Forums > Social Discussion > Panic on the streets of London....
Login/Join to Participatemember
44 posts
Location: Belfast
44 posts
Location: Belfast
Posted:
I can't help but feel that the latest annoucement by MI5 in the UK, is pure propoganda designed to keep us all on 'edge'.
After all a nation who lives in fear is easier to control and manipulate.Tougher and more restrictive laws can be brought in with virtually no opposition as its 'to protect us against Terror' - bullshit (IMO)
Am I just too cynical though? Do you think there really is a 'serious' threat to the UK right now? (Figues quoted were 1,600 Terrorist suspects, 30 so called 'active plots' and 'high risk' of an imminent attack)
I can't help but feel that the latest annoucement by MI5 in the UK, is pure propoganda designed to keep us all on 'edge'.
After all a nation who lives in fear is easier to control and manipulate.Tougher and more restrictive laws can be brought in with virtually no opposition as its 'to protect us against Terror' - bullshit (IMO)
Am I just too cynical though? Do you think there really is a 'serious' threat to the UK right now? (Figues quoted were 1,600 Terrorist suspects, 30 so called 'active plots' and 'high risk' of an imminent attack)
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
What do you think it would have said if he had dark skin, a beard and a turban? Front page news about a "terrorist plot" "foiled by police" and "threatening the safety of the nation" most likely.
Written by: BNP Explosives article
"He's not a terrorist and it's not a bomb factory..."
What do you think it would have said if he had dark skin, a beard and a turban? Front page news about a "terrorist plot" "foiled by police" and "threatening the safety of the nation" most likely.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
110% MONKEY EVERY TIME ALL THE TIME JUST CANT STOP THE MONKEY
3,149 posts
Location: London
3,149 posts
Location: London
Posted:
i doubt it personally.
i see no evidence of the media at large being particularly inclined toward ignoring racists to concentrate fully on islamic extremists. Nick Griffin and his cronies are regular hate figures in a number of tabloids and broadsheet papers, and rightfully so. I'm confused that you seem to be stating that they somehow get preferential treatment to muslims.
it seems the reason noone got hysterical is there wasn't anything to get hysterical about
Who exactly are you suspecting of doing what to prejudice... um... what?
i doubt it personally.
i see no evidence of the media at large being particularly inclined toward ignoring racists to concentrate fully on islamic extremists. Nick Griffin and his cronies are regular hate figures in a number of tabloids and broadsheet papers, and rightfully so. I'm confused that you seem to be stating that they somehow get preferential treatment to muslims.
it seems the reason noone got hysterical is there wasn't anything to get hysterical about
Who exactly are you suspecting of doing what to prejudice... um... what?
"Switching between different kinds of chuu chuu sometimes gives this "urgh wtf?" effect because it's giving people the phi phenomenon."
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
terrorism and war-might depend on perspective
(and normal pro-lifers have disowned the bombers cause that is so not pro-life, those might be anti-abortionists. i think that name fits them well)
terrorism and war-might depend on perspective
(and normal pro-lifers have disowned the bombers cause that is so not pro-life, those might be anti-abortionists. i think that name fits them well)
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
i guess it depends on your perspective.
but, you can well see what the perspective is in this discussion. If you have another one, lets hear it...
Written by: faithinfire
and normal pro-lifers have disowned the bombers cause that is so not pro-life, those might be anti-abortionists. i think that name fits them well)
i guess it depends on your perspective.
but, you can well see what the perspective is in this discussion. If you have another one, lets hear it...
Love is the law.
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
More later, but simon nagged me
I have only attacked the media. I think the police did a good job in both cases that I listed, and my comment was about the media only.
Oh, and yes, the BNP AS A PARTY "are more likely to make Party Political Broadcasts than launch chemical attacks and blow stuff up" but I don't think the members who were arrested were acting under party orders. They were only party members and a candidate MP of the BNP party.
EDITED_BY: Sym (1163433230)
Written by: simianWritten by: Sym
What is interesting, is that the media don't seem to care about events like the UKs biggest aims haul from a private house, yet when there is a raid on a house that a "former senior British Army Intelligence Officer with decades of anti-terror and explosives experience, declares to be 'fiction'." they talk about it for days.
Hmm, [Old link] contains the views of a couple of other Simons trying to explain why the BNP thing hasn't been big news, mainly because it probably isn't. The BNP, hateful as they are, are more likely to make Party Political Broadcasts than launch chemical attacks and blow stuff up.
I'd also say you have to draw a distinction between government propaganda and the media circus, although obviously each effects the other to a great degree. You can't really blame the govt for what papers choose to say. Thats putting the cart before the horse.
More later, but simon nagged me
I have only attacked the media. I think the police did a good job in both cases that I listed, and my comment was about the media only.
Oh, and yes, the BNP AS A PARTY "are more likely to make Party Political Broadcasts than launch chemical attacks and blow stuff up" but I don't think the members who were arrested were acting under party orders. They were only party members and a candidate MP of the BNP party.
EDITED_BY: Sym (1163433230)
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
everything is perspective it doesnt matter, it was simply a response to something someone said about pro-life bombers
being pro-life i don't want to be associated with those people
you want me to tie it in-i'm sure there are muslim people who wish not to be associated with those acting violently
everything is perspective it doesnt matter, it was simply a response to something someone said about pro-life bombers
being pro-life i don't want to be associated with those people
you want me to tie it in-i'm sure there are muslim people who wish not to be associated with those acting violently
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
Im sure there are. Im talking about this discussion though. Which has been mostly about the media response to current and percieved terrorist threats.
Im sure there are. Im talking about this discussion though. Which has been mostly about the media response to current and percieved terrorist threats.
Love is the law.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
offering the alternative to the media says without the conspiracy theory
offering the alternative to the media says without the conspiracy theory
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
your offering was about the crusades and the commies.
*bangs head*
your offering was about the crusades and the commies.
*bangs head*
Love is the law.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
it was the media causing fear of the unknown-a faceless threat which we then tried to put a face on
well, the crusades it was more a word of mouth thing, but still stories were told of an enemy, people then took those stories and put faces on the bad guys
do i have to connect the dots on everything?
this is not horribly difficult
it was the media causing fear of the unknown-a faceless threat which we then tried to put a face on
well, the crusades it was more a word of mouth thing, but still stories were told of an enemy, people then took those stories and put faces on the bad guys
do i have to connect the dots on everything?
this is not horribly difficult
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
GOLD Member
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Pirate Ninja
3,882 posts
Location: Galway/Ireland
Posted:
No no, thats grand. I understand now...
No no, thats grand. I understand now...
Love is the law.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
bandaid for the pointless head banging
bandaid for the pointless head banging
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
The crusades were about winning back the holy land for Christians, no ? likewise the hunt for commies was about America identifying an enemy that needs to be fought. Neither have anything to do with terrorism.
Terrorism is about civilians using violence to try to influence government policy, meaning that goverments can't be terrorists, contrary to popular belief.
Pro lifers, feminists, environmentalists , animal rights groups have all used terrorism in the past in order to get their message across, and are now subject to prosecution under the Patriot Act.
Do we assume that the MI5 plots concern Muslims ? I do, not wholly based on media attention, but also based in part on fear of a religion whose scriptures instruct the faithful to kill any infidel who refuses to convert.
The crusades were about winning back the holy land for Christians, no ? likewise the hunt for commies was about America identifying an enemy that needs to be fought. Neither have anything to do with terrorism.
Terrorism is about civilians using violence to try to influence government policy, meaning that goverments can't be terrorists, contrary to popular belief.
Pro lifers, feminists, environmentalists , animal rights groups have all used terrorism in the past in order to get their message across, and are now subject to prosecution under the Patriot Act.
Do we assume that the MI5 plots concern Muslims ? I do, not wholly based on media attention, but also based in part on fear of a religion whose scriptures instruct the faithful to kill any infidel who refuses to convert.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
(not really pro-lifers-grrr)
but it was an ambiguous face. if you asked someone who was terrorism they might say osama or saddam or afganistan or jihad. people think muslim nowadays for terrorist which is wrong and i'm sure someone will exploit
(not really pro-lifers-grrr)
but it was an ambiguous face. if you asked someone who was terrorism they might say osama or saddam or afganistan or jihad. people think muslim nowadays for terrorist which is wrong and i'm sure someone will exploit
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
SILVER Member
member
186 posts
Location: San Francisco, USA
member
186 posts
Location: San Francisco, USA
Posted:
The Communist scare was all about terrorism. Terror of Communists. Communists weren't running around trying to scare anybody, but the government and the media were hell-bent on making the people so scared they'd turn in their own neighbor in a heartbeat. In that respect, what's happening now is remarkably similar.
The Communist scare was all about terrorism. Terror of Communists. Communists weren't running around trying to scare anybody, but the government and the media were hell-bent on making the people so scared they'd turn in their own neighbor in a heartbeat. In that respect, what's happening now is remarkably similar.
"Ours is not to question The Head; it is enough to revel in the ubiquitous inanity of The Head, the unwanted proximity of The Head, the unrelenting HellPresence of The Head, indeed the very UNYIELDING IRRELEVANCE of The Head!" --Revelation X
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
My instinct is to question that- for me, terrorism is, in large part, theu use of terror and I see no reason why goverments can't be guilty of that.
To check this out I looked for definitions in the dictionary and online and-
seems to be true.
Some definitions
even those US govt defintions don't preclude the possibility of govts being terrorists (depending on the definition of 'unlawful' of course)
So it seems to me there is no definitive definition of 'terrorism' and, of those definitions there are, less than 50% preclude the possibility of a goverment being guilty of commiting acts of terror.
Written by: stout
Terrorism is about civilians using violence to try to influence government policy, meaning that goverments can't be terrorists, contrary to popular belief.
My instinct is to question that- for me, terrorism is, in large part, theu use of terror and I see no reason why goverments can't be guilty of that.
To check this out I looked for definitions in the dictionary and online and-
Written by: wikipedia article
Few words are as politically or emotionally charged as terrorism. A 1988 study by the US Army (PDF) counted 109 definitions of terrorism that covered a total of 22 different definitional elements. Terrorism expert Walter Laqueur in 1999 also has counted over 100 definitions and concludes that the "only general characteristic generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence".
seems to be true.
Some definitions
Written by:
is defined by the US Department of Defense as "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives."
The FBI defines terrorism as "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
even those US govt defintions don't preclude the possibility of govts being terrorists (depending on the definition of 'unlawful' of course)
Written by:
Dictionaries
The Oxford English Dictionary defines terrorism as "a policy intended to strike with terror those against whom it is adopted; the employment of methods of intimidation; the fact of terrorising or condition of being terrorised."
Webster's New International Dictionary defines terrorism as the "act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized; specif.: a The system of the Reign of Terror. b A mode of governing, or of opposing government, by intimidation. c Any policy of intimidation.
The definition of the term in the Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics (2nd edition) begins:
Term with no agreement amongst government or academic analysts, but almost invariably used in a pejorative sense, most frequently to describe life-threatening actions perpetrated by politically motivated self-appointed sub-state groups.
Look up terrorism in
Wiktionary, the free dictionary.The American Heritage Dictionary defines terrorism as "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."
So it seems to me there is no definitive definition of 'terrorism' and, of those definitions there are, less than 50% preclude the possibility of a goverment being guilty of commiting acts of terror.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
interesting, a term with no agreement.
I tend to favour the first two definitions since they're more specific ( and the one's I've always used ) but we can go with the broader, more subjective definitions, that way everybody can be called a terrorist, and anything can be called terrorism as long as someone is perceived to be terrorized.
That UK group, Christian Voice, could there antics be called terrorism, since their goal is to restrict behaviour using intimidation ?
Or is there a level of violence needed to achieve terrorist status ?
With the broader definition, the word looses alot of it's impact, all non defensive acts of war become terrorism, anyone in the military gets labeled a terrorist, political decisions that one doesn't like could be called terroristic..........
So i guess it's not really wrong then to equate a bunch of guys who look like tourists dropping off bombs on public conveyances, with the acts of a nation or state, just bad advertising, that's all.
interesting, a term with no agreement.
I tend to favour the first two definitions since they're more specific ( and the one's I've always used ) but we can go with the broader, more subjective definitions, that way everybody can be called a terrorist, and anything can be called terrorism as long as someone is perceived to be terrorized.
That UK group, Christian Voice, could there antics be called terrorism, since their goal is to restrict behaviour using intimidation ?
Or is there a level of violence needed to achieve terrorist status ?
With the broader definition, the word looses alot of it's impact, all non defensive acts of war become terrorism, anyone in the military gets labeled a terrorist, political decisions that one doesn't like could be called terroristic..........
So i guess it's not really wrong then to equate a bunch of guys who look like tourists dropping off bombs on public conveyances, with the acts of a nation or state, just bad advertising, that's all.
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
I feel that for an act to be a terrorist one, there does have to be a level of violence.
Perhaps one way to narrow the term would be to say that there also has to be an intention to cause terror- this would differentiate it from certain acts by governements where, although the consequences are terror amongst a population, the intention was, in the eyes of the perpetrators, to achieve an aim other than terror.
So, in the case of the Bush government or certain acts by Israel, although the consequences are the same as those of terrorists, the intention would not be to cause terror but instead, to achieve certain political or defensive aims.
So, however misguided those intentions are/were, they would not be acts of terrorism (despite the fact that they caused terror).
However, even though this may seem plausible, on the other hand, many organisations we would consider to be definitly terrorist, could similarly claim that, though their acts cause terror, their primary intention is actually to raise awareness of, and ultimatley, to defend, the rights of the people they claim to be defending/avenging.
To me, despite the complexity of the issues, when it comes to the bombing of civilians who cannot choose to be elsewhere and who can't alter the actions of whatever group the bombs are a reaction to/defence again- whether the bombers are Arab, Israeli or American; ultimately those bombings, in the main, have in common the fact that they cause terror, death and misery, to people who are, in some fundamental sense, innocent.
Personally, in that scenario, i have no problem with the word terrorism being applied to the bombers, regardless of whether they're a government or not.
When it comes to the definition of the word 'terrorist', lots of groups have a vested interest in shaping it, what that definition becomes in the future is very much going to be determined by what goes on here and now.
Given the time of year it's possibly appropriate to mention those soldiers of the world war one trenches shot as being 'cowards' and how the current definition of the word 'coward' has, with the benefit of hindsight and an appreciation of what war really does to the minds of men, now been deemed to not apply to them as they have been officially exhonerated.
Maybe in a hundred years, the word 'terrorist' will similarly be seen in a much different light to the one it is seen in today.
Words are an integral part of war, those with vested interests are always keen to get their definitions accepted- the terms 'shellshocked' or 'traumatic stress disorder' can be seen as much less useful than 'cowardice'.
Similarly, governments do not want to be fighting 'freedom fighters' or 'soldiers', when they can instead be dealing with 'terrorists'; and, they most especially do not want to be called 'terrorists' themselves, even if their acts cause far more actual terror, then the groups they are fighting against.
I feel that for an act to be a terrorist one, there does have to be a level of violence.
Perhaps one way to narrow the term would be to say that there also has to be an intention to cause terror- this would differentiate it from certain acts by governements where, although the consequences are terror amongst a population, the intention was, in the eyes of the perpetrators, to achieve an aim other than terror.
So, in the case of the Bush government or certain acts by Israel, although the consequences are the same as those of terrorists, the intention would not be to cause terror but instead, to achieve certain political or defensive aims.
So, however misguided those intentions are/were, they would not be acts of terrorism (despite the fact that they caused terror).
However, even though this may seem plausible, on the other hand, many organisations we would consider to be definitly terrorist, could similarly claim that, though their acts cause terror, their primary intention is actually to raise awareness of, and ultimatley, to defend, the rights of the people they claim to be defending/avenging.
To me, despite the complexity of the issues, when it comes to the bombing of civilians who cannot choose to be elsewhere and who can't alter the actions of whatever group the bombs are a reaction to/defence again- whether the bombers are Arab, Israeli or American; ultimately those bombings, in the main, have in common the fact that they cause terror, death and misery, to people who are, in some fundamental sense, innocent.
Personally, in that scenario, i have no problem with the word terrorism being applied to the bombers, regardless of whether they're a government or not.
When it comes to the definition of the word 'terrorist', lots of groups have a vested interest in shaping it, what that definition becomes in the future is very much going to be determined by what goes on here and now.
Given the time of year it's possibly appropriate to mention those soldiers of the world war one trenches shot as being 'cowards' and how the current definition of the word 'coward' has, with the benefit of hindsight and an appreciation of what war really does to the minds of men, now been deemed to not apply to them as they have been officially exhonerated.
Maybe in a hundred years, the word 'terrorist' will similarly be seen in a much different light to the one it is seen in today.
Words are an integral part of war, those with vested interests are always keen to get their definitions accepted- the terms 'shellshocked' or 'traumatic stress disorder' can be seen as much less useful than 'cowardice'.
Similarly, governments do not want to be fighting 'freedom fighters' or 'soldiers', when they can instead be dealing with 'terrorists'; and, they most especially do not want to be called 'terrorists' themselves, even if their acts cause far more actual terror, then the groups they are fighting against.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
organic creation
246 posts
Location: earth, Wales (UK)
organic creation
246 posts
Location: earth, Wales (UK)
Posted:
America seems to be using fear to manipulate the people more than most other "democratic" countries and their economy seems pretty good.
one example that comes to mind was Y2K. everyone got all scared and went out and bought 1000 can goods and jugs of water.
when poeple are scared they are more likely to listen to their leaders and do what their told i would think.
but i agree that the real issue is more about the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer as gnarly cranium put so well. although it seems that people in power that are half intelligent would see that this polarization is not in the best interest of the country.
frightening really
"Do we assume that the MI5 plots concern Muslims ? I do, not wholly based on media attention, but also based in part on fear of a religion whose scriptures instruct the faithful to kill any infidel who refuses to convert."
only if your read the Koran completely literally without context of the time it was written
EDITED_BY: sagetree (1163505671)
Written by: stout
But how could having a controlled and fearful society be good for the economy ? I'm not being facetious here, just curious.
America seems to be using fear to manipulate the people more than most other "democratic" countries and their economy seems pretty good.
one example that comes to mind was Y2K. everyone got all scared and went out and bought 1000 can goods and jugs of water.
when poeple are scared they are more likely to listen to their leaders and do what their told i would think.
but i agree that the real issue is more about the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer as gnarly cranium put so well. although it seems that people in power that are half intelligent would see that this polarization is not in the best interest of the country.
frightening really
"Do we assume that the MI5 plots concern Muslims ? I do, not wholly based on media attention, but also based in part on fear of a religion whose scriptures instruct the faithful to kill any infidel who refuses to convert."
only if your read the Koran completely literally without context of the time it was written
EDITED_BY: sagetree (1163505671)
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
I'm no great supporter of conspiracy theories and that some greedy old man is holding all the strings. But the psychological effect of past years events - to me - are aligned and come in VERY handy... Now also German chancelerette is calling on the public to be on the edge and sharp at all times.
IMHO: if the population of a country is scared and paranoid it's FAR easier to implement a whole set of rules/ laws - that would have gotten rejected otherwise. Complete domestic surveillance can be done.... just a matter of PC-power.
Further: if we are all scared and paranoid about each other, we stop interaction and commmunication - key issues for any functioning society and rely on other forms (and technologies) than the direct one-one one. Certtainly the inability of our govt's to really offer any kind of "protection" and safety is covered up, as are the economical problems - nobody is ever touching...
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1163517705)
I'm no great supporter of conspiracy theories and that some greedy old man is holding all the strings. But the psychological effect of past years events - to me - are aligned and come in VERY handy... Now also German chancelerette is calling on the public to be on the edge and sharp at all times.
IMHO: if the population of a country is scared and paranoid it's FAR easier to implement a whole set of rules/ laws - that would have gotten rejected otherwise. Complete domestic surveillance can be done.... just a matter of PC-power.
Further: if we are all scared and paranoid about each other, we stop interaction and commmunication - key issues for any functioning society and rely on other forms (and technologies) than the direct one-one one. Certtainly the inability of our govt's to really offer any kind of "protection" and safety is covered up, as are the economical problems - nobody is ever touching...
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1163517705)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
ooo i never thought about the koran in context...i forget that there are bible fundies so there probably is koran fundies too....
very cool...i learned something
ooo i never thought about the koran in context...i forget that there are bible fundies so there probably is koran fundies too....
very cool...i learned something
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
member
44 posts
Location: Belfast
44 posts
Location: Belfast
Posted:
Wow- lots of valid and very interesting points..:) Thank you.
I strongly believe that Fear is a bigger weapon and it used more extensively than anything else.The governments try to scare us into eating better, try and scare us into being suspicious of each other, try to scare us into 'fitting in' to society. Being a good 'clone' like everyone else.
Why then, would they not try to scare us into giving up more and more of ourselves and our civil liberty?
Perfect weapon- Blame the terrorists.
It's exactly because of the current climate that they can use this weapon more effectively as the majority of people won't question it (as it's for their protection after all;) ) More and more of our personal lives are up for inspection and scrutiny. Where do you think it will end?
Wow- lots of valid and very interesting points..:) Thank you.
I strongly believe that Fear is a bigger weapon and it used more extensively than anything else.The governments try to scare us into eating better, try and scare us into being suspicious of each other, try to scare us into 'fitting in' to society. Being a good 'clone' like everyone else.
Why then, would they not try to scare us into giving up more and more of ourselves and our civil liberty?
Perfect weapon- Blame the terrorists.
It's exactly because of the current climate that they can use this weapon more effectively as the majority of people won't question it (as it's for their protection after all;) ) More and more of our personal lives are up for inspection and scrutiny. Where do you think it will end?
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
i think apathy is a weapon as well and mistrust
either we don't care about something or sometimes we think well they are just trying to scare us and nothing is going to happen
it seems likes it is en vogue to say the gov is crap and not trying to protect us but trying to scare us into submission, so therefore i shall believe the opposite of what they are saying
part of it i think is the media and the availabilty of info...if we didn't here about stuff like this on a regular basis, would it be different?
except in canada they seem to be getting along just fine
jk but you hear about us and brits and some aussie stuff, really nothing about canada-therefore we should all move there and start a poi and staff commune
i think apathy is a weapon as well and mistrust
either we don't care about something or sometimes we think well they are just trying to scare us and nothing is going to happen
it seems likes it is en vogue to say the gov is crap and not trying to protect us but trying to scare us into submission, so therefore i shall believe the opposite of what they are saying
part of it i think is the media and the availabilty of info...if we didn't here about stuff like this on a regular basis, would it be different?
except in canada they seem to be getting along just fine
jk but you hear about us and brits and some aussie stuff, really nothing about canada-therefore we should all move there and start a poi and staff commune
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
"Where does it end?" Good question, if it hasn't even really started YET...
One point is the argument: he who has nothing to hide has no problem in revealing sensitive data (like accounts and financial transactions, biological datas, health-status, sexual habits and possible drug abuse)
What citizens are likely to forget is that the govt is NOT your friend - even with the implementation of (socalled) democracy it's not the people who rule (in the end).
A government (at best) is a mediator between the "masses" and the "elite", but ultimatively it's not the ppl who are in power and control.
Yes, we're slowly tuned into "clonedom", a willing workforce (without organic farming ) and the less we communicate with our neighbours, the less we're active in our immediate surrounding - the more we play along.
It's a big psychological scam - hard to detect, because this system is developing since mankind.
Technological advance is the only real change over the past aeons, only more sophisitcated toys - the rest basically remained the same.
But "awakening" is a painful process and the insight that you really are alone in this world and that most of it is an illusion that you WANT to believe in - this insight is the most healing aspect of waking up, because it is giving you the option to get back into the drivers seat.
Dunno whether Canada, or Australia is the answer - dunno whether running away, or becoming autistic is the answer. I guess we will have to find all kinds of ways to resist the easyness of submission and to find our own truth (without becoming a missionary afterwards)... 
"Where does it end?" Good question, if it hasn't even really started YET...
One point is the argument: he who has nothing to hide has no problem in revealing sensitive data (like accounts and financial transactions, biological datas, health-status, sexual habits and possible drug abuse)
What citizens are likely to forget is that the govt is NOT your friend - even with the implementation of (socalled) democracy it's not the people who rule (in the end).
A government (at best) is a mediator between the "masses" and the "elite", but ultimatively it's not the ppl who are in power and control.
Yes, we're slowly tuned into "clonedom", a willing workforce (without organic farming
) and the less we communicate with our neighbours, the less we're active in our immediate surrounding - the more we play along. It's a big psychological scam - hard to detect, because this system is developing since mankind.
Technological advance is the only real change over the past aeons, only more sophisitcated toys - the rest basically remained the same.
But "awakening" is a painful process and the insight that you really are alone in this world and that most of it is an illusion that you WANT to believe in - this insight is the most healing aspect of waking up, because it is giving you the option to get back into the drivers seat.
Dunno whether Canada, or Australia is the answer - dunno whether running away, or becoming autistic is the answer. I guess we will have to find all kinds of ways to resist the easyness of submission and to find our own truth (without becoming a missionary afterwards)...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
GOLD Member
organic creation
246 posts
Location: earth, Wales (UK)
organic creation
246 posts
Location: earth, Wales (UK)
Posted:
that was a deep post firetom
"canada-therefore we should all move there and start a poi and staff (juggling) commune"
these words are a harmonious melody to my ears
that was a deep post firetom
"canada-therefore we should all move there and start a poi and staff (juggling) commune"
these words are a harmonious melody to my ears
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
Sad
I was just reading a post from Stout, who was apparently raising very valid questions... now it's gone. buahh why?
Stout: I do not feel threatened at all, that you consider my thread about food ingredients pushing paranoia and panick - much likely I am falling into the same tabloid trap to make up a catchy title in order to get your attention - or question much of what has been said here.
Hasn't it always been "en vogue" to criticise governments? Maybe 'cause it's easy to make politics out of ones own backyard and it has a slightly more sophisticated appearance than just talking about the weather...
Completely agreed that, if you do not want "sensitive" data to leak out - don't provide it in the first place... Very valid point. But then again: Everybody should be able to put out any information they want - without anybody collecting and possibly using it against the author.
At this point I am very happy that the gov't and it's institutions are NOT as progressed as we would think they could be...
I simply see no reason why I am forced to provide any data in the first place, why I should leave my thumbprint when cashing in a travellers cheque at Wells Fargo for say (*Well if you have nothing to hide...*) It's not about that, Stout (and all the others)... it's simply pushing boundaries and setting standards for the future. I am guilty unless I proove better... and therefore I have to pay the price for aeons of colonialistic western politics... That never has been and that never will be in my very own interest...
Personally I am not convinced that these measures will stop terrorism AT ALL. IMHO terrorism will only be stopped, IF our govenrnments start to take the concerns of these people serious and show some effort to improve the situation, IF there is a serious dialogue.
Start with the cause, not the symptoms. For say: The US veto in the UN - that stopped Israels condemnation for the latest shelling of civilians - is NOT going to help the situation. Right now, Israel is NOT taking appropriate measures and it is NOT right to say OOPS! and just ignore 20 wasted lives.
I simply do not consider ANY government to be THE friend of it's citizens or to act on their behalf - that's it and I can find little to no evidence that would proove this opinion to be erraneous. If you can provide any, I certainly look into and tell you what I (personally) think of it. 
Sad
I was just reading a post from Stout, who was apparently raising very valid questions... now it's gone. buahh why?Stout: I do not feel threatened at all, that you consider my thread about food ingredients pushing paranoia and panick - much likely I am falling into the same tabloid trap to make up a catchy title in order to get your attention - or question much of what has been said here.
Hasn't it always been "en vogue" to criticise governments? Maybe 'cause it's easy to make politics out of ones own backyard and it has a slightly more sophisticated appearance than just talking about the weather...
Completely agreed that, if you do not want "sensitive" data to leak out - don't provide it in the first place... Very valid point. But then again: Everybody should be able to put out any information they want - without anybody collecting and possibly using it against the author.
At this point I am very happy that the gov't and it's institutions are NOT as progressed as we would think they could be...
I simply see no reason why I am forced to provide any data in the first place, why I should leave my thumbprint when cashing in a travellers cheque at Wells Fargo for say (*Well if you have nothing to hide...*) It's not about that, Stout (and all the others)... it's simply pushing boundaries and setting standards for the future. I am guilty unless I proove better... and therefore I have to pay the price for aeons of colonialistic western politics... That never has been and that never will be in my very own interest...
Personally I am not convinced that these measures will stop terrorism AT ALL. IMHO terrorism will only be stopped, IF our govenrnments start to take the concerns of these people serious and show some effort to improve the situation, IF there is a serious dialogue.
Start with the cause, not the symptoms. For say: The US veto in the UN - that stopped Israels condemnation for the latest shelling of civilians - is NOT going to help the situation. Right now, Israel is NOT taking appropriate measures and it is NOT right to say OOPS! and just ignore 20 wasted lives.
I simply do not consider ANY government to be THE friend of it's citizens or to act on their behalf - that's it
and I can find little to no evidence that would proove this opinion to be erraneous. If you can provide any, I certainly look into and tell you what I (personally) think of it. the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Tom I killed the post, I felt it was too harsh and I'm rethinking my commitment to introducing real world complexities into simplified, idealistic models of human behaviour.
I mentioned your food thread as an example if information, or news. It I don't want to go as far as to say it was forcefully informative ( to coin a term ) but I couldn't help wondering if your OP in that thread were to appear in the mainstream media, would it be cited as an example of "how the media is trying to scare us into....."
Tom I killed the post, I felt it was too harsh and I'm rethinking my commitment to introducing real world complexities into simplified, idealistic models of human behaviour.
I mentioned your food thread as an example if information, or news. It I don't want to go as far as to say it was forcefully informative ( to coin a term ) but I couldn't help wondering if your OP in that thread were to appear in the mainstream media, would it be cited as an example of "how the media is trying to scare us into....."
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
I liked your post...
Really I am not here looking for "claqeurs", I am here because I am having my opinions turned apart, twisted, bended and thrown back at me in a different context. I came to the point where I recognise it even healing, to have my opinions questioned and reflected how I come across to others... That's the most important point - for me.
Sure I don't mind to get confirmation, but I personally favour "constructive criticism".
And I feel that - out of comfort - too many ppl are turning a blind eye towards the activities of their gov't.
What are the odds to get caught up in a terrorist attack? Why would anybody (seriously) start to get paranoid about this, if not govt's - along with media - feed this frenzy? I guess it's more likely to hit the lottery jackpot, get struck by lightning or eaten by a shark, than to get killed by a terrorist attack (outside Israel or Iraq)...
I liked your post...
Really I am not here looking for "claqeurs", I am here because I am having my opinions turned apart, twisted, bended and thrown back at me in a different context. I came to the point where I recognise it even healing, to have my opinions questioned and reflected how I come across to others... That's the most important point - for me.
Sure I don't mind to get confirmation, but I personally favour "constructive criticism".
And I feel that - out of comfort - too many ppl are turning a blind eye towards the activities of their gov't.
What are the odds to get caught up in a terrorist attack? Why would anybody (seriously) start to get paranoid about this, if not govt's - along with media - feed this frenzy? I guess it's more likely to hit the lottery jackpot, get struck by lightning or eaten by a shark, than to get killed by a terrorist attack (outside Israel or Iraq)...
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
It's always good to have your opinions questioned and expanded upon, that way you gain some insight as to why you hold those opinions in the first place. I can list opinions I held for years, and later revised in light of new information, I was simply wrong to hold those opinions when held up to the light of other opinions I also held.
It's all about balance really...
I wonder about the idea that too many people are turning a blind eye to what their governments are doing. This being the age of the internet, I feel it's easier than ever to get information when compared to say,,,the 1980's
So we have the MI5 story, then the next day we have a story that MI5 wants to double in size. Putting these two stories together allows us to make the connection that MI5 needs justification for their increased budget. Speculate, then investigate. I was looking for panic on the streets of London myself, but I couldn't find any evidence of it.
Yes, the odds of getting caught up in a terrorist attack are pretty small, and I think MOST people know this, but still may fear it. It's not rational I know, but neither is my fear of spiders.
It's always good to have your opinions questioned and expanded upon, that way you gain some insight as to why you hold those opinions in the first place. I can list opinions I held for years, and later revised in light of new information, I was simply wrong to hold those opinions when held up to the light of other opinions I also held.
It's all about balance really...
I wonder about the idea that too many people are turning a blind eye to what their governments are doing. This being the age of the internet, I feel it's easier than ever to get information when compared to say,,,the 1980's
So we have the MI5 story, then the next day we have a story that MI5 wants to double in size. Putting these two stories together allows us to make the connection that MI5 needs justification for their increased budget. Speculate, then investigate. I was looking for panic on the streets of London myself, but I couldn't find any evidence of it.
Yes, the odds of getting caught up in a terrorist attack are pretty small, and I think MOST people know this, but still may fear it. It's not rational I know, but neither is my fear of spiders.
member
44 posts
Location: Belfast
44 posts
Location: Belfast
Posted:
I liked the post also, although I reckon I am not quite young enough to be accused of displaying teenage Angst.
Panic on the streets was in reference to a tune.. That was all. It was not meant as anything more sinister.
I liked the post also, although I reckon I am not quite young enough to be accused of displaying teenage Angst.
Panic on the streets was in reference to a tune.. That was all. It was not meant as anything more sinister.
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [panic street * london] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > Panic on the streets of London.... [62 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com