v01i0

I think in cut there is something to think about. No offense tho: 9 11 Greatest lie ever sold I warn you - may contain offending material. Yet it bears something to think about.

He was either extremely brave or astonishingly fool.. Who the hell would hack pentagon from a home computer? Nevertheless on the good cause tho, too bad they made him a terrorist, which he apparently isn't. -v

Huh? What? Would it mean that you would have to pay watching a video over net or what? And that internet content would have to paid for? (too drunk to read o0) -v

No matter about human rights, freedom of speech or freedom in generally. Its all 'bout economical possibilities. There is a smell of hypocrisy in the air.. /me thinks about afghanistan and iraq. Yeah, right. -v

I don't believe it's accident though. It is there on purpose. I think its because the foldings are very simplistic, and both sides comes out with same folding. What the purpose is then? I don't know, but I have a guess. It's there because people are wanted to remember the attacks. 20$(and $10) bill then servers as everyday reminder of the events(for those who have seen this lol). -v

Even rocks are dangerous if you bash it into someone's head. Even tho guns are part of the problem, they are not the problem. Medicines can kill as they can heal, it's double edged sword. Maybe the right to own gun needs to be removed from known criminals(those of convicted from violency)? Thats all you need? -v

quote: Originally posted by Kalshion I'd really like to know how we are surpassing our limits, espically considering that all I see today is wars, famine, disease, hunger, water shortage's, and stuff like that How can you say we are surpassing our limits when those problems are still occuring? Indeed, those limits we have cannot be surpassed for long, it will result in consequences you mention. However, we can temporarily exceed them, but then come crashing down. You did comprehend concept of 'surpassing limits' quite differently, but nevertheless you are correct. -v

Of course it was horrible event, that caused a lot of pain to americans. I'm not happy about it either. Yet somehow a lot of people elsewhere in world have started to question the official story behind it. Even americans themselves don't seem to know the truth. One might ask that why the truth is so elusive on this matter? I doubt that many of us 'american bashers' or even 'democrats' claim to know the truth either, but at least we are willing to consider different sides of the story. One turning his head away at the moment of truth is not homo sapiens but homo religious dogmatious Human nature is to question all that is, or seems to be. As we are limited to perceive the true nature of a far away event, we need to rely on what others tell us about event. As hopefully we are that much enlightened people, that we won't buy any given story, we'll try to compose a picture of 'real event' from the pieces we obtain. Those pieces will naturally be one of those that are fitting to our worldview. Now that have been said, I'd like to introduce yet another story regarding 9/11. This one kinda lightens the burden of Bush and his regime, but increases weight on the hearts of zionists: More water on the mill -v

I'd say that government's 'the official' 911 story is a conspiracy. There's just another source telling us that it was a lie. Maybe it was Usama that organized the attack, but someone let it happen even tho they knew it was coming. That's another connection to Pearl Harbor. Donald, Dick and George needs sum spanking for they've been naughty. -v

Or that. -v

Hah, I think it's kinda cool, altho I'm not big fan to the band. It is cool as a statement. I wonder if Lordi will win the Eurovision song contest? There are few videos to be seen in Extras-section. -v

Daily Times - News from Pakistan Well, it seems that arms race in east is going on. Maybe we'll have peace when every country has capability to destroy each other. -v

LoL.. That's strange humour anyway! -v

LoL I don't have $20 bills available by a chance.. Anyone you dudes on the other side of the puddle ever tried to fold it like that? That seems like a good joke to me. Almost as good as those tinfoil beanies -v

I just gonna have to be happy with 2004 for sometime. But those screenies are making me wanting to uppgrade my PC. -v

Useful tip, thanks. Might even be more secure to install. -v

quote: Originally stated by Tony Blair But there is a different question to ask: why is it so important to the forces of reaction and violence to halt Iraq in its democratic tracks and tip it into sectarian war? Why do foreign terrorists from Al Qaida and its associates go across the border to kill and maim? Why does Syria not take stronger action to prevent them? Why does Iran meddle so furiously in the stability of Iraq? Indeed, one may ask the reason behind the sectarian fighting. Here's perhaps one of the reasons. I must some day congrulate Tony for questioning the conclusions of their own policy -v

I'd like to see it. I've heard its kind of 'Orwellian' movie. -v

Jag has point when he says that individual needs should be noted when planning a larger entity. By taking notice on that, humankind posses the potential to act together for a common goal(providing they don't kill themselves before that, as said above). -v PS. quote: Originally posted by The Black Ghost I almost wish we were sometimes. Quality space combat- and not in a video game... Yeah, like Ender's Game-style. Or then we just have to stage the attack by ourselves. ..And that wouldn't be first time, would it?

quote: Originally posted by Soback Limits on technology? I wasn't aware that technology had limits. At the moment it seems, just for example, that physics sets limits for data transferring between two points. Currently we cannot exceed speed of light, least not on my knowledge. Of course, that may change in future, which doesnÔÇÖt seem too credible however. And even claiming something like that is merely a supposition. quote: Originally posted by Soback The only major deserts are in some parts of Africa and Australia, notice how I said SOME Yea, I used wrong words in wrong succession. Although there are deserts, there are also steppes, mountains, swamps and such. Even there is a lot of free space, it is very expensive to take in use. -v

quote: Originally posted by The Black Ghost: This problem is a lot more widespread than just economic expansion problems. We're surpassing the limits of almost everything from pollution, population, morality, technology, etc... you name it. I could make a ten-page long list of problems and back each one up with a page of explantions its that bad. The thing is, most people know about these problems and how we are smashing past humanity's limits, but no one is going to act upon them. I think its time we do. Couldn't agree more. quote: Originally posted by Jaguar: I'd jump in here, but so far I see Sobacks points being either ignored, or rebutted by some ridiculous assertion. Not to be bitter or anything, but I find it strange that you fail to notice that I gave credit to Soback in several occasions. I wonder if you even read my post or just see red flag flowing in their place every time you open your eyes. World isn't that black and white, Jag. While disagreeing, people can still believe to each other having point in different matters although their disagreement is wider in it's nature. You seem to think that it's either us or them. Either ally or enemy. That is something which seems to be common problem in U.S society atm. quote: Originally posted by Jaguar: Volio, you are one of the most economicly naive people I have had the misfortune to meet in quite a while. I take pride on that. I'm not having problem in admitting that I'm no expert in economics. However I find it troubling that you basically agree in my points by saying that the depression will come. That's basically something which is conclusion from the problems I've listed in this thread(assuming one reads and comprehends them). But don't you worry, as Soback said and I've agreed: The economy will prevail after it has regained from it's depression. -v

Not only that, but you'd also need to shut your eyes and ears too.. Go and bury yourself six feet under, then you're safe of manipulating effects of the mean world. -v

Although you have point in several occasions, your reasoning in some parts is, at least to say, feeble. quote: ...if you take all the wealth in the world and re-distribute it equally between everyone. Within 5 years 95% of that wealth will end up with the people who had it before. If whole world's capital(capital is not just money, it's factories, land and even the information you posses) would be redistributed equally between all people, who can say for certainty that most of it would end up to the same people it belonged originally? It may happen tho, if the influential relationships would remain same, but I doubt that they would, since wealth and production means often are part of influence. I don't deny that there would still be people that fail to do any good for themselves with the capital they had, but there are lot more people whom previously didn't had any chances for enhance their quality of life. Not anyone lives in U.S(or any other countries where are good infrastructure and underlying system to enhance the possibilities to success). Not anyone can flee their country when bad times are upon, into the countries where things are better. If they could, it would end up in great mess. quote: Look up a picture of the world that is taken from space during the night...So, you know what's in the dark, unlit parts of the world. Resources. All kinds. Forests, mountains and hills filled with ores. Deserts and completely useless wastelands where even nature has failed to sustain life, except the toughest of it. Tho you are right of what comes to the distance of resources. But when the resource acquisition becomes harder, the expenses began to rise, so that the production will eventually end up being non-profiting. Same goes with feeding people of the earth. Most and the best cultivable land is already being used and the cultivation of the rest, where something can grow, is being expensive. quote: We don't need to force or regulate energy transitions nor markets. They regulate themselfs. When oil becomes sparse, the market will dictate that we swith over to solar, hydrogen, nuclear, coal, steam, wood, vegetable oil, ect... whatever energy/power source the market will bear. Many people have said the same you did, and I'm sure it will be said many times after. Sometimes however, people fail to comprehend it in wider context. As we run out of any form of energy, the usage of other forms increases, which results faster consumption of alternate sources of energy. I couldn't agree more on when you say that market will bear, of course it will, it has to adapt to preserve itself. My point was that we are wasting our common resources by allowing this to happen! Take the un-needed products for example. As you said, the markets will take care of them that they won't be produced very long, however they are still produced. And it's pure wastage of resources. Of course in failed communism this would be even bigger problem, as the state would probably keep producing something that anyone wouldn't need. Another problem that lies hidden in the quote above is that industry indeed is a system like any other, which tries to preserve itself. Tobacco industry is the most obvious example of all. They have even been caught of spreading misinformation about health impacts of tobacco, just to keep money flowing for their owners. Apart from that this is of course a huge ethical problem, other problems are socio-economical, that will occur when amounts of people with apartment loans and such will end up unemployed because some branch of industry quits existing. Indeed, concluding from your and mine debate on here and on other threads, it is becoming more obvious to me, that perhaps the flaw is not on the systems, not in capitalism nor in socialism, which both works well on paper. It is the human, which is the actor on those systems that is the flaw. I see our debate is originating from much deeper than just from our different views. I think it's from the contradictory nature of human being, whereas it is both, egocentristic and social being. -v PS. quote: As far as this notion of mining the earth of all it's minerals. I don't know where you are getting it from, but it's nothing but fiction. From various sources. But if you want to check it by yourself, you'll have to introduce yourself with Club of Rome publication, 'Limits of Growth, the 30-year update'(Dennis Meadows et al.).

Perhaps I used too strong word(collapse), it was depression which I meant. However, worldsystem is heading towards steep depression, or worse, if we continue on current course of consuption. We are like locusts, altho we might not having next place to go when we have cleared this one. Yeah, I can see the self-correcting mechanism in capitalism, thats why Kondratjeff's cycles are cycles. Every single system, of course, tries to preserve itself. That's law in system dynamics. However, does it have to work like Kondratjeff noticed? I mean, should we invent something that would regulate the "overheating" economy? At the moment technology businness could be causing another depression. Companies are pushing products on markets for which no one seems to have real needage. A lot of money have been invested in third generation mobile systems, yet consumers have welcomed it rather poorly. Of course, it might be fantasizing to imagine that there would be a way to regulate markets in order to make this waving between boost and depression to end. Maybe well executed market researching and more accurate information would help on that. Howerer, I think that growth cannot be endless - which it cannot be, as you agreed on - since eventually we have used every last piece of ore, last drop of oil, and cultivated the last square meter of land that is cultivable. Furthermore, with current rates of growth, that day might not be far in future. In my opinion, promoting (free)capitalism will take us there faster. Maybe somekind of regulation is needed after all. Simple reasons for that is the increasing pollution and depletion of non-renewing natural resources(I feel like I'm repeating myself). Although the worldsystem probably is capable of taking care of itself and repair the damage we've caused in time, but I'd like to see that mankind would be wise enough that this(collapse) don't have to happen. -v

I was inspired by iraqi quotes and islam thread to collect together my thoughts about underlying reasons behind the complicated situation of the modern world. Everyone interested is invitated to depate over the matter.. Here's my outline on the matter: The sheer insustainability of economical growth requires revising of global marketing policies. At the moment decision makers and company leaders are widely delusional about economical growth, which they believe can continue into the far future. But on the contrary, we are living in the world which has limits and exceeding those causes an inevitable collapse of global systems. Preceding has already been observed by Nikolai Kondratieff(see KondratieffÔÇÖs cycles). The reason of Kondratieff cycles is controversial but reality is that they do exist. One of the credible explanations is given by Club of Rome in their report ÔÇ£Limits of GrowthÔÇØ (Meadows - Randers - Meadows) which states that when a system exceeds itÔÇÖs limits of sustainability, it collapses. From this follows the supposition that fast growing economy keeps exceeding its limits and collapses over and over again, causing KondratieffÔÇÖs cycles to emerge. Reasons for this ÔÇ£economical overheatingÔÇØ can be conducted in delusions of economic growth. Today we have even new problem at hand. The current population has exceeded seven billions, while most of them are living in poverty and have no actual change for decent quality of life. The problem grows even greater, as we have already observed that poverty causes increase on birthrates. With the global media, this poor population becomes aware of the quality of life in the west, which makes them want it, and some people here of course want them to have it. Yet they fail to see the impossibility in this. They fail to see, that by demanding better life quality to the poor, they should reduce their own quality of life. Although one day we all may be poor due the depleted natural resources, and that day is not very far in the future. Our children may be the ones experiencing it. There is hope however, since we cannot tell for sure what kind of inventions future science will make. Some materials can always be replaced by others, and fusion energy may be the solution to the worldÔÇÖs energy issue. But that will be then, but present is now, and we have to remember, that future may also bring us problems that are not yet visible. Anyway, the huge chasm between the poor and rich could be one of the explaining factors behind the unrest in world today. ThereÔÇÖs a Marxian problem, when the profits of economy are mostly collected by the owners of capital, the poor become poorer and the rich even richer. Although there are systems(like taxes) that are designed to level this imbalanced division of income, it does not remove the problem of in-equilibrium on income division. It wouldn't be first time, when coups and wars would start due the extreme poverty of the masses. Other problem is the increasing pollution of growing production in world. Since the population is continuously growing and governments seek to enhance the welfare of their citizens, we are nowhere near of the limits of increasing pollution. It has been controversial whether the climate change is caused by pollution, but now there is growing consensus on the fact that it is, at least, speed up by growing pollution caused by increasing agriculture and industry. Based on preceding, one have to ask how to achieve sustainable development? No matter what you think, you have to agree that resources on this globe won't last forever. But will they last long enough so other alternatives like moon- and asteroid mining will become reality? Is the air still breathable after 20 years of growing industrialization? There's something to think about. Let the critical analyzing begin... -v