The only people stupider than those who proposed to the Pentagon to disable enemy fighters by gassing them with aphrodisiacs (therefore driving up one of the instincts best known for making people fight) are the homosexual activists who presented this as an attempt to make the enemy homosexual - which it was not - and dubbed it the "gay bomb"; and, of course, the moronic press agencies that picked up their rubbish. But then we know that whatever happens in the world is only relevant if it has to do with the crotch, right?
no subject
Date: 2007-06-15 01:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-06-15 01:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-06-15 02:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-06-15 02:21 pm (UTC)Thank you for saying this. I tried to say this but it didn't go over too well and, as a comedian says, you can't argue with stupid. I'm not surprised that bias was put on it but I am surprised more people don't see it for what it is *sigh*
As for the Pentagons side of it I refuse to think past it aside my random flippant, now there's a whole new take on Make Love not War =P
no subject
Date: 2007-06-15 07:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-06-15 07:04 pm (UTC)Oh, right - I hadn't thought about it from that angle. I was more the one pointing out that "sought to build" in this case actually meant that someone floated the idea, and had it shot down. This is sort of the Pentagon's job, to come up with new ways of fighting, preferrably non-lethal ways. It reminds me of
no subject
Date: 2007-06-15 11:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-06-16 12:35 am (UTC)I'm sorta disappointed, though. I decided not to join the military because I thought my ideas for making lethal zombie soldiers would be shot down. :(
no subject
Date: 2007-06-16 01:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-06-16 07:04 pm (UTC)And people are only interesting if they're ruled by it, apparently. Hence the premature sexualization of prepubescents, manfesting in the rush to dress young girls as prostitutes.