|
U-Know! Forum » The News |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Sin Agog 2253 posts |
Jan 29, 2015, 18:59
|
||
OK, but in that case how can you fully trust the information you've gotten that leads you to believe anyone's evil? I mean, I mentioned in that last thread, Murdoch has investments in arms industries; it's in his interest to constantly make out that certain peoples are evil so there'll always be guns being sold. It's in his interest (and other members of various governments who also have investments) to get us wanting to intervene, even if all of our interventions mostly end up with far more dead civs than whatever evil we're trying to tackle. If you distrust the news, you also have to question your own opinions, because in some way they've trickled down to you from the media. Say we decimate the latest bad guy, there will have to be a new bad guy designed and manufactured, as otherwise the business of war will go bankrupt. Why can't we invest that money in offering a safe-haven and relief to victims of the world's vicissitudes, rather than blowing shit up and causing more resentful, hardened people? Because they're not all going to die and we'll cut to end credits, happy marching band music. Shit doesn't work like that. We're stuck in some perpetual loop right now, and doing more of the same will result in more of the same.
|
|||
billding68 1016 posts |
Jan 29, 2015, 19:14
|
||
|
Sin Agog wrote: OK, but in that case how can you fully trust the information you've gotten that leads you to believe anyone's evil? I mean, I mentioned in that last thread, Murdoch has investments in arms industries; it's in his interest to constantly make out that certain peoples are evil so there'll always be guns being sold. It's in his interest (and other members of various governments who also have investments) to get us wanting to intervene, even if all of our interventions mostly end up with far more dead civs than whatever evil we're trying to tackle. If you distrust the news, you also have to question your own opinions, because in some way they've trickled down to you from the media. Say we decimate the latest bad guy, there will have to be a new bad guy designed and manufactured, as otherwise the business of war will go bankrupt. Why can't we invest that money in offering a safe-haven and relief to victims of the world's vicissitudes, rather than blowing shit up and causing more resentful, hardened people? Because they're not all going to die and we'll cut to end credits, happy marching band music. Shit doesn't work like that. We're stuck in some perpetual loop right now, and doing more of the same will result in more of the same. I actually have spent time abroad quite a bit also I have a brother who is currently in Pakistan but has spent all his adult life in various counties as part of his work(chad,yemen,egypt,niger,poland,ukrane)to name a few and hes encountered horrendous acts of evil 1st hand and documented it again as part of his work. So I do know from first hand accounts from someone I know very very well that not all is conspiracy many things may be but not everything. This world has always been in turmoil its part of the global condition always has been always will be sadly..but history doesn't lie.
|
|||
|
Sin Agog 2253 posts |
Edited Jan 29, 2015, 19:28
Jan 29, 2015, 19:27
|
||
|
I agree Pakistan and some aspects of Sharia law there are pretty effed up (though the country of Pakistan should never have been made in the first place- by a couple of English gents, over a dinner table). I just don't think it's up to us to put things in order. You can't be a moral force with guns in your hands. It's just a stupid, absurd image. And has any American-intervention ever been resolved amicably? Has it ever improved much of anything. or has it just pissed a bunch of people off? Why not try a new system of actively helping out. When Russia was in some dire financial straits in the late '70s, Carter agreed to ship them wheat in exchange for a change in their humanitarian policies- letting some of those who wanted to leave the country do so. It worked. There's no remunerative gain to be had out of this method, but if our aim was to truly help people out in need of helping, we could do so much better without wielding a single gun. Unfortunately, that is not our aim. Evil (which, yeah, I don't think really exists) cannot be countered by acting evil. People learn by example. Children learn that way. Adults learn that way. Species learn that way.
|
|||
spencer 3071 posts |
Jan 29, 2015, 19:40
|
||
I believe there is a department at the BBC that vets anyone that researchers and producers may want on air. Some people have had invites for interview cancelled many times...in effect there is a black list.
|
|||
Captain Starlet 1110 posts |
Jan 29, 2015, 20:03
|
||
Would that be anyone not on nigel farage's xmas card list?
|
|||
Markoid 1621 posts |
Edited Jan 30, 2015, 04:09
Jan 30, 2015, 03:45
|
||
|
Al Jazeera is quite good, as is RT (Russia Today). They're not totally different, but it gives a slightly different perspective from The BBC and the god awful Sky News. Glasgow Media Group is worth a look for a more academic and a sometimes more straitforword appraisal of the media. http://www.glasgowmediagroup.org/
|
|||
|
billding68 1016 posts |
Jan 30, 2015, 04:42
|
||
|
Sin Agog wrote: I agree Pakistan and some aspects of Sharia law there are pretty effed up (though the country of Pakistan should never have been made in the first place- by a couple of English gents, over a dinner table). I just don't think it's up to us to put things in order. You can't be a moral force with guns in your hands. It's just a stupid, absurd image. And has any American-intervention ever been resolved amicably? Has it ever improved much of anything. or has it just pissed a bunch of people off? Why not try a new system of actively helping out. When Russia was in some dire financial straits in the late '70s, Carter agreed to ship them wheat in exchange for a change in their humanitarian policies- letting some of those who wanted to leave the country do so. It worked. There's no remunerative gain to be had out of this method, but if our aim was to truly help people out in need of helping, we could do so much better without wielding a single gun. Unfortunately, that is not our aim. Evil (which, yeah, I don't think really exists) cannot be countered by acting evil. People learn by example. Children learn that way. Adults learn that way. Species learn that way. The U.S. leads the world (as it should) in foreign aid http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/us-foreign-aid-by-country_n_1837824.html
|
|||
|
Markoid 1621 posts |
Edited Jan 30, 2015, 05:48
Jan 30, 2015, 05:14
|
||
|
billding68 wrote: Sin Agog wrote: I agree Pakistan and some aspects of Sharia law there are pretty effed up (though the country of Pakistan should never have been made in the first place- by a couple of English gents, over a dinner table). I just don't think it's up to us to put things in order. You can't be a moral force with guns in your hands. It's just a stupid, absurd image. And has any American-intervention ever been resolved amicably? Has it ever improved much of anything. or has it just pissed a bunch of people off? Why not try a new system of actively helping out. When Russia was in some dire financial straits in the late '70s, Carter agreed to ship them wheat in exchange for a change in their humanitarian policies- letting some of those who wanted to leave the country do so. It worked. There's no remunerative gain to be had out of this method, but if our aim was to truly help people out in need of helping, we could do so much better without wielding a single gun. Unfortunately, that is not our aim. Evil (which, yeah, I don't think really exists) cannot be countered by acting evil. People learn by example. Children learn that way. Adults learn that way. Species learn that way. The U.S. leads the world (as it should) in foreign aid http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/us-foreign-aid-by-country_n_1837824.html Really? I'm actually not allowed to go to the US to visit a friend in Boston, due to misdemeanour a long time ago. I didn't kill anybody! I, and I say I am not welcome in your country, apparentely. Bin Laden was though, selling weapons to yous lot! The UK is slightly better in that aspect though.. Democracy? My friend in Boston said "Hi Marko! A very happy new year to you, too! I'm sorry to hear that the US is holding a grudge about something. They did the same with John Lennon. Have a great celebration in London. Probably a better place to be anyway. Or Glasgow, if you happen to be there. Definitely a great place to be!"
|
|||
|
billding68 1016 posts |
Jan 30, 2015, 05:59
|
||
|
Markoid wrote: billding68 wrote: Sin Agog wrote: I agree Pakistan and some aspects of Sharia law there are pretty effed up (though the country of Pakistan should never have been made in the first place- by a couple of English gents, over a dinner table). I just don't think it's up to us to put things in order. You can't be a moral force with guns in your hands. It's just a stupid, absurd image. And has any American-intervention ever been resolved amicably? Has it ever improved much of anything. or has it just pissed a bunch of people off? Why not try a new system of actively helping out. When Russia was in some dire financial straits in the late '70s, Carter agreed to ship them wheat in exchange for a change in their humanitarian policies- letting some of those who wanted to leave the country do so. It worked. There's no remunerative gain to be had out of this method, but if our aim was to truly help people out in need of helping, we could do so much better without wielding a single gun. Unfortunately, that is not our aim. Evil (which, yeah, I don't think really exists) cannot be countered by acting evil. People learn by example. Children learn that way. Adults learn that way. Species learn that way. The U.S. leads the world (as it should) in foreign aid http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/us-foreign-aid-by-country_n_1837824.html Really? I'm actually not allowed to go to the US to visit a friend in Boston, due to misdemeanour a long time ago. I didn't kill anybody! I, and I say I am not welcome in your country, apparentely. Bin Laden was though, selling weapons to yous lot! The UK is slightly better in that aspect though.. Democracy? My friend in Boston said "Hi Marko! A very happy new year to you, too! I'm sorry to hear that the US is holding a grudge about something. They did the same with John Lennon. Have a great celebration in London. Probably a better place to be anyway. Or Glasgow, if you happen to be there. Definitely a great place to be!" So how does your misdemeanor have any baring on the amount of U.S. aid given out? I don't understand your comment or how the two relate sorry.
|
|||
|
Markoid 1621 posts |
Edited Jan 30, 2015, 06:43
Jan 30, 2015, 06:37
|
||
|
billding68 wrote: Markoid wrote: billding68 wrote: Sin Agog wrote: I agree Pakistan and some aspects of Sharia law there are pretty effed up (though the country of Pakistan should never have been made in the first place- by a couple of English gents, over a dinner table). I just don't think it's up to us to put things in order. You can't be a moral force with guns in your hands. It's just a stupid, absurd image. And has any American-intervention ever been resolved amicably? Has it ever improved much of anything. or has it just pissed a bunch of people off? Why not try a new system of actively helping out. When Russia was in some dire financial straits in the late '70s, Carter agreed to ship them wheat in exchange for a change in their humanitarian policies- letting some of those who wanted to leave the country do so. It worked. There's no remunerative gain to be had out of this method, but if our aim was to truly help people out in need of helping, we could do so much better without wielding a single gun. Unfortunately, that is not our aim. Evil (which, yeah, I don't think really exists) cannot be countered by acting evil. People learn by example. Children learn that way. Adults learn that way. Species learn that way. The U.S. leads the world (as it should) in foreign aid http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/us-foreign-aid-by-country_n_1837824.html Really? I'm actually not allowed to go to the US to visit a friend in Boston, due to misdemeanour a long time ago. I didn't kill anybody! I, and I say I am not welcome in your country, apparentely. Bin Laden was though, selling weapons to yous lot! The UK is slightly better in that aspect though.. Democracy? My friend in Boston said "Hi Marko! A very happy new year to you, too! I'm sorry to hear that the US is holding a grudge about something. They did the same with John Lennon. Have a great celebration in London. Probably a better place to be anyway. Or Glasgow, if you happen to be there. Definitely a great place to be!" So how does your misdemeanor have any baring on the amount of U.S. aid given out? I don't understand your comment or how the two relate sorry. I am not a threat to your society, or possibly I am? If not barred from anything, then you're doing something wrong!
|
| Pages: 3 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
