- #31
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
If you say so Townsend.Townsend said:
I bow to your logic.
Continue.
News Australia predicts China passes US by 2015
Click For Summary
Australia's economy is poised to benefit significantly from China's anticipated economic growth, with projections indicating that China will surpass the US as the world's largest economy by 2015. China's economy is expected to expand by over 10% annually, driven by market reforms, high savings, and a large surplus labor force. This growth has already led to substantial increases in profits for Australian companies like BHP Billiton, which reported a record profit largely due to rising demand from China. The discussion also highlights concerns about the implications of China's economic rise, including potential shifts in global financial dynamics and the impact on US economic stability. Overall, the thread underscores the transformative effects of China's growth on global markets and Australia's economic landscape.
I bow to your logic.
Continue.
- #32
Townsend
- 232
- 0
The Smoking Man said:
I don't say so and it is not my logic, it is the definition and I am only showing you how it applies to what you said...why don't quit acting like a kid and stop saying "I bow to your logic." When you know full well that that statement is in it self a ridiculous statement and makes no sense. Or perhaps you don't realize that and I have been giving to far too much credit...
- #33
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
So who are you arguing with now Townsend?Townsend said:
- #34
Townsend
- 232
- 0
The Smoking Man said:
No one...I am have just made the mistake of wasting my time trying to explain a simple concept to a broken record.
Last edited:
- #35
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
If you say so Townsend.Townsend said:
I bow to your logic.
Continue.
- #36
Townsend
- 232
- 0
The Smoking Man said:
If that is so then why don't shut up already... You're worse than a 4 year old
You are in no way even remotely funny...
- #37
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
If you say so Townsend.Townsend said:
I bow to your logic.
Continue.
- #38
Skyhunter
The Smoking Man said:
touche'- #39
Kakarot
- 60
- 0
w00t for china, now we will be planning our vacations in china
- #40
Friendly Immigrant
- 1
- 0
Lisa! said:
National IQ averages of every country in the world: http://www.rlynn.co.uk/pages/article_intelligence/t4.asp
China is two points above U.S.A., but some 6 points below Japan and the Koreas. CNN and Fox News are helping make Americans stupid. Say no to the Neo-Conservative/Liberal monopoly.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #41
Townsend
- 232
- 0
Friendly Immigrant said:
While I agree with saying no to both the repubs and the dems I cannot for the life me see how a news station can really have an impact on anyone's IQ let alone on the national average IQ.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #42
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
Hence the need for a tongue-in-cheek smiley.Townsend said:
- #43
Skyhunter
IQ tests are designed to test intelligence. However the more knowledge a person has, the better they will score. My IQ scores (based on the Iowa basics) increased every test I took.Townsend said:
I think it has more to do with the culture of intellectual laziness. People just believe what the read/hear without making an effort to be critical and question the information they are given and find out what the whole story is.
Here is a good example of a smear campaign using disinformation.
Cindy Sheehan said:
Now the country she said was not worth dying for was Iraq.
Now do this google search: Cindy Sheehan fox "America is not worth dying for"
And see how her statement has been taken out of context by FOX news so that now the right wing bloggers and radio are quoting her as saying, "America is not worth dying for".
This is just the most recent example of disinformation, and it happens on the left as well. I just got back from a red state and 4 out of 5 people there believe that she was talking about America, when obviously when you read the whole statement in context, that is not what she was saying.
I am used to this tactic in political campaigns, but when it is coming from a supposedly objective "news" source
well do I really need to spell it out?Ok I will... pee are oh pee ay gee ay en dee ay
- #44
Townsend
- 232
- 0
Skyhunter said:
Am I suppose to know what the last line means?
- #45
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
Try saying it out loudTownsend said:Am I suppose to know what the last line means?
- #46
kat
- 42
- 0
good example of leftist propaganda. She was going to take him to Canada to prevent him for volunteering to fight in Iraq..twice..and then further volunteering...even when asked whether he was sure he wanted to...volunteering to go on the mission that killed him.
Why is she paralleling her sons volunteer actions in something he believed in with the vietnam war when people were beating the draft by going to Canada? Nice bit of propoganda at your sons expense there mz sheehan.
- #47
Townsend
- 232
- 0
The Smoking Man said:Try saying it out loud
What were you saying about the tongue in cheek smiley?
- #48
Archon
Propaganda? I don't follow.kat said:
She's saying that she would have taken her son to Canada had she known what she knows now about the war in Iraq. This isn't the same as the government deliberately spinning and manipulating facts to convince people of something. She's just expressing an opinion.
Presumably, her son didn't know this either when he enlisted, or the two of them would now be in Canada. So yes, he believed in the cause when he signed up to fight. But that's not what she's talking about: she's saying that if she had known (and this applies to a lot of soldiers), she wouldn't have supported the war. After all, many soldiers signed up because Hussein posed a threat to the United States, and because he had weapons of mass destruction, right? Neither of these were the case.
Also, something tells that she wasn't making some subtle comparison to Vietnam when she said that she would have taken her son to Canada.
- #49
Archon
p-r-o-p-a-g-a-n-d-a. See?Townsend said:What were you saying about the tongue in cheek smiley?
- #50
kat
- 42
- 0
lol, she is manipulating the facts. She's suggesting her grown son would not have re-enlisted to fight in Iraq...a second time had she known what she "knows now". Sorry, but her son..went to Iraq once, chose to go twice and then CHOSE to volunteer for a very risky mission, even after being asked if he was sure he wanted to. Her political outlook hasn't changed based on her sons death, it's always been exactly where it is now. She's not new to the side that she's speaking for. Is there any proof that she...ever supported the war, lolArchon said:Propaganda? I don't follow.
She's saying that she would have taken her son to Canada had she known what she knows now about the war in Iraq. This isn't the same as the government deliberately spinning and manipulating facts to convince people of something. She's just expressing an opinion.
Presumably, her son didn't know this either when he enlisted, or the two of them would now be in Canada. So yes, he believed in the cause when he signed up to fight. But that's not what she's talking about: she's saying that if she had known (and this applies to a lot of soldiers), she wouldn't have supported the war. After all, many soldiers signed up because Hussein posed a threat to the United States, and because he had weapons of mass destruction, right? Neither of these were the case.
Also, something tells that she wasn't making some subtle comparison to Vietnam when she said that she would have taken her son to Canada.
Last edited:
- #51
Archon
OK, I'm sure you know her son better than she does.kat said:
Anyway, what does her son have to do with the statement "if I would have known that before my son was killed, I would have taken him to Canada?" She says she would have taken her son to Canada. She's not saying her son wouldn't have wanted to enlist. (Incidentally, she explains his enlistment earlier in the passage: "I passed on that bull**** to my son and my son enlisted." He enlisted because of...you guessed it (hopefully, given the current topic)...propaganda. How appropriate.)
- #52
kat
- 42
- 0
Lol, Archon..what you're really trying to say is it's only propaganda when it doesn't jive with your own world view. Come on, a little self examination is due here.
- #53
Townsend
- 232
- 0
Archon said:
I know...you missed the sarcasm too.
- #54
Archon
Probably. We need that smiley...Townsend said:
- #55
Archon
Hardly. I'm saying that it fails to be propaganda just because it doesn't jive with yours.kat said:
I'm saying that she's not suggesting her son wouldn't have re-enlisted to fight in Iraq. She's suggesting that she wouldn't have supported his re-enlistment. These are two different things. The first, she doesn't know for certain unless she's capable of speaking to the dead. The second, however, is a statement of personal beliefs. It's true becuase she believes it, and you can't tell her otherwise.
She's not "manipulating facts" in order to deceive people into joining her cause: she's telling them that, had she known back then what she knows now, she would have tried to stop her son from re-enlisting. It's like saying "Well, if I had known back then what would happen if I drove while drunk, I wouldn't have done it." You can't call this misleading, can you?
- #56
TRCSF
- 60
- 0
kat said:
What I find particularly vile propaganda is the smearing of a grieving mother who's lost her son. That's propaganda of the worst sort.
As for Casey Sheehan's volunteering, since Bush obviously lied to him and every other American as to why we're fighting and dying, then his "volunteering" is irrelevant.
That's a bit like a child getting lured into a molestor's van with promises of candy and then saying "well, she volunteered.
- #57
kat
- 42
- 0
I'm sorry, I need some clarification from you. Are you saying that...he didn't re-enlist? are you saying she supported his re-enlistment? or she doesn't know if she did? Which "second" statement is of personal beliefs"? are you really saying personal beliefs are true...if you believe them to be?Archon said:
I didn't read " if I would have known that before my son was killed, I would have taken him to Canada. I would never have let him go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have" as I would have "tried" to stop him, but that she would have stopped him...definatively. Further more it seems to ignore the fact that her son was a grown man who made an educated decision based on experience. If anyone has the opportunity to judge whether their actions in Iraq are worth dying for...it's someone who's been there and then...volunteers to re-enlist and go back. More so then someone who's based their beliefs and opinions on what Iraq is about on the left slanted msm news or someone who has taken in by the propaganda of the lefts talking points hook, line and sinker.
Also, she appears to be suggesting that she was not against his going before the war started..and my understanding is that she's held this stance prior to the Iraq war and prior to her son being sent to Iraq, the first time.
Last edited:
- #58
kat
- 42
- 0
Normally I would agree with you. Then I saw the photo's of Cindy Sheehan prepping for the media and posing setting up a pose and grieving for the cameras. Her and Casey's own family members are denouncing her personal use of his death for her own political motives.TRCSF said:
Lol, he's a grown man with access to the same information as you. Actually, with access to more information then you as he had already been to Iraq once and chose to return. One thing he was NOT was an innocent child who doesn't understand evil men offer you candy from dark vans to do bad things to you. Spare me the hyperbole. He was a hero, who knowingly risked his life for something he believed strongly to be the right and moral thing to do.
- #59
alexandra
Errr... what was this thread about? It seems to have been well and truly hijacked. I was interested in the original topic and wonder if anyone wants to get back to that discussion?
- #60
Skyhunter
The first step to resisting propaganda is knowing how to recognize it, in all it's forms.kat said:
What Cindy is doing is propaganda because she is trying to influence opinion. What we are doing on this forum is also propaganda. Even the truth is propaganda when it is used to influence opinion.
What FOX did was deceptive. They took her statement out of context in order to change the meaning, distort the truth, you know, lie.
Kat your argument is that she is being deceptive and that is not so. She is stating her opinion and what she would have done if she were more informed and less influenced by deceitful propaganda, ie the lies told by her government.
Here is some good reading to learn how to recognize propaganda in all it's forms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda
http://www.propagandacritic.com/
This is Hitler's Mein Kampf, Volume 1 Chapter 6 War Propaganda
See how many examples you can find in the administrations media blitz in the build up to the Iraq "struggle".
http://www.crusader.net/texts/mk/mkv1ch06.html