two of the most important stories media wont report on

[Heruka]

better start waking up to whats going on around, most is done in low key fashion, under the radar.

[neverdowell]

One brief example..Sanders the great chicken king. He did not establish a great chicken empire until his late 50's, prior to that he was basically a failed businessman. Did he suddenly become very much more intelligent...no, heck no, no chance under the sun. Circumstance abounded which led his circumstance to precipitate in that direction. There are literally thousands of examples that is but one. The american ideal on such things, the rich being way way more intelligent...is a product of ignorant thought, and faulted, butr ingrained into their psyche.

They, the rich, take advantage of circumstance as the shock doctrine explains but have little excepting very basic forms, such as overt agressions/wars and governmental dominance by force, to elicit circumstance. They simply are to stupid to do so. They are ham and eggers in a fortuitous circumstance like Brahma perhaps thinking he is creating all around him by his greatness, convincing all around him he is the one, and great amd having them worship his greatness when all along...it is his circumtance and he, he is.....quite stupid. In past life he was compassionate and thoughtful that is all. Now he is quite stupid and wants peoples to worship him by that name or other.

The rich are similiar....not for a instant can they allow it is but circumstance so they create sociatal edifice to affirm their mistaken notion of superiority. And americans buy that false notion hook line and sinker.

I just wanted to say this is absolutely brilliant, ronnewmexico. I've been having similar thoughts lately, but you put it into words better than I ever could.

We tend to want to separate religion and politics, but an ignorant religious misunderstanding of reality devoid of rebirth+karma can snowball into a disaster in the political sphere, such as believing that a successful person has truly earned his position all in this lifetime (and this is a meritocracy, right?), and is therefore obviously that much more intelligent than a poor one, therefore who are we to question them, or question the economic system, etc...?

[ronnewmexico]

Well I don't know about the brilliant part but this to my opinion in ingrained in the american psyche.
Our founders were not common people as is perhaps the issue in some other countries inceptions in other parts of the globe but the very rich landowners the aristocracy of that day and time, sans birthright. Not Ghandi's Mao's or people of that sort, but the richest of the rich in the new world of the day.
Why not the common human, as leader...... no in fact the common soldier and such were not treated very fairly it seems, there being common actions having to be taken to secure the promises made to them to engage in the revolution.

The foundations were not rooted in liberty and freedom as we know them to be but a pragmatic response to government dictated by the mandates of circumstantial conditions necessitating such. No structure existed, (in fact the authoritarian structure the british enabled had just been removed) to enforce a authoritarian system of governance. So to accomodate a circumstance a "democracy" with only landowners of certain races and backround who were allowed to vote was created. The most restrictive form of government that could be allowed without a system of authority to enforce other. NO standing army no established legal venues.....this was a accomodation but of the slightest way to commoners rule.

Unfortunately american have always ingrained this thinking into their way of doing things. It is never the common person who is elected it is the richest of the rich. Not that birthright is enforced which it is not, but social standing as equal to its founders social standing is necessary.

So the logical extension is that the rich....are thought to be more intelligent, and not products of circumstance but by inherant ability. This fits in with the absoluteists way of looking at things, and conflicts with a karmic or perhaps asian way of looking at things. That being the circumstance dictates to a large degree the outcome of that circumstance, so we find that considered, common peoples not aristocracies being the leaders like as not.

The absolutists(theistically derived) view, basically thwarts that opinion and reality. And largly we all live our expections of how our lives should be...we create the realities we find.

As such americans bound to the idea that the rich and successful being the sole product of a higher intelligence are thusly in all matters just more capeable to be where they are and thusly be the rulers.

But as I mention with but that one example.....there are hundreds of thousands...the rich are produced by circumstance as well as the poor may be poor by circumstance. Not entirely, but at least in equal measure. If it was as they theorize.... the rich could never become poor nor the poor rich after attaining. A gradient of increase or decrease in wealth would always be present. A person like Sanders, or Donald Trump would never exist. All would progress gradually to their attained levels of intelligence or lack of intelligence and make more value on such basis.

That flies directly in the face of reality. Circumstance as equal as any other factor determine such.

But poor americans....you can go on and on but they will never allow such could be the case. No manageing of logic or discussion will pursuade....As I mention, it is in their very bones since the inception of the american state but they have failed to recognize it for what it is in their ignorant view of that thing, and this is how it is told them. With the additions of a absolutist framework of thinking which adds to and enables such thought however faulted in its consideration to exist.

For the most part a unwesternized asian mind would not sustain such concepts of inherant intelligence being present in the wealthy.

So in the americas we have these elaborate complex theories to allow for how things occur never for a moment questioning the basic premesis..that the inceptors of these conspiracies....are they so very intelligent and capeable to be performing these conspiracies??

They are not not by a whit...idiots they are for the most part. The wealth as does absolute power...tends to make one quite dull and uncapeable. That they are relying on brute force war and such as they can not conceive of other more efficient means.

That is the fact of this thing.

It should be perhaps added...this whole thing would not even past the giggle test without the enableing effect of the absolutist/theistically framed core principles which underlie its display.
America could not sustain a asian or buddhist way of looking at things and remain as it is. Such fallacies would quickly dissolve. The ideology is what provides its life blood.

[Heruka]

Hi Ron,

USA is a constitutional republic, and not a democracy. Democracy has been explained as two wolves and one sheep discussing what is for dinner. 270 some old years ago, there was either tyranny or liberty.

lets explore your ideas about moderation in this topic without the class struggle over lay for the moment. Moderation if we follow the train of thought is to lessen or weaken two strongly opposing views, ideas, situations etc. in other words to bring out of a square polarization, of opposites, dualism, a triangle of tri-isms. A perpetual motion machine of arguments for moderation, circular in nature if we connect the points of a triangle we produce a circle, much like a recycling symbol. Moderation then becomes the centrist’s axis mundi, a monopoly, the only argument in town. Not a very dynamic condition this homogenous consensus of non-thought. And if we look at democracy we see two opposites really circling this invisible axis, then we can say there exists a dualopoly. But what is this axis that the dualopoly circles? What then is this invisible non center of gravity that the two planets of left right orbit? What black hole is there where light cannot escape, and only by its effects can we perceive of its existence? since it has great and powerful influence, yet remains unseen, can we say that it is not there at all by moderate thought, can we laugh off its pull on things, by a cloak of denial?

Ramble off>>>>>

[Heruka]

http://www.trilateral.org/

[ronnewmexico]

No personal offense...but if you are reading my post to read it as that I claim america is a democracy....you are not reading it at all.

Really you need to reread it. What I state is that america was set up on democratic principal only to the extent of that necessary to accomodate the lacking of a authoritarian structure to enforce a completely undemocratic principled state or authoritarian state. The authoritarian structure was removed(england and its army) to accomodate basically a unjust economic to the founders of the US of A, not for purpose of freedom or liberty. Sans structure they had to accomodate the rabble with sops thrown their way such as democratic principle and legal review and such.

See our founders cared not a whit about freedom nor liberty nor democracy but cared they could not rule without some semblence of a democratic form adn rule of law being perceptable. Hence they established a democratic form of govenment(though yes a republic) that allowed democratic vote only to land owners and those of certain races....basically themselves.
That means was how they maintained control.

Howard Zinn and others believe in the benign or good nature of peoples and thusly often characterize america as being a nation set up with good principle and by good peoples that we have basically never lived up to. That to my opinion is far from the truth. It was a pragmatic response to circumstance of no forceable authority presence possible... was what it was. So due to belief in good nature even the left is misinformed. The right has very similiar notion in this thing stateing that the founders were good people and good men and we are furthuring their vision.

So it is the same thing. Founded upon a view of humanity as being good, when it is not.

REally my posts are quite long and comlex but these are unusual perspectives stated which you will generally not find elsewhere. They are worth spending a bit of time with to analyze. You may not agree but misunderstanding them misses the mark.
If I state black holes are perceptable by certain rays similiar to xrays which are detectable though gross light emenations are not and miss your basic point it misses the point. So I don't mention that.

I am not mentioning a moderate view...in fact this is the most radical view based upon the supposition that humanity is bad and basically evil, a notion you just dont find excepting nihilists who are never inclined to enter into the politic. Even theists includeing their god as composite to humanity find humanity a good thing worth grossly propogating.

I realize you will not accept this as fact nor that the rich or power holders are idiots but state this I do and not other. It is the most radical view. Conspiracy theory based upon widely held, agreed to... fact may be rare as conspiracy theory may be rare in isolation one compared to another. But the foundational principal of conspiracy theory..... that the powerful are very very intelligent and that good humanity is being led astray by bad selfish individuals....is the commonest of american foundational principal.
x

[Heruka]

No personal offense...but if you are reading my post

hi Ron,

it’s not in the words, and I will never take personal offense because this topic is much too impotant to just be about personalities, its about the links provided, not the side line, off shoot chat we are having. let’s consider the scientific links provided, and let’s be honest, there is much much more information out there to draw from, to cross reference and research and not drink from the one source of information, so that we can draw some basic understanding of the intentional, i.e. deliberate injection of toxins into our food and water. that’s the effects that we can measure and see, the intention behind that is, as you imply, a conspiracy theory.

In a court of law, a conspiracy has a three man (or woman) principle, it takes a minimum of three people to make an act of treason, conspiracy or sedition. clearly we have more than that in the food and water industries. then we come to the nature of theories. the big bang is a theory, inflation is a theory, the stock market is a theory, religion is a theory, and we can go on and on. So some theories are given credibility by respected (whether false or real) academia for public consumption. other theories are poo pooed for public consumption by "officials" and so forth, it’s all very predictable, selective and manipulated.

As a student of the teacher, the Buddha shakyamuni, I am interested very much in the human condition, this doesn’t mean simply sitting in a state of peace, whilst the world is on fire around me. the buddha moved around a lot, and travelled from place to place and talked to many people, the intent is all sentient beings not inclusive, or exclusive, a select few.

our food and water impacts us all.

I don’t want for you to agree with me at all, im not interested in a consensus.

respectfully

[ronnewmexico]

Ok....I won't and don't for reasons already stated.

Good luck with that and bringing others to that view.

[Heruka]

Ok....I won't and don't for reasons already stated.

Good luck with that and bringing others to that view.

thanks again Ron, but again you use this "bringing others to that view." throw away line as if I have a view to bring others too, oh well, I hold you in a higher regard than for you to just to make parting shots, as if that were my intention to bring others too a own view. As a Buddhist I do not discount others beliefs of a god and so forth, because we recognize that karmic vision produces these realms, so a christian religious conservative vision of the world has a shared karmic value for those invested in it. The moniker of "conspiracy theory" is again the type of cheap cloak of deniability that one throws out there, again the information is accurate and very informative, if one chooses not to take a care of what is around them, whilst busy entertaining themselves with distractions, like the parable of the rich father in a house that is burning trying to get his playfully distracted sons from perishing inside, out. A single report by itself does not make a data set, or a pattern, but many such investigations and reports of hazardous toxins and plastics, genetically modified food additives and frankenfoods, lithium, sodium fluoride and oestrogen's in water supply taken as a whole, most certainly joins together the dots, and indeed points to a larger concerted effort of intent, design and planning.

by the way, the best interpretation of the word entertainment I can find is to break the word into its different parts.

we know what enter means that is clear, and if memory serves correct meant is an action verb word, a doing word.
so now the word tain, i found that it is old french Latin word that means a reflective surface, mirror like. so to place all together we have to enter into the reflective and mirror like world.

indeed.

Whilst distracted the house burns.

[ronnewmexico]

this as stated....."there are many studies about the accumulative effects of these GMO foods, on organ failure and infertility and sterile increases in mammals sperm counts and so on, simple research will produce many papers and articles. the whole depopulation of the eugenics movement never went away, the Nazis had a word for it (final solution), the liberals have a name for it (planned parenthood) and the zealot "greenies" call it (global sustainability). whatever you call it, it is the same thing.

A death culture by design."
falls within the description of a conspiracy theory. You have added many additional substantiations to this which I don't discount as to valid content. However the by design you mention, and others perhaps mention.... I do take exception to and have offered rational for my opinion.

I don't see as being a buddhist or holding to those views has a whole lot to do with it.
I assume by posting this you are intending to bring others to your side or way of thinking on this specific so I find no fault in stateing that. I offer thread occasionally to do the same, I find no fault in that practice. If you are not intending to do that why offer this thread....it makes no sense to me.

So I expressed my opinion on why I take exception to the intention part, and you restate your opinions with additional colloborative evidence to support your theory. I restate my opinion with elaboration.

So we are at a impass. Nothing wrong with that but that is what it is.
YOu are welcome to your theory and any that agree are likewise welcome to it, I find no merit to the design part as stated. If you find that a cheap shot....OK, so what.

[Heruka]

this as stated....."there are many studies about the accumulative effects of these GMO foods, on organ failure and infertility and sterile increases in mammals sperm counts and so on, simple research will produce many papers and articles. the whole depopulation of the eugenics movement never went away, the Nazis had a word for it (final solution), the liberals have a name for it (planned parenthood) and the zealot "greenies" call it (global sustainability). whatever you call it, it is the same thing.

A death culture by design."
falls within the description of a conspiracy theory. You have added many additional substantiations to this which I don't discount as to valid content. However the by design you mention, and others perhaps mention.... I do take exception to and have offered rational for my opinion.

additional colloborative evidence to support your theory. I restate my opinion with elaboration.

...OK, so what.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... perts.html


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 350303.ece


http://www.jonesreport.com/article/04_0 ... r_911.html


http://www.population-security.org/28-APP2.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_development

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO#Con ... and_reform

http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalis ... huxley.htm

http://www.jbs.org/jbs-community/groups ... roupid=195


http://www.clubofrome.org/eng/new_path/

http://www.elliotinstitute.org/images/E ... sition.pdf

http://www.popcouncil.org/about/faqs.html

http://www.popcouncil.org/mediacenter/n ... olPill.asp


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38600414/ns ... parenting/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/tele ... alive.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,598108,00.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10371831

http://www.organicconsumers.org/article ... _20908.cfm


http://wellness.blogs.time.com/2010/05/ ... ltrasound/

[Heruka]

page 58 onwards>>> the problems of population

http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/up ... d-1968.pdf

http://static.scribd.com/docs/76968ycdaz6u3.pdf

http://www.chidicon.com/files/11.The_An ... er_Was.pdf

[Heruka]

. However the by design you mention, and others perhaps mention.... I do take exception to and have offered rational for my opinion.

Hi Ron, this is understandable, your plausible deniability, reads, that>>> people suck, and those in control are not really that clever. Which in light of the material offered, is quite normal. This in fact gives the information plausible credibility.

PSYOP's work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare

[Mr. G]

. However the by design you mention, and others perhaps mention.... I do take exception to and have offered rational for my opinion.

Hi Ron, this is understandable, your plausible deniability, reads, that>>> people suck, and those in control are not really that clever. Which in light of the material offered, is quite normal. This in fact gives the information plausible credibility.

PSYOP's work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare

Hi Heruka,

Do you go to the rigorous intuition forums? If not, you may enjoy it...there are some good posts on semantic priming and keyword hijacking in reference to psyops.

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/


On another note, I think this recent news is psyops:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100821/ap_ ... _wikileaks

[Heruka]

. However the by design you mention, and others perhaps mention.... I do take exception to and have offered rational for my opinion.

Hi Ron, this is understandable, your plausible deniability, reads, that>>> people suck, and those in control are not really that clever. Which in light of the material offered, is quite normal. This in fact gives the information plausible credibility.

PSYOP's work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare

Hi Heruka,

Do you go to the rigorous intuition forums? If not, you may enjoy it...there are some good posts on semantic priming and keyword hijacking in reference to psyops.

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/


On another note, I think this recent news is psyops:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100821/ap_ ... _wikileaks

thanks mr gordo, you give interesting links.

[Heruka]

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/d ... i0page.pdf


World BAnk...


reduce poverty = reducing the poor.

[Heruka]

[Mr. G]

University of Hawaii political science professor George Kent challenges the notion that hunger is merely the result of resource scarcity, rather than a political and social issue. "Under the current, dominant economics model based on the market system," he says, "there is no good reason to end hunger."

[justsit]

Not sure about Bill's reasoning here. If the relatively large amounts of money often used in the final months of life are reallocated, they will go to other patients, not to teachers. The "savings" are still used for health care, not shifted to a different sector. The choice isn't between "dying patients vs. teachers," it is between "dying patients with no chance of survival vs. patients with a chance to live another 20 years." If he is talking about allocation of scarce resources on a large scale, ie, "health care vs. education," that is a different discussion.

Within the health care sector, there are always difficult decisions to be made regarding the end of life. Financial considerations tend to be the last of the physician's priorities- up until recently, most physicians couldn't even tell you the cost of most drugs or treatments. He or she is usually focused on the patient, and makes treatment recommendations based primarily on standards of care and previous successful outcomes; the families or significant others themselves make the final decisions, sometimes based on nothing more rational than guilt ("We did everything for Mom, but they couldn't save her); cf, death denial in America. Having worked in health care for over 20 years, I can report there are no "death panels" in hospitals. There are utilization review managers in health insurance companies who make decisions about what is and is not covered, but that varies by individual policy.

Just my opinion here - "death panels" is a scare tactic. Could have come from any number of sources heavily invested in keeping the current health care cash cow fat and happy.

[Heruka]

tashi delek mr gordo,

yes i agree here with professor George Kent, from your video, hunger indeed is about distribution, the oldest game in the world of supply and demand.

hunger is indeed "highly political" as he mentions.