Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Metacomet who wrote (95120)	10/1/2012 12:40:03 PM
From: Joseph Silent	1 Recommendation Respond to of 220794

M, I was not thinking of Brazil when I wrote that because 1. guessing the motive behind the Brazilian decision is hard for me, and 2. I simply happened to look at the picture from the other extreme. Movements of great destruction have always begun with somebody's freedom. This includes the freedom to assemble people together, wear a moustache and wave a fist, carry a gun, fly a plane, drop a bomb, press a button. Some of those freedoms come with a flag, national anthem, badges, carefully nurtured images of pride ........ complicated things that people seem to have lost the freedom to fully grasp even though they are captive to the notion of freedom. I don't make excuses for anybody, and I am not arguing from logic that looks at first-order outcomes. I am looking from an intuitive place where I know I am not clever enough to understand consequences. We sometimes see common ground where there is none. A culture that worships its individual who has conflicting ideas of freedom may arm wrestle with a culture that worships its society which has conflicting ideas of freedom. Neither will ever be free, I suspect, as long as their arms are intertwined. Nor will they be free until they are free of beliefs. A God serves a purpose to someone. Urine serves a purpose to someone. Urinating on someone's God serves a purpose to someone. Google and Youtube serve a purpose to someone. Somewhere in this sacred, urinary, technological, information soup is the belief that we understand freedom, and can package and distribute it. After all, we have technology, and it may be the savior many have been waiting for. Perhaps the people of Iraq have freedom now. I have no way to know. But I know a little about the suffering caused by the argument to get there. Who profited? Am I free to really know?