patrick.net

 
  forgot password?   register

#housing #investing #politics more»
756,019 comments in 77,813 posts by 11,069 registered users, 1 online now: YesYNot

new post

curious2's comments

2   curious2   Aug 16, 3:48am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

3   curious2   Aug 12, 5:58pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Ceffer says

obsessive compulsive disorder

@Ceffer, that hypothesis made me more curious than usual, so I read further and found various case reports and other anecdotal evidence. From my brief initial reading, transgender may be distinguished from OCD by age of onset (e.g. onset ~20yo is probably OCD), but OCD can start by age 4 or even earlier. Such early onset might perhaps be diagnosed either way, and a wrong answer might explain some of the reportedly elevated suicide rates. Do you have links you might suggest for further reading?

4   curious2   Aug 12, 12:40am     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

That excerpt comes from Peter Hammond's book Slavery, Terrorism, and Islam, and is also excerpted in a post on Google Groups (of all places):

"How Muslims conquer the world

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris -- car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam - Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%

Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons."

5   curious2   Aug 11, 11:59pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

6   curious2   Aug 11, 5:16pm     ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Civilians, and carriers. Most Nazis didn't join the luftwaffe or kill people in concentration camps. Most were civilians who did the ordinary work of supporting and spreading Nazi doctrine.

BTW, Nazi-era Muslim leaders and the founding Nazis agreed their doctrines were very similar, and 100k European Muslims joined the Nazi SS for that reason.

7   curious2   Aug 11, 4:50pm     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Patrick says

I wish it were so, but no.

http://www.islam.ru/en/content/news/second-generation-dutch-muslims-becoming-more-religious

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/04/denmark-muslims-218-percent-more-criminal-in-2nd-generation-than-first

There's even a movie about this phenomenon:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/my_son_the_fanatic/

Exactly. Omar Mateen was born in the USA, and had been to Orlando Pulse more than a dozen times before he went full Muslim and murdered 50 people, injuring 50 more. One of the San Bernardino murderers was also born in the USA. Note the many similarities between those two Islamic family plans even though they happened 3,000 mles apart.

In the UK, the dole subsidizes polygamous families (but only if they're Muslim), with the result that extremely religious Muslims are over-represented at every generation. In Birmingham, now 21% Muslim, state schools are already censoring the standard curriculum to remove anything un-Islamic, and discriminating against non-Muslims. The terrorist who blew himself up at an Ariana Grande concert was born in the UK. Young British Muslims are much more likely to demand Sharia than older "Muslims" who emigrated from Islamic Pakistan partly to get away from Islam.

In Germany, the Muslim who murdered 10 people at a mall while shouting "Allahu Akbar" had been born in Germany. This happens around the world.

In SF, I see a growing number of young women in hijabs and even full length Islamic dress, usually with babies, and even young girls are dressing that way. Government and media encourage them to celebrate Islam and they teach their children to do that, but Islam says what it says.

Islam differs fundamentally from the other cultures listed above. It's a totalitarian doctrine that commands imposing a religion and conquest. It's a mistake to equate that with dietary and linguistic preferences, e.g. German sausage & beer vs Mexican tacos & tequila.

8   curious2   Aug 11, 3:35pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

somecrappynumber says

you and I have very different ideas about what constitutes a "moderate" muslim. When I think of a moderate, I think of the guys I work with....

They are not a representative sample of Muslims generally. In most countries that have Muslim majorities, most Muslims demand Sharia. As Islam metastasizes through a society, it takes over and kills everything else: most countries that have more than 20% Muslims, have more than 90% Muslims. As John Walker pointed out citing Freedom House ratings of 200 countries and territories around the world:

Muslims less than 20% of the population, 62% free
Muslims more than 20% of the population, 5% free

That dramatic disparity reflects what I consider the Weimar threshold: when the Nazis got to be more than 20% of the population, they achieved critical mass and took over. The combination of vigilante violence, plus outnumbering and permeating the police and military and government, proved too powerful to resist.

Pim Fortuyn had a similar insight, before he was murdered for criticizing Islam and campaigning against further Muslim immigration. (Theo Van Gogh made a film about him, and was then murdered by a Muslim for blasphemy.) As Fortuyn had said, he had a lot of support from voters who had immigrated from Muslim countries; he explained the reason was very simple: those people had immigrated to get away from Islamic rule, and had to compete for jobs with subsequent migrants who wanted to spread Islam. As Hillary Clinton acknowledged, lethal terrorism "is clearly rooted in Islamic thinking," and she used that as an argument for mass surveillance and further empowering her Saudi clients, whom she called "moderate" despite her own e-mails saying "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide." The bottom line for target countries is as 2Scoops and others have described: labor competition driving down wages, more mistrust and strife, more surveillance, widening gap in power (including in the form of revenue) between elite and everyone else, less liberty and prosperity for most people.

9   curious2   Aug 11, 2:45pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

somecrappynumber says

I am not sure what the answer is to the problem, but I am sure that doing anything that would make [ISIL/Daesh] happy is not it.

You seem to suffer from the too common fallacy that the enemy of your enemy is your friend, when in reality it can be an even worse enemy.

The difference between Islamic State and supposedly "moderate" Muslims (e.g. KSA) comes down to timing. ISIL/Daesh are true believers who imagine they have an omnipotent deity on their side and thus they want to fight right now. KSA prefer to spread Islam and develop a stronger position, then take over at a time when they have greater advantage. The House of Saud conquered Mecca and Medina less than a century ago, and on present trend Islam will very likely conquer France and Belgium less than a century from now. Spreading Islam plays into the Saudi strategy, and you can be sure that is not a good solution for the west. To the contrary, as Nassim Taleb wrote, "The west is currently in the process of committing suicide" by importing Islam.

Like it or not, confronting, denouncing, and containing Islam are the least bad options for the west. Whether ISIL/Daesh are happy about that or not is irrelevant. If you want them to be unhappy, then carpet their territory with Charlie Hebdo cartoons. Make it absolutely impossible for them to maintain the Islamic bubble that prohibits blasphemy. Whatever you do, don't be fooled by the veil that "moderate" sponsors of Islamic terror and conquest use to hide their intentions until they can stick a knife in your back. The west should treat Islam much the same way the west treated communism; in fact, Islam is worse than communism, so it warrants a higher priority and a consistently clear message.

10   curious2   Aug 10, 9:57pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Fucking White Male says

You're ignoring:

I didn't ignore items 1-3 on your list, and in fact I've tended to keep quiet about the topic except to question why the same surgery and treatments cost 10x more here than in Thailand, where the work seems to be at least as good or better. I did downvote the OP for calling it "gross" though, because that seems really unkind.

Regarding item 4 on your list, I did happen to see on PBS "Growing Up Trans." From the POV of trans kids entering puberty, their best chance at the adulthood they want is to begin hormones ASAP, so they push for that. IDK how many might be pushed into it, but in my experience it's difficult enough to get kids to eat their vegetables let alone change their anatomy. In any event, Caitlin Jenner and Pfc Manning are both adults, so it's moot.

Patrick says

And that's probably the effect you're seeing now.

Maybe so, but I don't see what other basis you would have for saying everything that doesn't fit your theory of what people should want and be is therefore vice. For a morbidly obese person to eat candy and donuts can legitimately be called a vice. Eating is not, in itself, a vice.

11   curious2   Aug 10, 9:04pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Patrick says

I'm not angry, I'm just saying that I don't approve, and should not be forced to approve.

You come back to this particular topic over and over again, insisting there are only two genders, no matter how many genetic, anatomical, and personal examples prove you wrong. You might disapprove of all sorts of things, from rap to feng shui, but this one is living rent free inside your head. Caitlin Jenner exists, and you gain nothing by denying that fact.

On a related point, Peter Thiel exists, and could have his choice of many males, females, whatever. He's gay. He wants male.

Somehow you keep reverting to some early program from maybe a midwestern Catholic school, a bit like Fortwayne without the religious dogma attached. You're not so sanctimonious as he is, but you have the same misplaced certitude that your doctrine trumps others' facts.

You haven't walked a mile in their shoes. You don't know how the world looks through their eyes.

12   curious2   Aug 10, 8:40pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (2)   quote    

Patrick, even Iran allows transgendered persons to get surgery, and pays for up to half the cost, following a fatwa from Ayatollah Khomeini. If you are more narrow minded than Khomeini, and so much so that you can't be happy for Pfc Manning, then you're imprisoning yourself in hellish anger, drinking poison and hoping she dies of it.

13   curious2   Aug 10, 12:56pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

"The baby girl was successfully delivered before hospital staff arrived on the scene to provide Matrosova with treatment and both were in "satisfactory" condition after experiencing "great stress" during the birth."

Reddit

SpecialSnowflake says

It says "Russian woman throws her baby to the wolves". Why?

No, it says "Russian woman abandons her children to the wolves." She and her husband being alcoholics, she believed the wolves could do a better job of raising the children.

14   curious2   Aug 10, 12:11pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

15   curious2   Aug 10, 12:07pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

One question I keep wondering about, and nobody seems to ask: why did Seth Rich die? Police found him conscious, able to talk to them. That doesn't sound like a professional murder, unless it was botched surprisingly badly. Then, he died in a hospital. No suspects, no arrests. Conspiracy theories have tended to focus on the issue of who shot him and why, but nobody seems to ask the bigger questions: who killed him, and how did they do it with nobody getting arrested? Did the shooter(s) know precisely where to stand in order to avoid being seen by security cameras, and yet not know how to kill someone? Were they simply lucky in choosing the right place to stand, and unlucky in failing to choose the right place to shoot? Or, did they get an assist from police and/or hospital staff, who completed the task? Even though Seth Rich was young and apparently otherwise healthy, it wouldn't take much to turn life threatening wounds into fatal wounds. Decades ago, autopsies were routine, and found many cases in which the actual cause of death differed from what people had assumed. Today, autopsies have become comparatively rare, and most decedents get buried without anyone knowing for certain what killed them. Shot in the back? That didn't kill him on the scene, so why did he die later elsewhere? Hospitals can't save everyone, but a young and otherwise healthy male would have a better chance than most, so why didn't he recover?

16   curious2   Aug 10, 11:46am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Dan8267 says

This is called fraud and should be treated as a criminal matter.

It isn't even fraud, it's just business enabled by laws written for the purpose of concentrating power (including in the form of revenue) in the hands of the patronage networks that wrote them. It is a logical consequence of a revenue-maximizing system operating as designed.

If reducing drug prices were actually a goal of either major party, it could be achieved by repealing the Rx requirement and opening all off-patent drugs to global competition. That way, similar drugs would compete with each other at the point of sale, and generic manufacturers would compete with the lowest prices in the world. Capitalism can work if markets are allowed to function without the distortions of American medical insurance legislation.

BTW, that is part of how Mexico achieves similar life expectancy to the USA, with 90% lower cost. Mexico has a whole chain of "Similar Pharmacies" that sell similar drugs, not exactly the same but close enough, at low prices. In the absence of Obamneycare cost shifting and obfuscation, competition from similar alternatives has the effect of reducing prices even for brand name drugs. Mexico does theoretically have an Rx requirement, but in practice Mexican pharmacists tend to be flexible about that. Also, Mexico subsidizes medical education for students smart enough to get through, and does not require excessive years of unnecessary and unrelated "education" before going into practice, so the country has a plentiful supply of competent doctors. If you walk into a pharmacy without an Rx, the pharmacy can either skip the Rx requirement or refer you to an onsite doctor who can prescribe whatever you need, for a small fee and in only minutes.

17   curious2   Aug 10, 11:25am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

zzyzzx says

Lowering drug prices has long been a goal for both political parties.

LOL.

18   curious2   Aug 10, 6:13am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

19   curious2   Aug 9, 11:31pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

20   curious2   Aug 9, 4:11pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

users   about   suggestions   contact  
topics   random post   best comments   comment jail  
patrick's 40 proposals  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home