Dear Johan (OUG),

Interesting topic.

There are several books that go to great
lengths on the subject - worth Googling
the web.

I like this answer to the question -
"Who Owns the World?

Answer:

The citizens thereof.

But we must claim it or there will be no one
and nothing to claim.

i guess thats the point/lexie\too many already are/staking their claim
and no one is stopping them

power water roads ports aIRPORTs/BRIDGES SEWERS/PARKS
THERE ARE those claiming water minerals flora fauna.rocks dirt its an endless supply of loot out there..[they actually bribed/this generation of natives/to give 99 year leases on their rights.]

its too huge/to fix globaly/its too complicatedat to many levels/with too many exploiters exploiting/that id rather ignore what they do/do as i do/so saying..[lol]

alex jones..[at the 5 minute mark]..
http://www.infowars.com/first-look-prometheus-ii-paradise/

explains how science has dead ended
evolution..it seems now cant have happend..as the books tell us..[as dan de man/said much better at the religion thread]
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16418&page=28

the point being/thE system now needs admit they decieved
or were misled..or that alians done it/and as alex explains/it gets wierd/and the movie planed is setting up tHE PLAY..

I HATE MOVIES.. but there yo go/the masses see our leaders have feet of clay...anyhow,,bac to my notes
. History teems with instances of truth put down by persecution. If not suppressed for ever, it may be thrown back for centuries. (pp. 36-37)

* Since reasoning, or inference, the principal subject of logic, is an operation which usually takes place by means of words, and in complicated cases can take place in no other way: those who have not a thorough insight into both the signification and purpose of words, will be under chances, amounting almost to certainty, of reasoning or inferring incorrectly.

* It might be plausibly maintained, that in almost every one of the leading controversies, past or present, in social philosophy, both sides were in the right in what they affirmed, though wrong in what they denied.
:
* It is a piece of idle sentimentality that truth, merely as truth, has any inherent power denied to error, of prevailing against the dungeon and the stake.

Men are not more zealous for truth than they often are for error, and a sufficient application of legal or even of social penalties will generally succeed in stopping the propagation of either.

The real advantage which truth has, consists in this, that when an opinion is true, it may be extinguished once, twice, or many times, but in the course of ages there will generally be found persons to rediscover it,..when from favourable circumstances it escapes persecution until it has made such head as to withstand all subsequent attempts to suppress it.

* If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. (p. 23)

* The dictum that truth always triumphs over persecution, is one of those pleasant falsehoods which men repeat after one another till they pass into commonplaces, but which all experience refutes.

History teems with instances of truth put down by persecution. If not suppressed for ever, it may be thrown back for centuries. (pp. 36-37)

* The usefulness of an opinion is itself matter of opinion.

* The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it.

If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. (p. 24)



* To refuse a hearing to an opinion, because they are sure that it is false, is to assume that their certainty is the same thing as absolute certainty.

All silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility. Its condemnation may be allowed to rest on this common argument, not the worse for being common. (p. 24)

* How can great minds be produced in a country where the test of a great mind is agreeing in the opinions of small minds?

A System of Logic: Ratiocinative and Inductive: Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation

* Whatever is known to us by consciousness, is known beyond possibility of question. What one sees or feels, whether bodily or mentally, one cannot but be sure that one sees or feels.

No science is required for the purpose of establishing such truths; no rules of art can render our knowledge of them more certain than it is in itself. There is no logic for this portion of our knowledge.
http://www.m-hikari.com/mccartin-2.pdf

* [W]e may fancy that we see or feel what we in reality infer... A truth, or supposed truth, which is really the result of a very rapid inference, may seem to be apprehended intuitively.
http://www.spiritwritings.com/GatewayOfUnderstanding.pdf
It has long been agreed by thinkers of the most opposite schools, that this mistake is actually made in so familiar an instance as that of the eyesight.

There is nothing...of which we appear to ourselves to be more directly conscious,..than the distance..of an object..FAR/from OUR/PRIOR/EXPERIENCE...Yet it has long been/ascertained,..that what is perceived..by the eye,..is at most nothing more/than a variously coloured surface;..that when we fancy we see

=,.all we really ''see..is certain variations...of apparent size, and degrees of faintness of colour;..and..that our estimate of SCALE/the object's distance.from us is the result o/f a comparison..(made with so much rapidity..that we are unconscious of making it)..between the size and colour..QUALITY/of the object..as they appear/at the time, and..the size/RELATIONSHIP/ASSOCIATIONS/EXPECTATIONS,,and colour of the same..[or of similar]..objects as they appeared/when..RECOCNISED/close at hand,..AS was known by other evidence.

The perception of distance..by the eye,..which seems so like intuition,..is thus, in reality,..an inference grounded on experience;

an inference,//which we learn to make;[BIAS/judge/cognise..TO selfADVANTAGE]...so rapidly a..s to appear exactly on a par with those perceptions/of sight which are really intuitive,..emotive response/to..the thin//

[our perceptions/of shape/form\fun-tion/colour]...shades/of\hades..grades/graduations/refractions/interferance/scatter/hue/vibrancy..all states of mind/..not..OF THE EYE..nor..the brain.

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/advocacy/respond-to-counterattacks/respond-to-opposition/main

all govts lie
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/28/uk-urged-by-human-rights-groups-to-tell-all-on-u-s-rendition-flights-to-diego-garcia/

So if the American military and intelligence personnel understand this, why do they still indulge in this barbaric behaviour?!?

Because they can hurt people, and get away with it with impunity, which has to be one gigantic "rush" for those very psychologically maimed individuals who enjoy it.
Hypermilitarized police departments
are more dangerous than whatever they fight
http://patriotrising.com/2014/06/28/hypermilitarized-police-departments-dangerous-whatever-fight/

Historians looking back at this period in America’s development will consider it to be profoundly odd that at the exact moment when violent crime hit a 50-year low, the nation’s police departments began to gear up as if the country were expecting invasion — and, on occasion, to behave as if one were underway.

get to hospital/or we shoot ya old man\..move it..NOW*
[bang bang..your dead.]..police policing policy
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/police-shoot-95-year-old-wwii-vet-death-refusing-go-hospital

here/jim..JUST WAIT TILL THEY GO OUT
then have a wee look arround/and dont drop that stuff[wink/wik]
the police state really doth stink
wink wink nudge nudge they even own the judge/fudge fudgeu
http://www.blacklistednews.com/%E2%80%98Sneak_%26_peek%E2%80%99_warrants_allow_police_to_secretly_enter_homes_without_notice/36247/0/38/38/Y/M.html

AND NEXT..the alian god as creator
but/if they made life here/who made their life ;'there'
=the same impossability...ok alians made us/who made them..huh?[get it?]

THEY LIED ABOUT EVERYTHING
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/enron-2-0-wall-street-wants-manipulate-state-energy-markets-just-like-manipulates-every-market.html
http://investmentwatchblog.com/why-the-world-is-preparing-for-a-reset/
MADE IT UP A THEY WENT/now got to many thugs/needing to pay the rent[keep your moneY UNSPENT.]

BUT WAIT/THERES MORE
http://www.wired.com/2014/06/90000-foreigners-targeted-for-spying/
no not that..

HOW dare you feed the poor/there is the door
http://www.orrazz.com/2014/06/73-year-old-veteran-loses-his-job-for.html

3000 a day
http://investmentwatchblog.com/detroit-shuts-water-off-on-3000-houses-per-week/
more jail-bail/PRIVATE PRIson evenue raiing/mate.

our computer/says//you paid too much\\go to jail..huh?
http://www.newsforage.com/2014/06/father-who-overpaid-his-child-support.html

we will only fund good terrorists
http://www.orrazz.com/2014/06/obama-wants-500m-to-fund-good-jihadists.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/in-photos-israeli-bulldozers-raze-bedouin-community-leave-children-without-water-in-high-temperatures/5388842
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/10932534/Facebook-conducted-secret-psychology-experiment-on-users-emotions.html
]but see that little number/hiding the ever/sO\sliGHTLY-bigger number
http://www.intellihub.com/obama-requests-nearly-60b-continue-endless-war/

http://patriotrising.com/2014/06/28/hypermilitarized-police-departments-dangerous-whatever-fight/
boycott that multinational chain/for sure.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/570302124/fear-not-the-path-of-truth-a-fallujah-veterans-doc

It's fascinating to see how people argue over a topic.

I went back to re-read Marx and Engels' 'Socialism, Utopian and Scientific' recently, in order to see how they elaborated on their own notion of Socialism. The work concentrated 95 % of its space on demolishing the various alternative Utopian Socialist theories but spent almost no time similarly examining Marx and Engels' own theory - as if, by demolishing the theories of ones adversaries, one has automatically, magically, promoted one's own. Which the pamphlet/book didn't do at all.

So, 579, we can attack capitalism all we like, yes, it's a very inequitable, vicious system - but that still doesn't speak to topics such as this, that in John Lennon's Utopian words, we should all be 'sharing all the world'. How to ever do that ? Is it a Utopian pipe-dream ?

Socialism, in the Marxist sense, now has many hundreds of years of combined experience of supposedly common ownership of the means of production - seventy in the YSSR, nearly seventy in China, forty in Vietnam, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Albania, Yugoslavia, Romania, Hungary, Poland, the Baltic countries, more than fifty in Cuba, etc.

And what happened in each and every one ? The 'leaners', to use Menzies' phrase, quickly joined the Party, moved up into dominant positions, and implemented Mafia-Marxism for all they were worth. In other words, they turned 'common property' into their own fiefdoms. The logical 'progression' of that process is North Korea.

So let's face it, neither capitalism nor common ownership provides the answer. Each one ends in some form of dictatorship, of money in one system, raw power in others.

Here's an interesting fact: in those socialist counties, the first leader who had NOT been schooled in pre-revolutionary times was Gorbachev, in 1985. In China, the current leadership and the one before, i.e. not in the first fifty years. In Cuba, not yet. In Vietnam, maybe not yet. In all the Eastern European countries, barely any from 1945 to 1989: perhaps Milosevic was the first.

[TBC]

Joe