Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Deaths from terrorism in the US in the last 10 years: <3000
Deaths from firearms in the US in the last 10 years: 300 000
If you are content with sacrificing liberty to protect against the spectacular and rare while ignoring the massacre that is going on around you, best of luck to you.
I am an ex-pat for good reason. I couldn't imagine bringing up my mixed-race kids in such a proto-fascist plutocracy.
Ok, karmadorje, I won't insist on having the last word on this and will let any reply you make to this go unanswered —or unanswered a week or more if a strong rebuttal.
First to repeat, from above, in answer to your firearm/terrorism numbers comparison analogy, I said:
How can anyone know of the full efficacy of these current protocols, anyhow? The randomness of the procedures in place is at least certain to stymie some low-tech trouble-makers who would like to make waves.
Furthermore, I think a fair number of firearms deaths that happen up close should be subsumed under the category of terrorism, anyway. Ask people of color who suffered from fear of lynchings, etc., whether that was terrorism or not. Violence is terror. If there were people confiscating those guns from the wrong hands right before the crimes were perpetrated, those gun violence death statistics would go way down.
I really think this is an emotional issue, mainly based on almost anarchical principles. Take this "liberty" issue you raise:
Sacrificing Liberty
I believe this to be a red herring. Let me try to define liberty, using the dictionary's principal definition:
1) the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. e.g.: compulsory retirement would interfere with individual liberty.
Now what is oppressive about setting a few extra conditions to open a passageway to speedy travel to a far-off destination? I mean, there's a short-term delay, and then, zip! you're off to a distant location. What greater freedom for those in the mere physical plane than such mobility? Efficient m o b i l i t y would be the most tangible of all liberties, it seem to me. If mobility is ultimately not being sacrificed, nor is one's liberty. There must be 50 ways to leave your lover:
Just slip out the back, jack
Make a new plan, stan
You don't need to be coy, roy
Just get yourself free
Hop on the bus, gus
You don't need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, lee
And get yourself free
No need for a last word at this point in the conversation. I understand where you are coming from and wish you luck with it as you are the one who has to live with it each day of your waking life. I know that you are being sincere and speaking in good faith. Likewise, I am speaking sincerely and I am not taking this personally. This is simply an exchange of ideas that happen to be on opposite sides of a series of issues that are important to us.
I am not comfortable with the direction that the US is going, from the Patriot Act and suspension of habeus corpus to extraordinary rendition, unlawful combatant designation, the travesty of ongoing sanctions against Cuba while at the same time increasing ties to the PRC, the constant political suppresion of the Global South, etc. The people who control the government in the US don't care about the little guy in their own country and if it is possible they care even less about people who don't live there. Perhaps it was ever thus. I have voted with my feet. I won't be coming back and I don't suspect I will be terribly missed. :-)
I will leave it to hardier souls than I to attempt to change the system. I will stay in the country I have settled in with its true liberties: universal health care, tremendous ethnic diversity, almost free higher education, gun control, reasonable copyright laws, etc. America holds on to a notion of itself as a beacon that has long been extinguished in the view of most of the civilized world. It is a nation, once great, that is now in decline. Quite simply, the terrorists have won. Everyone is afraid of tiny risks while being completely inured to the real risks that are around them. Quel dommage.
Securing the Washington Monument from terrorism has turned out to be a surprisingly difficult job. ...but I think we should close the monument entirely. Let it stand, empty and inaccessible, as a monument to our fears.
...
Some of them call terrorism an "existential threat" against our nation. It's not. Even the events of 9/11, as horrific as they were, didn't make an existential dent in our nation. Automobile-related fatalities -- at 42,000 per year, more deaths each month, on average, than 9/11 -- aren't, either. It's our reaction to terrorism that threatens our nation, not terrorism itself. The empty monument would symbolize the empty rhetoric of those leaders who preach fear and then use that fear for their own political ends.
The day after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab failed to blow up a Northwest jet with a bomb hidden in his underwear, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said "The system worked." I agreed. Plane lands safely, terrorist in custody, nobody injured except the terrorist. Seems like a working system to me. The empty monument would represent the politicians and press who pilloried her for her comment, and Napolitano herself, for backing down.
The empty monument would symbolize our war on the unexpected, -- our overreaction to anything different or unusual -- our harassment of photographers, and our probing of airline passengers. It would symbolize our "show me your papers" society, rife with ID checks and security cameras. As long as we're willing to sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety, we should keep the Washington Monument empty.
Heh... I think your quarreling has lost its' meaning yeah?
It's sometimes amusing to watch two people argue and argue until they both come to the conclusion that both their arguments have been rather pointless.
Heh... I think your quarreling has lost its' meaning yeah?
It's sometimes amusing to watch two people argue and argue until they both come to the conclusion that both their arguments have been rather pointless.
On the contrary, this is not merely quarreling but two heartfelt and diametrically opposed opinions of a very important issue. As this is a forum, the interlocutors usually do not convince each other of the opposite side. However, it is for those who read to think on the points raised and find what makes sense. The discussion is not wasted for the opposing viewpoint remaining unconvinced.
They're called discussions, or dialogues. We each try to listen to the other as best we can and express our thoughts as well as we can. This is not a fruitless exercise. It's in no way analogous to bargaining in the marketplace.
It's really helpful to a person to flesh out his argument with somebody else. I'll never forget when I was in college how difficult it was to write my philosophy papers —for all the contradictions that became evident in the process of making my arguments. Human beings are not calculators or computers. We are biological "systems" that think in organic terms. As such, we mix "apples and oranges" together all the time. As I said above in this thread, the Spanish philosopher José Ortega Y Gassett said that humankind has a Mission on this Earth and that Mission is the Mission of Clarity.
In a sense, as 1) no two people think alike and 2) this is a Buddhist forum, we're into interreligious dialogue. Hey, don't knock it!
Little information exists on the performance of x-ray backscatter machines now being deployed through UK, US and other airports. We implement a Monte Carlo simulation using as input what is known about the x-ray spectra used for imaging, device specifications and available images to estimate penetration and exposure to the body from the x-ray beam, and sensitivity to dangerous contraband materials. We show that the body is exposed throughout to the incident x-rays, and that although images can be made at the exposure levels claimed (under 100 nanoGrey per view), detection of contraband can be foiled in these systems. Because front and back views are obtained, low Z materials can only be reliable detected if they are packed outside the sides of the body or with hard edges, while high Z materials are well seen when placed in front or back of the body, but not to the sides. Even if exposure were to be increased significantly, normal anatomy would make a dangerous amount of plastic explosive with tapered edges difficult if not impossible to detect.
Still think this measure was adopted for the sake of airline safety from terrorist threats?
Comments
Deaths from terrorism in the US in the last 10 years: <3000
Deaths from firearms in the US in the last 10 years: 300 000
If you are content with sacrificing liberty to protect against the spectacular and rare while ignoring the massacre that is going on around you, best of luck to you.
I am an ex-pat for good reason. I couldn't imagine bringing up my mixed-race kids in such a proto-fascist plutocracy.
First to repeat, from above, in answer to your firearm/terrorism numbers comparison analogy, I said:
I really think this is an emotional issue, mainly based on almost anarchical principles. Take this "liberty" issue you raise:
Sacrificing Liberty
I believe this to be a red herring. Let me try to define liberty, using the dictionary's principal definition:
Just slip out the back, jack
Make a new plan, stan
You don't need to be coy, roy
Just get yourself free
Hop on the bus, gus
You don't need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, lee
And get yourself free
I am not comfortable with the direction that the US is going, from the Patriot Act and suspension of habeus corpus to extraordinary rendition, unlawful combatant designation, the travesty of ongoing sanctions against Cuba while at the same time increasing ties to the PRC, the constant political suppresion of the Global South, etc. The people who control the government in the US don't care about the little guy in their own country and if it is possible they care even less about people who don't live there. Perhaps it was ever thus. I have voted with my feet. I won't be coming back and I don't suspect I will be terribly missed. :-)
I will leave it to hardier souls than I to attempt to change the system. I will stay in the country I have settled in with its true liberties: universal health care, tremendous ethnic diversity, almost free higher education, gun control, reasonable copyright laws, etc. America holds on to a notion of itself as a beacon that has long been extinguished in the view of most of the civilized world. It is a nation, once great, that is now in decline. Quite simply, the terrorists have won. Everyone is afraid of tiny risks while being completely inured to the real risks that are around them. Quel dommage.
It's sometimes amusing to watch two people argue and argue until they both come to the conclusion that both their arguments have been rather pointless.
On the contrary, this is not merely quarreling but two heartfelt and diametrically opposed opinions of a very important issue. As this is a forum, the interlocutors usually do not convince each other of the opposite side. However, it is for those who read to think on the points raised and find what makes sense. The discussion is not wasted for the opposing viewpoint remaining unconvinced.
They're called discussions, or dialogues. We each try to listen to the other as best we can and express our thoughts as well as we can. This is not a fruitless exercise. It's in no way analogous to bargaining in the marketplace.
It's really helpful to a person to flesh out his argument with somebody else. I'll never forget when I was in college how difficult it was to write my philosophy papers —for all the contradictions that became evident in the process of making my arguments. Human beings are not calculators or computers. We are biological "systems" that think in organic terms. As such, we mix "apples and oranges" together all the time. As I said above in this thread, the Spanish philosopher José Ortega Y Gassett said that humankind has a Mission on this Earth and that Mission is the Mission of Clarity.
In a sense, as 1) no two people think alike and 2) this is a Buddhist forum, we're into interreligious dialogue. Hey, don't knock it!
Still think this measure was adopted for the sake of airline safety from terrorist threats?