Everyone needs to watch this video

12467…18

Comments

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited May 2009
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:

    You love making a fool of yourself don't you.

    7 years ago you say? How about 2 years ago?

    yea, you really got me. since this site is probably blocked in China, I'll cut and paste it for you.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/ ... 3552.shtml

    Polls, Truth Sometimes At Odds

    How can people believe something that isn’t true?

    A significant number of Americans say Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

    That number rose above 50 percent in the run-up to the war in Iraq in 2003. While that belief has since declined somewhat, for many Americans it still exists. In the latest CBS News/New York Times Poll 33 percent said they believe Saddam was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks.

    As has been repeated over and over, there was and is no evidence of any such link. So why do so many people believe something that just isn’t true?

    One reason might be related to the amount of time a person spends following news, something related to education and gender. Forty-four percent of those with a high school education or less say Saddam was personally involved in 9/11, while just 20 percent of college graduates say so. Thirty-eight percent of women think he was part of the attack, compared with 27 percent of men.

    Another reason could involve feelings about the Iraq war itself, and the importance of reducing cognitive dissonance. The Iraq War has become a partisan issue - three in four Republicans say going to war was the right thing to do, while three in four Democrats say it was not. Nearly half of those who now say the Iraq war was the right thing to do connect 9/11 with Saddam. Consequently, 40 percent of Republicans believe Saddam was involved in 9/11, while just 27 percent of Democrats do.

    Bringing down Saddam remains the key accomplishment of the war, according to the public, and those who support the war are more likely to believe this and to credit Saddam with a role in 9/11. Doing so, after all, gives them another justification for the war they support. Opponents of the war don’t have the same reason to blame Saddam.

    Making a link between terrorism in general and the war in Iraq also matters. Overall, Americans are more likely to say the war in Iraq is creating more terrorists who might attack the U.S. than to say it is eliminating terrorists. But among those who believe the U.S. is eliminating terrorists by fighting in Iraq, just about half (49 percent) believe that one of those terrorists was Saddam himself!

    Among Republicans, blaming Saddam is also related to the vote choice of those who say they plan to participate in a Republican primary or caucus next year. Those who support Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are more likely than those who support John McCain and Mitt Romney to link Saddam with 9/11.

    But finally, the belief in what isn’t true brings us back to the quality of information - to where it comes from and how it is perceived. Norbert Schwarz, a psychology professor and researcher at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, has conducted research (reported in this Washington Post article) that suggests that some people who are told something is false may actually remember it as being true. He measured the misperception within 30 minutes of the receipt of the information, and found that misperceptions may actually become stronger over time.

    Nice try.

    The following is taken directly from a 2008 Newsweek poll. Here's the link: http://www.newsweek.com/id/143921/output/print

    Newsweek Web Exclusive
    Updated: 7:59 p.m. ET Jun 28, 2008

    Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was DIRECTLY involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, or not?
    Yes 34
    No 56
    Don't Know 10


    2007 poll:

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/39529

    Dunce-Cap Nation

    We asked Americans about current events, history and cultural literacy. And we got some pretty disheartening results.
    Newsweek Web Exclusive
    Updated: 3:08 p.m. ET Sep 4, 2007

    Even today, more' than four years into the war in Iraq, as many as four in 10 Americans (41 percent) still believe Saddam Hussein's regime was directly involved in financing, planning or carrying out the terrorist attacks on 9/11, even though no evidence has surfaced to support a connection...'


    At any rate, the article you posted doesn't answer any questions. It's just a load of muddled conjecture designed to try and excuse the embarrassing fact of the poll.
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    soulsinging wrote:
    I was referring to your inability and refusal to answer a straight question.


    What straight question? Go ahead and remind me.
    soulsinging wrote:
    I point out that China has blocked access to any outside news sources... you ignore that and say "hey US mainstream media is selective too." That's intellectual dishonesty


    Actually, one common form of intellectual dishonesty is distorting what people actually said. For example, I didn't say "hey US mainstream media is selective too." I said something else. You're only able to argue by fudging the facts, and moving the goalposts. Still, everyone reading this has eyes to see quite clearly what you're up to, so keep going. It's amusing if nothing else.

    I've been reading, and soul is doing an excellent job exposing your intellectually dishonesty. although I shouldnt give soul too much credit, you make it all too easy
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I've been reading, and soul is doing an excellent job exposing your intellectually dishonesty. although I shouldnt give soul too much credit, you make it all too easy

    You mean 'intellectual dishonesty'?
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Byrnzie wrote:
    soulsinging wrote:
    and here is the crucial difference that you will no doubt ignore because it proves you wrong and reveals your hypocrisy... So don't talk to me about freedom. We have the options, we just don't always use them. China doesn't even give the option.


    My hypocrisy? Your government, and media, routinely lie to you. Are you denying that?

    The fact that some media outlets may have done an about-turn a year or two after the invasion/occupation of Iraq doesn't mean shit.

    People in China also have options - and most people don't always use them. Youtube was first blocked about 3 weeks ago. But for everything else there's web-proxy's.

    You think Americans are so much freer than people in other countries. I say bullshit.

    I believe the government lies to us and the media cosigns it. I'm not denying that at all. Are you denying that there is more censorship in China than in the US? You have to use a web-proxy to get news because the government prohibits you reading it... are you really going to tell me the US censors more than China?

    Your last statement is too vague. I think Americans are more free than the average Chinese.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Byrnzie wrote:
    soulsinging wrote:
    I was referring to your inability and refusal to answer a straight question.

    What straight question? Go ahead and remind me.

    Do you truly contend that people in the US have access to less information than the Chinese due to censorship?
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Nice try.

    The following is taken directly from a 2008 Newsweek poll. Here's the link: http://www.newsweek.com/id/143921/output/print

    Newsweek Web Exclusive
    Updated: 7:59 p.m. ET Jun 28, 2008

    Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was DIRECTLY involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, or not?
    Yes 34
    No 56
    Don't Know 10

    2007 poll:

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/39529

    Dunce-Cap Nation

    We asked Americans about current events, history and cultural literacy. And we got some pretty disheartening results.
    Newsweek Web Exclusive
    Updated: 3:08 p.m. ET Sep 4, 2007

    Even today, more' than four years into the war in Iraq, as many as four in 10 Americans (41 percent) still believe Saddam Hussein's regime was directly involved in financing, planning or carrying out the terrorist attacks on 9/11, even though no evidence has surfaced to support a connection...'

    At any rate, the article you posted doesn't answer any questions. It's just a load of muddled conjecture designed to try and excuse the embarrassing fact of the poll.

    The article you posted doesn't support your position. This article shows (as its headline clearly indicates) that Americans are fucking morons. It says nothing about censorship or access to information. The cause of American belief in the Saddam-9/11 connection is not mentioned at all in here. It could be inbreeding, stupidity, fox news, or anything else. But it certainly is NOT due to the fact that we can't read news articles debunking that claim.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    soulsinging wrote:
    I believe the government lies to us and the media cosigns it. I'm not denying that at all. Are you denying that there is more censorship in China than in the US? You have to use a web-proxy to get news because the government prohibits you reading it... are you really going to tell me the US censors more than China?

    Your last statement is too vague. I think Americans are more free than the average Chinese.

    Propaganda works in many different ways, and on different levels. In my experience people here generally aren't politically minded. The news here is innocuous. The media rarely distorts the facts, or uses the well-worn tactic of selective omission; if a subject is deemed harmful to the powers that be then it's liable to just be outright ignored. People aren't brainwashed, they're just oblivious to many things.
    Now, which one of these factors you deem to be preferable is up to you. I'd say it's debatable at any rate. And on the subject of being free, I think it makes little difference.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Intellectual dishonesty? Great, let's begin here then: Please point out one instance where I defended the Chinese government. Thanks, I'm waiting.
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Propaganda works in many different ways, and on different levels. In my experience people here generally aren't politically minded. The news here is innocuous. The media rarely distorts the facts, or uses the well-worn tactic of selective omission; if a subject is deemed harmful to the powers that be then it's liable to just be outright ignored. People aren't brainwashed, they're just oblivious to many things.
    Now, which one of these factors you deem to be preferable is up to you. I'd say it's debatable at any rate. And on the subject of being free, I think it makes little difference.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    soulsinging wrote:
    Do you truly contend that people in the US have access to less information than the Chinese due to censorship?

    Funny, but I don't recall you asking me this question before.

    I'm only aware of Youtube being blocked. I don't know what else is.


    I can't watch Youtube which requires javascript, and because javascript won't work through a proxy I can't watch Youtube vids. Other than that, I'm not aware of anything I can't access.

    As for the mainstream news here, I'd say it's just as innocuous and unchallenging as the mainstream news is in the U.S.

    If people want information they look on the internet. That's the same here as everywhere else.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Intellectual dishonesty? Great, let's begin here then: Please point out one instance where I defended the Chinese government. Thanks, I'm waiting.
    Byrnzie wrote:

    Propaganda works in many different ways, and on different levels. In my experience people here generally aren't politically minded. The news here is innocuous. The media rarely distorts the facts, or uses the well-worn tactic of selective omission; if a subject is deemed harmful to the powers that be then it's liable to just be outright ignored. People aren't brainwashed, they're just oblivious to many things.
    Now, which one of these factors you deem to be preferable is up to you. I'd say it's debatable at any rate. And on the subject of being free, I think it makes little difference.

    I posted the above after your claim that I defended the Chinese government.
    Either way, this just shows how desperate you are. Nothing in the above comment points to my defending the Chinese government. Keep trying.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    soulsinging wrote:
    The article you posted doesn't support your position. This article shows (as its headline clearly indicates) that Americans are fucking morons. It says nothing about censorship or access to information. The cause of American belief in the Saddam-9/11 connection is not mentioned at all in here. It could be inbreeding, stupidity, fox news, or anything else. But it certainly is NOT due to the fact that we can't read news articles debunking that claim.

    The mere fact of somethings availability doesn't presuppose that anyone's aware of it.

    Example: Every year for the past 35 years the U.S has unilaterally vetoed every U.N resolution calling for a peaceful two-state settlement of the Israel-Palestine issue. Thais information is available. How many Americans are aware of it?

    Have you read 'Manufacturing Consent' or 'Deterring Democracy'? You should.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    soulsinging wrote:
    Do you truly contend that people in the US have access to less information than the Chinese due to censorship?

    Funny, but I don't recall you asking me this question before.

    I'm only aware of Youtube being blocked. I don't know what else is.


    I can't watch Youtube which requires javascript, and because javascript won't work through a proxy I can't watch Youtube vids. Other than that, I'm not aware of anything I can't access.

    As for the mainstream news here, I'd say it's just as innocuous and unchallenging as the mainstream news is in the U.S.

    If people want information they look on the internet. That's the same here as everywhere else.

    your last statement is the very definition of intellectual dishonesty. its NOT the same as everywhere else.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_c ... c_of_China
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China

    'No unit or individual may use the Internet to create, replicate, retrieve, or transmit the following kinds of information:

    1. Inciting to resist or breaking the Constitution or laws or the implementation of administrative regulations;
    2. Inciting to overthrow the government or the socialist system;
    3. Inciting division of the country, harming national unification;
    4. Inciting hatred or discrimination among nationalities or harming the unity of the nationalities;
    5. Making falsehoods or distorting the truth, spreading rumors, destroying the order of society;
    6. Promoting feudal superstitions, sexually suggestive material, gambling, violence, murder;
    7. Terrorism or inciting others to criminal activity; openly insulting other people or distorting the truth to slander people;
    8. Injuring the reputation of state organs;
    9. Other activities against the Constitution, laws or administrative regulations.[8]



    And how does any of this differ from the laws in the U.S regarding the internet?
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China

    'No unit or individual may use the Internet to create, replicate, retrieve, or transmit the following kinds of information:

    1. Inciting to resist or breaking the Constitution or laws or the implementation of administrative regulations;
    2. Inciting to overthrow the government or the socialist system;
    3. Inciting division of the country, harming national unification;
    4. Inciting hatred or discrimination among nationalities or harming the unity of the nationalities;
    5. Making falsehoods or distorting the truth, spreading rumors, destroying the order of society;
    6. Promoting feudal superstitions, sexually suggestive material, gambling, violence, murder;
    7. Terrorism or inciting others to criminal activity; openly insulting other people or distorting the truth to slander people;
    8. Injuring the reputation of state organs;
    9. Other activities against the Constitution, laws or administrative regulations.[8]



    And how does any of this differ from the laws in the U.S regarding the internet?

    um, try all of them.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    um, try all of them.

    1. Inciting to resist or breaking the Constitution or laws or the implementation of administrative regulations;
    2. Inciting to overthrow the government or the socialist system;
    3. Inciting division of the country, harming national unification;
    4. Inciting hatred or discrimination among nationalities or harming the unity of the nationalities;
    5. Making falsehoods or distorting the truth, spreading rumors, destroying the order of society;
    6. Promoting feudal superstitions, sexually suggestive material, gambling, violence, murder;
    7. Terrorism or inciting others to criminal activity; openly insulting other people or distorting the truth to slander people;
    8. Injuring the reputation of state organs;
    9. Other activities against the Constitution, laws or administrative regulations.[8]

    So you're saying that 1,2,4, and 7 are o.k in the U.S?
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    By the way, nice job of derailing this thread.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    edited May 2009
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    um, try all of them.

    1. Inciting to resist or breaking the Constitution or laws or the implementation of administrative regulations;
    2. Inciting to overthrow the government or the socialist system;
    3. Inciting division of the country, harming national unification;
    4. Inciting hatred or discrimination among nationalities or harming the unity of the nationalities;
    5. Making falsehoods or distorting the truth, spreading rumors, destroying the order of society;
    6. Promoting feudal superstitions, sexually suggestive material, gambling, violence, murder;
    7. Terrorism or inciting others to criminal activity; openly insulting other people or distorting the truth to slander people;
    8. Injuring the reputation of state organs;
    9. Other activities against the Constitution, laws or administrative regulations.[8]

    So you're saying that 1,2,4, and 7 are o.k in the U.S?

    the first part of #7 is no good. the rest are perfectly legal
    Post edited by jlew24asu on
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    By the way, nice job of derailing this thread.

    lol ok dude. I'm sure your 20 posts about China having more freedoms then the US had nothing to do with that. wow, what a hypocrite.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited May 2009
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    By the way, nice job of derailing this thread.

    lol ok dude. I'm sure your 20 posts about China having more freedoms then the US had nothing to do with that. wow, what a hypocrite.

    Because I was the first to mention China in this thread, right?

    And nice job with throwing out insults. I wonder how many warnings you've received already for your fucking lame trolling tactics on this board?
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    By the way, nice job of derailing this thread.

    lol ok dude. I'm sure your 20 posts about China having more freedoms then the US had nothing to do with that. wow, what a hypocrite.

    Because I was the first to mention China in this thread and, right?

    And nice job with throwing out insults. I wonder how many warnings you've received already for your fucking lame trolling tactics on this board?

    spare me. no one insulted you. you clearly are acting like a hypocrite for involving yourself in 4 pages of discussion about China and US censorship. but yet, everyone else is to blame right?

    and I havent received any warnings for "trolling tactics" because thats not what I do. I'm involved in several discussions ranging from many topics.

Categories