Frungy's past comments

  • 3

    Frungy

    Where should the line be drawn, if at all, between freedom of speech and libel, slander or defamation?

    ... DUH!!!!

    Of course. Libel, slander and defamation all refer to FALSE statements that cause injury of some sort.

    Freedom of speech is not a license to make false statements.

    Of course it has become increasingly interpreted that way, especially in US politics and in the US media where there is no accountability and the media cycle moves on before the truth comes out.

    There are media and political watchdogs that check the truth of politicians and newspapers' statements, but they lack teeth.

    They NEED teeth.

    When I was younger a newspaper that made an error apologised and printed a front-page retraction... then the retraction moved to page 2, then to somewhere in the classifieds, and finally disappeared entirely.

    Likewise a politician knowingly lied to the public they were supposed to be serving normally made a public apology and resigned, then it became an apology, then it became a shrug and "next question"... which they lied about too, knowing that by the time it was checked it would be yesterday's news.

    When did we become so accepting that major democratic institutions would routinely lie to us? Don't we deserve better? What hope do we have for honest societies if we accept a steady diet of knowing lies?

    Posted in: Where should the line be drawn, if at all, between freedom of speech and libel, slander or defamation?

  • 0

    Frungy

    Nathan WardSep. 20, 2014 - 08:46AM JST Plus, their business owners did a great job outsourcing all the manufacturing jobs just like America that there are not enough quality jobs to be had.

    They outsourced the low skill, high risk jobs, like putting the wheels on cars and that was a good decision. They retained the high-skill, lower risk jobs like engineering and design and that was a good decision.

    Where they messed up was not understanding that:

    1. Someone who puts wheels on a car needs close supervision and to physically be at work every day.

    2. Someone who works with ideas on a computer-aided design project needs space, silence and little or no supervision (in fact micro-management inhibits creativity).

    Let technical workers telecommute, like they do EVERYWHERE else in the world. It would solve a host of Japan's woes.

    Posted in: Are women Japan’s saviours?

  • -1

    Frungy

    bass4funkSep. 19, 2014 - 05:14PM JST That didn't make sense? Why would these people leave their country? How about ISIS stops beheading people and letting people worship the way they want to worship-simple!

    You can't seem to grasp that "freedom of religion" is NOT a universal value. It is a value that the US and several other countries support, but in an equal number of countries religion is not a free choice.

    The simple fact is that the MAJORITY of people in Syria are Muslim, want Sharia law and want what goes with that.

    This is democracy, but the problem you seem unable to admit is that it includes cultural values that you do not support, namely that there is no freedom of religion.

    And this is where we come back to the main point, that the US is intolerant, incapable of tolerating other cultures and engaging in cultural colonialism.

    End of story. You cannot handle their culture so you're bombing them and killing them. That's intolerance at its most quintessential.

    Posted in: Obama picking his targets in Iraq and Syria while missing the point

  • -1

    Frungy

    bass4funkSep. 19, 2014 - 02:26PM JST I did. You are basically saying, everyone HAS to conform to Sharia and their twisted perversion of Islam and if you don't and you get your head chopped off, shot, buried alive, tortured, it's your fault. The Iraqi Yazidi and Christian minority just have to suck it up and tow the line? You are something else. Personally, I will smile every time A sniper pops one of these jerks and they get the hell carpet bombed put of them. This is madness and it has to stop!

    No, they could leave. Just like the woman in a burqa could choose not to go to the USA. This is the point you seem incapable of accepting.

    WT...so what about the Europeans that are being overrun by the radical Islamists, they should all leave as well? Hey, if these guys want to kill and behead each other I could really care less, but when they tell the majority of the populated country that they reside in Europe for example and tell them, they all need to convert or die. NOT only should they be kicked out and have their visas revoked, but they should be put in prison for even suggesting it.

    So you're advocating deporting people for exercising their right to free speech?

    These NATIVE Christians and Yazidi have every right to follow their religion the way they want without having to worry about losing their heads in their own country....Amazing!ds in their own country....Amazing!

    No, they don't. No more so than Americans have the right to wear a biking helmet into a bank, or refuse to pay taxes. The majority of people in that country are Muslim and want Sharia law. That's a little thing called democracy.

    So far, in the space of a single paragraph you've argued for the suppression of free speech and against democracy.

    When they kill our people, yes it does.

    You killed their people, about 250 000 of them. Does that give them the right to rule the USA? No. You don't have a point.

    Yes, yes, we are in total agreement, please tell that to all the ISIS members. There is still time.

    The ISIS are the majority. Democracy is rule of the majority. Don't like it... well, tough luck, it is the position that your country officially supports.

    Hey, you Europeans have enough room, you can take them in. We have enough of our own refugee problem.

    Ah, and here we have it. You want Muslims thrown out of Europe, but you sure don't want Christians in the USA.

    Seems like I was right on target with my comment about you rather killing people than letting them move in.

    The real problem here is your willingness to kill strangers rather than accept a foreign neighbor.

    If that were even close to the truth, the US wouldn't be the multi-culture melting pot it already is.

    Wake up, the US isn't a cultural melting pot. That lie has been repeated so often, but that doesn't make it true. The US is a seething mass of racism, as you have so elegantly demonstrated. Thank you for your illustrative post.

    Posted in: Obama picking his targets in Iraq and Syria while missing the point

  • -1

    Frungy

    bass4funkSep. 19, 2014 - 08:52AM JST

    Let's take the poor Islamic woman who goes to the US and enters a bank and is confronted by a SWAT team with guns demanding that she remove her veil or get shot. Who's the one being dictated to there?

    Not the same thing, apples and oranges argument and I am not going to give an answer to that nonsense

    You mean you CAN'T answer that, because the example I gave is freedom of religion. For the Muslim woman removing her burqa infringes on her religious freedom, but her choices are conform to US culture or die.

    other than, millions of people were forced, again FORCED to either convert, pay a tax, leave and leave all your personal belongings or die. Those are the options. Imposing? Of course. Female castration? What woman is the willing recipient of that? NONE! They need to stopped and they need to be killed, that simple. Anything else is just an excuse.

    So they have a choice, they can leave. But you'd rather KILL 90% of the population of a country than offer asylum to the 10% who do not want to follow the state religion... yeah, that's real logical.

    Ahh, like the Sudanese woman that converted to Christianity and was facing a Death Sentence if she didn't convert? I saw a beheading video of ISIS last week. They made this Iraqi Christian convert to Islam and were teaching him how to properly pray and after that, they still beheaded him. They can keep their version of Rome. They are murdering scum!

    I'm glad you think that they can keep their own country, how magnanimous of you!! You truly are kind to GIVE them what they already own. I don't agree with how they run their country, but that doesn't give me the right to walk in there with a gun, kill a mass of people and then demand they do things the way I want.

    People were trying, even the people that were living there, uhhh about 2500 years and why? Because they wanted to keep their head on their shoulders, so it's ok with you that these people leave their homes of thousands of years because a new Ueber radical Islamist group wants to lay waste to all infidels?!

    Yes, it is okay with me. Because all the other options are far, far worse. Things, like money and possessions, can be replaced. Lives cannot.

    And that's the equation here. US intervention will kill more people. Offering asylum to Syrian refugees? No real cost, actually a net benefit.

    The real problem here is your willingness to kill strangers rather than accept a foreign neighbour.

    Posted in: Obama picking his targets in Iraq and Syria while missing the point

  • 3

    Frungy

    Tim_FoxSep. 19, 2014 - 09:01AM JST Why not Tessa? Too many expats pander to cultural relativism in Japan. Cultural exceptionalism or whatever Japan sees itself as is no excuse to dodge critical thinking about cultural practices and kicking controversial traditional dining habits.

    You do realise that eating horse meat is not limited to Japan, don't you? There's a hugely long list of countries where it is eaten, such as Indonesia, China, Mongolia,Tonga, Philippines, Austria, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Canada, Chile, etc...

    Your argument is invalid and disrespectful. I can understand that some people with limited international experience might be shocked by practices in other countries that they consider "abnormal", but that doesn't mean that your cultural background is normal. Your idea that eating horse is "controversial" merely means that YOU do not approve.

    I've eaten horse once, and I was underwhelmed. It was expensive, the taste was similar to most game meats, and for my money I'd rather eat venison or veal.

    Posted in: Anybody care for horsemeat sushi?

  • -1

    Frungy

    sangetsu03Sep. 18, 2014 - 05:04PM JST But what if you are in the UK, where the most popular name for newborn boys is "Mohammed", and an ever-increasing percentage of "British Subjects" are demanding shariah law? Who should get out?

    There's this little thing called democracy, perhaps you've heard of it? If the majority of people in the country support the shariah law then they should have it, and live with the consequences. However with only 5% of the UK population being Muslim I'll write this off as more fear-mongering.

    The two men who were killed were journalists who entered the country with permission, and were granted visas for their stay. Their "right to be there" was granted with their visas, right? And what if the murderer/s are English, Iranian, or Qatari? By what right are they there? They certainly didn't receive any permission, did they? they are there simply to murder, rape, and destroy.

    So two men were killed by criminals. Oh dear, clearly this grants the moral authority to kill hundreds of thousands of people, move in, obliterate the native culture and religion and change things to suit yourselves... NOT.

    Ten tourists were killed in the USA in 2013 alone. Does this mean that the USA should be bombed?

    I have been to Iraq myself, and most of the so-called "insurgents" who were fighting and attacking US forces were not Iraqi, they were Saudis, Iranians, Syrians, Jordanians, fundamentalists from many lands. Quite few were Iraqis. Do fighters from Saudi Arabia have the right to tell people in Iraq to do anything?

    They don't have any right. But that doesn't mean that you have the right either. Two wrongs do not make a right.

    As much as you are opposed to "colonialism", you are seeing it occur before your eyes, but this time you are silent? The IS is conquering as much of the middle east as they have the guns and money to conquer, and their mission is quite obvious, isn't it? What do the letters. "IS " mean? What are the intended borders of this Islamic State? What is their goal? Will they be content to simply preach to each other in their empty deserts? Or will they do as Mohammed commanded, and spread Islam throughout the world by the sword if necessary?

    So the US solution is to bomb more innocent civilians? Brilliant. The entire IS situation wouldn't exist without the US's previous solution... which was also to bomb hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

    The US just creates an endless cycle of problems with this "solution".

    At the end of the day the IS problem will die down naturally if nobody feeds the flames, which is precisely what the US is NOT doing. And yes, people will die, but MORE people will die if the US intervenes. Saddam Hussein killed about the same number as the US. In short, all the US did was double the number of dead.

    And the difference is that Saddam Hussein would eventually have been overthrown by his own people, and they would have elected their own new government and reached stability. With the US intervening the Iraqi people didn't get the chance to determine their own government and will have to repeat the cycle until eventually their society reaches its own equilibrium point on its own.

    Posted in: Obama picking his targets in Iraq and Syria while missing the point

  • -2

    Frungy

    Doctors should be taking one look and saying, "No, you do not need this operation, it is a meaningless and pointless risk, and I will not risk your life with anaesthesia and surgery simply so you can follow some fashion trend.".

    LarrySep. 18, 2014 - 01:47PM JST Some people do not have access to comdoms or regular testing. So yes maybe in developed countries you have a point. I said nothing about fashion.

    Last time I checked Japan had plenty of access to condoms and regular testing, and so your line of reasoning is just plain illogical.

    Posted in: Foreskin clip joints take unwary males for a ride

  • 11

    Frungy

    LarrySep. 18, 2014 - 01:14PM JST It reduces the risk of contracting STDs.

    So does using a condom, or getting yourself and your partner STD tested before having sex, or being faithful to one partner... And none of these techniques require genital mutilation in the name of fashion.

    Posted in: Foreskin clip joints take unwary males for a ride

  • 7

    Frungy

    cleoSep. 18, 2014 - 12:49PM JST But why, if not for medical or religious reasons, would anyone want to chops bits off?

    Why do women get their ears pierced? Because it is fashionable.

    I agree with you 100% that it shouldn't be done, but sadly there's a lot of pressure on young men to have 6-pack abs, great hair, and no foreskin.

    Feminists have been up in arms for decades about the media pushing unrealistic images that damage the confidence and health of young women, but I think it is only fair to note that increasingly the same pressures are weighing on young men.

    Sadly progress towards gender equality hasn't resulted in one gender being raised up to the same level as the other, but both genders being pulled down to the same level of objectification. I find the entire phenomenon somewhat depressing.

    Posted in: Foreskin clip joints take unwary males for a ride

  • -2

    Frungy

    PandabelleSep. 18, 2014 - 11:28AM JST Please explain the carbon cost of generating hydrogen via electrolysis. You can use wind/solar/geothermal/whatever you like to generate the electricity at little to no carbon cost. It ain't going to be efficient but it'll be clean.

    Except that Japan isn't using wind/solar/geothermal/whatever. It is using mostly fossil fuels, which means that right now naturally occurring methane is greener than manufactured hydrogen.

    Calm down there, I didn't ignore your post. How much methane could be produced using this sort of scheme? Not much, I would think. And it doesn't change the fact that methane is a greenhouse gas, does it?

    You didn't understand my post then:

    1. Using methane and converting it by combustion into CO2 results in a net decrease in greenhouse gas levels. How to explain this simply. I take 1 kilogram of methane, and burn it, and release a lesser amount of CO2. In total there has been a decrease in greenhouse gas levels (1kg methane -> combusted in vehicle resulting in lesser amount of CO2). Manufacturing hydrogen and burning it results in multiple increases in greenhouse gas levels (1kg fossil fuels -> lesser amount of hydrogen through electrolysis + release of CO2 in both processing and from electricity consumption -> hydrogen combusted in vehicle --> more CO2 released).

    2. There is more than adequate methane and it is a renewable and natural resource if we just tapped, for example, sewerage processing in a large city like Tokyo.

    What the heck does energy density have to do with "risk"? That's like saying wood is riskier than TNT because wood's energy density is ~16 MJ/kg and TNT's is but ~5 MJ/kg. I think you need to understand the terminology better, Frungy.

    If I was comparing wood and TNT then you might have a point... but you don't because the "rest energy" of methane and hydrogen is comparable.

    Energy density is relevant because if put a match to a balloon full of methane and a balloon full of hydrogen the explosion from the hydrogen would be about 7 times bigger.

    You stated that methane would be more risky to store than hydrogen. You're mistaken and the energy density demonstrates that. A tank of a ton of hydrogen would be 7 times more dangerous than a tank filled with a ton of methane.

    You were mistaken, as you have been about virtually everything where you add "I would think".

    Posted in: Safety worries cloud Japan's dream of carbon-free hydrogen society

  • -1

    Frungy

    bass4funkSep. 18, 2014 - 08:29AM JST No! You're NOT following me. If I met a Jihadist and he were to ask me "Do you believe in Allah?" and I would say "No" and he would say "You're an infidel, you must believe in him, because if you don't, I will cut off your head!" Now who is the one being dictated to? I am trying to explain to this guy, let me worship the way I want and if I am an Atheist, it's my choice, but the guy still persists and threatens to cause me bodily harm. So now I have to defend myself against this radical lunatic that will NOT listen to reason, nor will he meet me headlong, so what am I supposed to do, capitulate to his demands or do I need to lose my head? You are NOT looking at it from these guys POV!

    What are you doing in his country? Why are you there? You have no right to be there.

    Let's take the poor Islamic woman who goes to the US and enters a bank and is confronted by a SWAT team with guns demanding that she remove her veil or get shot. Who's the one being dictated to there?

    But you'd say, "Oh, but she came to the US, so she must follow our rules.". Fair enough. When in Rome and all that. However the same applies to you in a Muslim country.

    Don't like it? Then get out.

    But don't go invading countries just because you want a holiday in Syria. You have no right to be there, especially with such an intolerant attitude.

    Posted in: Obama picking his targets in Iraq and Syria while missing the point

  • 6

    Frungy

    The center pressured the doctor to accept the 30,000 yen deposit the youth had already paid and waive the remaining balance.

    Honestly this isn't good enough.

    The doctor in question should have had his license revoked for unethical practice.

    When doctors realise that unethical business models will lose them their licences they'll just refuse to engage in this sort of thing, because a million yen may sound like a lot of money, but actually it is peanuts compared to the cost they paid for their education and license.

    Posted in: Foreskin clip joints take unwary males for a ride

  • -3

    Frungy

    bass4funkSep. 18, 2014 - 12:45AM JST

    ... so you want them to adopt a style of life, and a set of religious and cultural beliefs more "acceptable" to you?

    I never said that. They can believe in whatever and whoever they want. If they are controlled by the moderates or the secularists that would be more acceptable as to having radical Islamists going around cutting out tongues, hanging people and beheading them.

    And there you go again, dictating what government they can have, that their religion should be more "moderate", etc.

    Need I remind you that the USA is one of only a handful of countries in the world to still have the death penalty? Most people in Europe view USA's stubborn reluctance to abandon the death penalty as a sign of barbarism. Yet do you see Norway carpet bombing the USA in order to stop it? No, because that's counter-productive.

    Likewise bombing Syria to try and get them to stop beheading people is... well, it is backwards.

    As for your right to dictate which religious leaders they follow and which government officials they elect in their own country? ... wow, and here I thought there was this little thing called "democracy"?

    You clearly don't know what colonisation means. It means imposing your culture, beliefs and lifestyle on other people through force of arms.

    Actually I do, a lot more than you think, a whole lot more.

    No, clearly you don't, because you repeatedly assert the right of an outside (colonial) force to dictate the religion and government of another country.

    If it means to impose ISIS to NOT chop off people's heads, so be it, then you can say, we're colonizing them for the betterment of everyone,

    ... the Brits said precisely the same thing 200 years ago. They were "bettering" the savage Africans (by slapping them in chains), and the Aussie colonial government was "bettering" the life of Aboriginal children by sending them to live with White families, and the US government was "bettering" the life of the Africans by giving them gainful employment, education and removing them from a pagan society into a Christian society (seriously, this was advanced as a widely held pro-slavery position).

    Even the Roman empire advanced similar arguments for "pacifying" the Germanic tribes.

    Your arguments are not new, nor are they original. They're the same arguments that have been presented for 2000 years for colonialism.

    And that's what this is, colonialism all over again.

    Posted in: Obama picking his targets in Iraq and Syria while missing the point

  • -4

    Frungy

    scipantheistSep. 18, 2014 - 01:00AM JST @Frungy you missed the crippling lack of freedom of information in the PRC: can't just go on the internet and go anywhere. There I fixed it for you.

    Crippling lack of freedom? Do you have any Chinese friends? Because I do and as far as they know their internet is free, and only "dangerous" comments encouraging crimes are censored or followed up by the police. You know where that sounds a lot like? Most of the West.

    China is a LOT more like the West than most people would like to believe, and the differences are pretty much cosmetic.

    Posted in: Do you think it is OK for media organizations to support candidates in elections or should they remain neutral?

  • -1

    Frungy

    scipantheistSep. 18, 2014 - 01:11AM JST Fair enough, but I doubt Japan will be going 100% of any of those any time soon as they are probably more expensive if you don't have lots of land.

    So your "logic" is that if they're not going 100% green then why bother going even 20% green? I'd love to see your idea of healthy eating... I mean if you're not going to eat healthy 100% of the time then why bother eating healthily even 20% of the time?

    And thanks for the thumbs down.

    You posted erroneous information and then get sarcastic about getting thumbs-downed for it? Tres pathetique.

    Posted in: Safety worries cloud Japan's dream of carbon-free hydrogen society

  • -1

    Frungy

    scipantheistSep. 18, 2014 - 12:02AM JST @Frungy I love how your argument is basically: media organizations have problems, therefore democracy is a sham. Even you should be able to realize the difference between China and the West.

    Yes, I know the difference. China is slightly more honest than the West. Oh, and Chinese people are thinner. That's the sum total of the differences.

    Posted in: Do you think it is OK for media organizations to support candidates in elections or should they remain neutral?

  • -2

    Frungy

    scipantheistSep. 17, 2014 - 11:45PM JST This would be carbon free if Japan went all nuclear...

    No, it wouldn't be. Uranium mining, transportation and processing before it can be used, the carbon cost of building the plant itself, they all add up to about 110 g CO2e/kWh.

    By contrast:

    Solar power: 18 g CO2e/kWh

    Wind power: 8 g CO2e/kWh

    Geothermal: 6 g CO2e/kWh

    You're mistaken about nuclear power being carbon free. It isn't, and numerous studies have debunked this notion.

    Posted in: Safety worries cloud Japan's dream of carbon-free hydrogen society

  • -2

    Frungy

    SerranoSep. 17, 2014 - 07:26AM JST

    What are you talking about, Frungy? The USA is not trying to colonize these countries, we just don't want these counties run by ruthless fanatics who impose their weird Islamic ways on everyone and cut off the heads of aid workers.

    ... so you want them to adopt a style of life, and a set of religious and cultural beliefs more "acceptable" to you?

    You clearly don't know what colonisation means. It means imposing your culture, beliefs and lifestyle on other people through force of arms.

    Which pretty much perfectly describes the agenda you admit to.

    Posted in: Obama picking his targets in Iraq and Syria while missing the point

  • -1

    Frungy

    Should media by law be required to be neutral? Absolutely.

    Should political parties be prohibited by law from owning media? Absolutely.

    Freedom of information is an absolutely basic tenant of democracy. Without access to reasonably unbiased information about what the government is up to people have no hope of casting their votes responsibly.

    What shocks me is that so many people seem to accept bias in the media as a given, without realising that in effect they've accepted that democracy is in reality a sham, and we're in an oligarchy where big media tells us how to vote and who to vote for.

    ... of course this should come as no surprise, after all advertising spending is the single greatest predictor of which candidate will be successful in the US presidential elections, and has been so for the last 20 years.

    Posted in: Do you think it is OK for media organizations to support candidates in elections or should they remain neutral?

View all