by RJ Parker on December 17th, 2014
For those who are uninitiated, the “us military” is spending other people’s money on super-expensive robotic killing machines again. This time they made a drone that can swim. What’s next, a parrot drone that flies back to the pentagon and tells the stateacrats what you say about them behind closed doors? Oh wait, they already have our phones tapped and everything else for that matter, so it doesn’t matter. See the pic, pick your jaw off the floor and start feeling bad for Flipper.
From a comment I made on Facebook just a moment ago, related to the crazy robo-shark incident unfolding at the US military domination headquarters:
Ah, where to start…?
Ok, so… the military is an organization built on the premise that the world is out to kill you and the only way to be safe is to kill them first. That and military is funded with stolen money (tax dollars), so it’s not a voluntary situation between all parties.
There’s aggression in the equation at all times with any military and any government in general, because you are not given a choice. It’s like a stick up or a rape– but the victim is not your body, but your soul & bank account. Also, many people’s minds are warped by believing in nationalism and don’t realize the ends which their enthusiasm or nostalgic feelings are serving.
The mythical notion that militaries keep us safe is rebutted by the death-toll which tops 10,000,000 souls extinguished by the US military since 1900. I linked a good source, i’m not going to lay it all out for you, I just don’t have the time at the moment. Two million dead since 1900 were US soldiers, not that we should care any more about someone who just happened to be born closer to me on the Earth– because that’s insane.
So, in short, the military doesn’t need multi-million dollar robo-sharks trolling the ocean that they paid for with your and my stolen money. I say fuck no to robo shark crap.
SO this is how the media works…. Visit FreedomToons.com for more of the hilarity and insanity of that which you find below. Thank for ya’ll’s support and by the way, suck it.
by RJ Parker on November 21st, 2014
Fucking love this guy Seamus Caughlin and his team over at FreedomToons.com – They make complex social and political issues make sense and they tend to lean over the libertarian side of things, sometime even towards AnCapistan. Check out the comic and see if you learn something or pee yourself.
by RJ Parker on November 15th, 2014
I know you guys are all smart enough to spot a logical contradiction when you see one but unfortunately the general public is not always quite as sharp. The notion here is that dear leader obama is encouraging the FCC (federal communication cabal) to “ensure a free and open internet” by forcing ISPs (internet service providers) to grant equal access to all packets of data traveling down their “pipes.”
While, as with much of what is done by the state, this maneuver on its surface is sold as something pro-freedom and about equal access and so on. The sub-text here is communism and the synopsis is bigger government. The contradiction is so loud, that it is deafening. How can we ensure freedom by increasing regulation? Simple, it’s impossible, you can not.
When giving fair consideration to the alternative what do we have? We have ISPs being able to allow Netflix and Hulu to pay them extra to push their information to you faster while going to whitehouse.gov or some other non-paying site might be a slower load time, relative to other pages.
Personally, I’m not for my ISP tweaking the speeds of various packets but I still have utmost faith in the market to work this one out. Not surprisingly, the average amerikkan isn’t seeing it as such. Well, the average TV worshippers in the US are looking at obama delivering his speech and thinking to themselves what a hero he is. You and I and those awakened are not dumb to the fact that he’s trying to inch one step closer to having the FCC regulate internet traffic, monitor packets and so on.
Frankly, they can just justify the extra monitoring by saying they have to make sure no data packets are being prioritized over others. Typically the state takes their time and grabs power slowly, so expect no less with this. As with gun control, the state is content to take little sips out of their cup of Tyranny Tea and swish it around for awhile before spitting it out all over the meager little people
TL:DR – obama is trying to “enforce” net neutrality. Is he trying to win the support of more naive nerds or is this a move to grab even more power over internet access in general? Our guess: the latter.
by RJ Parker on November 11th, 2014
It’s easy to show why I like something my father liked or had hanging on the wall as a child. This doesn’t prove determinism.
Present how I like a poem written by an author who is unheard of by everyone I’ve ever known. And present why I would like that rather than another poem. I think I understand that the intent of saying we have determinism that is compatible with free-will is to potentially create a richer understanding in the connection or overlap of determinism and free-will.
However, I also think that the notion of compatabilism is just a soft way of saying determinism. My position is that if we have free will, it arises out of our consciousness and therefore is something that is a true product of our own individuality. The fact of our own free action itself is the proof or qualifier that free-will exists. Or, more simply, the individual owns some of his actions and to that extent he is free. The actions he can not rightly own, from them he is not free. To them, he is a servant. Free will and determinism are not compatible is my position, obviously. My understanding of any version of compatabilism still sounds like determinism in so far as I have not mistaken or forgotten a valid argument for it.
I know that I have not proven free-will conclusively but I do not need to disprove the negative. We have the experience of being free (despite our federal overlords) and the determinist or compatabilist has to expose how this feeling is misguided. He also has to do something profound to show that human creativity can be predicted universally.
My test is the following: For any determinist, create a work of art of a famous artist prior to the artist doing it himself and place said “predictive art” in a vault until a later date when the famous artist actually paints it himself, thinking it to be a fully original expression of his own free personhood and sense of self. Passing this test would be a conclusive and scientific proof for determinism. Only when we can prove determinism to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt, can we address the notion of compatabilism in proper order. However, I’m not expecting that to ever happen.
by RJ Parker on November 9th, 2014