MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, November 19th 2018 - 01:23 UTC

Lula barred from running in October elections; Haddad will lead the PT slate

Saturday, September 1st 2018 - 07:36 UTC
Full article 152 comments

Brazil's top electoral court, TSE, on early Saturday ended the political comeback plans of former president Lula da Silva, barring him from running in elections in October. Lula is in prison having been sentenced to twelve years for corruption last April. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Terence Hill

    “However Brazil's Attorney General Raquel Dodge said that the UN Human Rights Commission recommendation could not be applied in this case, since Brazil never promulgated the international accord which mandates submission to that UN body.” What load of rubbish, if such a requirement was true where is it so written in UN protocols. Your either in or out of the UNHR, you can't pick and choose what parts apply. “The precautionary measures issued are not recommendations, they are legally binding,” according to the UN Human Rights Commission.”
    “Brazil was elected today, October 28, to the United Nations Human Rights Council. The mandate will start on January 1, 2017.
    The Brazilian Government thanks the members of the United Nations for the support received. During the new mandate, our country will work to increase the effectiveness of the Council in promoting and protecting human rights.”
    http://www.itamaraty.gov.br/en/press-releases/15097-brazil-is-elected-to-the-united-nations-human-rights-council
    No surprise, but this will clearly enable Lula to hold the moral high ground, and ensure that the UNHRC will now uphold his claim.

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 12:51 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • DemonTree

    I told you they'd ignore the UN. Moral high ground isn't much use if your name's not on the ballot paper.

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 01:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @th. Ah, dear. What a shame about all the trouble you went to.

    I quote ”The Commission on Human Rights was intended to examine, monitor and publicly report on human rights situations in specific countries or territories (known as country mechanisms or mandates) as well as on major phenomena of human rights violations worldwide (known as thematic mechanisms or mandates.“ I don't see any suggestion that it could make rulings. Nor that its ”recommendations“ had any legal force. Bearing in mind that it was disbanded in 2006. Because it was useless.

    I'm reminded of the ”pronouncement“ of The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in relation to that Assange scum. Did anybody pay any attention? I found it amusing that the ”Group“ considered that the Governments of Sweden and the United Kindom were at fault. Only Ecuador and Assange thought it was ”important“.

    No doubt the ”activists“ of Brazil are hoping for more ”goodies“ if they can get him out of jail and into ”power“. Let's keep our fingers crossed that Brazil finds its way out of the Lula mire. After all, all that Lula did was to steal the people's money and spend ”most“ of it, less his ”cut”, on taking their minds off how many of them were being murdered.

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 02:43 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Enrique Massot

    As former Spanish dictator Francisco Franco once said: “All is tied - and well tied up.”

    And just like that, Brazilians are barred from electing their preferred candidate, Lula da Silva, who during his two terms as president undertook unprecedented work towards better economic and social justice in one of the most unequal countries in Latin America.

    The privileged minorities and their sbirs will be celebrating their “victory” over the popular will.

    “No, but what those people think they are? To send their own representative to interrupt our smooth way of conducting business? They should be happy we don't send them the tanks and the troops as we used to do.”

    Yes, they can celebrate now.

    But people never forget those who fought for them.

    They will never forget Lula.

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 03:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Conqueror
    “What a shame about all the trouble you went to..”
    What a shame you're so behind the times as it was replaced by “As Brazil is a state party to the UN’s First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, any decision by the HRC is legally binding.”
    http://www .brasilwire.com/un-investigates-lulas-imprisonment/
    although the Brazilian government recently requested for the UN Human Rights Committee to halt its investigation into ex-President Lula’s arrest, the request was rejected and the investigation is moving forwards.” http://www .brasilwire.com/un-investigates-lulas-imprisonment/
    Sarah Cleveland, vice-president of the UN Human Rights Commission, has condemned statements made by Brazilian officials following the UN's determination that the state should “take all necessary measures” to allow Brazilian presidential candidate Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to “exercise his political rights” as a candidate in the October presidential elections
    Speaking in an interview with swissinfo.ch Cleveland said the measures put forward by the Committee are “legally binding.”
    “The precautionary measures issued are not recommendations, they are legally binding and impose an international legal obligation on Brazil to fulfill them,” she said.
    Cleveland went on to say that the Geneva-based commission ”has no interest in the results of the elections, only in the right of everyone to participate.”
    But warned that “failure to comply with the precautionary measures would mean that Brazil would be violating” international treaties to which it is a signatory.
    The UN Human Rights Commission issued the decision on August 17,

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 06:44 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    Golly gee, a real scary threat from the UN by threatening with ”failure to comply with the precautionary measures would mean that Brazil would be violating” international treaties to which it is a signatory. Could result in some serious international sanctions...

    I have a great compromise to offer instead, Brazil promptly exiles permanently both Lula and Dilma to the democratic Bolivarian Republic paradise of Venezuela where he can be submitted as a presidential candidate with Dilma as his vice presidential running mate.

    Some striking advantages to consider...
    First, he'd easily beat Maduro, but then again currently a donkey could beat the ex-bus driver. Secondly, despite Lula being a criminal, he'd still be lesser of a crook than Maduro. Third, Brazil would no longer have to put up with the continuing presence of two thieving Marxists in their country. Win-win for both countries!

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 09:17 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth.
    “presence of two thieving Marxists in their country.”
    “Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice
    ...People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. ... Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.”
    https://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 10:50 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    This Marxist-Socialist apparition has the nerve to lecture me and threaten the nation of Brazil with the laughable sanctions of a worthless UN agency demonstrates that he's nothing more than a lugubrious leach, a dopey doppelgänger of deceit and deviance... Terrence is clearly a lethal liar, a dimwitted and incredibly foolish Marxist.

    Perhaps once Comrade Hill has educated his little miserable soul, learned to articulate himself like an adult and proven his worth, then maybe people at this thread will take him seriously. But until, all anyone’s going to do is just point and laugh. Sorry for Tovarich Terry, but them’s the breaks in life.

    By the way, I'm so very impressed that Enrique Massot reminded us here of el Caudillo de la Guerra de Liberación contra el Comunismo y sus Cómplices great wisdom. I think he would have had a much simpler and expedient solution to Lula running again for president.

    Sep 01st, 2018 - 11:22 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth.
    “Low-intelligence adults..” Got you dead to rights didn't it? So the veneer has peeled off, and the frothing fascist underneath is revealed. Of course the UN can't do anything, except it will show that Lula is now a cause célèbre, and that his incarceration is the result of a political show trial. That doesn't even meet the minimum standard of legal practice. “Terrence is clearly a lethal liar...” Oh we're to be subjected to your heartfelt opinion, devoid of any Burden of proof. Therefore, reiterating your 'moniker' of 'No proof, no truth.' So thanks for the little rant, as it beautifully confirms the following. ”So are liberals smarter? Kanazawa quotes from two surveys that support the hypothesis that liberals are more intelligent. One is the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which is often called Add Health. The other is the General Social Survey (GSS). The Add Health study shows that the mean IQ of adolescents who identify themselves as “very liberal” is 106, compared with a mean IQ of 95 for those calling themselves “very conservative.” The Add Health study is huge — more than 20,000 kids — and this difference is highly statistically significant.”
    http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 12:47 am - Link - Report abuse -4
  • Chicureo

    Unlike our deluded Marxist, I'm very strongly committed to pragmatic democratic governance. As Enrique Massot would remind us of his hero, Francisco Franco remarked: “One thing that I am sure of, and which I can answer truthfully, is that whatever the contingencies that may arise here, wherever I am there will be no communism.”
    As earlier mentioned, some one like Franco in Brazil would have had a much simpler and expedient solution to Lula running again for president. Who knows, perhaps our pathetic and mentally challenged Terrence could be forcibly enrolled into a re-education settlement to reinforce his true commitment of Marxist-Socialisim and move to Cuba.

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 01:30 am - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth.
    It's no good readjusting the veneer the genie is out of the bottle. You low intelligent reactionaries don't realise it, but you're all clones of one another. When ever you run into any ordinary rational person who doesn't buy into your propaganda, you revert to type and accuse them without any evidence of being Marxist. Whereas, us centralists understand the perils of authoritarianism whether it be Marxism or fascism. That is why “the murky middle” is considered the optimum by political scientists.
    “Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.” - John Kenneth Galbraith

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 02:29 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    Terrence, again our Marxist-Socialist apparition who worships Lila, is clearly a dimwitted doppelgänger full of deceit and delusional deviance. If he miraculously somehow was able to articulate himself like an adult and accept reality, then maybe people would take some pity on his miserable worthless existence. For those who wonder who our boy is, just do a google search MercoPress “Terrence Hill + Marxist-Socialist” and they'll be amazed at the number of hits...

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 03:07 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth.
    Our “Low-intelligence adult.”
    Your quote of the dictator Francisco Franco (El Caudillo) reveals your own true mind-set.
    While my quotes reveal mine.
    “A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both.” Dwight D. Eisenhower
    “I despise people who go to the gutter on either the right or the left and hurl rocks at those in the center.” Dwight D. Eisenhower

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 03:11 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    Actually, Enrique Massot greatly admires Francisco Franco and loves quoting his virtues. Meanwhile, Terrence quotes another murderous general who was responsible for the death of millions of Europeans. It's clear that he's the real Facist-Marxist with his mind in the gutter...
    Thankfully, Lula and Dilma remain where they justly should be... Incarcerated

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 03:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    Dwight D. Eisenhower was a great American patriot who only engaged in a 'just war' in defence of his country. After Japan's undeclared attack, and Germanys declaration of war. Whereas, El Caudillo whom you quote was both a traitor and a mass murderer.
    ”Dilma remain where they justly should be... Incarcerated“
    Current affairs is not your strong point is it, and neither is anything else confirming that in fact you truly are a “Low-intelligence adult.”

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 03:51 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    There he goes again, denying factual reality, including the complicity of a murderous general who was responsible for millions of deaths in Europe.
    Search the archives of MercoPress and you'll clearly note the high number of “Terrence Hill + Marxist-Socialist” posts. (As I mentioned earlier, Enrique Massot is the admirer who first start quoting about his idol, Franco.)
    Our mentally deranged Marxist-Socialist-Facisist Terrence Hill needs to seek professional help, preferably in Venezuela where he belongs...

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 04:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • bushpilot

    “Us liberals are smarter than you conservatives”
    “Us liberals are smarter than you conservatives”
    “Us liberals are smarter than you conservatives”
    “Us liberals are smarter than you conservatives”
    “Us liberals are smarter than you conservatives”

    The guy is a broken record with this.

    And then,

    “Whereas, us 'centralists' understand the perils of .....”

    I love it when a liberal claims they are politically “central” to give the impression that they are balanced and their leftist theology is really just right down the middle.

    What a fork-tongued moron.

    You are not “central”, you are a High IQ liberal.

    But whatever your IQ is, you're an idiot.

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 05:09 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Think

    Psssst..., Shicureo...

    Would you please be so kind to infom me in which very super duper top notch ultra secret detention centre Dilma is incarcerated..., so I can send three dozen red roses to that wee lass...?

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 07:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”...note the high number of “Terrence Hill + Marxist-Socialist” posts.? I did it came back just like you, a big fat zero.There you go in your frenzied desperation of maligning Eisenhower who “was a great American patriot who only engaged in a 'just war' in defence of his country.”
    bushpilot
    Fishing is great today, one hook and two flip-flopping reactionary “Low-intelligence adults.”

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 10:19 am - Link - Report abuse -4
  • :o))

    Haddad will lead the PT slate.
    If lost; he'll still have enough political power.
    He's likely to make alliances with a prospective winner.
    Consequently, will declare Lulla a martyr & set him free.
    Ready will win in the NEXT election!?!

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Chicureo

    The twists and turns in the logic of Terrence hill's high IQ doublethink is bemusing, and I think it is safe to say that part of the power of his centrist Marxist-Socialist intellectual liberalism is that it is easier to surrender to its hypnotic fluttering rhetoric than to explain that once you face facts, there is no going back, no matter how isolated it may make you feel. Truly, it explains why he enthusiastically admires the political ideology of despots including Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Dwight Eisenhower, Joseph Stalin, Enver Hoxha and Pol Pot.

    Señor THINK
    Dilma Rousseff is currently under voluntary incarceration at the headquarters of the Partido dos Trabalhadores where you can have the roses delivered. ¡Saludos!

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 05:20 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”you'll clearly note the high number...” of no posts, to go with libelling both Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, and Dwight Eisenhower. They both are, or were something you'll never be considered, an honourable person. Thus confirming your empty assertions confirm there is no truth to your claims as proof is an absolute prerequisite. Thus, no proof no truth.

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Think

    Geeeeeeeee...., Shicureo...

    You must be reeeeeeeeeeeeeeealy bored in Shicureo...

    Wifey and family away on shopping holiday in Miami..., I reckon...

    Making fun of other posters heroic anticomunist mass-murderring milicos like your belowed Pinnochet..., I see...

    Glad I never told ya about me Baltic second (or was it first...?) cousin Sr.Roman Nikolai Maksimilian Fyodorovich...;-)

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 06:23 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Chicureo

    It's expected that our pathetic intellectual centrist Marxist-Socialist would continue defending a murderous general who was responsible for the death of millions of Europeans and closely collaborated with Joseph Stalin. Eisenhower even was awarded two prestigious honors by the oppressive Soviet Union. (Order of Victory and the Order of Suvorov) Does Terrence have any shame?

    Estimado THINK: Worse, as I'm incarcerated here in Viña under strict supervision by “she who must be obeyed” ...If I were to post about truly evil despots, Merino would be front and center, but...

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 07:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Think

    If I remember correctly..., Iosif toasted for Adolf in 1939...

    Funny guys all those rivalling crazy murderous milicos all over the world...

    Good thing that most of them are kept incarcerated under strict supervision by their respective “she who must be obeyed” ....

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 08:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”would continue defending” 'the leader of free world' who waged a legal and 'just war' against a fascist regime that had declared war on he US, with all that I have in such a 'just cause'. The apposite of Pinnochet and Stalin who had murdered and enslaved their own countrymen. Whom, the former you have sung the praises of, along-side El Caudillo. Therefore, confirming that in fact you truly are a “Low-intelligence adult.”

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    It concerns me deeply that our “high IQ” doublethink Marxist-Socialist is starting to completely melt down... Many murdering generals have used the same motive of 'just cause' to wage war against other nations resulting in millions of casualties. Franco was first honorifically mentioned by Enrique Massot and then Terrence followed by trying to glorify another infamous general. Yet this village idiot continues to rant fluttering rhetoric about “truth”...

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 08:52 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”Many murdering generals...“ May have, but in this case it's not even debatable. Just cause” is a legal term under international law, here educate yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory#Jus_ad_bellum
    While your catching up, a nation is entitled to wage war in self-defence, against the declarer.
    “Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.” Dwight D. Eisenhower
    “...you will bring about the destruction of the German war
    machine, the elimination of Nazi tyranny over the oppressed peoples of
    Europe, and security for ourselves in a free world. ...” Dwight D. Eisenhower
    ”Followed by trying to glorify another infamous general(Eisenhower)....” Give it up you've obviously lost the argument, as everything that Eisenhower did is sanctioned by international law, which is not swayed by your uninformed ignorant opinion.
    Therefore, confirming that in fact you truly are a “Low-intelligence adult.”

    Sep 02nd, 2018 - 11:09 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    It's a confusing argument justifying waging war resulting in the deaths of millions of innocent casualties and deceptively claiming that the crimes of documented murdering generals “are not even debatable...” From what I understand, murder of civilians is not acceptable to civilized societies. Terrence has obvious no shame nor an understanding of basic human decency.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 04:09 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    Terrence has obvious knowledge of the applicable international law.
    ”Right of self-defence – The theory of self-defence based on rational self-interest maintains that the use of retaliatory force is justified against repressive nations that break the non-aggression principle. In addition, if a free country is itself subject to foreign aggression, it is morally imperative for that nation to defend itself and its citizens by whatever means necessary. Thus, any means to achieve a swift and complete victory over the enemy is imperative.“
    Your claim that ”murder of civilians”, never happened since you have failed to meet your burden of proof. Therefore you are revealed as an unmitigated liar. Which is what all you dumb reactionaries do, when you can't win argument.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 04:19 am - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Chicureo

    More unhinged hypocrisy form our “intellectual” centrist Marxist-Socialist who insists to glorify a murderous general.
    Where is a single mistruth in the above post? Not one!

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 07:24 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.”
    Thank you for confirming that your claim is a complete fiction. If it was other, it begs the question as to why you wouldn't take the opportunity to prove it. Obviously there is no such evidence or you would have availed yourself of it. Therefore, in conclusion you are now a confirmed liar, and a “Low-intelligence adult.”

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 09:50 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • :o))

    REF: “Lula barred from running in October elections”:

    SO WHAT???
    https://i0.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Lula-perde-no-TSE.jpg?resize=576%2C420&ssl=1

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 10:53 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Chicureo

    More unhinged hypocrisy form our radical “intellectual” centrist Marxist-Socialist who insists to glorify a well documented murderous general. Terrence claims that “applicable international law” allows “...any means...” to achieve a swift and complete victory over the enemy...“ Does that mean that using enhanced interrogation such a water boarding of belligerent prisoners is acceptable or the use of tactical nuclear weapons falls within those international laws? Curiouser he then claims that the ”murder of civilians never happened” while his favorite warmongering general invaded continental Europe.

    :o))

    ¡muito engraçado!

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 12:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”well documented murderous general.“ Which is lacking any obligatory proof for your for your assertion.
    “AN ASSERTION IS A STATEMENT OFFERED AS A CONCLUSION WITHOUT SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. SINCE AN ARGUMENT IS DEFINED AS A LOGICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PREMISE AND CONCLUSION, A SIMPLE ASSERTION IS NOT AN ARGUMENT.”
    Ignoring the Burden of Proof http://learn.lexiconic.net/fallacies/index.htm
    Thus, due to your failure it must be false.
    “Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; States of Affairs; First published Tue Mar 27, 2012
    Philosophers connect sentences with various items, such as thoughts, facts and states of affairs. Thoughts are either true or false in an absolute sense, never both or neither.”
    plato.stanford.edu/entries/states-of-affairs/

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 12:45 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Think

    TWIMC...

    Let's put aside the “necessary means” to win a war...
    What about the years (yes, years) after the deserved victory...?
    - Eine kleine Geschichte über Nachkriegsdeutschland 1945-1948...
    https://en.rightpedia.info/w/War_crimes_of_Dwight_Eisenhower

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 01:17 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • DemonTree

    Rightpedia? You know that's a site created by neo-Nazi nutters, right?

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Chicureo

    Estimado THINK

    A corrected link for following is:
    http://en.rightpedia.info/w/War_crimes_of_Dwight_Eisenhower

    Péter Esterházy — ‘History belongs to the victors, legends to the people, fantasy to literature. Only death is certain.’

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 02:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    'Ike and the Disappearing Atrocities' answers quite clearly such revisionist history.
    “In fact, as Albert Cowdrey of the Department of the Army's Center of Military History reported to the conference, the overall death rate among German prisoners was 1 percent. Mr. Cowdrey's conclusion, ..
    https:// archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/98/11/22/specials/ambrose-atrocities.html?_r=2&oref=slogin
    Meanwhile,”complicity of a murderous general who was responsible for millions of deaths in Europe.” Yes, there are assertions by some of dubious standing, but where is the evidence? There is no credible evidence against Ike.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 02:54 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Think

    Mr. DemonTree...
    Yupppppppp..., I know...
    But do yourself a big favour...
    Search for some info of what happened in Germany during 1945/48...
    Your wee little Engrish Bomber Harris soul will..., maybe..., raise an eyebrow...


    Hermanito Shileno...
    Ahhhhhh... Count Esterházy....
    An intelligent young man... Stupid cancer...

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 03:04 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    Unlikely. I do know something, enough to be very sceptical of such implausible claims. And you know perfectly well I'm no Colonel Blimp. However, if you can find some source that isn't less trustworthy than a Nigerian prince wanting to make use of your bank account, I'm willing to read it.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 04:07 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Chicureo

    At the moment, one of Brazil's greatest treasures burns down due in part to insufficient infrastructure due to the theft of public funds being diverted to the politicians of all sides of the political spectrum... Terrible loss for the entire world...

    And DemonTree has good reason not to follow THINK's link down into the Rightpedia rabbit hole...

    The Allied tabulated the total death rate for POWs in World War II as follows:
    Percentage of POWs that Died”
    Russian POWs held by Germans 57.5%
    German POWs held by Russians 35.8%
    American POWs held by Japanese 33.0%
    German POWs held by Eastern Europeans 32.9%
    British POWs held by Japanese 24.8%
    British POWs held by Germans 3.5%
    German POWs held by French 2.58%
    German POWs held by Americans 0.15%
    This in part because Eisenhower reclassified German POWs from POWs to DEFs (disarmed enemy forces) who are reported at higher percentages, but my reference to him as a criminal refers to the end of July 1945.
    Numerous historical sources like: http://eurofolkradio.com/2014/11/20/war-crimes-eisenhower/ strongly document evidence of Eisenhower's alleged crimes, but I do not personally subscribe to the purported evidence.

    Meanwhile, getting back to Terrence's unforgettable behavior of defending war despots, there is a reasonable argument that he actually deserves our sympathy and sincere forgiveness: Pierre Trudeau wrote an editorial titled, Marxist Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, the subject of which is self-explanatory. And Dr. Robert Speiser, a board-certified clinical psychologist, wrote a book in which he diagnosed the confused and hypocritical ideology of the center-left as a tangible mental illness, already widely studied since the late ‘60s as liberal narcissistic personality disorder (LNPD) ”a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration.”

    Terrence Hill is obviously a very disturbed individual suffering from this sad illness and we need to leave him in p

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 04:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    As usual... a young brainwashed Engrishman refusing to educate himself whilst boasting about their Engrish education which encouraged them to research for themselves...

    Even Mr. Terence Hill hasmore grit than that...

    Boooring....

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    That's unfair, Think. I didn't say any of those things, and nor have I ever denied the allies did bad shit in WWII. But that doesn't mean I'm going to believe whatever lies evil and/or deluded people put up on the internet.

    @Chicureo, I agree about the museum. It's a great shame and a terrible loss for Brazil.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 04:35 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • :o))

    @Chicureo

    REF: ¡muito engraçado!

    Not really; if you consider the stolen wealth - stolen during thirty-forty years, by the political parties as well as by the political leaders [+/- two thousand of them]; which could easily have been used for improving the quality of life of the masses.

    But what really is disturbing, is that fact that all this stolen wealth - trillions of US$ - is irrecoverable [virtually DONATED to the crooks BY the masses] and there is NO way of keeping the corrupt away from the public wealth in the future. That's what I call as “Systematically Legalized Corruption”!

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 04:44 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”And DemonTree has good reason not to follow THINK's link down into the Rightpedia rabbit hole...“
    ”As when confronting the Holocaust-never-happened school, ask the obvious questions. If the answers aren't clear, the charges have not been proved. In Mr. Bacque's case, two such questions are: Where are the bodies? and Is this book consistent with our picture of Eisenhower's character as we know it from innumerable other sources? Ultimately, in cases such as this one, it is often the obvious questions that bring us closest to the truth.“ Stephen E. Ambrose
    ”Pierre Trudeau wrote an editorial titled, Marxist Liberalism is a Mental Disorder,”
    The source being only in your imagination, which reminds me of another myth that was circulated by the loony right concerning PT. That he had paddled a canoe from the Keys to Cuba. Remember the old cautionary about such stories. If it doesn't sound true it probably isn't.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 05:02 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Chicureo

    DemonTree

    Terrence reminds me somewhat like Patrick Edgar... http://en.mercopress.com/2018/01/11/weddel-seal-ends-on-the-mid-atlantic-brazilian-island-of-trindade/comments

    ...I just can't continue to mentally torment Terrance Edgar...

    As a student of military history, THINK does has a mindful perspective about the multiple views of what happened during the period of 1938 thru 1945. The bombing of Dresden is very painful to revisit.

    And yes, I greatly sympathize with what happened in London that was hit by V2s which nobody could fight against, but then when you study the devastation of Eastern Europe it's difficult deny the criminality of all war participants.

    Getting back to Brazil, firefighters reported that there was insufficient water pressure from the fire hydrants attributable to underfunded municipal infrastructure related to corruption.

    “Brazil is the country of the future... and always will be,” Charles de Gaulle

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 05:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”getting back to Terrence's unforgettable behavior of defending war despots“ I haven't defended any, nor have you proved I have, reliance on the ”Holocaust-never-happened school,“ is not credible source.
    ”Dr. Robert Speiser, a board-certified clinical psychologist, wrote a book...” If he existed and had written what you claim, where is the source? Otherwise we can lay that down to another untruthful conclusion of yours.
    You're not the first liar I've met posting on line, nor will be last, your just grist for the mill.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 05:40 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • DemonTree

    @Chicureo
    “Terrence reminds me somewhat like Patrick Edgar”

    I can tell. Don't you get bored of tormenting him?

    I don't know how much Think knows about the war, but it was him who jumped to the conclusion that I know nothing, and accused me of boasting about an 'Engrish education' I never even mentioned.

    There's plenty to complain about on all sides, but that doesn't mean all parties were equivalent. Eisenhower's treatment of the German pows doesn't begin to compare to the Germans' treatment of Russian ones, or the Russian treatment of German ones, or Japan's treatment of prisoners, either soldiers or civilians.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 05:54 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • Chicureo

    DemonTree

    That's why I now refer to him as Terrence Edgar and will cease tormenting him.
    I will say that anyone subscribes to any degree of Holocaust Denial is detestable. I also agree that all parties were not criminally equivalent during WWII.

    Be careful in estimating the profound depth of historical knowledge of Señor THINK. After graduating officers training I was fortunately accepted to study in my country's naval war college, yet he still has surprised me.

    You and I both attended “Engrish” schools, which obviously taught us history from a British perspective, no matter where your school was located in England, Australia, the USA or Chile in my particular case. That's THINK's valid observation.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Think

    Mr. DemonTree...

    You make it very easy for anyone to jump to the conclusion that you know nothing about no war...

    Let's just have a look at your post above and their ***“equivalences”***..., shall we...?

    You say...:
    ***“Eisenhower's treatment of the German POWS doesn't begin to compare to the Germans' treatment of Russian ones”***

    I say...:
    Indeed they don't even begin to compare..., laddie...
    Eisenhower had complete control over an unconditionally defeated Germany...
    Eisenhower had near unlimited means at his disposition for treating civilians and prisoners of a FINISHED war humanely...
    He didn't...

    Ze Germans had no control whatsoever over a quite beligerant MOTHER RUSSIA.., 2,000 km. away from their supply lines...
    Ze Germans had no means to care or feed their own invasive toops..., let alone treating civilians and prisoners of an ONGOING war humanely...
    They didn't...

    Besides... how many civilians do you Think a general have to willingly let die..., do qualify for Sr. Shicureos “Murderous General” category?
    1..., 10..., 100..., 1,000..., 10,000..., 100,000..., 1,000,000..., 10,000,000...?

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    @Chicureo
    My school did try to cover different perspectives on WWII; it included the treaty of Versaille and other events leading up to the war rather than just blaming the Germans, we learned about the Dresden bombing and discussed whether the atomic bombings of Japan were war crimes. From the internet I gather from that had I gone to school in Germany, I would have learnt a lot more about the holocaust. IMO it was reasonable for what it was, you can't really expect more from an average bunch of 13-14 YOs.

    I've complained on here before that the biggest fault with my education was the subjects they didn't include, starting with that whole Empire thing.

    @Think
    Do you really believe that Eisenhower killed 1m German pows, then? I admit, I had thought you posted the first link you came across just to make fun of Chicureo.

    I assume you do not trust the word of Nazis either, so is the book by Bacque your real source?

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 08:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    “However Brazil's Attorney General Raquel Dodge said that the UN Human Rights Commission recommendation could not be applied in this case...”
    How right she is......since when does a mere 'recommendation' by 2 members (out of 18) of the UNHRC have the power to dictate the rules to Brazil's judiciary ? Those that believe that can keep on dreaming.

    @EM
    “And just like that, Brazilians are barred from electing their preferred candidate...”

    “Just like that ” ??? well, well, well.....after 4 years of thorough investigation, conviction in (now) 5 courts (in which he had the right to more than ample defense), and it's 'just like that' ? like with the wave of a wand ?...poor toad.
    BTW, am still waiting for you to tell me who my candidate is, the one which you said was “facing difficulties”…C’mon Reekie, it’s simple enough..

    @Chicureo
    No doubt you noticed Terence Edgar's (poor Patrick, are you sure he deserves it ?) insistence on pushing his ““Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice...”, despite the fact that in another thread, Ben Madison did us the favour of exposing Terrence's lies...as usual omitting the parts of the study which go against his sick narrative. TH also quotes “People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb”….sounds like he’s describing himself…prejudiced and dumb….and isn't it strange that despite Terrence's allegations he follows no political leaning, he tries to insult you by calling you a 'fascista hustler' ? he is so transparent, that no amount of bs will be able to cover the fact he is a rabid communist, and uses his fake knowledge of the law (always quoting someone else) to try to push his leftist bias.

    Regarding the Museum in Rio, it is indeed an unimaginable loss....covered not only Brazil's colonial period, but had artifacts centuries older, from the Royal familiy's private collection...they can fix the building, but its contents are lost forever....just a symptom of Brazil's deterioration.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 08:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Mr. DemonTree...

    You are right that I posted the first link I came across... just to make fun of.... Terence Hill...
    (About an issue I know for a fact it has been airbrushed from History...)

    You are rIgh in having undestood that they have airbrushed your Engrish Imperial History...
    (I doubt though..., you know (or want to kow) to which degree...)

    You are right about me believing that Eisenhower was the visible face of a perverse sysem that teaches “War Lessons” to the losers..., killing millions of them..., so they “Never Forget”...

    Only to aibrush those very same episodes out of history once their beasty sadist instincts are satisfied and they want to beind of human again...

    Be it auld WKl..., WKII... or the recent Iraqi genocide...

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 09:03 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    There isn't a post you make that doesn't contain a lie.
    We can also find people who claim the earth is flat. But, it doesn't make it any flatter.
    ”… will cease tormenting him.“ Doesn't bother me in slightest, the subject matter js a side issue. What is important is what people reveal about their true character, it's extremely entertaining.
    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    ”Eisenhower had complete control...how many civilians do you Think a general have to willingly let die...“
    I didn't know of any?
    ”...completely misunderstands Eisenhower's …in the occupation. He puts full responsibility on Eisenhower for every policy decision, never recognizing that he had superiors from whom he took policy directives and orders -- specifically, the Army Chief of Staff; the European Advisory Commission, …the Joint Chiefs of Staff; the Combined Chiefs of Staff,…. ..on the diplomatic background, …noted that the policy of Eisenhower's superiors was to impress upon the Germans the fact of their defeat, the fact that they had brought it on themselves and in other ways to “treat 'em rough.” … Another was that German prisoners would not be fed at a higher level than German civilians, than the civilians of the liberated nations, or than the displaced persons (D.P.'s)....The Allied Governments were fearful of famine in the winter of 1945-46, and they were stockpiling food. Even with the reserves, they barely got through the winter, and it was three years before the European food shortage was overcome.
    Mr. Bacque's myth was Eisenhower's nightmare. No food shortage? Eisenhower wrote the Chief of Staff, Gen. George C. Marshall, in February 1945: “I am very much concerned about the food situation. . . . We now have no reserves on the Continent of supplies for the civil population.” Stephen E. Ambrose

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 09:05 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Chicureo

    Jack Bauer

    Marxist Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, the subject of which is self-explanatory... Terrence failed to appreciate my pragmatic suggestion of simply permanently exiling Lula and Dilma to the paradise of Venezuela... And if he knew anything about quoting a general, George S. Patton would have been the correct choice.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @Think
    Okay, thank you.

    “killing millions of them..., so they “Never Forget””

    And then what? They promptly did forget, took US aid and loans to rebuild, joined NATO 10 years later and welcomed the British and American troops stationed in the country?

    How do you know for a fact what happened? To take one issue, I've read medical studies of children born immediately after the WWII famine in Europe, and also that Coeliac disease was discovered in Holland in 1944 due to the shortage of wheat. It would require a massive conspiracy to create this level of detail, and until recently there were plenty of people who would remember if historians were lying.

    @JB
    How do you know Ben Madison was correct? Did you check?

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult.“
    ”Marxist Liberalism“ No such animal, only in minds of fetid fascists. Stick to what you know best dictatorships, and leave the field of mental health to those who are experts. As “Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice...” as you and the other rabid reactionaries are familiar with.
    Jack Bauer aka Proof-less and Truth-less
    Amazing how you will deny your own stated political preferences. Yet you will malign others that have specifically and consistently disavowed extremism of what ever stripe. “Ben Madison did us the favour of exposing Terrence's lies” If this where true why wouldn't you reveal it. If on the other hand it isn't true....
    Again, I wouldn't mention mental limitations with your obvious deficiencies.

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 10:11 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Think

    ***“killing millions of them..., so they “Never Forget”***..., indeed...

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_(1944–50)

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 10:26 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Terence Hill

    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    “killing millions of them..., so they “Never Forget”
    “During the later stages of World War II and the post-war period, German citizens and people of German ancestry fled or were expelled from various Eastern and Central European countries”
    Terrible indeed, but somehow understandable as to how the Eastern Europeans had suffered at the hands of the Germans. But, how does this impact on the Western Allies, and Eisenhower?

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    @Think
    Yes, I knew about that, though I didn't know the western leaders had been in favour of it, or that the death toll was quite so high. But what does it have to do with Eisenhower, except that the millions of refugees made feeding the Germans that much harder?

    Sep 03rd, 2018 - 10:42 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Chicureo

    DemonTree

    There's years of discussion regarding the Pandora's box opened on this forum about what the Allies did and didn't do to the Axis. (Eisenhower was repeatedly brought up by Edgar's inferior soulmate and comrade Massot referenced Franco.) The real debate here is Brazil's right to bar Lula's presidential attempt to circumvent the law. The Socialist-Marxist liberals seem to think the UN should dictate the Brazilian people should be obligated to comply.

    The more you study history, you learn how little you know and that much of that knowledge continually transitions over time. One of my anti-Marxist professors assigned my study group an entire semester in reviewing the Soviet Great Patriotic War's perspective, which was fascinating as well as contradicting what I'd earlier learned.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 12:00 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult “The real debate here is” is the history of the conflict. Which appears that UNHRC by their advisements, seem to be concerned about the treatment of the claimant. If they do make a ruling in favour of Lula, it means his submission is persuasive. Then in the world at large, in the public mind's-eye he is a wrongfully convicted person. Consequently, he will becomes a cause célèbre, while the Brazilian government is going to detest having to deal with the press.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 12:30 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    In reference to Dwight Eisenhower:

    “The government of The Falklands Islands kicked off a debate this week when it ordered that Weddel seals and Rockhopper penguins no longer be dropped alive into boiling water. Boiling them causes pain, the government said, and should be replaced by a more rapid method of death — such as bludgeoning them on the head with a hammer before cooking.”

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 01:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult “ ”...the subject matter is a side issue. What is important is what people reveal about their true character, it's extremely entertaining, thanks for the insight very revealing.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 01:28 am - Link - Report abuse -3
  • Chicureo

    Which brings the issue into complete clarity. Someone who would adoring admire Eisenhower would also describe the reprehensible brutal practice as “extremely entertaining” provides very revealing insight about the confused and hypocritical ideology of the center-left person suffering from mental illness.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 01:52 am - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult
    “...who would adoring admire Eisenhower” He was just a means to an end, who just is the author of some great quotes. As well as being a Republican President, Eisenhower was a moderate conservative. He was used as a 'yardstick' as I wanted to catch a glimpse of how a far a loony 'wingnut' like you was out in 'left field.' Amazing how visceral you are towards an extremely well liked moderate President. In fact one could describe your behaviour as decidedly anti-American.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 02:41 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Chicureo

    What incredible ignorance! Historically we Chileans are decidedly anti-North American due to their repeated interference in our republic's economy, politics and military policy. Republican President, Eisenhower approved covert activities to interfere in our freely democratic institutions, escalating by his protégé, Richard Nixon who directly ordered millions of Dollars in order to overthrow our Democratically elected President Allende. Then the Carter Presidential Democratic led North American government placed numerous restrictions greatly affecting our ability to defend ourselves. The mythical “extremely well liked moderate President” was greatly disliked here for his clandestine interference.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 04:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @Think
    You linked to an article about refugees, but we were talking about POWs and you said Eisenhower didn't treat the prisoners and civilians humanely, so what exactly are you accusing him of? I don't agree at all that he had 'near unlimited means' available; even in the UK rations had to be reduced after the end of the war, and our government was forced to take out a loan from America (finally paid off in 2006) to prevent the country going bankrupt. Easy to imagine how much worse things were in newly liberated/occupied Europe.

    About the Russian POWs, you have a point about the difficulty of taking care of them during the war, but Germany managed to care for British and American POWs according to the Geneva Conventions, and I was told that even when they were in the same camps they were kept separate and treated completely differently.

    @Chicureo
    The discussion must have been before I joined, I don't recall seeing any. And I don't claim to be an expert, only to know a little, enough that I'm unlikely to shocked by learning more. I agree history is fascinating, and interpretations do change over time and from one place to another; sometimes saying more about the present than the past. What did you learn from studying the Soviets that contradicted stuff you'd already learned?

    And you said you were going to stop tormenting Terry. Be strong, Chicureo!

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 08:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Chicureo aka “the fascista hustler” and No proof, no truth. Our “Low-intelligence adult
    Last time I looked you where singing the praises of Nixon and company, as you regarded his interference as beneficial, as it suited your fascist agenda. No wonder your all fucked up, as you don't no whether you're coming or going. As there nothing clandestine about Eisenhower, he was quite overt.
    “By early 1954, the Chilean government faced a budget crisis thanks to an accumulation of more than one hundred thirty thousand tons of copper. The surplus developed because the Chileans refused to accept declining prices when the Korean War ended. Chilean officials warned that they might sell the excess holdings to the Soviet bloc unless the United States agreed to make purchases for its strategic stockpile Eisenhower opposed surrendering ”to political or economic blackmail“ in principle, but he confidentially urged purchase of the backlogged commodity at the existing low market price if the Chilean government prohibited sales to bloc countries and legislated ”removal of present exchange inequities“ facing American copper corporations. Once again Secretary Humphrey opposed Eisenhower's advice because the purchases threatened his commitment to fiscal responsibility and free enterprise. This time however, the secretary of state decided to vigorously support Eisenhower. Dulles concluded that ”we can't prevent them [the Chilean government] from selling to the Russians if we refuse to buy.... No matter how stupid they may act we must remember that we have to deal with them.“
    ...There was an important lesson from this confrontation. Fiscal conservatives would be suspended, if only temporarily, when cold-war imperatives threatened national security.”

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 09:16 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • :o))

    @JB

    RF: Museum - “they can fix the building”:

    Instead of spending money NOW [for renovation and obviously for the corrupt to benefit from the expenditure] the masses should insist on maintaining the “shell” of what was a priceless museum - as a Constant Reminder [of the type of politicians the Brazilians always elect].
    http://www.sindextrema.com.br/v2014/wp-content/uploads/CHARGE-BRASIL1.jpg

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 09:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Mr. DemonTree...

    You say above...:
    - ***“Think... You linked to an article about refugees, but we were talking about POWs”*** -
    I say...:
    Nope... I linked to an article about Germanic refugees and I was talking about “the losers”...
    I quote meself...:
    - ***“You are right about me believing that Eisenhower was the visible face of a perverse sysem that teaches “War Lessons” to the losers..., killing millions of them..., so they “Never Forget”...

    You say further...:
    - ***”I don't agree at all that he (Yankee doodle Dwight) had 'near unlimited means' available“*** -
    I say...:
    Yes..., he did...
    - The Northamerican Great Plains were producing during the 1945-1950 time period a gargantuan surplus of cereals and meats..., as if it was no tomorrow...
    (So much it was... that by 1949... they started ”giving it away“ to ”poor friendly countries”...)
    Yankee Doodle Dwight had..., in June, 1945... some 1,000 USAT idle and available transport ships at his disposition after the end of the European hostilities...
    - Those enormous food surpluses were NOT directed to Germany..., because Ze Germans had to be taught the above mentioned “War Lesson”... Lesson which “fee” was millions of lives...
    - Those enormous food surpluses were neither directed to the UK...,because the Yanks were after your Empire...
    - Which they got...

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 11:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    “some 1,000 USAT idle and available transport ships at his disposition after the end of the European hostilities...”
    ”No food shortage? Eisenhower wrote the Chief of Staff, Gen. George C. Marshall, in February 1945: “I am very much concerned about the food situation. . . . We now have no reserves on the Continent of supplies for the civil population.”
    Stephen E. Ambrose
    I guess George wasn't much help.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 12:31 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    Two or three years back I read about Kanazawa’s reports ; wasn’t impressed. They sound tendencious, and always ‘only suggesting’ theories. He does in fact try to draw a parallel between intelligence and religion, family etc (as posted by Ben Madison).

    Interesting to note is that the definition of ‘liberalism’ is not the same in all countries : in the UK, it’s center ; In Japan it’s conservative, In NZL it transformed into today's National Party (more conservative than the Labour Party). In the US it “used to” mean what today is libertarianism (the opposite of today’s liberalism).

    But getting back to the study : one of K’s studies suggests people in poor countries have lower intelligence (than those in rich ones), already discredited by other researchers…(lower education yes, not necessarily intelligence). He suggests that more kids with higher intelligence are likely to become liberals, but does not say lower intelligence implies conservatism, or that kids who are conservative are less intelligent. The fact someone embraces liberal political ideology does not make them intelligent – if so, we'd have to conclude 1/3 of Brazil’s voters are very intelligent…hardly.
    He suggests that adolescents who are intelligent like to identify themselves as very liberal...Sounds like a fad...be 'trendy'; trying to be different ? not satisfied with who they are so they try to be who they are not ?

    The study goes on : “humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative (caring for family, friends etc), while being liberal (caring abt “indefinite nbr of genetically unrelated strangers they never met or interacted with”) is evolutionary novel (?? really ??)... so, if more intelligent children may say they are more liberal, where does this imply that intelligent kids cannot be conservative ? And he does not say conservatives are less intelligent…that is TH’s twisted take on it...as to be expected from him, in just about everything he posts..

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 03:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Jack Bauer aka Proof-less and Truth-less
    “that is TH’s twisted take on it”
    Of course studies like I have referenced don't definitely quantify what and every participant is. But, they are definitive as an accurate measurement as to IQ's by political categories, and thus is a correct measurement of intelligence.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 03:42 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    @Think
    Okay, but you did specifically say Eisenhower didn't treat the prisoners and civilians humanely, it wasn't just US policy in general.

    D'you think this is a fair summary:

    http://www.cyberussr.com/hcunn/for/us-germany-pow.html

    The camps were started during the war, the German infrastructure had been bombed to shit, and America was still busy fighting a war against Japan until August. I'm sure the countries liberated from Germany were higher on their list of priorities for food shipments.

    I could find no record of how much food the US produced in 1945, but some foods were also rationed there. I seriously doubt the amount produced in 1949, when the workers were back on farms, farm equipment was being manufactured again, and fuel was freely available, gives any comparison to during the war.

    “Those enormous food surpluses were neither directed to the UK...,because the Yanks were after your Empire.”

    Yes, and that loan I mentioned had conditions attached, they didn't give it out of the goodness of their hearts.

    @JB
    R. Ben Madison said “K's research is a two-edged sword; he also demonstrates convincingly that high IQ people are suckers for silly religious/secular fads, have higher rates of suicide and divorce, make worse parents, and lead less happy lives than average people do.”

    I had a look and none of that is in the study. In fact he says high IQ people are less religious and more committed to monogamy on average, and I found other publications of his saying the evidence on divorce is mixed, that smart people are happier on average, and, surprisingly, more attractive too.

    But just for you, I found this. A survey taken in Minas Gerais showing that in Brazil, people who describe themselves as centrist are more intelligent than those of the right or left, and those with no political preference had the lowest IQs of all:

    lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/political-orientations-intelligence-and-education.pdf

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Mr. DemonTee...

    You say...:
    ***“Ccould find no record of how much food the US produced in 1945, but some foods were also rationed there. I seriously doubt the amount produced in 1949, when the workers were back on farms, farm equipment was being manufactured again, and fuel was freely available, gives any comparison to during the war”***

    I say...:
    That's your big problem.. lad...
    Your youthful Engrish lazyhaughtiness... :-(
    - When you can't find the info you want duing the first 10 minutes of your search..., you begin to “Seriously Doubt” any “Foreign Provided Info” and start deducing what fits best in your head...

    - Shall we have a closer look to you above lazy “Serious Doubts”..., huhhhhhh...?..:

    1) “Farm production was vital to the war effort,... so American farmers got extra rations of gasoline and other staples”.... (Don't take me word for it... Google it...)

    2) The American 1945 -1949 crops were all good without big variations between them... (Don't take me word for it... Google it...)

    3) The return of the American lads to the fields wasn't a plus for production... They wanted to earn double and work half of what the tens of thousands of 1942-45 imported Mexican beaners did... (Don't take me word for it... Google it...)

    4) You have any idea how looong American tractors and harversters lasted in the tirthies
    and forties.... They were not build like Iphones..., you know... (Don't take me word for it... Google it...)

    5) Again..., fuel was freely available for American farmers during the whole WW II period. - PERIOD. (Don't take me word for it... Google it...)

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 07:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    No, I didn't 'start deducing whatever fits best in my head'. When I couldn't find records of food production, I looked for other evidence, such as this site:

    http://plainshumanities.unl.edu/homefront/agriculture.html

    This gives a very different picture to what you say, and it includes the braceros.

    There is nothing wrong with weighing claims based on common sense and prior knowledge, so long as you are willing to change your mind if you do find the evidence. And if it's so very easy to find, why don't you set a good example and do some googling yourself? So far all you've given me is a Wikipedia article, and you haven't told me whether you think the site I linked to was fair or not, either.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 08:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    Good article...

    Now please tell me where your above linke goodd article ***“Gives a very different picture to what I said”***

    Thanks in advance...

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 08:18 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Terence Hill

    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    All things considered the starting point for a correct evaluation of the conditions in post WWII Germany is from the perspective of the principal actors at that time. German “Disarmed Enemy Forces” (D.E.F.), Albert Cowdrey of the Department of the Army's Center of Military History reported to the conference, the overall death rate among German prisoners was 1 percent. Mr. Cowdrey's conclusion, strongly supported by another conference participant, Maj. Ruediger Overmans of the German Office of Military History in Freiburg (who is writing the final volume of the official German history of the war),..
    And here is Eisenhower writing to the Combined Chiefs of Staff on April 25, 1945: “Unless immediate steps are taken to develop to the fullest extent possible the food resources in order to provide the minimum wants of the German population, widespread chaos, starvation and disease are inevitable during the coming winter.”
    These -- and many, many similar messages -- went out before the surrender. After the first week of May, all of Eisenhower's calculations as to how many people he would be required to feed in occupied Germany became woefully inadequate. He had badly underestimated, for two reasons. First, the number of German soldiers surrendering to the Western Allies far exceeded what was expected (more than five million, instead of the anticipated three million), because of the onrush of German soldiers across the Elbe River to escape the Russians. So too with German civilians -- there were millions fleeing from east to west, about 13 million altogether, and they became Eisenhower's responsibility. Second, the number of slave laborers liberated was much greater than anticipated, by more than two million. In short, Eisenhower faced shortages even before he learned that there were 17 million more people to feed in Germany than he had expected.”
    So all things considered while their lot w

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 08:25 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    @Think
    These bits:

    “During the war, the farm labor shortage became serious across the Great Plains. Farmers could not compete with defense industry wages, and the military took away many of their sons and hired hands. The construction of military bases and employment at the bomber and ordnance plants, airbases, ammunition depots, and flying schools further drained the agricultural labor supply in the region because the construction and war industries paid considerably higher wages than farmers.”

    “The agricultural labor shortage remained critical across the Great Plains during the war years.”

    “Great Plains farmers knew that agricultural machinery would help them solve the labor shortage, improve efficiency and production, and reduce labor costs. But, they could not purchase much equipment during the war because defense industry needs for iron, steel, and rubber had priority over agricultural machinery manufacturers. A farm implement shortage developed quickly, particularly for tractors, combines, and corn pickers, and forced Great Plains farmers to share equipment when an implement broke or wore out.”

    “By 1944, Great Plains farmers experienced a severe implement shortage. With most iron and steel reserved for military purposes, few farm implement manufacturers built needed equipment.”

    “Throughout the war insufficient farm machinery and labor hindered the efforts of farmer's to increase production.”

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 09:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    Continued.
    ”...Eisenhower faced shortages even before he learned that there were 17 million more people to feed in Germany than he had expected.” Stephen E. Ambrose
    So in retrospect, while their lot was not a picnic. They, by comparison to the treatment they had meted out to others that had fallen into their hands, where more than humanely treated.

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 09:28 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Think

    Mr. DemonTree...

    Nothing of what you mention above ***“Gives a very different picture to what I said in my above five points”***

    Read them again if you don' t believe me...

    Of course .., it was a little war going on..., but fact is that the Yanks outperformed industrially and agriculturally the rest of the world during the war years of 1941 -1945 by several lenghts...

    Fact is that in June 1945 they had all the food and all the transport they needed to properly feed the whole of liberated/occupied Europe...

    But Ze Germans had to be taught the sadistic lesson..., and ~ 2,000,000 of them didn't survive it...

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 09:55 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    You implied that lack of labour and equipment were not problems for production in America, which the article certainly disagreed with.

    “fact is that the Yanks outperformed industrially and agriculturally the rest of the world during the war years of 1941 -1945 by several lenghts”

    Now that is perfectly believable. But you could stand to find some evidence for the rest: that it was a deliberate policy, and that 2m Germans died after the war as a result of American actions alone (not the Soviet Union, or other countries).

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 10:55 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    “Ben Madison said “K's research is a two-edged sword”; Yes he did, ‘n the K report does ‘mention’ IQ in connection to religiosity ‘n other customs or behavioral traits etc …

    ”he says high IQ people are less religious and more committed to monogamy on average” Unless you want to keep on splitting hairs indefinitely, you’ll have to agree that the report ‘suggests’ a lot, ‘implies’ a lot, but is not ‘emphatic’…leaving plenty of room for other interpretations.
    But my point is that TH’s claim, based on ‘theories’ created by K – that liberals are more likely to be intelligent than conservatives, or trying to imply that conservatism excludes intelligence - is BS.
    The report is not the gospel truth, or anything near it, and to select excerpts, out of context, like TH does in order to support his tiresome quotes, is not very intelligent, nor does it prove he has a high IQ…to the contrary.

    “But just for you …” tks (LOL)…regarding the findings of the MG survey, tend to agree, but in general terms - that people who are centrist are more intelligent than extremists – obviously there are exceptions, as intelligence is an innate quality, which can be used, or developed depending on yr environment.
    Perhaps the quality of being centrist, and not a radical, implies to a certain extent, that you are less fanatic, and as such, not as stressed out as a radical might be.
    But AFAIC, the probability of someone being a political radical – left, or right – has very likely stemmed from something pretty significant to push them to extremes. No one becomes radicalized for nothing.
    Those in Brazil, who are well-to-do, but yet embrace populism (or even communism), usually do so out of convenience rather than by conviction…(just look at most politicians)…their very way of life contradicts what they preach.
    And I agree, to have no political preference is a sign that something is missing.....that you are perhaps disconnected from the world ?

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 10:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Voice, V0ice, Vestige, Think et al, sock-puppeteer extraordinaire and mythology major
    “2,000,000 of them didn't survive”
    “With regard to another of Mr. Bacque's conclusions, he arrives at his sensational figure of one million dead through a system of analysis that has left almost everyone who has tried to check his statistics and methods befuddled. He did make one mistake because of a typing error by a clerk. He saw a figure of 70,000 prisoners in an Army medical report and then calculated the total death rate for all prisoners in American hands on the basis of that number and the 21,000 deaths also mentioned in the report. That is, he arrived at his most basic conclusion, a death rate in all camps of 30 percent, by dividing the 21,000 deaths by the 70,000 prisoners. However, the 70,000 figure should have been 10 times higher. All other figures in the document make it clear that the correct number of prisoners was 700,000. This would make the death rate not 30 percent but 3 percent....the overall death rate among German prisoners was 1 percent....he total death by all causes of German prisoners in American hands could not have been greater than 56,000.” Stephen E. Ambrose
    JB
    “TH’s claim, based on ‘theories’” by Hodson. But, here go's Kanazawa.“The report is not the gospel truth..” It's even better, and you can't refute it
    ”So are liberals smarter? Kanazawa quotes from two surveys that support the hypothesis that liberals are more intelligent. One is the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which is often called Add Health. The other is the General Social Survey (GSS). The Add Health study shows that the mean IQ of adolescents who identify themselves as “very liberal” is 106, compared with a mean IQ of 95 for those calling themselves “very conservative.” The Add Health study is huge — more than 20,000 kids — and this difference is highly statistically significant.”
    http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html

    Sep 04th, 2018 - 11:31 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    Splitting hairs? Are you gonna claim any of this was in Kanazawa's report? “high IQ people are suckers for silly religious/secular fads, have higher rates of suicide and divorce, make worse parents, and lead less happy lives than average people do.”

    But even if K is right, it doesn't say anything about individual people, that's just Terry demonstrating his own level of intelligence.

    I guess the problem with these studies is what you said earlier: nobody agrees on what left and right mean, and it varies between countries. So the same person might classify themselves differently depending where they live. K defined liberalism as “the genuine concern for the welfare of genetically unrelated others and the willingness to contribute larger proportions of private resources for the welfare of such others.” Do you agree with his definition?

    I'm not sure I agree that no one becomes radicalised for nothing; some people just seem to be attracted to odd ideas, and I'm not sure intelligence has any bearing on that. But I think it is true that large numbers of people don't become radicalised for no reason; people are attracted to the extremes when society isn't working for them, and in Latin America, society has failed to work well for much of the people, much of the time.

    “Those in Brazil, who are well-to-do...”

    Firstly, you can't say Dilma etc joined communist groups out of convenience back in the 60s, so it must have been conviction, and although her views obviously became less extreme over time, there's no reason to think she doesn't really believe them. I'd say the moderate politicians are if anything more likely to be motivated by convenience, because they don't seem to have too many convictions, and are perfectly willing to switch parties to further their ambitions. Secondly, what benefits do ordinary well-off voters get from supporting populism, or socialism? Seems more likely their ideals are genuine, even if they don't always live up to them.

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 11:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    The same OLD story:
    https://i0.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Incendio-no-Museu-Nacional.jpg?w=650&ssl=1

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 01:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    And the last paragraph, which I ran out of room for:

    As for the people with no political preference, the survey says “This probably results from little interest leading to limited information on political issues and both could be based on lack of ability necessary to comprehend cognitively demanding political issues. Low intelligence, not making any political decisions or limited interest in political issues do not help citizens acting in a responsible way.” TBH though, all the differences found in that survey were pretty small, just a few IQ points. They may or may not be real but either way they don't seem like a big deal.

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 02:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    The RISING competition:

    http://s2.glbimg.com/ykJnlUF_EhmlpvUTHcz_jUJkhas=/s.glbimg.com/jo/g1/f/original/2016/11/11/esmola-estados.jpg

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 02:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “...it doesn't say anything about individual people” Of course it doesn't since it involves, “more than 20,000 kids”. It expressly states “the mean IQ of adolescents who identify themselves as “very liberal” is 106, compared with a mean IQ of 95 for those calling themselves “very conservative.” So it's stating a general truth as to two groups with different views, as to a comparison of their IQ's. ”that's just Terry demonstrating ...“ No, that's you on futile fawning exercise, deliberately mistaking what I've said. Since I have never mentioned individual comparisons, with exception of your fascist chum, who gives every indication of having an expected IQ of around 95. Which Gordon Hodson describes as ”Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies.”

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 05:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Lol. “I've never mentioned individual comparisons, except that I totally have with JB.” And with Chicureo, I might add. Your assessments of both are pure wishful thinking; just because someone holds views you find abhorrent does not make them stupid.

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “just because someone holds views you find abhorrent does not make them stupid” Nor does it give any indication of intelligence by either of these individuals. In particular, when both engage in deliberate mistruths, which they still hold too even when the evidence clearly exposes their deceit.

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 06:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    “Are you gonna claim….?” No, K doesn’t say tt specifically, more like B. Madison’s take on it. K is pretty good at ‘suggesting’ a LOT without being emphatically specific ; AFAIC, his conclusions are not proven theories, and that is my point. Some of his conclusions may apply to certain groups, in some countries, but TH’s distorting them to try to prove “his” bias, is BS.

    “K defined liberalism as “the genuine concern for welfare of genetically unrelated others ‘n willingness to contribute larger proportions of private resources for welfare of such others.” Do you agree with his definition?
    If you consider it from the point of view of an individual, who is imbued with truly selfless ‘n noble intentions to help others in need, then yes….from the point of view of politicians, who entitle themselves liberals, not one bit.
    Politicians (especially populists) are very verbose ‘n generous with ‘other’ people’s money, not possessing anything near the sentiment of dedication to work in society’s interests, instead of their own. And am NOT saying politicians on the other side are any better. They are all driven by sick ambition, using whatever rhetoric that gets them ‘there’.

    “no one becomes radicalized for nothing”…(sorry, thought in Portuguese, where 2 negatives equal a positive). I meant no one becomes radical without a good reason. Dilma got involved w/ communism because she had some crazy, distorted or romantic view of it, and fell in love with an ‘older’ radical…not particularly mature, or smart, but once in, she carried on…until caught.
    She didn’t always belong to the PT, and she changed party ‘cause Lula became impressed with her ‘skills’ at using a laptop (at PB), which Lula had never seen before, and took her under his wing. She changed for convenience, and kept up the populist crap as she realized it was a good way to survive.
    Benefits for the well-off (champagne socialists – the TV crowd), being seen as sympathetic towards the masses.
    Forget TH..

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 06:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    JB
    “his conclusions are not proven theories” Can't imagine how you possibly think your unqualified opinion counters two major studies, which rely on “more than 20,000 kids”
    “to explore the controversial connection between low intelligence and prejudice, and at this point they have overcome most of the methodological barricades, allowing them to rigorously analyze and answer this important societal question. Two of these researchers—Kristof Dhont of Ghent University, Belgium, and Gordon Hodson of Brock University, in Canada—have been studying the idea and synthesizing the work of others, and they summarize the fruits of this ongoing project in a forthcoming issue of the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science. The short answer is yes—there is a clear, predictable and causal link between low intelligence and prejudice, including racism.”
    https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/were-only-human/is-racism-just-a-form-of-stupidity.html

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 07:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    K doesn't say anything remotely similar, I wonder if B. Madison just made it all up? Anyway, it's hard to prove things in the social sciences, and K seems to like forming ambitious conclusions. Best to take all these studies with a pinch of salt.

    I'm sure some politicians are just pretending to hold beliefs in order to get votes, but what's interesting to me about that definition is that it may not apply to those at the bottom. If BF recipients vote for Lula, they may well be aiming to help themselves, not 'unrelated others', but they'd still say they were on the left (not sure if 'liberal' is used much in Brazil).

    Re 'radicalised for nothing', I understood what you meant. Just think some people are naturally drawn to the extremes, but they are a minority. For the most part I agree. Back in the 60s, people didn't have an much experience of communism, so more reasonable to think some version of it could work. Especially when previous governments were doing such a bad job, as measured by the massive amount of poverty, hunger and illiteracy.

    Rousseff was originally a member of the PDT, who seem to have been rivals with the PT for the left wing of politics? Evidently the PT won that one, at least for now.

    What do you mean by 'TV crowd'?

    @TH
    “Nor does it give any indication of intelligence”

    No, it doesn't. Nor does telling deliberate mistruths, which Chicureo has been doing just to wind you up.

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 10:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    Is Racism Just a Form of Stupidity?
    “Considerable evidence shows that conservative ideology predicts all sorts of prejudice—against ethnic and racial minorities, the disadvantaged, any outgroup. Indeed, right wingers are much more likely to see outgroups as a threat to traditional values and social order, resulting in heightened prejudice. Dhont and Hodson tested and confirmed this mediation model: Lower childhood intelligence clearly predicts right-wing ideology and attitude, which in turn predicts prejudice in adulthood.” Wray Herbert.

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 10:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    So what? Are you gonna claim it says anything about individual people?

    Sep 05th, 2018 - 11:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “Nor does telling deliberate mistruths” Thanks for the confirmation.
    Lets be little objective here, does that description sound familiar? It certainly fits to a tee two lying wingnuts that post on this site. There is no objective characteristic that excludes them.
    “Dhont and Hodson tested and confirmed this mediation model: Lower childhood intelligence clearly predicts right-wing ideology and attitude, which in turn predicts prejudice in adulthood.”

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 12:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    The only way to be objective about IQ would be to give them an IQ test. Otherwise it's just like saying Maria Sharapova must be short because she's a woman.

    Since Chicureo was an officer in the navy, there's a decent chance he was given an IQ test at some point, but even if he does know his score, I daresay you wouldn't believe him.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 09:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “The only way to be objective about IQ would be to give them an IQ test.” Failing that is to rely on the best available evidence.
    “This unusual test reveals how smart you are ...a couple of researchers ran a funny experiment about honesty....It didn’t matter whether they claimed they were honest or not; it didn’t matter whether they were religious, whether they were male or female, or whether they lived in a city. Money didn’t seem to be a factor either. Even after controlling for incomes, the researchers found that the most honest people were the ones who scored highest on the intelligence test.” Jeff Guo
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/14/this-unusual-test-reveals-how-smart-you-are/?utm_term=.bff44eb3aca0

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 09:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    That's a very interesting experiment. On the face of it, the less intelligent participants were more likely to choose the optimum course of action. ;) And not only were the more intelligent participants less likely to lie, but when they did they preferred to say 4 or 5 rather than 6. If you're already decided to lie, then why not go for the maximum win? Probably because they were worried about getting away with the lie, and balanced that against the expected gain. It's reasonable to think smarter people would also be better at lying and getting away with it. But the most interesting thing of all is not mentioned in the article: the higher intelligence group reported less 6's than would be expected by chance. Did some people roll a 6 and lie about it because they were afraid of other people's opinion?

    I found the original paper, which also includes a similar experiment done on soldiers. In this version, the payout was public, so there was a contradictory incentive for the participants of not wanting to look like a cheater to their colleagues and superior officers, and the number reporting a 6 among the high-scoring soldiers was significantly less than would be expected by chance.

    https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=290121104103076028116005098099083117096008010047067082026005085077003106127022098126114002127017056025028075111066122089099108112010070053028099115085118100122019061080010083093120120066075024065122106116119097007112107124112124120013007096065103064&EXT=pdf

    Terry, the test they used is at the end of that paper in Appendix B. If you want to put your money where your mouth is, you can give your answers to questions 19 - 30, 33, 38, and 43.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “Terry, the test they used is at the end ...” Thanks, I don't need too do it, as I don't want for myself any benefits from dishonesty, so I have no further interest. Unless, you're such an ego tripper, your pathetic existence requires the salutary effect. Please note the scientific observations concerning intelligence, political opinions, and honesty.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 11:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Terry, the questions I highlighted are those testing intelligence. If you want to give us an objective measure, this is your chance.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 12:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “I highlighted are those testing intelligence.” Have no interest one way or another, since one, its decidedly off topic, and two, it's not to going to impact on me in any way.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 12:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Heh, I thought not. Objective assessments can be so unforgiving. ;)

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 12:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “be so unforgiving” The only relevant issue, is not allowing the hijack of the subject matter, and permit it to be dragged off topic, in an attempt to rehabilitate one's ethically challenged buddies.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 12:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Yeah, cos intelligence testing is totally off topic in a discussion about intelligence. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

    But if you're not ready to confront the truth about yourself, perhaps you'll think is more on topic:

    https://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/everybody-is-a-little-bit-prejudiced-sometimes

    “A new study shows that as people become more intelligent they don’t become any less prejudiced, they only change who they are prejudiced towards, with the usual direction going towards those who we see as different from ourselves.”

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 12:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “as people become more intelligent they don’t become any less prejudiced,” So according your slant we can become less also. I can see that becoming the flavour of the day. Please excuse me, I'm becoming less intelligent. Give your head a shake .

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    “Please excuse me, I'm becoming less intelligent.”

    Don't trouble yourself, there's certainly no need for that!

    And what a shock that you're picking nits instead looking at the evidence, when it doesn't confirm what you want to believe. Here's the abstract of the study so you can't complain about some journalist's phrasing (and bizarrely attribute it to me):

    ”Previous research finds that lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice. We test two unresolved questions about this association using a heterogeneous set of target groups and data from a representative sample of the United States (N = 5,914). First, we test “who are the targets of prejudice?” We replicate prior negative associations between cognitive ability and prejudice for groups who are perceived as liberal, unconventional, and having lower levels of choice over group membership. We find the opposite (i.e., positive associations), however, for groups perceived as conservative, conventional, and having higher levels of choice over group membership. Second, we test “who shows intergroup bias?” and find that people with both relatively higher and lower levels of cognitive ability show approximately equal levels of intergroup bias but toward different sets of groups.”

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 01:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    I've looked at the evidence and found it wanting. So you try to fluff off a site named Big Think, that is not associated with any known university department. That doesn't have any named researchers or their qualifications. Written by Scotty Hendricks whose expertise is “work covers a wide variety of topics.” Give head another shake as this is not the 'real McCoy.'

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 03:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Wow, you really are as dumb as a door. Don't you know the difference between a site reporting on some research and the research itself? The link is in the first paragraph, but for the mentally challenged among us, I've reproduced it here:

    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550616660592

    The study was published in the peer reviewed journal 'Social Psychological and Personality Science', and the authors are Mark J. Brandt of Tilberg University and Jarret T. Crawford from the College of New Jersey.

    Now watch Dumbass Hill try to find some other pathetic excuse to dismiss the study, just because he doesn't like its conclusions.

    I predict he will play 'my authors are more eminent than your authors', however, that doesn't work because this study doesn't contradict theirs at all, merely adds to it. They are not saying those earlier studies are wrong.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 04:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    Clicked on a link that lead me to a source. So you have one study claiming what you state, against the three studies that refute that contention. “5,914 individuals versus“ more than 20,000 kids — and this difference is highly statistically significant.”
    So the Tilburg study states ”On the other hand, individuals of higher intelligence were likely to be prejudiced against groups considered conventional and groups thought to have a high choice in their associations, such as conservatives.”
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/whats-hot/the-type-of-people-you-hate-depends-on-how-smart-you-are-study-says/ar-BBJ8uCq
    Which is double speak for saying, they are likely to be intolerant of those that are intolerant. Whoopee-do, that is exactly how I characterise myself.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 04:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    I give him the link to the study, but he prefers MSN news. Naturally.

    Now that you have seen I was right, Terry, how about you apologise for telling me (twice) to 'give my head a shake', whatever the hell that is supposed to mean?

    And because you're just that predictable, you proceed to argue against the study in almost exactly the way I said you would. As I already noted, the other studies do not refute this one at all, rather they confirm part of it. Why are you even bothering to argue? It seems you agree with the conclusions.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 05:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    So the only thing it's added to earlier studies is “they are likely to be intolerant of those that are intolerant.” What an earth shattering revelation. No shit, Batman.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Terry: “I can't deny the study is real any longer, so to protect my over inflated ego, I'll pretend it's not important.”

    For him this probably represents progress.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 06:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    K does mention religion, sexual behavior, family; Googled “Kanazawa study linking IQs to liberalism”. Read all 10 results on 1st page : much the same, and mention how groups with higher/lower IQs tend to view these matters.

    Just a few excerpts, as there are far too many to post here: “Young adults who identify themselves as “not at all religious” have average IQ of 103 during adolescence, while those who identify themselves as “very religious” have average IQ of 97 during adolescence” (NB: during “adolescence”);

    “So, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to go against their natural evolutionary tendency to believe in God, and they become atheists.”;

    “In particular, the Hypothesis leads to predictions about three evolutionarily novel values of liberalism, atheism, and, for men, sexual exclusivity”, “… would therefore suggest that more intelligent individuals are more likely to be atheist than less intelligent individuals”;

    “…Five-Factor Model may there4 predict that more intelligent individuals are more likely to be open to polygyny as….”.

    Google “The disadvantage of smarts - Quick study: Satoshi Kanazawa on ...” It says “Intelligent people are more likely to be left-wing, childless ‘n homosexual atheists..”
    Definitely not to be taken literally, except by the smart TH who only selects parts which help his distorted views ; since he considers himself the smartest and most inteligent guy in the world, wouldn't that indicate that he’s more likely to be a leftist ‘n a homosexual atheist ?Wonder if he agrees with K here ?? or will he make an exception for himself ?

    Dilma sucked up to Lula because she believed it would help her career, or political future (i.e., if she thought that far).

    By the TV crowd, I mean actors, actresses, singers, socialites etc, who all like to look good in the public eye, but their life-styles contradict their discourse, which is as far as their ‘help’ goes.
    NB : K identifies himself as a “strong 'libertarian’”.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    So you found another study that adds absolutely nothing of any significance. It simply confirms what was already known, how profound. Heres a couple more, “the most honest people were the ones who scored highest on the intelligence test. Lower childhood intelligence clearly predicts right-wing ideology and attitude, which in turn predicts prejudice in adulthood.”
    JB
    “TH who only selects parts” that absolutely define what you are, or what you're not. Predictable by your behaviour that would be expected to score low in an intelligence test. The fact that you continue to lie even when exposed, should be a sufficient proof as to your intelligence.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    TH
    According to your biased, uninformed opinion....now you are just trying to slink out the back door, change the subject....obvious that you only post the parts of Kanazawa's study that (you believe) support yr BS.......you can't have your cake and eat it too....

    “Predictable by your behaviour that would be expected to score low in an intelligence test”.

    And what intelligence test would that be, numb nuts ?

    Well, since you are 'obviously' the smartest and most intelligent guy in the world, am curious about the “left-wing, homosexual atheist” part...

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 07:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    JB
    Your the only one slinking you since you don't deny as untrue anything that I posted.
    “what intelligence test would that be”
    ”researchers found that the most honest people were the ones who scored highest on the intelligence test.” Not this one.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/14/this-unusual-test-reveals-how-smart-you-are/?utm_term=.bff44eb3aca0

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    Sure, and I mentioned some of those earlier:

    “In fact he says high IQ people are less religious and more committed to monogamy on average, and I found other publications of his saying the evidence on divorce is mixed, that smart people are happier on average, and, surprisingly, more attractive too.”

    But none of them support Madison, and K's findings on polygyny contradicted the 5-factor model. Being childless doesn't make you a bad parent, and atheists aren't prone to silly religious fads.

    “And what intelligence test would that be, numb nuts ?”

    The one he refused to take for fear of what it would reveal. ;)

    @TH
    You didn't answer Jack, do you agree with K's other conclusions on high IQ individuals (left-wing, homosexual atheist)?

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 08:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    Oh! You mean your attempt to hijack the thread in support of your fascist buddy. By issuing orders to other posters. Let me remind you yet again of the famous quote from Byron to Mrs Wordsworth, when she did the same. “Fuck off”

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    That wasn't an order, that was a challenge. Refusing has enabled me to draw an adverse inference about your intelligence, although it was hardly necessary. No wonder you prefer silly speculation based on surveys that are useless for saying anything about individual people. The facts just aren't on your side.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 08:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “based on surveys that are useless for saying anything about individual people...The facts just aren't on your side.” Yeah thats why they do them, because they have no useful value, you wish. In fact science moves from the general to the specific inevitably.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 09:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Learn to read. They are useless for saying anything about individual people, but they are useful for other things. And don't bother pretending to know anything about science, I'm fairly knowledgeable so you won't get away with it like you can with law.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 09:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “They are useless for saying anything about individual people”. If an individual meets the criteria for inclusion in group, then the characteristics of that group, on the balance of probabilities. Are more attributable to that individual than one who is not inclusive to that group.

    Sep 06th, 2018 - 10:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    “...it doesn't say anything about individual people” Of course it doesn't since it involves, “more than 20,000 kids”... ”that's just Terry demonstrating ...“ No, that's you on futile fawning exercise, deliberately mistaking what I've said.

    I take it you've changed your mind, then? You've gone back to telling Maria Sharapova she must be short because she's a woman? The evidence for that is a hell of a lot stronger than your studies, but you'd still be wrong. Besides, we're not starting from no knowledge; you can get a good idea of someone's intelligence by talking to them, and while a clever person may not always show it, or could even pretend to be dumb on purpose, it would be nearly impossible to fake being smarter than you really are for long. For example, if someone can write in clear, correct English, that implies a certain level of intelligence, though the converse is not true. Someone who writes badly may be stupid, or they may be dyslexic or just poorly educated. Or they may be a non-native speaker, but in that case they will make different types of errors, so it's relatively easy to tell the difference.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 10:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “get away with it like you can with law.”
    I cite principals of law where I believe they are applicable. There is not one instance you can point to to where you can say it was not true. “science, I'm fairly knowledgeable” You may well claim you are, like JB claims to be an expert on Brazilian history. But, when push comes to shove he knows sweet Fanny Adam about it.
    So it's clear you're unable to refute the the contention that we can move from the general to the particular. So you can save all your jaw-boning trying to skirt the issue. So like JB much you claim, and still prove nothing.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 10:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    A useless reply, you didn't address a single one of my points.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 10:55 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    So at the end of the day with your failure to drag the issue off topic, we're left with YHO., priceless.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • :o))

    But FINALLY, better days are just around the corner:
    https://www.otempo.com.br/image/contentid/policy:1.2027080:1536185114/CHARGE%20O%20TEMPO.JPG?f=3x2&w=620&$p$f$w=ac4ac92

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    Oveun ed yrret ratnemrota sedeup, otcarter em, oerucihc.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 01:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    When I backed up Madison’s remarks it was because I had a “vague” recollection of those subjects being addressed by K….but afaic, while the study might be interesting reading, it is not conclusive proof of anything, as numb nuts would have us believe.
    It shows tendencies that 1) do not necessarily apply across the board to all members of a specific group, or 2) that are excluded from all other groups. Just another one of TH’s distorted views on reality.

    TH’s “If an individual meets the criteria for inclusion in group, then the characteristics of that group, on the balance of PROBABILITIES. Are more attributable to that individual than one who is not inclusive to that group”…
    Well, well, seems that numb nuts is no longer as assertive as he used to be in his judgment about us ...do you think he’s losing confidence in his own bs ?

    TH’s “I cite principals of law where I believe they are applicable.”….
    Right, where ‘he believes’ they are applicable…so, not immune to error, or to pushing his own agenda. His posts are becoming more ‘n more revealing of what a twit he is.

    TH’s “…like JB claims to be an expert on Brazilian history” (???)…
    Would like him to show where I have ever “claimed to be an “expert” on Brazilian history”…Whereas he has tried to convince everyone that he knows more about what went on in Brazil in the early 60’s, than the Military’s intelligence agency & the CIA.

    He won’t reply to my question on “K's other conclusions on high IQ individuals (left-wing, homosexual atheist)”….Obvious by the way he resorted to tergiversation....and he even accuses you of “trying to skirt the issue”....laughable.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 05:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    JB
    “Whereas he has tried to convince everyone that he knows more about what went on in Brazil in the early 60’s” I was eminently successful in my reliance on the historical record to expose your bogus narrative.
    “If an individual meets...”
    I use the appropriate wording to make my points successfully, since you've been unable to refute any of them.
    “won’t reply to my question” I stick to the topics and I'm not interested in side issues that have absolutely no relevance.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @TH
    Just as I expected...arrogant, presumptious and weird...



    @DT
    Didn't I tell you ? Wonder what he tries to hide so hard ?

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 08:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    JB
    Your ego may delude you into believing your personal opinion is meaningful. But unless you can can meet your burden of proof it will remain a meaningless naked assertion. “a simple assertion is not an argument” http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
    So you're simply blowing smoke up your ass.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 09:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    There's so many variables, you can't really draw strong conclusions. My experience agrees with the other study, the one I linked to. If you can persuade people it's wrong to be prejudiced against some group, their (our) first instinct is too find someone else to dislike. Besides, whatever the probablities, you can't use it to judge individual people. No matter what I think about the average right-winger, It's obvious both you and Chicureo are intelligent.

    Suppose Terry pulling back his claims is a sign he isn't completely delusional. But the truth is he cites principles of law whether or not they are remotely applicable, and seems unable to comprehend the difference. His rule is obvious: if it says what he wants he cites it, regardless of sense or relevence, and if not he makes up some bullshit reason to disregard it.

    Can you read my cryptic post above? It wasn't addressed to you, but I wonder if anyone can work it out. It's not that hard really, you just need to look at it from the right point of view.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    So we are graced with yet another unsupported assertion.
    Two posts, two IMHPO's, two smoke blowers.

    Sep 07th, 2018 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    ”If you can persuade people it's wrong to be prejudiced against some group, their (our) first instinct is too find someone else to dislike.”
    Probably right, in many cases. I would think however, that the tendency to look for some OTHER group, or person, to be prejudiced against, translates into some irrational mental process (or need) that may have little or nothing to do with the reality of that OTHER group (the one being rewarded with your prejudice for apparently no reason at all). Anyway, I agree that stats can't be used to judge 'individuals'.

    TH's bs knows no limits...and I think he IS completely delusional....no normal pérson acts the way he does. When cornered, he changes the subject or answers yr question with some feeble excuse, such as in the 5th post above ...“ I stick to the topics and I'm not interested in side issues that have absolutely no relevance”....'he' decides what the 'topic' is and whether it is relevant....which means he 'selects' what suits his sicko views.

    Regarding his statement (to me) “Your ego may delude you into believing your personal opinion is meaningful”.....does he really think that I give a damn what 'he' thinks of my opinions ? not in the least...anyway, as mentioned 100 times before, he has no idea of the difference between an opinion and a fact....an opinion is not (stated as) a fact (or proof), unless you say it is a fact that your opinion is 'whatever it may be'.....Such as, it's a fact that in my opinion, TH is an arrogant, deluded idiot...

    After looking at your cryptic post above, and seeing it from the 'right' point of view, it became obvious that each word was written back to front, and in Spanish...then it was easy, “Chicureo, I retract, you can torment 'T' again..”

    Sep 08th, 2018 - 11:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    JB
    You stick with your unproven opinions, while I'll continue to prove my assertions are true. While you are left merely whining and opining.

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 03:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    It's not always irrational. For example, someone who is brought up very religious and then becomes an atheist may be ostracised by their family and friends, in which case hating religion and religious people is not surprising. And if some group hates you (say, because you're a left-wing, homosexual atheist), or your friends, then it's natural to hate them back. Plus with political groups it's common to think the other side's policies are not just misguided but actively bad for everyone. The more delusional ones may even believe their opponents are purposely trying to destroy the country, like those nutters who though Obama was the antichrist.

    Supposing the survey is right and liberals are more prejudiced against groups people have chosen to join, is that better? Being prejudiced against the KKK seems perfectly reasonable, prejudice against SUV drivers less so...

    As for Terry, it's hard to know how much of his problem is lack of understanding, and how much is his arrogance/stubbornness. Does he really not understand when we point out flaws in his arguments, or is he refusing to admit to them because he can't stand being wrong? I think it seems strange because he has learned a lot of stuff by rote, but doesn't understand it fully (eg his favourite fallacies). I tried to explain the basics to him but he had no interest in learning or constructive discussion, only in trying to prove me and everyone else wrong.

    I thought you'd be able to understand my riddle. ;) I wondered if there was a way to communicate that not everyone could read, and it should have been obvious to Chicureo, but he seems to have disappeared. Can you read Spanish easily or not so much? You said you learnt to speak it as a child, but I don't know how far you got learning reading and writing before you moved to Brazil.

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 05:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “Does he really not understand..” Yes, completely the sophism of you claiming that because you say so it must right. This site is not my first rodeo, nor are you the first loser. Who in spite of the insurmountable evidence to contrary, attempts to claim otherwise. When you go out limb at behest of someone who is proved a liar, it means you are wrong also, as there is no end runs round it.

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 05:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @TH
    Well, there's no point asking you, because I already know you won't admit it, and you refuse to do anything else that might show what you know or understand. I assume it's because you don't have confidence in your own ability.

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 07:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    I have every complete confidences as my posts are intrinsically fact based, whereas your claim is based your own opinion. Which also leads you to supporting those who clearly shown to be liars.

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 08:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    May not be always irrational or w/o purpose, but stems fm some 'weird' process…Yr ex, the religious person turned atheist becomes prejudiced against religion, so you’re saying that they divert their hate from family that ostracized them, to religion.…why does this imply they 1st became prejudiced against their family ?

    Regarding being ‘hated’ by some group (“say, because…”), reckon TH knows all about that.

    As far as political policies go in Brazil, the problem is that most parties, to a larger or lesser degree, promise what, practically speaking, will not /cannot happen, or is plain ridiculous. Ex.: in Brazil, roughly 30% of the population is in debt – not because they “have” a loan, but because they have one (or more) and can’t pay, like not paying one's credit card ; Ciro Gomes “promises” to zero everyone’s debt…how ? by transferring the total volume of debt, from banks & credit card institutions, to the Bank of Brazil (Federal), then renegotiate with each of the all 62 million, to finance the debt in 36 times (with or w/o interest was not mentioned) ; what, if actually done as he ‘promises’, will probably happen ? most likely, as it always does when most (in Brazil) refinance their debt, they start from scratch and in no time are in debt again…who’s gonna subsidize them the 2nd time ? or is he going to prohibit new loans and/or having credit cards ? this is the typical bs we hear during the political propaganda (and mainly from the mid to extreme left) lapped up by the ignorant.

    Re liberals v. conservatives, considering non-extremist groups, the problem is the former usually try to impose their views on the latter, while the latter is content to mind its own biz (the KKK is extreme, hating it is reasonable - btw, founded by democrats).

    TH should donate his brain (if he has one) to science, to try to discover what went wrong. His assertions are not true, th4 cannot be proved.

    Yes, can read Spanish. As a kid, spoke it at home, til Portug took over.

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 08:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    JB
    “TH should donate his brain” Says one who has been proven to be an unrepentant liar, innumerable times. Yet, you have failed to refute any of my posts since they were based entirely on my meeting my burden of proof.

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 08:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @JB
    I'm not saying anyone is prejudiced against their family, rather than they blame the religion and probably rightly so. If you suffered because you grew up religious, or your family won't talk to you because of their religion, why wouldn't you hate it? There are religions that specifically forbid members to be friends with non-members. And besides personal reasons, many people object to their influence on society, for example the power of the Catholic church meant divorce wasn't legalised in Argentina until 1987, and in Chile until 2004.

    And that is a perfect example of how conservatives imposed their views on liberals, as they still do in other areas. How could it be otherwise? If the government is going to be involved in marriage at all, they have to set the rules on who can marry and whether they can divorce. Drugs can either be banned or not, the country can only have one immigration policy, and you don't get to decide if your taxes are spent on the military or on food stamps. Back when the KKK was founded, the Democrats were the pro-slavery party, but things have changed a lot since then. Until 1965, in the US South it was illegal for a restaurant owner to serve both black and white people, even if they wanted to. Everything was segregated by law, and it wasn't liberals enforcing their view that black people should sit at the back of the bus and go to crap schools and live in bad areas and often be unable to find a public toilet to use, or a cinema or pool that would let them in.

    And to fix that, the federal government had to force their views on the people who supported segregation. There's no getting away from it either way.

    As for being hated, dunno about Terence, but most of us have probably met people who are prejudiced against us for some reason or other. You never have?

    Re Ciro, doesn't sound very practical. If people can't pay their debts, maybe it should be made more difficult to take them out. Why do companies give them credit in that case?

    Sep 09th, 2018 - 09:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “So you have provided no evidence for your claims.” Unfortunately not every body else operates on the same ethical standard as you and your bosom buddies.
    “or that he was told by God to carry out the attack.”
    “de Oliveira says no one but ”God above“ ordered him to carry out the attack.”
    https:// www.ndtv.com/world-news/god-sent-him-to-stab-brazilian-candidate-jair-bolsonaro-attacker-adelio-bispo-de-oliveira-says-in-vi-1913491
    The man(de Oliveira) was arrested in 2013 for another assault, police said.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/brazilian-candidate-stabbed-gets-hospital-almost-dead-n907311

    Sep 10th, 2018 - 02:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    @DT
    You said “If you can persuade people it's wrong to be prejudiced against some group, their first instinct is find someone else to dislike”. Presumed you meant that prejudice was necessarily transferred fm one group to another, while what you meant was just finding some group to dislike in view of your ‘misfortunes’, or being contradicted. These reactions, based on personality, can go a 1000 ways.

    The CC’s influence on society, and on ‘laws’, imo is negative…why should people (ex: ARG, CHI) have to subject themselves to religious principles ? what abt freedom to take yr own decisions, especially when they don’t necessarily impact society ? Don’t think the CC is a particularly good example of conservatism to be used here. Kinda gets away from more mundane issues, ‘n anyway, it appeared centuries before the concept of liberalism did, and is what it still is today, purely out of convenience.
    IMO, ‘laws’ governing marriage should be governed by more practical issues than religion. While (any) religion might give comfort to those who believe piously in it, they have no right trying to impose their beliefs on others. Anyway, best stick to common issues and forget religion.

    If not mistaken, 20th C segregation policies in US were not the brainwave of either party, but rather the result of prejudice by white society (generally speaking) which led to discrimination against blacks. It’s a complicated matter, ‘n cannot be satisfactorily dealt with in 2000 characters.

    Sure have met some people (not many thk God), who have different prejudices, but none are as arrogant, presumptuous, stupid or impossible to make sense of, as TH.
    Would think that anyone normal who knew him personally, would not socialize with him.
    While the interest spread (difference btwn what banks pay investors, and charge for loans) is so big, banks aren’t particularly diligent in giving loans or credit cards. Added to people’s incapacity to control their budgets /spending impulses...

    Sep 10th, 2018 - 05:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    JB
    JB
    “or impossible to make sense of, as TH.”
    That's because I'm intolerant of the intolerant, of which you are one of the most extreme.
    That's because I operate on the principle. of honesty which is completely foreign concept to you. As “researchers found that the most honest people were the ones who scored highest on the intelligence test.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/14/this-unusual-test-reveals-how-smart-you-are/?utm_term=.bff44eb3aca0

    Sep 10th, 2018 - 06:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    “Presumed you meant that prejudice was necessarily transferred fm one group to another”

    Yeah, I'm not sure my thoughts were really clear. Maybe we need to look at it the other way. What do people get out of prejudice? They get to feel better about themselves because at least they are not as bad as *those* people (red necks/Muslims/fascists/socialists/etc depending on the person), and they also get to bond with like minded people by having something in common. So we chose the group depending on stuff that has happened to us, or just what everyone around us says, but we do like to chose a group.

    And that makes me wonder: we don't have much in common with regards to politics, but we sure do both think Terry is a idiot. Is it the same principle?

    Re religion, it's not always a conservative force, but it is more often than not, especially the Catholic church. I agree we should have the freedom to make our own decisions as much as possible, but presumably a majority in those countries disagreed until recently. And the various evangelical churches, nearly all with very conservative views, are a significant force in the US. They are not at all shy about wanting to enforce their views on others, and nor are the Muslims in much of the Middle East.

    I don't think religion had much to do with segregation, though. A you say, it was the result of prejudice by white society. And it was only ended over the objections of quite a bit of that society, forced on them by the federal government.

    As for the debts, if the government made them harder to collect in future, the banks might be less keen to hard them out. I don't know if that would be a good think or not, people might just resort to loan sharks.

    Sep 10th, 2018 - 11:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    DT
    “but we sure do both think Terry is a idiot. ”
    Praise indeed, considering the source. Now, I would be worried if it was the inverse.

    Sep 10th, 2018 - 11:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!