We´re in a lot of trouble!

Originally posted by Daniem
...because you are reading this now...

Perhaps...but then the trouble I would be in would likely stem from my insistence on reading this during work hours...*sigh*...yes I am working a weekend (dreams of free time).

That said...I thought that I would offer a bit of perspective here...

"...because less than 3% of you read books"

What kind of books? How often?

And before you answer those questions, consider that the state of electronics and the push to 'save' the ecology of our world...it is likely that all of our reading in some distant future will be in a digitaized format.

Besides, the internet is arguably a more powerful tool because, despite the fact that there is alot of information, you are afforded the oppurtunity to interact with it and discuss it using various sources (valid or not).

'Tis a good thing...

"...because less than 15% of you read newspapers"

You know, I consider myself in trouble when I am reading a newspaper! The reporting is so completely half assed and inadequate that I feel like I am reading a romance novel with as many times as I want to fall in love with a story or am down right disgusted by it.

Do you know how bias is presented?

I like Obama. What kind of bias is in that statement?

Variant...because people either like him or not for various reasons. Some will feel comforted with my affiliation and some will be arguementative towards it.

So let's use a more neutral subject (by the way, I don't care who wins the election, we're all screwed regardless.. )

I like oatmeal.

That statement means nothing to anyone. Noone would be inclined to eat oatmeal along with me (unless they were really hungary...

But if I said, "I love the sweet and succulent taste of a warmed rasberry as it sits a top a sea of freshly prepared oatmeal grown in the forbidden patures of kings and queens," well...I bet that I would get a few takers. At the very least...the conversation continues.

That is bias. The use of connotative words...or simpler, adjectives.

The facts are boring and the newspapers know this. So does TV. They use flashy colors in conjunction with connotative words in bright inflection and snazzy fonts.

That is what the human mind reacts to (and the female form... ).

So if 0% of the population read newspapers...I think we'd be a bit better off...despite the fact that people are reading the internet equivalent which has the room for even more irrelevant crap...*sigh*...unless you are on an interactive medium...like ATS

"Because the only truth you know, is what you get though TV and internet."

Speak for yourself and not us. Thank you.

"Right now, there is a hole, an entire generation that never knew anything that didnt come out of the TV."

For starters, a TV didn't learn me not to touch a hot stove. I figured that one on my own...

So right there, I am thinking there is a flaw with your statement. However, I see what you mean so, I'll go with it...

An entire generation grew up with the primary entertainment was television...myself included, though I escaped (kind of) in my early twenties. The T.V. is mostly a showcase of desired social behavior (soap operas of many kinds), crass (undesirable) social behaviour, as in 'comedic relief' and advertisements. Rinse and repeat.

There are some valid channels...Animal Planet is an interesting and fun one at times, for those who live in a metropolis, PBS (Nova) has its' moments, etc.

The problem, therefore, isn't necessarily TV. It's the discretion used in watching it. It's the lack of mental interaction utilized while entranced by it. A commercial is prrof that someone got paid to try and manipulate you without ever meeting you. How is that for a conspiracy theorist?

"But TV is not the truth. TV is an amusement park.....*Snip* "

No. Bad. Stop telling us what is a problem and start discussing why it is. Informing of a problem does not help anyone.

"Mind control is probably THE issue of the century! Do you believe it is by accident that the population has become a mass of lobotomized zombies focused on trivialities, lemmings totally apathic when it comes to anything that is important? To put it simple, in case that you neither have spent your life in some remote location without media access, nor know anything about mind control and related topics, than your mind is controlled! It's as simply as that!"

Stop the labeling. Mind influence is a better term than mind control and if I didn't know any better, I would say that you are just repeating other people's words...which would be more ironic than the example cited above...

I think you bring up very valid points here, but you aren't grasping the entire picture...

KMFNWO:

4x0=0

An object in my left hand that I call "4" and an object in my right I call "x0"; well...

the object that I call "x0" is not nothing...it is an object (in this case a bottle of smart bottle; yeah, I fell for that bit of marketing ).

Your analogy is flawed.

[edit on 14-6-2008 by MemoryShock]

And how would you go about creating free thinkers? What process would you have people follow, what books would you put on a required reading list, what philosophies would you endorse?

Every historical example I can think of, where there was deliberate attempt to 'free people from their bonds' and 'enlighten' them, has shifted, in practice, from the original, altruistic principles, to dogma, indoctrination, and a new form of required conformity.

Perhaps people simply can't be led to enlightenment and freedom, and they must find their individuality for themselves.

In that case, how can they be encouraged to do so? If we really want free-thinkers in society, that means, also, that people must be able to be free from the definitions and viewpoints of those who would 'liberate' them.

Perhaps the one thing good that can be said about the constant drumbeat of group-think, triviality espoused as importance, and mind-control that the OP mentions, is that it can be so poisonous, so disgusting, that individuals often develop 'anti-bodies' to it, and are forced away, adrift, to find their own directions, their own priorities -- themselves.

Note: Trying to actively practice this philosophy is dangerous. I don't endorse that. 'Poisoning the well' to force people to find their own water elsewhere, where they will, makes one definitely a poisoner, not a liberator.


[Edit to mention: MemoryShock, my reply wasn't directed to you -- I didn't see your post before I replied or I would have made that more clear. Sigh. We obviously like the same kinds of threads -- looking forward to our debate!]

[edit on 14-6-2008 by Ian McLean]

reply to post by MemoryShock


Good stuff you bring forth.. and yes im just a messenger in the first post, the quotes are more or less from the videos i linked to.

I dont know if the point is that we are so hopelessly addicted to one medium, that we dont "know" of any other places of info. That we only check with that one, and therefore only get their input on the matter (false or not). And then adopt their views.


And the quote;
...because you are reading this now...
- or -
...because you are hearing this now (in the video)

Does that mean that we are currently reading\hearing something that is false? To prove that we will take the stats we hear to heart very easily? "Only 3% of you reads books." Is this statement even correct?


Hehe I cant take this 100% seriously, because he`s basicly saying that he is the enemy, "dont listen to me, thats why we`re in trouble" But I think i get the point.

BTW I dont watch TV

So what should we do to avoid being "brainwashed?" Should we not even bother to absorb information from sources that you don't trust? Should we all just stop sending our children to school? From what I gather, you don't think I should be watching any television, reading anything on the internet, and relying solely on books and newspapers, the credibility of which are just as questionable. There is an infinite amount of information waiting for me to absorb, but if I follow your advice then I'll never learn about it, by choice? You're telling people to ignore certain sources of knowledge, which in my opinion is very dangerous. I'd rather take my chances and learn what I can. I don't simply let things that I see and read determine what I should believe, and I won't be letting you do it for me either.

TV's are excellent for watching downloaded movies. And thanks to the channel selector, I can skip the propaganda if I want. Sometimes I turn on CNN for a laugh though. Its hysterical.

So yes, I agree with the previous poster that you should not blame the TV when in fact its the corporations/government that are using the media to influence your thinking to what suits them. Its perfect to have a scared population if you want to sell the illusion of keeping them safe.

People get smarter with age. In my 20's, I didnt question the news because I didnt have life experience. Now I do. Its part of growing up I think. You realize everyone has their own agenda, and someone is paying for the propaganda to get through to you because it fits their agenda.




[edit on 14-6-2008 by Copernicus]

I think interpretation, analysing and intelligence is what the OP may be getting at.

As a scientists once told me, what separates us from monkeys is we ask questions. The problem is the modern society has an environment which is presented as black and white. Most people, sadly, believe what the TV and internet tells them. No offence, but ATS is sometimes evidence confirming it.

You watch and read. That's it. A third party does the interpretation, analysing and intelligence for you. But that should not be the system.

If we read an article in the paper, you should ask yourself how the individual came to that conclusion. Do not just accept it at face value.

Truth and fact is what you want it to be, not what someone else has told you.

You got a flag from me, now people will see this thread, and read it, and start reading books, and we will be in less trouble !

I predict a new dark age soon. Anyone with a book in his hand will look suspicious, I think this is happening already



[edit on 14-6-2008 by pai mei]

There are several ATS MIX guests that Johnny and I have had over the past year that address the Mind Control issues, Stewart Swerdlow just recently and a few others. Believe or not, it is a fascinating subject matter that really intrigues me.

Dave

I agree with this post completely. I've been noticing that people are starting to dedicate more and more time to movies and entertainment. More and more time to pleasures...

It's their way of getting away from the daily struggles of life, which are getting harder and harder. Here's why...

- High gas prices led by corrupt oil companies
- Higher food prices due to inflation
- Natural disasters happening everywhere
- The sub-prime mortgage crisis
- The Iraq War, and the threat of future false flag attacks
- A President that couldn't care less

It's hard to actually sit down and read, isn't it? Most people would rather turn on the TV.

Originally posted by pai mei
You got a flag from me, now people will see this thread, and read it, and start reading books, and we will be in less trouble !

I predict a new dark age soon. Anyone with a book in his hand will look suspicious, I think this is happening already
[edit on 14-6-2008 by pai mei]

I still have to argue that the credibility of books is no better than other sources. I could write a book that says anything I want it to, but it doesn't make my writing credible, and reading it won't enlighten you. If anything, I would be attempting to brainwash you into thinking whatever I like. You don't need a keyboard or moving pictures to do that.

And what makes you think that a "dark age" is coming? Why would having a book make you look suspicious? Do you realize that (at least in the 'free world') that statement has consistently become less and less true in the last few hundred years? What are you basing this on?

Four, multiplied, zero times, is just four. It never got multiplied. See?

Now lets write it in symbols: 4x0=4 You have indeed been mislead.


Every 'science' that has been taught is full of lies. Its easy to spot the ones who think differently. They get to go to the re education facilities......They are a danger to anyone in power.

See just like I said 4x0=0. Thats my story and i'm sticking to it.

reply to post by Daniem


To acknowledge that we are being controlled and see how it has effected our lives is an "aha!" moment. Finally beginning to Understand what is going on around us and how we fit into the puzzle is the EUREKA! moment indicating that you have found the correct path. After that it is your choice what to do.
If you don't program your mind then someone will do it for you, this we should not deny nor can we avoid.

Originally posted by hinky
You [Daniem] have a slim grasp of the total picture...
...The internet has killed off the newspaper with TV going to web sites to attract younger viewers.

I would say he has summarized the point, although slim, it is none-the-less correct.

To say that the internet has killed news is a short sighted and, I think, incorrect outlook. I would say that it is the lack of important and accurate news from the media that has created the need for internet news.
To listen only to corporate media outlets has a 'dumbing down effect', we are out of the loop and have no clue as to what is going on making decisions out of fear and ignorance. What kind of message does that send to the world+?

If the so called 'investigative reporters' would dare risk their careers and actually investigate and then...well... I don't know- maybe...REPORT some of it then there would be no need to scour the internet looking for news.
No, I think we all went to internet news as the only source of any truth and the old media followed. Not all of the stuff on the internet is true but there is a far better chance of finding some here then from corporate owned media.

by hinky
The US education is so dumbed down, many kids can't read an entire book as it takes attention, and those who do will not comprehend most of what they read.

This is an example of seeing the problem but not understanding what is going on- just an aha and not Eureka.

by hinky
As an adult with a view towards the kids (under 30 crowd) of today. In the whole scheme of things, FUBAR comes to mind. All a person concerned about this can hope for is that the people involved have more common sense than educators give them credit for having, and can figure out facts from fiction. It will become harder and harder as the education system relies more and more on computer based information than real, in your hands, books and paper driven research.

your perspective makes me sad and, lucky for me, I disagree. I see kids today being able to digest far more information then we could 20+ years ago at a much faster rate. The problem may be that they have yet to, "Stop and smell the roses," or learn how important it is to rest and take in what your learning. I see a dumbing down effect but not all under 30's are effected and if you understand what an exponential increase is then hold on to something solid 'cuse here we go.


[edit on 6/14/2008 by Devino]

Originally posted by KMFNWO
hold an object representing 4 in one hand. Hold an object representing X 0 in you other hand. X 0 is nothing so you have nothing in your other hand. Put the two hands together and what is left? 4. Therefore you can see clearly that 4 X 0 = 4

OMG. If you are serious then we are in a lot of trouble, but especially you. This expression is the sum of either four groups of zero or zero groups of four. Either way, the answer is zero every time.

If you are making a joke with your post then I'm sorry. If not, then I'm not.

Regarding the whole "4x0" issue..

Multiplication is the "Addition of sets"

8, in the world of multiplication, is "2 sets of 4".

12, in the world of multiplication, is "3 sets of 4".

4, in the world of multiplication, is "1 set of 4".

0, in the world of multiplication, is "no sets of 4".

Hence, "4x0=0"

Originally posted by greatpiino

I still have to argue that the credibility of books is no better than other sources. I could write a book that says anything I want it to, but it doesn't make my writing credible, and reading it won't enlighten you. If anything, I would be attempting to brainwash you into thinking whatever I like. You don't need a keyboard or moving pictures to do that.

And what makes you think that a "dark age" is coming? Why would having a book make you look suspicious? Do you realize that (at least in the 'free world') that statement has consistently become less and less true in the last few hundred years? What are you basing this on?

Credibility you ask ? Try reading a few books, fictional books I mean. Try "Iron Heel" from Jack London, or "Shogun", "King Rat", "Les Miserables", whatever, try "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer"

You do not know anything about books, if you ask for "credibility". They allow you to see the world from different points of view, not to be like a superstitious peasant from 1500 with it's fixed view of the world

A dark age is coming : oil is running out, how do you think all these people who never read a book will behave ? I say they will behave like the medieval peasants.
The car, the computer, the washing machine, everything modern around us does not make us smarter. Unless we ourselves are curious to find out stuff

If you find books boring do not read.
You will react like this when you see one :
seclists.org...

The offending book was an essay by Karl Marx, On Suicide. It was the
reference to suicide that had got the policemen really excited. They
barely registered the author, though when they did real panic set in
and there were agitated exchanges. The way they began to watch me was
an indication of their state of mind. They really thought they had got
someone. My passport and boarding card were taken from me, I was
rudely instructed to re-pack my bag, minus the crucial "evidence" (the
SDZ, the TLS and the offending text by Marx), and I was escorted out
of the departure area and taken to the police headquarters at the
airport.

I mean a book about suicide ?! Dangerous ! Could make you want to kill yourself ! Or others !



[edit on 14-6-2008 by pai mei]

I would just like to throw a thought bomb out and see what happens.

If you think you have been a victim of mind control, then rebel against it. I happen to think that we are all wearing a yolk by choice. What we have is a classic carrot and stick setup. The carrot is the desire to be admired by those around you. The stick is the fear of embarrassment. Go out in public and intentionally draw attention to yourself. Go ahead. Do it. Stand on a street corner and tell people that you believe we're all being controlled. If you can't do it, why not? Afraid of embarrassment?

Originally posted by pai mei
Credibility you ask ? Try reading a few books, fictional books I mean. Try "Iron Heel" from Jack London, or "Shogun", "King Rat", "Les Miserables", whatever, try "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer"

You do not know anything about books, if you ask for "credibility". They allow you to see the world from different points of view, not to be like a superstitious peasant from 1500 with it's fixed view of the world

On average I read about 3 books a month, both fiction and non-fiction. You're not understanding my point. Obviously you can't question the credibility of a fictional book which is meant for entertainment. I question the credibility of books as a reference tool in comparison to that of television programs, internet content, etc. My argument questions the trustworthiness, NOT the usefulness, of books. That is the point I am debating in the context of this thread, which is where we should keep this discussion. Again, you definitely didn't understand my point.

Originally posted by pai mei
A dark age is coming : oil is running out, how do you think all these people who never read a book will behave ? I say they will behave like the medieval peasants.
The car, the computer, the washing machine, everything modern around us does not make us smarter. Unless we ourselves are curious to find out stuff

So basically what you're saying is that anyone who doesn't regularly read books loses their concept of morality? Because someone never read a book, they're going to revert to the mindset of 'medieval peasants?' If this is what you believe, then you are drastically underestimating our human race. I'm not looking to pick a fight with you, I'm just trying to understand what you're saying.

You've made some assumptions about me and you've put words in my mouth, I don't appreciate it. Like I said, you've misunderstood my point in relation to the context of this thread.

reply to post by Daniem



You realize that the ATS-type people read more books and watch less TV?

We are so disconnected from reality we´re not even interested in Britney Spears new outfit.


[edit on 14-6-2008 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by Skyfloating


I am, how was she dressed? Was her hair all oily and hot looking?

j/k


To the rest:

But anyway, even though I agree that the majority of people are interested in very superficial stuff. That doesn't mean that I shouldn't watch tv.

I hardly read physical books, I read e-books more often. Mainly because they don't have to be delivered when I purchase them. I hardly read newspapers, mainly because it doesn't make sense to read them. I hate to generalize, but they usually have primarily bad, sensational news in them.

And besides, the internet has helped me a great deal in my personal development and is helping me financially.

And as for tv. I watch MTV sometimes (love pimp my ride and mtv cribs), and I don't see anything wrong with that. I watch baseball sometimes and I watch a lot of football, especially with the Euro 2008 going on now. Plus comedy, sci-fi, documentaries etc...

I enjoy myself with it, and I don't see anything wrong with that.




[edit on 14-6-2008 by TheBandit795]

I noticed in high school the history books tended to preach that all the problems in the world were directly related to religion. Not just any religion, but specific religions. Religions that had clearly defined sets of moral standards, were the primary targets. Examples were given, often pitching entire groups into the same barrel. It didn't matter if the most vocal and visible were only a small slice of that groups' reality, or that they had risen to the power positions they had due to the fact they were designed for doing exactly what they did - a demoralizing focal point, representing an entire belief system which could then be used to demonstrate how incorrect the belief system is or was. This happens all the time.

For example, when Bush was voted in for his second term, some broadcaster got on CNN, with a map of the USA in which the areas that voted for bush were colored red, and the areas that voted democratic were colored blue. Across the middle of the map were the words JESUSLAND. Then the broadcaster got out what has to be the biggest single televised example of prejudice I've personally witnessed on american news, and said something along the lines of:

The red states are people with lower IQs, not as smart or as well educated as the blue states.
The red states were primarily people of christian faith. (this automatically painted a picture in the mind of the viewer that the two are synonmous - lower IQ = christianity (= red state = bush = greedy capitalist liar = etc))
It was further fine-tuned to indicate people who lived in the red states were prejudice, white, uneducated, rednecks. Every possible negative connotation was used.

LATER, it was determined that the electronic voting machines had been tampered with and that Bush had won by vote tampering. But now the idea was in the mind of the young folks in the colleges and so forth, that their candidate of choice hadn't won because greedy, white, red neck, christian idiots, with no educations, had voted in bush and made sure he won by tampering with the voting machines.

I'm telling you, Palpatine would've been proud of the entire debacle.

I watched those videos, and boy, do they make alot of sense.



[edit on 14-6-2008 by undo]