western hypocrisy?

[soykan]

For the folks that loves to support groups like BNP, KKK, etc, and read Daily Mail and Fox News occasionally, As an observer on J-sites, I notice a presence of "sub-conscious" hypocrisy.
My source? Go to yahoo answers or any conservative site and you will automatically notice neocon catch phrases such as "islamic conquest", "jobs taken by hispanics", and occasionally "crime towards white christians by barbarians" etc.....
And now these very people go to Japan or some other country and then comming back and saying that all this "anti-gaijin" behaviour is wrong. Western "anti-gaijin" often seems far too underplayed. While not bluntly obvious, its subtle enough to cause conflict and segregation, especially in the case of the UK as a rise for support of BNP due to 7/11 and all. You then have guys like David Duke and David Irving who make mutual understanding, globalization and Integration impossible.
The whole idea of diversity is only a means to supplement a declining and aging workforce. But most do not agree in wanting any more closer relationship than just being the co-worker partner. Drawing lines of segregation like some parts of the states ( such as the case of african neighborhoods and anglo neighborhoods) is not "true multiculturalism" and does not even come close to promoting co-prosperity but rather creating opposition.
After looking up on Glenn Beck, Pat Robertson, Bill Reilly and Ann Coulter, you will wonder if they have been in close relations with Ishihara Shintaro or equivalent.
Its more concerning because western nations tend to have the finest militaries, and when the "redneck" or the "BNP" types get one to many it may be dangerous.
Has western "anti-gaijin" atitudes been overly downplayed?? Usually if this comes to the surface its too late, but we see policies in western laws being changed more in favor of more radical conservatives. There is a "Bush" type guy born every minute too you know.
But is it serious enough to be a concern?? With possible war in Iran and possibly Korea, a draft might even take place, and certain people being shipped to Gitmo, etc.

 

[Akakubisan]

Some spaces or paragraphs might help your point come accross.
Honestly, I am fairly confused on what end result you are trying to achieve.

 

[soykan]

Let me simplify, Do you think "Xenophobia" in Japan is nothing compared to the rest of the western world or other well off nations??

Websites of many well developed nations are now loaded with posters who are shouting things along the lines of "islamic conquests" and "criminal immigrants stealing jobs from anglo neighborhoods" etc...

Even though this mantra has been getting old, I notice more and more people now seem to believe in these things from outside Japan. There are some who even want Jim Crow laws to be in place. Infact, I am starting to get more "anti-gaijin" atitudes from the UK and US rather than Japan. Is it not some kind of an epidemic??

On the side curious note, the Mayan calender ends at 2012, maybe such troublesome times is a proof of that ancient prophecy?

 

[JimmySeal]

American conservatives acting hypocritically? Surely you jest

But you haven't really demonstrated any way that they are acting hypocritically, just xenophobically. Conservatives, and people who go to Japan and complain about racism are two different groups of people, and you have not demonstrated to what extent those groups overlap.

 

[hideway]

This thread smells.

 

[bammbamm&pebbles]

Even though this mantra has been getting old, I notice more and more people now seem to believe in these things from outside Japan. There are some who even want Jim Crow laws to be in place. Infact, I am starting to get more "anti-gaijin" atitudes from the UK and US rather than Japan.Is it not some kind of an epidemic??

have u been reading r-garbage on this website !?

ww.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=209478


one poster wrote :

I have been giving this alot of thought lately. In the times of the good old days of the 1950's the strong White generation after World War 2 you would think there would be a out cry of what is going on in the United States as of now.

In those times America was literally a White heaven but now nothing more but ruins.



Those people cling to reminiscence of America's 1950 conservative golden age.

Sunday Monday happy days .. Tuesday Wednesday happy days .. Thursday Friday happy days .. the weekend comes ... the cycle hums .. rock & roll all week long ...



Happy Days theme song video

ww.youtube.com/watch?v=gMxkMy9JvXI&feature=related

 

[theAlphaDuck]

just so you know...

the UK is one of the most diverse and tollerant countries in the world!

right now the notting hill carnival is going on...which almost 2million people are likely to attend and get a taste of carribian culture.

of course there are a few racists....
but the 7/7 attacks have actually had no real effect on the mindset of the british public....

it takes more than a couple of idiots killing themselves to effect the public.

as for the terrorist attack in scotland.....that was funny!!!....clearly there inteligence network is not that good....because scottish people are hard.....and glasgow is just about the hardest place in the world.....of all the airports to car bomb...they choose glasgow!!

the attack failed...

cos a bagage handler dragged the car bomber out of his burning car and beat the **** out of him...then the police turned up...and the baggage handler AND the police beat him up.....before carting him off to jail....

so yea.... we are not worried about immigration...just because the far-right shouts loudest doesnt mean that there the most listened to

 

[Mycernius]

I hope he hasn't been reading Stormfront, after all that site is such a wonderful source of objective information Feature a lot on Racists say the darnest things, although the BNP seem to have grabbed it at the moment.

 

[soykan]

Haven't read a single thread on stormfront. Although there is a possibility that some of those guys might have been going to sites that are meant for the more liberal folk and start a "party" or two.

Actually the western "anti-gaijin" part came from one fanatic weeabo on Asiafinest.com who claim that the Anglo Saxons defeated the Russians several thousand years ago, then settled on an Island and named it Japan, invented bushido, samurai and ninjas blah blah blah, or something along the lines.....

Some Americans may feel that being labeled gaijin feels as if they are being grouped with mexicans and people of middle eastern decent and tries very hard to revise and re-educate people that they are not just any gaijin but indigenous owners of planet earth, particularily on J-Today website, where a patriot try to exaggerate that the US would be safer than Japan if it had no immigrants at all.

Its only that these guys start showing up in sites that I least expect them to show up is what is annoying.

 

[JimmySeal]

Actually the western "anti-gaijin" part came from one fanatic weeabo on Asiafinest.com who claim that the Anglo Saxons defeated the Russians several thousand years ago

So the conclusion I am to glean from this is "I don't like wackos who post ridiculous crap on message boards."

It seems you and I have something in common.

 

[Charles Barkley]

So the conclusion I am to glean from this is "I don't like wackos who post ridiculous crap on message boards."

It seems you and I have something in common.

lol, me too Jimmy, me too.

 

[riermman]

Some Americans may feel that being labeled gaijin feels as if they are being grouped with mexicans and people of middle eastern decent and tries very hard to revise and re-educate people that they are not just any gaijin but indigenous owners of planet earth, particularily on J-Today website, where a patriot try to exaggerate that the US would be safer than Japan if it had no immigrants at all.

The West took Africa and made the indigenous people gaijin. i.e. Apartheit
The US took Texas and made the Mexicans gaijin. It's still an on-going problem.
Britain took Australia and made the Aboriginals gaijin.
In Japan, the Westerners are not Gaijin. It's the Japanese who are gaijin. (Okinawa , for example.)

 

[bakaKanadajin]

You're forgetting who really operates government. Corporations are heavily invested in politics and if that means keeping one ethnic minority down because they'll be pleased at the prospect of a bit of cheap labour being thrown their way, or if this unpopular and draconian dictator serves a corporations needs better than that one, install him and so be it. It's a much more tangled web than a few nationalistic, hawkish pinheaded throw-backs from the decades past, although they certainly help things along.

Through all this greed and manufactured ethnic inequality you have the current depletion of the middle class in wealthy Western nations, because costs go up everywhere. I truly believe that when the hierarchy of needs isn't being met; that is the food and shelter and happiness requirements of a population are going unanswered, natural competition and group-ism emerges. If things get really bad this further deteriorates into lawlessness and individual/familial survivalism much like many war torn countries and poor nations right now.

All the ethnically divided us/them BS is a direct result of EVERYONE not having enough to go around. It's only now seeping into the last Western enclaves of 'liberal freedom and democracy' where this kind of thing supposedly doesn't happen. Here you have white supremacist and xenophobic groups reacting to the lack of resources they're experiencing by lashing out and saying things like 'jobs lost to Mexicans' and 'increasing immigration', because they feel there simply isn't enough at the table. If everyone was fairly well-off, that is, if we had a thriving, ethnically diverse middle class combining today's social progressiveness with yester-decades widespread economic prosperity, I doubt you'd have much to quibble about and all that xenophobia would fall on deaf ears.

Not to blow sunshine up my own rear-end, but in my home town of Toronto, (acknowledging that it too has problems) for the most part people are extremely well off relatively speaking and therefore get along. Hard racism is a discouraged and frowned upon element that just never rears its ugly head. I'm sure the same is true in places like New York, London, etc. The people themselves are not hateful unless influenced, I don't think anyone wants to hate anyone else. If conditions deteriorated though (and they are little by little) I could foresee (and bit by bit I did see) separation along ethnic lines and a reversion to groupism but I think that's moreso survivalism. That can be played on by governments and it is.

I think the bottom line is that those who are born in a country will always feel a slightly greater sense of entitlement to things than the newcomers because this is human nature, we aren't that far-removed from animals. Imagine a party where everyone has worked hard to contribute to the meal and everyone is just about to sit down when some people walk in off the street and sit down too. If there's plenty to go around then great. If there isn't, you can't help but feel a slight sense of 'hey, what gives you the right?' The scale can tip that direction and things can get ugly.

But the flipside is, when there is plenty, we have the ability to be incredilbly compassionate and tip the scale in the other direction. Things can be the complete opposite; if there's enough we can be inviting people in off the street to this party.

Increasingly, corporations and lazy/corrupt government are tipping the scales to manufacture greed, unrest among the world's people and they're creating opportunities for the purpose of securing greater control. Ask yourself how much freedom of choice in the market and how much free information you are getting compared to what you know you COULD be getting. How much of that was via the recent power grabs by corporations and governments over the last little while. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Glenski]

riermman,
You've never been to Japan, so I suppose we'll have to excuse your strange definitions of "gaijin". Westerners, for example, are indeed gaijin in Japan. To say otherwise is either ignorant or dishonest (to quote something you wrote earlier).

 

[riermman]

#14
You didn't get the point. There's no problem when the indigenous people call foreigners "foreigners", because foreigners are foreigners. It's the problem when the foreigners start to marginalize the indigenous people and call themselves the rightful owners of the land when they actually aren't.

 

[Glenski]

Oh, #15, I got that point, #15. I just disagree (as would most people), #15, with your comment about westerners not being gaijin, #15. How do you, #15, respond to your statement on that, #15?

http://homepage.plix.com/rhansen/iwillnot.au

 

[soykan]

It seems that I am getting the drift that it is a crime to be born in poor countries, or a crime to be foreigner in general. Even if you are an upstanding citizen trying to lets say go to Yale, get an MBA and build a legit buisness or integrate into a company.

Some of the far-right will still go out of their way to accuse this guy of being a wanton criminal for "stealing/theiving college seats in barbaric

Such is the mentality of the anti-gaijin cults around the globe. What makes it scary is that its these nuts that care more about voting and politics then normal folks. Its more worrying especially with the high possibility of a Iran war or even a war with North Korea... Isn't a war on such a scale a bit dangerous in modern times like this??

 

[noyhauser]

You're forgetting who really operates government. Corporations are heavily invested in politics and if that means keeping one ethnic minority down because they'll be pleased at the prospect of a bit of cheap labour being thrown their way, or if this unpopular and draconian dictator serves a corporations needs better than that one, install him and so be it. It's a much more tangled web than a few nationalistic, hawkish pinheaded throw-backs from the decades past, although they certainly help things along.
Through all this greed and manufactured ethnic inequality you have the current depletion of the middle class in wealthy Western nations, because costs go up everywhere. I truly believe that when the hierarchy of needs isn't being met; that is the food and shelter and happiness requirements of a population are going unanswered, natural competition and group-ism emerges. If things get really bad this further deteriorates into lawlessness and individual/familial survivalism much like many war torn countries and poor nations right now...

Increasingly, corporations and lazy/corrupt government are tipping the scales to manufacture greed, unrest among the world's people and they're creating opportunities for the purpose of securing greater control. Ask yourself how much freedom of choice in the market and how much free information you are getting compared to what you know you COULD be getting. How much of that was via the recent power grabs by corporations and governments over the last little while. Just my 2 cents.

See I wonder how you can actually say that when everything points to the opposite occurring. The great media companies of the 20th century are breaking down one by one. The Tribune company, the New York Times Company, Washington Post Corporation, and News Corp. are all hemorrhaging money. Many are failing. Its a sad reality is that as the great journalist Carl Bernstein stated, we might be watching the slow decline of "the pinnacle of journalistic standards." Sure there have been failings, but overall journalism has been a critical part of free speech in the west. Think about Bernstein: him and Bob Woodward brought down the most egregious abuser of civil liberties in U.S. history; Richard Nixon. This is a person who knows better than most the important role of journalism in holding truth to power.

This isn't some diabolical plot by "corporations." If anything they are the ones losing money. There are several factors, but two are critical; changing market and the so called "democratization of journalism." Both are due to the internet. Newspapers are losing money because their main cash intake, classifieds are no longer brining in revenue because of sites like craigslist and job postings are taking their market. Secondly, people have been turning to Blogs and other online resources to get their news. While some might think this has "liberated" news from the corporations, in reality its diminishing the quality of journalism across the board. Many, if not most bloggers, don't have the education, skill or resources to carry out effective investigations. Opinion now replaces fact.

The reality is that the news corporations like the NY Times company are a good thing. They uphold journalistic standards and ensure that you get quality news. A blogger can fabricate a story once in awhile, get caught, and continue without a problem. A news company can't; its obligated to be impartial and factual in its reporting. Most news companies are generally not beholden to the government or corporations. In the United States, the New York Times and Washington Post have been consistent critics of various administrations, both democratic and republican. Its not free because it shouldn't be; worthwhile things cost money.

Now I brought this all up for a reason... its there IS a difference between Western Countries and Japan. As I've pointed out in other threads, there has been a disturbing trend within Japan where internal criticism of these views isn't as apparent as they are elsewhere. In the United States, Canada and Europe, you have a diversity of views and a healthy debate. There is a constant dialectic occurring within the public sphere that restrains extreme views.At times it doesn't seem to be the case in Japan. I'm not saying that the West is perfect on these matters, nor Japan is terrible; I'm just pointing out the fact in the latter country this debate is weaker, and has consequences for its country's future.

 

[bakaKanadajin]

See I wonder how you can actually say that when everything points to the opposite occurring. The great media companies of the 20th century are breaking down one by one. The Tribune company, the New York Times Company, Washington Post Corporation, and News Corp. are all hemorrhaging money. Many are failing. Its a sad reality is that as the great journalist Carl Bernstein stated, we might be watching the slow decline of "the pinnacle of journalistic standards." Sure there have been failings, but overall journalism has been a critical part of free speech in the west. Think about Bernstein: him and Bob Woodward brought down the most egregious abuser of civil liberties in U.S. history; Richard Nixon. This is a person who knows better than most the important role of journalism in holding truth to power.

This isn't some diabolical plot by "corporations." If anything they are the ones losing money. There are several factors, but two are critical; changing market and the so called "democratization of journalism." Both are due to the internet. Newspapers are losing money because their main cash intake, classifieds are no longer brining in revenue because of sites like craigslist and job postings are taking their market. Secondly, people have been turning to Blogs and other online resources to get their news. While some might think this has "liberated" news from the corporations, in reality its diminishing the quality of journalism across the board. Many, if not most bloggers, don't have the education, skill or resources to carry out effective investigations. Opinion now replaces fact.

The reality is that the news corporations like the NY Times company are a good thing. They uphold journalistic standards and ensure that you get quality news. A blogger can fabricate a story once in awhile, get caught, and continue without a problem. A news company can't; its obligated to be impartial and factual in its reporting. Most news companies are generally not beholden to the government or corporations. In the United States, the New York Times and Washington Post have been consistent critics of various administrations, both democratic and republican. Its not free because it shouldn't be; worthwhile things cost money.

Now I brought this all up for a reason... its there IS a difference between Western Countries and Japan. As I've pointed out in other threads, there has been a disturbing trend within Japan where internal criticism of these views isn't as apparent as they are elsewhere. In the United States, Canada and Europe, you have a diversity of views and a healthy debate. There is a constant dialectic occurring within the public sphere that restrains extreme views.At times it doesn't seem to be the case in Japan. I'm not saying that the West is perfect on these matters, nor Japan is terrible; I'm just pointing out the fact in the latter country this debate is weaker, and has consequences for its country's future.

I don't think you can honestly say there's much of a debate going on anywhere these days. On the day to day issues sure, there is a facade of democracy and freedom of thought happening because, without these crumbs, the pigeons (us) would really start crapping on the politicians heads. But really, are we freely debating and addressing the issues that matter?

The most central issue which North America faces for example is SPP and the unification of the continent. This initiative is one of the most far reaching and hardest impacting things that could happen in our lifetimes but coverage is mostly relegated to (comparatively unwealthy) independent media sources and the internet. All the meetings are held in secret and behind closed doors surrounded by barbed wire. Only the heads of Canadian, American and Mexican state along with corporate brass are permitted to attend. Even demonstration and protest is heavily curtailed, one of the most fundamental rights. News coverage is scant and only does lip service to any semblance of free journalism or press. There was a time when media kept government in check by telling the people flat out precisely what was going on but now they're helping to protect the secrecy.

If you call the current media industry the pinnacle of journalism you may be right insofar as the media is more far-reaching, technologically advanced and informative when it comes to human-interest stories and certain pieces of investigative news, but really, what we're getting is not the entire truth and this is why with the advent of the internet more people are choosing to search elsewhere for information. They (the media) are the orchestrators of their own demise if you ask me. Corporations will pull ad-money and sponsorship out from under the media's feet if things aren't reported properly. We have a multiplicty of networks and sources but at the top they're all controlled by a handful of sources, how independent can the news possibly be in this condition? It's so not free it's a joke, and the moment any journalist or network tries to really hit the issues and stop towing the party line they'll be shot and their career abruptly ended. They've unfortunately set themselves up for disaster this way.

Because of this people are tuning out and perhaps this is why the media is dying. No one trusts it anymore. Why should I trust any source that tries to sell me improperly tested pharmaceuticals from its ad sponsor on one page and then tells me lies on the opposing page about what's really happening around the world?

 

[soykan]

#19 may seem correct. In the fact that future middle east oil conquests must require more public attendance and participation. Since the government is being drawn into a corner now, it will probably put in more tough measure to gain more support.

The patriot act passed, airports and borders under martial law, minutemen, arrest without warrant or evidence, and 90% of the grisly stuff about Guantanamo is being gagged from the public.

Eventually things like "citizen loyalty" laws may be passed to allow the government to draft the public, like in the Vietnam war days where you can get a sentence and a permanant criminal record for not serving

The manpower required for a Iran & North Korea campaign is tremendous, a few radical Texans will not be enough and Corporate leaders like Dick Cheney might take solutions to extremes to accomplish this. The more starving and desperate folks there is the easier it is for extreme politicians to recruit, because the human will to survive can go to extremes too.

i.e. A BNP or KKK member might save a starving Redneck on the streets, give him food shelter and a job, recruit him and turn him into a loyal subject, in a decade or so they will have an army of 10 million or more.... Unfortunately, humans can sometimes be this easy to use. And all this for a resource (oil) that probably won't last 1 and a half centuries.

 

[Pachipro]

See I wonder how you can actually say that when everything points to the opposite occurring. The great media companies of the 20th century are breaking down one by one. The Tribune company, the New York Times Company, Washington Post Corporation, and News Corp. are all hemorrhaging money. Many are failing.

Are they really? Is it any wonder that News Corp bought a controlling interest in myspace.com and are getting their paws into every aspect of popular websites?

Think about Bernstein: him and Bob Woodward brought down the most egregious abuser of civil liberties in U.S. history; Richard Nixon. This is a person who knows better than most the important role of journalism in holding truth to power.

Did they really? Really? I'm glad you believe that as you are the pinnicle of the person who is to be brainwashed. Do a little Googling, if you dare, and you will discover that it was Henry Kissinger that brought Nixon down with his secret tapings in the Oval Office and, thus, made him a kingpin for the New World Order and Not Woodward and Bernstein. They were just the reporters and sheep and nothing else for which they were well rewarded.

This isn't some diabolical plot by "corporations." If anything they are the ones losing money. There are several factors, but two are critical; changing market and the so called "democratization of journalism." Both are due to the internet. Newspapers are losing money because their main cash intake, classifieds are no longer brining in revenue because of sites like craigslist and job postings are taking their market. Secondly, people have been turning to Blogs and other online resources to get their news. While some might think this has "liberated" news from the corporations, in reality its diminishing the quality of journalism across the board. Many, if not most bloggers, don't have the education, skill or resources to carry out effective investigations. Opinion now replaces fact.

Not true. The major media knows that the internet is the place to be today and that's where they have their claws. Do a little research and you too will discover that IT IS a MAJOR DIABOLICAL plot by corporations. Far from losing money, they are making tons of it. Soon America will be nothing more than a corporate facist state as well as Canada as they lick the boots of the US and follow, much as Japan does, whatever they are told to do or they will suffer the consequences. What consequences you may ask? Well just look at how Japan was taken down when they failed to follow the US and NWO policies. Their economy crashed, they still have not recovered, and their private postal savings was commercialized to be used by the NWO.

The reality is that the news corporations like the NY Times company are a good thing. They uphold journalistic standards and ensure that you get quality news. A blogger can fabricate a story once in awhile, get caught, and continue without a problem. A news company can't; its obligated to be impartial and factual in its reporting. Most news companies are generally not beholden to the government or corporations. In the United States, the New York Times and Washington Post have been consistent critics of various administrations, both democratic and republican. Its not free because it shouldn't be; worthwhile things cost money.

Do you really believe that propaganda noyhauser? Do they really uphold true journalistic standards? If so then you are just the person they are hoping to persuade as I have said in previous posts. Before you attack me please read this quote from John Swinton, former Chief of Staff of the NY Times and called by his peers "The Dean of His Profession" when he was asked in 1953, 1953! 55 years ago, to give a toast to the NY Press Club. He responded with the following statement:

"There is no such thing as an independent press in America, if we except that of little country towns. You know this and I know it. Not a man among you dares to utter his honest opinion. Were you to utter it, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print.

I am paid one hundred and fifty dollars a week so that I may keep my honest opinion out of the newspaper for which I write. You too are paid similar salaries for similar services. Were I to permit that a single edition of my newspaper contained an honest opinion, my occupation - like Othello's - would be gone in less than twenty-four hours.

The man who would be so foolish as to write his honest opinion would soon be on the streets in search of another job. It is the duty of a New York journalist to lie, to distort, to revile, to toady at the feet of Mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread, or what amounts to the same thing, his salary.

We are the tools and the vassals of the rich behind the scenes. We are marionettes. These men pull the strings and we dance. Our time, our talents, our lives, our capacities are all the property of these men - we are intellectual prostitutes." (As quoted by T. St. John Gaffney in Breaking The Silence, page 4.)

noyhauser, do you still honestly believe, based on what you know and with no further research, that the NY Times and other publications such as the Washington Post, etc are really giving you the news without "fear or favor"? (To quote from the Japan Times, English Version) and are really a"good thing"?.

If so then you are the exact type of person they are hoping to persuade with their education system and propaganda. It's about time most people woke up, including you, and start to do a little more research behind the scenes and propaganda for, if the above quote, from a NY Times man himself, does not convince you then there is no helping you.

If that does not convince you then here is another, on record in the Congressional Record:

Representative Callaway discussed some of this press control in the Congressional Record, Vol. 54, Feb. 9, 1917, p. 2947:
"In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interests, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press..

They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers.. An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers."

I can add more proof and will if you require it to prove that the media is biased and only reports what "they", the shadow government, want you to believe and see. All my "proof" is on record and verifiable and I have done probably a thousand more hours of research than you have.

This quote above, I know, goes way back nearly 90 years and to believe it is still NOT going on today shows gullibility and naieveism and proves that there are still many people who are easily swayed and proves that "their" education/indoctrination system of propaganda is working better than they hoped. Do you really believe that all the past wars happened by chance and were not financed, on both sides, by the same people controlling our news today? Not only in the US, but in Canada, Europe, Australia,Japan, etc as well as in many other countries. If so then you need a re-education. Their claws are long and go back hundreds, if not thousands, of years in order to reach thier goal.

Please prove me wrong.

 

[Glenski]

Ah, don't ya just love conspiracy buffs...

 

[bakaKanadajin]

This is just a general commentary, not directed at Glenski or anyone in particular.

The way I see it conspiracy buffs aren't strange if they present perfectly plausible ideas with a decent amount of material to back it up. Most discussions I've seen here for example involve PachiPro presenting something that's not so far-fetched (governments wanting more power, corporations wanting more money.. the two working together? INSANE!) and providing sources/quotes as good as anyone elses if not better.

Rebuttals usually take the form of 'that's crazy, no way, you're obviously one of THOSE kinds of people', but that's the extent of it. Most times what makes 'conspiratorialists' what they are in the public view isn't their lack of credible evidence, cooky ideas, and lack of respect for the sciences or logic, (in fact sometimes they have more supporting evidence than the status quo's view) as much as it's our aversion to hearing unpleasant truths that would change our core beliefs about the world around us.

 

[noyhauser]

I don't think you can honestly say there's much of a debate going on anywhere these days. On the day to day issues sure, there is a facade of democracy and freedom of thought happening because, without these crumbs, the pigeons (us) would really start crapping on the politicians heads. But really, are we freely debating and addressing the issues that matter?

The most central issue which North America faces for example is SPP and the unification of the continent. This initiative is one of the most far reaching and hardest impacting things that could happen in our lifetimes but coverage is mostly relegated to (comparatively unwealthy) independent media sources and the internet. All the meetings are held in secret and behind closed doors surrounded by barbed wire. Only the heads of Canadian, American and Mexican state along with corporate brass are permitted to attend. Even demonstration and protest is heavily curtailed, one of the most fundamental rights. News coverage is scant and only does lip service to any semblance of free journalism or press. There was a time when media kept government in check by telling the people flat out precisely what was going on but now they're helping to protect the secrecy.

Sigh. The reason why there isn't a story is because there isn't one. There is no "unification of the continent." If anything, since 9/11 we've seen a retrenchment of bilateral relations between Canada and the United States. Trade has been impeded because of new security measures leading to billions of dollars of losses, and surveillance along the border has increased dramatically. And you have member of the U.S. Congress calling for increased measures. Next year you're going to need passports to cross into the U.S. These are real step backwards from any sort of "union." In reality both sides do well from the current state of affairs.

The Canadian economy is stronger because of our floating dollar and differing policies. As for your "secret meetings," most of them are fairly mundane, on more technical issues dealing with the relationship. Actually where the most progress has been made is on bilateral meetings between Premiers and Governors. They usually cover regional issues like resource management, environmental protection, emergency preparedness and the like. It makes sense to have such meetings. In the pacific it makes no sense to have two separate fishing policies, particularly for conservation purposes. Air pollution requires similar joint efforts since the pollutants frequently don't observe national lines. Just because they are occurring, does not mean they imply the creation of some sort of supranational government. Most of them are on mundane technical issues, of little interest to the press or public. When they do they get reported on.

If you call the current media industry the pinnacle of journalism you may be right insofar as the media is more far-reaching, technologically advanced and informative when it comes to human-interest stories and certain pieces of investigative news, but really, what we're getting is not the entire truth and this is why with the advent of the internet more people are choosing to search elsewhere for information. They (the media) are the orchestrators of their own demise if you ask me. Corporations will pull ad-money and sponsorship out from under the media's feet if things aren't reported properly. We have a multiplicty of networks and sources but at the top they're all controlled by a handful of sources, how independent can the news possibly be in this condition? It's so not free it's a joke, and the moment any journalist or network tries to really hit the issues and stop towing the party line they'll be shot and their career abruptly ended. They've unfortunately set themselves up for disaster this way.

Completely untrue. What the internet has done has actually weakened the editorship control. Before press editors had the ability to control what was in their papers. Now that's not the case. Many reporters and op-ed writers just put their failed pieces on the internet. The blogs, many of which are on the papers website, are un-edited (partly because of the volume of posts) and usually just examine issues of interest in more depth or from a more personal perspective. They don't really show anything different. The whole idea that the "real story" isn't getting out, in reality is a fallacy.

This is just a general commentary, not directed at Glenski or anyone in particular.
The way I see it conspiracy buffs aren't strange if they present perfectly plausible ideas with a decent amount of material to back it up. Most discussions I've seen here for example involve PachiPro presenting something that's not so far-fetched (governments wanting more power, corporations wanting more money.. the two working together? INSANE!) and providing sources/quotes as good as anyone elses if not better.
Rebuttals usually take the form of 'that's crazy, no way, you're obviously one of THOSE kinds of people', but that's the extent of it. Most times what makes 'conspiratorialists' what they are in the public view isn't their lack of credible evidence, cooky ideas, and lack of respect for the sciences or logic, (in fact sometimes they have more supporting evidence than the status quo's view) as much as it's our aversion to hearing unpleasant truths that would change our core beliefs about the world around us.

They are perfectly plausible ideas until you actually read into a subject and realize what many of these theories for what they are: implausible, often misinformed perspectives, based more on an interest to claim some sort of "high knowledge" than a real interest in doing the grunt work required to understand issues. Most of the time the citing is poor, taking other poorly researched or out of context articles to support a point that just tries to prove a negative perspective on certain people's actions. Mostly, these theories are so poorly constructive, they offer no helpful insight into the situation and are completely debased from the reality of the situation.

The realization I've come up with is this: people aren't necessarily good, bad or evil. Peoples behaviour is based on wide varieties of motivations, which can't be simply assumed. Most people don't enter public service because they are greedy, and they don't turn out that way. They have their reasons for their policies, which are quickly revealed by their actions. Many, if not most, are forthright, and when you get a sense of it (often years after), you gain a very deep appreciation of the tapestry that makes up history. Its complex, and even over its sweep, impossible to fully comprehend all of its constituent parts. So I don't assign behaviors to people whimsically. Some experts use theories to do so, but I tend not to as a professional choice. I try to get participants perspective, and understand why they made the decisions they did. It takes a lot of effort, reading, discussions, research and the like.

You can claim that reporters don't report the news, but when you meet these brave men and women, you realize how absolutely infantile your claims look. They have a personal commitment to getting the truth out, and have watched many of their colleagues die in the process of doing so. They do get their story out. If they didn't you'd probably see far more disgruntlement from the profession. Yet they keep going to these places and doing their job.

I can already the see the obvious response from the conspiralists. You're just going to keep citing people who claim that its all one big shell game that I'm a cog of and I'm to naïve. It just adds to the amusement, especially when you consider my efforts to understand these issues, compared to the level of effort you and others seems to put in. As I stated above, I don't claim to know the "truth"… its an impossibility. However I can judge with a reasonably confidence, what I don't know, where I might be wrong, what claims are realistic, and which ones aren't, given the information I have in hand.

 

[Pachipro]

Originally Posted by bakaKanadajin
I don't think you can honestly say there's much of a debate going on anywhere these days. On the day to day issues sure, there is a facade of democracy and freedom of thought happening because, without these crumbs, the pigeons (us) would really start crapping on the politicians heads. But really, are we freely debating and addressing the issues that matter?

The most central issue which North America faces for example is SPP and the unification of the continent. This initiative is one of the most far reaching and hardest impacting things that could happen in our lifetimes but coverage is mostly relegated to (comparatively unwealthy) independent media sources and the internet. All the meetings are held in secret and behind closed doors surrounded by barbed wire. Only the heads of Canadian, American and Mexican state along with corporate brass are permitted to attend. Even demonstration and protest is heavily curtailed, one of the most fundamental rights. News coverage is scant and only does lip service to any semblance of free journalism or press. There was a time when media kept government in check by telling the people flat out precisely what was going on but now they're helping to protect the secrecy.

Sigh. The reason why there isn't a story is because there isn't one. There is no "unification of the continent." If anything, since 9/11 we've seen a retrenchment of bilateral relations between Canada and the United States. Trade has been impeded because of new security measures leading to billions of dollars of losses, and surveillance along the border has increased dramatically. And you have member of the U.S. Congress calling for increased measures. Next year you're going to need passports to cross into the U.S. These are real step backwards from any sort of ﾂ"union.ﾂ" In reality both sides do well from the current state of affairs.

The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monsterous he cannot believe that it exists.

I really cannot see how you can say there is "no story" to a North American Union (NAU) noyhauser, especially when it is all around you if you will just do a little googling and weeding out the crap. Look at how the European Union was formed and you will see the same exact steps being implimented in North America. This is not a put-down, but I used to think exactly the way you do now, but I learned there is more to what is going on around us than the BS we are being fed on a daily basis from the media and educational institutions. However, you (and myself in the past) remind me of the clergy that refused to look into Gallileo's telescope when he wanted them to to look in and see the moons of Jupiter and that Jupiter was round and that moons did in fact revolve around it. They refused, forbade him from using his telescope or reporting his findings, and placed him in jail until he recanted. Mankind, therefore, remained ignorant to the fact that the earth was not flat and was not the center of the universe for hundreds of years. Finally I decided to look, and sometimes wish I hadn't, as the truth really is stranger than fiction.

If you truly believe "there is no story", please download this PDF file from the Council of Foreign Relations entitled, "Building A North American Community". Read it fully, and I mean really read it if you seriously believe what you do and then tell us what you think. Tell us that it is a no story and that it is not happening under your very nose and that this PDF file is just nothing and means nothing and that it is just taken out of context when the full context is here! Then please e-mail Lou Dobbs of CNN and tell him he is full of it and spreading mistruths as he recounts here concerning a NAU:

And here is an update from Lou Dobbs concerning the SPP that bakakandajin alluded to and you fail to believe:

Is he as nuts as I or bakakandajin? Are we all making this stuff up and believing crap that really doesn't exist? Or, do we just have a better handle on what is going around us than others and trying to spread the word to the "handicapped individuals" and the ignorant?

I also noticed how you politely ignored, and had no comment concerning my quote above from the NY Times Editor and the quote from the congressional record about the control of newspapers and media. Do a little research and you too will discover that ALL major media, in ALL industrialized countries, ARE owned by financial institutions who have a vested interest in not letting this news out ands ONLY let out what they deem is necessary or will do no harm. Trust me, some of the conspiracy stuff does get printed from time to time, but there is never any detail or follow-up and is just there to show people like you and others that they are "free and independent" and not controlled.

Do a little more digging and you will see that the financial interests are owned by the wealthiest families in the US and Europe and that these families go back hundreds of years. Please, look into the telescope, or would you rather prefer to stay in your own safe cocoon and heed when you are told to "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain?" (Wizard of Oz reference). After all, we have no facts to back up our claims and are just a bunch of conspiracy nuts.

If what is printed and said is NOT true, why aren't the authors held for libel and slander? Could it be that there are many thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of people like yourself who do not believe it anyway and to start a lawsuit would just draw attention of the masses to the truth and they just might start looking into it? To ignore it is the better course of action as most people believe, "Well, if that were true it would on the evening news and in the newspapers." Exactly my point.

As I stated above, I don't claim to know the ﾂ"truthﾂ"ﾂ… its an impossibility. However I can judge with a reasonably confidence, what I don't know, where I might be wrong, what claims are realistic, and which ones aren't, given the information I have in hand.

Knowing the truth is not an impossiblity if one dares look into the telescope. Some like myself question things, do not take things at face value anymore and dare to look in only to discover the truth and then be relegated to the folder of "conspiracy nut" and could even be placed in jail if the Patriot Act was followed to the letter. However, I don't care. I just try to pass on what I, and others, have discovered and if they refuse to believe it so be it. It doesn't matter one way or the other as people will only believe what they want to believe without doing any in depth research.