Feb 2nd 2010 1:08AM My wife likes to drink generic soda pop, although I disapprove. I believe soda pop is unfiltered city water, high fructose corn syrup and artificial colors, artificial flavorings and sodium benzate preservate less than 1/10th of one percent. Although I neither smoke tobacco nor use alcohol, I see CocaCola akin to both tobacco and alcohol, only more deadly, not because the high fructose corn syrup is poison, but because fools drink this addicitive blend in such high quantities. But I think I should let the fools drink what they want, for it is they that help our or great nation, for without the buyers of CocaCola, our nation's dentists would have to go unemployed like the rest of us, and our medical doctors would be forced into having to give up their mortgages and boats. My wife thinks I am annoying, after seeing this post. I really do not care. I feel loyal to facts and honesty, I do not try to say pretty and unfounded misinformation. To my dismay, I may be unhelpful to our economy, favoring instead being a saying of truth and reality. Can you proove me wrong with any of these assertions? if you think you have a fair shot of effectively convincing me that this liquid conconction has any value beyond the financial benefits for dentists, medical doctors (like for diabetes cases and obesity) and to help sell worthless products that move money and serve no other purpose, please let me know. I would like to hear from you! Just respond to this email and I will be glad to tell you my truthful opinion and honest observations.
Jan 24th 2010 1:35PM Although I respect those who have different ideals than me, and although I value creativity in one's home, I personally would feel very uncomfortable in such a home with animal products on the walls. Indeed, I am a vegan, except I do consume honey and occasional fish, but I nonetheless must say I disapprove of someone placing animal body parts on their walls. But who I am to say anything? I am sure there are things I do that *someone* must disapprove of. I do admire the author of this article for writing someone somewhat controversial. But if I walked into a house with deer, elk and even fish heads, I would be uncomfortable, not so much scared, because I believe the animals deserve a better end that being a trophy like some part of a house. The animal did not give its life, presumably, to allow the homeowner to survive, but rather to allow the home owner to have a 'pretty' conversation piece. Maybe the homeowner prior to selling the home could have added something more novel to their cabin's interior, like maybe a few hundred thousand digits of PI (3.14159265 etc.) or a wall paper of the first ten thousand prime numbers. Or maybe even a list of political prisoners or activists who gave their lives to make our world a better place (or at least thought they did make things better for everyone). Anyway, just my opinion, take it as you will. I just thought I would share it, and let you post your reaction accordingly. Have a great day!
Apr 9th 2008 4:35PM I have had many tramatic experiences at schools. I was homeschooled from one to eight, then public high school, then private traditional religious boarding, then private 'alternative' religious boarding schools; I went to three colleges, but never got a degree. I find myself harboring a lot of contempt for the teacher's position of power.
I have, from a lifetime of hating school, decided to focus my energy into competing with the schools, offering better education for less cost. It is economic damage I plan to do to the world of high schools and colleges by offering a superior learning technology.
So, I have spend one and one half decades studying books on education, learning, computers, economics and law. My goal: To utterly annoy existing schools by serving their students better than they ever could.
To this end, I have helped launch nonprofit school based in California. I am determined to succeed, or I will die trying to help bankrupt public schools worldwide by offering a superior learning experience.
Schools, in this world, tend to indoctriate the students with the views and beliefs that serve the wealthy and powerful. As a California Justice recently said of the purpose of education, paraphrasing a bit, "Educataion has the purpose to teach citizenship, patriotism and loyality to the state". Hence, in March 2008, homeschool became ILLEGAL in the state of California.
Clearly our civil liberties and rights are being taken away in the name of either progress or terrorism, or both. It is entirely possible that other U.S. states will follow suit like California, and ban homeschooling.
This case of the child with the design shaved into his hair is another example of school administrators taking what is arguable unlawful control of the lives of the students. For what purpose? To produce the product as similar as possible and obedient as possible.
That product is... our children, our daughters, sons, sisters and brothers... to serve not so much what the community needs, but rather what the wealthy corporations want.
Corporations want workers and consumers. And for as long as we buy the latest television, computers, dishwasher, refridgerator, etc. we will be voting our support of corporations.
These corporations consume our children's childhood, defining who they are based on the preferences of authorites. This is the same in the U.K. as well as U.S.
So, my view on the haircut issue is that the school is playing power with the parents, keeping the parents in line. Parents are expected by the school administrators to help assist in the brainwashing of their children with the content provided by the school's faculty ("teachers.")
my organization is Universal School. My website is www.soniceye.org My name is Eric Meyer, treasurer.
May 14th 2007 3:11PM War is about making money for the presently rich. Censorship is about keeping classism and hate so the masses turn against each other, not towards questioning the governments of the world, including the U.S. We have no real enemy except the insecurity and confusion within; while that is rampent, humans kill not or sport or grudge, but out of reverence to their fellow indoctrinated peers. As it turns out, 96% of the world benefits from peace, 1% benefit from war, and the other 5% benefit from persuding others to buy products, services and offers that largerly serve the owning classes of the world. War is about making money for the rich, and by restricting their information access, they will be better soliders, better able to obey blindly and hard fellow men, women and children at the mere command of a superior. Someday, only the superiors and authorities will live on this earth, and then they will fight one another at the expense of billions of human lives. Thanks to nuclear technology, biological weapons and chemical weapons, this is possible, and due to the unquenched thirst for ever more power and authority, this gloomy future is also very probable within the next eight decades. Our hope hindges upon soliders listening to their conscious, not their superior, and acting with a firm committment to peace and understanding. Our only real enemy is racism, for racism is the seed that allows a military to exist and fools to obey its ordinances. May the fate of all humanity rest on the hope that the world is freed from thought of enemies to defeat but instead seeks to find friends to engage in peaceful commerce and trade. There will be peace, the only question is, will humanity survive in suffcient numbers to enjoy this legacy?
Nov 6th 2006 12:14PM what about the 38,000 children who die each night due to a problem no more incurable than clean drinking water and a cup or rice? When there is too much money on hand, a person spends, and spends it well, on 'foods' that serve no real purpose other than to be written up as an expendature and therefore a reason to communicate to the world the essential idea, "I have my needs funded, plus I am spending the money you need for your needs, too." What do you think, then, about white truffles? Are they helping the world's needs get met, or are they a way of spending the world's share of resources for one's own self and family? At that, are white (or black) truffles a way to share resources, other than by the taxes paid on them and, as such, are those taxes going primarely to water and rice projects or the military, the roads and the tax collectors who systematically try to enforce the rules and codes to attempt to help the middle and upper clasess to get better returns on their real estate investments? So, I implore you, why not boycott all truffles this year, instead giving to the impoverished of the world, so you may have some hope of being truly human beyond all those material possessions and other showy glossy things.
Oct 14th 2006 1:37AM When humanity focuses on real needs, wants and desires -- for love, respect, affection, food, water, shelter, meaningful work -- then and only then may we have an opportunity to rise up towards peace, understanding and tolerance, so that we may truely live in the moment that we call the consensus reality. It is unfortunate that history repeats, such as the nuclear war in India documented by historian David Hatcher Childress, of 6,000 years ago, in his research. If we pursue an empty goal, of money for the sake of money, we may buy our own death via technology and innovation. We must now, and for all time, commit ourselves to redirecting our energy from trying to control others to make profits, towards accepting ourselves as beings with needs that do not necessarily require money, or expensive gifts. Buying for the sake of buying is a disease, one that manifests itself in consumerism, and is the core of Capitalism. Socialism discourages innovation and hard work, but Capitalism discourages living and results in sickness and death. There are 38,000 children in the world who die each night due to lack of food and water. How can anyone justify buying an airplance for two million dollars when that money could provide for so many people and give real hope from education and basic resources like drinking water wells and nutritous plants. Indeed, we spend, as a nation, enough money on warfare and militiary to give nearly every impoverished person on the earth with food and medicine and a future they may actually realize. Instead, our rich citizens want to flaut their wealth and buy purely worthless commodities. For what? To fly and fly to try to forget about the poverty and suffering? To meet some character who is probably less noble or caring than your local soup kitchen coordinator? Why not pay $77,000 to meet your local soup kitchen staff and try some heardy soup that cost a mere 55 cents and can save a life for another day to dream of a way out of poverty and suffering?