be willing to take either side of a debate if challenged - just for the fun of the debate itself .
Lots of folks like to debate. Lots of folks find it tiring.
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5390
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Cindy Glass:
If I am not mistaken, he would probably be willing to take either side of a debate if challenged - just for the fun of the debate itself .



OK, is anyone here to change the role.
Let us say now Jason will support Taliban and Omar will support US acts.
Good fun Na
Alas, I wish you were right OR I am wrong.
 
Cindy Glass
"The Hood"
Posts: 8521
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Jason, Omar - you up for this?? .
 
Cindy Glass
"The Hood"
Posts: 8521
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Does Jason actually have to support the Taliban? Or can he start with where we are NOW and support what should happen in Middle East - having the US stay OUT of it?
Then Omar could argue why the US should step in and insure that Iraq is not breaking it's agreement and creating weapons.
 
Jason Menard
Sheriff
Posts: 6450
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I would always be up to the challenge to argue a position opposite of that which I might normally take.
Of course since I always argue for the correct position, it might be difficult to make a convincing argument the other way .
[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 479
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I find the idea great. Let's Hope Omar will take the challenge. I bet that Jason will soon be out of arguments.
[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: Younes Essouabni ]
 
Leverager of our synergies
Posts: 10065
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
"I bet that Jason will soon be out of arguments" - what, aren't you going to help him?
 
R K Singh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5390
1
Spring Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Jason Menard:
Of course since I always argue for the correct position,


Who told you that you argue for correct position? .

Jason, Omar - you up for this??


Smileys are good thing, you can say some good points without hurting anyone.
 
High Plains Drifter
Posts: 7292
Netbeans IDE VI Editor
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Debate is equal parts evidence, reasoning, and persuasion. Although it is by definition an adversarial process, you can't have a very interesting debate when most points offered are recriminations or restatements of personal opinions in the form of 'shared higher beliefs.'
How do you debate on behalf of a terrorist group? Isn't the founding point of all terrorist activity that reasoning and discussion don't work? If you are a known suspect of terrorist activity, how do you come out in the open for a discussion of the issues?
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1865
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Michael Ernest:

Isn't the founding point of all terrorist activity that reasoning and discussion don't work?


Certainly a disbelief in the success of democratic processes could lead one to consider the terrorist option. Another is the possibility that a terrorist's goal is to setup a dictatorship and therefore the terrorist organization does not want to promote the use of democratic systems. For example, what would be the result of diverting money away from Islamic terrorist organizations and instead investing the money in building Muslim political organizations that would work peacefully within the political process? The result would be Muslim organizations that are able to work successfully within a democracy. How would that promote the goal of setting up an Islamic dictatorship the rules over the entire Islamic world? Obviously, the use of democratic systems is not going to promote the establishment of any dictatorship; therefore, the terrorists have no use for a democratic approach.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 18944
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
quote:
originally posted by Michael Ernest
Debate is equal parts evidence, reasoning, and persuasion. Although it is by definition an adversarial process, you can't have a very interesting debate when most points offered are recriminations or restatements of personal opinions in the form of 'shared higher beliefs.'
How do you debate on behalf of a terrorist group? Isn't the founding point of all terrorist activity that reasoning and discussion don't work? If you are a known suspect of terrorist activity, how do you come out in the open for a discussion of the issues?

You bring a very interesting point of what debate is really all about and how it is inherently adversarial.
latest Merriam Webster's definition: debate:
: a contention by words or arguments: as a : the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b : a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides
I believe that to seek the truth of matters
one must be objective. We are all probably familiar with what it means to be objective but for clarity's sake: Objectivity means to
deal with and judge facts without distortion by personal interpretations. That definition of Objectivity makes me laugh as it contains an obvious paradox. How can one rid him/herself of their OWN personal interpretations
during the process of "interpreting the facts"??
Answer: with utmost difficulty.
The good news is....you can Try!!! You can try hard to disown your personal inclinations/preferences/viewpoints and exit outside "yourself" and take the standpoint of a the "fair" unbiased judge..one who lets both opponents into his/her court and takes no sides until all is said and done! One who listens to both opponents' sides of the story without a predetermined liking/hate of either side?!?!?!?
Not only that, but also one who has the courage and will to re-define right and wrong during the proceedings. Are we prepared to be truly objective??
Usually what happens in debates (by the inherent meaning of a "debate") is you take a side before you even start. This perception of yours is usually not based on an objective judgment (u wouldn't be in the debate to start with if you had it all figured)
As interesting and useful as it may be, it cannot be adequately objective to reach a fuller understanding of the truth of matters (or at least what you would be able to justify to yourself as the truth of matters)
Let's be objective...let's not be biased to one side or the other..but rather float freely listening to all sides equally "as if" we belong to none...very very difficult..but worth it if we care for "truths"...
but for plain entertainment, for fun, for time waste and especially for "self-assurance"...you don't have to be objective.
 
Michael Ernest
High Plains Drifter
Posts: 7292
Netbeans IDE VI Editor
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Objectivity is a goal, of coursem and often a state that's hard to maintain unless most parties agree to it.
But the element of persuasion usually calls for elements beyond forc of intellect. Objectivity by itself can be a powerful persuader, and it can also be quite boring applied in a single-minded way.
I'd rather say, let's strive for objectivity and see how far that takes us.
 
Dan Chisholm
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1865
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I agree that the judge must remain objective, but the participants in the debate must argue in favor of one position or the other. Otherwise, there is no debate. The entire process can remain civil and informative as long as the participants avoid personal (ad hominem) attacks against one another.
 
Anonymous
Ranch Hand
Posts: 18944
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Dan Chisholm:
[QB]
Certainly a disbelief in the success of democratic processes could lead one to consider the terrorist option. Another is the possibility that a terrorist's goal is to setup a dictatorship and therefore the terrorist organization does not want to promote the use of democratic systems..."

Let's ask this question: Have the domocratic processes been offered as an option for the terrorist to start with? If so, what are the channels for those options? Let's remember we're talking about democracy in the world which is NOT at all the same as Democracy within the boundaries of America. The great civil rights of democracy that American people enjoy
are not enjoyed by people of many nations. Could it be possible the terrorist is amongst those "silenced" and oppressed people who are not allowed to voice their opinions? Could it be that their governemnts have stripped them from their rights of democracy or even free-speach?
Take it to the next level, Could it be that America has aided those governments, possibly in opressing those people? Is it possible the terrorist is striving to be heard afterall? Striving for democracy? These questions...we should seek the answers to, to enlighten our serarch!
When you talk about democracy and "democratic processes" as a system , and who beleives in it and and who doesn't.. you should first specify which people get the chance to share in this democracy...the scope of people to which this democracy is a viable channel to take control of their own destinies.
Let's strive to go EXTRO towards the world and not just INTRO towards ourselves. Let's try to get out of our bubble and see how life really is for other people of the world...I mean we're trying to truly understand what's going on and why it's going on..right?!

 
Dan Chisholm
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1865
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by <J.S.T>:

Let's ask this question: Have the domocratic processes been offered as an option for the terrorist to start with? If so, what are the channels for those options? Let's remember we're talking about democracy in the world which is NOT at all the same as Democracy within the boundaries of America. The great civil rights of democracy that American people enjoy
are not enjoyed by people of many nations. Could it be possible the terrorist is amongst those "silenced" and oppressed people who are not allowed to voice their opinions? Could it be that their governemnts have stripped them from their rights of democracy or even free-speach?


You have made some good points that make it very clear that my post was not specific. I was not referring to democratic processes in the Middle East because none exist. I was referring to democratic processes in the United States. We were the victims of the September 11 attacks which were intended to force changes in American policy. I was trying to make the point that American policy changes can be achieved by working within the democratic processes that are available here. The following quote is a post that I recently made in another thread.


In any conflict between nations, cultures, religions, philosophies, or geographic regions there will be at least two sides to the story. Some conflicts appear to be an obvious choice between good and evil and certainly the leaders of each faction will try to frame the conflict as such. In other cases, a reasonable person can sympathize with either side. Here in the United States many Americans sympathize with the Palestinian people yet strongly oppose the Palestinian use of terrorism. Similarly, many Americans sympathize with the Israeli people but question the policies of the Israeli government such as the construction of settlements in the West Bank. Many Americans do not view favorably the results of the Balfour Declaration but feel that both the Palestinians and Israelis need to find a way to work toward peace within the framework of the existing realities.
The foreign policy of any democracy is strongly influenced by those that vote. (I don't want to say that the voters dictate foreign policy because the issue does not always come up in the elections.) Here in the United States, the Jewish population is only about 3% of the total population. However, by far, they are the best organized and the most likely to vote in every election. As a result, the percentage of seats held in Congress by Jewish Americans probably greatly exceeds 3%. In contrast, Arab Americans don't hold any seats in Congress. Some may say that it is unfair, but I say that it is an example of the rewards available to those that work within the democratic system.
I doubt that American reaction to acts of terror by Islamic fundamentalists will be appealing to the Islamic world. However, American reaction to the efforts of Arab and Islamic political activists here in America could produce a major shift in American foreign policy. Muslims are required to donate some percentage of their income to charity and that includes the Saudi Royal Family. Today, many of those charities have been shut down due to suspicions of associations with terrorist organization. Where is that money going today? Why not use the money constructively here in the United States to develop the capability to participate in the democratic process? President Bush won the elections by something like a hundred votes in Florida. Similarly, any minority that cares to get organized and use their power to extract promises from the candidates can determine a close congressional race. Even if Arab Americans represent only 2% of the population in a particular district they can influence the behavior of the candidate if they get organized and vote.
If Arab Americans want to extend their influence to the non-Arab American population then they may do so by getting involved in the educational system. Here in America, there is now a trend to move children from public schools to private schools. If the money that is currently used to support terrorism is diverted to a system of private schools in America then the children that attend those schools might have an opportunity to gain a different view of the issues involving the middle east. (No I am not making a judgment on which view is correct.) If the schools are able to prove their success in low income school districts, then the possibility exists that similar success could be achieved in middle income districts. Once those children reach the age of 18 and register to vote, their impact will be apparent.
Tremendous political benefits could be achieved by getting involved in charity work within American inner cities. Contrary to popular belief, the number of poverty stricken people in America is very high and the US government has been reducing the resources that are made available to the poor. (No, I am not making a judgment against current domestic policy. Instead, I agree that such aid is sometimes better provided by charitable organizations.) If Arab and Islamic leaders would like to generate tremendous political support within our inner cities, then open some homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and day care centers that offer affordable rates for the children of working parents that can't otherwise afford day care. In return for the humanitarian support you can ask the people to register to vote.
My advice to the Islamic world is as follows. Abandon terrorism and instead invest in democracy, education, and charity. If you want to influence America then just become a part of America and participate constructively in the democratic process. A constructive approach will produce better results.

 
I'm thinking about a new battle cry. Maybe "Not in the face! Not in the face!" Any thoughts tiny ad?
Sauce Labs - World's Largest Continuous Testing Cloud for Websites and Mobile Apps
https://coderanch.com/t/722574/Sauce-Labs-World-Largest-Continuous
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!