 | | Re: K, in even simpler terms, for those of us who hate seeing death and killings and such...
|
|
(...) If you see this, and you're slowly convincing me that your interpretation of what's going on is true, so now I see it, how come this isn't common knowledge to the rest of the masses? What's going on? How can the first ammendment be "taking a (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: K, in even simpler terms, for those of us who hate seeing death and killings and such...
|
|
(...) Participation in a conspiracy is dangerous stuff. There are always loose ends that you can't tie up. That's why big awful conspiracies that require lots of secrecy and participation are silly. Acting President Bush is, I believe, worried that (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not the Green party...
|
|
(...) THere was a report on my local NPR (NW Ohio) this morning that some company is marketing a similar cure for West Nile Virus as well. Maybe mosquitos can't see you in that spectrum? -c (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Not the Green party...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jason Spears writes: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) Thanks for the heads up! Much appreciated. And your p.s.--first rate! Dave K. (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Not the Green party...
|
|
(...) Well here is what WebMD has to say about argyria: (URL) appears that the silver posioned him, causing a condition where his pigment is different, not just an alteration to a couple layers of skin. (...) -Jason PS - I am not a Doctor, nor do I (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Not the Green party...
|
|
(...) OMGoodness!! Oh I want to be blue!! Say I'm an Andorian with my antennae lopped off! If there is anyone who knows something about medicine and hte human body--if someone drank this silver solution to the point where their skin turned blue, (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | K, in even simpler terms, for those of us who hate seeing death and killings and such...
|
|
Not to boil it down to the lowest possible common denominator... (URL) denies having weapons of mass destruction, and its U.N. ambassador, Mohammed Aldouri, suggested Sunday his country could allow inspectors access even to the presidential sites (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not the Green party...
|
|
(...) Wouldn't that be a great way to seperate the real medicine from the Dr. Schlob's Instant Cure? Fake cure-all's do some sort of permanent change, like turning your skin blue, or stamping "sucker" on your forehead. If *I* was in charge of the (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO Star Wars 2003
|
|
John & All, (...) That's all well and fine, John, but regardless of you being a history major, etc. it is not on topic for Star Wars, and I for one do not want to see this kind of thing where it doesn't belong, because of the possiblity of having (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO Star Wars 2003
|
|
Chris & All, (...) Because it did not belong in Star Wars. If this thread continues, I hope it would be in it's appropriate group, because of the political / historical aspect to it. If people want tot alk about this, feel free to do so here, but (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) These two paragraphs are the crux of the issue, for me. We might add a third permutation and ask: if the author creates a work intended to stir social change, but it doesn't, is it still propaganda? That seems like a suitable opposite of your (...) (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Not the Green party...
|
|
What the?! (URL) like a candidate who knows a nostrum when he sees it! If Browne can't do it, maybe blue can! Dave! (22 years ago, 7-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) I remember in January '86 when the shuttle blew up--the news preempted all the soaps for the afternoon to cover the terrible accident. Then the tv stations received many nasty letters and phone calls from irate viewers who were angry that they (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) Certainly advertising is by nature propagandist. There seems like a critical difference between a piece of fiction that is written solely to entertain and one that is written with underlying political/religious/...l/whatever messages that are (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) I think the bigger question is: What isn't propagandized? Isn't all advertising propaganda? Isn't every book propaganda? Every medium's main purpose is to promote its ideas. Isn't the very promotion of ideas propaganda? (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) TV (...) silly. (...) I agree. But also believing that what you see on a soap is litterally true...so much so that you write in to the fictional characters is pretty extreme. I'm sure that lots of (all?) people are successfully propagandized (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) Arguing the validity of the words of a (...) BTW, you didn't ask, but the main reason that I dont't post more to debate is that most of these debates end up spending most of their life argueing over the validity or quotes, sources, statements, (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) Exactly. (...) So what medium isn't spewing propaganda? (...) It would be interesting to see the ratio of those letters received to viewers. IS it 1%, 10%. I don;t think it would be very high at all. (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) "flyby." (...) Well, that's sort of technically true, but at the same time, the thread wouldn't have started without the context that leads to it. In that way, it is a continuation of more than one other thread in which TWW was cited. So I (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
|
|
(...) Actually, if I may clarify--this was a new debate about TWW and the validity of using cites from the show--Larry pointed out that in his opinion, any cite from TWW will carry no water with him. That was this particular debate drew in issues (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
