your translations are wrong, self-serving and lazy. i will not do your work for you, especially as you have clearly made up your mind to keep your head in the sand. good day sir.
perhaps i should have been clearer on my use of that article as reference. i have not (and have no real interest) in compiling all the data sources i have learned from which create the mosaic. the truth, as it usually is - is blatantly obvious. it's we who are blind. i listed it after a 5 second google search to at least turn any open-minded readers onto the possiblity of additional information.
as far as ridiculing something, well, you seem more interested in attacking the source rather than content. even a cursory further examination (rather than expecting it to be spoonfed) would enlighten.
i do however, encourage anyone who sees an uncanny coincidence in the timing of the action (which is/was in conjunction with a situation at fukushima that from a technical perspective, is effectively FUBAR - with significant long-term implications) to further investigate on their own and use critical analysis to determine for themselves. To the extent that I (or others who speak of these things) appear in other respects (even if it's just the ability to craft a seemingly coherent sentence) to be rational and logical, then maybe that will (to some degree) encourage others to accept the even possibility that the conclusions are based on some reasonable thought and analysis. if not - then no worries. i'm not much of a believer in revolution anyway. evolution on the other hand..
follow the logic for a moment.. if it happened to be true that information dissemination (particularly as it pertains to nefarious government doings) were controlled (even in some small part) via the large corporations that are mass media outlets... from where would you expect to gain access to truth? By no means should you, or I, or anyone simply believe something because it's presented - but to dismiss something (or accept something) purely on the basis of the level of 'officialness' of the medium, without regard for critical analysis of the subject matter is foolish (especially in light of the understanding that history again and again and again points to mass manipulation always existing... though it's uncovering is usually made far after the fact). i respectfully suggest you introduce yourself to the works of Gore Vidal.
when the state can arbitrarily designate something as a 'state secret', it's all at risk. if you speak to nuclear engineers who have real opinions on the state of affairs there (most importantly, do not have any vested interests, economic or otherwise), you will understand why it's logical that they would create a gag order. Though the 'Fukushima Gag Order Bill', though given the intelligence of Abe and his cronies, might have been a first draft name proposal, they no doubt found it easier to wrap it into the larger and better sounding 'state secrets' bill. but by no means do i believe it to be the sole ugly thing baked in there.. carte blanches are great like that
ignorance (willfult or otherwise) always seems to find it's way into ad hominem attacks, doesn't it? well.. in case you aren't either a shill/troll or too far overdosed on the koolaid.. it's not like they're even really pretending. i mean, at least they used to try to cover it up.
considering that the recently passed 'state secrets' law in japan effectively gags anyone from talking about fukushima in an honest way, the fact that this is being released at all probably means it's just to warm up the public for the real shoe to drop..
oh, and in case you don't know the law... here it is.
absolutely agree! and further to the point, anything that happens on this planet is something a lot less than.000000000001% of the known physical universe - so lets just piss on life wherever we see it! pass me a cold one good buddy
Scrub the word 'betting' from the headline, as there is no indication they are putting any money where their mouth is,,
Why Morgan Stanley Is Continually Trying to Convince Investors That Tesla Will Kill Your Power Company
but of course, that's not accurate either, because the article and reports merely report THAT morgan stanley is making the pitch, not WHY.. so maybe it should be: Morgan Stanley Continues to Try and Sell Investors On A Company That Has Paid Them Many Millions in Underwriting Fees and Stands to Pay Them Many More Millions More If They Can The Public Buying It
FIFY
MS, like GS, has ample capital to deploy in areas they see as real opportunities. I would discount their vehement jawboning (which is trying to convince others to buy.. what they're selling! what a coincidence!) and instead look to where they are themselves deploying capital.
26 happens to be a very important number kabbalistically.. it is the numeric value of the 'name of god' (jehovah, for those not afraid of being stoned) which represents the complete manifested universe. im just saying - kinda neat.
|Maybe... but like radio, TV and telephones before it, not having internet access is cutting you off from a huge world of invaluable information, even if you only spend 0.1% of your overall time accessing it. It's not as if they're being charged by the hour of by the MByte, so wasting lots of time doesn't cost anything, and doesn't preclude the valuable uses.
wasting lots of time is not a harmless activity - especially for kids, if what said 'wasting' is, is actually indoctrination into the life of becoming a consumerist drone fit only to become the most minor of cogs.
|And the same is true of rich people who pay for their own internet access... So what's the problem? Do you have some crazy puritanical streak that says poor kids should spend every waking hour working their asses off, like their lives depend on it? People spend more time on entertainment than education, but the former doesn't preclude the later. How many people here can say that they spend no time on mindless entertainment?
im a bit surprised by the level of excitement and the ad hominem attack. nonetheless, i am not, and did not suggest anything of the sort. my point being that if the 'haves' in our society are going to deliberately give to the 'have-nots', it should be something constructive, not firewater. sure - give the kids access to internet at home so they can watch junk and jerk off like everyone else - but that should be secondary AFTER actually doing something constructive that has a chance of enriching their lives. isn't that the whole point of giving to those less fortunate? teach a man to fish and all that?
having tutored several underprivileged kids in a large urban environment (and having witnessed how when left to their own devices they used their internet access for NOT educational rich-poor-divide-shrinking stuff, but rather typical time-wasting stuff ) this seems like a poor answer to social responsibility to me for a $139 billion company that is Comcast.
Without guidance and structure, 'for the children' will go to the lowest common denominator, so basically, they are subsidizing a new generation of kids to grow up addicted to watching 'teen-wolf' on MTV-tube.
What might actually be nice would to see comcast, oh, i dont know, sponsor after-school computer education programs? Or frankly anything that provides for the real thing that tends to be absent in households that are barely making ends meet - additional educational structure.
i hear ya, but recognize.. they wouldnt be anywhere near as cool as the movies make em out to be. no explosions w/o O2... just a lot of crumpling and squishing.
on the contrary - we are told to be scared, and take positions of 'side' all the time, albeit usually very subtly (though none the weaker impact for it's implied nature). i agree, the article appears to be about facts - i was speaking to a larger theme which i think you missed.
someone remind me again... they're the bad guys, and we're the good guys, right? it's all so confusing sometimes - i don't always know when i'm meant to be properly scared into fully thinking and doing what i'm told. the news generally does a good job, but sometimes i wish Vince McMahon were put in charge of all news... life was so much simpler when it was Hulk Hogan vs. the Iron Sheikh.
USA Freedom Act? fools! don't they know i have my decoder ring that tells me what it's really about? here's a clue.. whatever they tell you it is... it's the opposite.
"The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out" - George Carlin
hey ya'll - i know these guys have been trying to invade us and everything, but look.. they're nowhere to be seen, and they've left us this SWEET giant wooden horse! i don't know about you, but im thinking it's partytime!! open up them gates and roll that baby in!!
imho, that's the real question people should ask themselves. if one can extract oneself from the insane notion that our propaganda presents, that of 'THIS time, an escalation of VIOLENCE will SURELY lead to PEACE!" then once you realize this pattern has repeated.. forever.. and never worked.. the remaining conclusions are to me a) pockets of humanity are literally insane, and b) someone (or group of someones) is benefiting from all this activity. it behooves us all to ask ourselves who this might be, as it will likely shed light on the truer drivers.
i didnt say morals.. i said moral compass. granted, i didn't define it here - but by that, i mean felt perception - which is (partially) an awareness of ones connectedness with one's environment. if you perceive yourself as part of a whole, then you cannot callously do harm to that system any more than you could callously cut off your own hand. morals are rules written by men. if one's moral compass is functioning intact (and call it whatever you want), you dont need someone or something to tell you whats right or wrong. you feel it implicity.
Slashdot Mirror
your translations are wrong, self-serving and lazy. i will not do your work for you, especially as you have clearly made up your mind to keep your head in the sand. good day sir.
perhaps i should have been clearer on my use of that article as reference. i have not (and have no real interest) in compiling all the data sources i have learned from which create the mosaic. the truth, as it usually is - is blatantly obvious. it's we who are blind. i listed it after a 5 second google search to at least turn any open-minded readers onto the possiblity of additional information.
as far as ridiculing something, well, you seem more interested in attacking the source rather than content. even a cursory further examination (rather than expecting it to be spoonfed) would enlighten.
i do however, encourage anyone who sees an uncanny coincidence in the timing of the action (which is/was in conjunction with a situation at fukushima that from a technical perspective, is effectively FUBAR - with significant long-term implications) to further investigate on their own and use critical analysis to determine for themselves. To the extent that I (or others who speak of these things) appear in other respects (even if it's just the ability to craft a seemingly coherent sentence) to be rational and logical, then maybe that will (to some degree) encourage others to accept the even possibility that the conclusions are based on some reasonable thought and analysis. if not - then no worries. i'm not much of a believer in revolution anyway. evolution on the other hand..
follow the logic for a moment.. if it happened to be true that information dissemination (particularly as it pertains to nefarious government doings) were controlled (even in some small part) via the large corporations that are mass media outlets... from where would you expect to gain access to truth? By no means should you, or I, or anyone simply believe something because it's presented - but to dismiss something (or accept something) purely on the basis of the level of 'officialness' of the medium, without regard for critical analysis of the subject matter is foolish (especially in light of the understanding that history again and again and again points to mass manipulation always existing... though it's uncovering is usually made far after the fact). i respectfully suggest you introduce yourself to the works of Gore Vidal.
when the state can arbitrarily designate something as a 'state secret', it's all at risk. if you speak to nuclear engineers who have real opinions on the state of affairs there (most importantly, do not have any vested interests, economic or otherwise), you will understand why it's logical that they would create a gag order. Though the 'Fukushima Gag Order Bill', though given the intelligence of Abe and his cronies, might have been a first draft name proposal, they no doubt found it easier to wrap it into the larger and better sounding 'state secrets' bill. but by no means do i believe it to be the sole ugly thing baked in there.. carte blanches are great like that
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/co...
ignorance (willfult or otherwise) always seems to find it's way into ad hominem attacks, doesn't it? well.. in case you aren't either a shill/troll or too far overdosed on the koolaid.. it's not like they're even really pretending. i mean, at least they used to try to cover it up.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/co...
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/op...
considering that the recently passed 'state secrets' law in japan effectively gags anyone from talking about fukushima in an honest way, the fact that this is being released at all probably means it's just to warm up the public for the real shoe to drop..
oh, and in case you don't know the law... here it is.
absolutely agree! and further to the point, anything that happens on this planet is something a lot less than .000000000001% of the known physical universe - so lets just piss on life wherever we see it! pass me a cold one good buddy
or if people would shift to a vegetarian diet. FIFY
Scrub the word 'betting' from the headline, as there is no indication they are putting any money where their mouth is,,
:
Why Morgan Stanley Is Continually Trying to Convince Investors That Tesla Will Kill Your Power Company
but of course, that's not accurate either, because the article and reports merely report THAT morgan stanley is making the pitch, not WHY.. so maybe it should be
Morgan Stanley Continues to Try and Sell Investors On A Company That Has Paid Them Many Millions in Underwriting Fees and Stands to Pay Them Many More Millions More If They Can The Public Buying It
FIFY
MS, like GS, has ample capital to deploy in areas they see as real opportunities. I would discount their vehement jawboning (which is trying to convince others to buy.. what they're selling! what a coincidence!) and instead look to where they are themselves deploying capital.
26 happens to be a very important number kabbalistically .. it is the numeric value of the 'name of god' (jehovah, for those not afraid of being stoned) which represents the complete manifested universe. im just saying - kinda neat.
hey - if you want to be treated with the dignity and fairness due to a human being, stop whining and just incorporate.
space hates us for our freedoms..
totally agree - though i think the odd's of that happening are slightly less.. not to say it isnt worth agitating for though
|Maybe... but like radio, TV and telephones before it, not having internet access is cutting you off from a huge world of invaluable information, even if you only spend 0.1% of your overall time accessing it. It's not as if they're being charged by the hour of by the MByte, so wasting lots of time doesn't cost anything, and doesn't preclude the valuable uses.
wasting lots of time is not a harmless activity - especially for kids, if what said 'wasting' is, is actually indoctrination into the life of becoming a consumerist drone fit only to become the most minor of cogs.
|And the same is true of rich people who pay for their own internet access... So what's the problem? Do you have some crazy puritanical streak that says poor kids should spend every waking hour working their asses off, like their lives depend on it? People spend more time on entertainment than education, but the former doesn't preclude the later. How many people here can say that they spend no time on mindless entertainment?
im a bit surprised by the level of excitement and the ad hominem attack. nonetheless, i am not, and did not suggest anything of the sort. my point being that if the 'haves' in our society are going to deliberately give to the 'have-nots', it should be something constructive, not firewater. sure - give the kids access to internet at home so they can watch junk and jerk off like everyone else - but that should be secondary AFTER actually doing something constructive that has a chance of enriching their lives. isn't that the whole point of giving to those less fortunate? teach a man to fish and all that?
having tutored several underprivileged kids in a large urban environment (and having witnessed how when left to their own devices they used their internet access for NOT educational rich-poor-divide-shrinking stuff, but rather typical time-wasting stuff ) this seems like a poor answer to social responsibility to me for a $139 billion company that is Comcast.
Without guidance and structure, 'for the children' will go to the lowest common denominator, so basically, they are subsidizing a new generation of kids to grow up addicted to watching 'teen-wolf' on MTV-tube.
What might actually be nice would to see comcast, oh, i dont know, sponsor after-school computer education programs? Or frankly anything that provides for the real thing that tends to be absent in households that are barely making ends meet - additional educational structure.
i hear ya, but recognize.. they wouldnt be anywhere near as cool as the movies make em out to be. no explosions w/o O2... just a lot of crumpling and squishing.
on the contrary - we are told to be scared, and take positions of 'side' all the time, albeit usually very subtly (though none the weaker impact for it's implied nature). i agree, the article appears to be about facts - i was speaking to a larger theme which i think you missed.
someone remind me again... they're the bad guys, and we're the good guys, right? it's all so confusing sometimes - i don't always know when i'm meant to be properly scared into fully thinking and doing what i'm told. the news generally does a good job, but sometimes i wish Vince McMahon were put in charge of all news... life was so much simpler when it was Hulk Hogan vs. the Iron Sheikh.
USA Freedom Act? fools! don't they know i have my decoder ring that tells me what it's really about? here's a clue.. whatever they tell you it is... it's the opposite.
"The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out" - George Carlin
hey ya'll - i know these guys have been trying to invade us and everything, but look.. they're nowhere to be seen, and they've left us this SWEET giant wooden horse! i don't know about you, but im thinking it's partytime!! open up them gates and roll that baby in!!
imho, that's the real question people should ask themselves. if one can extract oneself from the insane notion that our propaganda presents, that of 'THIS time, an escalation of VIOLENCE will SURELY lead to PEACE!" then once you realize this pattern has repeated .. forever.. and never worked.. the remaining conclusions are to me a) pockets of humanity are literally insane, and b) someone (or group of someones) is benefiting from all this activity. it behooves us all to ask ourselves who this might be, as it will likely shed light on the truer drivers.
if you're not paying for it... you're the product.
an oldie, but goodie.
where is the Mod troll-categorization for 'Govt Shill'? jeez. if you're gonna spew cowardly lies, at least you can be polite about it.
i didnt say morals.. i said moral compass. granted, i didn't define it here - but by that, i mean felt perception - which is (partially) an awareness of ones connectedness with one's environment. if you perceive yourself as part of a whole, then you cannot callously do harm to that system any more than you could callously cut off your own hand. morals are rules written by men. if one's moral compass is functioning intact (and call it whatever you want), you dont need someone or something to tell you whats right or wrong. you feel it implicity.