Re: achieving world piece ...
 

goodness....

getting really philosophical and all...

I was 'amused' when ol George declared that GOD told him to save the Iraqi people ...and we should go blow the place up in HIS name...hmmmm

on the other channel , Saddam was telling his folks that ALLAH had directed him to oppose the in invasion ...

both guys talking to their GODS....who control the destiny of men.
???

anyway , my original point ....and the PIECE part of it ...was the fragmentation of the world society due to everyones pursuit of HIS/HER happiness at the cost of someone else's 'happiness'...

and the fact that the 'activities' listed are very seldom achieved by ME...sure that some of yall have the fragmentation firmly together...

but that the dog has these activities as a way of life ...

unfortunately, I agree with Michael...as long as ANYone wants his or her happiness at the expense of someone else ....there will be fragmentation.

until the INDIVIDUAL person has as her mission the happiness of other people as the definition of HER happiness the splits will occur..and, having know several women with that attitude of 'service', they eventually get tired of giving and not getting back.

thanks for the thoughts

bob

Re: World Peace is a Pipe Dream. Just a Tool of Control.
 

Jasperhobbs,

Thanks for your thoughts.

AIDS: Do people suffer from it? Yes. It it caused by HIV - note my specific use of the term HIV/AIDS? The answer is NO.

SARS: More people die from pneumonia each and every day than died of SARS during the entire scaremongering fiasco, or even since SARS was first Identified.

WAR ON TERROR: Terror is an Emotion. You cannot have a war against an Emotion. If you say it's Terrorism, I debate that. The word Terror has been Cleverly Chosen. If it was Terrorism, then that too would be equally as useless because Terrorism is an Action, a Style of Warfare. It's as equally silly to declare a War On Running or a War On Sniping as it is a War on Terror. A War On Terrorism is like saying a War on War Tactics. And that's absurd.

Why not call it a War On Terrorists? Because then the Enemy could be Clearly Defined and we would all know whether a Government Decree would be a step in achieving the object. But "Terror" muddies the waters and the Govt can define it however they please.

Let me give you the definition of Terrorism...

The US Department of Defense defines it as "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."

Please note very carefully the term "unlawful" in there. It is there to Allow the Powers That Be to commit the same Acts, but deem them Lawful, isn't it?

If you remove that word - unlawful - then you Broaden the scope. And you see that what the US, Britain, Australia, Poland, are doing in Iraq, what Mugabe is doing in Zimbabwe, and so on in other parts of the world, all fall under the blanket term of Terrorism. And whether a person is called a Terrorist or Freedopm Fighter or Resistance, all depends on which side you are on - To Hitler, the Resistance were Terrorists.

This WOT is just Another Sounds-Good Reason to Limit your freedoms - freedom of movement, freedom of financial secrecy, and so on. It's all a bunch of small steps.

Michael Ross

Re: achieving world piece ...
 

Bob,

Thanks for mentioning the leaders and their "gods".


This is the same Jibble put forth for eons. To "live for others". Obviously, this is Flawed as you yourself immediately state after the above...


If Happiness was achieved by Serving Others, then these woman would have been Happy.

THINK for a moment WHO is telling you to achieve happiness by serving others? The Church? Hmmm.... think they have something to gain.

ANY time someone tells you to Serve Others there is a Slave/Master thing at play somewhere. If you look you will find it.

Happiness - however that is defined - would be Better Achieved by... pleasing yourself without infringing upon other people's property rights while Not expecting Something For Nothing. An Equal Exchange of Values, in other words.

What happens instead is, people try to get values for nothing from other people. To Control them for their own benefit. To withhold information the other person would need to make an Informed Decision.

Children see this in action from their parents, teachers, politicians and so on. And simply Adopt what they see without question.

We touched on this Briefly on the other forum. Conflict can be resolved by two people Unless...

1. There is a Thirdy Party involved

2. One is trying to get values for nothing from the other person (Control them for their own gain).

Michael Ross

Where POWER really comes from
 

Ankesh,

Thanks for being thinking.

Actually, it's Not a flawed arguement.

World Peace is achieved Only by Not wanting Power over others - something unlikely to happen on this planet. I am merely Stating and pointing out to you, the very idea of wanting world peace is to want power over others - to control them for your wishes, and to Assume everyone else wants the same as you. And this is to be guilty of the same thing the more-visible "world Not at peace" people are guilty of.

Me? I have no such desire. I do not wish to change the world. I am quite okay with Letting it and its inhabitants be how they want to be. I merely point out the hypocrisy of wanting world peace.

POWER: Power can not be taken it can only be Given. If someone has POwer over you it is because YOU give them that power.

If I do not give my power willingly, the only recourse a power monger has is to turn it into something physical. But Physical power only has a limited effect and can backfire doubly so.

Michael Ross