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
Sunday, March 22, 2009
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
Friday, February 20, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool as a whim (Private Mail) to neilmc
Subject: Your attempts to go Real World on Clive Hamilton
(See: http://blog.websinthe.org/2009/02/20/where-clive-hamilton-accuses-me-of-trying-to-silence-him/ for more on the story, as well as: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1145505&p=53 and the long message from user "neilmc" detailing his planned cowardly and underhanded Real World attack on someone he does not agree with.
Start-of-quote
"From my point of view it appears that Professor Hamilton has launched a personal anti-pornography campaign and is using his University title to add weight to his agenda."
So what ? None of us are any different when it comes to linking earned titles and the like with what we do or say. When one has done the work and put themself through the discipline, they have earned the bragging rights after all.
Perhaps it is time for you to seek some professional help for your online addictions (and fear of finding it hard to feed them once ILCF is implimented) now that you have so obviously come to the sad and scary stage whereby you are prepared to try and have someone somehow moderated or shut-down by complaining to their employer and/or associates.
Quite shameful, cowardly, and despicable of you neil (and I'm sure your peers, if they be of any decent moral fibre, will agree), and in fact not much different to the alleged phonecall/message that was delivered to Geordie Guy's residence or the investigation I once had to go through all because someone who couldn't handle being found wrong on the internut, decided to try and get revenge by making a false claim to my employer at the time.
I strongly suggest you reconsider both your intent and motivations.
Feel free to post this whim into the public domain either at whirlpool or as a comment on a blog, whatever. I will be adding it to my online public accessed archives at http://derblatz.blogspot.com anyway.
regarDS
End-of-quote
EDIT: After sending the above, I also discovered that even the Hero of the Anti-ILCF brigade (Mark Newton) had this to say (and more, but I'll stick to fair-use) about neilmc's planned Real Worlding.
"Guys, I feel the need to pour some cold water on this effort to chase Hamilton through CSU. (much snipped) But in my opinion, the correct response to speech with which one violently disagrees is more speech to explain the disagreement. Trawling through the speaker's social and professional circles until you find a point where you can apply pressure to prevent further speech is just wrong."
(See: http://blog.websinthe.org/2009/02/20/where-clive-hamilton-accuses-me-of-trying-to-silence-him/ for more on the story, as well as: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1145505&p=53 and the long message from user "neilmc" detailing his planned cowardly and underhanded Real World attack on someone he does not agree with.
Start-of-quote
"From my point of view it appears that Professor Hamilton has launched a personal anti-pornography campaign and is using his University title to add weight to his agenda."
So what ? None of us are any different when it comes to linking earned titles and the like with what we do or say. When one has done the work and put themself through the discipline, they have earned the bragging rights after all.
Perhaps it is time for you to seek some professional help for your online addictions (and fear of finding it hard to feed them once ILCF is implimented) now that you have so obviously come to the sad and scary stage whereby you are prepared to try and have someone somehow moderated or shut-down by complaining to their employer and/or associates.
Quite shameful, cowardly, and despicable of you neil (and I'm sure your peers, if they be of any decent moral fibre, will agree), and in fact not much different to the alleged phonecall/message that was delivered to Geordie Guy's residence or the investigation I once had to go through all because someone who couldn't handle being found wrong on the internut, decided to try and get revenge by making a false claim to my employer at the time.
I strongly suggest you reconsider both your intent and motivations.
Feel free to post this whim into the public domain either at whirlpool or as a comment on a blog, whatever. I will be adding it to my online public accessed archives at http://derblatz.blogspot.com anyway.
regarDS
End-of-quote
EDIT: After sending the above, I also discovered that even the Hero of the Anti-ILCF brigade (Mark Newton) had this to say (and more, but I'll stick to fair-use) about neilmc's planned Real Worlding.
"Guys, I feel the need to pour some cold water on this effort to chase Hamilton through CSU. (much snipped) But in my opinion, the correct response to speech with which one violently disagrees is more speech to explain the disagreement. Trawling through the speaker's social and professional circles until you find a point where you can apply pressure to prevent further speech is just wrong."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
