actually as far as Islam is concerned, it depends on what you are. Christians and Jews are regarded as "people of the book" traditionally: they're viewed as misguided, but not evil. as far as how they regard people of non-Abrahamic religions, that's another question, but consider that Zoroastrianism still survives (granted, in very small numbers) in Iran.



but forming communities and cooperating to create a better life is also human nature: it's what allowed us to survive the ice age. where's that all gone to?



AMEN!!! you don't need to see a virus to know when you're sick!

Well he's already threatening closure of a second TV station as we speak (or rather type). Hopefully Evo Morales and Rafael Correa don't follow in his footsteps.

But I really think that the most dangerous person alive is the President of the United States... a person is gauged "dangerous" by the potential he/she can do damage, is it not?

And before I would just say that he is misguided in terms of foreign policy, but now it appears that he's trying to preserve his own legacy at the peril of the American people by entrenching deeper in Iraq. From Reuters; the implications of what Tony Snow is saying is scary: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N30416213.htm

And if this took place, well it would just be like the Roman Emperors of old (it is an op-ed though): http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-geyer_31edi.ART.State.Edition1.4370227.html


Putin's a really shady guy though; but unfortunately no one's really complaining due to worsening political freedoms and the fact that the economy is doing well and thus most Russians support him - just goes to show that people would prefer money to political freedoms, which is why China is doing so well I guess. But at least the Russian people traded in a cantankerous drunkard for a lean, muscular, judo black belt and KGB agent. How cool is that!

For anyone who thinks that if we leave the middle east or muslim alone it will become some kind of united front (or nation) to combat America is just plain ignorant of history (both ancient and modern). When was the last time the entire middle east was untied?

...NEVER. Although it did come close at some points in history (Persian/Greek Empire and Ottoman to name a couple). Beyond that point, a large number of muslims live outside of the middle east (particularly in southeast asia.) They are also very unlikely to join a united muslim anti-american crusade because of cultural differences with muslims in the middle east.

On top of all of that, look at what is happening in Iraq right now. It is civil war and it has been building for a long time. That is the problem with creating a huge empire and untied front. People disagree and if you kill or oppress the people they disagree with you they are going to fight whatever empire you are going to try to build in there territory. These disagreements are not solved overnight and everyone suddenly gets along.

That would make me as dangerous as your typical serial killer. Some nut case may create potential, but potential I don't think is a good measure of 'dangerous'.

I actually think the VP is more dangerous than the P. Rove too.

a good point. perhaps danger is better estimated by "potential level of violence" taken alongside "likeliness to use it." the U.S. historically uses its military far more often than other industrialized countries, and we certainly have one with an unsurpassed capacity for violence.

and i also agree with you sort of, the VP scares the crap out of me. but who's more dangerous with a gun, a calculating criminal or a drooling idiot?

and it's an old story, too. they spun Nasser that way (and he actually was trying to build up a unified middle-eastern empire, but the 'anti-american' came from our media spin).

After thinking about this question in the context of the discussion, I propose that the P is the gun being wielded by numerous calculating criminals. The sort of gun that goes off on its own every so often.

Profits is why the US has a propensity for violence. And the public has become somewhat numb to it. Conflict is very profitable for a lot of people.

yeah, the U.S. is the only place where the common working person actually believes the idea that "war is good for the economy." no, war is good for the rich. it only kills off breadwinners among the lower classes, depletes resources, and leaves a major part of the population to suffer mental trauma.

We pay taxes. Our leaders spend insane amounts of money on missiles and planes and guns, send sharply dressed recruiters to the more depressed areas of the country, and make like they're heroes sending other folks' children to war. The guys making the missiles and planes and guns and all the other associated goodies, along with the big investors, rake it in.

It's the opposite of Robin Hood. And it's very dangerous.

Hmmm, very interesting. No *public face* to maintain, infinite wealth that would obviously be kept within the *family* or something like that AND the ability to maintain this position of power *eternally*. Sound like my kind of people!  
I think you're right about this as there are the *hidden elite* throughout the world and they do control how things flow on this ball of dirt and water we call home. Some would say this is absurd thinking but it isn't. We may not know who or what they are but they exist. A group such as the Bilderberg comes to mind quite immediately. Every year the world's most powerful and influential people gather without so much as a blip on the radar of the press/media, even though some of the most well known reporters and anchorpeople are invited to attend these *meetings*. Doesn't anyone find it odd that a group of the world's most wealthy individuals can get together for a *party* and not be harassed by the press? Those who debunk this logic always fall back on the reasoning of "since these people are important it is necessary to keep their meetings as secret and secure as possible to prevent some harm coming to them at the hands of some loony or conspiracy nut".
It's not that simple people.  

Well it actually was in WWII, but we were defending ourselves at that time. It really depends on the leader; after the Cold War, Bush I and Clinton started cutting back on military spending in favor of a "smaller, leaner" military. Bush II reversed that policy, saying that the "first priority" will be the military:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020123-13.html

But definitely more dangerous is the current's President's thinking. He believes that he has some great destiny, and fashions himself on the great presidents of the past: Reagan, Truman, Roosevelt, even perhaps Abe Lincoln. This is why his position on Iraq is so intractable.

Well don't worry... thanks to his policies the US will become irrelavent in 30 years and China will take over. Will have to see how that turns out (probably worse )

They're very intelligent, very rich, and have a great deal of experience. They probably 'employ' the very best sociology and psychology minds on the planet. I'd bet they spend as much, or more, money covering their tracks as they do doin' their thing.

Look at the label 'conspiracy theorist'. Anybody who has been paying the slightest attention to current events would know that conspiracies do exist, have existed for thousands of years. There are also some who read a lot of stuff and are capable of reading between the lines and connecting well scattered dots. I bet there were some good German folk in the early thirties saying "something isn't quite right here."

They've inundated all avenues of media with ridiculous 'conspiracy theories' in an attempt to discredit all 'conspiracy theories'. And they've been very successful. I see examples of this on almost every message board. On this message board, for example, a member ridiculed another member who put forth a theory by suggesting the member also believed the twin towers were brought down from the inside. I don't necessarily believe this, but it is more plausible to me than even the official story. We spend millions investigating the slightest thing in the US, but, unless I missed it, we found some paper passports in the wreckage, some video tapes of Arabs in airports, and Osama praising the attacks (not accepting responsibility), and a couple of days later we're on the march. We're still on the march, but for some reason, no longer particularly interested in Osama. We investigated what went wrong, but we forgot to investigate who all was involved. And with the constant barrage of violence and scare tactics all over the place, a large majority of the American public was fooled into missing this. Or maybe I'm missing something. I'd be willing to bet large sums of money that there is a conspiracy surrounding 9/11 if I thought proof would ever be brought forth in my lifetime. What that conspiracy is, I'm not sure we'll ever know.

They've successfully been able to place obscure loop holes in many rules and laws that only those who can afford to employ many of the best people in their respective fields are able to find and abuse. These loop holes are unlikely to be found by even the most talented folks without the financial resources to back up the effort.

Marcus, it's the people who finance these types of efforts who are the most dangerous people in the world. For all we know, one or more may even play GalCiv2.

Oh No! They found me out! Now I'll have to switch from Cultural Influence to Outright Warfare!   

Ah-ha! I knew you were somehow involved with all this.

You didn't read my post. I already said the Christians of old Europe had some fun, which is inclusive of the crusades and the Spanish inquisition.

Thats what Putin said, you say tomato I say tomato... but it all spells the same thing doesn't it

So by your Logic Christians had their fun Warring in the Crusades, Turning America into Colonial provinces, Destroying Civilizations such as the Aztecs in the name of Isabella, who was divinely appointed by God.
The Spanish Armada which aim was to Destroy the Heathens of the same Religion in England. Mass killing of the Jews as soon as Christianity gained dominance in Europe. Slavery networks spanning the entire world ect.
So now its the turn for those who are Musliem and therefore represent Islam, to destroy the Infidels.

Intresting to note there are probably more Organised terrorist groups in South America, (Columbia in particuler) then there is Islamic Terrorist groups who have vowed to destroy the west.


To the guy who thinks 9/11 is a conspiracy, after reading about this and other acts by the American goverment, i too am Skeptical of the offical report.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods Undeniable evidence.

if you don't see it on Unsolved Mysteries, then it's a real conspiracy.



that was a unique case; in some ways, WWII was like an elaborate public works project (as far as its effect on the U.S. economy). things would have been very different if we'd been involved with the war sooner (like in WWI, since so many point to the ways the second was a continuation of the first), or if our industrial-manufacturing economy weren't already in shambles at the time (we were still recovering from the great depression). nonetheless, point taken.

It is not about turns, it is about who has been learning lessons from the mistakes of the past and who has not.

Well thats a lie, cause they "the church of england" bought shares in a company , making "landmines2

So the CofE isn't so pure


Reading more, marcus

Why is it so impossible to get away from religion


It seems like this is a mad theory that gives rational people a way to think irrationally

Is religion the ultimate culture shock, the mother of irrational thinking.

Some lord tells me not, but so many religious ppl say "why" and worse "why not"

Marcus

OK, its awkward to be an athiest. too many desperate ideas

At least their your own ideas!

As a Christian myself, it is easy to see that my opinions and actions could be viewed as not my own. I do not like that! and Christians who just blindly tow the company line kinda irritate me as well. I say this.... God gave me a brain and i intend to use it!

Having Faith should not mean that you put aside your own instincts, because that is very dangerous, that is exactly how cult leaders succeed with mass suicides or how muslim extremists succeed in recruiting suicide bombers.

Faith to me means believing in God,mirracles and forgivness not believing that my every day life is not my own to do with as i see fit. And this is different from what allot of Christians believe.... they are all searching for what Gods plan for their life is. I think God's plan for your life is to use the brain he gave you and make your own descisions!

I am surely searching.
This is my athiesm.
What is my God? Where is an athiesm?

Marcus
]
PS, where does "me" lie

Is it a god?

Or a fool?
for me its a power based fool.


But who is that. leave it up o you.

That is nicely abstract!

I have two books I'd like to recommend to anyone, and no I have no interest whatsoever in converting anyone, I couldn't care less what religion or culture anyone belongs to - as long as they are compassionate, honest, strong, courageous, intellectual, and responsible. No I'm not an atheist, but ... well, just check out these two books: "An Open Life", [Harper and Row Publishers] ref: Joseph Campbell Foundation, http://www.jcf.org/about_jc.php - and "An Open Heart", [Little, Brown and Company] ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Open_Heart

Th rest I leave up to you.