You know what, fuck you. You are a fucking racist.
You're saying that it's possible that some races are less intelligent than others, and that there isn't any evidence to disprove that.
You aren't clever and your attempt to disguise your racism is pathetic.

>> ^jwray:

Good video, but I'll have to quibble:
1. Universality of belief in a supreme being is an outdated canard. Monotheism was not even in the majority until the ascendancy of Christianity and Islam.
2. There is insufficient evidence to confirm or deny a difference in average mental capability between races, because of confounding cultural and translation issues for any sort of standardized test.
If you want to succeed, you can't afford to be sloppy with the facts.

While indiscriminate spraying of DDT is obviously stupid and dangerous, the rise in worldwide malaria rates in response to the restrictions on DDTs use have killed hundreds of thousands to millions of humans.

Now, unfortunately, it's too late. Like not using all of one's prescribed antibiotics, we allowed mosquitoes to develop a resistance to DDT when we stopped using it and it doesn't work anymore (at least not as well).

By the early 1960s we had malaria cases in India down to almost zero from 75 Million in 1947. Sri Lanka went from 2.8 million cases in 1946 to 17 cases in 1963. Malaria was on the verge of extinction in these places.

Then we lost DDT thanks to Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring". By 1976 there were 6.4 million cases in India. Today it sits between 2 and 3 million cases a year and India is one of the luckier ones. Throughout most of sub-Saharan Africa more than 50% of all children are infected. In Zambia, in 2005, there were 1353 cases for every 1000 children under 5 years old. That means a huge percent of the children are infected more than once a year.

Was DDT dangerous to spray indiscriminately? Absolutely. Was it saving millions of lives? Without a doubt.

http://www.videosift.com/video/1946-Post-War-Anti-Racist-Cartoon-Brotherhood-of-Man

>> ^therealblankman:
>> ^Raaagh:
Ok, let me predicate this my mentioning a few weeks ago I poured over a picture book on Picasso with the stories behind each painting.

I dont really like Picassos paintings, but his attitude tickles/scares me (painting pictures of his sister getting auto-sodomised etc)

I was expecting something far more, angsty, anti-social, lewd, and arty but that was just beautiful and so passionate. It really drew me and and had its way with me.
Thanks poster.

Picasso?


bwahahaha

I mean Dali, I was dog tired when I wrote that


The book was something like this but probably slightly diff format as the cropping on the cover image is better:
http://www.amazon.com/Dali-Midsize-Robert-Descharnes/dp/3822831816/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246844599&sr=1-1

>> ^Raaagh:
Ok, let me predicate this my mentioning a few weeks ago I poured over a picture book on Picasso with the stories behind each painting.

I dont really like Picassos paintings, but his attitude tickles/scares me (painting pictures of his sister getting auto-sodomised etc)

I was expecting something far more, angsty, anti-social, lewd, and arty but that was just beautiful and so passionate. It really drew me and and had its way with me.
Thanks poster.


In all the years of art history classes and going through the cubist era, I don't remember hearing or seeing anything like you mention from Picasso.... What book are you talking about?

Your video, DESTINO: Salvador Dali and Walt Disney collaboration (1946), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^Raaagh:
Ok, let me predicate this my mentioning a few weeks ago I poured over a picture book on Picasso with the stories behind each painting.

I dont really like Picassos paintings, but his attitude tickles/scares me (painting pictures of his sister getting auto-sodomised etc)

I was expecting something far more, angsty, anti-social, lewd, and arty but that was just beautiful and so passionate. It really drew me and and had its way with me.
Thanks poster.


Picasso?

>> ^burdturgler:
It is complete speculation on his part that there is no nuclear weapon ambition or program in Iran.

The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran (pdf), the consensus opinion of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies:

"We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program."


The C.I.A. and the rest of Earth found out because India detonated one.

India announced the pursuit of atomics in 1946, in 1968 it did not sign the NPT, in 1974 it conducted its first tests. This doesn't sound like lack of knowledge to me. The information was kept from the general public to avoid a preemptive atomic confrontation between India and Pakistan. That issue as a whole is entirely different then the one in the Middle East.


Iran needs to dial back it's rhetoric and hate speech and get more in line with the international cooperation and dialog that it's people wants.

Shouldn't Israel then as well. Instead of telling the Palestinians what form of existence they should enjoy? I mean honestly you talking about a nation whose power structure was assassinated by the CIA for oil rights brought in a corrupt Shah. Eventually lead to the Islamic revolution. No US dialog has been maintained since. It's like me kicking over someones sand castle and then becoming shocked at their attempt to punch me in the face.


Does anyone honestly think a nuclear armed Iran is a viable option for world stability and peace?


Is a nuclear armed North Korea? Russia? US? Seems to be alot of tolerance for that there. A state a believe far more willing to put its entire population at nuclear apocalypse.

No nation attains nuclear weapons for the purpose of using them anymore. It just doesn't make sense politically, ever since the US detonated the Hiroshima bomb and the nuclear arms race of the Cold War that nuclear weapons simply exist as means of deterrence. First strike policy is not pursued by any state because its admission and allowance to be attacked first preemptively. Thus everyone claims base deterrence use.

I don't find it acceptable that Israel has UNDECLARED nuclear weapons still and somehow that is okay. The threat of them striking Iran is just as great in my eyes. Shit they bombed Syria and Iraq just for the smallest whiff of nuclear capability. But what kind of action is that? How is that acceptable.

Further more your entire line about Iranians being made into anti-Israel haters flies in face of the protests taking place now trying to depose a president who was clearly illegally placed into power and has spent the last 4 years doing nothing but talking garbage. I don't know why people are so willing to think Bush was retarded in his foreign policy assessments and somehow take Iran's president seriously.

Henry Hazlitt can probably illustrate it better than I can.

Here is an online version of his 1946 book, "Economics in One Lesson"
http://jim.com/econ/contents.html

Reading the first 20 pages or so (chapters 1-6) should give you a pretty good explanation.

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Irishman:
Free Palestine. End the illegal occupation. Stop the oppression.

If only it could be that simple.
How is ending the occupation defined?
-Removal of all troops?
-Lifting aerial and naval blockades?
-Granting right of return?
-The elimination of the Israeli state and restoration of historic Palestine?
Hamas founders and charter define it is all the above by the way.
What borders define Palestine?
-1946?
-1948?
-1967?
-1973?
-Current Day?
Finally, in the -ahem- unlikely -ahem- event that rocket and suicide attacks on Israel(if it is still allowed to exist) continue for years afterwards, what is Israel expected to do?


Well, it's an ugly, ugly mess down there. It was a mistake to create Israel in the first place, because there was no historic basis for it. It was just done. And the borders have even fluctuated pretty wildly, as you already indicated.

There are no easy solutions.

One solution is for the involved parties to duke it out, so to speak, at the cost of many innocent lives.
Another is for the rest of the world to take a side and either force an agreement (and risk another uprising) or wipe out one side (which is virtually impossible, and also genocide).

There are no laws for the world, so we have no real jurisdiction to arbitrate their conflict, so natural conclusion is to isolate the countries from the rest of the world and let them have their fight, and to the victor goes the spoils. This is of course tremendously unfair, because we've already helped one side pretty damn much, and it's also very inhumane because many, many lives are wasted.

As I said, there are no easy solutions. Can you think of reasonable solutions?

(I hesitate to add this, but at the heart of this conflict is once again the elephant in the room - religion. If people were reasonable, this would not be nearly as bad as it is.)

>> ^Irishman:
Free Palestine. End the illegal occupation. Stop the oppression.


If only it could be that simple.

How is ending the occupation defined?
-Removal of all troops?
-Lifting aerial and naval blockades?
-Granting right of return?
-The elimination of the Israeli state and restoration of historic Palestine?
Hamas founders and charter define it is all the above by the way.

What borders define Palestine?
-1946?
-1948?
-1967?
-1973?
-Current Day?

Finally, in the -ahem- unlikely -ahem- event that rocket and suicide attacks on Israel(if it is still allowed to exist) continue for years afterwards, what is Israel expected to do?

>> ^volumptuous:
ps: How do I know there's cliques here?
Well, a lot of us reach new stars/crowns etc and never have a "CONGRATS TO ____" thread. We just are rewarded silently and privately by Mr.Sifty, and go about our business.


CONGRATULATIONS VOLUMPTUOUS FOR PUBLICATION OF STARPOINT #68.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Disney-1946-Story-Of-Menstruation

Seriously, If that vid earned you #69 that would just be kinky in a blankfist/kp way.

I mean, the narrator said "sprouting teeth"...

This is actually from "No Leave, No Love", made in 1946: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0038779/

The piano player is Frank "Sugar Chile" Robinson: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0732630/

Tags for this video have been changed from 'marx brothers, harpo marx, harp, music, casablanca, classic' to 'marx brothers, harpo marx, harp, music, casablanca, classic, 40s, 1946' - edited by swampgirl

Tags for this video have been changed from 'beauty, beast, vintage, cocteau, symbolism, french' to 'beauty, beast, cocteau, symbolism, french, 1946, 40s, george harrison, fan video, bw' - edited by Eklek