Ambulance watchers are a step below ambulance chasers....

Voyeuristic preoccupation with human misery is healthy for mind, body , and soul.

Question: Is the previous statement true, false, or meaningless?

Personally, I believe seeking this form of tragic spectacle for entertainment purposes and the increasing popularity among the masses of the same, points to a decline in the fabric of our society in general as well as the decline of the quality of information and novelty available on this website. Conversely, preoccupation with video clips evoking warm, fuzzy feelings (MEEOOOOW??!!!) represents a basic hind-brained function of a human being in times of duress or uncertainty to want to curl up next to a warm nipple and re-enter the fucking matrix!

Like most fan vids, takes most of the spectacle and melodrama and takes out the humor and subtlety and mashes it into an emo music video. blah.

Dude, why would they do some altruistic humanitarian venture? They're fucking Taco Bell. I like tacos. I especially like free tacos.

>> ^spoco2:

@seltar My issue is with you labelling it 'a nice thing to do'. A nice thing to do would be for Taco Bell to do some sort of humanitarian work in the town, maybe build a community centre, a library, just provide something the town needs.
Hey, they could have even pretty much done what they did here... They could have flown in stuff for them to make their tacos and served them for free and that would have been an awesome response to the hoax.
BUT
What they did was, make a spectacle of it, send in a film crew, chopper in the van (when that was entirely not needed) make a little documentary about it, get people saying how wonderful Taco Bell is.
If they had just gone in, done it as a goodwill thing, and then any publicity that OTHERS made of it would have been great.
But that they sent their own film crew and are putting this in their TV ads now... THAT'S what's wrong with this. There's no altruistic, simple case of 'hey, you know, I think people might think better of us if we just turn up there and dish out free food. And if people tell others how nice we were, that'd be great, but it's not what's really important'.
It's a fricken military operation robbed of any 'niceness' by it being SO overproduced and it being shoved down everyone's throats as to just how 'nice' Taco Bell is.
The more I explain it, the more I dislike it, because if they'd just done it without the fan fare, without the EXPECTED mass publicity from it, then I would have applauded.

@seltar My issue is with you labelling it 'a nice thing to do'. A nice thing to do would be for Taco Bell to do some sort of humanitarian work in the town, maybe build a community centre, a library, just provide something the town needs.

Hey, they could have even pretty much done what they did here... They could have flown in stuff for them to make their tacos and served them for free and that would have been an awesome response to the hoax.

BUT

What they did was, make a spectacle of it, send in a film crew, chopper in the van (when that was entirely not needed) make a little documentary about it, get people saying how wonderful Taco Bell is.

If they had just gone in, done it as a goodwill thing, and then any publicity that OTHERS made of it would have been great.

But that they sent their own film crew and are putting this in their TV ads now... THAT'S what's wrong with this. There's no altruistic, simple case of 'hey, you know, I think people might think better of us if we just turn up there and dish out free food. And if people tell others how nice we were, that'd be great, but it's not what's really important'.

It's a fricken military operation robbed of any 'niceness' by it being SO overproduced and it being shoved down everyone's throats as to just how 'nice' Taco Bell is.

The more I explain it, the more I dislike it, because if they'd just done it without the fan fare, without the EXPECTED mass publicity from it, then I would have applauded.

Thor was great. Straight forward, good spectacle, like a good comic book.
>> ^VoodooV:

tell me...how do you have plausible character development for Thor and Loki, a couple of demi gods.
when you take into consideration this is a comic book movie...and on top of it, the only reason the movie existed was to introduce Thor for the later Avengers movie...I thought they did pretty good.

>> ^oritteropo:

What do you mean by "people like you"? Who are you lumping me in with? How does it affect you, personally, if politicians in a far off land make decisions that neither of us would agree with in our homelands?
Please either mark your other profile comment as private or edit it to remove my comment or delete it, I didn't want my comment public or I would not have ticked the private box.
>> ^coolhund:
>> ^oritteropo:
Have you ever studied the French Revolution? Ron Paul's policies didn't go so well for Turgot, and haven't for anyone else who has tried them since.
I guess since neither of us are U.S. based we can always sit back and watch the spectacle from afar, eating popcorn, no matter what they try
Looks like you have studied the french revolution, but not what Ron Paul actually wants to do, or rather will be able to do.
And yes I guess its easy to sit back and eat popcorn for people like you.



Why does it have to affect me personally? I mean it affects me, but not directly (thankfully I dont live in one of those countries where it would), though there is no denying that the US has a huge influence on my country aswell. I can think around the next corner. I know how decisions in foreign policy of a superpower affect people on the whole world. You can see it every day. You want to tell me that it doesnt affect the whole world how the US has treated the middle east for the last 5+ decades? Do you really think they hate the US and their supporters because they are "free"? Do you think they wont forget that the US and other western countries supported the "Israelis" all the way where they are today? What would you do if someone took a good chunk of your property and just give it someone else? And a few decades later all you have left is only a spot for you to sleep and defecate on, because everything else has been taken by those, and you are treated like criminals by them and the majority of the world, because they control media in said superpower and you dont. Who would you blame for that? Only the one taking your land or also the one who allowed them to take it and continue to support them?
Or are you hiding behind your hypocrite ethics and moral by saying "thats not an excuse"?

The Vietnam war, based on lies, the attack on Iraq 2003, based on lies, etc, etc, etc, didnt affect the world??? It didnt affect me? How can you think that? Do you really think other regimes dont look at the USA and think to themselves, if they are the biggest hypocrites on this earth, why cant we be? There are enough examples for that, even in Europe. European governments suddenly made as bad and audacious decisions in foreign and internal policies and were inspired by the sudden and open showing of totalitarianism. Some even follow the US like they are their lapdogs. That doesnt affect me or anyone in the world?

Sorry, but if you dont realize how a superpower like the US acting with such massive and audacious hypocrisy, for every human on this earth with an IQ higher than 50 to see, then I have nothing else to say.

>> ^oritteropo:

Have you ever studied the French Revolution? Ron Paul's policies didn't go so well for Turgot, and haven't for anyone else who has tried them since.
I guess since neither of us are U.S. based we can always sit back and watch the spectacle from afar, eating popcorn, no matter what they try
In reply to this comment by coolhund:
When America picked Rome as its role model, it was destined to die the same way.
It had potential, but corruption is a constant threat and no where near enough is being done to battle it.
I am truly shocked how divided your country has become, and how much of a threat and actually enemy to the worlds freedom after 9/11.
You havent learned a bit. Still waging wars everywhere, support totalitarian regimes (and even install them) even if its just behind the curtains. You ask yourself why "terrorists" are attacking you? You should ask yourself instead why so few are attacking you.
Believe me, I really loved the US for the most of my life. I always wanted to live there. I loved having American soldiers stationed in my country. But not anymore. A few years after 9/11 I got my ignorance armor removed by force and realized youre just as bad as the other hypocrite countries that call themselves civilized, democratic and free. But since you have so much power and exploit it all the time, youre actually worse.
I really wish you would return to your former values and actually uphold them. But looking at how corrupt your country has become, my hopes are extremely low. Just by looking at how you let the perfect opportunity pass by not voting Ron Paul - again, hurts me so much. Seeing people here and elsewhere spewing out propaganda that was indoctrinated into them reminds me of myself a few years ago. I can only feel disgust when thinking about that. In an age of information theres still so much misinformation and bias... Its sad. No wonder corruption is blooming like never before.
And yes, I am pretty sure some indoctrinated individuals will jump at me now for my last 2 sentences and mentioning Ron Paul. Save your breath, I have tried to talk to people like you for years and I was one of you. You will only learn the hard way - just like me.



Looks like you have studied the french revolution, but not what Ron Paul actually wants to do, or rather will be able to do.

And yes I guess its easy to sit back and eat popcorn for people like you.

That was quite the spectacle! I adore NPH =o)

>> ^longde:

It just seems like you have an ax to grind with africans, and your last comments show it.
African people aren't violent warlords; but they are homophobic, dogmatic, and patently dishonest. I get it. Thanks for your contributions to this anti-stereotyping video.
Who doesn't try to put themselves in the best light? British people, atheists, and gay people -three of the most moral peoples on the planet -never do that. >> ^Deano:
>> ^longde:
I'd rather like to see you in Nairobi in their faces patronizingly asking them about their personal beliefs.

I'd be quite happy to. Though I don't see why it would have to be patronising. If you want to have an honest dialogue then those matters are going to come up and everyone should be willing to discuss them.
It would make a change from my experience in London where it's quite the opposite way around. I often encounter Nigerians who are often more than comfortable sharing their views about religion and not so subtle opinions about homosexuality. They tend to be women due to the sector I'm in and one was so pushy as to wonder what I did on a Sunday if I didn't go to church. And then followed it with "Are you gay?" She was blissfully unaware that she was putting herself in disciplinary trouble. She just didn't care.
My mate used to work at the passport office here in London which was the centre of quite a few heated political disputes in the last few years. The workforce included a bunch of really nice African guys but dodgy as hell and always pulling some scam.
This is, in my view, definitely a cultural difference. My friend is a straight arrow, very reliable and honest so the contrast between him and others (hell even myself as I like to cut corners sometimes) is more pronounced. In another country some of those behaviours (including racial bullying and generally taking the piss) might be fine but here not so much. The problem with the passport office is that they lacked leadership and strong management so everyone ran amok.
So getting back to the video, yes it's nice to challenge stereotypes but let's remove the rose-tinted spectacles at the same time. I'm sure these chaps are as super nice as they are depicted, but it IS a depiction designed to promote a charitable cause. Everyone has prejudices and blind spots, everyone can and will be an arsehole. Even after you strip away the stereotype you can't get rid of that.



Apologies for not replying promptly @longde but work has consumed most of my time over the weekend.

I have no axe to grind. I thought I had expressed myself clearly but I apologise for failing to do that. My original comment was intended to counter the somewhat rosy, unrealistic and some might say shallow depiction of African men in the video.

It's not much different from those lovely promo videos showing off everyone in their best light (anyting from the Olympics springs to mind). We intuitively KNOW the reality behind such things and my comment was merely a reminder of that. And I put the smiley face on because, no, I do not have a problem with anyone from Africa and I resent that accusation. I have plenty of experience and appreciation for people from all walks of life but I'm not afraid to call it as it is. If this video was going the other way I'd be providing counter-examples as well. I've got plenty of experience of the good and bad in people - and if you heard me rant about my Norwegian family I can only assume you'd think me anti-Scandinavian

Finally I'm a bit puzzled by your last sentence. It really doesn't make any sense to me. Perhaps you could explain. Honest question.

It just seems like you have an ax to grind with africans, and your last comments show it.

African people aren't violent warlords; but they are homophobic, dogmatic, and patently dishonest. I get it. Thanks for your contributions to this anti-stereotyping video.

Who doesn't try to put themselves in the best light? British people, atheists, and gay people -three of the most moral peoples on the planet -never do that. >> ^Deano:

>> ^longde:
I'd rather like to see you in Nairobi in their faces patronizingly asking them about their personal beliefs.

I'd be quite happy to. Though I don't see why it would have to be patronising. If you want to have an honest dialogue then those matters are going to come up and everyone should be willing to discuss them.
It would make a change from my experience in London where it's quite the opposite way around. I often encounter Nigerians who are often more than comfortable sharing their views about religion and not so subtle opinions about homosexuality. They tend to be women due to the sector I'm in and one was so pushy as to wonder what I did on a Sunday if I didn't go to church. And then followed it with "Are you gay?" She was blissfully unaware that she was putting herself in disciplinary trouble. She just didn't care.
My mate used to work at the passport office here in London which was the centre of quite a few heated political disputes in the last few years. The workforce included a bunch of really nice African guys but dodgy as hell and always pulling some scam.
This is, in my view, definitely a cultural difference. My friend is a straight arrow, very reliable and honest so the contrast between him and others (hell even myself as I like to cut corners sometimes) is more pronounced. In another country some of those behaviours (including racial bullying and generally taking the piss) might be fine but here not so much. The problem with the passport office is that they lacked leadership and strong management so everyone ran amok.
So getting back to the video, yes it's nice to challenge stereotypes but let's remove the rose-tinted spectacles at the same time. I'm sure these chaps are as super nice as they are depicted, but it IS a depiction designed to promote a charitable cause. Everyone has prejudices and blind spots, everyone can and will be an arsehole. Even after you strip away the stereotype you can't get rid of that.

>> ^longde:

I'd rather like to see you in Nairobi in their faces patronizingly asking them about their personal beliefs.


I'd be quite happy to. Though I don't see why it would have to be patronising. If you want to have an honest dialogue then those matters are going to come up and everyone should be willing to discuss them.

It would make a change from my experience in London where it's quite the opposite way around. I often encounter Nigerians who are often more than comfortable sharing their views about religion and not so subtle opinions about homosexuality. They tend to be women due to the sector I'm in and one was so pushy as to wonder what I did on a Sunday if I didn't go to church. And then followed it with "Are you gay?" She was blissfully unaware that she was putting herself in disciplinary trouble. She just didn't care.

My mate used to work at the passport office here in London which was the centre of quite a few heated political disputes in the last few years. The workforce included a bunch of really nice African guys but dodgy as hell and always pulling some scam.

This is, in my view, definitely a cultural difference. My friend is a straight arrow, very reliable and honest so the contrast between him and others (hell even myself as I like to cut corners sometimes) is more pronounced. In another country some of those behaviours (including racial bullying and generally taking the piss) might be fine but here not so much. The problem with the passport office is that they lacked leadership and strong management so everyone ran amok.

So getting back to the video, yes it's nice to challenge stereotypes but let's remove the rose-tinted spectacles at the same time. I'm sure these chaps are as super nice as they are depicted, but it IS a depiction designed to promote a charitable cause. Everyone has prejudices and blind spots, everyone can and will be an arsehole. Even after you strip away the stereotype you can't get rid of that.

Ahhhh ... the spectacle of nature ... utterly stupefying! =o)

>> ^flechette:

All I can say is, I want to like football (or soccer, whatever it is) more than I do, but I just can't fathom watching something for half an hour before someone scores. To be fair, I think baseball is more boring to watch, but for a different reason.


Ah, this is the beauty in football. Every match is different, you'll see different approaches, different styles, different attitudes, individual skill, teamwork. It's not just about scoring goals.

But it's not easy. It's a game of skill and if you're good or the opposition is very bad then you'll score lots. Or you'll enjoy one of those humdingers where either side might score at any time.

But often we're forced to endure turgid rubbish, it just happens sometimes, but the ultimate redemption is when finally, finally someone scores a goal. It's a satisfying release of energy and there is honestly nothing much like it even if your team has been playing like utter twits.

It is really, as much about the journey as the destination.

Hopefully it's a nice ride (I'd pay good money to see a mazey Messi dribble where he failed to score, rather than someone bundle one in) but sometimes it can be perversely enjoyable to see a bad team scrape a result.

On the other hand, going back to a U.S sport like basketball I see no particular thrill from seeing two sides trade baskets ad-infintum. It's just a relentless predictable, progression to the end at which point someone wins and players can crow about their "stats". I always loved playing basketball but it doesn't work for me as a spectator sport.

Meanwhile I love Football (American Football as we Brits tend to call it). That has more in common with soccer than any other U.S sport IMO. Players are still far too in thrall to coaches but it remains a magnificent spectacle.

Baseball I don't really get - but I respect it's traditions and iconic status in sport.

I think they were trying to create a visual spectacle that resembles a medieval tapestry for a couple's wedding. So it's not exactly an opera, but more of a wedding show. The theme is consistent as the performance takes place in a giant church, in front of what looks to be a map of the known world in medieval times. The choir sings in a Bulgarian Orthodox chant style (http://youtu.be/js2Ga92Ta14), again the theme of Medieval church.

So the theme is consistent, but still I'm having trouble getting the overall message. I see that there are two couples that are highlighted, so my guess is that the message is about 'relationships' or 'love'. At first the play starts in still motion and everything peaceful. Then it goes through various emotions. Pain, joy, excitement, turbulence, etc. This part may be eluding to what love or relationships are like. And finally, after the couples kiss, everyone breathes, and sighs, to signal that the craziness is over and we can now rest. At the moment of their kiss the cherubs of the world (probably their close friends) are stretching their arms towards them and blesses their unification.

>> ^kevingrr:

@ghark
1 - I'm not sure which swipe of Chris Hedges you are referring to. If it is in regard to the Moral Landscape I can only comment that Hedges takes every opportunity to inject himself into the spotlight. Having read the Moral Landscape I can say that the ideas Harris presents CAN be challenged by legitimate thinkers, of which Hedges is not.
Hedges game has been to misrepresent Harris' point of view as written in End of Faith. I would go so far as to call Hedges an all out liar. See my post in this thread:

2 - Where here is Sam blindly racist? He states that acts of terror are more likely to be carried out by young Muslim men than by 5 year old girls or grandmothers.
If I said that black athletes are more likely to be basketball players and white athletes are more likely to be baseball players would that make me racist? Because in terms of professional sports that simply IS the case. Note I am not saying WHY that is the case - I am simply saying it is and the statistics prove it.
As I have said before Sam is not racist, but he is honest about who is most likely to have some bad ideas and he does not like bad ideas.
3. Sam is not a pacifist but he is not a warmonger either. As I listened to the entirety of the interview I noted he had a very nuanced idea of when war, or physical violence of any kind, is justified.
One last link regarding Hedges:
Here


Shouldn't the definition of terrorism (of which there are many) be carefully examined before making that statement? I assume you are using the 'American mainstream media' version, which of course means, an act in which a colored person with a beard tries to inflict injury or death on other (usually white) people. If the definition is not looked at with mainstream-media-tinted spectacles then it would not be a stretch to say that the 105,000+ documented Iraqi civilian casualties since 2003 were caused by American (and allied troops) terrorism. Political and resource motivated civilian slaughter on a massive scale (and on foreign soil) sounds very terrorist-like to me. Using this line of logic, would it not make more statistical sense to worry about young to middle aged white males having access to military training than scanning middle aged Muslim men at airports.

My point is not to blame the US troops, Australian troops were also involved, my point is simply that someone of Harris' intellect should be above the simple fear mongering and use of blatant misleading generalizations that he's demonstrating in this video. He was one of my hero's for a while there, and seeing him for what he truly seems to be leaves me a bit hollow inside.

As far as Hedges goes, he seems to be on the mark most of the time, and is an excellent speaker, however I thought his shots at Harris were pretty poor form (during his book launch) because it just seemed to be a blatant publicity stunt, so I agree with you on that to a degree.

Please take in mind My BS meter couldn't handle more than about 25-30 mins of the video, and as @LukinStone mentions, Harris explains some of his comments in more detail later in the video, I just couldn't make it that far unfortunately. Most of what I was hearing was self-gratification, "a large American city has about a 50% chance of having a nuclear bomb set off in it within the next decade or so", racist comments and some war mongering, there's only so much I can take