politicians throughout history have rarely been 'in charge'. remember when christian bale thought raz-al-gool was the asian guy instead of liam neeson? yeah. like that.
at the risk of recommending a 'banned book', checkout 'zinn's people's history of the united states.'
i think the original poster simply erred by referencing chemical and opposed to nuclear weapons. in any case, why anyone would believe anything lying liars say is beyond me.
just because a film might be on youtube (is the greater good even there? i dont know), doesn't make it a 'youtube video put together by someone in their basement.' go to http://www.greatergoodmovie.or... if you want, and see what was put into it and making it.
frankly, i don't care where the truth comes from. it could be scribbled on the back of a napkin.
the only thing more painful than having to listen to propaganda, is having to listen to it regurgitated by it's victims.
you believe that a 'court ruling' has to do with truth? cmon dude. i sincerely have no animosity toward you (even though you are apparently now my first 'foe' . i hope you are at least enjoying the humor in this exchange).
joking aside though, i understand why this is hard to see, and why i no doubt seem to you like an a-hole crackpot. it's ok. but these are larger issues about information control and a fundamentally deceptive process. i dont wanna fight, and im not going to convince you absent a "manifesto", which im not really into. ive said my peace. if im right, then maybe at some point you'll see it. if im wrong, then hopefully i'll see that. i dont think the latter is likely, but hey - anything's possible.
the more i think that maybe eric shmidt is trying to do the right thing, and so making such an outrageous statement to communicate the OPPOSITE. in other words, 'to avoid NSA spying, NEVER store ANYTHING in google services.' this might be the only way he can 'say' it with a gun at his head.
can discredit anything and everything you have ever said before publicly. then again, i wonder if it's reached the point of kabuki theatre such that he's trying to deliberately be ridiculous to communicate in the only way he can. kind of like when a hostage deliberately oversells his 'newfound devotion' to his captors' cause to try and communicate that there's a gun pointed at his head.
dude - i already recommended a documentary called 'The Greater Good'. start there. when you've seen it, come back to me and talk. until then, try and keep your insulted sensibilites to yourself.
love,
cardoor
sorry, but im not fearmongering. just trying to point out that which hides in plain sight. in any case, even though you will probably dismiss me as a hoax and charlatan for not spoonfeeding you a litany of facts and figures, i'm gonna let it be here. at some point, maybe you'll see. best regards.
i am not arguing that polio vaccines are bad. few if any 'anti-vaccers' actually do. the argument you are presenting is very much the result of a manufactured attempt to obfuscate the much more nuianced issues (albeit VERY important) with a smokescreen of the 'seemingly' obvious.
i in no way mean to imply that you are deliberately misrepresenting anything - just that the indoctrination is so deep - touching on all our heartstrings of 'save the children'.
let's ask the question another way - if you are Pfizer, and your goal is to make $.. and know that to even QUESTION whether vaccines are necessary causes one to be ostracized, doesnt it seem like an easy money maker to keep adding (and selling) more and more 'stuff' ALL in the same one shot?? Who's going to call you on it? anyone that DOES you just say is anti-vaccine!
well guess what. look at the ingredients and what's happened over the last 15 years. (answer: THAT).
there are most likely strong positive benefits to vaccinations in general (although to be fair, and probably to the surprise of many people, if you look at the multi-decade trend data, in theory, the declines in infection could easily be attributable to simple things like generically better hygiene. the statistical significance is far from absolute.)
the larger problem though is not with all vaccinnes per se', but with what vaccines have become NOW, versus even 10-15 years ago. there are BIG changes that have dirty fingerprints all over them.
only real solution (or at least the beginning of one) would be to have truly independent studies done on the linkages between vaccinnes and any number of disease/disorders that have been very strongly linked. the more you learn about the FDA, USDA, big pharmaceutical companies, and their legal exemptions from prosecution, the money's involved.. etc, the more you realize how obvious it is that there are real dangers and risks being passed along to the unwitting public in the interests of $.
before a study like that could happen, awareness needs to be raised, which is difficult in the face of such a full-on propoganda assault. the fact that my comment got downmodded to troll SO quickly, is telling. never mind the fact that i have a gazillion + points here and was not an AC. (although, i was admittedly abrasive, so that part is definitely my bad). i would definitely recommend the documentary i mentioned as a starting point, but simply point out that there are PLENTY of highly-intelligent people raising the issues i am, which the media/general-public are only too quick to slap with a demeaning label in what are effectively little more than ad-hominem attacks.
ok - here come the downvotes. whatever. but the extent to which people buy the whole 'these anti-vaccers are crazy!' line is astonishing.
on the one hand, people here on/. can't stop talking and agreeing with each other about how much the government, police, corporate industry, media, lie, manipulate data, and propagandize (is this a word?). On the other hand, when an actual issue comes up that doesn't 110% smack you in the face of blatant, obvious, incontrovertible evidence that even a 3 year old can see, you are only too quick to lap up the stories that are fed to you like thirsty puppies.
STOP. THINK. data and questions are out there. remember the george carlin line - "The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out."
I take no offense at your comments, and appreciate the reciprocated civility. That being said, i'd like to point out that in your response (and i'm not trying to play line-for-line devils advocate) you begin by admitting to having a specific bias, and then reject my offering (of a book that in my opinion has the potential to communicate some critical eye (and mind) opening things) with what sadly amounts to an argument of 'i know what i know, so i don't need to investigate anything that offers contradictory information'.
I respect your career in journalism, as well as what appears to be a remarkably high degree of personal and professional integrity. Unfortunately, neither of those things alone can inure one from psychic and cultural biases as deep as the ones to which we are referring.
In fairness, you don't me from a hole in the wall. If you were someone in my immediate social circle and/or knew more about my personal history and status, you might reconsider - or might not. it doesn't really matter. I don't go around handing books on these subjects to friends and family, or bringing this stuff up at the thanksgiving table. People generally have powerful cognitive biases for the simple reason that the more broad expansive viewpoint can be very upsetting (at least initially), as structures to which they have grown accustomed to as bedrock begin to appear as shifting sand. It's not 'fun'. If someone asks me, I answer. that's about it. I am though guilty of using the occasional online sounding board as an outlet, if only for the expression of sentiment that i mostly feel it's appropriate to keep internalized.
Slashdot Mirror
politicians throughout history have rarely been 'in charge'. remember when christian bale thought raz-al-gool was the asian guy instead of liam neeson? yeah. like that.
at the risk of recommending a 'banned book', checkout 'zinn's people's history of the united states.'
i agree with pretty much everything you said, except for your implicit acknowledgement that the 'terrorists' are who and what MSM say they are.
i think the original poster simply erred by referencing chemical and opposed to nuclear weapons. in any case, why anyone would believe anything lying liars say is beyond me.
just because a film might be on youtube (is the greater good even there? i dont know), doesn't make it a 'youtube video put together by someone in their basement.' go to http://www.greatergoodmovie.or... if you want, and see what was put into it and making it.
frankly, i don't care where the truth comes from. it could be scribbled on the back of a napkin.
the only thing more painful than having to listen to propaganda, is having to listen to it regurgitated by it's victims.
dude. tldr. i thought these piece-by-piece rebuttals were one-off, but they seem to be youre mo. uncle. you're right about everything.
you believe that a 'court ruling' has to do with truth? cmon dude. i sincerely have no animosity toward you (even though you are apparently now my first 'foe' . i hope you are at least enjoying the humor in this exchange).
joking aside though, i understand why this is hard to see, and why i no doubt seem to you like an a-hole crackpot. it's ok. but these are larger issues about information control and a fundamentally deceptive process. i dont wanna fight, and im not going to convince you absent a "manifesto", which im not really into. ive said my peace. if im right, then maybe at some point you'll see it. if im wrong, then hopefully i'll see that. i dont think the latter is likely, but hey - anything's possible.
the more i think that maybe eric shmidt is trying to do the right thing, and so making such an outrageous statement to communicate the OPPOSITE. in other words, 'to avoid NSA spying, NEVER store ANYTHING in google services.' this might be the only way he can 'say' it with a gun at his head.
can discredit anything and everything you have ever said before publicly. then again, i wonder if it's reached the point of kabuki theatre such that he's trying to deliberately be ridiculous to communicate in the only way he can. kind of like when a hostage deliberately oversells his 'newfound devotion' to his captors' cause to try and communicate that there's a gun pointed at his head.
sigh. just watch the documentary dude. start there.
dude - i already recommended a documentary called 'The Greater Good'. start there. when you've seen it, come back to me and talk. until then, try and keep your insulted sensibilites to yourself. love, cardoor
i'm reminded of the line from the godfather...
Kay: Do you know how naive you sound, Michael? Presidents and senators don't have men killed.
Michael: Oh. Who's being naive, Kay?
sorry, but im not fearmongering. just trying to point out that which hides in plain sight. in any case, even though you will probably dismiss me as a hoax and charlatan for not spoonfeeding you a litany of facts and figures, i'm gonna let it be here. at some point, maybe you'll see. best regards.
ok - that wasn't really a serious question. now i feel bad for piling on the BH hate-train. but man.. seriously.. its.. just...too much...
is bennett haselton a real person? and if so, any idea what abnormal psychological diagnoses he might fit?
i am not arguing that polio vaccines are bad. few if any 'anti-vaccers' actually do. the argument you are presenting is very much the result of a manufactured attempt to obfuscate the much more nuianced issues (albeit VERY important) with a smokescreen of the 'seemingly' obvious.
i in no way mean to imply that you are deliberately misrepresenting anything - just that the indoctrination is so deep - touching on all our heartstrings of 'save the children'.
let's ask the question another way - if you are Pfizer, and your goal is to make $.. and know that to even QUESTION whether vaccines are necessary causes one to be ostracized, doesnt it seem like an easy money maker to keep adding (and selling) more and more 'stuff' ALL in the same one shot?? Who's going to call you on it? anyone that DOES you just say is anti-vaccine!
well guess what. look at the ingredients and what's happened over the last 15 years. (answer: THAT).
there are most likely strong positive benefits to vaccinations in general (although to be fair, and probably to the surprise of many people, if you look at the multi-decade trend data, in theory, the declines in infection could easily be attributable to simple things like generically better hygiene. the statistical significance is far from absolute.)
the larger problem though is not with all vaccinnes per se', but with what vaccines have become NOW, versus even 10-15 years ago. there are BIG changes that have dirty fingerprints all over them.
only real solution (or at least the beginning of one) would be to have truly independent studies done on the linkages between vaccinnes and any number of disease/disorders that have been very strongly linked. the more you learn about the FDA, USDA, big pharmaceutical companies, and their legal exemptions from prosecution, the money's involved.. etc, the more you realize how obvious it is that there are real dangers and risks being passed along to the unwitting public in the interests of $.
before a study like that could happen, awareness needs to be raised, which is difficult in the face of such a full-on propoganda assault. the fact that my comment got downmodded to troll SO quickly, is telling. never mind the fact that i have a gazillion + points here and was not an AC. (although, i was admittedly abrasive, so that part is definitely my bad). i would definitely recommend the documentary i mentioned as a starting point, but simply point out that there are PLENTY of highly-intelligent people raising the issues i am, which the media/general-public are only too quick to slap with a demeaning label in what are effectively little more than ad-hominem attacks.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.- H. L. Mencken
if you're curious, start with a very simply little documentary called 'the greater good.'
ok - here come the downvotes. whatever. but the extent to which people buy the whole 'these anti-vaccers are crazy!' line is astonishing.
/. can't stop talking and agreeing with each other about how much the government, police, corporate industry, media, lie, manipulate data, and propagandize (is this a word?). On the other hand, when an actual issue comes up that doesn't 110% smack you in the face of blatant, obvious, incontrovertible evidence that even a 3 year old can see, you are only too quick to lap up the stories that are fed to you like thirsty puppies.
on the one hand, people here on
STOP. THINK. data and questions are out there. remember the george carlin line - "The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out."
ok. now downvote me.
ergo, the purpose of the torture is not to elicit 'good intelligence' but to ____________ (fill in the blank yourself.)
it saddens me when people ask questions like "don't they know that this will only 'create more "bad-guys" to fight?!?!?"
yes. yes they do.
they would elect to be transferred? poor dears. cry me a river. and the rest were 'just following orders' no doubt.
not anarchy at all. a very well orchestrated and tightly run system. you and i are just not part of the 'club'.
don't be disheartened. i can't express the sentiment any better than this link:
http://thepresenceportal.com/A...
if any of that resonates with you, i would highly recommend picking up michael brown's book 'the presence process'. also happy to PM offline.
oh - sorry for the lump of text.. i forgot the breaks and clicked submit too quickly.
I take no offense at your comments, and appreciate the reciprocated civility. That being said, i'd like to point out that in your response (and i'm not trying to play line-for-line devils advocate) you begin by admitting to having a specific bias, and then reject my offering (of a book that in my opinion has the potential to communicate some critical eye (and mind) opening things) with what sadly amounts to an argument of 'i know what i know, so i don't need to investigate anything that offers contradictory information'. I respect your career in journalism, as well as what appears to be a remarkably high degree of personal and professional integrity. Unfortunately, neither of those things alone can inure one from psychic and cultural biases as deep as the ones to which we are referring. In fairness, you don't me from a hole in the wall. If you were someone in my immediate social circle and/or knew more about my personal history and status, you might reconsider - or might not. it doesn't really matter. I don't go around handing books on these subjects to friends and family, or bringing this stuff up at the thanksgiving table. People generally have powerful cognitive biases for the simple reason that the more broad expansive viewpoint can be very upsetting (at least initially), as structures to which they have grown accustomed to as bedrock begin to appear as shifting sand. It's not 'fun'. If someone asks me, I answer. that's about it. I am though guilty of using the occasional online sounding board as an outlet, if only for the expression of sentiment that i mostly feel it's appropriate to keep internalized.
gracias