View unanswered posts | View active topics
It is currently Tue Apr 23, 2024 9:36 pm
Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibition
Author |
Message |
UncleZook
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm Posts: 1400
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
Not wrong about the size of your brain ... but your usage of it. Yes, yes. Par for the course, Chico. I gave you quite a bit of content to rebut - as I usually do in my posts - but because I also included some messenger evaluation, you used that as a segue out of an indefensible position - as you usually do in your rebuttals of my post. The archives are littered with your deafening silence on the salient points I make and your preference for form over function in your rebuttals. Emily Post must be up somewhere on your ancestry tree. For the record, your hypocrisy is glaring. When I made the Assange arguments, you argued for the appearance of obvious reality as opposed to the reality itself ... and now, in the Prop 37 arguments, you argue against the appearance of obvious reality and state that Prop 37 is nothing short of reality itself. Such certainty from a man who questions the certainty of others. You are the quintessential know-it-all, Chico. I bow in your presence. Very few things in man-made endeavors always happen. Exceptions and rules, as it were. Of course, you once again seek refuge in absolutist posturing when the probability (of the relative case) is highly unfavorable to your arguments. Grassroots movements by in large ... are controlled oppositions designed by the state apparatus. They are rife with apparatchiks, voluntary and involuntary, that are mendacious and clueless, respectively. The exceptional cases to the rule of controlled opposition are not that significant in the grand scheme of things, to warrant mention. Your polemics have value as pep talk, I'm sure. But the reality is that democracy is controlled by the state and for state interests (which are essentially power pyramid interests in 2012). At this late stage in the game, I'm not so much interested in theories of real solutions as real solutions themselves. Maybe yours. But they've had zilch effect where it counts, e.g. in the minds of the people. Unless critical mass of informed individuals is attained, we are doomed. And Kooch and Paul have done far less for critical mass than McKinney, IMO. In fact, one can argue that they make the promises and give the hope ... because doing that much (or little) essentially keeps the masses in a cul-de-sac circular. As it were. Again, real revolution will arrive by expanding the minds of the masses ... not by expanding their hope chests. Pax Cognitas
_________________ 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 Sep 24, 2012 2:31 am |
|
|
Chicodoodoo
Site Admin
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm Posts: 11869
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
Oh, I must have missed it. Can you summarize with a concise, bulleted list? BTW, your bling-bling dance around the meaning of "obvious" just didn't qualify as an argument of any substance, in my book. The rest of your post was just more character assassination, so any real debate was aborted before conception.
_________________ It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.
|
Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:57 am |
|
|
Chicodoodoo
Site Admin
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm Posts: 11869
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
To label, or not to label, that is the question. Andy asks the key question here. Monsanto has a consistent history of falsifying and hiding information from the public. It is THE classic sociopathic company that maximizes profits without any concern for public safety. I doubt any independent party would argue otherwise. Qui bono? Clearly, Monsanto benefits if it can sell the public unhealthy GMO foods without the public knowing. Clearly, the public suffers if it doesn't know it is consuming harmful products. Is Monsanto running a false-flag with this issue? While we shouldn't dismiss the possibility, the evidence is extremely weak and entirely conjecture. Did Monsanto try to keep European countries from labeling GMO food by campaigning against its own company interests? Does Monsanto ever work against its own company interests? The preponderance of evidence says "No", but if you can find good evidence saying otherwise, you might have a reason to argue for a false-flag. The argument that debating the labeling of GMO foods detracts from the question of their fundamental safety and ethical usage is, to use Zook's term, legerdemain. The demand to label GMO foods is a direct result of the perceived danger of GMO products and the unethical business practices of Monsanto. From what I can see, Zook's alarm over Proposition 37 passing is much ado about nothing.
_________________ It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.
|
Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:15 pm |
|
|
andywight
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 5:40 pm Posts: 2156
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
" Much ado about nothing" you're being far to kind here, UncleZook's posts are far more insidious than this!
_________________Think twice before you speak, especially if you intend to say what you think. QRK: QifUSqn6ygXK61pEkm2g4iBY9ZcLw4g4su FCK: FettxKyQVhsSURZt1XQxUTypwxEeBbTgUQ Please visit http://forum.qrk.cc/ for all things Crypto!
|
Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:39 pm |
|
|
Chicodoodoo
Site Admin
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm Posts: 11869
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
Criticism acknowledged. I am being kind, but that closing quote fit nicely with the Shakespearean theme that I opened with. So in effect, I did it for Zook.
_________________ It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.
|
Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:55 pm |
|
|
magamud
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 10:33 pm Posts: 4156
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
_________________ Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.
|
Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:18 pm |
|
|
Chicodoodoo
Site Admin
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm Posts: 11869
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
Good find, Mags. Dynamite stuff! Follow the money. Money is perhaps the biggest conflict of interest humanity has ever seen. With 9/11, Zook would surely agree to follow the money. With Proposition 37, Zook says following the money is suddenly a false-flag. I think Zook is wrong here. The placement of money is consistent with the business interests of the companies involved.
_________________ It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.
|
Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:20 pm |
|
|
UncleZook
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm Posts: 1400
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
Apples are apples. Oranges are oranges. Binary thinking is binary thinking. Thanks, Chico, for misapplying yet again the one-shoe-fits-all cobblering. Eating the chocolate vanilla cake, and calling it one or the other, as it were. Oversimplified analysis. Though there are times when following the money leads to argument circulars, much of the time it leads back to the financiers of operations under scrutiny, whether they be Faustian in nature or simply fool's pleasure in measure. 9/11/2001 needs no new introduction in this regard, nor are money trails necessary for conclusions there. Part of the preponderance, but not a necessary part. As for Prop 37, outlining caution in advancing is not a sudden decree anchored in the certainty of a false flag - though the binary thinkers would not have it any other way - but a torchlight to carve a path in the uncertainty of darkness. The pattern is there ... in the ruts of the road of true and tried journeys ... that one would be remiss not to comment on them. There is no hard evidence to either support Prop 37 or oppose Prop 37 ... unlike 9/11/2001 ... but there is sufficient pattern to oblige us to slow down the march into possible (probable??) madness. To wit, I see enough pattern to warrant bringing attention. You do not. Your intuition against mine, Chico. IMO, the potential for false flag placement of money is very high ... as is the (inter)connectivity of the aforementioned business interests. This interconnectedness is not random. At least, we must assume this is the case ... for the evidence of isolated independent companies spending their corporate advertising budgets against Prop 37 is pollyannish at best. The big spenders against Prop 37 are well-coordinated. A significant portion of the pro-Prop37ers are also well-coordinated. But because this twin coordination is largely slanted against prop 37, that is no proof that Prop 37 injures the coordination. If anything, it speaks to the contrary. Much of the public is being steered away from the important issues of GMO toxicity to its tacit approval by shifting critical judgment to issues of marketing. That appears to be the larger goal here. Which is perhaps why the coordination attacks prop 37 in the overall imbalance, for that gives the masses something to cheer for (in counterpoint). Alas, when the masses start cheering, the mob rules. And when the mob rules, there are usually a few well-placed instigators steering direction. In effect, giving the mob a small victory (Prop 37 by counterpoint, e.g. the corporate coordination tipping heavily against Prop 37) ... yet gaining for themselves the larger victory (the shifting of the debate from their Achillean Heel of toxicity to our Achillean Heel of marketing). C'mon, how stupid do they think we are, Chico? How stupid do you think we are to not recognize the high potential for legerdemain here? I mean, these publicly available spending lists are being promoted hard and heavy by the alternative media and, too, the mainstream establishment ... and that is a free clue that Denmark is perfuming. And the smell ain't pretty. To wit, they want us to know that Prop 37 is being opposed by the rabid wolves amongst us ... so that we will go out and support it. Pax Postcard From Indiaps: Many a child has been steered into behavior by reverse psychology. That pattern is as old as humanity. Yet you would deny its presence here?? You can do better than that, Chico.
_________________ 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.
|
Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:25 am |
|
|
andywight
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 5:40 pm Posts: 2156
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
Can you explain how the mandatory labeling of GMO food around the word has benefited the likes of Monsanto n Co?
_________________Think twice before you speak, especially if you intend to say what you think. QRK: QifUSqn6ygXK61pEkm2g4iBY9ZcLw4g4su FCK: FettxKyQVhsSURZt1XQxUTypwxEeBbTgUQ Please visit http://forum.qrk.cc/ for all things Crypto!
Last edited by andywight on Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
|
Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:15 am |
|
|
Chicodoodoo
Site Admin
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm Posts: 11869
|
Re: Prop 37: Proposition or Propaganda? Remembering Prohibi
Give us the supporting evidence, then make your conclusions. Don't give us your conclusions, neglect the evidence, and call it another day of superior discernment. A very bad synopsis, Zook. Attention was given to your theory, as is required by a philosophy of "question everything, dismiss nothing". But the supporting evidence was too weak to be credible, so your theory was rejected until better evidence is forthcoming. If you feel your theory still has legs, bring us the evidence. The "twin coordination" is only evidence of conflicting interest. If anything, it doesn't speak for or against your theory. You're grasping at straws here. We've already addressed this, Zook. The question of GMO toxicity is not in the hands of the people, but in the hands of the government agencies that have been co-opted and outright purchased by the sociopathic business interests. Thus, that battle is already lost. Requiring the identification of GMO ingredients is still within the hands of the people (maybe), and so that is where their efforts are rightly focused. Again, that is only evidence of divided interests, and does not support or refute your theory. Another misdirected "to wit". Explain how defeating Proposition 37 would protect our health. If you take pictures and record the highlights of your travels, I'll make you a mini web page to share with all, like I did for Andy's boat trip and my bicycle routine. Reverse psychology is the exception to steering children rather than the rule. I don't deny its presence, I just don't see any good evidence to support that exception in this case.
_________________ It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.
|
Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:18 am |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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
|
|