I need some background info before I even consider a way. Why are we killing these people? (overpopulation, blah blah blah, Thomas Maltheus, etc, but I want a good argument). How do we decide which four billion gets to go - and why four billion, why not 4.1? Where do we acquire resources to do this?

?

Just out of interest, why would we want to do that?

There Ain't No Justice

Awesome survey. I might get slaughtered for this, but the 'justest' way that's springing to mind is gassing.

how about we don't!

Oddly enough, this came from a New York Times article about internet trolls.

You know, I think you may be answering the wrong question (though I have to give you credit for not flinching). I think the question is more about how do we pick who dies, not about how they die. So, for example, do we just give everyone a number between 1 and 6, then say everyone that got 1,2,3, or 4 dies? Or do we kill all the people with brown eyes (assuming this is roughly 2/3rds). Or, maybe everyone with Type 0 blood. Or, do we kill all the people with the lowest IQ? Or, the people with the lowest physical ability.

Since there's no mention of a time limit I'd just say continue living in our current lifestyles abusing the amosphere and all that crap.

Oh so you have to read the first part of the question more throughly, you got me on that too.

I'd say 'off' all the people with two vowels in their last name then.. You'd get then Johnsons' (crap that's one of my last names) the Garbutt's (crap my actual one), hmm that idea isn't such a good one then. Maybe people with 3 then.

There is no just way.

Oh. *blush*

Then, I'd say a combination of lowest IQ and physical ability.

Now I feel like a prat.

We don't. There is no such thing as a just killing.

an unflinching prat

Don't forget, I'm the one who failed to put an apostrophe in "let's" (and, honestly, I had no idea I was suppose to... must have forgotten about that contraction after all my years of living).

Several strategic tactical thermo nuclear warheads?

Bah.

There's a just way to kill people?

Youth-in-Asia????????

We don't.

Ooh, I have an idea. We could set some nuclear missile to a literally random (or as random as random can be) coordinate. Just screw up half the earth. I have a sneaky feeling the Western world would try and be all 'Sup let's bomb the rest of the Earth. They don't even speak English.' and China would predicte that we would do that and bomb the hell out of us, and then Russia's like 'Da Zvedanya, planet Earth!'

Basically, if the threat was there; if the idea that four billion people had to die existed, globally, then anarchy would be the decider. Which, is, you know, man, totally lame.

I thought this meant four people, not four billion. Hmm. Maybe we can just abort every fetus that is conceived until we get four billion of them. And we kill them before they can feel pain and we do it really quickly.

Wait, I am confused. You mean 4 out of 6,000,000,000 OR 4,000,000,000 out of 6,000,000?

By just you mean the most fair way of picking them, or the most humane way of killing them?

If this a reference to overpopulation and controling it, I think that warfare is the most humane way to go. I think its better to get killed by shrapnal than to die slowly from starvation. However, warfare wouldn't be the most fair because the country with the crappiest military would have the highest number of its citizens killed off. But then again so would starvation.

I am also highly biased in favor of picking people 3rd world countries because 1) self preservation, 2) the people there are the most miserable to begin with therefore to maximize overall happiness I say save the richer countries, 3) you DESERVE the government that you get, and quite frankly, they're poor in part because their government is so currupt yet they continue using the same bs reasons to re-elect them, 4) the US already is one of them most, if not the most the most generous countries in the world giving billions in aid, 5) it really isn't fair that their women pluck out 20 little bastards as opposed to our 2.3 (hey lady, its a vagina, not a clown car), and 6) did I forget to mention self-preservation?

That not-withstanding, the most fair way to kill 4 bill / 6 bill people is by computer by lottery, where every individual, reguardless of country, sex, age, race, has an equal chance of getting picked.

Gas them to death lethal gas will do

> There is no just way.

I do believe Bill has just flipped out Jean there is something going on here?

> There's a just way to kill people?

Plenty and plenty of lethal gas

I wouldn't really say that's just...
But then, I'm not all for death..

> I wouldn't really say that's just...
> But then, I'm not all for death..

Well Bill figures if worse comes to worse and why he created this survey then death it is

When love is gone, there's always justice
And when justice is gone, there's always force
And when force is gone, there's always Mom.
Hi Mom!

We give them reruns of "Friends." They die of boredom

Do you mean "just" as in deserving or as in humanely? Who would decide who gets to live?

I think the best way would be the American way - feed them fast food on a regular basis. That would be humane. Make the fat cats who sell the stuff richer while you stuff your face with feel-good food. It's a win - win situation!

Good question Jessica....

It was a reasonable survey, but the thought of killing masses of people is chilling, very sad. The very thought of scientists perfecting something that would harm, kill masses of people is sickening. I think some of these countries that are overbreeding, overpopulating the world, should consider birth control, not murder.

> Good question Jessica....
>
> It was a reasonable survey, but the thought of killing masses of people
> is chilling, very sad. The very thought of scientists perfecting
> something that would harm, kill masses of people is sickening. I
> think some of these countries that are overbreeding, overpopulating
> the world, should consider birth control, not murder.

No birth control sounds like a better way to deal with the billions of people but it may never happen in this time and age

Unfortunately, the countries that need the most help, are overpopulated. What we need to do is try to stop the flood of people into this country from countries that don't believe or know birth control. Overpopulation is a way to drive a country into poverty, into a cesspool. Americans better wake up.

Feed them high fructose corn syrup. Let them use products that contain sodium laural sulphites and food grade anti freeze.

fake a terrorist act here, have the CIA lie about their sources, and say that countries harboring 9-11 terrorist suspects, go there bomb the crap out of it, then rebuild it, wait--- thats the war in iraq, sorry i was confused

by giving them the electric chair

Hitler wanted everyone with blue eyes, blonde hair and german descent, Bill is Hitler reincarinate? yikes

> Unfortunately, the countries that need the most help, are overpopulated.
> What we need to do is try to stop the flood of people into this
> country from countries that don't believe or know birth control.
> Overpopulation is a way to drive a country into poverty, into a cesspool.
> Americans better wake up.

And sadly Americans are not likely to wake because we are land of the free and some foreigners are going to come
here wanting amnesty through customs and people like President Bush will say yes to them most all the time oh yea!
we have room to spare in America for even more people oh no we do not , at least some Mexicans are being
deported and sent back to Mexico thinking they will seek refuge how wrong they are Jean

Let's start with the welfare/foodstamp/social security system abusers. People that could work and contribute, but don't. Also... the prisoners.

This is fun. Mwaha.

I attended a Sanctuary Policy rally in San Francisco last week. The opposition were vile. We were asking for the mayor's resignation, due to his sanctuary policy. More American people have been raped and murdered by illegal aliens than have been killed in the war. I think both are horrible. As I've said we need to STOP LEGAL and illegal immigration. Why invite more people in when corporate business are exporting our jobs? Real Americans are losing their jobs. Obviously, many people disagree with our stand, but I say people have to use common sense...we can't take in the world without killing the country.

'Most just' doesn't necesarily mean 'just'.

Let's kill the rich! ..oh, wiat, that's only like 1%... let's kill the people who use cellphones while driving!

Yeah, plus I have a couple of rich friends .


Okay!


note to self: stop talking on the phone and driving ASAP.

Let's put two billion people on each of three boats, give them detonators, and tell them that the last boat left unexploded gets to live.

This is true.
I shall ponder a better answer.

How 'bout a game of Twister? Everyone who is unable to stand up, dies.
That's pretty extreme.

That's an awesome idea. We could cover, like, Australia with a huge twister game.

Yes! Great idea.
Let's do this.

deal.

So the "most just" way means the most painless? Efficient? Cost effective? There are, I assume, many ways, and just leave it to some mad man/woman, to think of it.

I'm just saying that the most just way might not be deemed just, but it's fairer than the other ways. So yeah, probably the most painless, or the least discriminatory.

> I attended a Sanctuary Policy rally in San Francisco last week. The
> opposition were vile. We were asking for the mayor's resignation,
> due to his sanctuary policy. More American people have been raped
> and murdered by illegal aliens than have been killed in the war.
> I think both are horrible. As I've said we need to STOP LEGAL and
> illegal immigration. Why invite more people in when corporate business
> are exporting our jobs? Real Americans are losing their jobs. Obviously,
> many people disagree with our stand, but I say people have to use
> common sense...we can't take in the world without killing the country.

It feels like America is taking in the whole world and yes it needs to stop but the next President will have his hands tied
behind his back with so many issues on this and that it is crazy, the Mexicans that are deported their jobs are open
and farmers are hurting because no American will replace the Mexicans and work in the fields for that tiny pay they
get that could not even pay my bills with what they get paid?

Only 2% of the jobs are agricultural, ask yourself what are the other jobs the illegals are taking? They're taking jobs that I KNOW Americans will take. Also, the agricultural jobs, I believe Americans would take too. The "tiny pay" you speak of is actually quite ample, considering they receive lots of benefits from American taxpaying citizens. I read something not long ago, and altogether, most illegals make as much if not more than legal Americans that have to pay their way, their food, their shelter, their medical. their education. We must stop illegal immigration, and stop giving them benefits. We must stop legal immigration also.

We are becoming a communist nation. We have lost our freedoms. We have been invaded by third world nations. But, we WILL WIN in the end....

> Gas them to death lethal gas will do

Na. Too expensive.

> Only 2% of the jobs are agricultural, ask yourself what are the other
> jobs the illegals are taking? They're taking jobs that I KNOW Americans
> will take. Also, the agricultural jobs, I believe Americans would
> take too. The "tiny pay" you speak of is actually quite ample, considering
> they receive lots of benefits from American taxpaying citizens. I
> read something not long ago, and altogether, most illegals make as
> much if not more than legal Americans that have to pay their way,
> their food, their shelter, their medical. their education. We must
> stop illegal immigration, and stop giving them benefits. We must
> stop legal immigration also.
>
> We are becoming a communist nation. We have lost our freedoms. We
> have been invaded by third world nations. But, we WILL WIN in the
> end....

Yes we have lost our freedoms indeed and America goes around looking for another war with another country what
next we ask Iran? Sure hope we do not have war with Iran we just cannot afford another war it is costing Billions to
fund the war in Iraq and illegals take other jobs like the meat packing plants Hormel.

> |> Gas them to death lethal gas will do
>
> Na. Too expensive.
>
>

Oops should not have said this because of the Jewish people and what Hitler did to the Jewish people oh so sorry
this really is not funny at all

I agree. I am against war, but at times, we must defend our country. My heart cries over the precious young men, over the years, and now young women who are losing their lives over profit. While I don't claim to be a strategist in world affairs, I do see things, and know things that the one world elitists are doing that I don't like. From what I see, it appears the one worlders are putting countries into debt, owning them in the end. Taking country, by country to join in the U.N., and the one world political/economic government.

I realize we have enemy in the world, but I say, clean our country from within, protect it from outsiders. Help other countries, under tyranny, by training them to help themselves. This is not what is happening in Iraq. There is a book called "The Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”, by John Perkins, gives you a little scenario of what is happening in Iraq.

There's no reason why we should be killing four billion people. It's absurd to even think of doing something like that. In the Bible, the sixth commandment says "You shall not murder."

Where do you stand on the death penalty?

'where do you stand' - dude, that's a stupid way of putting things.

Yeah, I know. Sounds like he's standing on the death penalty - LITERALLY.

> I agree. I am against war, but at times, we must defend our country.
> My heart cries over the precious young men, over the years, and now
> young women who are losing their lives over profit. While I don't
> claim to be a strategist in world affairs, I do see things, and know
> things that the one world elitists are doing that I don't like. From
> what I see, it appears the one worlders are putting countries into
> debt, owning them in the end. Taking country, by country to join
> in the U.N., and the one world political/economic government.
>
> I realize we have enemy in the world, but I say, clean our country
> from within, protect it from outsiders. Help other countries, under
> tyranny, by training them to help themselves. This is not what is
> happening in Iraq. There is a book called "The Confessions of an
> Economic Hit Man”, by John Perkins, gives you a little scenario of
> what is happening in Iraq.
>

Yes I have been hearing the whole truth about Iraq and just do not know how credible this really is , on the evening news; it is all about Iraq and just how they are spending our Money to rebuild , Iraq economy depends on the oil they have over there and gee they get Billions to rebuild and very little of that Money is ever being used to rebuild the infrastructure like sewer and water and electricity? Yes American dollars are being spent foolishly and the U.S. is just being a scapegoat in all this oh what a waste of American money and i blame this all on President Bush for getting this war started in the first place.

The World Bank has everything to do with Iraq....Check out the book "The Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"
.......................................................
World Bank Fired Wolfowitz to Hide Corruption: Former Official

Friday, August 8, 2008 11:40AM

By: Kenneth R. Timmerman

Senior officials at the World Bank have admitted that the firing of former Bush administration official Paul Wolfowitz as World Bank president was a scheme to block an unpopular anti-corruption campaign he had championed, a former World Bank official told Newsmax.

“The stuff about his girlfriend was all contrived,” former World Bank official Steve Berkman told Newsmax. “It was a mini-scandal people at the Bank used to nail him.”

Senior World Bank managers and board members “didn’t like this guy from the get-go,” Berkman said. “He was going counter-current to the World Bank bureaucracy.”

Berkman has just published an expose of corruption, “The World Bank and the Gods of Lending,” based on his 16-year experience auditing World Bank projects, particularly in Africa.

The “gods of lending” in the title is a reference to the international bureaucrats who run the Bank, and believe “they can do no wrong,” Berkman writes.

“They have created the myth that they are at the ‘cutting edge’ of development, while they hide the appalling number of failures within the Bank’s portfolio — failures that enrich the government elites of the Third World while creating mounds of debt that cannot be repaid.

“It is this single truth that exposes the hypocrisy of the whole business: the Bank pretends it is lending for noble purposes, while the borrowers pretend they will put the money to good use.”

Instead, Berkman writes, World Bank funds are regularly “placed in the hands of officials with a history of looting national treasuries.”

Corruption is so rampant, it swallows a minimum of 10 percent of the more than $20 billion the Bank disperses every year, and probably as much as 25 percent to 35 percent of total lending, according to internal Bank estimates, Berkman said.

Wolfowitz attempted to tackle corruption in World Bank projects virtually the day he took office as Bank president on June 1, 2005, accelerating the efforts begun by his predecessor, James Wolfensohn.

In July 2005, Wolfowitz suspended an $800 million loan to health sector projects in India because of allegations of corruption. “That was the beginning of his downfall,” Berkman told Newsmax.

Wolfowitz was responding to a 600-page internal World Bank report on the India loans, the product of a year-long effort by a 75-member team of investigators, many of whom interviewed suppliers and project managers in India.

“What they found was rampant corruption in all five projects they investigated,” Berkman told Newsmax.

The report found shell companies that were paid by the Bank for goods and services that were never delivered. They found tainted pharmaceuticals bought by the Bank and distributed to the public, as well as bribes and kickbacks being paid at the most senior levels of government.

But instead of attempting to rectify these problems, Bank management “went on the attack when somebody came to us with information,” a former World Bank official involved in the India corruption investigation told Newsmax in a separate interview.

“For example, there was a doctor who came to us because the AIDS testing kits the Bank was buying were faulty and producing bad results. Rather than address the issue, the Bank staff issued a fierce denunciation of the doctor’s personal credibility and went on the offense” against him, the source said.

In another egregious example, Bank officials certified that a hospital built with Bank funds had achieved all the benchmark results. But when the investigators went to visit the project, all they found was a hole in the ground.

At the time, India was the Bank’s largest customer. When Wolfowitz ordered the suspension of the health sector loans to India, senior Bank officials showed “no inclination to take appropriate steps to safeguard resources,” the former official who was involved with the India loan suspension told Newsmax.

Instead, they practiced “denial, denunciation, and eventually collusion in the effort to stop any investigation.”

The World Bank country director for India at the time, Michael Carter, told National Public Radio that the loan suspension took him by “complete surprise,” and that Wolfowitz’s approach to dealing with the corruption allegations in India was “seriously flawed.” (Mr. Carter has since retired from the Bank.)

“The India example is particularly interesting because it refutes many of the objections that were commonly raised against the anti-corruption efforts,” Wolfowitz told Newsmax in response to questions about the loan suspension.

Wolfowitz said that his critics claimed that by holding up a follow-on loan until problems in an earlier loan program had been fixed, he was “depriving the poor of needed health care.” They also accused him of basing the loan suspension on U.S. Political considerations.

India was indeed a close strategic partner of the U.S. And a great example of a successfully developing democracy, Wolfowitz said. “But that didn’t make it right to turn a blind eye to corruption in World Bank “health” loans that were actually making people sick.”

India was not the only country whose World Bank-funded projects were rife with corruption. “There was a pattern,” another former World Bank official told Newsmax. “It was Kenya, Uzbekistan, Chad, and others.”

During his tenure, Wolfowitz suspended loans to these countries, as well as other projects in Bangladesh, Yemen, Congo and Argentina, because of allegations of widespread corruption.

The appointment of Wolfowitz angered the NGO community as well as World Bank employees. Some 1650 non-governmental organizations voiced “strong opposition” to his nomination, while a survey of World Bank staff conducted in April 2005, shortly before the Board approved his nomination, found that nearly 90% were opposed to his appointment.

Wolfowitz was forced to resign as president of the World Bank last year after allegations that he had engineered a sweetheart deal at the Bank for a woman to whom he was romantically tied.

Wolfowitz argued that he had properly sought guidance on the woman’s employment contract from the Bank’s human resource department, and followed it to the letter.

The contract terms were spelled out in an agreement signed by the vice-president of human resources — who later claimed he had objected to the deal. “There were a thousand people at the Bank earning what Shaha [Aliriza] was going to make,” a former aide to Wolfowitz said.

But Berkman says his sources at the Bank told him unequivocally that senior Bank management and members of the board used the flap over Aliriza’s employment as a pretext to get rid of Wolfowitz.

“Nothing would surprise me,” Wolfowitz said, when Newsmax asked for his reaction to this latest accusation.

In his groundbreaking book on the World Bank, Berkman provides dozens of examples where high-minded development projects turn into a “feeding frenzy” for “rent-seeking” government officials and their cronies in the Third World.

In 1998, for example, he was sent to the tiny West African country of Gambia to investigate a $12.3 million project aimed at helping farmers.

Burning shoe leather in the capital, Banjul, he visited suppliers who had been paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for equipment they never sold, and confronted government officials who tacitly admitted to the kickback scheme.

Although the project was supposed to provide direct assistance to farmers, he found that World Bank project managers had approved the disbursement of “huge sums” on “frivolous and illegible procurement.”

The project billed the Bank for hundreds of thousands of dollars of office furniture, vehicles, lodging, fencing, air conditioners and household furnishings, for which there was little accounting and no direct use by those the project was intended to benefit.

In all, Berkman found $8 million of questionable purchases — 65 percent of the entire project total — while few farmers received much assistance.

He called the Gambia program “death by a thousand cuts” because of the sheer number of schemes used successfully to siphon funds from the Bank into the pockets of government officials and their cronies.

At the conclusion of this dizzying narrative of malfeasance, Berkman nevertheless argues that the World Bank should be kept alive, if it can be redirected to its original purpose of providing legitimate development aid.

One of the fixes he offers is to move the Bank’s investment portfolio away from the mega projects it likes to fund toward micro-credits, small projects run by individuals or at most small businesses.

Another is to hold countries — the Bank’s customers — accountable for embezzled funds, and require them to reimburse the Bank.

But the real problem, Berkman acknowledges, is the culture of the Bank, the aura of arrogance and self-contentment that has led managers to shovel money out the door with reckless disregard for how it is spent.

“It is management that has brought the Bank to its present state, and it is management that should be held accountable, not the institution,” Berkman writes.

He calls for the Bank to fire top managers and bring in “fresh blood that would not expend its efforts covering up past mistakes, but would focus upon the problems of the present — fresh blood that could truly revitalize the Bank.”

But Berkman’s own narrative and the saga of Paul Wolfowitz’s efforts to tame corruption suggest that fresh blood soon would become blood on the floor, as entrenched managers worked behind the scenes to destroy any effort to seriously reform the way the World Bank and “the gods” of lending do business.

The whole Bush Administration is corrupt indeed and accountable to what has happened here and sure hope they try Bush for war crimes and all of this

Don't forget to tell ourself
*rimshot*

> Where do you stand on the death penalty?

I have mixed feelings about the death penalty. Part of me thinks that people should be executed for the shedding of innocent blood and part of me thinks that we shouldn't execute people and just let God deal with them.

Fair enough.

Four people? Easy. Pull out your gun.

Or do you mean four million? Nuclear blast works good and fast.

c'mon mother nature....pole shift anyone?

Kill em with kindness

New flew virus