This lady obviously does not love the life cycle and needs to work up a positive mindset and be doused with maybe a half eight of mushrooms and somehow without the guidance of others be made to gaze upon the beauty of puppydom. And feel horribly horribly regretful yet positively changed... in a positive way through connective-negative-introspection.

Smells a whole lot like Gattaca. (1997) Heavy on introspection, light on the effects budget.

I wonder if she has to dress up in a 3-piece suit before she boards the rocket ship.

Weird, I wonder if they are going to keep it introspective, or whether they are actually just doing a ploy to get human over to the other planet and "serve man?"

Tags for this video have been changed from 'luc, besson, movie, love' to 'luc besson, love, Angel A, Mirror Scene, french, mirror, self realisation, introspect' - edited by BoneRemake

>> ^MarineGunrock:
Now that I go back and read your comment again, I see I mis-read it and shouldn't have downvoted. My bad.
I too have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and my tour in Iraq was no picnic. For several years, I wanted to be a cop, and I would still like to, but I have come to realize though introspection and professional help that constant mortaring has re-wired my brain to the point where I should not be a police officer. It has left me with an extremely short temper, and that would most definitely lead to no good. I can only hope that others in my position do the same.
Semper (Fi/Paratus/whatever suits you).
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
>> ^MarineGunrock:
And yes, for the record, I do believe that all capable persons have a moral obligation to help when possible.

Hey Marinegunrock, you have a right to downvote my comment, and I have no problem with that. Still, I would like to explain a bit about my comments---because I think you might have the wrong impression (I tend to fuck up on expressing my thoughts.)
Soldiers and Marines returning from overseas have two types of medals. Those they wear on their chests, and those they wear in their minds. They live life on the edge in a warzone. I don't remember a day my unit wasn't mortared over in Iraq--but I served nevertheless. That does not mean I, or other servicemen, adjusted well upon return... And they certainly were not ready for a career in law enforcement!!!
However, instead of wearing this mental medal proudly, instead of saying, "I am a motherfucking Marine or Soldier, I have issues," people are saying, "Hey, I went through hell and came back flawless. Love me please."
Just because we are heroes doesn't mean we are right in the brain my friend. You have to be wrong in the head, or you don't survive--or you get others killed...




Don't worry Marinegunrock, for every one good comment out there---there are one-million ignorant comments. In other words, in a world of trolls, it takes a constantly keen eye to tell between the shit and the diamonds. Hell, I don't even have half the time, so I learn the people when I can... In fact, that's why I explained myself to you---because I can see you post reasonably.


I am greatly impressed that truth matters to you more than blind-emotions Marinegunrock; I am honestly impressed. Few people would admit any problems anywhere, and that's why we as people, and this country, have so many--we break em, but we don't attempt to solve them.

Now that I go back and read your comment again, I see I mis-read it and shouldn't have downvoted. My bad.

I too have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and my tour in Iraq was no picnic. For several years, I wanted to be a cop, and I would still like to, but I have come to realize though introspection and professional help that constant mortaring has re-wired my brain to the point where I should not be a police officer. It has left me with an extremely short temper, and that would most definitely lead to no good. I can only hope that others in my position do the same.

Semper (Fi/Paratus/whatever suits you).



>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^MarineGunrock:
And yes, for the record, I do believe that all capable persons have a moral obligation to help when possible.

Hey Marinegunrock, you have a right to downvote my comment, and I have no problem with that. Still, I would like to explain a bit about my comments---because I think you might have the wrong impression (I tend to fuck up on expressing my thoughts.)
Soldiers and Marines returning from overseas have two types of medals. Those they wear on their chests, and those they wear in their minds. They live life on the edge in a warzone. I don't remember a day my unit wasn't mortared over in Iraq--but I served nevertheless. That does not mean I, or other servicemen, adjusted well upon return... And they certainly were not ready for a career in law enforcement!!!
However, instead of wearing this mental medal proudly, instead of saying, "I am a motherfucking Marine or Soldier, I have issues," people are saying, "Hey, I went through hell and came back flawless. Love me please."
Just because we are heroes doesn't mean we are right in the brain my friend. You have to be wrong in the head, or you don't survive--or you get others killed...

I've been told ^that^ comment makes no sense. Let me try again.

By calling himself a libertarian or liberty activist, blankfist creates an irrational mental environment of infallibility. He doesn't see his ideology as subjective reasoning, but rather the embodiment of liberty itself. Argue with blankfist, and in his mind you are arguing with liberty.

It doesn't matter that his subjective concept of liberty is geared towards a very small amount of wealthy business owners at the expense of the working class. It doesn't matter that when put into practice, his ideology produces results that are violent, oppresive and corrupt. Like the Christian soldier who fights as an agent of God, blankfist is a free market soldier that fights as an agent of a higher power called liberty. Right and wrong no longer mean anything when you are fighting for the divine.

With this mindset, Milton Friedman's 'shock therapy' in Chile that replaced a socialist democracy with a capitalist dictatorship and left tens of thousands dead becomes an unfortunate but necessary sacrifice to the gods of liberty. Whenever a newly deregulated market spawns oppression and theft, (S&L's,Enron,Mortgage Fraud) there are always plenty of scapegoats to pawn responsibility off onto, because the true God of market liberty self-regulates. With this mindset, there is no need for introspection, because liberty is perfect. Liberty is Love. Remember Ron Paul's Love-olution billboards? You aren't voting for a man, you are voting for the physical embodiment of love! How could anyone be anti-love?

Same goes for 'objectivism', especially when the concept is tied to 'individualism'. Individuals are incapable of objectivity. Ayn Rand titling her movement 'objectivism' is evidence that she is in no way objective. A 'collective' of people, with different life experiences and areas of expertise would ironically be more much more objective than an 'Objectivist' individual. It's like rain on your wedding day, or titling your subjective ideology 'objectivism'. Sorry Alanis, that lyric doesn't rhyme and is going to need some work.

I believe we reinforce this divinity complex when we use words such as libertarian or objectivist. We should either call them what they are, anarcho-capitalists, or develop our own divine self-definition.

Truthitarianism? Correctist? IMASMARTYURADUMY.com?

@dystopianfuturetoday

Somebody needs to doublepromote and quality this sift.

Strangely enough this guy follows my journey fairly close. Although, my belief in my faith ended quite a bit quicker and I didn't have the "psychotic" disconnect in my thoughts; thinking one half of me was God (the reverent, introspective, inner voice we all use when not active doing something -- before sleep, for example). But, I never had people in my life that actively tried to create these schizophrenic/psychotic leanings and learnings (except "The Holy Ghost/Spirit"; it was taught to be a feeling of what was right or wrong -- I'm guessing they never understood that our instincts are much closer to that relation than the previous inclination and require no supernatural interventions).

I also had to realize that the education they had (elders or older; secondly, older people get a courtesy from me still, but only as it applies to practical experience and "common sense" wisdom -- anything supernatural or distinctly at odds with facts will be discarded, quickly) greatly differed if only for the sure fact that my schooling was in an age of far more known and it's dissemination was far more readily available. It had also had time to be distilled into easier to understand methodology, for example: high school courses, that in my parents high school years would've been a college or university class.

This is very well done and very articulate. I've never understood the inability to be able to put your faith, for a moment, to the side and weigh with equal fervor: fact versus what you've been told (all of which is hearsay of hearsay...). If your faith or your God is so fragile that it cannot withstand a few worthless scientists "testing you" then it's not worth having anyway.

If your faith forces you to run away from these talks at the mere mention of it, I will guarantee to you that one day, when you need it, your faith will fail you. Some lose their faith from this, without even talking or looking at contradictory information.

Very well done and a great find @dystopianfuturetoday. The sift is better with this. How about a new call (must be invoked by four people or so and it only affects the channel(s) it belongs to; except for the first week it's invoked): *doublequality or as I would like *permanentquality ...

Being self-critical and introspective is a good thing, I approve of this sort of comedy.

Reminds me of all this bullshit about American Exceptionalism.

@SDGundamX

Haha, your editing is moot since I received your original post by e-mail!

Anyway, as far as I know not much research has been done on this, maybe because American researchers fear they will not get grants for possibly "debunking" religion. In any case, I do not put much weight on psychological studies. Neurological studies are another matter though, and concerning the Buddhist monks (and other yogis) research has been done that demonstrates neuronal patterns similar to being high on drugs while meditating. Nothing concrete on the placebo effect (we don't even know how it works on a neuronal level), but I would bet money that what I said will be found true at least in some cases.

Now, the rest is conjecture based on accounts of religious experiences by religious people and on my own lifelong feelings and introspection as an atheist that never believed in the christian god even though my grandmother was a pastoral teacher and fervent catholic; and comparing those thoughts and feelings with those of other prominent atheists like Hitchens and Dawkins, while also reading much of the science behind human behavior in general. I am also a philosophy major, for what it's worth (not much if we're talking strictly about scientific evidence, but can be worth lots if we are talking about science or religion in themselves). And really, its not that only religious people get angry when their worldview is challenged, it's that most people that set hard limits on what is real and what isn't will get angry when you present evidence that they cannot refute against your beliefs. That's why most religious scientists don't get angry, but try to find flaws in theories instead: they compartmentalize well, mostly because they are more intelligent that the general population. Still, I think that compartmentalization is a dead end on all levels.

On a closing note, it is not wrong to have opinions on subjects based on conjecture, etc. as long as they are in line with what has been demonstrated so far in science. Physicists don't have any proof about string theory yet many believe that it is "true", meaning that they believe the basic approach is sound and will ultimately give the best answer to today's unsolved problems in physics. The problem with religious thinking is that none of the basic and necessary premises of religion have any empirical evidence, i.e. it's all metaphysics. This is what I meant by non-rational beliefs: they are not irrational, but they are based on indemonstrable premises, fallacies or faith.

please show me where in this thread someone else discussed how "fuckable" she is (or isn't), excluding of course dft's hypothetical question meant to invalidate qm's own opinion.

i "single" you out because you are the only one who made such a comment.

if you feel "singled" out by "whatever" is "stuck up" my "ass", you should read my comment history and you will realize that i make the same bitchface comments to all the thoughtless, unwise, latently sexist, white, middle class, male, proto facist comments i've ever had the displeasure of reading on this site.

if this is causing some butt hurt on your end, my prescription would be a quiet period of introspection and to reread your comments and wonder how on earth someone could up come with the aforementioned category to fit them into it.

if you can't find the answer, it's hopeless. unclench and the pain will subside.

My problem isn't with Apple itself, nor their obnoxious marketing; neither is it with people such as yourself who find the product satisfactory for their needs (even though I remain of the opinion that there are other products out there that would probably be better suited for you, even if they might not be of the same level of polish, because, like @gwiz665 said, "Apple sure know their polish").

What bothers me is the staggering number of people that buy the brand, not the product, because of simple conformism, and because they don't even try to evaluate their choices based on their needs/price/etc.; especially elderly people who I can see in stores or who I know (like my colleagues) won't be using and/or don't know how to use the majority of the "advanced" functions a smartphone has, just to try to be "hip" and "with the now". Also, fanboys who are above rational argument as to why a device other than one of their brand is better at a particular task/criteria (such as call audio quality, at which the original iPhone was complete rubbish). These people are, for the most part, stupid, and I despise them for their ignorance. >> ^dag:

The calls of "fanboyism" are interesting - it seems like a way to marginalise and dismiss - without providing a cogent argument.
I do love Macs.
I hear people ranting a lot about what an asshole Jobs is, the "marketing", etc, etc - but the arguments rarely involve the platform itself.

>> ^EDD:
>> ^dag:
The platform wars are getting bizarre. The level of disdain seems weird to me. Mac evangelism is also strange - and I'll admit to doing some of it.

Let's be realistic here, dag: you're the most prolific only Apple preacher on here.
Also, since Apple produces computers (or what they pass as computers these days </quick jab>) as well as other hardware and software, this is long-past a simple console war: personally, I simply can't stand Apple marketing and the enormous praise they get from fanboys with different standards and values in consumer electronics than me.
P.S. Don't mistake that last bit for critical introspection and self-consciousness. I am still DEAD CERTAIN that MY values are better than YOURS.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

The calls of "fanboyism" are interesting - it seems like a way to marginalise and dismiss - without providing a cogent argument.

I do love Macs.

I hear people ranting a lot about what an asshole Jobs is, the "marketing", etc, etc - but the arguments rarely involve the platform itself.



>> ^EDD:

>> ^dag:
The platform wars are getting bizarre. The level of disdain seems weird to me. Mac evangelism is also strange - and I'll admit to doing some of it.

Let's be realistic here, dag: you're the most prolific only Apple preacher on here.
Also, since Apple produces computers (or what they pass as computers these days </quick jab>) as well as other hardware and software, this is long-past a simple console war: personally, I simply can't stand Apple marketing and the enormous praise they get from fanboys with different standards and values in consumer electronics than me.
P.S. Don't mistake that last bit for critical introspection and self-consciousness. I am still DEAD CERTAIN that MY values are better than YOURS.

>> ^dag:

The platform wars are getting bizarre. The level of disdain seems weird to me. Mac evangelism is also strange - and I'll admit to doing some of it.


Let's be realistic here, dag: you're the most prolific only Apple preacher on here.

Also, since Apple produces computers (or what they pass as computers these days </quick jab>) as well as other hardware and software, this is long-past a simple console war: personally, I simply can't stand Apple marketing and the enormous praise they get from fanboys with different standards and values in consumer electronics than me.

P.S. Don't mistake that last bit for critical introspection and self-consciousness. I am still DEAD CERTAIN that MY values are better than YOURS.

>> ^lavoll:
taser happy overweight pigs


You know who else is overweight? The black man in this video and 55% of Americans!

We could apply violent pig to anyone... Like to all the common thugs on the street, just like all the people in America... Of course, then who could we blame for brutality? Not the everyday man because that would take introspection as to why society as a whole fails...

Remember, all cops come from flesh and blood and some are stupid. What would have been the appropriate course though? Go after him? (Answer, no.) Wait him out (Possibly, but figure he can wait up to about two days... ) Tase him? (Answer, depends if you think you can safely take him down. Considering everyone thinks they are more capable than they truly are, these cops prolly did too.)

Also, if there is a suspected gun, the cops who want to return home disable as soon as possible. The cops that want to test their speed and accuracy wait until they are dead. When they hit him with the first taser, what was behind him? If it was land, they needed to try and tase him right then and there (While he was seated. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron... It was BECAUSE he was SEATED that the opportunity was right. Of course the view is bloacked...) If the first deployment would have succeeded, the man who threatened to take life would have been fine. You say lethal force wasn’t warranted and you are correct, but the taser is only a potentially lethal weapon. Just like the hands and feet are a potential lethal weapon… A gun on the other hand, if used correctly will nearly always be lethal (Cause death or great bodily harm...)

If I was in that situation, and I was law enforcement (which I am not,) here is a potential scenario:

Fat man on bridge threatens to off himself. May be packing due to his 50 page history, reports from family AND state of agitation (So, first thing I know is that he may murder himself and any "Pig headed mother-fing cops"--as come others call all cops here on this site.) We respond, try to wait him out. Looks bad, because he is saying f-you, I will do it. We wait till he sits, there is ground behind him (Cannot see from this camera footage,) and then deploy the less-than-lethal taser... It fails. He gets up, makes a dash for the security of the bridge but also a better drop point. Take him down or let him fall? Hrm, hard to say because now he knows what will happen to him if he stops and therefore, he prolly won't stop... Taser deployed... And he falls. Slightly better outcome than if he had done a head-first dive of his own accord, which is of course what he promised to do... But bad outcome anyways…