SOME people here are no different than anyone elsewhere...they have to have a pigeon hole to put you in...
and it must be one of their approved holes
cause you ain't nothin' if your in the wrong hole
heaven forbid if you're in more than one hole at a time
as a matter of fact you just may be less worthy of posting here if not conforming to their approvalness
here's a stamp for you so you can continue to be a member worthy of posting
or you could use this one
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started. They could still get him out of office. But instead, they want mass death. Don’t forget that.
Thanks SLAD. I often appear stupid because I really am stupid. Or maybe "thick" is a better descriptor. My nickname in high school was "dumb Swede" (there were a lot of Norwegian farmers living in that school district).
America is a fucked society because there is no room for essential human dignity. Its all about what you have, not who you are.--Joe Hillshoist
Wombaticus Rex » Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:06 am wrote:The United States has a very clearly divided and polarized political climate and I don't think there's really any doubt in your mind, at all, about your questions.
Liberal news sites: AlterNet, The Nation, HuffPo, TruthOut, etc. Which you also, already know.
I think those were probably honest questions, even if you are right that there isn't "really any doubt in your mind, at all, about your questions". I think neon was wondering what others mean by those terms.
Schticke will do his thing and the sheople will follow. Big deal. Let them. The irony is too dark to laugh at.
Carry on.
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.
NeonLX » Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:34 am wrote:Thanks SLAD. I often appear stupid because I really am stupid. Or maybe "thick" is a better descriptor. My nickname in high school was "dumb Swede" (there were a lot of Norwegian farmers living in that school district).
We're all Bozos on this bus but some seem to forget that very important fact
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started. They could still get him out of office. But instead, they want mass death. Don’t forget that.
This is actually the fifth P that doesn’t exist at Indiegogo
“In a world where everybody is funding everything, the role of gatekeeper will become obsolete,” she told Wired.co.uk at Web Summit 2012. “Who’s to say who should be able to raise money and who should not? We don’t believe it’s anybody’s right to make that decision. In that world you want a system where the cream rises to the top based on meritocratic reasons, not someone’s biased opinions. We’re in the business of truly democratizing funding.
Indiegogo lets anyone in the world get into the crowdfunding game. Danae Ringelmann, co-founder of crowdfunding site Indiegogo, is well on her way to achieving the mission she set herself back in 2008 when the company launched — democratize funding.
“In a world where everybody is funding everything, the role of gatekeeper will become obsolete,” she told Wired.co.uk at Web Summit 2012. “Who’s to say who should be able to raise money and who should not? We don’t believe it’s anybody’s right to make that decision. In that world you want a system where the cream rises to the top based on meritocratic reasons, not someone’s biased opinions. We’re in the business of truly democratizing funding.”
Because of this mentality, Indiegogo — which now has a presence in more than 200 countries — has given us the delights of the Bug-a-Salt and the Tesla museum, but also raised money to give a Congolese pastor a kidney transplant. Successful campaigner Cathy Pearson, who directed and produced a film about picture editor John G Morris, spent around three months putting her pitch together for Indiegogo and raised 40 percent of her film’s total budget.
Joining Ringelmann on stage at Web Summit, Pearson said she hoped for a day when broadcasters would see the platform as a legitimate funding source. In the meantime, absolutely anything (legal) can be pitched on the site.
Using the “gogo factor” — a proprietary algorithm that measures the activity in a campaign and drives the placements of projects on the site according to that data — a campaign’s ongoing success or lack of is immediately clear. Ringelmann calls it the “cream rising to the top”, and it’s part of the transparency that allows the project to be truly democratic.
But how can a campaign nab that desirable homepage spot? Ringelmann says the company has gathered five years of data to know “what matters and what doesn’t” when it comes to a successful campaign strategy, and the team have nailed the key factors, including the four Ps (more on that later). Here are her tips on how to get the gogo factor.
Have a very clear and transparent funding goal and deadline
Ask yourself: how much do you need to raise, by when and what’s it for? Be very transparent and specific with your use of funds. You do not need to raise 100 percent of your budget to start your company all in one campaign. You just need to be very specific with how much you are raising right now and how far that money should get you in your project. A target that’s too big either represents a dollar amount that the campaign owner would not know how to spend, has not explicitly outlined the total use of funds or maybe are not ready to hit based on the current size of their network.
Consider breaking up your funding into stages
We’ve seen projects come back with multiple campaigns to fund their project at different phases. And it behooves people to break down their total funding needs into chunks. It’s more manageable and hitting your goal means you’re executing what you said you would. That only sets you for greater success for the next funding campaign.
Film a great (and revealing) campaign video
Campaigns that have videos on average raise 114 percent more than those that don’t. But you need to personalize your story. Don’t just talk about what your project or product is, but why it’s important and why you’re the right person to do it. People need to look into your eyes and see your passion to be prepared to part with wealth because people fund people. You have to really open up.
Offer people an exciting give-back
Offer different perks at all different levels. Offer three to eight different ones — too much overwhelms, too few doesn’t excite. 92 percent of campaigns that reach their goal offered perks. Have fun with them — make them exclusive and unique. I was looking at the Don Rosa campaign — he’s a comic artist famous for doing Scrooge and Donald Duck — and he has a new comic book and one of the perks was a video tour of him round his house. That’s pretty personal.
Be proactive in getting the word out
Use social media and email. We’ve layered in a lot of those tools — funders will be prompted to tweet out and put it on Facebook, and that will amplify your word of mouth campaign. But be proactive and use the updates. Campaigns that use them every one to five days raise 100 percent more money than those that don’t. Updates can be anything from video updates to talking about the progress of the campaign or the project itself. If one of the perks is T-shirt designs, ask them to vote for what color they want — engage your audience to get people more invested.
And keep communicating, even if something goes wrong
Funders fund based on their own confidence and we encourage funders to do their due diligence — but sometimes things go wrong anyway, and constant communication helps in these cases. One campaign, set to launch a flying disco ball at Burning Man, ultimately couldn’t follow through because of bad weather. But because they did a good job updating funders along the way it was okay. We send folks reminders automatically to say you’ve not talked to your funders lately.
Make your early audience validate you
This is where the first 30 percent of your funding is really important. We encourage people to soft launch their campaigns and get the first 20-30 percent of funds from people that know them and can validate them. Once that happens, do a hard launch and start to reach out to friends of friends, bloggers or influencers. Again, once people start to fund you they’ll be prompted to tweet you and naturally and organically their friends of friends will start to discover it — that’s how you amplify your campaign. We see that campaigns that raise the first 30-40 percent from people they know before stranger dollars start to come in reach their targets. Think about it, my mother would probably be much more likely to invest in me first than she would be to put money into the stranger she just met on the street — but she would fund the stranger if she knew I had. It’s the social application that’s happening and the credibility thing. The transparency of the web is allowing people to fly much farther than ever before.
And the four Ps… We’ve seen over the last five years that there’s five reasons anyone funds anything in the world, anytime, and that’s passion, perks, participation and pride.
Passion
There’s this campaign that was raising money for Pastor Marion. He is known as the Schindler of the Congo and has been saving lives for a decade and his life came under attack last year and his kidneys started to fail. So two reporters took it upon themselves to raise money to send him to South Africa and get his kidney transplant paid for. They reached out to all the readers who had been following the story for the last decade and they were passionate about doing good and had informed them for so many years.
Perks
We’ve already been over this, but as an example one campaigner at Indiegogo was a 3D printer maker who didn’t have the funds to prototype his product and get it to market, so he pre-offered units as a way to raise $160,000. A lot of people that funded it wanted that 3D printer.
Participation People want to be part of something bigger than themselves. A film called Salaam Dunk about the positive impact basketball is making in young girls’ lives in Iraq. When I was a young girl I played basketball and it had a huge positive impact on my life and confidence so while I can’t quit my day job and volunteer for this film or help teach basketball to girls in Iraq, I can participate in the movement by funding this film.
Pride This comes in all forms, but the biggest one is recognition. People like to be known for doing stuff. We’ve seen the Karen Klein campaign — the bus monitor who got bullied on a bus. Someone saw it online and wanted to do something about that and send her on a vacation. You could see all the people excitedly commenting and announcements that they were the tenth funder, or the 25th. They felt involved and they’re early-in and discovered it first. It was the same thing with the Tesla campaign, which raised $1.2m (£750,000).
Profit
This is actually the fifth P that doesn’t exist at Indiegogo. But that could become legal soon with the Jobs Act — we totally helped that happen by writing case studies to White House senators to make that decision. We’ll take a look when the regulations come out to see what it is. I generally think the reasons people fund are multiple, and when you introduce profit it doesn’t mean all the motivation will shift to that side. I definitely think that there’s a dynamic flow of motivations coming into play every time somebody contributes.
and btw all 'liberals' are not assholes, dumbfucks or idiots...some are wonderful human beings with souls and hearts
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started. They could still get him out of office. But instead, they want mass death. Don’t forget that.
I personally imagine that if this thing takes off, like it has the potential to do, that genuinely alternative websites, many of which present the news and cold facts the establishment definitely doesnt want you to hear would truly get some fiscal kickback from this. Most riggies probably know who they are, or at least know of their own.
I also love the idea of the station as a platform for independent musicians and comedians.
well, 100k pounds isn't remotely enough, unless the plan is to use all volunteer labor. Russia Today took ~$800 million dollars over a decade to get going.
Costs for this sort of operation will primarily be labor. Though bandwidth and server costs (depending on # of users, and they're going to have to fight hard to keep bots from eating up tons of bandwidth) could run maybe $250/month in the early phases (and that's up to a fairly heavy user load). Also depending on if they have to pay for office/studio space. The biggest challenge would be getting the all volunteer staff to show up with their best work after the initial honeymoon wears off. They certainly won't be producing 24 hours of programming a day, in fact I'd guess 7 hours a week would be a lot. They can't just take articles they like from sites they like, they'll have to have staff asking for permission to use stuff a lot. Or just post a very short except and link to it. If they're able to work with youtube they can cut costs a lot, but I bet they want to host their own video/audio. Probably they'll be able to pull a few 2nd/3rd tier podcasters to the site.
Anyway, it could work. Not sure if that's really a good thing or not though.
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
Cross-posting from the Tantra-Induced Delusional Syndrome ("TIDS") thread:
David Icke: A Biographical Profile
David Icke was born in Leicester, UK in 1952, the son of a British World War II hero. He did not do well in school, but was talent-scouted by a football (we call it soccer in the U.S.) team, Coventry City. He also played for Hereford United. Early onset of arthritis ruled out a football career, and Mr. Icke retired from the sport in 1973. During the 1970s and 1980s he was a print and television journalist. He also began to dabble in politics, and after 1988 became one of the spokesmen for the UK Green Party.
About 1990, Mr. Icke began to get heavily into New Age ideas, evidently while searching for alternative cures to the pain of his arthritis. In early 1991 he claims to have had a spiritual experience at a pre-Columbian burial site in Peru. Not long after he returned to the UK, he resigned from the Green Party. At this point in his life he began wearing only clothes that were turquoise colored, believing it channeled positive energy. He also began making bizarre doomsday predictions, such as a prognostication that Great Britain would crumble into the sea as a result of earthquakes. (There is no significant seismic activity in Britain). Mr. Icke later recanted these predictions, admitting they were “nonsense.”
What really projected Mr. Icke into the public eye was an April 1991 interview with BBC personality Terry Wogan. You can see a video of the interview here. In the interview, Mr. Icke continued to make strange apocalyptic predictions. He also claimed, or at least implied, that he was the Son of God—later Mr. Icke said this was misinterpreted. The studio audience present at the interview laughed. The BBC brass cringed; many thought the show went too far. Fifteen years later, Mr. Wogan admitted that he was too hard on Mr. Icke during this interview. Certainly the interview had a devastating effect—Mr. Icke said he was afraid to walk down the street for fear of public derision, and he dropped out of sight for several years.
In 1999, Mr. Icke came out with his most famous book, The Biggest Secret, the book with which he is identified on-screen in Thrive. This book established the central tenet of Mr. Icke’s philosophy: that the world is run by a race of reptilian aliens that can change their shape and appear to be human, and that the world’s political, economic and social systems are a colossal conspiracy by these evil aliens to enslave mankind. These aliens are supposedly from the constellation Draco, but also from another dimension. Over his various series of books and lectures, Mr. Icke has expounded on this theory, weaving a complicated science-fiction history of the world wherein these aliens have been breeding humans since ancient times. People whom Mr. Icke thinks are secretly reptilian shape-shifting aliens from Draco include Bill Clinton, the late Princess Diana, Queen Elizabeth II, former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, President George W. Bush (of course), and, for whatever reason, Hollywood actor and former country star Kris Kristofferson.
Mr. Icke has not changed this basic narrative in 13 years. Indeed, he’s still out there today, giving lectures all over the world and getting paid handsomely for it. According to one estimate, he may make as much as £300,000 (about $475,000) for one appearance in the UK.
Is There Any Evidence to Support David Icke’s Theories?
No.
There is not a single shred of evidence anywhere in the world to suggest that (1) shape-shifting reptilian aliens from the constellation Draco actually exist; (2) various world leaders, celebrities and country-western stars are actually reptilian shape-shifting aliens from the constellation Draco; or (3) that there is a such thing as an “Illuminati,” a “New World Order” or a “Global Domination Agenda.” On this blog, I have already debunked the Global Domination Agenda and demonstrated why we can be certain that it does not exist. All of the so-called “evidence” produced by Mr. Icke and/or his supporters falls along exactly the same lines as the discussion in that article about why evidence proffered by Illuminati/NWO/GDA believers does not, in fact, prove the existence of this group or their supposed agenda. Mr. Icke’s theories are total fantasy.
A favorite activity of believers in Mr. Icke’s fantastic delusional scenarios is to scrutinize videos on YouTube of world leaders suspected of being reptilians for “evidence” of them changing from their human into their reptilian form. Sometimes believers will seize upon a glitch or anomaly in the video, often lasting only split seconds, and trumpet it as “proof” that the person is “changing into a reptile in front of our eyes!” Often the culprit will be a bulging vein in the person’s neck, a common retinal flash (red-eye), or a pixellation error in the streaming video which the believer insists makes the person look like they have “lizard eyes.” For some reason, former presidents Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush are favorite targets for this ludicrous accusation. Here is an example of a video which reptilian believers cite as total vindication of Mr. Icke’s claims.
As you can see, it’s a pretty boring interview by the former presidents, and despite the frenzied claims of the subtitles, neither of them change into reptiles, nor anything even remotely close.
I challenge any believer of Mr. Icke’s theories to explain how and why this video proves (I) that reptilian shape-shifting aliens exist; (II) that these aliens come from Draco; (III) that these aliens rule the world, or (IV) that President Clinton and President Bush are said reptilian aliens.
To those supporters of Mr. Icke who will invariably say, “But you haven’t proved that what he says isn’t true,” I will reply, I don’t have to. It’s Mr. Icke’s burden to prove that what he says is true. The burden of proof never shifts to skeptics to disprove conspiracy theories. I am not suggesting that we reject David Icke’s theories about reptilian shape-shifting aliens because they sound crazy. I’m suggesting that we reject them because there is no evidence to support them, and because, as if this is not enough reason to reject them, they have another very serious and troubling problem.
What Do David Icke’s Theories Really Mean?
The problem with Mr. Icke’s false assertions is that they are essentially science-fiction redresses of the old “Jewish world conspiracy” theories from the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with reptilian shape-shifting aliens from Draco standing in for Jews. Mr. Icke even believes in the authenticity of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a notorious anti-Semitic forgery that was proven false almost a century ago. Of course, in Mr. Icke’s mythology, it was not the Jews who wrote about their plans of world domination in the Protocols, but aliens.
Michael Barkun, an academic researcher who studies comparative religion, wrote a book called A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003). Dr. Barkun is the leading scholarly expert on conspiracy theorists in the United States today. On page 104, in a chapter where Dr. Barkun describes the conspiracist ideology of Mr. Icke, he says:
“This set of nested conspiracies [described by David Icke] achieves its goals through control of the ‘world financial system’ and its mastery of ‘mind control’ techniques. Its goal is a ‘plan that, according to Icke, had been laid out in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Although Icke is careful to suggest…that the Illuminati rather than the Jews wrote The Protocols, this is the first of a number of instances in which Icke moves into the dangerous terrain of anti-Semitism.”
The reason that aliens became stand-ins for Jews has to do with the evolution of conspiracy theory during the 1980s and 1990s, when right-wing militia conspiracy milieu (think Timothy McVeigh) became intertwined with the UFO/alien subculture. Dr. Barkun states, on page 144:
“This type of speculation projects terrestrial racial categories onto creatures from outer space….Such racial classificatory schemata are common among those who argue for multiple types of alien visitors. Even among writers who most unambiguously reject anti-Semitism, the alien racial types disquietingly appear to reproduce old stereotypes. The evil Grays are dwarfish with grotesque features—not unlike stereotypes of the short, swarthy, hook-nosed Jew of European anti-Semitic folklore. They are contrasted to the tall, virtuous Nordics or Aryans. Although there is little to suggest that those who employ such terms do so to make direct parallels to earthbound categories, the images seem clearly to be refracted versions of older racial anti-Semitism.”
This is useful background, but it isn’t really about Mr. Icke per se. However, Dr. Barkun does get there, after discussing how conspiracists like David Icke are inconsistent about proclaiming to not be anti-Semitic while advancing clearly anti-Semitic theories:
“David Icke also seeks to have it both ways, simultaneously claiming to be offended at the thought that anyone might find him anti-Semitic and hinting at the dark activities of Jewish elites. He protests that the charge of anti-Semitism is merely a ruse to silence truth seekers, a tactic of the shadowy ‘Global Elite,’ who ‘denounce anyone who gets closer to the truth as an anti-Semite.’ According to Icke, the Anti-Defamation League is the conspiracy’s tool for silencing ‘researchers who are getting too close to the truth about the global conspiracy.’…
The more strongly Icke is condemned for anti-Semitism, the stranger are his protestations of innocence. He attacks alleged exploiters of the Jewish people, including B’nai B’rith, which he identifies as the Rothschilds’ ‘intelligence arm,’ used to ‘defame and destroy legitimate researchers with the label anti-Semitic.’ It was supposedly the Rothschilds who brought Hitler to power, created Zionism, and ‘control the State of Israel.’…Icke and other UFO anti-Semites obsess about ‘Jewish bankers.’ They are alleged to be the international wire-pullers behind countless episodes of national collapse and international turmoil. The old names, such as Rothschild and the firm of Kuhn, Loeb, continually recur. Given this penchant for recycling old themes, it is scarcely surprising that that hoary forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, exerts an abiding fascination.”
brainpanhandler wrote:You can't really separate SchtICKE from his project.
I was hoping you might continue that remark with......"cos if you could, its a decent idea".
Perhaps its just that Ive been around here too long, but you didn't surprise me.
So go ahead and elaborate on my thoughts about the project as a good idea ( assuming in some non Ickean utopia that you and others appear to strive for, he wasnt involved)
Lets take he who should not be spoken out of the equation once and for all. Question to BPH;
The crowdsource funding of a TV and radio station that will broadcast the news that the shepherds and their sheepdogs ( since you appear big on such analogies) dont want us to hear,
Good or bad idea?
As an asiide Ive learned an absolute ton about indiegogo funding and stuff from this. Personally, that was worth looking at the link in and of itself if you ask me.
ON EDIT
American Dream. Ive just read that article that you so graciously crossposted from that thread, and Ive never read such a crock of factual/opinionated hit piece crap in my entire life. It's probably any amount worse than any of the chaff you continuously appear to extract from Icke I guess I was never previously dilligent enough to read the stuff you post. If the article above is anything to go by, I'm not such a bad judge after all.
I understand that you may well be busy, but please check your facts in your articles before you post them. This thread was doing ok in that regard up until this point.
Meanwhile I love the concept of the project. Ive never personally heard of it before. What do you think about ir ?
American Dream. Ive just read that article that you so graciously crossposted from that thread, and Ive never read such a crock of factual/opinionated hit piece crap in my entire life. It's probably any amount worse than any of the chaff you continuously appear to extract from Icke I guess I was never previously dilligent enough to read the stuff you post. If the article above is anything to go by, I'm not such a bad judge after all.
Please identify specific points made that you do or do not agree with- what you've written is entirely muddy.
Above and beyond that, let's not be distracted from the overall thrust of the critique.
David Icke is very bad news indeed- associating him with real points of crisis and struggle: against organized pedophilia, against settler colonialism in Palestine, etc., is very likely to hurt much more than it helps. And these things do matter a great deal...
"If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything." -Malcolm X
American Dream. Ive just read that article that you so graciously crossposted from that thread, and Ive never read such a crock of factual/opinionated hit piece crap in my entire life. It's probably any amount worse than any of the chaff you continuously appear to extract from Icke I guess I was never previously dilligent enough to read the stuff you post. If the article above is anything to go by, I'm not such a bad judge after all.
Please identify specific points made that you do or do not agree with- what you've written is entirely muddy.
Above and beyond that, let's not be distracted from the overall thrust of the critique.
David Icke is very bad news indeed- associating him with real points of crisis and struggle: against organized pedophilia, against settler colonialism in Palestine, etc., is very likely to hurt much more than it helps. And these things do matter a great deal...
AD, Im not turning this thread into a slanging match, or an essay which criiques point by point. But, for example, Icke believes that Bill Clinton is in and of himself, a shape shifting reptilain from the planet Draco?
Where does Icke say that? Have you read it yourself? Or is that the same kind of bland sloppy generalisation that critics of Icke, such as yourself accuse Icke himself of , whenever his name is mentioned?
It's clearly not the idea of a TV station that tells people stuff that the 0.000001% dont want us to hear, its the name huh?
American Dream. Ive just read that article that you so graciously crossposted from that thread, and Ive never read such a crock of factual/opinionated hit piece crap in my entire life. It's probably any amount worse than any of the chaff you continuously appear to extract from Icke I guess I was never previously dilligent enough to read the stuff you post. If the article above is anything to go by, I'm not such a bad judge after all.
Please identify specific points made that you do or do not agree with- what you've written is entirely muddy.
Above and beyond that, let's not be distracted from the overall thrust of the critique.
David Icke is very bad news indeed- associating him with real points of crisis and struggle: against organized pedophilia, against settler colonialism in Palestine, etc., is very likely to hurt much more than it helps. And these things do matter a great deal...
AD, Im not turning this thread into a slanging match, or an essay which criiques point by point. But, for example, Icke believes that Bill Clinton is in and of himself, a shape shifting reptilain from the planet Draco?
Where does Icke say that? Have you read it yourself? Or is that the same kind of bland sloppy generalisation that critics of Icke, such as yourself accuse Icke himself of , whenever his name is mentioned?
It's clearly not the idea of a TV station that tells people stuff that the 0.000001% dont want us to hear, its the name huh?
Fucking good idea though, innit?
So you dispute the position of one chair on the deck of the Titanic???
WAS DEFINITELY NOT TRYING TO IMPLY OTHERWISE, just to be caps-lock clear.
justdrew » Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:13 pm wrote:well, 100k pounds isn't remotely enough, unless the plan is to use all volunteer labor. Russia Today took ~$800 million dollars over a decade to get going.
