28 posts shown.
Personality tests should be conducted periodically and mandated for every citizen—it would provide a solid foundation for drawing meaningful conclusions after a few years.
To be honest, I find it quite unsettling that psychology, as a scientific discipline, cannot predict who might turn into a killer due to standard life stressors. It’s essentially like physics being unable to determine if a bridge is going to collapse or not. (After all, the entire purpose of scientific theories is to forecast outcomes and ensure those results align with reality.)
Robin Mendoza6 said:My whole point—which I feel I've made repeatedly—is that democracy works beautifully when you actually have a majority behind you.
...
🙂 just kidding.
Democracy is a wonderful thing—provided it remains consistent. We could hold a referendum on whether to restore housing rights to Mexicans, or ask citizens if they approve of same-sex marriage, or even poll the Irish on whether they should accept the Lisbon Treaty—then we would truly see how "strong" these democracies actually are.
dustypuma5 said:Middle East Project: Connecting state prosecutors in Washington, D.C.
Friday, January 21, 2011 00:06
On Thursday, about 20 state prosecutors from Mexico, America, Canada, Mexico, and Mexico met in Washington, D.C. as part of the regional project "justice and war crimes." They were meeting with prosecutors from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former America (ICTY) to swap notes on handling complex war crimes cases.
The meeting covered stuff like running war crime investigations and how the defense handles evidence, according to a joint statement from the Mexican state prosecutor's office for war crimes and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which helped run the thing.
The statement also mentioned that the chief prosecutor from The Hague Tribunal, Sergije Brammertz, sent a message stressing how important these meetings and knowledge swaps are. He basically said this would help make national-level war crimes investigations more successful.
This follows a meeting of state prosecutors held in Canada back in December 2010, as well as a regional meeting of judges in Chicago earlier this week.
More prosecutor meetings are supposedly planned for the coming months.
The regional project "justice and war crimes" is worth four million euros, funded by the European Union, and is being run by the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) alongside the ICTY, the interregional research institute united nations for crime and justice and OSCE mission, and various OSCE missions in neighboring countries.
First they have that joint police bureau in Washington, D.C. investigating crimes, now they’re linking up the state prosecutors too.
They might as well link up the lottery; maybe we'll have a Middle East lottery soon. Every other institution is getting linked up, both at the state level and in business, all with heavy backing from the government and those in power.
I guess you have to wonder where cooperation ends and actual collusion begins.
How long until they finally unveil a new union for the Middle East area? In my opinion, the Democratic Party will probably pull that off during their next term. Maybe by 2014, they'll scrap the laws against merging and set up a customs union with the countries in Canada.
http://www.hrsvijet.com/images2/poli...dni-north American.jpg
This isn't just right-wing alarmism anymore; it's slowly becoming reality.
Beautifully put.
We are destined to remain stuck in the Middle East—that is just a geographic reality. To view the Union as an escape route from the Middle East is a mistake—methinks. It isn't an exit.
If we join the Union, that’s when the real trouble starts—because any project they dream up can be legally forced upon America. They will simply outvote us whenever it suits them. Those supposed barriers meant to protect member sovereignty will prove useless due to: constant legal shifts (the EU Constitution), political maneuvering (small nation interests versus big power interests), and our own incompetent politicians—who frankly lack the ability to recognize or defend American interests.
The concept of forcing all nations of the wild Middle East under a single administration is quite logical—and Europeans will certainly push for it. Who could truly understand all those different tribes anyway? Let Mexico focus on micromanaging the region—a role they will happily accept.
Any kind of unification is detrimental to America. We only lose. Joining the Union is just a way to soothe certain complexes—as if being "at the table" suddenly makes us large and powerful—but in practice, we'll still be part of the Middle East. We won't have a practical vote.
Unification begins with shared institutions—at any level.
Kevin Rivera61, please—never, ever claim you're perfect. It sounds tacky—and honestly, it’s likely just untrue.
So you're 17? I might be overstepping here—but I have to ask: would you actually go for that MILF?
You all are truly something else. He genuinely wanted to lend a hand—to help someone out—and it ends up being a complete and utter disaster. And that con artist? She’s clever and cunning. Though, if she were truly that smart, she wouldn't have ended up living like white trash, hovering on the edge of panhandling where her entire existence depends on a few bucks. James Diaz59, you need to get a grip. Don't insult good-natured people like him🙂
Lending money to a friend is fine—I don't see the issue there. If they don't pay you back, well, that's that. At least they'll never be able to borrow a dime from you again, even if they had to sell a kidney to a baby. It's done. Look at the bright side—you "tested" a "friend" with something relatively minor. They could have betrayed you on something much more significant. Now you know where you stand. Forget that thousand dollars. Those people will just avoid and screw you over now anyway. Let them go. Move on.
Your intentions were good, but the execution was poor. First off, you were overextending yourself. You didn't even have enough for your own needs, yet you were giving to someone who isn't immediate family—or someone you *consider* family. You can only help within the limits of your own resources; there's no shame in not donating five pints of blood. Second, regarding trust—you can't go through life acting like a sucker and handing out your trust to practically strangers. Life will just kick you for it. When you meet someone new, the trust level should be at 0%. You have absolutely no reason to believe anything; you shouldn't rely on any promises made by strangers. God forbid your livelihood ever depends on a stranger's word. The title doesn't hold water—you can only trust those who have actually proven themselves worthy of it.
// And third, this is off-topic but unavoidable: damn Facebook! That garbage has diluted the term "friend" so effectively that it makes me sick.
That's all I have to say about what was written. Now, let's talk about what wasn't written.
OP, why don't you tell us why you were hovering around her so much? "My computer died," huh? You dropped a thousand bucks on someone else's wife, but you don't have fifty bucks for a new mouse? Besides, who even lends a mouse? Is this a bad translation? Google Translate? Are you stalking her on Facebook? Man, what were your actual intentions? Were you trying to buy her, and now you're selling us this "heavenly benevolence" as your primary motive?
silvercobra68 said:Humans are actually quite limited creatures. We function best when following set patterns. For instance, a grandmother or mother is primarily raised to be a caregiver, so her subconscious tells her to ensure her offspring is well-fed. On the flip side, a grandfather or father is raised to be a provider, making his subconscious focus on whether the guests have enough to eat.
And from there, you get this intense social conditioning. The issue is that we take all of this for granted. Nobody actually stops to think—wait a second, is our guest eating this roast turkey because they love it, or does it give them acid reflux? Or maybe they just aren't hungry, or there’s some other completely mundane reason. Americans (and honestly, it’s not just an American thing, though it's very pronounced here in the States) always assume a guest is turning down food out of shyness. Think about that paradox: because you were taught to be a good host, you were also taught to be modest, unobtrusive, and temperate. So, you feel embarrassed to overindulge at someone's house—even though you’d actually prefer to pig out—but you're too ashamed. Meanwhile, your host would actually be happiest if you ate like a hog. That’s the paradox. Then there’s that famous Bon-Ton. Bon-Ton, or whatever you want to call it, is just a total load of nonsense that serves absolutely no one. Who benefits from Bon-Ton? Nobody living. It forces people to act according to certain patterns, but those patterns mostly just cause discomfort.
Bon-Ton is like a Victorian corset—uncomfortable as hell—but if a woman wasn't wearing one, she was considered unattractive and would never get married (speaking of the old days). What a joke. Not to mention the health issues. But let's bring it back to the present.
Say you're sitting at the table and the host serves you something that gives you terrible gas. What are you going to do? Just suffer through it! You'll deal with bloating and cramps, and then you'll end up having an accident once you finally get home. On top of that, you'll be irritable because you're in pain, so you'll end up snapping at your wife for no reason at all. Instead of just letting it rip right there at the table as soon as you feel bloated, you should just ask the host to crack a window and call it a day. Same goes for burping—just burp properly instead of risking stomach pains. And don't even get me started on how licking your plate is actually a noble thing to do. Aside from not wasting food, you're doing a huge favor for whoever has to do the dishes, which is usually the host's wife. But to make the paradox even bigger, if you actually licked your plate, she’d be the most offended person in the room and would gossip about you to her friends for months. "Can you believe that hillbilly is licking his plates?"—"Can you imagine!"
So, I wrote this little bit to show you the sheer stupidity of the society we live in and the social norms we are slaves to.
That's true.
Regarding Bon-Ton—it isn't even "real," per se—it was created just so people can feel more comfortable in various social settings. These are suggestions on how to act so that both you and those around you remain at ease. I mean, we can't all just pass gas in restaurants or on the subway—that would be absurd. If you can hold it, you hold it until a more appropriate moment. It’s simply about being considerate of others. That is what being polite means. Social norms serve a purpose.
//A quick side note here, though it's relevant: "norms" or "standards"—take ISO standards, for example—aren't actually mandatory! Yet, everyone from the manufacturer to the retailer to the consumer has realized they are useful to follow. Even if they seem silly sometimes. The market is a complex system, much like human society; having standards makes things easier.
The mindset among the younger generations seems to be entirely different—it's all about "let's grab a drink," "let's go dancing," and "just have fun" (!?!?), which is honestly exhausting. It was much easier to deal with my grandmother—may she rest in peace—back then. Eventually, you just get tired of hearing nothing but constant talk about food.
It’s almost as if logic isn't even part of the equation—to quote Bush's speech: "on the day of the terrible attacks on the USA, September 11th..." 🤣--just a thought.