One of the many books I read during my time away from the site....
Written by Andy Andrews, fantastic author IMO. He wears his faith on his sleeve so for those of you who may get your bowels in an uproar over that, you have been forewarned.
Read it if so inclined and form your own opinions.
This question is one of the central issues of the human race. It is not new, but became critical to our survival in the 20th century with the rise of powerful central states, the development of propaganda through mass media, and the application of industrial technology to mass murder. These factors changed the equation drastically.
The most documented example is Nazi Germany of course, though as Andrews points out there were many others in the last 100 years. The best film documentary of World War II was produced by the BBC in 1973 -- The World at War. It is available from Netflix. Disks 8 and 10 are outstanding for showing daily life in Germany, the rise of Nazi control, and how the holocaust was conducted. The answers are all there if you can stand to look. Then ask yourself if you see similar actions taking place today. http://movies.netflix.com/Movie/The_World_at_War_Collector_s_Edition/70102599?trkid=2361637
Thanks for introducing me to Andy Andrews. This interview of him compliments the video you posted. I can't get it to embed.
PS - The World at War will never be equaled. Their timing was ideal. They interviewed many participants and players while their memories were still vivid, but events far enough past that they could talk about them. It is in a class by its self.
We could really get into trouble here talking about the sanctity of life . America is far from innocent .
Dogs and Travlin
Thanks for the book and the interview. I watched the latter and his message couldn't be more relevant, and religion didn't come into the interview. Maybe it does in the book, but if the message continues to be relevant, it can stand on its own without relying on religious beliefs. In fact, the those belief systems would tend to diminish his authority in my eyes. Do you guys think it stands on its own?
Short answer - yes, it stands on its own.
If you watch any of his YouTube clips or read his books, you will clearly see there are spiritual overtones and in some instances, direct references to the divine. For example, in The Final Summit, the Archangel Gabriel and Saint Jean d'Arc are prominent characters - as is Winston Churchill.
The relevance of his message doesn't rely on a belief system. Depending on what one "believes" from a religion/faith standpoint, either despite these references, or because of them, the message is and remains very relevant.
No matter how you frame it, I don't think you will be disappointed....
This may help answer your question. Given what he says in this clip does it matter if he is a Southern Baptist, a Jew, an atheist, a Buddhist, a Muslim, an agnostic, a Catholic or a follower of the Church of the Lunar Consciousness?
Gil, you're absolutely right that America did its killing antiseptically from 30,000 ft. in Cambodia and Laos. Lets not forget death squads in Central America or WMDs in Iraq or Pinochet in Chile. Our country has a long list of atrocities to its detriment.
That said, this site has a standard of language use that precludes the kind you used in your post. Now, it's also true that that standard may reflect a certain cultural insensitivity, but it is what it is. It will be interesting to see how the assemblage reacts.
Why settle for being banned once is when you can just create a new avatar and start all over?
sincerely hopin' the assemblage don' leave a boot tread to my neck, n' hopin' the flag on m' post can be switch'd with a little clean up then?
My apologise if I caus'd you or anyone offense as none was meant.
---killed millions, too.
"The population of Russia grew during the Soviet Union, and the population of China exploded under Mao — does James think there was no mass death there either? Keep going back to the record. There were indeed some decent men among the imperial rulers, whose instinct was to feed the starving Indians. One colonial administrator, Sir Richard Temple, reacted at first by importing massive amounts of rice from Burma. The official record shows that only 23 people died under this enlightened policy. If James and Ferguson were right, Temple would have been held up as a beacon of the way British chaps do things. But in reality, he was severely reprimanded by London for his “extravagance.” The Economist savaged him for allowing the lazy Indians to think “it is the duty of the government to keep them alive.”
showered you can see ill everything that's going
Requires dermatologist’s consultation
Talking about 15minutes show you how
How To Rapidly Expand The Power Of Your Memory
A group for people who don't have a permanent place for their roots, expatriots, homeless, unemployed... and for those who would help us