Sarkozy Wins French Presidential Election

Page 3 of 3 [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Santa_Claus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,454
Location: City 17

08 May 2007, 7:44 pm

manalitwist wrote:
Santa_Claus wrote:
manalitwist wrote:
Santa_Claus wrote:
manalitwist wrote:
Santa_Claus wrote:
manalitwist wrote:
Santa_Claus wrote:
Santa_Claus wrote:
Explain to everyone why it is true.


It is the gut feeling of a seasoned political observer.

And thats why I should believe this silly theory? :roll:


Its not so far fetched, you are calling it silly and you are talking tin hats etc yet look at zionist control in USA and many countrys, look at Canada, uk etc etc

Look at what, what is there to look at? No one has any reason to believe the leaders of any of these countries are zionists consperators. Show us all some proof since you seem to think you know it all.


Oh god man you are far too naive for me to attempt that. Go and find it yourself.

Since you apparently know what youre talking about you should at least have some proof to share with all of us 'uninformed'.


I cannot offer proof of what is a gut feeling and the fact that it is apparant not just to me but to politicians in the UK and elsewhere that the Zioinists have infiltrated governments across the world. Are you a zionist :?:

I am not a 'zionist', I am someone asking you for proof that these 'zionists' have infiltrated governments across the world.



manalitwist
Banned
Banned

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,105

08 May 2007, 7:47 pm

Ok perhaps another time.


_________________
Make mine a super frapalapi with double cream lots of Aspartame choc chip cookies a lump of lard and make it a big one


Santa_Claus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,454
Location: City 17

08 May 2007, 7:49 pm

manalitwist wrote:
Ok perhaps another time.

I have my doubts but ok.



manalitwist
Banned
Banned

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,105

08 May 2007, 7:51 pm

Santa_Claus wrote:
manalitwist wrote:
Ok perhaps another time.

I have my doubts but ok.


How gracious :wink:


_________________
Make mine a super frapalapi with double cream lots of Aspartame choc chip cookies a lump of lard and make it a big one


blacktext
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 20 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 109

09 May 2007, 6:50 am

jimservo wrote:
I think that President Elect-Sarkozy, at least to an extent, may be right in his remarks. Certain traits are in-born, and pedophilia has proven most difficult to combat with many sex offenders despite extensive therapy. In this (and to be clear, I am not making a moral comparison here) one could note the difficulties that other people have when they try to change their sexual preference.


What makes people uneasy is the direction that public policy will take to reflect Sarko's brand of thinking. Such as - why should the state spend money on prevention if criminals, cancer patients, and the suicidal are born and not made?

Are Sarkozy's thoughts scientific, or is this just politics masquerading as science?



jimservo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,116
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs

09 May 2007, 3:05 pm

blacktext wrote:
What makes people uneasy is the direction that public policy will take to reflect Sarko's brand of thinking. Such as - why should the state spend money on prevention if criminals, cancer patients, and the suicidal are born and not made?


To be clear, I don't know everything about Sarkozy and his thoughts on this, however my personal feeling is that people are born with chararistics, but also have the ability to make choices in life, and to adapt. Now, the questions as to how prone a person is in one direction or another in a given area will vary from one person to another.

Now that I have this article again I believe it to be rather vague and over-presumptive.

Quote:
Is this Nicolas Sarkozy claiming that adolescent suicides and paedophilia are genetically predetermined? There’s no hint of a hoax about it.


Not exactly, he claimed what he claimed (in a free-flowing conversation) that caused him to apparently apologize although I can't find the quote to that apology.

He said, "“I disagree; I am inclined personally to think that people are born paedophiles, and that it is a problem that we do not know how to treat this pathology." Now here he says that people are "born paedophiles." Later, in regards to smokers, that "Our circumstances are not the only factor, what is inborn in us plays a huge part.” Now perhaps he views philological determination differently then psychological determination. Or perhaps he mispoke. Or perhaps he, to put it simplistically, that people are "born paedophiles." I have watched enough criminal documentaries to understand he would not be alone it this belief.

Let's move forward.

Quote:
For five years now the presidential candidate has shown himself to be a keen supporter of behaviourist theories, developed in particular in the US.


OK, now the article must establish this is the case. After explaining what it beliefs "behaviorist theories" to be it says...

Quote:
Without saying as much, Nicolas Sarkozy clearly follows this line of thought.


Oh! That does make it easier to say doesn't it.

Reporter: Hi, Bob Dole. Do you support X?
Bob Dole: No.
Reporter: Are you a racist?
Bob Dole: No.
Reporter: But doesn't the fact you don't support X mean you are a racist?
Bob Dole: No, I support X because of A, B, and C.
Reporter: Hmm...I'm think your a racist.

Quote:
He has already shown this same “social Darwinism” with the “Domestic Security” law of March 18th 2003. “Under this law, prostitutes, beggars, the homeless and youths from the suburbs are punished as though they are delinquents, thus turning penal violence back on the victims of social violence”, observed the French magistrate Évelyne Sire-Marin. In the same vein, the 2004 report by the UMP deputy Jacques-Alain Benisti aimed to establish a pseudo-scientific “graph of a youth’s deviation from the correct path.” The real future of a delinquent, starting out, very young, with trouble speaking French, ends up, as an adult, committing “robbery with violence”…


This essentially argues that the policy of putting criminals in jail is the same as Social Darwinism. Since am a Social Darwinism, but I believe in putting criminals in jail is a good way of fighting crime let me assure you that the two are not fundamentally equal by default. Similarly, attempting to analyze where and how crime emanates is not Social Darwinism but part of the Social Sciences. Such tools are vital if crime fighting, and have been used by non-Social Darwinists in this country for years.

Non-English speaking immigrant populations to the United States generally did have a higher crime rate then the native-born population. The same has been the case in France. Over time the crime rates dropped as encouragements to assimilate and natural inclinations to do the same took their effects.

Quote:
Without developing entirely this reasoning, Nicolas Sarkozy has attempted, over many long months, to establish in early drafts of the bill for the “Prevention of delinquency”, the principle of an “early detection of behavioural problems which may lead to delinquency” in all 3 year-olds. He was supported in this goal by the infamous report produced by INSERM, the French National Institute for Medical Research. Published in 2005, it advocated studying children from the age of three or four years for “predictive” signs of a future delinquency. Among these, “emotional coldness”, “unruliness”, “impulsiveness”, or any other “indications of low morality”…


I take no position on this without further information.

Quote:
Faced with the powerful mobilisation of the collective behind the “Pas de zero de conduite” petition which opposed this measure, the ex-interior minister has finally dropped it, at least for the time being. As for INSERM, the institute was rebuked on the 6th of February, by the CCNE, the French National Consultative Bioethics Committee. “The history of science shows us the futility of attempting to reduce the determination of an individual’s future to such and such criteria”, wrote the CCNE. A point of view which clearly, Nicolas Sarkozy has not considered.


Here is a link to the CCNE report. From a cursory review of it, although I have not read the recommendation by Sarkozy, I have some doubts at to the credibility of the report. Again, I take no position of the measure itself.



jimservo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,116
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs

09 May 2007, 3:07 pm

These comments by the Sarkozy, I like:

Quote:
"France will be at the sides of the Libyan nurses locked up for eight years; France will not abandon Ingrid Betancourt; France will not abandon the women who are condemned to the burqa; France will not abandon the women who do not have liberty. France will be by the side of the oppressed of the world. This is the message of France; this is the identity of France; this is the history of France."


(source)