http://www.rawpaleodiet.org/ - Raw Paleo Diet Web Site
http://www.beyondveg.com, specifically http://www.beyondveg.com/cat/paleodiet/index.shtml The second site is the "anti propoganda" - because I'm reasonable. A buddhist principle to keep in mind as you look through it (specifically in regard to raw animal foods) is to "rely on the teaching and not the person". (The author of _Instinictive Eating_ wasn't much of an instinctive eater, smoked, and died a couple of years ago of cancer - the author of some of the beyondveg pages seems to hold this against the diet).
Raw meat is dangerous, no matter where it comes from.
Cooked meat is dangerous, no matter where it comes from. See, dogma can go both ways!;)
This is not a place I would go to for health advice.
Ah, the superhealth report is really just a starting point - a report from a guy who wasn't doing so hot in the past, and found a better way. Where you go it up to you. Which is really the most important point - no one else can give you perfect health, you need to find out what it is that your body needs to be well. You might find that you do really well on no meat at all, cooked meat, or maybe even (*gasp*) Raw Animal Foods. What you find is a unique discovery for yourself - no one else's needs will match your own.
Usually I don't really care when people believe in strange things, but when they start giving dangerous advice to others based on them, I feel compelled to speak.
My posts are not meant so much as advice, as they are a statement of fact - myself, and many others, eat un-cooked animal products. The primary aim is to challenge the status quo - seemingly everyone establishment says "cook your meat well or you'll regret it", while there are plenty of us who do pretty well the other way around.
This just occurred to me - if you are one who is interested in Raw Animal Foods, but worried about the risk of bacterial or parasitic infection, you should obtain a copy of Nourishing Traditions, by Sally Fallon ("The cookbook that challenges politically correct nutrition and the diet dictators"). It's basically a recipee book that deals with all your concerns regarding raw meat - freezing for 14+ days will kill all parasites (according to the USDA), and there are recipees for marinades & the like to deal with the "bacteria problem". I don't have a copy myself (only leafed through one at the local farmer's market last fall), but I suppose I really ought to get a copy... Raw meat is consumed elsewhere in the world - Germans like raw hamburger, Libiyans (sp?) have a couple tasty raw meat dishes, japanese are big on sushi (yeah, so there's that one fish that if not prepared right will kill you. so stay away from that one).
from a review:
Since I wrote my first review, I have added even more of Fallon's recipes to my regular menu, and continue to reap the health benefits of the diet: I stopped gaining weight after years of lowfat dieting; I have more energy, stamina, mental clarity, and focus; and my mood swings and irritability are gone. Plus, the food is DELICIOUS! Hooray for butter, cream, whole milk, and eggs! Hooray for full-fat meats! Hooray for pickles and crispy nuts! Get the book! It's worth it.
Raw veggies is nice. But raw meat is not. Especially chicken. Salmonilla can kill. And beef has e coli etc.
I've heard it before. "but aren't you woried about salmonella?" I'm not - salmonella, et all, are largely a product of industrial-style meat manufacturing. Real meat is not manufactured. I buy my meat from the local organic food store. It's raised naturally, without antibiotics and hormones, etc. I eat my meat on an empty stomac, so all there aren't any obstacles between the stomac acid and any "bad" bacteria that might happen to be present.
Read the superhealth report (link in my first post). It explains why we (I'm not the only one who eats raw meat) don't worry about salmonella or e coli or whatever the food-borne-illness of the month happens to be.
some other bitter (yum =) purple-white vegetable (radicco?)
broccoli
The human body really adheres well to the GIGO principle: Garbage In = Garbarge Out. It's been my experience that how well I feel is a function of my food inputs - ie, when I eat (*gasp*) cooked meat or processed foods, I feel noticeably less well. Some of these recipes don't sound too horribly bad from a puritanical standpoint, but "frito pie"? No thanks. But anything's better than Taco Bell every night I suppose...
Obviously, marginally addictive drugs without severe side-affects can be tolerated. The rest give us a clearly defined state interest in removing them.
... but where do you draw the line? I don't consume any drugs of any sort - perscription or not - and I don't think you should either. Got a headache? Want to take an ibuprofen? Too bad, ibuprofen has some rather severe potential side effects, and since I'm the man in power, I've decided that it is illegal for you to consume said dangerous drug.
Two 30-second spots... suggest illegal drug sale profits may help fuel terrorism.
And in the ideal world the suggestion would be caried through to the only obvious conclusion: prohibition of illegal drugs should be ended, and funds wasted on fighting the "drug war" should be redirected towards [voluntary] treatment programs for addicts. These are "your" tax dollars at work people (3.2 million of them, for 60 seconds of propaganda). If you don't like it then it's time for you to start withdrawing support from the system. (that's conceptually, semantically, and financially)
The "war on drugs" does not have a clearly defined enemy. It's been going on for what, 30 years? And there's no end in sight. The "war on terror" also does not have a clearly defined enemy. Are you ready for perpetual war?
The um....idea that they're working off of now is fighting third-world countries.
Nothing like a comment on the nature of the beast. Thanks. (Taliban originally supported by U.S., Saddam Hussein supported by U.S. [iran/iraq war], Iran's Shah supported by U.S. [overthrown in 1979], etc. And that's just in the middle east.)
to finish the train of thought: "Riots have existed as long as mankind [has been oppressed]." People don't just go out rioting for the hell of it, there is inevitably some form of trigger. I won't say anything about what I think that trigger often is...
ah, been there, tried that.. My problem is kinda weird, in that I literally don't dream very vividly visually. I'll wake up and remember a story line, but there are few visual impressions to go along with that storyline. That being said, I once saw a sort of massage therapist (actually a "trigger point therapist") thrice last spring, and for a week and a half afterwards I had the most incredibly visually intense dreams in my life. And then I started to write them down (like you're supposed to), and the visual aspect of the dreams cut out. Just like that. At the time I wasn't sure what to attribute the dreams to (I'd gone home for spring break, had started taking a magnesium supplement, had steak & the like for the first time in months, and saw the trigger point lady), but I've recently been told that it was, in all likelyhood, the bodywork.. So tomorrow I'm going to call people who do Craniosacral therapy. And hopefully the dreams will return.
I've tried it all - vitamins, herbs, dream journels, reality checks, alone and in combinations, nothing else has brought the sort of intense dreaming I now know is possible. Feel free to email if anyone would like to talk about the subject..
The device you speak of is called 'NovaDreamer' (or 'Super NovaDreamer' for the version w/ the computer interface), and it's availible from the Lucidity Institute here. I have one, it's kinda neat, but hasn't worked for me quite yet.
i shouldn't waste my time replying to this, but what the hell..
After 25 years, the LP is a complete and utter failure.
There are more libertarians in office now than ever before. It sounds to me as if you could use a little improvement in your thinking skills, but I'll let you make that determination for yourself.
"There are many ways to respond to the information you receive. One way is to instantly and automatically reject it. Another is to instantly and automatically accept and believe it.
"Another is to evaluate it: 'Might there be something useful for me here?'
"Another is to see if it fits with your current knowledge. If there's just one thing "wrong" with any of it, then reject all of it."
I suppose that pointing out a decade of falling crime statistics doesn't earn me any points toward proving that government can offer protection?
I suppose that you accept it as coincidence that your decade of falling crime statistics mirrored a decade of economic prosperity? (which is another matter entirely - Misean economists say the boom-days were artificially induced by cheap money, and we're now beginning to see the fallout from past monetary policy... check out their newsletter archives, read and think about it for a bit).
even though the page makes it sound like government is pointless and useless.
The buildfreedom site is far more than just another 'government is baad, mkay' page. The many pages make (what I believe is) a convincing argument that not only is "government" pointless, but is actually harmful, coercive, contradictory, anti-freedom, etc. "Government" can actually be quite useful, say, if someone has something you want ("money"), and you think that everyone should help out poor people. You can use "government" to take the producer's money and redistribute it to people who produce nothing of their own. Now, maybe in a few cases this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but for the vast majority of cases we have at best a "win-lose" situation ("welfare" recipient/tax-victim), but most of the time we have a lose-lose situation (welfare in the classic sense is like a snake pit, once it grabs you it never lets go).
> The government in America does have one, very special, magical power that you seem to be neglecting, it has the support of the people it is regulating.
I believe that this would fall under this trap:
Government Trap #7: The belief that government represents the people. Individuals always represent themselves (Unselfishness and Group Traps). To think otherwise is a delusion.
"The government in America" does not have "the support of the people it is regulating." It has the support of some of the people it is regulating, which is a far cry from unanimity. Other governments have the support of some of the people whom they regulate too (some people in China are all for their current power structure...), the degree to which people support "the government" in "America" does not a "special, magical power" make.
On the contrary--government people are really stupid, and even more so when it comes to computers.
This statement reminded me of a page full of various thought traps people fall into, in particular this one:
Government Trap #5: The belief that government people can do anything better than other people. Government people don't have any special magical powers.
Also worth calling attention to are:
Government Trap #9: The belief that government provides protection. Just look at the crime statistics. (or recent events in New York City)
Government Trap #10: The belief that certain activities or functions must be done by government. Government consists of people. These people don't have any special magical powers.
... and especially this one:
Government Trap #13: The belief that government exists as a volitional entity. This is an aspect of the Group Trap. When having to deal with "government," you always have to deal with individual human beings. Realizing this helps make you much more effective in warding off any attempts by individual government people to violate your freedom. Rather than having to handle "the government," you have to handle one or a few specific individuals. Frederic Bastiat said. "The State is the great fictitious entity by which everyone expects to live at the expense of everyone else." [emphasis added]
Read the rest of this report, "Harry Browne's Freedom Principles" here.
What you suggest is a self perpetuating cycle of violence that will most likely turn the US into a totalitarian police state in efforts to prevent terrorism
In the short term (~10 years) I'll agree with you - we're going to see more and more of the police state meme spreading throughout the land between the Atlantic and Pacific, but long term the it'll most likely accelarate "the US's" present path towards future irrelevancy. Consider:
"The great historian and theorist, Arnold Toynbee, whose descriptions (A Study of History , Oxford U. Press) of the patterns of history were, I believe, pretty well on target, observed that declining and falling civilizations tend to attempt to solve their problems through central agencies and authorities.
"The fact that declining civilizations fail to solve their problems, which Toynbee attributed to other causes, might very well be attributed instead to that very tendency to try to work through central arrangements."
Fortunately, the decline of "the U.S." as a world power (akin to Rome's fall from glory) doesn't necessarily have to be the case:
" In rising civilizations, people on their own, at "grass roots" level, take on the problems and issues. People are enough in communication to imitate each other's successes and avoid each other's failures, but for the most part are working free of central direction, and usually aren't the people who had been expected to be the source of the answer.
It also seems intuitively correct that people who work with what they have, including themselves, on the problems, are more likely to find effective solutions than either the central authorities or all the masses of people standing around waiting for their direction or for resources which are controlled by someone else."
How many light-years across is the universe? If this light is really 13.6 billion years old, why didn't it pass the earth a long time ago? Shouldn't it be out re-defining the "edge of the universe"? Or maybe it's like the game astroids, where your ship goes off the edge of the map and reappears on the other side?
not impossible, just go independant contractor, or use a payroll service that doesn't demand a number (such as American Contracting).
get a phone
don't know anything about this one, though I imagine it's not impossible
open a bank account
open a non-interest bearing account, no need for a number. Don't try to open the account at one of those supermarket branches, go to a major office,
get a loan
You're better off debt free, but if you must, borrow from family, or apply for credit cards without using a number - not all will automatically deny you for not including a number.
If I didn't know better, I'd suspect that you were talking about "President" G.W. Bush & his big guns. What do you think the rest of the world will consider him when the full furry is unleashed?
terrorcrat - n. "terrorist bureaucrat"
Re:What we must do
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The most important responsibility of government is to protect the lives,
liberty, and property of its citizens. Our government has failed in this
regard.
"Our government" has failed in this regard because the primary responsibility of people acting under the guise of government is to insure the continued existence of government (to make sure they still have a job, are still important, and still have control over 'the population'). You can see this in their news conferences - to paraphrase "I want to let everyone know that the Federal Government still exists and is still working, and is doing important stuff". Nevermind that the actions of those acting under the guise of government were likely the primary instigator of these attacks, as you point out - remember that bin Laden got his start with the CIA (MSNBC article), and our 'government' chooses sides often enough in worldwide conflicts to royally piss off people who get the bad end of the boom stick.
Many thanks to whoever it was that posted Harry Browne's "When Will We Learn?" article on slashdot yesterday.. In case you missed it, here's the first section:
>>>
The terrorist attacks against America comprise a horrible tragedy. But they shouldn't be a surprise.
It is well known that in war, the first casualty is truth ? that during any war truth is forsaken for propaganda. But sanity was a prior casualty: it was the loss of sanity that led to war in the first place.
Our foreign policy has been insane for decades. It was only a matter of time until Americans would have to suffer personally for it. It is a terrible tragedy of life that the innocent so often have to suffer for the sins of the guilty.
When will we learn that we can't allow our politicians to bully the world without someone bullying back eventually?
President Bush has authorized continued bombing of innocent people in Iraq. President Clinton bombed innocent people in the Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Serbia. President Bush Senior invaded Iraq and Panama. President Reagan bombed innocent people in Libya and invaded Grenada. And on and on it goes.
Did we think the people who lost their families and friends and property in all that destruction would love America for what happened?
When will we learn that violence always begets violence?
<<<
What 'America' must do now is stop the insanity, stop whipping out it's proverbial dick and beating people with it, even if some believe 'it's in their best interest'. Mind your own business, and there'll be less animosity towards you in the world.
here's what I was looking for...
on
Sklyarov Update
·
· Score: 2
A quote from one of the handful of people who know how to demand their rights:
"BTW, when you are in custody, they have only 30 days to get you to trial, which they [prosecutors - krkrbt] CANNOT do due to incompetence. When you bail out ["bail out" = post bail - krkrbt], you lose some good strategies, plus you give them an additional 15 days (50% more time) to get you to trial. And when you waive your right to a speedy trial, it can go on for years. This is why a few nights in jail to get a good false arrest case can be worth it. You could have had them, according to already decided cases [wish I could find the case-law for these numbers.. email me some other time. -krkrbt]. You let the tiger's tail go. Good luck!! You might be able to grab it again. They [governmental prosecutors -krkrbt] are often incompetent, and unable to recognize your prior errors."
email me if you'd like to know more about the author of the quote (where it came from, etc).
the right to a speedy trial (6th Amendment)? "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,..." It seems that it's been several months since Dmitry was first arrested, surely he has the right to be arraigned within less than a week. But then again, you only have rights if you know how to demand them, as a russian he wouldn't know the ins and outs of American jurisprudence (not to imply that more than a handful of Americans know how to successfully demand rights from freedom violators)..
... there was an article recently on mises.org on the FBI's "great tradition" (GWB's term). I don't know that I want those people protecting me from olympic park bombings (they did that one real well...) or tracking me down for imaginary crimes.
"If you're not a criminal you have nothing to worry about" - famous last words. See this story.
And when your Internet goes down, they will proceed at "government speed" to fix the problem, the kind of speed that comes from workers whose jobs are 100% safe no matter what they do, and they have no stock options.
Good point... Someone I respect was lamenting that people were beginning to actually seek out government jobs, because (in his view) traditionally it's been people who couldn't find a job anywhere else that took a government job. While this certainly isn't a universal quality (some people seek out government jobs because they get to control people, others for various reasons, etc), the point is - Do you want the guy (probably an MCSE) who can't hold down a tech job anywhere else keeping your internet connection running? But that's how government works..
Cancer cells may be immortal, insofar as they don't undergo programmed cell death
Regular cells may be immortal too:
An experiment which lasted 29 years was to unveil something quite remarkable, something which could have important significance on the life span of man in the future. Dr Alexis Carrell of the Rockerfeller Institute for Medical Research, took small samples of heart tissue from a chicken embryo and immersed them in a solution from which they obtained all the necessary nutrients. As the cells took up the nutrient rich broth, they also excreted their metabolic wastes into the same solution. Each day, the old solution was discarded and replaced with fresh broth. This chicken heart tissue lived for 29 years, only dying when the assistant forgot to change the polluted fluid. (note: when I first heard about this... "study", they said the cells had died when the project was discontinued, 'csuse the figured they could keep them alive forever.) Commenting, Dr. Carrell said:
"The cell is immortal. It is merely the fluid in which it floats which degenerates. Renew this fluid at intervals, give the cell something on which to feed and, so far as we know, the pulsation of life may go on forever..."
So if you could find a way to quickly & effectively remove remove all wastes from the fluid surrounding your cells every day, and replace that with fresh nutrients (more than those found in the typical refined fare), maybe you wouldn't have to fall victim to "programmed cell death", or at least not so soon. (hey, it's just a possibility, and a remote one at that, everyone still dies eventually)
Cameron: May I assume you're imagining longer, healthier lives?
Harman: Absolutely. The fact is, if you get sick at 65, you're going to be sick for a long time. But if you're healthy and productive well into your 90s and you get sick at, say, 95 or 100, at that age the body cannot tolerate trauma. You die quickly. With the kind of longevity I'm postulating, society gets the benefit of many more years of experience from the elderly (65 and older) and oldest old (85 and older) without the old being a burden on society. Mother Nature did not mean for us to live forever, but that does not mean we should not try to increase our functional life span. In the ideal scenario one would live a long, active, useful life, then die quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.rawpaleodiet.org/ - Raw Paleo Diet Web Sitel
http://www.beyondveg.com, specifically http://www.beyondveg.com/cat/paleodiet/index.shtm
The second site is the "anti propoganda" - because I'm reasonable. A buddhist principle to keep in mind as you look through it (specifically in regard to raw animal foods) is to "rely on the teaching and not the person". (The author of _Instinictive Eating_ wasn't much of an instinctive eater, smoked, and died a couple of years ago of cancer - the author of some of the beyondveg pages seems to hold this against the diet).
Cooked meat is dangerous, no matter where it comes from. See, dogma can go both ways!
This is not a place I would go to for health advice.
Ah, the superhealth report is really just a starting point - a report from a guy who wasn't doing so hot in the past, and found a better way. Where you go it up to you. Which is really the most important point - no one else can give you perfect health, you need to find out what it is that your body needs to be well. You might find that you do really well on no meat at all, cooked meat, or maybe even (*gasp*) Raw Animal Foods. What you find is a unique discovery for yourself - no one else's needs will match your own.
Usually I don't really care when people believe in strange things, but when they start giving dangerous advice to others based on them, I feel compelled to speak.
My posts are not meant so much as advice, as they are a statement of fact - myself, and many others, eat un-cooked animal products. The primary aim is to challenge the status quo - seemingly everyone establishment says "cook your meat well or you'll regret it", while there are plenty of us who do pretty well the other way around.
This just occurred to me - if you are one who is interested in Raw Animal Foods, but worried about the risk of bacterial or parasitic infection, you should obtain a copy of Nourishing Traditions, by Sally Fallon ("The cookbook that challenges politically correct nutrition and the diet dictators"). It's basically a recipee book that deals with all your concerns regarding raw meat - freezing for 14+ days will kill all parasites (according to the USDA), and there are recipees for marinades & the like to deal with the "bacteria problem". I don't have a copy myself (only leafed through one at the local farmer's market last fall), but I suppose I really ought to get a copy... Raw meat is consumed elsewhere in the world - Germans like raw hamburger, Libiyans (sp?) have a couple tasty raw meat dishes, japanese are big on sushi (yeah, so there's that one fish that if not prepared right will kill you. so stay away from that one).
from a review:
Raw veggies is nice. But raw meat is not. Especially chicken. Salmonilla can kill. And beef has e coli etc.
I've heard it before. "but aren't you woried about salmonella?" I'm not - salmonella, et all, are largely a product of industrial-style meat manufacturing. Real meat is not manufactured. I buy my meat from the local organic food store. It's raised naturally, without antibiotics and hormones, etc. I eat my meat on an empty stomac, so all there aren't any obstacles between the stomac acid and any "bad" bacteria that might happen to be present.
Read the superhealth report (link in my first post). It explains why we (I'm not the only one who eats raw meat) don't worry about salmonella or e coli or whatever the food-borne-illness of the month happens to be.
- Chicken livers (raw, Mmm... =)
- chicken leg/thigh (raw)
- pecans (raw, in shell)
- pine nuts ("raw", but lightly oxygen roasted)
- walnuts (not really raw, but non-cooked)
- almonds (raw)
followed with: (all raw)- spinach
- Mustard greens
- purple kale
- celery
- some other bitter (yum =) purple-white vegetable (radicco?)
- broccoli
The human body really adheres well to the GIGO principle: Garbage In = Garbarge Out. It's been my experience that how well I feel is a function of my food inputs - ie, when I eat (*gasp*) cooked meat or processed foods, I feel noticeably less well. Some of these recipes don't sound too horribly bad from a puritanical standpoint, but "frito pie"? No thanks. But anything's better than Taco Bell every night I suppose...Check out the Superhealth report, it's what got me started...
Obviously, marginally addictive drugs without severe side-affects can be tolerated. The rest give us a clearly defined state interest in removing them.
... but where do you draw the line? I don't consume any drugs of any sort - perscription or not - and I don't think you should either. Got a headache? Want to take an ibuprofen? Too bad, ibuprofen has some rather severe potential side effects, and since I'm the man in power, I've decided that it is illegal for you to consume said dangerous drug.
Two 30-second spots ... suggest illegal drug sale profits may help fuel terrorism.
And in the ideal world the suggestion would be caried through to the only obvious conclusion: prohibition of illegal drugs should be ended, and funds wasted on fighting the "drug war" should be redirected towards [voluntary] treatment programs for addicts. These are "your" tax dollars at work people (3.2 million of them, for 60 seconds of propaganda). If you don't like it then it's time for you to start withdrawing support from the system. (that's conceptually, semantically, and financially)
The "war on drugs" does not have a clearly defined enemy. It's been going on for what, 30 years? And there's no end in sight. The "war on terror" also does not have a clearly defined enemy. Are you ready for perpetual war?
The entire Iran/iraq thing was a single incident.
Does the "United States'" suppression of a democratic revolution in favor of keeping the Saudi "royal family" in power count as a separate incident?
Nothing like a comment on the nature of the beast. Thanks. (Taliban originally supported by U.S., Saddam Hussein supported by U.S. [iran/iraq war], Iran's Shah supported by U.S. [overthrown in 1979], etc. And that's just in the middle east.)
to finish the train of thought: "Riots have existed as long as mankind [has been oppressed]." People don't just go out rioting for the hell of it, there is inevitably some form of trigger. I won't say anything about what I think that trigger often is...
ah, been there, tried that.. My problem is kinda weird, in that I literally don't dream very vividly visually. I'll wake up and remember a story line, but there are few visual impressions to go along with that storyline. That being said, I once saw a sort of massage therapist (actually a "trigger point therapist") thrice last spring, and for a week and a half afterwards I had the most incredibly visually intense dreams in my life. And then I started to write them down (like you're supposed to), and the visual aspect of the dreams cut out. Just like that. At the time I wasn't sure what to attribute the dreams to (I'd gone home for spring break, had started taking a magnesium supplement, had steak & the like for the first time in months, and saw the trigger point lady), but I've recently been told that it was, in all likelyhood, the bodywork.. So tomorrow I'm going to call people who do Craniosacral therapy. And hopefully the dreams will return.
I've tried it all - vitamins, herbs, dream journels, reality checks, alone and in combinations, nothing else has brought the sort of intense dreaming I now know is possible. Feel free to email if anyone would like to talk about the subject..
The device you speak of is called 'NovaDreamer' (or 'Super NovaDreamer' for the version w/ the computer interface), and it's availible from the Lucidity Institute here. I have one, it's kinda neat, but hasn't worked for me quite yet.
i shouldn't waste my time replying to this, but what the hell..
After 25 years, the LP is a complete and utter failure.
There are more libertarians in office now than ever before. It sounds to me as if you could use a little improvement in your thinking skills, but I'll let you make that determination for yourself.
"There are many ways to respond to the information you receive. One way is to instantly and automatically reject it. Another is to instantly and automatically accept and believe it.
"Another is to evaluate it: 'Might there be something useful for me here?'
"Another is to see if it fits with your current knowledge. If there's just one thing "wrong" with any of it, then reject all of it."
(src)
I suppose that pointing out a decade of falling crime statistics doesn't earn me any points toward proving that government can offer protection?
I suppose that you accept it as coincidence that your decade of falling crime statistics mirrored a decade of economic prosperity? (which is another matter entirely - Misean economists say the boom-days were artificially induced by cheap money, and we're now beginning to see the fallout from past monetary policy... check out their newsletter archives, read and think about it for a bit).
even though the page makes it sound like government is pointless and useless.
The buildfreedom site is far more than just another 'government is baad, mkay' page. The many pages make (what I believe is) a convincing argument that not only is "government" pointless, but is actually harmful, coercive, contradictory, anti-freedom, etc. "Government" can actually be quite useful, say, if someone has something you want ("money"), and you think that everyone should help out poor people. You can use "government" to take the producer's money and redistribute it to people who produce nothing of their own. Now, maybe in a few cases this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but for the vast majority of cases we have at best a "win-lose" situation ("welfare" recipient/tax-victim), but most of the time we have a lose-lose situation (welfare in the classic sense is like a snake pit, once it grabs you it never lets go).
> The government in America does have one, very special, magical power that you seem to be neglecting, it has the support of the people it is regulating.
I believe that this would fall under this trap:
Government Trap #7: The belief that government represents the people. Individuals always represent themselves (Unselfishness and Group Traps). To think otherwise is a delusion.
"The government in America" does not have "the support of the people it is regulating." It has the support of some of the people it is regulating, which is a far cry from unanimity. Other governments have the support of some of the people whom they regulate too (some people in China are all for their current power structure...), the degree to which people support "the government" in "America" does not a "special, magical power" make.
On the contrary--government people are really stupid, and even more so when it comes to computers.
... and especially this one:
This statement reminded me of a page full of various thought traps people fall into, in particular this one:
Government Trap #5: The belief that government people can do anything better than other people. Government people don't have any special magical powers.
Also worth calling attention to are:
Government Trap #9: The belief that government provides protection. Just look at the crime statistics. (or recent events in New York City)
Government Trap #10: The belief that certain activities or functions must be done by government. Government consists of people. These people don't have any special magical powers.
Government Trap #13: The belief that government exists as a volitional entity. This is an aspect of the Group Trap. When having to deal with "government," you always have to deal with individual human beings. Realizing this helps make you much more effective in warding off any attempts by individual government people to violate your freedom. Rather than having to handle "the government," you have to handle one or a few specific individuals. Frederic Bastiat said. "The State is the great fictitious entity by which everyone expects to live at the expense of everyone else." [emphasis added]
Read the rest of this report, "Harry Browne's Freedom Principles" here.
In the short term (~10 years) I'll agree with you - we're going to see more and more of the police state meme spreading throughout the land between the Atlantic and Pacific, but long term the it'll most likely accelarate "the US's" present path towards future irrelevancy. Consider:
"The great historian and theorist, Arnold Toynbee, whose descriptions (A Study of History , Oxford U. Press) of the patterns of history were, I believe, pretty well on target, observed that declining and falling civilizations tend to attempt to solve their problems through central agencies and authorities.
"The fact that declining civilizations fail to solve their problems, which Toynbee attributed to other causes, might very well be attributed instead to that very tendency to try to work through central arrangements."
Fortunately, the decline of "the U.S." as a world power (akin to Rome's fall from glory) doesn't necessarily have to be the case:
" In rising civilizations, people on their own, at "grass roots" level, take on the problems and issues. People are enough in communication to imitate each other's successes and avoid each other's failures, but for the most part are working free of central direction, and usually aren't the people who had been expected to be the source of the answer.
It also seems intuitively correct that people who work with what they have, including themselves, on the problems, are more likely to find effective solutions than either the central authorities or all the masses of people standing around waiting for their direction or for resources which are controlled by someone else."
Read the rest of this statement here: http://www.winwenger.com/special.htm
How many light-years across is the universe? If this light is really 13.6 billion years old, why didn't it pass the earth a long time ago? Shouldn't it be out re-defining the "edge of the universe"? Or maybe it's like the game astroids, where your ship goes off the edge of the map and reappears on the other side?
james
Get a job
not impossible, just go independant contractor, or use a payroll service that doesn't demand a number (such as American Contracting).
get a phone
don't know anything about this one, though I imagine it's not impossible
open a bank account
open a non-interest bearing account, no need for a number. Don't try to open the account at one of those supermarket branches, go to a major office,
get a loan
You're better off debt free, but if you must, borrow from family, or apply for credit cards without using a number - not all will automatically deny you for not including a number.
If I didn't know better, I'd suspect that you were talking about "President" G.W. Bush & his big guns. What do you think the rest of the world will consider him when the full furry is unleashed?
terrorcrat - n. "terrorist bureaucrat"
The most important responsibility of government is to protect the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens. Our government has failed in this regard.
"Our government" has failed in this regard because the primary responsibility of people acting under the guise of government is to insure the continued existence of government (to make sure they still have a job, are still important, and still have control over 'the population'). You can see this in their news conferences - to paraphrase "I want to let everyone know that the Federal Government still exists and is still working, and is doing important stuff". Nevermind that the actions of those acting under the guise of government were likely the primary instigator of these attacks, as you point out - remember that bin Laden got his start with the CIA (MSNBC article), and our 'government' chooses sides often enough in worldwide conflicts to royally piss off people who get the bad end of the boom stick.
Many thanks to whoever it was that posted Harry Browne's "When Will We Learn?" article on slashdot yesterday.. In case you missed it, here's the first section:
>>>
The terrorist attacks against America comprise a horrible tragedy. But they shouldn't be a surprise.
It is well known that in war, the first casualty is truth ? that during any war truth is forsaken for propaganda. But sanity was a prior casualty: it was the loss of sanity that led to war in the first place.
Our foreign policy has been insane for decades. It was only a matter of time until Americans would have to suffer personally for it. It is a terrible tragedy of life that the innocent so often have to suffer for the sins of the guilty.
When will we learn that we can't allow our politicians to bully the world without someone bullying back eventually?
President Bush has authorized continued bombing of innocent people in Iraq. President Clinton bombed innocent people in the Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Serbia. President Bush Senior invaded Iraq and Panama. President Reagan bombed innocent people in Libya and invaded Grenada. And on and on it goes.
Did we think the people who lost their families and friends and property in all that destruction would love America for what happened?
When will we learn that violence always begets violence?
<<<
What 'America' must do now is stop the insanity, stop whipping out it's proverbial dick and beating people with it, even if some believe 'it's in their best interest'. Mind your own business, and there'll be less animosity towards you in the world.
A quote from one of the handful of people who know how to demand their rights:
"BTW, when you are in custody, they have only 30 days to get you to trial, which they [prosecutors - krkrbt] CANNOT do due to incompetence. When you bail out ["bail out" = post bail - krkrbt], you lose some good strategies, plus you give them an additional 15 days (50% more time) to get you to trial. And when you waive your right to a speedy trial, it can go on for years. This is why a few nights in jail to get a good false arrest case can be worth it. You could have had them, according to already decided cases [wish I could find the case-law for these numbers.. email me some other time. -krkrbt]. You let the tiger's tail go. Good luck!! You might be able to grab it again. They [governmental prosecutors -krkrbt] are often incompetent, and unable to recognize your prior errors."
email me if you'd like to know more about the author of the quote (where it came from, etc).
the right to a speedy trial (6th Amendment)? "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, ..." It seems that it's been several months since Dmitry was first arrested, surely he has the right to be arraigned within less than a week. But then again, you only have rights if you know how to demand them, as a russian he wouldn't know the ins and outs of American jurisprudence (not to imply that more than a handful of Americans know how to successfully demand rights from freedom violators)..
"If you're not a criminal you have nothing to worry about" - famous last words. See this story.
Good point... Someone I respect was lamenting that people were beginning to actually seek out government jobs, because (in his view) traditionally it's been people who couldn't find a job anywhere else that took a government job. While this certainly isn't a universal quality (some people seek out government jobs because they get to control people, others for various reasons, etc), the point is - Do you want the guy (probably an MCSE) who can't hold down a tech job anywhere else keeping your internet connection running? But that's how government works..
Regular cells may be immortal too:
An experiment which lasted 29 years was to unveil something quite remarkable, something which could have important significance on the life span of man in the future. Dr Alexis Carrell of the Rockerfeller Institute for Medical Research, took small samples of heart tissue from a chicken embryo and immersed them in a solution from which they obtained all the necessary nutrients. As the cells took up the nutrient rich broth, they also excreted their metabolic wastes into the same solution. Each day, the old solution was discarded and replaced with fresh broth. This chicken heart tissue lived for 29 years, only dying when the assistant forgot to change the polluted fluid. (note: when I first heard about this ... "study", they said the cells had died when the project was discontinued, 'csuse the figured they could keep them alive forever.) Commenting, Dr. Carrell said:
"The cell is immortal. It is merely the fluid in which it floats which degenerates. Renew this fluid at intervals, give the cell something on which to feed and, so far as we know, the pulsation of life may go on forever..."
Google search for "immortal chicken cell"
So if you could find a way to quickly & effectively remove remove all wastes from the fluid surrounding your cells every day, and replace that with fresh nutrients (more than those found in the typical refined fare), maybe you wouldn't have to fall victim to "programmed cell death", or at least not so soon. (hey, it's just a possibility, and a remote one at that, everyone still dies eventually)
Cameron: May I assume you're imagining longer, healthier lives?
Harman: Absolutely. The fact is, if you get sick at 65, you're going to be sick for a long time. But if you're healthy and productive well into your 90s and you get sick at, say, 95 or 100, at that age the body cannot tolerate trauma. You die quickly. With the kind of longevity I'm postulating, society gets the benefit of many more years of experience from the elderly (65 and older) and oldest old (85 and older) without the old being a burden on society. Mother Nature did not mean for us to live forever, but that does not mean we should not try to increase our functional life span. In the ideal scenario one would live a long, active, useful life, then die quickly.
A report on Superhealth
---