It's OK for you to think as you do, Allan ! And, it's OK too for me not to think as you do.
I've nothing against BO. In fact, it feels good it is he on the stage instead of Bush, and I certainly wish he succeeds at what he 's promised to pursue and deliver. Only, I see no purpose is served in concluding too soon. And, I see no reason whatsoever for going ga - ga over BO, from what I've observed so far. On Oct 12, 12:33 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > Vam sometimes I think you walk with your eyes closed because you do not want > to see. One thing I see happening he is dissolving the school yard bully > mentality that was so deeply installed by the Bush mentality, bringing into > play a genuine desire for Peace that is something that is desperately needed > by this world to day. > > "I see said the blind man but he did not see at all!" > Allan > > > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thank you, OM ! The quotes are grim reminders of ourself and of > > irrational power structures rooted in our mass ignorance. > > I see all this sing - a - song ga - ga paen to BO as being symptomatic > > of much the same, albeit a ' feel good ' one. > > > What we need be doing is not to suspend our critical eye and to > > continue to ask : BO ... who ? > > > What has he done ? What is he doing ? What does it bode for our > > future ? There are some positives, in terms of what he's said he > > represents. But, at the end of the day, we are still to find out if > > did it all lead to causing more trust, goodwill, security, hope, > > transparency, fraternity, simplicity, joy and happiness ... ? > > > Did it take us closer to reconciliation of people who are merely > > different, who merely have different perspectives, who are either > > violent ( for reasons of their own ) or are facing the violent ( for > > no rhyme or reason ) ? > > > Did we end up changing the world, its global power structures, > > thoughts, beliefs and attitudes, resource management priorities and > > poverty management practices ? > > > Did we come to strengthen and orient our global institutions towards > > voices of the different, small, poor and weak people among us ? > > > Have we better assured ourselves from all the violence potential in > > the arms stockpiles, ideology wars, global warmimg, military - > > industrial - economic cliques ... ? > > > Have we brought the interests of the common global citizen to our > > collective fore ? > > > The day we have some positive answers and evidence to back up, that > > would be the day to let BO know how we see his life and his work ! > > The rest is either religious fervour or political subtlety. > > > On Oct 11, 5:15 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > PEACE: > > > > “They who have put out the people’s eyes reproach them of their > > > blindness.” - John Milton, 1642. > > > > The Third Reich was very effective in many ways. I think we have much > > > to learn from their rhetoric which, when analyzed, can be quite > > > instructive. Much of it points directly to the methodology used > > > globally ever since. Without an understanding of how leaders > > > manufacture consent, we are doomed to repeating the human frailty of > > > susceptibility to nationalistic appetites and we will never have the > > > clarity of mind, emotion and will to be able to demand the peace which > > > is our absolute right. – OM > > > > From a conversation with Herman Goering (a German politician, military > > > leader and a leading member of the Nazi Party) in his cell at the > > > Nuremberg trials 4/18/1946 found in ‘Nurenberg Diary’, a book by > > > Gustave Gilbert who was an intelligence officer and psychologist > > > granted free access by the Allies to all prisoners held in the > > > Nurenberg jail: > > > > ======www.snopes.com===== > > > > “Why, of course, the people don’t want war,” Goering shrugged “Why > > > would some poor slob on a farm risk his life in a war when the best he > > > can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, > > > the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor > > > in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, > > > after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy > > > and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it > > > is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a > > > Communist dictatorship.” > > > > “There is one difference,” I [Gilbert] pointed out. “In a democracy > > > the people have some say in the matter through their elected > > > representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare > > > wars.” > > > > [Goering] “Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the > > > people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is > > > easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and > > > denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country > > > to danger. It works the same way in any country.” > > > > ====== > > > > JOSEPH GOEBBELS - a German politician and Reichsminister of Propaganda > > > in Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945. > > > > "...the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. > > > Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and > > > repetitious. The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no > > > success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind > > > constantly...it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them > > > over and over." – Joseph Goebbels > > > > “During a war, news should be given out for instruction rather than > > > information." – Joseph Goebbels > > > > "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will > > > eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such > > > time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic > > > and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally > > > important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, > > > for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, > > > the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." – Joseph Goebbels > > > > “Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for > > > every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its > > > roots in the street.” – Joseph Goebbels > > > > "It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of > > > public opinion." – Joseph Goebbels > > > > ===== > > > > Quotes from the movie “Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the > > > Media” www.IMDB.Com > > > > Noam Chomsky: The point is that in a military state or a feudal state, > > > or what you would nowadays call a totalitarian state, it doesn't much > > > matter what people think, because you've got a legend over there that > > > you can control what they do. But when the state looses legend, and > > > you can't control people by force. And when the voice of the people > > > can be heard you have this problem, it may make people so curious and > > > so arrogant that they don't have the humility to submit to a civil > > > rule. And therefore you have to control what people think. > > > > Noam Chomsky: Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. > > > So was Stalin. If you're really in favor of free speech, then you're > > > in favor of freedom of speech for precisely for views you despise. > > > Otherwise, you're not in favor of free speech. > > > > Noam Chomsky: There's maybe twenty percent of the population that is > > > relatively educated, more or less articulate, that play some kind of > > > role in decision making. They're supposed to participate in social > > > life either as managers, or cultural managers, like say, teachers, > > > writers and so on. They're supposed to vote. They're supposed to play > > > some role in the way economic, political and cultural life goes on. > > > Now they're consent is crucial. It's one group that has to be deeply > > > indoctrinated. Then there's maybe eighty percent of the population > > > whose main function is to follow orders and not to think. > > > > Noam Chomsky: When the state looses the bludgeon... you have to > > > control what people think. And the standard way to do this is to > > > resort to what in more honest days used to be called propaganda. > > > > Noam Chomsky: There's nothing more remote from what we have been > > > discussing than a conspiracy theory. If I give an analysis of, say the > > > economic system, and I point out that GM tries to maximize profit and > > > market share - that's not a conspiracy theory; that's an institutional > > > analysis. It has nothing to do with conspiracies. That's precisely the > > > sense in which we've been talking about the media. The phrase > > > "conspiracy theory" is one of those that's constantly brought up, and > > > I think it's effect simply is to discourage institutional analysis. > > > > Noam Chomsky: Suppose I get on "Nightline". I'm given two minutes and > > > I say Quaddafi is a terrorist or Khomeini is a murderer... I don't > > > need any evidence, everybody just nods. On the other hand, suppose you > > > say something that just isn't regurgitating conventional pieties... > > > Suppose you say "The biggest international terror operations that are > > > known are the ones that are run out of Washington", or suppose, you > > > say "What happened in the 1980s is the US government was driven > > > underground", suppose I say "The US is invading South Vietnam," as it > > > was, or "The best political leaders are the ones that are lazy and > > > corrupt", "If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war > > > american president would have been hanged.", "The Bible is one of the > > > most genocidal books in the total canon.", "Education is a system of > > > imposed ignorance", "There is no more morality in world affairs, > > > fundamentally, then there was at the time of Genghis Khan..." People > > > will, quite reasonably, expect to know what you mean. Why did you say > > > that ?... You'd better have a lot of evidence... But you can't give > > > evidence if you're stuck with concision. That's the genius of this > > > structural contraint. And in my view, people from Nightline and so on, > > > if they were smarter, if they were better propagandists, they would > > > let dissidents on, let them on more in > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
