UFO:Alien Invasion
Offtopic => Offtopic => Topic started by: Chriswriter90 on November 06, 2008, 04:08:55 pm
-
In my opinion he really was the better candidate, I just didn't like his decision to take All of our troops out of Iraq.
It really should be up to the Iraqi people wether or not they need our soldiers' protection anymore.
But this thread should really just focus on Obama and the Election.
-
I guess outside the U.S., more than 90% would have voted for Obama. He's smart. I'm all for him. There's a lot of hope and expectations put on him. Quite a burden. Time will tell how much he can actually *change*.
On a sidenote, I was really impressed by greatness McCain showed in his little speech when he had to admit he lost. That man has style !
-
Europe is generally much more liberal than conservative Americans, so Democratic candidates tend to be more popular here. I don't know about other parts of the world though.
-
BTAxis, thx for pointing that out. I may know quite a lot about the other parts of the world, but I still don't know enough.
So I guess the '>90%' was an exaggeration. Bare with me.
Even in Europe, there are areas that can be *very* conservative (eg. Ireland, Poland,...).
Africa would surely vote for Obama, arabian countries probably too. The Aussies I met were all a little less conservative than the US-americans. I know quite a lot about asian countries, but then again, I don't really have a clue how they would vote.
However, 'the world voting for the US-president' is a very hypothetical szenario. Considering that far too many people in this world can't even vote for the president of their own country....
-
Obama is the "change" that is engineered. C'mon, as if any politician that ascends to power does not have the blessing (actually in servitude) to the corporatocracy.
Obama or McCain, two wings of the same bird, two sides of the same coin.
So Obama has taken the helm, it only means more of the same, more tyranny.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5755
But should any of you be too indolent or biased against facts to check that out, here's some of the surprises that Boss Obama is planning:
A "civilian national security force" that rivals the army in strength, (can anyone say Gestapo?). He is going to continue the fraudulent War on (OF) Terror, founded on the lie of 9/11 and the bones of 3,000 Americans. Using that excuse, he is going to continue the War on Terror in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and of course, Americans' liberties are still going to be raped as usual. No mention of the PATRIOT Act whatsoever. None also about the NSA's and FBI's spying. Zip about the expanding Executive Power which gives the President power to take control of the government and use army troops to police America. Of course, nothing is said about preparations for martial law (3 military units have been assigned to "homeland security" (a phrase Hitler also used). I guess Americans are just as gullible as Germans when Hitler made love to them before he turned dictator. Some smooth talking and the masses are all over you.
Two More U.S. Military Units Assigned For Homeland Security
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5733
In The Great Tradition: Obama Is A Hawk
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9338
I'm sick of hearing "change". What does Obama have that signifies change, besides maybe (appearing to have) intelligence, which is naturally attractive, given the 8 years of GWB. His foreign policy advisor is Zbigniew Brezsinki, the man who gave us the original "arc of crisis" in the Middle-East ostensibly to destabilise the Russians (Yeah, right, the Russians which Wall Street funded and built up), he was the SOB that gave us the Mugahedeen, which spawned Bin Laden. By the way, Al Qaeda is a fictitious organisation today. It was a computer-generated codename for Bin Laden's fighters during the CIA-funded guerilla war against the Soviets. Moreover, he is the good friend of yours truly David Rockefeller, whom Brezsinki co-founded the Trilateral Organisation (another globalist organisation) with to promote integration within and between N.America, W.Europe and Asia (Japan) in 1973. If anyone remembers, I quoted Rockefeller as saying "The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
Al Qaeda does not exist and never has
http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/397/13821_AlQaeda.html
Besides, Obama is a corporate insider. He's a member of the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations, which is the de facto foreign policy arm of the US. Almost all presidents since 1921 have come from that elite group, except Bush (I guess he was too stupid). Well, I expect Presidents to be elites, but given that the CFR has globalist roots, an Obama presidency would mean a continuation of the status quo towards erasing national sovereignty and ushering in world government. At the beginning of the 20th Century, the Inquiry was formed to start global integration and WWI was their tool to create the LoN. However that failed and the CFR was formed in New York to advance this goal. WWII was engineered as well and succeeded in creating the first global body, the UN. CFR involvement is clear when you find out that almost all of the UN delagation in San Francisco, 1945, were CFR members. Anyway, his top campaign contributor is Goldman Sachs, which has received $6 billion of taxpayers money to hand out $7 billion in salary bonuses. Great job Obama, continue screwing with the common working people. Like the people before him, his allegiance is to the corporatacracy which explains why he supported the bailout to Wall Street financiers and the fraudulent Federal Reserve, transferring wealth from the poor to the rich again just like what happened during the Great Depression.
"Globalisation thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves, because they cannot insulate themselves from what goes on elsewhere. Sovereignty is no longer a sanctuary."
–Richard Haas, President of the CFR, 2006
Wake up people, the liberal-conservative/Democrat-Republican/left-right paradigm doesnt exist except to blind people from the one-party global fascist order that is already in place. Mussolini said that "Fascism should be more properly called corporatism because its the merger of state and corporate power." Fascism doesnt only come with jackboots, but also Armani suits.
-
(Not bothering to place all of the previous post in a quote box...)
Yikes. :o
That was deep.
Please keep in mind that anyone, meaning anything from just one person to an organization, can publish any opinions, predictions, and even "facts" on the net, regardless of how obscure the logic it was based upon, regardless of if it really does make sense or is "totally out there." Further, anyone can discuss such things and snowball it even beyond that.
Allow me to quote Will Wheaton from an old part of the FAQ from his personal website (not sure if it is still there or not, and I admit this might not be an exact quote as it is from memory):
"...I heard that-"
"Yeah, I heard that too, and since it was posted on the Internet, it must be true, right?"
I have to agree with the statement those two lines mean.
I don't mean to turn you off when I say this EchizenR, but, dude, are you one of those "survivor" guys who keeps a hidden cache somewhere in their basement or home filled with assault weapons, grenade launchers, and other nasty stuff just in case everything hits the fan and anarchy happens?
-
Heh, that thought had struck me as well.
I don't bother reading posts like that, for what it's worth. Not going to agree with it anyway and I don't feel like arguing either.
-
You see, that is what I meant by "crimestop". And also, a deep egoistic refusal to be proven wrong. On the contrary, I would love to be proven wrong, I would like to believe that governments work for the best interest of their people. I would love to be wrong about an one world government New World Order. But as it is, the facts prove otherwise.
Please point out the obscurity of my logic. It would make my day to know that the world isnt as messed up as it is. Also, unlike you, I like to be proven wrong because it allows me to be elevated to a higher level of understanding. Thats learning.
In America where 4 corporations have a stranglehold on information, the Internet allows an alternative viewpoint to be presented. Information that has not been filtered by the corporatocracy. Corporations, via legalised bribery called lobbying control governmental policy, not the sheeple that engages in a ritual known as voting every 4 years. I'm not asking anyone to be illogical here. Think about it, for a politician that depends on business interests throughout his political career, would you think he would sacrifice the acceptance of such an establishment to fight for the rights and well-being of the people, whose opinion he only has to win every 4 years?
So what would you constitute as logic, if my post was the work of a raving lunatic? Even if I made sense, since this is the Internet, it automatically becomes inaccurate? Except for that link about Al-Qaeda, which is an opinionated piece (and could be disregarded if you're that sceptical, but doesnt change the fact that Bin Laden was funded by the CIA during the 1980s), the rest of the links are news articles, which are not empty claims. Let me quote what Obama said about his "civilian national security force":
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=69601
Now, it seems that people have a penchant for ignoring things that don't agree with their worldview. Assuming you support Obama and was irked by my post, and/or, ignored what I posted, have you ever thought "Do I actually know this to be false? Or I am conditioned to think that way?" It seems that people are scared to be proven wrong and are not willing to challenge preconceived ideas.
I don't believe that people are so solipsistic that facts do not exist just because they are ignored. If your notion of "facts" is so imaginery, what forms the basis of truth?
I would like to point out that every year since 1954, 125 of the world's most powerful business and political elites have met in secret under armed guard for a meeting. The Bilderberg Group, if anyone is familiar with that. For most of the 20th Century, the mainstream media has been silent on its existence, total black-out, and only in recent times have the alternative media covered its meetings. This year, it was held in the US, total media black-out. In 2007, it was held in Turkey and fortunately there were several small demonstrations. It suffices to say, it exists. What goes on inside is speculation, but that just begs the question, "What does really go on inside when the world's most powerful people meet in secret?"
Is anyone going to deny the existence of the Bilderberg Group and say I'm a nutcase, before checking it out first? Just because I'm putting an argument that you're never heard of before or ridicule as impossible, does that mean that I am crazy?
By the way, Destructavator, I'm sure you know what the 2nd Amendment says. In a time when police brutality is at the high it is today, what with toys like tasers and so-called "non-lethal" EM weaponry, it only makes sense to arm oneself. I'm sure that was what the Founding Fathers meant it to be, to protect the people against tyranny.
-
Every industrialized country in the world even China has universal healthcae...
Now hopefully through obama the united states can join those countries..
Im a conservative republican that has fought in wars.. I voted for obama...
Eizchener there is a corporatocracy... however... without those corporations youd still be a serf :-)
-
Without the corporatocracy, Humanity has the chance to create a substantially better society. While Exxon and BP just made $14.8 billion and $10 billion in profits during the 3rd quarter of 2008, half the world lives without electricity. This is coming 2 years after MIT published a report that states with current technology, we could extract 4,000 years of geothermal energy. Clean, renewable and unlimited. Tell me, what would happen to those profits if geothermal energy was utilised to lift the Third World out of poverty? With an abundance of energy, just like air, it cannot be charged anymore, and would also allow an unlimited supply of clean water. And thats not including wind, tidal, wave and solar (for which there is now a 100% efficient solar panel, while consumer types are only 14-20%). If only 1 hour of sunlight at noon is harnessed, the earth could be powered for an entire year. However, the obstacle which energy corporations create is to restrict the utilisation of batteries which store solar energy. While they hold the patents, energy independence will continue to be elusive. Is this not a deliberate attempt to hinder technological advancement in order to continue making profits?
1 billion and likely more people go hungry everyday, 35000 children die of hunger everyday. While in 2006, the FAO admitted in its report, "The State of Food Insecurity in the World Today" that global food production is able to feed every single person on the planet and could still produce more. But, Big Agro like Monsato and Cargil are pushing GMOs that not only have a lower yield, but they destroy the livelihoods of small farmers because the GM seeds are 1000% more expensive than traditional seeds and cannot be reused because of "terminator" technology. While GMOs, and related insecticides are needed to grow their crops, these corporations will continue to make obscene profits while small farmers are plunged deeper and deeper into debt. Today, 1000 farmers commit suicide in India every month because of the enormous debt which growing GMOs bring. Furthermore, the distribution of food is horribly uneven; in order to feed paying customers like us, Big Agro divert most food to developed countries leaving Third World nations to starve even with food aid.
It is the existence of these exploitative corporations that perpetrates misery worldwide. How are those people not serfs, when corporations seek to make profits by placing it above human concern? In the US, 910000 jobs have been lost since the beginning of 2008 due to the offshoring craze. Even with record profits, companies still seek to relocate, depriving blue collar workers of a livelihood. Worst, banks have just robbed the American people of a trillion dollars, with support of yours truly Obama, not to make loans to the people, but to give out huge salary bonuses and acquire insolvent companies and using the money to clear their debts. Is this even human?
-
EchizenR, the reason why people don't want to hear what you have to say has nothing to do with the content of your statements, but the way you make them. If you want to know why: it's because the tone of your posts makes you look like a complete and utter whackjob.
Regards,
Winter
-
EchizenR, the reason why people don't want to hear what you have to say has nothing to do with the content of your statements, but the way you make them. If you want to know why: it's because the tone of your posts makes you look like a complete and utter whackjob.
Regards,
Winter
May I know what about my tone makes me look like "a complete and utter whackjob"? And why? Even if I sound like one, does it mean that everything I present is fraudulent? Has it come down to this? That people will only believe something if it has the "spin" that Fox News can put on a news story? Not offended, just want to know where my 'mistake' is in. If you doubt the validity of my previous posts, I'll gladly furnish you with the sources.
-
You see, that is what I meant by "crimestop". And also, a deep egoistic refusal to be proven wrong. On the contrary, I would love to be proven wrong, I would like to believe that governments work for the best interest of their people. I would love to be wrong about an one world government New World Order. But as it is, the facts prove otherwise.
Didn't read the rest. I just want to say that what you call crimestop and a refusal to be proven wrong, I call common sense. Conspiracy theories aren't facts. On the off-topic board you've constantly attacked everything remotely related to government, commerce or other forms of establishment, as well as made a case for aliens zooming around on Earth. And you really believe in it too. It's paranoid. The fact that you can quote all those sources is testament to it. I get the impression that you spend a large part of your free time looking for "proof" that justifies your beliefs, which is fine, but you'll excuse me for not joining you in it.
-
Didn't read the rest. I just want to say that what you call crimestop and a refusal to be proven wrong, I call common sense. Conspiracy theories aren't facts. On the off-topic board you've constantly attacked everything remotely related to government, commerce or other forms of establishment, as well as made a case for aliens zooming around on Earth. And you really believe in it too. It's paranoid. The fact that you can quote all those sources is testament to it. I get the impression that you spend a large part of your free time looking for "proof" that justifies your beliefs, which is fine, but you'll excuse me for not joining you in it.
Wait...so if something is labelled as a "conspiracy theory" or even feels like one, you automatically switch off?
Its not called paranoia. Paranoia is when the belief is beyond logic or facts. Can you really disregard the sources for my "beliefs"? "Conspiracy theory aren't facts." Precisely, the official account of the 9/11 attacks is a big conspiracy theory: 19 arab Muslim hijackers directed by Bin Laden took over 4 airplanes and crashed 3 of them. The 9/11 truth movement just tries to put forward an alternative explaination that is better backed by the evidence than the official theory. But for some reason, they seem to be ridiculed by people. In fact, the FBI doesn't regard the 9/11 attacks as being committed by Bin Laden because there isn't enough proof. Whatever "proof" you claimed "justifies [my] beliefs" is actually the inverse. Doesnt the things you perceive (assuming this is the so-called "proof") shape one's belief? I don't go out of the way to find proof that backs my beliefs, as people learn new things, they change their perceptions. Aren't you just dismissing people because their beliefs challenge yours or because you think you know it all?
Do you really think that one can come up with a particular worldview first, then go on the net to find substantiating information? You might, but I don't. There was a time when I believed that governments work for the best interests of their people and that there was no such things as conspiracies. But as I learned, I changed my worldview as a response to new information.
By the way, about the alien issue, it seems I earned your scorn by bringing in faith. You can bash Christianity for all you want, whatever I said about aliens, it was not due to any particularly strong belief of mine, but rather an attempt to relate to the topic. I admit I know almost nothing about the alien phenomena and do not read into the issue.
And what is wrong with attacking the establishment? If its mere assertions, then you got a case. But as it is, I've pointed out the deliberate suffering caused by these institutions which can be easily verified. I don't think that "they're coming to get me". I believe that these inhumane actions are being perpetrated because not enough people are aware of it and so, I'm merely trying to inform people. It is due to sheer reticence that tyranny is being pushed onto the American people. Do you call the PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 or the FISA Amendment Act sheer conspiratorial ravings? This is not an extreme belief that is immovable. As I said, if there's anything to refute it, I'll gladly take a look because I'm willing to learn. As in systems in Nature, Human beings are Emergent, they change over time. Are you one of those people who hold a fixed view of the world their whole life? I don't think so.
-
I said I wasn't going to argue, so I'll try to keep my reply short. I stand by my opinion I gave before. I don't believe in the things you're trying to "inform me about" and I have no intention of seriously listening to them. This isn't because I don't want to be proven wrong (I don't think I'm "right" in that sense) or because I have unwavering faith in the establishment. I just choose to reject the views you're trying to propagate.
I won't deny that the system is imperfect and unjust at times, but I will not take conspiracy theories seriously, especially ones of the 9/11 calibre. Assuming any governmential body is able to deceive their citizens on that scale is well outside the realm of the reasonable and any "proof" to that effect is based on happenstance, conjecture and paranioa a will to see it as such.
And one more thing. I'm not "dismissing" anybody. If I was you'd be banned now.
-
Well there must be a reason why you reject such views, whether because you might be afraid to come to terms with certain things, or afraid to be proven wrong, or some other reason. Or is it that everything I've presented is fraudulent?
Anyway, since you've admitted that you didn't read 2 of my longer posts for various reasons, you don't know what I presented, but still probably reject it as inaccurate or [insert derogatory adjective] information. Doesnt it seem like you're illogically closing your mind off to information that you FEEL is fraudulent and the result of paranoia before even looking at it?
I don't understand what is against considering "conspiracy theories". You don't know everything, and neither do I. That's why people shouldn't close their minds to new information. Have you ever asked yourself why you don't take conspiracy theories seriously? Is it because you KNOW it to be false, or are you conditioned to think that away? On 9/11, you're right, that a government cannot deceive its citizen "on that scale" as evident from the many 9/11 truth movements. In fact, a majority of Americans question the official version. Look at Building 7, no plane crash, but 8 hours later, it collapses just like the Twin Towers, in controlled demolition fashion.
By the way, I perfectly appreciate you taking the time to respond, and yes, not banning me for such heretical views.
-
You don't seem to be able to accept that people might simply not agree with you. You think that because you quote websites and other sources, your audience can't deny the truth as you present it, and if they don't accept your reasoning they must have a reason for doing so. You act like a missionary. You try to spread the one true faith amongst the unbelievers, showing your holy book as proof. Only you don't use ancient lore, you use factoids and constructive reasoning. But just as one can deny the bible, so do I deny the validity of your theories and their evidence.
-
EchizenR , Taking a quick glance at a random couple of your "sources" I'd say much of what you've been ranting about is based on a lot of ideas people have thought up as "what if..." or "I wonder..." and then built upon through discussion, snowballing into ideas of totally contrasensical proportions.
Sorry for putting you on the spot, but in glancing at just some of what you post, I see a lot of jumping to wild conclusions left and right, very questionable conclusions that in most cases could be defeated by common sense, but there are just so many of them that it isn't worth the substantial amount of time it would take to show evidence that most of these concepts don't really "hold water."
I have to agree with Winter:
EchizenR, the reason why people don't want to hear what you have to say has nothing to do with the content of your statements, but the way you make them. If you want to know why: it's because the tone of your posts makes you look like a complete and utter whackjob.
Honestly EchizenR, if someone were in front of me telling me everything you've posted here, I can picture such a person as a wild-eyed, downright frantic individual running in circles screaming "Help! Help! Mass government conspiracies in action! We're all slaves! We're all going to be controlled and suffer a fate worse than death! Aaaaaahhhhh!!! (pant) (pant) (pant)"
Adding to the problem is the sheer volume of all of your ideas, bombarding the rest of us with them, as if to intimidate or induce a panic.
Do governments lie? Yes. Do politicians lie? Yes. Do they cover things up and manipulate things? Yes. All of them do. Do they do it to the extent that you imply, taking it that far? I doubt it, I have to say no when it comes to that.
Please understand I'm not trying to insult you or make you feel unwelcome here, but, with regards to all these theories, yikes, calm down.
-
I must step in here and say, that even though speculating and suspecting things is actually very intellectual thing to do, so is also proving them right or wrong. I read much of the links and as Destructavator said, they all seem to be very imagination based what-if stories. Nothing wrong in them, unless it is underlined that it is speculative. Perhaps a bit surprisingly - even to me - I have to say that really huge conspiracies can be made. And has been made. Lies above lies have so many times in history mislead people. Thus I don't totally deny the chance of 9/11 being planned and performed by US government or high ranking agencies. However, I still haven't seen even a single proof that holds water, and thus I don't find it believeable and I think US governemnt just tried to benefit from the opportunity. However, it would be easy to misjudge you as "frantic individual running in circles screaming..." because it might not be true. Still, even I find it difficult to see you as anything else.
Obama's victory was clear, congratulations to him. However, I am, as I have stated elsewhere, very concerned of the situation and perhaps hoped the other outcome... Let's hope my concerns are pointless.
-
Very amusing analogy. I don't profess to hold the "one truth faith", in fact you'll probably agree that no one does. And I don't agree with the missionary label because if there is any chance that I am wrong, and there is evidence for it, I will not religiously hold on to a belief that has been proven wrong. But, as Jefferson said:
"Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to accidental opinion of the day but a Series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers plainly proves a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to slavery."
(And that is why I presented evidence that an Obama presidency would not change anything because he is also a corporate insider, evident from his support for a trillion dollar gift to Wall Street banks- which I elaborated in my first few posts.)
Whatever evidence I've presented "proves a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to slavery". If you don't agree, there MUST be a reason. Is it possible for anyone to act without rational reasoning? You probably say that you don't have a reason for rejecting whatever I've presented because it might have stirred up some emotional response to the perception of a conspiracy, and having been conditioned to reject that, you do. I'm guessing here, so don't get offended.
If such evidence is useless, pray tell me how would you come to a conclusion about objective reality?
Sorry for putting you on the spot, but in glancing at just some of what you post, I see a lot of jumping to wild conclusions left and right, very questionable conclusions that in most cases could be defeated by common sense, but there are just so many of them that it isn't worth the substantial amount of time it would take to show evidence that most of these concepts don't really "hold water."
I have to agree with Winter:
Honestly EchizenR, if someone were in front of me telling me everything you've posted here, I can picture such a person as a wild-eyed, downright frantic individual running in circles screaming "Help! Help! Mass government conspiracies in action! We're all slaves! We're all going to be controlled and suffer a fate worse than death! Aaaaaahhhhh!!! (pant) (pant) (pant)"
Adding to the problem is the sheer volume of all of your ideas, bombarding the rest of us with them, as if to intimidate or induce a panic.
Do governments lie? Yes. Do politicians lie? Yes. Do they cover things up and manipulate things? Yes. All of them do. Do they do it to the extent that you imply, taking it that far? I doubt it, I have to say no when it comes to that.
Really? Please enlighten me. I would really like be able to connect with people on these issues so could you tell me one issue that you think is highly illogical and labels me as a raving lunatic?
I have never tried to scare-monger and if I have, I apologised. My aim was to get people to realise that reality is not as it seems. I know I can get long-minded at times, because there is so much to say. That image that you described is quite funny though it is ironic that you used such an imagery because (think about it) if most people rejects controversial and challenging ideas, then aren't they slaves? Except in the intellectual sense? In fact, I think its impossible for someone like me to run around screaming like you pictured. Probably, you got the idea from TV and thus, could explain your perception of such people. Another irony would be that when you realise that your mind has been controlled by conditioning, you dont panic, but become able to react in a calmer way. Suppose you know that a government will carry out a terror attack. When the terror attack hits, instead of being caught up in the wave of fear that is designed to sweep the country, and perhaps be used to pass, say, the PATRIOT Act, you know who is to be blamed and will avoid being emotionally exploited.
On 9/11, could anyone tell me how WTC building 7 collapsed just like the two Twin Towers, in controlled demolition style? Even though it wasn't hit by a plane and had only 2 isolated pockets of fire? Is not this proof of some, if not entire, government complicity?
By presenting the "dark-side" of the world, I don't intend to frighten. Knowledge is power, and if you know, you can do something to change it. Like I pointed out in a previous post, corporations have exploited Humanity to an absurd degree. But if no one (or at least most people) is aware of it, then there cannot be any correction to society.
When you say that you don't think governments "take it that far", what do you mean? Do you mean you THINK they will never kill their own citizens in a terror attack? Well, lets just use 9/11 as an example, as usual. Historically, there is a precedent for this kind of inhumane treatment by governments. In 1963, the Joint Chiefs of Staffs drew up Operation Northwoods which spelled out a terror attacks conducted by the government to be blamed on Cuba and justify an invasion of the communist island (sound familiar)? Let me quote some stuff from the declassified documents which you can easily get on the public domain.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf
"...have considered...a request...for brief but precise description of pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba."
"...based on the premise that US military intervention will result from a period of heightened US-Cuban tensions which place the [US] in the position of suffering justifiable grievances."
"Such a plan would enable a logical build-up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camouflage the ultimate objective and create the necessary impression of Cuban rashness and irresponsibility on a large scale, directed at other countries as well as the [US]."
"A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces...land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on base...blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires...burn aircraft on air base...lob mortar shells from outside of base into base...sabotage ship in harbour...sink ship near habour entrance..."
"...blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba...blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters... We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington..."
Need I quote more, although there IS more...There is no need to fear, or panic. Simply being aware of this is enough to open your mind to more information which will enable one to realise what is happening. And yes, that's what I do. Using the information I have, I come to a conclusion about the world. What is wrong with that?
-
OK, I think I've already gotten deeper into this than I've already cared to go. I have better things to do, things that need to get done today, and I don't have time to worry and be a basket case all day long in some paranoid state. I'm going to drop out of this discussion and get on with these other things, and if the government is controlling me while I go take care of these other things, spying on me, reporting my activities to aliens, whatever, I don't care - What the hell. Somewhere, at some point, one has to put their foot down and say "enough is enough!" Well, that's what I'm doing here.
Before I go, as my last note here, I'll say that if you were to apply that wild imagination and creativity of yours in the right way along with your long-winded thoughts, I'd imagine you could very well write a good book or two, and perhaps make something out of it.
-
...if the government is controlling me while I go take care of these other things, spying on me, reporting my activities to aliens, whatever, I don't care - What the hell. Somewhere, at some point, one has to put their foot down and say "enough is enough!" Well, that's what I'm doing here.
Before I go, as my last note here, I'll say that if you were to apply that wild imagination and creativity of yours in the right way along with your long-winded thoughts, I'd imagine you could very well write a good book or two, and perhaps make something out of it.
I don't know what you're ostracising whatever I've posted, because I have not asserted anything about governments "controlling" people or "aliens" spying on people. I'm talking about the growing governmental powers that are bordering, in some cases, becoming tyrannical. Which is very real in the world. Since when did the Founding Fathers intended for the Executive Branch to usurp the checks and balance system for a system where the president can freely pass Executive Orders and write them into law?
I don't know whether to laugh or to cry. I've presented a primary historical document, the Northwood Documents and yet, you still think I'm a paranoid nut. Its in the history books.
-
On the other hand world has changed significantly from the days of Founding Fathers, so I don't find that point valid.
-
I don't know whether to laugh or to cry. I've presented a primary historical document, the Northwood Documents and yet, you still think I'm a paranoid nut. Its in the history books.
Intriguing...you know, if there really was a huge conspiracy in place, don't you think that unclassifying such document would be kind of...stupid?
And to respond on previous posts...
Without the corporatocracy, Humanity has the chance to create a substantially better society. While Exxon and BP just made $14.8 billion and $10 billion in profits during the 3rd quarter of 2008, half the world lives without electricity. This is coming 2 years after MIT published a report that states with current technology, we could extract 4,000 years of geothermal energy. Clean, renewable and unlimited. Tell me, what would happen to those profits if geothermal energy was utilised to lift the Third World out of poverty? With an abundance of energy, just like air, it cannot be charged anymore, and would also allow an unlimited supply of clean water. And thats not including wind, tidal, wave and solar (for which there is now a 100% efficient solar panel, while consumer types are only 14-20%). If only 1 hour of sunlight at noon is harnessed, the earth could be powered for an entire year. However, the obstacle which energy corporations create is to restrict the utilisation of batteries which store solar energy. While they hold the patents, energy independence will continue to be elusive. Is this not a deliberate attempt to hinder technological advancement in order to continue making profits?
so...first, you mistook "profit" and "turnover". It's hellota difference.
Almost 100% efficent solar panel exist...but has to be kept at near absolute zero temperatures to preserve superconductive properties. Those that have high efficency generally are damn expensive, that's why you don't see them much for sale. Normal people can'ŧ afford them, or they just save less than they cost. And by the way...you realize that solar panels take hellot of space, and we need it for other things too?
Wind, tidal energy. You know, variants for use for larger scale are still competing with technical problems. They often have unexpected impact on nature, for example they often generate low-frequency noise that, while humans don't hear it, drive some animals mad. Geothermal energy...you know, while there IS a lot of power available, accessing just minority of it would be actually far beyond economical possibilities of most corporatins or governments.
By the way, storing of energy in large quantities is actually very, VERY problematic. And evidently don't understand economics at all. If any corporations had the patent on anything really groundbreaking, the best thing to do to make profit would be to actually to use it to gain monopoly, or let others use it too...for a VERY big money. Because, patents have limited duration you know. Keeping it secret would be the worst thing to do.
1 billion and likely more people go hungry everyday, 35000 children die of hunger everyday. While in 2006, the FAO admitted in its report, "The State of Food Insecurity in the World Today" that global food production is able to feed every single person on the planet and could still produce more. But, Big Agro like Monsato and Cargil are pushing GMOs that not only have a lower yield, but they destroy the livelihoods of small farmers because the GM seeds are 1000% more expensive than traditional seeds and cannot be reused because of "terminator" technology. While GMOs, and related insecticides are needed to grow their crops, these corporations will continue to make obscene profits while small farmers are plunged deeper and deeper into debt. Today, 1000 farmers commit suicide in India every month because of the enormous debt which growing GMOs bring. Furthermore, the distribution of food is horribly uneven; in order to feed paying customers like us, Big Agro divert most food to developed countries leaving Third World nations to starve even with food aid.
Earth would be able to produce much more food. But where do you want to put all those 6 bilion people, industies, besides you need space for industrial crops, infrastructure etc...
You really blame corporations for everything. But why do people of Africa, Myanmar or North Korea, and many others, starve? It's because their country is ruled by people either incompetent, or too egoistic and power-hungry to really give a damn and do something with it. To relate it to previous part, you really can't build a power plant where it would be destroyed before being completed.
GMOs are very complex matter and you really don'ŧ understand a bit. Just about terminators...unlike animals, plants like crosbreeding, and the do it very often. When you have a large field of crops that are modified ot be resistant against some parasites, and you keep them fertile, it is very likely they will not only spread, but also crossbreed and pass some of their genes on their wild relatives. That will have significant impact on ecosystem, and eventually it increases chances that those parasites will evolve resistency...if you don'ŧ believe me, there was a big problem with GMO grass at some golf clubs in California I think...I believe it was this spring or summer. And that is only one of many problems. You know...gene manipulation is a tricky thing.
It is the existence of these exploitative corporations that perpetrates misery worldwide. How are those people not serfs, when corporations seek to make profits by placing it above human concern? In the US, 910000 jobs have been lost since the beginning of 2008 due to the offshoring craze. Even with record profits, companies still seek to relocate, depriving blue collar workers of a livelihood. Worst, banks have just robbed the American people of a trillion dollars, with support of yours truly Obama, not to make loans to the people, but to give out huge salary bonuses and acquire insolvent companies and using the money to clear their debts. Is this even human?
Freedom to act brings freedom to be selfish. And freedom is what western civilisation is based on. While I agree that a lot of corporations act selfishly without concern of other humans, it is a result of democracy, where acceptable compromise should emerge if everyone will pursue his own goals. As we can see, it is far from perfect. But what else you want? Communism? Kim Jong Il (if he's still alive) can tell you how it works. Military dictature? Myanmar, once one of jewels of British empire, is now one of top ten poor countries. Monarchy? History of Europe will tell....
What you need is to get your ass off chair and see the world how it really is.
-
so...first, you mistook "profit" and "turnover". It's hellota difference.
No, in this particular case he is right. It is actually profit, not turnover.
IIRC Exxon made some 40 Billion $ profit in 2007. Stock value was something like 360 Billion last week.
btw Thx for your other explanations. I had heard of the 25-30% cells used in satelites and some 42% in a labratory, but not of those 100% at 0 Kelvin.
-
It's not 100% anyway...I'm not sure about exact specs but I've heard about 80-90ish...100% is actually impossible. But of course, conditions nescessary to operate such cells make them impossible to use.
-
@Sarin:
I suppose they got some 85% at -272 Celsius and said "in theory it *would* be 100% at 0 Kelvin".
Such a statement quickly evolves to "there are cells of 100% efficiency" in the hands of conspiracy theory creators...
@EchizenR:
I suppose you agree that those 100% solar panels that have to be cooled to 0 Kelvin will NOT solve our energy problems.
So now that we have proven that at least *one* of those 283 arguments (a rough guess) you brought up in this thread was *wrong*, what will you do ?
Will you
a) just continue rambling with the remaining 282 arguments OR
b) take a much closer look at the arguments you use in the future (maybe ask someone who *really* understands)
-
@Duke
The 100% efficient solar panel I was talking about was unveiled only recently, and it was by a research team, if I mentioned anything about commercial production, my mistake, I apologise.
New solar cell material achieves almost 100% efficiency, could solve world-wide energy problems
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39807/113/
Of course I could be wrong about the '283' issues I brought up. And hope that someone could disprove them and correct me instead of implying that I'm mentally unsound and by extension everything I bring up is fraudulent. I'm still waiting for anyone to disprove the existence of the Bilderberg Group, the Building 7 collapse on 9/11, the corporate connections that I pointed out Obama has (to prove that whoever is elected has already been prepicked for us- can any of you move away from his nice-sounding rhetoric?). I'm not trying to impose my worldview on anyone. I guess what I'm trying to do is to get people to look at information which they've automatically shut their minds off to. You may say that 9/11 was not an inside job. Fine, but surely there is something to the scores of eye-witnesses' and fire-fighters' accounts of multiple explosions on the ground level right?
@Juni Ori
Well, if the Republic is out-of-date, I suppose fascism should be fine with you. Corporatism as Mussolini said. Liberties that are inherent to Man are not valid today I suppose. "We hold it to be self-evident that all Man are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights..." Thats all crap with you I guess.
@Sarin
Whether it was stupid to declassify it or not, the point is that it HAS BEEN declassified. Can you DENY ITS EXISTENCE? Heck, the government even released plans for the deployment of US troops on US soil under the FOIA just recently. And we're talking about events more than 40 years ago. If all of you cannot accept what I'm talking about, at least go look at the Northwoods Documents, which you will find out I'm not making up because it is there. Detailed clearly, as I've pointed out, is that the US Government, in that case, actually considered carrying out terror attacks on their citizens to further a geopolitical aim (Afghanistan?), fortunately Kennedy didn't carry it out.
In fact, Seymour Hersh exposed a similar proposal from one of Cheney's meeting,
"There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build — we in our shipyard — build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up."
Interview with Hersh: http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/31/cheney-proposal-for-iran-war/
Article: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh
There is nothing conspiratorial about it. Its just dirty politics, which nobody here wants to admit. Governments do carry out terrorist attacks. Been that way since Hitler burned his own Reichstage down, to Operation Gladio in W.Europe during the Cold War- where the US Government trained squads to bomb civilian targets and blame it on the communists, to 9/11.
I agree that in the case of Myanmar and N.Korea, the governments are to blame, as far as I know. But the suffering in Africa? Corporations. A case in point, the Congolese crisis which the media has portrayed as a tribal conflict. In actuality, the Rwanda and Uganda-funded militias are proxies of corporations (about 100 of them, according to the UN) which are used to rape the Congo of its timber, gold, diamonds and coltan (of which the Congo is the world's primary supplier of this "grey gold" found in all mobile phones).
U.S./U.K. Allies Grab Congo Riches and Millions Die
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10815
About the geothermal energy that can fuel Humanity, at least you admit that there is lots of it (4,000 years worth according to MIT), when it comes down to energy which could raise the standard of living of billions and alleviate suffering, shouldn't the first thought be :"Can we do this?", instead of "Do we have the money to do this?"? That is what happens when you place profit above the human concern. Well, if you think its too idealistic, fine... thats how inhumane the world is. But think about the possibilities that open up as soon as unlimited energy is harnessed.
Yes, GM is complicated, and could in fact give rise to whatever-resistant crops and so on... But consider that farmers are charged exorbitant prices for seeds and insecticide, a problem which GMO should have solved, its simply a policy of economic warfare. As I pointed out, GM companies charge farmers 1000% higher prices for GM seeds than traditional seeds do, and causes profound human suffering in the name of making money.
The GM genocide: Thousands of Indian farmers are committing suicide after using genetically modified crops
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10829
Yes, I admit that I'm not qualified to talk about the scientific aspects of GM, but it seems to me that GM companies are using GM technology to wipe out small farmers and monopolise the food industry, which they already have done. Destroying the crop's ability to produce viable seeds for the following season with "terminator" technology is just a corporate scheme to keep the farmer dependent on the corporations for more seeds and continue making money for them. Why the need for such an unnatural use of science then?
It may or may not be good that GM genes spread into the wild. Not going into the ecological aspects here, not qualified again, but... since companies like Monsato hold the patents on their GM genes, when it spreads into a field where a farmer was not planting GM seeds, and the farmer ends up with some GM crop, Monsato sues the farmer into bankruptcy for infringing on copyrights. Many a farmer's livelihood have been destroyed this way.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Goliath_and_David:_Monsanto%27s_Legal_Battles_against_Farmers
Don't misunderstand me, I'm not a Luddite and am for technology. But my issue is with the inhumane people controlling the technology. You say that energy companies should use groundbreaking technology to get more profits instead of suppressing it. But as soon as the patent is utilised, the pandora's box is opened and the possibility of a monopoly disappears because the information has been released. Why are we still using fossil fuel-powered cars when there has been air-powered ones for more than 100 years and also water-powered cars?
I attack the establishment because I know there can be a better alternative, which I would be glad if you would examine. Yes, I need to experience the world because unlike any of you, I'm have not got off my chair my whole life... I want to bring your attention to the monetary system. Money is used to regulate scarcity. Because paper is scarce, limited, it has a price which money represents. Likewise, energy, water etc. But air isn't charged because there is an abundant supply of it. But today, with an abundance of energy (geothermal) and an abundance of food, wouldn't it be better to abolish money? With money and the PROFIT MOTIVE, which drives exploitation and social neurosis, gone, the impetus to use our advanced technology will only be for the betterment of society, not to make profits. The human concern is placed first, whereas today, profits are placed first. While all of us can claim a relatively comfortable life than people in the Third World, the other half of the world is suffering. Being a social institution since a technology-less age, money is obsolete when we can use technology to give us abundance. I know this sounds crazy and radical (even communist, but under communism, there is still money, so the suffering continues), but that is the alternative which would give us a substantially better society where money isn't used to enslave anymore.
If anyone is interested, information on this movement can be found at:
http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/
-
I had a valid post in this topic and now it has been hijacked bya troller.... Eichzhnereneraea i dont know who you are... but this topic isnt about government conspiracies its about Obama winning the election ....
now.... about the solar cells The DOD has been throwing up satellites MOSTLY powered by small nuclear fission devices... However some of the Solar Cell satellites are up there but none of them are weaponized because solar energy doesnt produce enough power for weapons capabilities... Most of the solar cell satellites are used for observation (read spying) and the like... However... They are quite useful and iI expect to see them used more in the future.
Board master for future reference... if i make a topic and its hijacked by this troller im going to send complaints in until you ban me or do something about it.. I dont like having to read through 50 pages of garbage that is non topic to find one piece of topic information
NOW as for Obama.... The Europeans have criticized Americans for being a racist nation for years and years... Keep in mind these are the same people that brought you slavery and endentured servitude... However... Did you know that not 1 single European country has had a minority leader not a single one.. not spain not portugal not switzerland not france not england or germany or poland or austria not norway or finland or Sweden not the czech republic or slovakia not belarus not lithuania not ukraine....... So the next time your european brothers start shouting american racist make sure they're well aware they havent put any minorities into the seat of power of their .... ahem... Small GDP countries... compared to the biggest economy in the world.. :)
-
Yeah I agree, the racial double standards against America will diminish significantly.
By the way, I admit I "hijacked" this topic but my first post here was on topic as far as it concerns the president-elect Obama. I simply said that he is just like the previous presidents before him with regard to corporate credentials. But people started bashing me for having dissenting opinions before even checking the validity of my statements or the evidence offered.
-
I agree with Darkpriest, this topic has been jacked...but still I feel obliged to reply on some Echizen's statements...
Your problem is that you mostly speak about technology that is experimental and is far, VERY far away from practical use. You can't just rush deploying something just because it looks promising. I will give you an example that should be very dlose to you. Some years ago, Europe started widely supporting biofuels. It looked nice-renewable alternative for fossil fuels until we find better source of power. It wnt on for a year or two, and you could see biogas almost at every gas station. Then...it was revealed that by planting, harvesting and processing crops for biofuel you use up more fuel than you gain from it, and also they burn less effectively, resulting in increased pollution. FAIL. That is what you get from rushing the untested technology. Atually lots of "ecolological" tech ends this way.
I don't deny there were and are scenarios how to start war. But it doesn'ŧ meant it has been or will be carried out. It's like you would be walking down the street, look at nice girl, and get arrested (or at least accused) for raping.
Again...you are idealistic. Money are in fact measure of materialistic possibilities. When a project would cost more than it's entire budget of US, nobody will be able to try it.
Now for the patents...look. If you develop a patent for something that can increase your profits, and not use it for, I think 50 years till patent goes off, you had no profit from it. And after those 50 years, everyone would use it, because they already developed it too but couldn't use it because they weren't allowed by you. But now, they can use it, they don't have to pay you for it...and what profit you had from that? 0.
Wind and water powered cars are again just in process of development, and encountering similar problems as other, supposedly ecological technology.
Your "alternative" as you describe was actually tested. The experiment is now known as Soviet russia.
Yes, what you describe IS communism, it's the estabilishment Marx and Engels wrote about. You know, that needs some unreal conditions to be fulfilled before it is implemented. The most impotant you noted. Profit motivation. And here is the problem. We had it before we invented the money. Our ancestors had it before they crawled out of the sea. It is one of driving forces for all living beings, the self-preservation. Money is just one form of its expression. It is highly unlikely that we will EVER be completely free of it, and totally impossible that it is going to happen in a next millenium...
Well that is it, now back to the topic.
You know...I'm actually pretty sure that at least some of presidents/first ministers/etc... of european countries have some minorities in their ancestors, like Obama is half-black. It's just the black minority is somewhat...more visible. In Europe, most minorities don't differ by look, but by customs, etc...and most of them are actually so naturalised so there's no difference except origin.
-
Some years ago, Europe started widely supporting biofuels. It looked nice-renewable alternative for fossil fuels until we find better source of power. It wnt on for a year or two, and you could see biogas almost at every gas station. Then...it was revealed that by planting, harvesting and processing crops for biofuel you use up more fuel than you gain from it, and also they burn less effectively, resulting in increased pollution. FAIL. That is what you get from rushing the untested technology. Atually lots of "ecolological" tech ends this way.
I don't deny there were and are scenarios how to start war. But it doesn'ŧ meant it has been or will be carried out. It's like you would be walking down the street, look at nice girl, and get arrested (or at least accused) for raping.
...
Your "alternative" as you describe was actually tested. The experiment is now known as Soviet russia. Yes, what you describe IS communism, it's the estabilishment Marx and Engels wrote about. You know, that needs some unreal conditions to be fulfilled before it is implemented. The most impotant you noted. Profit motivation. And here is the problem. We had it before we invented the money. Our ancestors had it before they crawled out of the sea. It is one of driving forces for all living beings, the self-preservation. Money is just one form of its expression. It is highly unlikely that we will EVER be completely free of it, and totally impossible that it is going to happen in a next millenium...
Yeah, and the UN condemned biofuels as a "crime against humanity" because it was causing most of the rise in food prices.
Well, I guess there WERE WMDs in Iraq and those plans for an Afghanistan invasion weren't sitting on the president's desk before 9/11.
I thought I qualified myself when I introduced my "alternative" presented in www.thezeitgeistmovement.com . No doubt it will sound like communism, I guess I need to elaborate. Under communism, there is still a ruling elite functioning in a monetary system and the elite use a command economy to control the country. In this technological age, we could wipe out scarcity and abolish money because when everyone has been satisfied (when there is an abundance of energy and food), the desire to preserve oneself by exploiting others is gone. You could well say that it is true communism, in an age without money. At the same time, because everyone is well off (not a phoney goal like under communism with technology), there is no need for government. It will be truly a society that is geared towards human progress not profits. All made possible by technology. But money is such an age-old institution (that is made obsolete by technology) that people cannot consider a world without it.
Idealistic, but we have the capability and it'll surely be a more humane world than the present.
-
Idealistic, but we have the capability and it'll surely be a more humane world than the present.
We have not yet, and it is very questionable that it will EVER work.
To elaborate...first, you don't really see it. Energy and food will never be free. Becaue behind every loaf of bread, every watt of energy is human labor. And even if you somehow manage to secure that, for example via robots, and robots doing that is sound of far future, more and more things will become basic needs. Shelter, heating, soft bed, internet...at some point you will always need human work. So you will need some rules, and who makes rules? Government. And you will need also some way of enforcing these rules. If you had not, lots of people would do nothing. You will always have people doing art, R&D and other interesting things, but you will have nobody to do uninteresting, but nescessary work. And it can't work that way...
You overestimate power of our current technology...and also you underestimate the need of "driving force" for humans.
Ninja edit: and I will ignore your wannabe sarcastic comments, because they are partly true in a nonsarcastic way.
-
To elaborate...first, you don't really see it. Energy and food will never be free. Becaue behind every loaf of bread, every watt of energy is human labor. And even if you somehow manage to secure that, for example via robots, and robots doing that is sound of far future, more and more things will become basic needs. Shelter, heating, soft bed, internet...at some point you will always need human work. So you will need some rules, and who makes rules? Government. And you will need also some way of enforcing these rules. If you had not, lots of people would do nothing. You will always have people doing art, R&D and other interesting things, but you will have nobody to do uninteresting, but nescessary work. And it can't work that way...
You overestimate power of our current technology...and also you underestimate the need of "driving force" for humans.
But energy and food is in abundance today by virtue of technology, like I pointed out in my previous posts. Without money, there will be a revolution in consciousness so much as that it'll be almost impossible to imagine such a system. I know most people may say that humans will lose their motivation. When the profit-driven motive disappears, I'm sure humans will find another incentive. Perhaps exploring the oceans or outer space? Regulation and laws would have be approached differently since without money, most of our social ills disappear. The regulation of the system could very well be done by supercomputers.
True, this system needs to worked out in more detail but given that the Singularity is approaching, it is vital that people are aware of this potential change.
Please visit www.thezeitgeistmovement.com , this IS the change we need.
-
NOW as for Obama.... The Europeans have criticized Americans for being a racist nation for years and years... Keep in mind these are the same people that brought you slavery and endentured servitude... However... Did you know that not 1 single European country has had a minority leader not a single one.. not spain not portugal not switzerland not france not england or germany or poland or austria not norway or finland or Sweden not the czech republic or slovakia not belarus not lithuania not ukraine....... So the next time your european brothers start shouting american racist make sure they're well aware they havent put any minorities into the seat of power of their .... ahem... Small GDP countries... compared to the biggest economy in the world.. :)
Now that's just not fair. Just because there are no minority leaders doesn't mean they're racist. You can't compare. For one thing, the populations of North America and Europe are completely different. Racism has little to do with politics. And even less with the GDP.
I would also like to point out that Europe never had anything like the "back of the bus" things, never had any segregation of colored people from white people. We were civilized. We did it with jews. (Joke!) Today the color of skin isn't an issue in Europe anymore. America still has a fair degree of racism in that sense today, though it's a lot less than it was. In a few decades it'll probably be so marginalized it's not even a theme anymore, same as in Europe. However, Europe has moved on to nationalism. People are grouped and prejudiced against depending on the country they or their parents are from, and this can get pretty nasty.
-
Amusing. This is actually how communism began and how it evolved to the communism we know. Utopia...but we need to work on some details. Erm...we have to make some compromise to make people behave like they should, but it is only for a while till they learn. And again. And again and...*bam*. See? Even if you had the tech to do it, and I repeat we are still far away from that no matter what you think, first problem will be transit between estabilishments. And that is actually very first of problems...
You are very wrong when it comes to tech. Lots of things work in lab. But only very small percentage of them are usable in real. All that redeeming technology you mentioned here is only a laboratory technology that is far from normal use. And most of it will not make it into normal use for a long, long time.
You are also totally wrong about money. You think money is a source of greed and all sins :) . But money is only EXPRESSION of the competetive nature of humans, and life itself is of competetive nature. Look around yourself and you will find another expressions of it...power, success, respect...money is just one of many ways how did the natural selection estabilished itself in human world. Instead of being eaten, you're just being poor (please, take this as a VERY simplified explanation). Humans will find other ways how to compete, because there will always be things to be fought for. Even if you remove all materialistic needs, there will be some you can't remove. Love is one of most obvious examples.
So think about it. Money are most common way of competition because of its wide exchangeability.
-
I suppose the next step for the Republicans and Neocons needs to be to accept that they lost, quit with the sour grapes, and look at why they lost.
Here's a good list of reasons:
1. Dirty campaigning. According to the posters on neocon websites like FreeRepublic, Obama's campaign was dirtier. It didn't look like that from this side of the Atlantic and I suspect it didn't look like that to many Americans who voted for Obama. John McCain himself had to defend Obama on rallies from claims that were so blatantly untrue that repeating them harmed the Republicans more than it harmed Obama. And as for booing Obama's name during McCain's concession speech.... nasty.
2. Foreign affairs. Another administration who would pick a fight, then have to look at an atlas to find the country they're picking a fight with. Someone send those nutjobs a copy of Sun Tzu and maybe, just maybe, they'll understand how to do it properly.
When the prospective VP posited the idea of going after Russia you just knew that under her watch America's military might would be split on even more fronts, and even less likely to win any one of the conflicts it starts.
Bush proved that the neocons are too attention-deficit to ever finish one mission before starting the next. Daddy's unfinished job in Iraq was more important to Bush, than isolating Al Qaeda and the Taleban in Afghanistan and then turning its attention onto Saddam.
3. Free market. The sacred cow of neocons is that any restrictions on free enterprise are a bad thing. Excellent! That's why 3Com is being bought out by China (much to the consternation of the Pentagon), and that's why the media was able to be so unashamedly pro-Obama. Way to hoist yourselves on your own petard!
4. Religious Fundamentalism is a liability, not an asset. Sarah Palin thinks the world is younger than frozen woolly mammoths, that non-Christians are the enemy, and that if you say "God is on our side" often enough, he will be.
That puts her on level par in intellectual terms, with radical Islamists who think that God is always on their side, non-Moslems are the enemy, and all science is bad.
-
@EchizenR:
Thanks for posting the link to the solar stuff.
I have read the article. It's about scientists that created a few molecules of a material, that has
...a theoretical potential of almost 100% efficiency. Commercial products are still years away,...
Now let's look what you made of the above:
...and solar (for which there is now a 100% efficient solar panel, while consumer types are only 14-20%).
Quite a difference...and you don't need to know a thing about the technology to see the difference.
As I do NOT want to imply that you did that at will to 'betray' your readers, I conclude that the conversion happened silently in the back of your brain.
That is a behaviour of the human brain that most people are more or less vulnerable to. We tend to see only what we want to see...
-
I guess outside the U.S., more than 90% would have voted for Obama. He's smart. I'm all for him. There's a lot of hope and expectations put on him. Quite a burden. Time will tell how much he can actually *change*.
90%? Where did you get that number? I hear he is more popular outside of US than MCCain (mostly cause people think McCain=Republican=Bush .. and that's probably the main reason why he lost), but not by that big a margin.
My preference was Hillary, McCain, Obama... in that order. Obama just strikes me as untrustworthy..like he's someones puppet. I'd be glad if time proves me wrong...well, pretty muhc everyone would be glad :D
-
About the whole consipracy thing:
I've read and seen a lot of things from countless sources. At the end of the day I can only say - I know jack s***! There are so many confilicting "facts" thrown around by everyone, so many half-truths and "what if's" that the only conclusion I could reach was - I don't know. And poking around more isn't god for my sanity.
There may very well be a giant conspiracy theory. I know there are a few of a lesser scale done all around the world. I for instance know some of the worlds powers are trying to re-write the history of my country (cause I was there. Outright lying about some event I witnessed first hand for instance.. like the action Međački Džep. You can read about it on the Wiki but it's a whole load of bull***)
Anyway, I'm open to pretty much anything. I doubt most of those stories are true, but I wont' just dismiss them completely. Stranger things have happend, and the world is a funky place...
-
90%? Where did you get that number?
I already stepped back from that guess a few posts later. It was a *guess*. Probably because I never personally met a single person who did like G.W.Bush. (I haven't been to the US while he was president).
And YES, it's probably that "McCain=Republican=Bush"-thing why Europe would vote for Obama.
-
Now that's just not fair. Just because there are no minority leaders doesn't mean they're racist. You can't compare. For one thing, the populations of North America and Europe are completely different. Racism has little to do with politics. And even less with the GDP.
I would also like to point out that Europe never had anything like the "back of the bus" things, never had any segregation of colored people from white people. We were civilized. We did it with jews. (Joke!) Today the color of skin isn't an issue in Europe anymore. America still has a fair degree of racism in that sense today, though it's a lot less than it was. In a few decades it'll probably be so marginalized it's not even a theme anymore, same as in Europe. However, Europe has moved on to nationalism. People are grouped and prejudiced against depending on the country they or their parents are from, and this can get pretty nasty.
oh no you never had the back of the bus thing... you simply didnt allow them to be citizens in your country or to join the empire as a full fledged member represented in parliament.. maybe you forget india or any number of colonies in africa you totally raped for resources while suppressing the population..
Ive always been offended by the European thought that because we had segregation we were somehow more racist than Europe.. Excuse me europe you were the ones that began the importation of slaves to the Americas...... As far as nationalism goes... I equate it with racism... you werent born on this side of the line therefore you are evil inferior and must be destroyed.... Its the same thing.... you dont ever hear that happening in the Americas... Sure we make jokes about the canadians and mexicans just like they make jokes about us... however.... We will probably become one Solidary nation within the next 50 years... I dont see that happening in europe for a long long time...
Also.. Ill have it noted that there has only been 1 war between any nations on the north american continent in which the europeans werent involved.. and there has only been 1 rebellion (american civil war) however.... The europeans had several wars on our continent... Spanish-Mexican War American-Spanish war French- Indian war... etc... once we got rid of the europeans we stopped having wars on our continent (it certainly didnt stop us from getting involved in other european based wars.. WW1 WW2 Korea (french) Vietnam (french) ... compared to about 500 wars in Europe just in this millenium...
i have nothing against europeans.. but they seem to like talking bad about each other and killing each other... They are quite good at it... not as good as the chinese mind you but they are pretty good at starting wars..
Excuse my ranting BTAxis but... the whole racism/nationalism thing is a touchy subject with me.. as I see the north american union one of the first steps towards ending nationalism... so can you tell me Axis why India was denied a far representation in english parliament or perhaps any of the african nations... and lets not forget apartheid :-)
-
Trash man you trust hillary more than mccain and obama?? you cant be serious... The clinton-bush oligarchy is what has gotten us into this mess... 20 years of letting them run our country into the dirt and selling everything to china for the lowest common denominator...
No no.. I trust obama and mccain far more than ill ever trust a bush or a clinton...
I honestly would have been happy with either mccain or obama.... less than satisfied with palin... than with Biden.... but neither of them were named bush or clinton... thats all that mattered to me..
Again as a conservative person i voted for obama.. and id do it again....
-
Excuse my ranting BTAxis but... the whole racism/nationalism thing is a touchy subject with me.. as I see the north american union one of the first steps towards ending nationalism... so can you tell me Axis why India was denied a far representation in english parliament or perhaps any of the african nations... and lets not forget apartheid :-)
You're stuck in the past. Yeah, stuff happened. Slavery happened. Exploitation happened. Apartheid happened Altogether, a lot of bad things happened, and it was Europeans who made it happen. But that was WAY in the past. Concessions have been made, responsibility has been accepted, apologies have been made and the chapter in history has been closed. Nothing you've mentioned bears any relation on present day society. American racism is happening TODAY. That's the difference.
-
By the way, I admit I "hijacked" this topic but my first post here was on topic as far as it concerns the president-elect Obama. I simply said that he is just like the previous presidents before him with regard to corporate credentials. But people started bashing me for having dissenting opinions before even checking the validity of my statements or the evidence offered.
@ Trashman
So regarding my stand on Obama (on-topic here), and the evidence offered, it is assumed that it is all lies or "half-truths" even before anyone looks at them? If people are uncomfortable with the word "conspiracy", I won't use it. Let's just call it oligarchical collectivism, as Orwell did.
"A ruling group is a ruling group so long as it can nominate its successors. The Party is not concerned with perpetuating its blood but with perpetuating itself. Who wields power is not important, provided that the hierarchical structure remains always the same."
If you took a look at my evidence, which has also been reported by the mainstream media, then you'll realise that Obama is no different than any corporate-bought president. By the way, as a sidenote, I can't believe how all of you ignored Operation Northwoods given it being (blatantly) in the historical record and not needing any so-called leap of faith.
@ Darkpriest
Glad you mentioned the North American Union (SPP signed without congressional approval, which is being implemented by stealth and eroding the sovereignty of the US. If you've heard about the NAU, and look at other sovereignty-eroding institutions like the EU, the AU and the coming Asian Union, doesn't this signal a move away from national sovereignty to supranational sovereignty that concentrates power in a small group of elites? Lord Acton remarked that "Power corrupts; and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
@BT
Regardless whether a black man has become the president of the United States, (white) people still regard coloured as different and thus, subconsciously, still engage in discriminatory behaviour, whether significant or trivial. I couldn't help noticing you were from the Netherlands. I'm sure Geert Wilders would be a good example of this, not that I necessarily disagree with him. But people tend to alienate people that are different, or hold different beliefs from them. Moreover, if blacks become (hypothetically) more out-spoken against white because of this, it may provoke even more racial strife.
@ Duke
I made a mistake with the solar panel as you pointed out. I apologise. Looking beyond that, is this reason to disregard everything else I posted? Let's say I don't say anything and just give you a news article that shows the 10 most corrupt politicians of 2007 by Judicial Watch of whom Obama (again, on-topic) is one of, including Hillary Clinton.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2007
If everyone likes to defend their worldview so much, and rejects all challenging views, then please come to your own conclusion. Not that I'm a pessimistic $%#@, but I'm reiterating my stand (see above) on an Obama presidency which so many have erroneously (in my opinion) think represents "change" and are in irrational raptures.
-
Having lived in both countries, I can testify that both the dutch and the English are racist as fuck. However, I've also visited the US, and concluded that European racism is nothing like American racism.
Europeans complain about immigration and all those damned foreigners around nowadays, but they don't discriminate to anyone's face. Americans will try to avoid you or treat you rudely the second they find out you're from another country, let alone a different skin tone.
This is first-hand. Feel free to tell me I'm wrong, but that's my experience.
Regards,
Winter
-
Trash man you trust hillary more than mccain and obama?? you cant be serious... The clinton-bush oligarchy is what has gotten us into this mess... 20 years of letting them run our country into the dirt and selling everything to china for the lowest common denominator...
No no.. I trust obama and mccain far more than ill ever trust a bush or a clinton...
I honestly would have been happy with either mccain or obama.... less than satisfied with palin... than with Biden.... but neither of them were named bush or clinton... thats all that mattered to me.
So family name is the only thing that interested you during election? :o
Well, clearly we have vastly different views. I for one consider Clinton one of the best presidents the US had.
-
Europeans complain about immigration and all those damned foreigners around nowadays, but they don't discriminate to anyone's face.
They feel threatened as a culture..as a people. With good reason.
The West..the clasisscal white christian male/female if you want it - is dying out. Slowly, but it's happening.
-
They feel threatened as a culture..as a people. With good reason.
They haven't got a culture anymore. The #1 dish in Britain is chicken tikka massala, for pity's sake. The only thing threatening them is their own failure to move with the times.
Regards,
Winter
-
Winter, with all respect, that's a huge exaggeration. The more the outside-culture causes pressure, the more people bring their own culture in public and are proud of it. Unfortunately, and this is why I have resisted too many refugees taken, this can cause also very strong nationalism, racism and xenophobia. Saying that european cultures don't move with the times is just ignorance or arrogance, I hope the first one. European culture is actually kind of unifying in many ways, while still sticking to the old traditions. Cultural problems, poverty and racial unequality in countries with huge numbers of refugees and immigrants, such as GB and France, is unfortunate, but unavoidable.
-
They haven't got a culture anymore. The #1 dish in Britain is chicken tikka massala, for pity's sake. The only thing threatening them is their own failure to move with the times.
Regards,
Winter
If by "move with the times" you mean "go quietly into the night", then I'd agree with you.
But to be honest Britain, to my knowledge, never had a varried domestic quisine. There is more to culture than just food tough.
But if you are right saying that they don't have a culture anymore, why do you think it is so? What about other countries that still do? Should they simply allow their culture to dissapear? It is, after all, a very precious thing.
-
It is, after all, a very precious thing.
I don't see why. It's empty ritualism with no significance apart from being old. I have no use for concepts that don't have a practical justification.
Regards,
Winter
-
Obama Action Doll ;D
http://www.dannychoo.com/detail/mac/eng/image/10204/Obama+Action+Doll.html (http://www.dannychoo.com/detail/mac/eng/image/10204/Obama+Action+Doll.html)
-
I don't see why. It's empty ritualism with no significance apart from being old. I have no use for concepts that don't have a practical justification.
A culture that was shaped by my father, and my fathers father, etc, etc... Customs, songs, language, the way of life .. you call all these things insignificant?
So why exactly should I abandon my culture and adopt the new one? What exactly is better in it? Do you have any justification for that? And lastly, just cause you don't see why it doesn't mean it is worthless. Obviously it means a lot to a lot of people. Or are you saying that all those people who put some worth into their culture are morons and you are the only intelligent one?
-
Some of these are significant. But some...hey, burning witches at stakes was once a tradition too.
-
I guess Winter is american, at least very common comment from there. In any case, there's some sort of culture. I prefer some sort of bit more traditional, but I like seeing some of the new features that have been implemented to ours. However, I hate those superficial parts that have appeared here too.
-
"The #1 dish in Britain is chicken tikka massala, for pity's sake."
The British CTM dish which is #1 in the UK (if you believe the late Robin Cook) was inspired by the Asian dish but is actually a Glaswegian creation.
We Brits don't move with the times, that's true. We stand still if we can possibly help it.
We're fighting the long game.
Given time, if we stand still long enough the American Evangelical Right will have retreated into their cold war bunkers to avoid the Blue Menace of Islamicisation, the American mainstream will be in the grip of a new hippy zeitgeist, the Middle East and Africa will be split into so many sectarian conflicts that they won't be a threat to anybody, the French will be paralysed with national strikes (no change there), China will have gassed itself in its own polluting fumes, Russia's elite will be too busy buying football teams to worry about anything else...
And the world'll be ours for the taking.
-
I guess Winter is american, at least very common comment from there. In any case, there's some sort of culture. I prefer some sort of bit more traditional, but I like seeing some of the new features that have been implemented to ours. However, I hate those superficial parts that have appeared here too.
I am not american and never have been, thank you very much.
Regards,
Winter
-
why is american a derogatory term? We freed Europe, The philippines.... Began the road to worldwide democracy with the american revolution. Ended totalitarianism posing as communism... Not to mention inventions like electricity, the internet, etc etc. ..... I know America has not always done wonderful things.. But what we have done is wonderful.
I know some around here may remember when the threat of soviet invasion, maybe no WW2 people around but being An American was once a compliment....
Wait until China rises to superpower status... American will again be a compliment and not an insult
-
Americans "invented electricity"? Dude, read up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity).
-
Freed Europe...aw man, go find some history textbooks. What US actually has done at the end of WWII was to split Europe between Soviets and themselves....
Same goes for ending Soviet communism. It was actually incompetence of their leaders that caused their fall more than intervention of other "western" nations. Again, you've been part of it, but you claim you've done it yourselves.
Well...if you want to know why people often regard Americans as idiots...for most people out there, people like George Bush jr. are example of typical american. And from what I've seen so far, most people who proudly claim that they are American are actually similar to him...
-
Obama is no messiah, but he's no Bush either. He's someway between the two, and that's a huge-ass improvement over the worst president in the history of America. Personally, on current form, I think Obama will become one of the most beloved presidents in American history. People are clutching at reasons to be cynical (e.g. appointing some of the better people who served Clinton not being change) but from what I can see he is following through on his promises - he's massively increasingly transparency, appointing people on merit, and talking big about some very important issues. Treating green energy like the space race is going to make a huge difference to the world and it's about damn time too.