I saw this documentary yesterday and was in a state of deep depression. Many or most of you have probably seen it, but to me it was new. It is about how mass media in the US is controlled by a handful of large corporations. These corporations have one goal: to get larger and control the system that reports the news. To this end, big media has aligned itself with the conservative Republican political minority and has pushed their selfish agenda in order to gain political favor and build fortunes.

This is part of an online a review:


Punctuated with quotes and phrases from George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, this film takes issues that many people may already suspect to be true and presents it with sound and video. The movie is a good presentation of how American society has turned into an oligarchy of frightening proportions. In some sense, Orwell Rolls In His Grave is a pretty depressing film. To think that the wealthiest one-tenths of one percent of the country is in control of the largest corporations, the executive and judicial branches of government and the mass media is something that challenges our notions of freedom and democracy.

Why are some news stories dropped? Why are some news stories not reported on at all? The documentary presents evidence that the 1980 and 2000 U.S. presidential elections were won by Republicans through dirty tricks and media spin and control. The movie investigates the 1980 "October Surprise" when hostages held for more than 400 days in Iran were detained longer until after the presidential election. Director Pappas presents evidence that representatives from the Ronald Reagan campaign met with representatives from Iran to ensure that the hostages would not be released until after the election. The hostages were released the day of Reagan's inauguration. After a congressional commission turned back any accusation of wrongdoing, the story and scandal was never reported further.

The movie also shows the scandalous situation during the 2000 election which led to many votes not being counted or tallied incorrectly in Florida. With the rest of the country divided, Florida became the pivotal state in which the presidential election would be decided. The election between George W. Bush and Al Gore was so close in Florida, that the Florida State Supreme Court ordered a manual recount of all ballots to determine the winner. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, stopped the recount when it looked like Gore may win. The movie suggests that Bush "stole" the election and the media essentially overlooks this political maneuvering.

Orwell Rolls In His Grave is an acerbic political movie. It ties in big media with politics and specifically targets the Republican party and the Neo-Conservative (neocon) movement. The creators of the film present a lot of evidence linking politics and big media corporations, however it glosses over some other issues which may have made a more balanced report. For example, the 1980 "October Surprise" got a lot of press 6 years later when the public learned that the Reagan administration actually did make an arms deal with the Iranian government for the release of the hostages -- it then look the money it made during this illegal sale and sent it to rebels in Nicaragua. This scandal became known as the Iran-Contra Affair and the resulting reports and congressional hearings were news for nearly two years.

http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/networks/orwe...

The full movie is available to watch online here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=19...

Orwell Rolls in His Grave "Could a media system, controlled by a few global corporations with the ability to overwhelm all competing voices, be able to turn lies into truth?..." This chilling documentary film examines the relationship between the media, corporate America, and government. In a country where the "top 1% control 90% of the wealth", the film argues that the media system is nothing but a "subsidiary of corporate America." Director: Robert Kane Pappas - Run Time 1 Hour 46 Minutes

In Britain, only 8 percent of the population is Catholic (compared with 25 percent in the United States). Abortion there is legal. Abortion is free. And yet British women have fewer abortions than Americans do. I asked Cardinal Hume why that is.

The cardinal said that there were several reasons but that one important explanation was Britain’s universal health-care system. “If that frightened, unemployed 19-year-old knows that she and her child will have access to medical care whenever it’s needed,” Hume explained, “she’s more likely to carry the baby to term. Isn’t it obvious?”

A young woman I knew in Britain added another explanation. “If you’re active,” she said, “the way to avoid abortion is to avoid pregnancy. Most of us do that with an IUD or a diaphragm. It means going to the doctor. But that’s easy here, because anybody can go to the doctor free.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...

This section contains Adult Content and may challenge established religious beliefs! Do not read this section if you are under 18 or offended by material that may be in conflict with the established doctrines of Christianity!

Around the world the classic “heart-shape” has come to represent love. It’s carved into trees and printed on millions of valentines cards every year. In one sense, the meaning of any symbol is what most people believe it means. Still, to truly understand something it’s often worth looking beyond the obvious. What the heart-shape actually means is the subject of some debate.



/snip

The truth seems to be that the heart-shape or “Secret Heart” was a stylisation of the vagina and the inverted head of a male penis. So when "hearts become entwined" it means much more than just love.

How can this be true? There have been claims that it first appeared in Neolithic times but we’ve found no hard evidence of this. It does appear in the Roman period and can be seen in 2,000 year old Roman graffiti in the cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii – occasionally on the walls of brothels where it features more detail than the modern version. There is no question that sexual intercourse in ancient Rome and other great cities of the time was much more “liberal” than now but, even then, there were restrictions. (Pliny the Elder) One theory is that it was a secret symbol that a man would give to a woman to indicate that he wanted to make love to her – especially if there was a restriction on them being together – perhaps a difference in social status. A woman might do the same thing. The heart symbol seems to have first represented lust before it became associated with love. Think how similar it is today and how many cards are signed, “From your secret valentine”.

/snip

So how did it become so widely spread? One theory is that the Christian Church adopted and sanitised it. They certainly used this strategy to overwhelm many other pagan and pre-pagan beliefs and symbols. Easter was once a celebration of fertility – that’s why we still give Easter Eggs. The very name comes from the pagan Goddess Eostre whose sacred animal was the rabbit - Easter Bunny (ever wondered why?). This wasn't the only conversion. The names of most of the weekdays are actually named after Nordic or Roman Gods, Thor - Thursday, Frija - Friday, Woden - Wednesday, Saturn - Saturday. Mayday is actual a fertility rite, Lent was the pagan lean month when food stocks needed to be conserved and the halo - or rays of light from the head of the deity - were actual a representation of the Egyptian Sun God Ra. We could go on but we think we've made our point.

A very long article here:

http://www.aquiziam.com/secret_heart.html

http://www.calendarioromano.org/06.html

for the edition of

CALENDARIO ROMANO 2010

appeal to single clergymen or seminaristi are made that appreciate to contribute with this initiative of information on Rome to contact the being followed author of the Calendar to deliveries:

telefon +39.347.3724217

e-mail: p.pazzi@libero.it

I may just convert

I posted this in GD as well, but it needs to be shouted from the rooftops.

GD link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Article:

Returning the car & my emotional breakdown(s)
by Florida4Obama
Digg this! Share this on Twitter - Returning the car & my emotional breakdown(s)Tweet this submit to reddit Share This
Sun Mar 07, 2010 at 04:30:31 PM PST

If you've been following the story of my nephew and the ordeal that he has been through in the past several days, you know that yesterday we returned the car to his parents. The drive was long, but when we got there the family was civil to me and my friend for the most part. It is clear they are very hurt by their sons sexuality. I had an emotional breakdown of my own.

Please follow me below the fold for the full story.

* Florida4Obama's diary :: ::


My best friend Dena and I left for North Carolina right around midnight on Saturday morning. We were returning my nephew's car to his parents at their request. I know many here suggested we just leave it somewhere, but we couldn't do that. As far as my sister and her husband knew, we still thought we were picking up some of my nephew's belongings as well. The drive was long, and Dena did most of the drive so I could sleep.

We arrived in less than 11 hours. When I pulled up in front of the house, the circular driveway was full of cars. Upon entering the house, I encountered my despondent sister and her husband. With them were several couples from their church, and a few from their neighborhood. My sister immediately ran to me and hugged me and just burst into tears. She said, "How could this happen to our family?" Several ladies in the room helped me calm her down.

Just by doing a quick look around the first floor of their house, I noticed their oldest son's pictures were nowhere to be found with one exception. His senior picture was sitting on a table by itself with a candle beside it. If I didn't know better, I would've thought he had died in a tragic accident. My sister and her husband are obviously hurt, but their actions were more of grieving for a deceased child as opposed to finding out their child was gay.

Read here:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/7/843...

Cold hearted, cruel and barbaric.




This young man is being treated like a criminal because he was born gay.

Last Saturday, Karen Zipdrive over at Pulp Friction wrote a very nice post about Canada and the Olympics that were recently held there. I especially liked the way she ended her post, and personally, I agree with her sentiments. These are her words:

You see, the fact is, Canada is what America tried to be and failed.

Canadians are far more united as Canadians.

They are neither gun freaks nor warmongers. They never owned slaves, they aren't filled with racism, and gay people can get married and enjoy the same rights as any Canadian adult taxpayers.

They have good healthcare for all.

The Canadian dollar is strong.

Except for the cold weather and lack of even one tropical climate in any of their provinces, Canada would be a most desirable place to live.

Sure, America is richer and we have more exportable goods. We have more diversity of nature, more Hollywood and more New York City-style sophistication.

But Americans are not as kind as Canadians, and we can be way too aggressive and prone to violent bullying, discourtesy, and a sense of superiority toward citizens of most other nations.

The Vancouver Olympics may have had their share of uncooperative weather and a modest opening ceremony (especially compared to the Chinese!)but they have done themselves proud by reminding the world that Canada is filled with warm, welcoming people and a charming, national sense of humility.

The rest of us could all learn a lot from the Canadians.

http://bestoftheblogs.com/Home/26693

/snip:

What there was, though, was a feeling that everybody belonged to one of these two sides. Your religion, your school, your favourite football team, your stance on Northern Ireland and whether it was the Queen or the Pope that were to get themselves to fuck – they were all locked on together, you would know all these elements of a person’s personality by only knowing one.

Like people created on a production line. Cardboard cut-outs. And I’m embarrassed to say that I was one of them. I don’t mean to put down people who see themselves as one of those two sides. If you’ve thought it all out and those are your views, then fair enough. But I felt like they were put in my head, and I never questioned them.

And, over time, I started to unweave this fucking crap that passed down the generations, from one fucking idiot to another. I started to wake up to some of the realities of my personality.



http://www.limmy.com/blog/2010/02/25/the-b...

Liberals and Atheists Smarter? Intelligent People Have Values Novel in Human Evolutionary History, Study Finds

ScienceDaily (Feb. 24, 2010) — More intelligent people are statistically significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.


The study, published in the March 2010 issue of the peer-reviewed scientific journal Social Psychology Quarterly, advances a new theory to explain why people form particular preferences and values. The theory suggests that more intelligent people are more likely than less intelligent people to adopt evolutionarily novel preferences and values, but intelligence does not correlate with preferences and values that are old enough to have been shaped by evolution over millions of years."

"Evolutionarily novel" preferences and values are those that humans are not biologically designed to have and our ancestors probably did not possess. In contrast, those that our ancestors had for millions of years are "evolutionarily familiar."

"General intelligence, the ability to think and reason, endowed our ancestors with advantages in solving evolutionarily novel problems for which they did not have innate solutions," says Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science. "As a result, more intelligent people are more likely to recognize and understand such novel entities and situations than less intelligent people, and some of these entities and situations are preferences, values, and lifestyles."

Full article here:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/...

Sir,

This is indeed revolutionary stuff. Not the deliberate reconsideration of the DADT issue, but that you're actively encouraging such an adult, open dialog.

I'm one of your officers, currently deployed supporting a WIAS tasker and I look forward to my Division meeting up with me here in Afghanistan. My partner of 10 years and I have happily accepted the various assignments the Army has given me this past decade and have weathered my two 12-month-long and one 15-month-long deployments like, I would imagine, nearly every other couple - save for one detail: the partner I leave behind has no support from any official channels. He would be notified after my brother who is listed as my Emergency POC/NOK. After 10 years, my partner has earned the right to be told first about my death. He has earned the right to make my health emergency decisions. And, he has earned the right to be recognized for his sacrifices just as any other spouse. The exception being that he is not a spouse. We are not a recognized couple. And the very fact that he and I live in a marriage-like relationship could cause us to lose my pension and our financial security later in life.

As a former combat arms commander, I've had to face the DADT issue not just because I am gay - an imutable characteristic that is no more a choice for me than someone could choose their race - but because I've had 4 gay men in my command who I have known to be gay. I knew about two of them because they believed that living a lie was counter to their ethical charge as Soldiers. One was chaptered and the other was transferred. I knew about another because he was outed by an Evangelical roommate who had "baited" him into admitting it to him. He was not chaptered because we were a week from deploying and no one believed he really was gay. When he left the Army after we redeployed, he came back to tell me that indeed, he was gay. And, I knew about the fourth one because after he died of wounds from an IED, his partner of four years wrote me - not knowing my orientation - to tell me how much SSG ___ loved the Army, how we were the only family he'd ever known, and how much he appreciated the support of his fellow NCOs who knew about his personal life and whose spouses back home had taken care of him (the partner).

Read the rest here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35571422/ns/ms...

http://images.nypl.org/index.php?id=123277...

http://community.livejournal.com/vintage_a...

We should keep and know our history lest we are condemned to repeat it.

This is the problem the right wing has. They cannot swallow that Obama is an educated, intelligent BLACK man.

See more here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/851...

RICHMOND — State Delegate Bob Marshall of Manassas says disabled children are God's punishment to women who have aborted their first pregnancy.


He made that statement Thursday at a press conference to oppose state funding for Planned Parenthood.

"The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children," said Marshall, a Republican.

"In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There's a special punishment Christians would suggest."

Marshall was among more than 20 people, mostly Christian pastors and clergy, who gathered for the press conference in the General Assembly Building.

http://www.newsleader.com/article/20100222...

In the words of Christopher Hitchens: Religion is poison.

Religion is far more of a choice than homosexuality. And the protections that we have for religion — we protect religion. And talk about a lifestyle choice — that is absolutely a choice… It’s a travesty that people have forced someone who is gay to have to make their case that they deserve the same basic rights as someone else.
-

Jon Stewart

Anyone who has time, your local abortion clinics will need volunteer escorts until march 28th, to be able to get through the parking lots filled with spitting hate mongers, and safely into clinics to get an abortion. i strongly urge all of us who have time and support these women's right to choose 2 see if any clinics near you would like volunteers, please.

http://womensrights.change.org/blog/view/4...

Ever wish you could make the already troubled life of a woman with an unwanted pregnancy even harder? You are in luck! Today marks the start of the anti-choice movement's "40 Days for Life" event. From now until March 28th, event organizers are amping up protests at abortion clinics in 165 cities, both here in the United States and abroad.

Obviously, protesters outside of abortion clinics is nothing new. Every day, patients must walk through a gauntlet of insults and shame before they can get inside. Employees, too, are harassed, leading many to have security escorts and protected identities. For some reason, these anti-choice activists feel it is not only a good thing, but their Christian duty, to harass these people on a daily basis. That's why so many abortion clinics have volunteers who escort patients through the chaos outside. During the 40 Days campaign, the number of these protesters grows.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor claims that the rise of secularism has led to a liberal society, hostile to Christian morals and values, in which religious belief is viewed as "a private eccentricity" and the voice of faith groups is marginalised.

The cardinal warns that Britain shows signs of degenerating into a country free of morals, because of its rejection of traditional values and its new emphasis on the rights of the individual.

There are now "serious tensions" between Christians and secularist society, he says, in which atheists are becoming more "vocal and aggressive".

Writing in a book on multiculturalism, to be published on Monday, the Cardinal argues that immigrants have a duty to adjust to British life, but expresses concern that they are faced with a culture that is increasingly repressive and intolerant. He says that while the country has become more diverse and pluralistic, the Christian values which have shaped its identity should not be abandoned.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...

He should just keep quiet morals and values. Doesn't he belong to RCC, well known for fucking little boys?