Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: What's dumb in the corporate media

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maple Bay, B.C.
    Posts
    61
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default What's dumb in the corporate media

    The Nazional Post gets the inaugural “the stupid, it hurts!” award for the following:

    How to survive a nuclear attack

    Turns out those idiotic "duck and cover" videos from the 1950's were really, you know, right after all!


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    2,185
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nigel Hanrahan View Post
    The Nazional Post gets the inaugural “the stupid, it hurts!” award for the following:

    How to survive a nuclear attack

    Turns out those idiotic "duck and cover" videos from the 1950's were really, you know, right after all!


    How so? Any nuclear attack will likely not be by a country that can wipe us out. It is more likely to be a small terrorist type scenario. Go in the basement if you have one and stay there for a day. It seems simple enough. I just saw a book on amazon which talked about some women that survived the bombs dropped on Japan with serious injuries. They did survive, though.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maple Bay, B.C.
    Posts
    61
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir Drkulec View Post
    How so? Any nuclear attack will likely not be by a country that can wipe us out. It is more likely to be a small terrorist type scenario. ...
    Nuclear materials are well supervised. So I don't think your claim stands up.

    The other thing is that the vast majority of so-called terrorists are actually sponsored by one government or another. This is a general global problem - governments draw attention to the terrorism issue but actually what they mean is that the terrorists they support are fine; it's just the ones they don't like that is the problem. Larry Wilkerson, a famous US defense analyst, remarked recently:

    There’s no doubt about it, but we seem to have this uncanny knack of calling people terrorists when we don’t like them, and calling them freedom fighters when they are terrorists when we like them.
    What is true is that the risk of nuclear conflict is, now, greater than it has been since the Cuban missile crisis. Just check the doomsday clock of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

    https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/

    As for "duck and cover" there have been many studies, e.g., Carl Sagan's The Cold and the Dark: the world after nuclear war, that show how idiotic this view is. Those not killed in the immediate blast would die in the following wasteland. To quote the author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,

    Quote Originally Posted by William Shirer
    "In our new age of terrifying, lethal gadgets, which supplanted so swiftly the old one, the first great aggressive war, if it should come, will be launched by suicidal little madmen pressing an electronic button. Such a war will not last long and none will ever follow it. There will be no conquerors and no conquests, but only the charred bones of the dead on an uninhabited planet."

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tecumseh, ON
    Posts
    2,185
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nigel Hanrahan View Post
    Nuclear materials are well supervised. So I don't think your claim stands up.
    And yet so many countries that aren't supposed to have nuclear weapons have them.


    The other thing is that the vast majority of so-called terrorists are actually sponsored by one government or another. This is a general global problem - governments draw attention to the terrorism issue but actually what they mean is that the terrorists they support are fine; it's just the ones they don't like that is the problem. Larry Wilkerson, a famous US defense analyst, remarked recently:



    What is true is that the risk of nuclear conflict is, now, greater than it has been since the Cuban missile crisis. Just check the doomsday clock of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

    https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/
    What do the proponents of the doomsday clock know? They are the same people who were saying that we would run out of oil in the 1990s. I don't believe in the prognostications of the chicken little class when those are accompanied by suggestions to shovel money towards them to solve the crisis.

    As for "duck and cover" there have been many studies, e.g., Carl Sagan's The Cold and the Dark: the world after nuclear war, that show how idiotic this view is. Those not killed in the immediate blast would die in the following wasteland. To quote the author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,
    The best way to understand what all of these purveyors of gloom and doom really believe is to look at their behaviour. If they really believed what they were peddling they would behave differently. Bernie Sanders and Al Gore would not own multiple mansion size homes and travel the world on private jets. They do, so whatever they say, they don't believe enough to alter what they do when it is convenient for them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •