God(s) bless the U(N)SA
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-08-2013, 07:56 AM (This post was last modified: 22-08-2013 06:18 PM by Luminon.)
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
[Image: 995495_554024707998631_80655560_n.jpg]
Bradley Manning got 35 years. I wonder why they didn't outright sentence him to death, maybe that would be too fascist. He got the sentence for exposing stuff like this.

[Image: 21452_228973707250956_1512101179_n.jpg]
Dear Americans, there are enough people in the world eagerly wishing to pull off a thousand 9/11 attacks on you. That is the international security as Obama and Bush see it.

If you claim there are nuances to principles, there are no nuances to getting arrested or shot for disobeying the power.
The Venus Project
FreeDomain Radio - The greatest philosophy show on the web!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 09:29 AM
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(18-08-2013 09:04 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Is this really what you have in media?

Terrorism is a matter of intent. Words have definitions.

Unsourced and context free pictures of dead children is about the most shallow and crass rhetorical device imaginable.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 09:34 AM
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(22-08-2013 09:29 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(18-08-2013 09:04 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Is this really what you have in media?

Terrorism is a matter of intent. Words have definitions.

Unsourced and context free pictures of dead children is about the most shallow and crass rhetorical device imaginable.

Terrorism means using violence to achieve political goals. In this case that means global politics.
Yes, I know that some photographs of rioting bearded men are actually riots against religious fundamentalism and pro education. But I think this one is fairly clear.
So what is your opinion and would you change it if I provided source and context?

If you claim there are nuances to principles, there are no nuances to getting arrested or shot for disobeying the power.
The Venus Project
FreeDomain Radio - The greatest philosophy show on the web!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 09:39 AM
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(22-08-2013 09:34 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(22-08-2013 09:29 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Terrorism is a matter of intent. Words have definitions.

Unsourced and context free pictures of dead children is about the most shallow and crass rhetorical device imaginable.

Terrorism means using violence to achieve political goals. In this case that means global politics.
Yes, I know that some photographs of rioting bearded men are actually riots against religious fundamentalism and pro education. But I think this one is fairly clear.
So what is your opinion and would you change it if I provided source and context?

Without source and context it is a dishonest action to post that.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
22-08-2013, 09:46 AM
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(22-08-2013 09:34 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(22-08-2013 09:29 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Terrorism is a matter of intent. Words have definitions.

Unsourced and context free pictures of dead children is about the most shallow and crass rhetorical device imaginable.

Terrorism means using violence to achieve political goals. In this case that means global politics.
Yes, I know that some photographs of rioting bearded men are actually riots against religious fundamentalism and pro education. But I think this one is fairly clear.
So what is your opinion and would you change it if I provided source and context?

No, terrorism is using violence to inspire terror. That is to say, create a psychological or morale effect in order to accomplish political ends.

My opinion is that dead children are bad? Your post is far too vague to make any further judgement.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 01:18 PM (This post was last modified: 22-08-2013 01:22 PM by ridethespiral.)
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
Except civilian injuries among Iraqi children are well documented...as are birth defects and rare cancers related to radiation exposure.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 01:57 PM
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(22-08-2013 01:18 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  ...as are birth defects and rare cancers related to radiation exposure.

Nope.

Whether or not there is increased frequency of such among Iraqi populations (which is not particularly well attested and certainly not well attributable), one cannot isolate exposure factors in such a way as to determine with any certainty the dominant cause - keeping in mind that exposure to any number of immediate chemical contaminants is indeed quite likely.

One may, at the very least, be quite sure that radiation is not a cause, given that there is no unusual radiation lurking in the Iraqi countryside.

And don't you dare say 'depleted uranium', if that's what you're thinking when it comes to radiation. Unless you're eating it the radiation is insignificant. And if you are eating it then it will kill you because it is chemically toxic.


I'm all for accountability. But one must be very careful not to make unwarranted accusations (which I really don't understand - there are so many warranted ones to chose from...). That's counterproductive.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
22-08-2013, 02:43 PM
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(22-08-2013 01:57 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(22-08-2013 01:18 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  ...as are birth defects and rare cancers related to radiation exposure.

Nope.

Whether or not there is increased frequency of such among Iraqi populations (which is not particularly well attested and certainly not well attributable), one cannot isolate exposure factors in such a way as to determine with any certainty the dominant cause - keeping in mind that exposure to any number of immediate chemical contaminants is indeed quite likely.

One may, at the very least, be quite sure that radiation is not a cause, given that there is no unusual radiation lurking in the Iraqi countryside.

And don't you dare say 'depleted uranium', if that's what you're thinking when it comes to radiation. Unless you're eating it the radiation is insignificant. And if you are eating it then it will kill you because it is chemically toxic.


I'm all for accountability. But one must be very careful not to make unwarranted accusations (which I really don't understand - there are so many warranted ones to chose from...). That's counterproductive.

"After ravaging Iraq over the past decade, the U.S. is finally exiting the country, leaving behind a toxic cesspool of military waste. Since the assaults on Fallujah in 2004, the city has seen an astronomical rise in birth defects and abnormalities, which some have linked to the American military’s suspected use of depleted-uranium rounds munitions during the war. We go back to Iraq – but this time, with a Geiger counter in hand."

http://hbo.vice.com/episode-three/ep-3-seg-2

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 02:59 PM
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(22-08-2013 02:43 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  "After ravaging Iraq over the past decade, the U.S. is finally exiting the country, leaving behind a toxic cesspool of military waste. Since the assaults on Fallujah in 2004, the city has seen an astronomical rise in birth defects and abnormalities, which some have linked to the American military’s suspected use of depleted-uranium rounds munitions during the war. We go back to Iraq – but this time, with a Geiger counter in hand."

Yeah. My bolding there. Toxicity and radioactivity are different things. If the introductory paragraph conflates them...

I'm not denying the toxicity and potential teratogenic properties of waste left behind, either by the military or by lazy/incompetent contractors; there are likewise tremendous amounts of contaminants released in the general breakdown of order through the period, petrochemically-sourced and otherwise. All that? Sure. I am not denying it and I rather suspect it.

But there's literally no way that radioactivity from depleted uranium is accountable for anything. Also data show an increase in birth defects beginning in 1999/2000 (not 2003/2004). Also Vice ain't exactly peer review (sidenote: where might I watch the actual video?).

That's what I mean; that's at silly claim. Making stupid claims decreases one's credibility when one then make relevant claims.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2013, 03:15 PM (This post was last modified: 22-08-2013 03:36 PM by ridethespiral.)
RE: God(s) bless the U(N)SA
(22-08-2013 02:59 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(22-08-2013 02:43 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  "After ravaging Iraq over the past decade, the U.S. is finally exiting the country, leaving behind a toxic cesspool of military waste. Since the assaults on Fallujah in 2004, the city has seen an astronomical rise in birth defects and abnormalities, which some have linked to the American military’s suspected use of depleted-uranium rounds munitions during the war. We go back to Iraq – but this time, with a Geiger counter in hand."

Yeah. My bolding there. Toxicity and radioactivity are different things. If the introductory paragraph conflates them...

I'm not denying the toxicity and potential teratogenic properties of waste left behind, either by the military or by lazy/incompetent contractors; there are likewise tremendous amounts of contaminants released in the general breakdown of order through the period, petrochemically-sourced and otherwise. All that? Sure. I am not denying it and I rather suspect it.

But there's literally no way that radioactivity from depleted uranium is accountable for anything. Also data show an increase in birth defects beginning in 1999/2000 (not 2003/2004). Also Vice ain't exactly peer review (sidenote: where might I watch the actual video?).

That's what I mean; that's at silly claim. Making stupid claims decreases one's credibility when one then make relevant claims.

It's on HBO...So if you have HBO Go you can watch it there. It's Episode 3. They also did a kick ass piece on Nigerian oil pirates: http://hbo.vice.com/episode-nine/ep-9-seg-2

I watched the piece and I can't believe that is was faked in anyway...nor can I see a reason to do so.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/...10444.html
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/4/5/bro...ntaminated

Ps. On a similar note to the discussion we had in the conspiracy thread there comes a point when the lack of substantial reporting and officially sanctioned information from the major networks gives rise to new independent news sources out necessity. Fox, CNN, MSNBC...Their coverage of the Iraq war was despicable, embedded bullshit and pentagon graphics, no coverage of the contractor corruption, rebellion, or accurate civilian casualty counts. Shock and awe and US causalities, Bush on his battleship and that was about it.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: