HOME | DD

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-03-30 22:42:39 +0000 UTC]

Quick question (just cos I'm in a Troll mood), how many radiation-related illnesses resuled in the deaths of civilians during the Cold War?

I only wonder because the amount of radiation in this scare-tactic-media-called "crisis" is equal to the amount dispersed about the planet during nuclear bomb testing by the Americans and Soviets.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SpacerHunterZORG In reply to MouseDenton [2011-04-01 21:53:50 +0000 UTC]

The mainstream media is downplaying the severity of the situation. Nuclear is way too dangerous and should not be used as a power source, or as a weapon. Those companies in the industry lie about leaks and safety records. We need to get away from nuclear, natural gas, and oil.

There are so many alternative energy sources that can be used, including solar, geothermal, wind, magnetic, etc. Even water can be used for energy (look up Stan Meyer's patented water powered engine.)

Those nearest the Fukishima plant will experience fatal radiation sickness, but since the Japanese government is downplaying the situation, we probably won't hear too much about it. In the long run, cancer and birth defects will increase dramatically (although cancer has been on the rise for decades now, due to humans poisoning the environment, pesticides, prescription drugs, and the chemicals that are put into our food.) The cancer industry must be jumping for joy, considering all of the profit they hope to see from all of this.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-04-02 00:01:00 +0000 UTC]

Hm. So you actually think that a source of media, which thrives on a population showing interest in their programming, is telling a fear-loving audience that the situation is better than it actually is? I can see your point, but the problem is (as you said with humanity at the end of your statement) that humans will do a lot of bad things for their own gain, and inciting fear through exaggeration is a prime example of this in media.

But back to nuclear power. You can't say that the advancements in nuclear technology are all bad--we actually fight cancer with radiation, how's that for irony--and these positive advancements would not have been possible if there was no industry for it. That is to say, a civil industry that was created by nuclear power. We'd still have small labs stumbling around if it hadn't been for the major power corporations competing with each other to make breakthroughs (though this did cause relaxation of safety protocols).

As for the current disaster, your claim that radiation sickness will kill people near the plant is completely false at this point. Did you not hear that the two workers who practically bathed in the radioactive water were sent home from the hospital the same day? They were not even kept for observation.

I agree, however, that there are other sources of power with negative side-effects not nearly as large as what we've got now, but I consider nuclear power to be one of the better choices we're presented with. Honestly, the industry has among the lowest fatal accident records in history, with only a few major incidents.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SpacerHunterZORG In reply to MouseDenton [2011-04-02 03:25:45 +0000 UTC]

Did you even wonder why they weren't kept for observation?

Radiation therapy often causes the return of cancer, which, of course, means money in the pockets of the corporate medical industry. I guarantee that there is a cure for cancer, without chemotherapy or radiation, but the big corporate health "care" companies don't want us to have it (because that would cut into their profits.)

In fact, plants such as marijuana have anti-cancer properties, and often successfully aid in the healing of cancer patients (which is one of the contributing factors of why it's illegal - it would cut into the profits of big pharma.)

As the disaster in Japan has illustrated, nuclear is just too dangerous. Sure, there may have been far fewer reported incidents. The fact remains, however, that if an accident were to happen, millions of lives, and possibly at least half the world, is at risk.

Oftentimes, statistics from nuclear plants crisis' do not take into consideration the cancers and the birth defects that disable and kill for years to come. One still cannot live near Chernobyl, and radiation remains in many places even further away from Chernoybl that prohibits the grazing of cattle or the cultivation of crops.

In regards to the Three Mile Island incident, according to the Radiation and Public Health Project, “new analysis of health statistics in the region found that death rates for infants, children, and the elderly soared in the first two years after the Three Mile Island accident in Dauphin and surrounding counties.” My boyfriend was an infant within the set contamination zone. When the incident happened, his dad decided to move everyone away from there, which probably saved their lives.

There is also the issue of used nuclear waste. Where does one store something that has a half-life of at least thousands of years? Why would societies want to power their infrastructures with anything that could poison the environment, and everyone and everything around it, for centuries? Destructive energy is not clean energy, no matter how one looks at it. I refuse to accept nuclear radiation as the new norm.

Thank you for the constructive debate, by the way.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-04-02 04:44:01 +0000 UTC]

Actually I must thank you for this debate, it's quite interesting.

Now about the keeping for observation I mentioned. Your whole argument revolves around the (mostly true) assumption that all powerful humans are out to benefit themselves by causing destruction to others. If this is true, the hospital would've kept them in their care if there were the smallest thing wrong with them, so as to charge more if only from the government or present the documents for a lawsuit against the power company. Instead they let them go home, which suggest to me that either there's nothing dangerous to their health.

On to cancer. Radiation is not the perfect cure for it, and it doesn't cause it to return, it just doesn't get rid of it all, which is why it comes back. Unless you annihilate the disease, it returns. There are experimentally successful cures out there, but the FDA is taking forever to approve them (here the red tape becomes an issue, what with all the different groups feeling the need to impress their opinion to alter the situation to their advantage before all is said and done on every little issue). I don't place stock in the theories of there being cures for all the problems in the world, but they're being kept hidden. Sure there are better things out there that are hard to get due to money, but there's no "God potion" for anything. An example would be a type of concrete/cement that would allow roads to require minimal maintenance for decades, however the companies don't use it because the states wouldn't need to re-hire them to repair the roads.

I agree that the statistics are flawed because the companies don't want to take responsibility for all those possible lawsuit-inducing consequences, but that's why there's third party groups that do independent research. These groups evidence is more accurate because they don't have any bias relations to the parties involved (sometimes they even dislike them all). If the highest competitor of some company tells me they're doing nothing wrong, I'll take their word for it.

Now we've hit that little myth I was hoping we would: Nuclear Waste. This is indeed a problem, but do you know where most of the nuclear waste comes from? Weapons. Barely a fraction of the waste produced in history belongs to nuclear power plants, because it's relatively easy to create fuel. Weaponizing plutonium is a very costly process, and while I'm no expert, I read an article in NatGeo that briefly tried to explain the process, which at one point involves submerging the radioactive material into a vat of chemical liquid to enrich it. We're talking massive amounts of liquid for a miniscule amount of material. After the process is done, all the chemicals involved are radioactive, useless, and lethally hazardous.

The power plants are very small producers of nuclear waste, and they're even finding ways to re-use the waste because it costs them money to throw it away. Do you really think the companies are making money off of holding onto this crap? The real producer of nuclear waste is governments. Weapons do the overwhelming majority of it, not these power companies.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SpacerHunterZORG In reply to MouseDenton [2011-04-02 16:48:26 +0000 UTC]

Unfortunately, the FDA often exchanges cronies from the big corporate pharmaceutical and food/agriculture industries, and also from Monsanto. If there is anything that could impede the mega-profits of such large companies, then the FDA will either drag it's heels in approving such treatments, or they go after anything that could get in the way. For instance, the FDA has been trying to ban supplemental vitamins and minerals for years, as these drug companies are trying to get synthetic vitamins out onto the market (and charge three times as much for them.) They often go after companies that offer organic foods and herbal supplements, while allowing the bigger corporations flood the market with poisonous produce, high fructose corn syrup, preservatives, GMOs, and aspartame (which are all hazardous to our health.)

Even vaccines now contain mercury; I will never get the flu shot because it often causes neurological disorders. Not that I am completely against all vaccines (diseases such as smallpox and measles are, fortunately, a distant memory.) However, we now have government trying to force these new poisonous vaccines onto the populace (such as the HPV vaccine) so that their friends in pharma can benefit, while the side effects are just as bad as the disease that the vaccination is meant to prevent.

Of course the nuclear power companies are not the only ones at fault - we must also pass that blame onto the government and Military Industrial Complex. Sure, dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended the war, but what are the drastic consequences of nuclear development? Is the cure now worse than the disease?

It goes to show that the government and the corporations are one and the same - the government represents the corporations, and not the Rights and Will of the People.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-04-02 22:15:08 +0000 UTC]

I have to disagree with your assumption that the FDA is actually helping companies. Sure it's a rusty, outdated machine with a lot of beurocratic gum jammed into the gears but it's still got a lot of watchdog groups it must please by getting in the way of companies, or people like green peace will step up, point out the flaws, and then the FDA will lose funding (back to the money) from the government who will take action against them in order to stay elected in office by pleasing the voters.

Now these vaccines and medicines may contain toxins, but that's how you become immune to something. The theory behind the vaccine is what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, and they're purposefully injecting you with too little to be killed by but just enough to improve your immune system. I personally think the cause of negative effects by most of these drugs is people overdoing it. One vaccination is enough, to get multiple or more than is advised (probably due to paranoia) is doing harm. But the pharmaceutical industry is far from pure of corruption, I agree with you there. These guys, however, resort to corruption not always to buddy up with the FDA but to work around it, because it's easier for them to do that or they know the FDA has enough honesty to say "Hell no you can't give this to people!"

As to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, like the war that brought about them it was a necessary evil. But that's another debate, here you're right: the creation of a new super weapon sparked an obsession (humans naturally obsess over new things yet still fear change) with them, causing the nuclear arms race and unbelievable amounts of nuclear waste from enriching elements to weapons-grade material.

As I've stated before, the power industry as a whole can't be blamed for past events--you could even blame Chernobyl's disaster on the USSR; secrecy, denial of the accident, not even evacuating civilians immediately!--it's the arms race and the nuclear powers that caused the bigger problems. We've contaminated more than the Chernobyl exclusion zone and this Japanese reactor incident combined through nuclear testing (and that's just on land--not counting oceanic and atmospheric tests). Nuclear weapons, however relevant they may be as a deterrent in modern politics between first-world powers are very expensive and destructive to create and maintain, and (while cheaper) are devastating to use--both physically, mentally, psychologically and politically.

The nuclear problems are caused by the world's biggest bluff in the game of war. Not the power companies, just playing a little solitaire off to the side.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SpacerHunterZORG In reply to MouseDenton [2011-04-07 01:14:25 +0000 UTC]

The FDA often promotes it's so called regulators from the criminal corporation Monsanto and other big pharmaceutical and corporate food companies. In turn, these companies continue to poison the populace with high fructose corn syrup, GMOs, preservatives, prescription drugs, and mercury in vaccines (which is contributing to neurological disorders and lower I.Q.s) Vaccines should not contain mercury!!!

In fact, Monsanto developed an artificial sweetener called Neotame, which is similar to aspartame, but is derived from a chemical weapons NEUROTOXIN called neotox II. Aspartame is already toxic to humans, and Neotame is at least 13,000 times sweeter than aspartame, but with one addition - 3-dimethylbutyl (listed on EPA's most hazardous chemical list.) In 2002, despite having such hazardous chemicals, the FDA approved the addition of neotame in our food and even in livestock feed. The FDA, associated with Monsanto, even approved the addition of Neotame in foods that are USDA organic and Kosher. And guess what? Companies aren't even REQUIRED to list the chemical weapon neotame in the list of ingredients. This poison all courtesy of the Monsanto-sponsored FDA, of course.

And, at the behest of Monsanto, the FDA made sure that companies don't even have to inform their customers if the food that they are consuming is made of GMO's. Monsanto also bankrupts farmers that don't use Monsanto seeds when wind-born pollination occurs. They have also manufactured terminator seeds, which produces impotent plants whose seeds cannot be used to germinate new plants in the next season, because they cannot germinate again! And the list of Monsanto evils goes on and on.

Yes, the FDA often exchanges employees with Monsanto. This is a criminal cartel that has a malevolent aversion to the environment, fauna, and humanity, and profits off of it big time by monopolizing the industry.

And since when does Washington care about what voters think? All they have been concerned about is protecting their criminal bankster friends and corporations as they slowly destroy our planet. Democrats and Republicans both have the same mission - protect corporate interests, no matter how criminal, at all costs.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-04-07 20:56:13 +0000 UTC]

It seems to me that you don't have a full understanding of human beings. If there's a group, there's a counter-group. If someone likes something, someone else hates it. If there's politicians who support the free reign of companies over the lives of the people, there's politicians who are against it. For example, if the republicans said they liked dogs, the democrats would instantly start talking about how cats are better. If the republicans suggest lighter restrictions on corporations, the democrats instantly go the other way.

This is because the politicians actually DO care what their voters think--and even more what they know. They want the voters to think they're doing a good job, and if the last poles for their state said most people don't like what companies are doing in the US, then guess what his/her next vote will be for? Tighter restrictions on said companies. This is so they can get voted back in. It's the people who aren't voted in that you can accuse of not caring about what people think--but everyone cares about what people know.

In any group, particularly those assigned to regulate, information is very important. But not nearly as important as who has it, who knows who has it, and so on. If the FDA did something that endangered lives (or even cost them), then the information will get out (or we wouldn't be having this conversation) and a special-interest group will pipe up and start yelling about how they screwed up or were doing exactly what you're accusing them of. Then the people get mad, the poles change, and the politician who's thinking about his/her re-election is going to do (or appear to) what their voter district is feeling. And on top of that, they'll want to look like they're going above and beyond and then take action against the FDA for doing whatever it was that they did, which the FDA dreads because it could mean disrupting their pay (the almighty dollar instead of votes).

There aren't many decent people who are willing to do the right thing at great personal cost when there are no instantly apparent side-effects for not doing so. And while the politicians are messed up, there are those who are fighting on the right side (probably for the wrong reasons but what ever).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SpacerHunterZORG In reply to MouseDenton [2011-04-13 15:55:00 +0000 UTC]

The Republican and Democrat parties might as well be the same party. Both only listen to the money, not the American People, and are puppets of the big corporations. When there's a bill that could affect a corporation's bottom line, their lobbyists essentially bribe the politicians into voting the other way. It does not matter if the bill would benefit the People more than the corporations, and would be better for society. It's usually the corporations and lobbyists that determine law in Washington, and the politicians, Democrat or Republican, are often bought out by big interests. Both parties listen to the corporations, not the People.

A great example would be the Obamacare bill passed last year; the single-payer system was completely wiped out of the bill because of hard lobbying by the for-profit insurance companies, who knew that people would generally gravitate towards a less-costly plan. The bill didn't address the real reasons why "health care" costs are skyrocketing (it's because the whole system should not be a for-profit system and there are high amounts of toxins in our food and environment - but that's another debate.)

Hell, even the same companies contribute to both Republican and Democratic campaigns. During the last presidential election, malevolent corporations such as Goldman Sachs, Chase, Morgan Stanley, and BP contributed to both the Obama and McCain campaigns.

And remember when Obama promised us "hope" and "change?" His policies are eerily similar to the Bush administration's policies, perhaps even more draconian:
1) Extension of the Patriot act, which attacks our Constitution and our civil liberties and privacy
2) Less transparency in the Obama White House
3) Continued with the bailouts of huge corporations with taxpayer money
4) Continuing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and lowering corporate taxes (in fact, some companies, such as Bank of America, don't pay taxes at all) while resorting to strict austerity measures for the poor and middle class
5) Obama continues the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that the Bush administration lied us into. He accelerated the conflict in Afghanistan instead, when he "promised" that we would see an end to both wars. Obama also defied Constitutional law by invading Libya without Congressional approval.
6) Obama appointed cronies from Chase, Goldman Sachs, General Electric, and others into his cabinet.
7) Obama pretty much turned the other cheek as the BP/Haliburton oil spill continues to poison the Gulf environment and the people and fauna living within it. In fact, Obama is allowing 13 companies (such as Chevron and Shell) to drill under the same environmental review standards that stood before the BP Gulf spill.
8) More of our civil liberties have been erroded under the Obama administration. Example - the TSA installing radiation-filled naked body scanners in airports while their disgusting, perverted agents molest both adults and children.
The list goes on and on, with similar parallels between a Republican administration (Bush's) and Democratic administration (Obama's.)

Politicians also lie to get votes. Governor Scott Walker was elected in Wisconsin because he assured the voters that he would not attack the unions. But, we all know what happened after he was elected, don't we? He attacked the working person all in the name of corporate interest (and the Koch brothers, who were major contributors to his campaign, also urged him to go after the unions.) Walker wined about a budget shortfall while 2/3 of corporations in Wisconsin paid little or no taxes to the state.

So you see, the system is wrought with lies to the public to get these politicians elected so that they can continue with pro-corporate policies. The FDA is no exception. As I've been stating, the FDA is comprised with Monsanto cronies so that Monsanto can continue poisoning people with their Frankenfoods.

The politicians in Washington do not care about what the People think, or what Rights the Constitution says we have, by law. Both parties are ultimately bought out by huge lobbying and corporate interests.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-04-13 20:51:59 +0000 UTC]

Alright, I've been patient up to this point, but what you're saying now is half-uneducated, fear-mongering dribble.

First: the media. Yes, we have a great media system. Sure there are a lot of bias organizations out there, but you can always find a few neutral sources for any given topic (if this were true you'd have absolutely no evidence and shouldn't have bothered saying anything) and these organizations seek to disgrace politicians and celebraties for money (which they get through pleasing the audience, who loves scandals, and increasing ratings). If there was bribery to the degree you're implying, we would all know about it. Be able to do something? That's up for debate, but we would know about it. But since we don't, I can safely say that most politicians are not being outright bribed (campaign contributions aside).

To wrap up the FDA: their money comes from the Government, so they care what the government thinks more than the companies.

Here's a quick crash-course in motivation between the parties: republicans want money and corporate power, so they do everything you're talking about to decrease government power, since their power comes from corporations. Democrats are motivated by power, which comes from being in the government, so they want it to grow. This means that the democrats want more government control over companies, which is the opposite of what republicans want. And both are motivated by votes more than anything, because you can't get campaign contributions (or bribes) if you're not in an office, and you can't get into an office if you outright ignore what the people voting for you next year are telling you. It's not a great system, but it's better than most. Also consider this: the people telling them what to do are probably just as bad as them, only they don't get paid for it.

Your criticisms of Obama's administration are really poorly informed, or just ignorant by choice. Yes there are a lot of flaws in what's been done, but a lot of what you said are just outright wrong:
1) His campaign promised to end the Patriot Act, but he ended up signing its continuation (goddamnit)
2) Unless you live in Germany, don't expect any transparency (probably even then) from the government
3) While the bailouts may have been good intentioned--hell, they may have even helped--they were done wrong. Who the hell forgot to tell the people they gave money to what to use it for??? (This was probably a republican or a democrat who owed a republican a favor for his/her support for a left-wing bill)
4) I hate tax cuts. I support our government's operations, particularly our troops, which means paying for it and paying them in taxes. If you look back on that debate, you'll see that it wasn't just a "All in favor?" "I!!!" deal, there was a lot of debating and arguing by the White House against the cuts for the wealthy, but the democrats did want to keep the cuts for the middle and lower classes. Rather than let them all get high taxes, they agreed to cut those for the upper class too. Compromise is not a bad thing, you just have to exercise good judgement.
5) I must know who the fool is that told you the "wars" in Afghanistan and Iraq were illegal. Afghanistan isn't a war; it's a conflict, and if congress wanted to get out, they could just vote to cut military funding and starve our militaries into a withdraw. Obama didn't promise to instantly pull out of anywhere, he knew that doing that is impossible (even now) and he only promised to get out of Iraq. In a smart move, he stayed clear of promising to pull out of Afghanistan, since any intelligent person knows that it's a mess we'll have for a long time now.
Also, the attack on Libya was not unconstitutional (blame Bush and the republicans for the 60-day combat action freedom by the president, rather than only 30 which it was--fair) and it was not an invasion. We did not land ground troops, and the only people we did put on the ground were intel officers (just like on every other godforsaken country on the planet). It was just a military action whose costs were equal to a drop in the ocean compared to the two "wars" and not a war on its own. If we'd stayed and gone after the government with intent to destroy, dominate or just kill their leader, that would've been unconstitutional.
6) Just as I can say that not all Nazis were evil, maybe some of the people from these corporations have morals. Questionable, but maybe.
7) There was nothing wrong with the regulations on the oil drilling (other than what happens to the oil, but that's for another time), it was BP who failed to meet these safety requirements in secret. Also, Obama didn't "turn a blind eye", it's nothing like Katrina: how much can you do to scrape the surface off of the ocean? While New Orleans could've recovered much better if FEMA hadn't had its head up its ass, why don't you ask the Coast Guard how easy it is to separate oil and water. Over hundreds of square kilometers. Within 24 hours.
8) Look, you give me evidence that the TSA is filled with child molesters and rapists, that the images they see are more intrusive than the ones that I've seen, and that there are measurable health-risks involved with these scanners (scientific, unbiased DATA) and I'll STILL tell you to just drive yourself to your next business meeting overseas. I think the scanners are a bit much (someone'll always find a way) but I also believe we should be allowed > 3" pocket knives (like the Germans).
And as to parallels, of course there are similarities--opposites are equal! I'm an atheist and my best friend is a hardcore Christ follower, and we agree on all kinds of stuff.

Aaaaaand yes: politicians DO lie to get votes, but they can only get so far before they lose their reelection hopes, so while they do get away with more than enough, there is a limit that the mighty dollar can't push them past.

Finally, the most important thing for anyone apolitical to remember: You might not care about politics, but politics cares about you. Probably not in the way you think or want, but it does.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SpacerHunterZORG In reply to MouseDenton [2011-04-21 15:49:38 +0000 UTC]

I thank you for the debate, but it appears that you do not want to realize the truth. I know it can be overbearing and unbelievable at times for one to realize that the world is far more sinister than one could ever have known. I cannot unlearn everything I have learned about all of this, and I have become far better at reading in-between the lines of major news stories (including NPR.)

Corporations such as Blackwater/Xe Services and Haliburton are profiting big time into these "conflicts" that we were lied into. Much of our deficit is because of these "conflicts" that nobody wants, except for the people profiting off of them, of course. To quote a line from a book on natural healing, "it's all about the money." If it weren't for these wars and the money being used for erroding our civil rights, we would have a better health care system and be on the way to better energy sources.

Hundreds of thousands of civilians in these countries have died from attacks from U.S. troops. The Iraqis and the Afghani people don't want the U.S. there any more, and more and more Americans don't want to see their troops in those countries anymore, either. It's a failing battle that is only ending up in more pointless death and destruction, and is only further encouraging anti-American attitudes. I have seen the video leaked from WikiLeaks where U.S. troops gunned down a van of Reuters reporters without reserve; one of our more logical soldiers tried to help a couple of Afghan children injured in that particular crossfire, and his commanding officer shouted at him to "stop fucking with those kids." This is also the same military that is parading with the bodies of Afghani 12 year olds as if they're deer trophies, and taking fingers and ears as trophies as well. I have seen those photos and it made me ashamed to be an American.

I am not "fear mongering" and everything that I have stated is indeed verified; for example, all you need to do is search for Monsanto on Google and many of the top results are articles on the evil that the FDA allows them to do.

Many, many people can tell you that I am far from ignorant and "half-uneducated." I feel that it is my patriotic duty to discuss what is really wrong with this country, and the world, to people that may have an involuntary or voluntary ignorance to such truths. I feel that our liberties and freedoms are under attack by a callous government that only listens to what the corporations and the top 1% have to say. It's time for citizens to unite against this evil; whether you're an Athiest, Christian, Muslim, Jew, or Wiccan, Gay or Straight, Black, Caucasian, Asian, Hispanic, Middle Eastern, or otherwise; before the world becomes an irreversable Orwellian future.

Here are some great resources, including documentaries and alternative media:
* democracynow.org (a great place for news that mainstream media outlets devote little to no coverage on)
* Food, Inc. (a documentary that illustrates the horrid state of our food industries - it also goes into the evils of Monsanto.)
* zeitgeistmovie.com (a site that links to the three Zeitgeist documentaries that discusses the monetary system, 9/11, religion, and more)
* The Union (an insightful documentary about the illegalization of marijuana)
*propublica.org (an in-depth alternative news site)
* corbettreport.com (one article about surveillance is interesting - [link] ) or the Alex Jones Channel on YouTube.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-04-21 20:26:51 +0000 UTC]

Here's a problem with your self-righteous attitude: you think what you've learned, been told, and found is the truth, just because of the evidence you've come into contact with. What I'm seeing in your argument is that you're a radical unwilling to alter their current way of thinking in spite of overwhelming evidence. Despite my showing you how your own ideals conflict, you still refuse to admit there's any fault what you're saying.

This is quite ironic, seeing as how the problems you complain about are caused by radicals, people refusing to compromise for the greater good, and it seems your sources are also radicals who turned to such means in order to achieve a victory against something specific, almost like radicals turning people against Islam to protect against Middle-Eastern aggression.

You are right in your fight against the corporations, but do you really have any idea how much worse it would be if there were no people in the government and various organizations actually fighting against them? You would have no rights not due to federal laws, but because you signed them away in a contract at birth. Seriously, you need to think along the lines of "At least this thing we have is good, where did that come from?"

Only a selfish, spoiled, rotten parasite would say that there's nothing good in this country, including what's been given by the government. Personally I feel we've lost much of what we had, but we've still got a lot. If you've lived in a foreign country, you know how good we've got it here, and the good things in this life come from the very groups you're universally trash-talking.

"You all remember the song 'War, what is it good for?' BUSINESS" -Bill Maher. Yes, corporations are profiting from war at the cost of lives, rights and tax dollars, but Afghanistan was not a war we were lied into, it was a mess we started by not helping the Afghans after we saved their asses from the Soviets. If you watch "Charlie Wilson's War", you get a good idea of what happened and why we're fighting there today. And your saying that nobody in those countries wants to have us there is false.

Do you know why most fighters join the Taliban? Money. There are no jobs, and I spoke with a soldier who told me stories of how children would volunteer to carry their bags and gear just for a few bucks. Naturally they didn't give them anything they couldn't handle, but the children wanted to do it because their families had no money. Huge amounts of CIA money are paid out to Afghan civilians for working on bases, helping the forces, and other similar tasks. Our efforts are doing more good than harm to Afghanistan, though it may not seem like it to the people State-side, crunching numbers and watching the 1% of attacks that kill innocents on Wikileaks.

I notice that your sources are not first-hand accounts (as in you obtained personally from the source or witness) but rather collected information ran through multiple middle-men which dilutes the facts even more than they started off as. Fewer steps increases efficiency, it's engineering and physics, and it also applies to information. Go and get some yourself, don't just go to some blog or other researcher--double check what they tell you. Think for yourself, don't be a transmitter. Unless you can do that I think we'll be done here rather quickly.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SpacerHunterZORG In reply to MouseDenton [2011-05-01 16:03:53 +0000 UTC]

I do think for myself - and there is overwhelming evidence proving that our government is for the 1%, of the 1%, by the 1%. I cannot keep quiet while a child is molested by a TSA agent or while the government is encouraging us to spy on our neighbors in the name of "security,", which is further eroding our rights everyday. Many of my sources are first hand news accounts. DemocracyNow.org (which also airs on many NPR stations), hosted by award- winning journalists Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, is a legitimate news site that goes out into the field with first-hand accounts, as well as Propublica.com. It is actually pretty widely known that Monsanto poisons our food and stomps on farmers, and these evils are allowed by the FDA. You can even step out your door or even go out into the community to see the negative effects of this corporate globalism.

Have you noticed that wages have fallen, while more and more work is demanded of us? Have you noticed the sharp rise in cancers in recent years? My boyfriend's mom is in the health "care" field, and she certainly has. More and more people that I know are waking up to the truth, even my grandparents (who come from that generation of stoic patriotism.) Our country is quickly turning into a third world country, where fewer and fewer people can afford to live, and where millions of people cannot even get health care because of their low economic status, including myself. All while the wealthy achieve even more wealth.

If we truly lived in a "capitalistic" society, those big banks and corporations would have been allowed to fail because THEY were the ones who made poor business decisions. If smaller businesses made unwise business moves, they would go out of business. The same should apply to the big banks and corporations as well. The whole economic downfall is attributed to a stay-perpetually-in-debt kind of system that is obviously failing and should not be allowed to continue. These banks and corporations are the rotten, selfish, spoiled parasites sucking the life away from the people, while the government aids them and passes policies protecting them.

And while the awakening has been painfully slow, more and more people are realizing that this is not the way things should be. The government only has the interest of the rich and powerful in mind, and their policies are shaped by hard lobbying. The country must return to WE, THE PEOPLE, instead of these policies that continues to erode our country. While I do appreciate that I live in a country where I am not stoned almost at whim for being a woman or that I don't have to worry about the streets blowing up around me, I also recognize that this country is going to hell. America could become that bad, and there are more and more policies put into place that are eroding our rights that prove that our government does not have our best interest in mind. It's always done gradually, of course, or else we wouldn't be having this debate.

Between working full-time, art, yoga five days a week, having an actual social life, and many, many other interests and ideas, I just simply do not have time to continue this debate any further, nor tolerate or respond to your denial or your name-calling. We shall shake on it and agree to disagree, and I bid you luck on your future endeavors.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MouseDenton In reply to SpacerHunterZORG [2011-05-01 18:21:18 +0000 UTC]

"Our country is quickly turning into a third world country" I'm sorry, but I must ask if you've ever been to a third world country. I've been to a second world country, and I wouldn't even compare the US to Colombia, lest we have a bloody revolution reminiscent of Russia's Red revolution.

Here's my big problem with what you're saying: when you make specific accusations, you're not being clear with your evidence. On other topics you're very well-rounded. What you said about not bailing out banks just made my mind up about using stimulus packages, and I agree with you. But when you say that the TSA molests little children, you're starting to be rather intensive on a particular issue, and for that you need evidence, which it seems you don't have. Of course if I'm wrong here, please send me the link to a verified news article so I may see for myself if this is true, because I've not found it to be.

I agree.

I agree that this country is going down hill, and fast (but we've still got a long fall before we meet up with most of the rest of the world). What kills me is that this nation has huge potential to be great (sounding like Hitler here...), but we're f*cking it up big-time. I agree there's things we need to do, but I disagree that there's nobody in Washington trying to it. The top 1% is a huge problem in our policies, but we're still living in the top 20% of the world because their self-promoting agenda is constantly being inhibited by the people up there fighting for us and the right things.

Maybe that's me having a blind faith in humanity, and it's probably there to keep me from giving up on this country, but if we refuse to believe that we've got some kind of voice or that we don't have any people of power fighting the good fight, we're no better than rebels and insurgents hiding in God-forsaken hills battling a government at the cost of everyone, innocent and guilty, with a refusal to compromise or try and cooperate.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to Surrealism4humans [2011-03-29 00:04:38 +0000 UTC]

Thank you! ... Yes, BIG BROTHER is watching us all! NOW, more than ever, and tomorrow, even more!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Surrealism4humans In reply to RSConnett [2011-03-29 04:02:44 +0000 UTC]

It's an unfortunate reality. But at least we're aware, yes?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to MegalodonMax [2011-03-29 00:04:58 +0000 UTC]

yes it is ...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MegalodonMax In reply to RSConnett [2011-04-04 01:13:21 +0000 UTC]

I hope it doesn't end up like that, but I guess we'll all see soon enough.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to OvermindC [2011-03-29 00:05:10 +0000 UTC]

Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to savageworlds [2011-03-29 00:05:28 +0000 UTC]

Delighted to hear it! Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to Immy-is-Thinking [2011-03-29 00:05:37 +0000 UTC]

Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to Immy-is-Thinking [2011-03-26 02:11:47 +0000 UTC]

Yeah! Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to LucaRossiMartini [2011-03-29 00:05:49 +0000 UTC]

Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RSConnett In reply to Chelovek [2011-03-29 00:06:03 +0000 UTC]

Indeed!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0