Originally posted by NemesioEvery time you make one of these criticisms, you are deliberately attempting
Every time you make one of these corrections, you are deliberately attempting
to look like a dick.
So, why would you criticize Shavixmir for deliberately attempting to look like a
plonker?
Nemesio
to look like a plonker-donker.
So, why would you criticize Bowmann for deliberately attempting to look like a
dick?
Flex
Originally posted by Bosse de Nagedid you know owls look forwards very well ... they look like carnivores,
I can't comment until I see a photo of Bowmann.
and cows look all around at the same time ... cows look like herbivores....
how will a photo of Bowmannn help you understand how he looks at the world?
Originally posted by flexmoreI don't recall criticizing him in my post. I made the observation that his calling
So, why would you criticize Bowmann for deliberately attempting to look like a
dick?
a person a plonker for using a noun instead of an adjective in a list on this web
site makes him a dick. If he objects to someone's actively pursuing his
plonker-hood, I find it odd that he would not object to someone's actively
pursuing dick-hood.
Now, perhaps, for Bowmann, being right but a dick doesn't harbor any negative
quality, whereas being a decent guy but wrong harbors a great negative quality.
I would find such a stance odd, but I can't say definitively what Bowmann thinks.
Perhaps he thinks he's being helpful and doesn't realize that he's a dick! Or,
maybe he thinks that the correcting outweighs the dick-ness.
In any event, my observing that he's a dick doesn't make me anything in particular,
or do you just let people be dicks without comment where you live?
Nemesio
Originally posted by flexmoreHe will look at his feet all the time?
did you know owls look forwards very well ... they look like carnivores,
and cows look all around at the same time ... cows look like herbivores....
how will a photo of Bowmannn help you understand how he looks at the world?
Originally posted by angie88That's what I thought.
from wikipedia:
The U.S. frontier
Following the victory of the United States in the American Revolutionary War and the signing Treaty of Paris in 1783, the United States gained formal, if not actual, control of the British lands west of the Appalachians. The prohibition against settlement was rendered moot and the lands of the Ohio Country and in weste ...[text shortened]... Frontier "closed". Many have less than 2 persons per square mile.
btw, thanks shavi 😀
1 thing I can think of that they learned in the frontier days is the importance of using the media to distort factual occurances to appear in a better light for the american way of life.
Like, for example the genocide of the indians back in the frontier days. I've noticed a lot of americans (probably the same ones who think that Saddam had something to do with 911) get edumacated by the tv and movies.
Misinformation through the media has been going on since the days of the frontier. Sitting Bull, after being allowed off the reservation for the day was due to give a prepared speech to dignatories on the opening of part of the Pacific NorthWest Railway. Instead of the welcoming message, Sitting Bull said "I hate you. I hate all the white people. You are thieves and liars. You have taken away our land and made us outcasts." His translator hurriedly translated what he'd said into the original prepared welcoming message.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/frontierhouse/frontierlife/essay11_3.html
This distortion of facts to suit agendas carried on to this day. Think of cowboy and indian movies that you watched as a child. They always made you root for the poor whiteman over the terrifying Indian. Unfortunately, images of the whiteman committing massacres of women and children and continually reneging on deals with the natives doesn't make very good tv for the whiteman. And so every child (I don't think its inaccurate to say "every" here) that watches cowboy and indian movies growing up, is imbued with the misconception that the indian were the barbaric ones during the frontier days, which couldn't really be further from the truth.
And now for the scary part. Changing the news to something which you know to be false is NOT illegal in the u.s. This is one of the most mindblowing news reports I have ever seen.
http://www.lot49.com/2004/09/fair_and_balanced.shtml
Especially, when you consider the war mongering that goes on in u.s. news-entertainment shows all the time. Even now, FOX are stirring up hate of europeans, as we are probably the only ones powerful enough to stop them, should they choose to invade further countries for oil, and other imperialistic reasons.
This has to be the most blatant case of hatemongering propoganda, I have ever seen...
http://blugg.com/stuff/foxs_view_of_the_bbc_player.htm
Just listen to the intonation of his leading words ("FROTHING", "LIED"😉 🙄
This isn't an attack on all americans. Just a commentary on how american society has always been lead through misinformation in the media.
Hope it helps, somewhat.
D
Originally posted by RagnorakThanks Dee, that was a really interesting read. I' not sure if I can build it into my essay though, as it's not a characteristic strictly speaking... I might put it into the last part about contemporary society though. Actually, I think I'll definately do that. I just have to watch it that it doesn't turn into n anti-american tirade... it's far from what I have in mind, because generally speaking I like the americans.
That's what I thought.
1 thing I can think of that they learned in the frontier days is the importance of using the media to distort factual occurances to appear in a better light for the american way of life.
Like, for example the genocide of the indians back in the frontier days. I've noticed a lot of americans (probably the same ones who think tha ...[text shortened]... s been lead through misinformation in the media.
Hope it helps, somewhat.
D
That was the most interesting thing I've read today... gets a rec from me 😀
