I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by orenji, Feb 8, 2011.

  1. #21 clos3tgrow3r, Feb 9, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 9, 2011
    I agree wholeheartedly OP,,, in fact you voiced many opinions of mine which i had never been able to write down
    +rep


    -------------------
    there are people who think this man is depressing , that he raps about anti-government bullshit , that therefore his music should not be promoted .......well i tell you if thats the case and thats why you cant see some of the reality this man is putting before your ears then OBEDIENCE must >>>>> BE IN YO NAYCHURRRRRRR :cool:


    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bURgTLHryrg[/ame]
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hiB-Whoxec]YouTube - Immortal Technique - Internally Bleeding[/ame]

    but srsly if its just that you legitimately cant understand him thats ok too,,,,, i supose musical taste might be at play here ?? :p.....cept for the first one.....cant mistake the first one that shit is him preaching over a beat


    boox for the reading?
    Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (fiction)
    A Peoples History of the United States by Howard Zinn (non)



    and yes I MAD :mad:

    boats are sinking while these mother fuckers are riding the luxury liner
     
  2. WE all know something needs to be done.

    ESPECIALLY before the "internet kill switch" is put into effect which happened in Egypt.

    When and where do we start protesting??:confused:
     


  3. That's a good question. I think that we need to focus on opening the eyes of others. It won't be easy. People don't want to give up the things they've known for their entire lives. It won't be easy for people to give up their news shows and their radio talk shows. It won't be easy for people to stop putting their trust in the system that controls them. Even friends and family are a part of this system and it is especially hard to go against them, even if you know that you are right.

    There are so many social norms in place that prevent us from focusing on the truths. There are so many expectations we feel we need to fulfill for others. We are supposed to have a wife and kids. We're supposed to have pets. We're supposed to be upstanding citizens. We're supposed to take part in the fake politics used to distract us. We're supposed to cover the medical bills of our loved ones when we know that the government easily has the money to take care of all of our medical needs. They don't though. They can make money off of us and at the same time distract us with bills and other devices so we don't notice the big picture.

    Our children are used against us. We must constantly worry about their education. About the inefficiencies of school. About their college funds. We must worry when their grants and scholarships are being threatened to be removed. We love our children and that is why they are so easily used against us.

    We must worry about our spouses cheating because our media puts the idea in our heads that cheating is the most common and natural thing in the world. Some of us worry when there's nothing to worry about. This causes stress on the relationship. Self fulfilling prophecies. They want to divide us from those we love and make US feel like it's OUR fault. So we only blame ourselves and yet again we're distracted from the big picture. It is the most clever system man has ever devised.

    The most ingenious thing of all though, they only need to monitor the activities of the livestock. They don't actually need to craft many events and devices. They only need to let the events that support the system occur and squash the events that go against the system.


    Oh, this man has figured out how to power a car cleanly and efficiently? We can't have that, it may take away our power to control the economy. SQUASH.

    Oh, this television show script actually looks educational and enlightening? Can't have that, SQUASH.

    We have intel that terrorists are going to attack our cities? Oh, that will cause fear and as we all know, fearful livestock do not act rationally. Let it happen!

    The economy is crashing? Let's continue to let it happen. It causes fear and panic! These livestock are becoming too hard to mold, we must strike fear into their hearts so they become like putty again. Let it happen!

    Avian flu epidemic? Let the news cover it! Scare the livestock! Make sure they see nothing else on the news. We want to distract them as much as possible.

    etc. The examples are out there everywhere.


    How many years do these things keep us distracted? By the time we no longer need to worry about our children, about our job and our family and our bills, we are old and retired. In this society people are taught that old people's opinions are not to be respected. By the time we get to a point where we could actually see the big picture, we're either so firmly integrated into the system to see clearly or our opinions are not counted for anything.

    We allow alzheimer's disease to exist. There is evidence that suggests it's simply caused by aluminum poisoning. Do the research, the information is out there. Alzheimer's disease is just one example of the things the system allows that are beneficial to itself. It can't have intelligent elders existing. That's incredibly dangerous. The system will allow anything that discredits and dehumanizes them.


    I think we first must open our eyes and the eyes of others. Try to foster the ability to reason logically without the input of the system clouding our judgment. We must teach this ability to others. If they are unwilling to learn, be patient. Be loving, but do not give up your principles. We know there are a lot of things that are absolutely wrong. It's hard to put into words sometimes, but we know there is a problem. I, for one, refuse to be integrated into this system. I refuse to give up. I refuse to lose my anger because my anger allows me to reject the ideas I have been spoon-fed my entire life.

    The more and more that I write, the more convinced I am that George Orwell's 1984 parallels this reality perfectly. It's uncanny. Brave New World is another superb book that parallels this reality, thank you clos3tgrow3r.

    We need to keep looking. We need to instill the desire to look for truth in others. We need to be patient and loving towards those we wish to free. Their defenses against this, I suppose we could call this a mental revolution, will eventually drop once they realize we see through their defenses. Once they realize they have been a part of the system their whole lives. Once they realize they have been used and tricked and fooled, they will be angry. It's good to be angry, we have been stripped of our rights and kept ignorant. We should be angry! Anger does not mean violence, though. Violent actions only work to serve the system.


    Treat everyone with respect and love. They are being used, their actions and beliefs are designed by the system. Do not hate them, free them. Open the eyes of those you love. Be diligent. Don't sway from your path. Keep an open mind.
     
  4. Don't get me wrong, the military-industrial and prison-industrial complexes exist, so does lobbying of all sorts. But those facts in and of themselves are not sufficient to conclude that the government wanted the economic crisis to occur. That is certainly not in the interest of any government official with an elected/appointed position. When the economy is good people vote to keep those in power in office. When the economy is bad people vote them out. Look at the midterm elections, I'm not making this up.

    Hitler was also a vegetarian, does that make me more likely to go out and murder Jews? The fact that fluoride is deadly in large enough quantities is not appropriate evidence to justify the opinion that its addition to the water supply is anything other than a misguided attempt at improving the dental health of the public.

    Sodium is toxic in large enough quantities but Americans smother their food with salt every day. In the context of these chemicals, quantity matters.

    Please humor me and respond to what I asked in my first post in this thread:

    "But do you think the tap water in Washington D.C is so different from that in New York City or Los Angeles? Do you think congressmen get their vegetables and fruits from special farms and orchards that use unadulterated water? It's like hemp prohibition - a vestigial legislative act that doesn't have enough people giving a shit one way or the other for it to be repealed. Drinking tap water is certainly not going to curtail your life as much as drinking soda, I'm sure of that much."
     

  5. First of all, the amount of fluoride in our water is at a significant enough level that it causes calcification of soft tissues, specifically the pineal gland in the brain, among other locations. The levels in our water have been proven to lower I.Q. in children. It has been linked to specific forms of cancer. It contributes to arthritis. It causes fluorosis. It damages the immune system.
    Yes, at the levels we find in our tap water.

    There are many studies out there that show this. It isn't difficult to find them, just do a simple search. Yes I can give you specific sources, but someone will find something negative to say about each one which is why I encourage research and critical thinking. I can't convince people to believe everything I say, but perhaps I can encourage people to find answers themselves.




    Here is some history.
    Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb

    Cross reference it if it doesn't sit well with you. Try not to be affected by confirmation bias. It's difficult not to be.

    I don't know how congressmen live. I don't know what they consume or where they get their food. I do know that if any of them were behind the fluoridation movement, they would be drinking distilled water. The reason not many care about fluoride is because a long time ago a bunch of self-interested scientists decided to spread a lot of misinformation about it. Back then people had more trust in the government than we do now. People blindly accepted what they were told and any attempt to prove otherwise was squashed. No one could publicize findings contradictory to what the government said.

    Today we still believe there's nothing wrong with fluoride being in our water. Our parents say it's okay. We trusted them, we didn't know they were lied to. We didn't know we were being fooled. It became firmly established that fluoride is good for our teeth and should be in our water.

    But isn't it odd that they're putting a chemical in our water for the purpose of keeping our teeth healthy? It's in all of our food and beverages. It's in our water. It can be absorbed through our skin. It permeates our society. I am not exaggerating. Please look it up.

    Why is the government so concerned with our dental health? If fluoride was really effective, why wouldn't they keep it out of our water and sell it more profitably? Why would they keep our teeth healthy when unhealthy teeth means more dentist visits which means more profit. Why does this chemical need to be in everything we consume? We aren't given the choice to have unhealthy teeth if we wanted to? We aren't given the choice to stop consuming fluoride? Everything about the way this chemical has seeped into our society is suspicious.
     
  6. you worry too much. Everything is hunky fokken dorry here.

    I gots weeds womens and plenty of work

    what else do i need?

    i dont need to worry about shit i cant do anything about other than post rants on message board.
     
  7. I'm probably going to regret this later, but...

    I disagree with a lot of what's said here because the arguments tend to fall into two traditional logical fallacies: circular argument (sometimes called "Begging the Question") and the false dichotomy (claiming there are only two possibilities, when really there could be more, this can fall into "Affirming the Consequent" or the "Fallacy of Many Questions" in formal logic).

    Just two quick examples:

    This is clearly circular. We are controlled because they sell us things that they have determined we should want. How have they determined it? They've observed us until they know what we want, and then they target us with what we want, because they want us to want what we apparently want.

    There's no control here. Put differently, most of us would want an iPod because it allows us to carry a ton of music with us in a portable manner, regardless of whether or not we ever saw a commercial.

    As for false dichotomy:

    The false dichotomy here is that the author accepts only 2 possibilities: Either the FDA keeps beneficial things illegal because they are paid to do so, or they don't. (It is phrased as a declarative, but the reasoning is identical: If the FDA is keeping something beneficial illegal, it must be paid to do so).

    But there are a myriad of other possibilities, beginning with basic incompetence, and then running the gamut from religious beliefs to genuine disagreement in the scientific community (i.e. if 60% of the community believes it to be beneficial, but 40% believes it to be harmful, it is fair to say that the substance is beneficial, and yet argue that the FDA may have grounds for controlling it).

    I suspect the real problem here has something to do with the "research" involved.

    If you go to scholar.google.com and type in "effect of sodium fluoride on health" you will find 257,000 results, 90% of which were run by research institutions without government involvement then published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, and the overwhelming majority find that fluoride holds significant dental health benefits.

    If, instead you go to Google and type "fluoride is bad for you" one of the top results is from the "Global Healing Center" run by "Dr. Group" who, according to his CV is a "Certified Clinical Herbalist". He will tell you why flouride is bad, but has never run a double-blind test under clinical conditions.

    You be the judge.
     


  8. I was just about to say identify those two fallacies aswell :smoke:
    But nice going man, your right. OPs argument is indeed circular. I won't bother going into it as you've pretty much done that :)
     
  9. #29 orenji, Feb 10, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 10, 2011


    I think you misunderstood me a little bit. What we want is always based upon past events. Past events are shaped by the government or the powers above it which pick and choose which events get to unfold. The problem is, even if everything I say is 100% completely true, it's still possible to say that my arguments are circular if you're basing your views from inside the system that shapes us. This is why my conclusion is to think critically, keep an open mind and question everything. This altruistic goal is outside of the system which keeps us fettered. It's the only thing I can think of that could reduce the holds that are placed around our lives.

    Nitpicking at my arguments based on flimsy assumptions is not going to help anyone except perhaps people who need to inflate their egos. I constantly try to throw away my ego because I know it does me no good. It clouds my judgment. This is why I don't seek recognition. I will always be anonymous but I will always try to open people's eyes.

    As for the false dichotomy, I never said any of the possibilities you came up with were not in play. I never said the FDA only makes things illegal when it gives them a profit. I merely said that it is a self-interested organization that makes things illegal for its own benefit. I can sit here and play with words all day with you and anyone else who wants to bring my views down via petty wordplay. I won't though, because that is not constructive.

    I only want to open the eyes of others. No conceivable harm can come from people thinking for themselves and for people to try to become aware of what is really happening around them.

    Edit: One more thing. Check the dates of the articles when you search for "effect of sodium fluoride on health." This only strengthens my original argument. Read about the history of fluoride, the science involved at that time and check the dates of those documents on scholar.google.com.
     

Share This Page