VIRUS VIRUS VIRUS

wrote:
> Osama Bin Ladin was found hanged by two CNN journalists early Wedensday evening. As evidence they took several photos, some of which i have included here. As yet, this information has not hit the headlines due to Bush wanting confirmation of his identity but the journalists have released some early photos over the internet..
> http://24.13.13



DON't OPEN!



>

m II

m II wrote:
>
> wrote:
> > Osama Bin Ladin was found hanged by two CNN journalists early Wedensday evening. As evidence they took several photos, some of which i have included here. As yet, this information has not hit the headlines due to Bush wanting confirmation of his identity but the journalists have released some early photos over the internet..
> > http://24.13.13
>
> DON't OPEN!

No ****!

If you're dumb enough to open any of the "See my sister's tits..."
or "Tapes of exploding Senator..." types of files, you deserve to
get what you get.

Notan

Notan

On 23-Jul-2004, m II <> wrote:

> > Osama Bin Ladin was found hanged by two CNN journalists early Wedensday
> > evening. As evidence they took several photos, some of which i have
> > included here. As yet, this information has not hit the headlines due
> > to Bush wanting confirmation of his identity but the journalists have
> > released some early photos over the internet..
> > http://24.13.13
>
> DON't OPEN!

There are thousands of these virus posted on newsgroups every day.

X-Ray-Wa

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 01:40:23 GMT, Notan <> wrote, in part:
>m II wrote:
>> wrote:

>> > Osama Bin Ladin was found hanged by two CNN journalists early Wedensday evening. As evidence they took several photos, some of which i have included here. As yet, this information has not hit the headlines due to Bush wanting confirmation of his identity but the journalists have released some early photos over the internet..
>> > http://24.13.13

>> DON't OPEN!

>No ****!

>If you're dumb enough to open any of the "See my sister's tits..."
>or "Tapes of exploding Senator..." types of files, you deserve to
>get what you get.

That may be true. Certainly, people ought to be cautious in what files they open
and download.

Still, though, I don't see how this in any way changes the fact that it is *just
awful* that anyone could possibly be so mean and cruel as to try and play a trick
on someone else that they don't even know, who didn't do anything to hurt them.

I think that the police ought to work harder to find all the naughty people like
that.

And then our society should kill them quickly, before they get the chance to hurt
anyone else ever again. Until we live in a happy, peaceful world, where the idea
of hurting anyone else never even occurs to anyone.


Hey, wait a minute? Isn't wanting to hunt people down and kill them - even if
they have done bad things to hurt others who didn't do anything wrong - also a
symptom of the aggressive impulse?

That, in itself, isn't a big deal. We just redefine the problem as the failure of
people to direct their aggressive impulses *properly* (i.e., towards enjoying TV
shows about our heroic FBI agents pursuing wicked spammers to the ends of the
earth) and letting these aggressive impulses express themselves in the form of
harm to innocent people.

Of course, then we need a precise definition of harm to innocent people that
everyone agrees on.


Thus, when a Palestinian farmer who never hurt anyone has his farm cut in half...
by a wall to keep out Palestinian suicide bombers who try to blow up Israeli
civilians who never hurt anyone...

we have to know EXACTLY what to do about this that is fair to EVERYONE and that
leads to ABSOLUTELY NO DEBATE OR CONTROVERSY.

Thus, for example, we might decide that the wall will still be built, because it
would send the wrong message to terrorists to dismantle Israeli settlements in
response to terorrism, but that the Palestinian farmer would be given full
financial compensation - and we would allocate the responsibility for paying this
financial compensation partly to the Israelis (they really shouldn't have built
the settlements in the first place), partly to the Palestinian Authority (the
terrorists have been festering in their jurisdiction), partly to other countries
in the Arab world (whose news media have presented Hamas and Islamic Jihad and
similar groups in a positive light)... and all these parties would promptly pay
their share with no complaints.

Is abortion the killing of an innocent baby, or is it a medical procedure that is
stigmatized in order to impose one religion's sexual mores on everyone else?

Again, if we are going to be absolutely unmerciful to those who hurt the
innocent, we have to know exactly who IS hurting innocent people. So we have to
determine *exactly when* the developing embryo changes from a living organism
that is not a young person, perhaps because the brain hasn't yet started
functioning, to one that is a young person.

Because we can't risk being wrong.

If we're wrong, either we will punish people who perform abortions - who ought to
be recognized as heroes, for helping young women who are unjustly pilloried by a
society with hypocritical sexual mores...

or we will punish people who blow up abortion clinics - who ought to be
recognized as heroes, for resisting the slaughter of children who are
discriminated against because of their youth.

After all, if we've decided that aggression and violence are not wrong in
themselves, but they're ONLY wrong if they're directed at the WRONG TARGET, then
in order to consistently hand out punishments according to that principle, we
always have to know which targets are right or wrong.


Isn't that going to be a problem? Surely we can't be expected to have all the
answers to everything right away?

Well, if we don't know the right answer for sure, perhaps we could use something
called humility. When it's obvious someone is doing something wrong, our society
would indeed indulge its aggressive impulses by stopping that person - *through*
a legal structure that has adequate safeguards.

But when we don't know, we need to refrain from acting on impulse.

This means that we will have to do more than just retarget our aggressive
impulses. We will have to recognize that even when an aggressive impulse might be
justly targeted, it still has the potential to be dangerous; we have to be calm
enough to allow justice to sometimes work slowly, because that's the only way to
have justice when the right answers don't always pop out at you immediately.

Also, even if we *could* always figure out who was right and wrong, what would we
do with our aggressive impulses once we DID get rid of all the bad people?

Obviously we have to have a situation where we don't have a lot of people just
bursting with aggressive impulses which need an outlet quickly to cope with
either eventuality. So we need to look at where aggressive impulses come from.


Aggressive impulses come from frustrated desire.

If you are hungry, it is time to go out and kill something so you can eat it. If
someone is hurting you, it is time for you to stop him.

Those of our ancestors who reacted to problems by trying to solve them survived
and had their children survive. Their associates who were apathetic about threats
to their survival did not become anyone's ancestors, so we don't take after them.

So it is clear what we have to do to have a less aggressive society.

Each year, the government needs to call its experts together, to figure out how
many toys, and of what kind, our factories can manufacture so that every child
can have one.

And then the TV stations will not be allowed to show commercials for other toys
that are too expensive and fancy to be included in this plan.

This will help our children get started on the right foot to an adult life free
of aggressive tendencies, informed with a positive outlook on life.

Other measures, also involving economic redistribution, will help to ensure
people don't feel excessively high frustration levels from being unable to
purchase things that are important. Thus, a national medicare program is a good
idea, because people who are driven to bankruptcy trying to save the life of a
family member unexpectedly injured or taken ill become unhappy.

The intent, though, is just to provide people with what is really important, not
to prevent some people from being richer than others; if people aren't encouraged
to put forwards extra effort, there won't be as much to go around.

We focus on things like medical care, which is important because it can be life
and death, and toys and other things that affect the health and well-being of
children, because children are just developing their personalities, and they are
immature, so they have to be protected especially well from the frustrations
caused by having less money than other people.

Now, then; is there anything else I haven't mentioned yet that is REALLY
IMPORTANT to people, and which therefore requires a little extra attention from
the government to ensure everyone gets a share, to avoid people getting
frustrated and aggressive?

Let's follow our young child again; protected from seeing TV commercials for toys
which other parents could buy for their children with the extra money they had
left after the taxes they paid to allow poor families to buy the toys provided
for in the one-year-plan. Let's assume this child is a boy; for some reason, it
seems to be the boys who have the greater problem with aggressive impulses.

Here he is going to high school.

You know where I'm going with this one, so I will skip past some syllogistic
steps here.

If everyone had a car, what would the smog in Los Angeles be like?

If everyone got married and had either 2 or 3 children with equal probability,
how soon would the United States become a net food importer?

If women achieve equality, and are liberated from economic dependence on men,

and the human sex ratio at birth is 1:1,

and a significant fraction of women do not have a compelling interest in forming
a relationship with a man

(perhaps as a result of being rape/incest survivors;

perhaps because they value their independence, and they feel that a male partner
would tend to want to dominate the relationship due to vestigial cultural
factors;

perhaps because the primary factor that would attract them to such a relationship
would primarily be the prospect of a cuddly baby to hold and love, and, as they
find this impractical for any number of reasons, nothing remains to make it
appealing), then

if no similar fraction of men are without strong heterosexual appetites,

how do you avoid having the widespread occurrence of the sort of frustration that
leads to those difficult-to-deal with aggressive impulses we've been talking
about?

Historically, one way this has been done is by letting some women do the work of
two (or more), and now AIDS has largely precluded this option.

Other possible solutions to this issue meet with the insuperable objection that
they fail to respect the equality and personal autonomy of women.


It is now time to leave the problem of building a happy and perfect world as an
exercise for the reader.

John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html

John Savard

fortunately this is not a binary group.
"X-Ray-Wa" <X-> wrote in message
news:...
>
> On 23-Jul-2004, m II <> wrote:
>
> > > Osama Bin Ladin was found hanged by two CNN journalists early
Wedensday
> > > evening. As evidence they took several photos, some of which i have
> > > included here. As yet, this information has not hit the headlines due
> > > to Bush wanting confirmation of his identity but the journalists have
> > > released some early photos over the internet..
> > > http://24.13.13
> >
> > DON't OPEN!
>
> There are thousands of these virus posted on newsgroups every day.

Jeremy Wrinklebottom