Posted on 08/30/2006 8:32:01 AM PDT by UnklGene
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1692699/posts
I sure did. It kind of reminds me of a joke by a comedian (Seinfeld?) where someone is trying to describe a mugger while being politically correct. I hadn't considered the speculation about the safety of SUV's being a talking point. But I was sure his mental stability would come into play. But, indeed, at least with some sidewalk drivers, there is a question of craziness or drunkenness. I don't recall the Duke incident offhand.
It's like we are fighting the war blindfolded.
And that's the way some like it!
"http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1692699/posts" should be:
Family: Suspect in SF rampage thought 'devil was coming to him'
Getting Muslims to believe Muslims were behind 9/11 is akin to taking a poll after Jesus was crucified and asking the locals if He really was the Son of God. A minority would say yes. The majority would say no. Thankfully polls do not determine the truth in such cases.
Hey, I have a B.S. in Zoology and it wasn't a soft science (then - UCLA Class 1969).
They taught me a great tool which these fools have either never learned or forgotten.
Occam's Razor.
Occam's razor (also spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham (Guilhelmi Ockam and Guillermi de ockam in Latin [1]). Originally a tenet of the reductionist philosophy of nominalism, it is more often taken today as a heuristic maxim that advises economy, parsimony, or simplicity in scientific theories.
Occam's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or "shaving off", those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae (law of succinctness):
entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem,
which translates to:
entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor
Who's here? HoosierGal!
Welcome. I imagine you live or work around Goshen.
Your observations are very good. I knew peaceniks at Notre Dame, some influenced by Howard Yoder. They are big on being against war, but not clear on dealing with aggression.
I came to that same realization a couple of years ago. I had a day off and spent it running errands for my pets while they rode around in the back seat. My dogs will come up to me and start barking and I'll let them out. They bark again and I let them in and give them a bone. It took them a couple of years, but I'm trained now.
OK - first it will desensitize and then it will satisfy bloodlust. Which is it?
I think it will serve as a reminder. I have seen recent footage of the second plane smashing into the south tower. I would never confuse that jetliner for a drone.
But there are many who haven't seen what actually happened for 5 years. They need to see it.
And if you broadcast it once an hour, most people will see it 3 times a day or fewer.
Shalom.
Ping
Bingo! Thanks for the ping.
Satoisfy the bizaare bloodlust of those advocating a daily screening of the 911 atrocity on every station identification.
Desensitize everyone else who doesn't have that strange fixation.
I dont think what you advocate will make 911 more meaningful to most people. As I said, it will make it less real.
You thought that was live? That was all produced at ILM/CIA/NSA/FOX HQ months ahead of time, then seamlessly inserted.
Who are you going to believe, thousands of eyewitnesses and your own logic, or me?
Doesn't matter - they've already forgotten. Had we kept playing it (hourly, daily, at the start of each day, etc) they might accept the images as real. However, we didn't, so now they would think it was some kind of Hollywood production.
Shalom.
99.9999 percent of government employees wouldn't go along with it, and the ones that wouldn't would be ratting out the conspirators with the very first shred of real evidence they found. Which they'd find, unless there isn't any. You simply can't hide a conspiracy the way that the theoriests describe it happening.
Unless, of course... you're the all powerful, all knowing President of the United States. Who, oddly enough, is considered a big dummy by most of the theorists.
It's one of two extremes with these guys. Either Bush is the dumbest rube to every bumble his way into the White House, or he's a diabolical mastermind who pulled off the greatest conspiracy in history. Whichever fits their need, depending on where in the narrative they are.
Bin Laden? You do realize that Bin Laden is really just President Bush wearing a mask, right? He and Dr. Ayman Zawa-Cheney are the ones who have been making all of those jihadist videos.
Karl Rove was also playing an al-Qa'ida mastermind in his spare time, but they arranged for his alter ego, Khalid Sheikh Muhammed, to be "arrested in Pakistan" so he could get back to the one job he truly loves.
Reprogramming Diebold machines.
I mean, seriously, how have you guys not figured this out yet? Have you ever seen Bush and Bin Laden in the same room? I feel like the guy watching Superman who cringes when no one notices Clark Kent "suddenly disappear" right before Superman shows up.
"Gee, President Bush, where'd ya go? You missed bin Laden! He was right here!"
Think about it! He can't catch bin Laden because he is bin Laden.
Idiots!
A rediculous state of 'news' and/or affairs. . .to give this sickness a forum. . .
I don't think your hourly broadcast would have brought you the desired outcome.
Is it really the *gov't* that insists this, or the MSM? I don't hear gov't comments on these episodes (and there are more all the time), but I notice that the MSM doesn't give us the names of the perps - otherwise we'd notice that they are Muslim.
We're treating these all as individual crimes here, but if this same stuff was happening in Iraq at the same rate, we'd be calling it "civil war".
And who's to know if the gov't is monitoring these people? Maybe they are, but if the NYT finds out, they'd have to stop.
That's the point that Rumsfeld has been making lately. He's getting raked over the coals by the Dems and the MSM for doing it, but I applaud him (and Bush) for doing it.
I think this is definitely the important issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.