At last whirlpool mod "WarT" has finally managed to lie his way via dishonest, unjust, unbalanced, and abuse of authority type moderating (as this very derblat list continues to bear witness to) to having "derspatz" permanently banned from "broadband" forums and my voice silenced there on the subject of ISP Level Content Filtering.
And there was great rejoicing from the anti-ILCF pro-pr0n circle-jerkers ?! :)
Actually, they are so starved for a whipping-boy that they've resorted to manufacturing their own "turn on and off at will" devil's advocate. Heh.
Anyway, here is the message delivering the perma-ban. Apparently it was sent on Friday but as I rarely actually log on I didn't get it until a moment a go. Enjoy.
Friday at 5:42 am
Forum Ban
As per previous warnings and your inability to refrain from trolling and hijacking discussion in the Broadband forum, you now no longer have the ability to post there
Such bans are permanent
Sorry Harlen, I know that playing the D.A. is wearing you down but I can't offer to tag and take over from ya now. :)
regarDS
Monday, March 30, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36
Ok, now that I've done my pro Conroy and pro Bolt thing by way of balance here is a bit of free info that some might want to use as ammunition from the other side of things.
As a Born Again Christian since 1982 I reckon I can offer some insight into how that particular brand of human Generally thinks when it comes to "Free Speech/expression" and "Democrazy".
Fear not, I'll be brief and it should mostly be obvious to ya'll anyway (though remembering back through the last 35 clusters of pages, maybe not).
In short, us xtoids (especially the Fanatical Religious Zealots) really only reckon GOOD speech/expression should be made free and easy, and to hell with the rest. No surprises there.
As for democrazy, this next one may come as a surprise.
We don't really want it, it isn't want we are working towards and we only put up with it because it can be made to serve us while we wait for God to sort us all out once and for all. We actually want a theocracy/benevolent dictator but will accept no-one for the job but God (coz we don't want Taliban or Priests tellings us what for either), so merely put up with/use democrazy in the meantime.
Have you ever heard or read in the ancient writings usually deemed sacred to xtoids about the "Democrazy of Heaven" ?
But Of Course not - but why haven't you noticed that before hmmm ?
Tis always "Kingdom of Heaven" this and "Kingdom of Heaven" that, along with the promise do away with the governments and kingdoms of man on earth and replace it with the same kind of system used in Heaven.
THIS is what we are working towards and want and THIS is why we don't really care about protecting "democrazy" nor any freedoms of speech or expression that are so easily deemed to be less than worthwhile or ultimately profitable to one's soul.
Now, aren't both Senator Conroy and PM Rudd of somewhat xtoid persuasion ?
Glad to be of service.
regarDS
As a Born Again Christian since 1982 I reckon I can offer some insight into how that particular brand of human Generally thinks when it comes to "Free Speech/expression" and "Democrazy".
Fear not, I'll be brief and it should mostly be obvious to ya'll anyway (though remembering back through the last 35 clusters of pages, maybe not).
In short, us xtoids (especially the Fanatical Religious Zealots) really only reckon GOOD speech/expression should be made free and easy, and to hell with the rest. No surprises there.
As for democrazy, this next one may come as a surprise.
We don't really want it, it isn't want we are working towards and we only put up with it because it can be made to serve us while we wait for God to sort us all out once and for all. We actually want a theocracy/benevolent dictator but will accept no-one for the job but God (coz we don't want Taliban or Priests tellings us what for either), so merely put up with/use democrazy in the meantime.
Have you ever heard or read in the ancient writings usually deemed sacred to xtoids about the "Democrazy of Heaven" ?
But Of Course not - but why haven't you noticed that before hmmm ?
Tis always "Kingdom of Heaven" this and "Kingdom of Heaven" that, along with the promise do away with the governments and kingdoms of man on earth and replace it with the same kind of system used in Heaven.
THIS is what we are working towards and want and THIS is why we don't really care about protecting "democrazy" nor any freedoms of speech or expression that are so easily deemed to be less than worthwhile or ultimately profitable to one's soul.
Now, aren't both Senator Conroy and PM Rudd of somewhat xtoid persuasion ?
Glad to be of service.
regarDS
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36
Mark Newton writes...
He was defensive. It was almost embarrassing to watch, and he looked defeated.
... and yet my partner (who until tonight had heard nor knew anything about the filtering issue or my involvement in online "discussions" about it, or the "waa, waa, waa"ing going on from a certain minority, etc) and I thought completely the opposite of your above suggestions, Mark.
Unbidden, she (a school teacher, BTW) found herself of similar view to Andrew Bolt (who I ButOfCourse thought was brilliant and right on the money as per usual) and was scornfully laughing at the irony and hypocrisy and assault upon both reason and the higher responsibilities of freedom/democrazy that both the audience questioners and female and/or more left-wing panel members were spouting forth.
What we both noticed and appreciated the most though was that although Senator Conroy was in the company of both initially a mostly hostile audience and panel, by keeping to the bottom-line and fundamentals, both the panel and audience (who weren't necessarily the rabid rabble they first appeared to be) he soon won them all over to a mostly respectful and understanding silence.
Sure, Andrew Bolts aided in this (to the degree that the lady in the scarf shared her agreement, though no prizes for Andrew for the way he received that agreement. The lad just can't help himself. heh.) but it was obvious that despite the initial planned (and yes, obviously expected) ambush and hijacking of Senator Conroy on the ILCF topic, he won the studio over and not even Tony seemed game to weigh in with his predictable opinions like he usually does.
Based on the uproar usually exampled in these forums one would have expected the TV audience to be comparably vocal (especially considering other episodes of qanda and Tony's calls for order in the past), but no, it would seem that under studio lighting, folk more prone to anonymous outbursts and ranting may well be more inclined to behave reasonably, especially when their confrontations with cold hard logic are rendered a tad more accountable.
All in all, I reckon that it looks like the ALP has a winner with Stephen Conroy and I would expect that they will be keeping him out in front for some time to come, and that the general public will be more likely to side with what he and Andrew had to say on the matter than the publisher and that climate change bloke.
Congrats Senator Conroy on a job well done (you certainly earned your travel allowance for that one !) and cheers to you as always Andrew Bolt (btw, I luvved and cross-posted heaps your stuff on the Uncle Bill and his happy snaps of kiddies thang last year.)
Mark, you obviously might wish that this ILCF thing is a major player on the good Senator's dinner plate, but I doubt if it even rates as a garnish, let alone as one of his essential food-groups.
AFAIC, by the end of that aspect of qanda, the body language of most of the audience and panel seemed to indicate an attitude that the topic was at most much ado about nothing and could we please now talk about something else.
regarDS
He was defensive. It was almost embarrassing to watch, and he looked defeated.
... and yet my partner (who until tonight had heard nor knew anything about the filtering issue or my involvement in online "discussions" about it, or the "waa, waa, waa"ing going on from a certain minority, etc) and I thought completely the opposite of your above suggestions, Mark.
Unbidden, she (a school teacher, BTW) found herself of similar view to Andrew Bolt (who I ButOfCourse thought was brilliant and right on the money as per usual) and was scornfully laughing at the irony and hypocrisy and assault upon both reason and the higher responsibilities of freedom/democrazy that both the audience questioners and female and/or more left-wing panel members were spouting forth.
What we both noticed and appreciated the most though was that although Senator Conroy was in the company of both initially a mostly hostile audience and panel, by keeping to the bottom-line and fundamentals, both the panel and audience (who weren't necessarily the rabid rabble they first appeared to be) he soon won them all over to a mostly respectful and understanding silence.
Sure, Andrew Bolts aided in this (to the degree that the lady in the scarf shared her agreement, though no prizes for Andrew for the way he received that agreement. The lad just can't help himself. heh.) but it was obvious that despite the initial planned (and yes, obviously expected) ambush and hijacking of Senator Conroy on the ILCF topic, he won the studio over and not even Tony seemed game to weigh in with his predictable opinions like he usually does.
Based on the uproar usually exampled in these forums one would have expected the TV audience to be comparably vocal (especially considering other episodes of qanda and Tony's calls for order in the past), but no, it would seem that under studio lighting, folk more prone to anonymous outbursts and ranting may well be more inclined to behave reasonably, especially when their confrontations with cold hard logic are rendered a tad more accountable.
All in all, I reckon that it looks like the ALP has a winner with Stephen Conroy and I would expect that they will be keeping him out in front for some time to come, and that the general public will be more likely to side with what he and Andrew had to say on the matter than the publisher and that climate change bloke.
Congrats Senator Conroy on a job well done (you certainly earned your travel allowance for that one !) and cheers to you as always Andrew Bolt (btw, I luvved and cross-posted heaps your stuff on the Uncle Bill and his happy snaps of kiddies thang last year.)
Mark, you obviously might wish that this ILCF thing is a major player on the good Senator's dinner plate, but I doubt if it even rates as a garnish, let alone as one of his essential food-groups.
AFAIC, by the end of that aspect of qanda, the body language of most of the audience and panel seemed to indicate an attitude that the topic was at most much ado about nothing and could we please now talk about something else.
regarDS
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
derspatz writes...See: http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/
I am fascinated that you have linked Syd Walker's blog. He is almost fanatically anti-censorship.
Would you lot accept my message on this particular subject any other way ? :)
regarDS
I am fascinated that you have linked Syd Walker's blog. He is almost fanatically anti-censorship.
Would you lot accept my message on this particular subject any other way ? :)
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
( @ ) Lillary ( @ ) writes...
(again, Derspatz excepted from that statement as he is an expert at playing with himself). *Oops, I suspect I'm about to have my post removed!
lol. solipsists r us ?
*I guess that makes you and me, both ... :)
regarDS
(again, Derspatz excepted from that statement as he is an expert at playing with himself). *Oops, I suspect I'm about to have my post removed!
lol. solipsists r us ?
*I guess that makes you and me, both ... :)
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
Source?
And another source for you which details even better why the recent change to the Cleanfeed wiki amounts to vandalism.
See: http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/
There are plenty of other examples out there if you care to look. Just put +lapin +curtailment +child +precious.
Now, who is going to undo the recent wiki vandalism in that regard ?
regarDS
And another source for you which details even better why the recent change to the Cleanfeed wiki amounts to vandalism.
See: http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/
There are plenty of other examples out there if you care to look. Just put +lapin +curtailment +child +precious.
Now, who is going to undo the recent wiki vandalism in that regard ?
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
Source?
For starters, try: http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/lapin.htm where the Rabbi pretends to be Hitler and writes "Finally, dear Julius, you will remember what I frequently said and wrote in Mein Kampf: "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people." I explained that as long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. It is truly heartwarming to see how well this lesson has been learned by the American government. In the name of children, incursions into the private lives of American citizens have been made that we Nazis would have gazed at with open-mouthed admiration. Does it matter that our bodies failed as long as our spirit still triumphs?"
Now THAT is where the wiki quote has been lifted from, with only a tiny portion of it being Hitler's words from Mein Kamf.
Thus, the wiki quote should be attributed to Rabbi Daniel Lapin, yes ?
regarDS
For starters, try: http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/lapin.htm where the Rabbi pretends to be Hitler and writes "Finally, dear Julius, you will remember what I frequently said and wrote in Mein Kampf: "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people." I explained that as long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. It is truly heartwarming to see how well this lesson has been learned by the American government. In the name of children, incursions into the private lives of American citizens have been made that we Nazis would have gazed at with open-mouthed admiration. Does it matter that our bodies failed as long as our spirit still triumphs?"
Now THAT is where the wiki quote has been lifted from, with only a tiny portion of it being Hitler's words from Mein Kamf.
Thus, the wiki quote should be attributed to Rabbi Daniel Lapin, yes ?
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
The quote is indeed from Mein Kampf which was dictated by Adolf Hitler. Rabbi Daniel Lapin is not whom stated this quote.
Just fixed that up on the wiki
by now making the wiki incorrect. Go back a page or two in this thread and you will see another user has provided a DIRECT LINK to "Mein Kamf" and what Hitler wrote re: "the Child" and it is NOT what you have now just misattributed on the wiki.
What is in the wiki is a quote from the Rabbi, nothing more and nothing less and if you want to put something there that Hitler actualy said, then I suggest you actually look up Hitler's book and properly quote it.
Here is the link the another user provided a moment ago.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=berhcMAjzZEC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=The+state+must+declare+the+child&source=bl&ots=KH_Nso_26V&sig=dds3AtPQXQAUCG2jBlovhEmhkbs&hl=en&ei=HOjFSf--HpSZkQX_wszDDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA72,M1
Now compare that to what is on the wiki and to what the Rabbi wrote and tell the forum who rightfully should be attributed for what has been recorded verbatim on the wiki ... and then go undo your vandalism.
regarDS
Just fixed that up on the wiki
by now making the wiki incorrect. Go back a page or two in this thread and you will see another user has provided a DIRECT LINK to "Mein Kamf" and what Hitler wrote re: "the Child" and it is NOT what you have now just misattributed on the wiki.
What is in the wiki is a quote from the Rabbi, nothing more and nothing less and if you want to put something there that Hitler actualy said, then I suggest you actually look up Hitler's book and properly quote it.
Here is the link the another user provided a moment ago.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=berhcMAjzZEC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=The+state+must+declare+the+child&source=bl&ots=KH_Nso_26V&sig=dds3AtPQXQAUCG2jBlovhEmhkbs&hl=en&ei=HOjFSf--HpSZkQX_wszDDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA72,M1
Now compare that to what is on the wiki and to what the Rabbi wrote and tell the forum who rightfully should be attributed for what has been recorded verbatim on the wiki ... and then go undo your vandalism.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
The state must declare the child ... --Hitler.
A common misattribution for the quote as you gave, for it was actually penned by Rabbi Daniel Lapin. For future reference, see the quotes section of cleanfeed wiki found here: http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=Cleanfeed
regarDS
http://twitter.com/derspatz
A common misattribution for the quote as you gave, for it was actually penned by Rabbi Daniel Lapin. For future reference, see the quotes section of cleanfeed wiki found here: http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=Cleanfeed
regarDS
http://twitter.com/derspatz
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
.....mandatory reporting by ISPs to a central Government agency
Yeah right.
I think we can fairly describe your post as a troll.
Banks aren't alone in being required to follow "mandatory reporting" to a Government agency, so why not ISPs in the future ?
It's called "checks and balances" and helps make a system work better.
Anyway, AFAIC, always calling "Troll" at those who hold different opinions than your own, tends to merely demonstrate your own fears and narrowmindedness.
No doubt you've also herringed me rather than risk being exposed to contrary opinion, and would like to see me banned from these threads ? Don't worry, that sword of Damacles has been hanging over my neck for some time now (compliments of a whim months ago from mods/admin indicating I was only but one mod attention away from a permenant ban in the broadband area) and I'm surprised I'm still able to post here at all.
So rejoice and be glad that it was you who was that final drip responsible for the ocean to wash me out of here. :)
regarDS
Yeah right.
I think we can fairly describe your post as a troll.
Banks aren't alone in being required to follow "mandatory reporting" to a Government agency, so why not ISPs in the future ?
It's called "checks and balances" and helps make a system work better.
Anyway, AFAIC, always calling "Troll" at those who hold different opinions than your own, tends to merely demonstrate your own fears and narrowmindedness.
No doubt you've also herringed me rather than risk being exposed to contrary opinion, and would like to see me banned from these threads ? Don't worry, that sword of Damacles has been hanging over my neck for some time now (compliments of a whim months ago from mods/admin indicating I was only but one mod attention away from a permenant ban in the broadband area) and I'm surprised I'm still able to post here at all.
So rejoice and be glad that it was you who was that final drip responsible for the ocean to wash me out of here. :)
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34
Ah good, it would seem that our Elected Government are getting ready to "move forward" with the desired and necessary implimentation of Web Filtering and Control, and the latest step in this plan being the obviously predictable and planned failure of "Tactical Move 1A" in relation to a Leakable Black List utilised as an aspect of ILCF (ISP Level Content Filtering).
History readily demonstrates that Western Democratic Governments tend to adopt a Hegelian approach when faced with trying to bring about outcomes that have an element of unpopularity with various vocal minorities.
That is to say, they know what they actually want to achieve so present a number of solutions knowing full well that the most objectionable will be rejected usually in favour of the least objectionable ... but that the outcomes achieved by even the least objectionable are at very least the minimum desired in the first place anyway.
So our Elected Government will now wring their hands and wail ""Oh me, oh my, our precious blacklist has been leaked - the ISPs aren't to be trusted, Big Business will fail in terms of Doing The Right Thing for the sake of our children and future, we need to legislate a Better Way", and then go on to present "Tactical Move 1B", etc, etc, until what they actually were willing to settle for (or better) is established.
Personally I reckon that our Elected Government is not only well aware of the shortcomings of ILCF as it currently is touted, but also has an array of alternative approaches armed and ready and that the method/solution that will eventually be implemented will be embraced by the opposition Government and the FF independant ... as well as most reasonable OZ citizens and parents for that matter.
Sure, it probably won't be the kind of solution I would like to see implemented, but I live in hope. It doesn't change the fact that I am firmly of the view that something desperately needs to be done to make the online world a better place. Not that the offline world is all that brilliant these days mind you ...
Anyway, my preference is that everyone and every company and business in OZ should be issued a permanent static IP and/or web-browsing personal ID that is tied in with a system of mandatory reporting by ISPs to a central Government agency (just like how banks have to report financial transaction over a certain amount ... which is quite a low amount BTW).
Obviously such reporting would involve WhiteList filtering for daily/mundane essentials ( (: ie, ebay, banking, whirlpool, google news :) ), but all else would go to be logged against your permanent record to be crunched/compared at whim and will as resources and need dictate rather than potentially contributing to a real-time page-hit response delay.
No More Secrets, let alone a secret list that will always end up leaked.
I see a number of advantages in this kind of system. The first being that internut speeds would probably improve due to folk aware of personal accountability being a little bit more careful as to how they used that resource. Another is that folk in here complaining about the lack of "due process" in terms of being filtered before they had the chance to "commit the crime" will at last get their wish of being able to be naughty , be tracked and charged, and get their day in court instead.
Obviously another is that anonymous online attacks, piracy, dissemination of pr0n and a whole bunch of other illegal and/or unsavoury/undesirable activities will take a serious hit at long last.
However, one of the best advantages I see in this kind of system involving mandatory reporting of anything that isn't on a whitelist, is that it would force parents to make damn sure they knew what their kids were getting up to on the McNet/Web and police their own households a bit better.
Isn't that what many of you have been saying needs to happen in the family home ?
Win/Win AFAIC.
Hmmmm, actually, I wouldn't be surprised if in part this kind of system IS one of the solutions our Elected Government has waiting in the wings to be announced now that the most objectionable solution has been outed (no doubt by design).
Either way, it has my vote. Could also be quite the money-spinner for someone clever enough to design it ... that is, if it hasn't already been designed and ready to be put into practice not only here in OZ, but also in the USofA and in the EU, etc.
If so, the Russian Mafia are really not going to like it. :)
regarDS
History readily demonstrates that Western Democratic Governments tend to adopt a Hegelian approach when faced with trying to bring about outcomes that have an element of unpopularity with various vocal minorities.
That is to say, they know what they actually want to achieve so present a number of solutions knowing full well that the most objectionable will be rejected usually in favour of the least objectionable ... but that the outcomes achieved by even the least objectionable are at very least the minimum desired in the first place anyway.
So our Elected Government will now wring their hands and wail ""Oh me, oh my, our precious blacklist has been leaked - the ISPs aren't to be trusted, Big Business will fail in terms of Doing The Right Thing for the sake of our children and future, we need to legislate a Better Way", and then go on to present "Tactical Move 1B", etc, etc, until what they actually were willing to settle for (or better) is established.
Personally I reckon that our Elected Government is not only well aware of the shortcomings of ILCF as it currently is touted, but also has an array of alternative approaches armed and ready and that the method/solution that will eventually be implemented will be embraced by the opposition Government and the FF independant ... as well as most reasonable OZ citizens and parents for that matter.
Sure, it probably won't be the kind of solution I would like to see implemented, but I live in hope. It doesn't change the fact that I am firmly of the view that something desperately needs to be done to make the online world a better place. Not that the offline world is all that brilliant these days mind you ...
Anyway, my preference is that everyone and every company and business in OZ should be issued a permanent static IP and/or web-browsing personal ID that is tied in with a system of mandatory reporting by ISPs to a central Government agency (just like how banks have to report financial transaction over a certain amount ... which is quite a low amount BTW).
Obviously such reporting would involve WhiteList filtering for daily/mundane essentials ( (: ie, ebay, banking, whirlpool, google news :) ), but all else would go to be logged against your permanent record to be crunched/compared at whim and will as resources and need dictate rather than potentially contributing to a real-time page-hit response delay.
No More Secrets, let alone a secret list that will always end up leaked.
I see a number of advantages in this kind of system. The first being that internut speeds would probably improve due to folk aware of personal accountability being a little bit more careful as to how they used that resource. Another is that folk in here complaining about the lack of "due process" in terms of being filtered before they had the chance to "commit the crime" will at last get their wish of being able to be naughty , be tracked and charged, and get their day in court instead.
Obviously another is that anonymous online attacks, piracy, dissemination of pr0n and a whole bunch of other illegal and/or unsavoury/undesirable activities will take a serious hit at long last.
However, one of the best advantages I see in this kind of system involving mandatory reporting of anything that isn't on a whitelist, is that it would force parents to make damn sure they knew what their kids were getting up to on the McNet/Web and police their own households a bit better.
Isn't that what many of you have been saying needs to happen in the family home ?
Win/Win AFAIC.
Hmmmm, actually, I wouldn't be surprised if in part this kind of system IS one of the solutions our Elected Government has waiting in the wings to be announced now that the most objectionable solution has been outed (no doubt by design).
Either way, it has my vote. Could also be quite the money-spinner for someone clever enough to design it ... that is, if it hasn't already been designed and ready to be put into practice not only here in OZ, but also in the USofA and in the EU, etc.
If so, the Russian Mafia are really not going to like it. :)
regarDS
Monday, March 16, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31
@18492727 Mark Newton writes...
["With all that scrutiny over all that time, if there was a definitive indication of harm we'd have found it by now and it'd be common knowledge."]
We have, it is, and so I must say that you are either lying or trolling (and have herringed accordingly on the latter, although I doubt if WarT will be inclined to agree) here Mark ... and I suspect you are quite aware that you are in fact doing both.
Anyway, to keep things simple for you, here is just two names for you to digest today.
Bob Crane and John Worboys.
Then when you are done with your investigations there, head over to http://www.woai.com/content/news/newslinks/story/Porn-addiction-may-cause-brain-damage/pEv5fGR-xEu5AIrXNg5iFA.cspx
Today, more than ever, we need greater and far more strict control of unwholesome and degrading graphic information. As for the damaging effects of such information, even blind freddy could see that it is self-evident.
Except to addicts in denial out to justify and protect their supply at all costs that is ...
regarDS
["With all that scrutiny over all that time, if there was a definitive indication of harm we'd have found it by now and it'd be common knowledge."]
We have, it is, and so I must say that you are either lying or trolling (and have herringed accordingly on the latter, although I doubt if WarT will be inclined to agree) here Mark ... and I suspect you are quite aware that you are in fact doing both.
Anyway, to keep things simple for you, here is just two names for you to digest today.
Bob Crane and John Worboys.
Then when you are done with your investigations there, head over to http://www.woai.com/content/news/newslinks/story/Porn-addiction-may-cause-brain-damage/pEv5fGR-xEu5AIrXNg5iFA.cspx
Today, more than ever, we need greater and far more strict control of unwholesome and degrading graphic information. As for the damaging effects of such information, even blind freddy could see that it is self-evident.
Except to addicts in denial out to justify and protect their supply at all costs that is ...
regarDS
Friday, March 13, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31
"We have no children in our household so why do we need a clean feed?"
For the same reason fluroide is added to your water. IE, coz on so many levels it is good for the long term welfare of both you, your local community, society and nation.
The ANZACS didn't go and sacrifice their lives and limbs for us so that lawlessness could abound; they did it so goodness and decency could be preserved. Yet the current cesspool which is the Internut is how we repay their nobility and selflessness.
So, by comparison, what are you prepared to sacrifice so that goodness and decency can be restored and preserved ?
Oh I commend you for your choice of not having children (tis virtually planned future child abuse to choose to spawn these days anyway), and for sure, my fellow supporters of the philosophies promoted at http://www.vhemt.org will be overjoyed, but what are you prepared to do in terms of "going the extra mile" for the good of humankind and the planet ?
Surely a little Internut filtering wouldn't be too much to ask, especially if it helps promote a revival of more admirable human behaviours and a turning away from that which merely serves to enslave and degrade us, hmmm ?
regarDS
For the same reason fluroide is added to your water. IE, coz on so many levels it is good for the long term welfare of both you, your local community, society and nation.
The ANZACS didn't go and sacrifice their lives and limbs for us so that lawlessness could abound; they did it so goodness and decency could be preserved. Yet the current cesspool which is the Internut is how we repay their nobility and selflessness.
So, by comparison, what are you prepared to sacrifice so that goodness and decency can be restored and preserved ?
Oh I commend you for your choice of not having children (tis virtually planned future child abuse to choose to spawn these days anyway), and for sure, my fellow supporters of the philosophies promoted at http://www.vhemt.org will be overjoyed, but what are you prepared to do in terms of "going the extra mile" for the good of humankind and the planet ?
Surely a little Internut filtering wouldn't be too much to ask, especially if it helps promote a revival of more admirable human behaviours and a turning away from that which merely serves to enslave and degrade us, hmmm ?
regarDS
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31
Mark Newton writes...
I expect there's room for a balanced approach.
- mark
I concur.
Nice to see some words of true wisdom from "the other side" in this debate, too.
regarDS
I expect there's room for a balanced approach.
- mark
I concur.
Nice to see some words of true wisdom from "the other side" in this debate, too.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt31
'saving' the children from obscenity just leaves them ill-prepared for the real world... better to shove it in their faces and discuss/explain it with them than shield them from it all together.
Or alternatively try and make the world a better place for young AND old by encouraging one and all to consider the higher responsibilities of true freedom and the beauty of free willed sacrifice in order to bring worthwhile benefit to others, and the recognition that sometimes the weak-willed need to be helped and guided to the better path and way by limiting their choices in relation to that which hinders and degrades.
Surely one of the higher responsibilities of the truly free would be to make every sacrifice necessary to protect the innocence of children and by doing so, also be unselfishly contributing towards creating a better future for humankind, and surely, when it comes to the weak-willed who are either unwilling or unable to make such sacrifices, when it comes to The Online World, something like ILCF needs to be implimented to make the choices and defining/dividing line so much simpler.
Sure, "worldproof the child" while there is the need to, but why not also work towards "childproofing the world" until the day is reached where no "worldproofing" is required ?
regarDS
Or alternatively try and make the world a better place for young AND old by encouraging one and all to consider the higher responsibilities of true freedom and the beauty of free willed sacrifice in order to bring worthwhile benefit to others, and the recognition that sometimes the weak-willed need to be helped and guided to the better path and way by limiting their choices in relation to that which hinders and degrades.
Surely one of the higher responsibilities of the truly free would be to make every sacrifice necessary to protect the innocence of children and by doing so, also be unselfishly contributing towards creating a better future for humankind, and surely, when it comes to the weak-willed who are either unwilling or unable to make such sacrifices, when it comes to The Online World, something like ILCF needs to be implimented to make the choices and defining/dividing line so much simpler.
Sure, "worldproof the child" while there is the need to, but why not also work towards "childproofing the world" until the day is reached where no "worldproofing" is required ?
regarDS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
