Reply to topic  [ 234 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 24  Next
Censorship 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 10:33 pm
Posts: 4156
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
Quote:
As long as I and others can speak freely in my defense


Not much freedom around. Perhaps there is a speech zone available in your area?

Quote:
"Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you."


Generally people think they are being fucked in life, so that level of standard is quite low....

_________________
Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.


Sun Feb 17, 2013 8:05 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
magamud wrote:
Generally people think they are being fucked in life, so that level of standard is quite low....

I think you aren't reading the Golden Rule with proper comprehension. It doesn't say, "Do to others what they do to you." That is called "Tit for Tat", and it has its uses, mainly to help less empathetic people better understand the Golden Rule. "Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you" sets the proper maximum level of mistreatment that a normal person would want to tolerate.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Sun Feb 17, 2013 8:55 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
magamud wrote:
Generally people think they are being fucked in life, so that level of standard is quite low....

I think you aren't reading the Golden Rule with proper comprehension. It doesn't say, "Do to others what they do to you." That is called "Tit for Tat", and it has its uses, mainly to help less empathetic people better understand the Golden Rule. "Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you" sets the proper maximum level of mistreatment that a normal person would want to tolerate.


The Golden Rule exists across a continuum from the negative form to the positive form.

Propriety is in the eye of the beholder. Two forms of the same statement.
"Do to others what you would have them do to you"
"Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you"


"Do (something) to others what you would have them do to you"
"Do (nothing) to others what you would have them do to you"

or

"Do not do (something) to others what you would not have them do to you"
"Do not do (nothing) to others what you would not have them do to you"



Point is ... doing nothing can be evaluated as the trivial case of doing something ... and doing something (e.g. holding oneself in restraint) can be evaluated as doing nothing.

The Golden Rule really only has one contiguous meaning ... and any attempt to bifurcate this meaning is to create unnecessary confusion.

Pax Veritas

ps: To wit, "Do unto others what you would have done unto you." (including the doing of nothing) ... is sufficient for all cases including the negative form.

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Sun Feb 17, 2013 2:51 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
UncleZook wrote:
Two forms of the same statement.
"Do to others what you would have them do to you"
"Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you"

Given this statement, it's clear to me that you will have trouble with the concept behind the Golden Rule. These two statements are not the same philosophically. The first fails to set a ceiling or a floor, while the second does set a floor and requires no ceiling. Both assume equality between individuals and normal psychology, which is why the Golden Rule is so poorly practiced in a world of hierarchy dominated by sociopaths.

Quote:
The Golden Rule really only has one contiguous meaning ... and any attempt to bifurcate this meaning is to create unnecessary confusion.

I believe you have demonstrated with your post that you are skilled in the art of obfuscation and wield it like an accomplished gatekeeper.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Sun Feb 17, 2013 7:16 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
Internet censorship -- Facebook censors Jon Rappoport

And why wouldn't it? Criticizing Obama runs counter to the agenda of the ruling sociopaths that put Obama in power. These same ruling sociopaths control the intelligence agencies, like the CIA, which uses Facebook to augment their surveillance of Americans in order to prevent anything from interfering with that same agenda.

It's the second coming of Nazi Germany. I wonder if the American flag will become as reviled as the swastika. I'm thinking it has already started.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:36 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
Internet censorship -- Facebook censors Jon Rappoport


The above article is substandard for Rappoport, for he promotes the theory that a whiz kid actually created Facebook, which was then co-opted by the intelligence agencies ... when the preponderance suggests that Zuckerberg, Brin, Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber - even Bill Gates of eugenicist_IBM_past-connected and eugenicist_Microsoft_present-connected corporations - and virtually every other kid that became an instant billionaire while simultaneously influencing a large swath of impressionable minds (in the past few decades) ... was placed there by intelligence think tanks, e.g. to corral, monitor and subvert their generation and other recent generations.

Here's another, Yevgeny Chichvarkin:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 38006.html

Forbes list of young billionaires:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briansolomo ... orbes-400/

Venture Capital provides the seed money, and bankster empire connections do the rest. No man, woman, child or dog ... ascends in this corrupt globalizing, centralizing economic system without the system's assistance. And the system assists those it has chosen to rise, e.g. for its own purposes. There are exceptions, I'm sure, but this is the rule.

But here's an excellent article by Jon Rappoport on GMO food labelling debate:
http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2012/ ... -monsanto/

Rappoport is bang on in his reading of the GMO labeling tea leaves. So he's batting 0.500, it would seem. As a baseball player, that's the stuff of legend. As a truthseeker, that's a poor batting average.

As for my own reading the internet censorship tea leaves ... it's possible the system wants to draw attention to Facebook as being a genuine corporation at a time when people are starting to question its origins. Rappoport could be one of their vehicles to this end. We can pretty well conclude that Kim Dotson is in league with the system's desire to discuss internet censorship <------------- which is a minor distracting issue when compared to the other great issues of our time. I say minor ... because the discussion is not going to produce any real results. Let's face it, the plug is not going to be pulled - or the noose tightened - on the internet any time soon, because the internet provides a valuable monitoring service for the system. A double-edged sword with the system wielding the sharper side of the blade, as it were.

But hey, give the masses a view of the unaffordable cake ... and they'll starve drooling over it while waiting in the bread lines. As it were.

Quote:
And why wouldn't it? Criticizing Obama runs counter to the agenda of the ruling sociopaths that put Obama in power. These same ruling sociopaths control the intelligence agencies, like the CIA, which uses Facebook to augment their surveillance of Americans in order to prevent anything from interfering with that same agenda.


Criticizing Obama runs parallel to the ruling agenda. Obama has no real power. Criticize him all you want. When he becomes a liability, he will be replaced. Not before. The real powerbrokers profit by this keystone kriticizing routine ... because they get to operate in the shadows (while the floodlights make Obama even more whiter than his genetic mix had allocated).

To wit, those same ruling sociopaths also control the POTUS.

Quote:
It's the second coming of Nazi Germany. I wonder if the American flag will become as reviled as the swastika. I'm thinking it has already started.


Yup, part in parcel of the NWO`s designed isolation and neutering of the American state, where the gun and the Bill of Rights give the little guy more than a fighting chance to resist their planned integration into a globalized centralized union.

Pax

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:30 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
UncleZook wrote:
Two forms of the same statement.
"Do to others what you would have them do to you"
"Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you"

Given this statement, it's clear to me that you will have trouble with the concept behind the Golden Rule. These two statements are not the same philosophically. The first fails to set a ceiling or a floor, while the second does set a floor and requires no ceiling. Both assume equality between individuals and normal psychology, which is why the Golden Rule is so poorly practiced in a world of hierarchy dominated by sociopaths.


The two statements are identical mathematically. They just operate in different quadrants. For a graphical understanding, consider the function y = x^2. One function, two arms of the parabola (one in each of two quadrants).

Philosophy introduces redundancy.

Quote:
Quote:
The Golden Rule really only has one contiguous meaning ... and any attempt to bifurcate this meaning is to create unnecessary confusion.

I believe you have demonstrated with your post that you are skilled in the art of obfuscation and wield it like an accomplished gatekeeper.


Those who do not understand make all kinds of wild assertions and innuendo. So be it. Lashing out is one of their many mechanisms to cope with personal deficits in understanding.


Pax

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:45 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
UncleZook wrote:
The above article is substandard for Rappoport, for he promotes the theory that a whiz kid actually created Facebook, which was then co-opted by the intelligence agencies ... when the preponderance suggests that Zuckerberg ... was placed there by intelligence think tanks, e.g. to corral, monitor and subvert their generation and other recent generations.

Ummm, Zook... Did you even read the article? That's pretty much what it says.

Quote:
Venture Capital provides the seed money, and bankster empire connections do the rest. No man, woman, child or dog ... ascends in this corrupt globalizing, centralizing economic system without the system's assistance. And the system assists those it has chosen to rise, e.g. for its own purposes.

OK, you clearly didn't read the article. You must still be doing the Zook surface skim, or else reading without comprehension. How do you expect to be taken seriously if you continue to comment without watching the video, or reading the article, or questioning the source? How many times must you make the same mistake before you correct yourself?

Quote:
Let's face it, the plug is not going to be pulled - or the noose tightened - on the internet any time soon, because the internet provides a valuable monitoring service for the system.

The noose is already being tightened. Didn't you read the article? Rappoport's work is being censored from Facebook. That is a tightening of the noose.

Quote:
Criticizing Obama runs parallel to the ruling agenda.

Obviously not, or criticism of Obama would be plastered all over the media instead of being censored. Where do you get these nonsensical ideas? Gatekeeping school?

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:08 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
UncleZook wrote:
Those who do not understand make all kinds of wild assertions and innuendo.

Exactly. Your prior post is a classic example. Look within, young Padawan. Beware the Dark Side. Understanding is not found there.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:17 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 10:33 pm
Posts: 4156
Reply with quote
Post Re: Censorship
Danger Will Zookie Robinson! Danger...

_________________
Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.


Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:48 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 234 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 24  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.