Self Righteous Scorn Gets Tiresome
There's a website that I frequently because it's a mixture of useful information and links along with interesting wild speculation and opinion. It's Sorcha Faal/David Booth at WhatDoesItMean. (main page the last few days seems to be a donation request)
You know, if there's one thing I can't stand with all this internets business, it's snide puffiness and posturing self importance when sniffing about other sites. We have to remember that if there's anything the world wide tubes thing has taught us, it's to use discrimination and discernment in our browsing. It's sort of the ultimate marketplace - if you don't like it don't buy it but don't smear it just because you don't like it. Sites can be quite useful in other ways, like visiting wingnut pages to get a chuckle or catching the latest propaganda in MSM. It's hard for me to understand why people feel the need to trash sites, except to proclaim their self importance by belittling other efforts, by any definition a small minded preoccupation.
WhatDoesItMean is divided into two sections, when it's not groveling for funds, news links and opinion essays that get published every few days. It's the latter that seem to generate the badmouthing. I look forward to them; if people have any brains at all they can decide for themselves what to dismiss and what they resonate with. It might be that the work in deciphering what's bullshit and what might contain kernals of truth is a bit too strenuous to embark on, if that's the case the fault lies with the visitor and not the visited site.
In any case, consider the following.
A month ago WhatDoesItMean ranted about North Korea causing the oil catastrophe in the gulf, in my mind a fairly ludicrous hypothesis, but then these days who the hell knows for certain? It got picked up around the tubes and predictably was trashed by the lofty self righteous as more disinfo from a favorite whipping boy. The reason I'm bringing this up is because there was this passage in that piece:
"This “impossible dilemma” facing Obama is indeed real as the decision he is faced with is either to allow the continuation of this massive oil leak catastrophe to continue for months, or immediately stop it by the only known and proven means possible, the detonation of a thermonuclear device.
Russian Navy atomic experts in these reports state that should Obama choose the “nuclear option” the most viable weapon at his disposal is the United States B83 (Mk-83) strategic thermonuclear bomb having a variable yield (Low Kiloton Range to 1,200 Kilotons) which with its 12 foot length and 18 inch diameter, and weighing just over 2,400 pounds, is readily able to be deployed and detonated by a remote controlled mini-sub.
Should Obama choose the “nuclear option” it appears that he would be supported by the International Court of Justice who on July 8, 1996 issued an advisory opinion on the use of nuclear weapons stating that they could not conclude definitively on these weapons use in “extreme circumstances” or “self defense”.
On the other hand, if Obama chooses the “nuclear option” it would leave the UN’s nuclear conference in shambles with every Nation in the World having oil rigs off their coasts demanding an equal right to atomic weapons to protect their environment from catastrophes too, including Iran."
Haha, what trash! Good grief, WhtDoesItMean is a pile of shit, what bozo would read that garbage? Wait, what?
Energy expert: Nuking oil leak ‘only thing we can do’
"As the latest effort to plug the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico meets with failure, the idea of nuking the immediate area to seal the oil underground is gaining steam among some energy experts and researchers."
and:
Business Insider - "Next, the so-called "nuclear option" is about to get a lot of attention. In this case, of course, nuclear option is not a euphemism. It's the real idea that the best way to kill this thing is to stick a small nuke in there and bury the well under rubble. Supposedly it's been done in Russia, and by the middle of the coming week, it will be all over cable news, as pundits press The White House hard on whether it's being considered and why not."
Pretty damn good read a full month ago at WhatDoesItMean.
You know, if there's one thing I can't stand with all this internets business, it's snide puffiness and posturing self importance when sniffing about other sites. We have to remember that if there's anything the world wide tubes thing has taught us, it's to use discrimination and discernment in our browsing. It's sort of the ultimate marketplace - if you don't like it don't buy it but don't smear it just because you don't like it. Sites can be quite useful in other ways, like visiting wingnut pages to get a chuckle or catching the latest propaganda in MSM. It's hard for me to understand why people feel the need to trash sites, except to proclaim their self importance by belittling other efforts, by any definition a small minded preoccupation.
WhatDoesItMean is divided into two sections, when it's not groveling for funds, news links and opinion essays that get published every few days. It's the latter that seem to generate the badmouthing. I look forward to them; if people have any brains at all they can decide for themselves what to dismiss and what they resonate with. It might be that the work in deciphering what's bullshit and what might contain kernals of truth is a bit too strenuous to embark on, if that's the case the fault lies with the visitor and not the visited site.
In any case, consider the following.
A month ago WhatDoesItMean ranted about North Korea causing the oil catastrophe in the gulf, in my mind a fairly ludicrous hypothesis, but then these days who the hell knows for certain? It got picked up around the tubes and predictably was trashed by the lofty self righteous as more disinfo from a favorite whipping boy. The reason I'm bringing this up is because there was this passage in that piece:
"This “impossible dilemma” facing Obama is indeed real as the decision he is faced with is either to allow the continuation of this massive oil leak catastrophe to continue for months, or immediately stop it by the only known and proven means possible, the detonation of a thermonuclear device.
Russian Navy atomic experts in these reports state that should Obama choose the “nuclear option” the most viable weapon at his disposal is the United States B83 (Mk-83) strategic thermonuclear bomb having a variable yield (Low Kiloton Range to 1,200 Kilotons) which with its 12 foot length and 18 inch diameter, and weighing just over 2,400 pounds, is readily able to be deployed and detonated by a remote controlled mini-sub.
Should Obama choose the “nuclear option” it appears that he would be supported by the International Court of Justice who on July 8, 1996 issued an advisory opinion on the use of nuclear weapons stating that they could not conclude definitively on these weapons use in “extreme circumstances” or “self defense”.
On the other hand, if Obama chooses the “nuclear option” it would leave the UN’s nuclear conference in shambles with every Nation in the World having oil rigs off their coasts demanding an equal right to atomic weapons to protect their environment from catastrophes too, including Iran."
Haha, what trash! Good grief, WhtDoesItMean is a pile of shit, what bozo would read that garbage? Wait, what?
Energy expert: Nuking oil leak ‘only thing we can do’
"As the latest effort to plug the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico meets with failure, the idea of nuking the immediate area to seal the oil underground is gaining steam among some energy experts and researchers."
and:
Business Insider - "Next, the so-called "nuclear option" is about to get a lot of attention. In this case, of course, nuclear option is not a euphemism. It's the real idea that the best way to kill this thing is to stick a small nuke in there and bury the well under rubble. Supposedly it's been done in Russia, and by the middle of the coming week, it will be all over cable news, as pundits press The White House hard on whether it's being considered and why not."
Pretty damn good read a full month ago at WhatDoesItMean.
posted by nolocontendere at 5:07 PM
1 Comments:
I loved as much as you'll receive carried out right here. The sketch is tasteful, your authored subject matter stylish. nonetheless, you command get got an edginess over that you wish be delivering the following. unwell unquestionably come further formerly again since exactly the same nearly very often inside case you shield this hike.
Also visit my web page payday loans
Post a Comment
<< Home