a little over 30 years ago news used to be not-for profit but rather a badge of honor and integrity.journalists and newsrooms prided themselves on actually reporting and while there were still problems,america had a fourth estate that (for the most part) still reported actual news.

where we find ourselves today is corporate opinion news that (since the late 70's) is FOR-profit).gone are the days of actual news and what is placed in its stead is entertainment dressed up like a dolled-up whore which the zombified american public has been hypnotized to believe is "news" when in actuality it is just entertainment.opinion generated conflict in order to create a dramatic soap opera where americans can enjoy their mac-n-cheese on tv trays and nod their heads in drooling supplication to their corporate (insert name here) god.

how do you control a population of supposed "free society"?
you cant have the midnight knock.
nor can you black bag every dissenting voice.
no no...
you control how they think.
you control their opinion.

let us consider a few points:
1.the media is the NUMBER ONE lobbyist.
not big oil.
not big pharma.
but the media.
2.with almost 3000 media outlets in the USA yet only FIVE owners.(thank you cuntface michael powell!)
that is one mighty powerful megaphone to influence the opinions of a population.
and its works....brilliantly.just look at some of the comments here.

@chingalera has pointed this out in his usual colorful manner and is spot on.

independent news media is the only way to go if you are looking for actual journalism.

@shinyblurry do not get caught in the trap my friend.do not rely on corporate "news" to enlighten you concerning the situation in the middle east nor the origins of the anymosity towards america.truth does not suit their purposes in controlling your opinion.
might i recommend this most excellent documentary:
http://videosift.com/video/The-Power-of-Nightmares-part-1

and @quantumushroom i will let chomsky address your false equivalency argument:

mmmm, soap noodles.

I've commented on some other durian videos here before, so I won't ramble too much. Suffice it to say that after almost 6 years of living in Thailand, I'm a pretty major durian fan. I came around to accepting or even liking the taste pretty quickly, but now I even like the smell -- which I found neutral to slightly negative at first.

I wonder if it has some sort of "taster/non-taster" compound in it, but more directed at smell. I'd say 80%+ of the westerners that I know here hate durian, with only 1 in 5 or 10 coming around to appreciating it, like me. Amongst native Thais, I'd say the ratio is more like 60% like it and 40% don't. That seems to hint to me that there might be a genetic root cause.

One more thing that this brings to mind is people's descriptions of the smell. I can't give a good description that compares it to anything, and I never really agree with any that I hear. I certainly don't agree with fish, shit, feet, or any of the other descriptors in the video here. It is sort of similar to people's reactions to cilantro/coriander. I love cilantro, but lots of people that I know hate it and describe it as tasting "like soap", which I don't get at all. Perhaps that is some other genetic taster/non-taster type of thing.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 2 Badge!

Holy fuck! New soap opera coming to afternoon tv?

Some Hot Cheeze in there!

Thanks for the video!

When you cook with garlic, if you don't like the smell, wash your hands with soap and cold water when you're done. The smell won't stick if your pores aren't open.

I like how the opening lighting and camera work looks like a Star Trek Daytime Soap Opera

>> ^spawnflagger:

I like the idea, but didn't he do a simple product search ?
or hell, even the domain itself - http://www.gojo.com/ . It's a brand of hand cleaner (good stuff too) that's been around for years.
I don't see how he isn't infringing on the brand/trademark "gojo", so a lot of legal battles ahead...
Oh, and lastly - cancer. Do you want a high-powered cell phone transmitter next to your brain, or a low powered bluetooth headset?


Trademarks are only supposed to protect against similar products. It would be trademark infringement to make another soap or cleanser and call it Gojo. A shampoo would probably be considered too similar; maybe something cleaning-related like a sponge or scrubbing brush, too. A headband with a suction cup is not in the same market so it shouldn't be in violation.

The microwaves that are emitted by a cell phone are non-ionizing and thus, not linked to cancer. They're in the same carcinogen group (2B) as coffee and pickles.

Soap's on the bottom shelf...

Besides intelligent design and random chance, what other alternatives are there?

That is a very odd question - it doesn't take a great imagination to come up with possibilities, once we depart the realm of "seems to be likely". Time could be an illusion - the universe could be completely static, arbitrarily existing in its current form throughout all eternity. Ahead of you (none of us exist... oops!) is a soap bubble that looks like whatever you're seeing right now - behind you is an endless velvet Elvis painting. To be very clear: I don't know this isn't the case (and even if God or mescaline made me 100% convinced that this was or wasn't the case, I still would have no actual way of knowing - I'd just have a brain that's been messed with and thought it knew things it didn't).

You can make it as convoluted as you like..in the end, it is all either the product of design or chance. If you disagree, come up with an alternative.

Anyways - I'll repeat my previous question. Do you accept it's possible that you're being deceived by a demon who can mess with your thoughts? This is a fairly simple question; I've answered your questions, and I don't think it's unfair for me to expect a yes or no answer.

No, because God has given me sufficient evidence that I can be certain of it. A person receiving absolute confirmation of Gods existence has a justified true belief in God, regardless of what someone who has no such revelation perceives as reasonable. Indeed, a person on the outside of this revelation is irrational and incapable of determining what truth is.

>> ^jmzero

Do you believe God can make Himself known in such a way as you could be certain about it?


Of course. A theoretical omnipotent God could obviously convince me that He exists. That's tautological - He could do anything. He could 100% perfectly convince me that I'm a helicopter - whether or not that's true (right now I don't think I'm a helicopter, but I certainly could be).

It's also quite possible that - devoid of the presence of God - I could become very convinced of His (or Her's, or Its) presence by a stroke, a trolling demon, an advanced machine that could rewrite things in my brain, a misconception/bias that I don't see, or even just a very vivid dream.

Going further, there could be a God who believes himself omnipotent - and uses that power to convince people to worship him. But unbeknownst to Him he's actually the child of a Sun rabbit, the rabbit in turn having been born in an explosion at a fireworks warehouse (which was itself made by the rabbit, created backwards in time). The rabbit doesn't interfere and allows God to conduct business in just the way you think he does; you see, the rabbit thinks all the ginger spirits in heaven look like delicious, bobbing carrots and he thus lets God carry on with his business.

Besides intelligent design and random chance, what other alternatives are there?


That is a very odd question - it doesn't take a great imagination to come up with possibilities, once we depart the realm of "seems to be likely". Time could be an illusion - the universe could be completely static, arbitrarily existing in its current form throughout all eternity. Ahead of you (none of us exist... oops!) is a soap bubble that looks like whatever you're seeing right now - behind you is an endless velvet Elvis painting. To be very clear: I don't know this isn't the case (and even if God or mescaline made me 100% convinced that this was or wasn't the case, I still would have no actual way of knowing - I'd just have a brain that's been messed with and thought it knew things it didn't).

Anyways - I'll repeat my previous question. Do you accept it's possible that you're being deceived by a demon who can mess with your thoughts? This is a fairly simple question; I've answered your questions, and I don't think it's unfair for me to expect a yes or no answer.

I'll buy them a bar of soap and a haircut. Filthy, smelly artists. And yet this is probably cheaper than incarceration.

Anti-bacterial soap anyone?

>> ^HugeJerk:

J.J. Abrams does a good job of finding interesting show ideas, putting together a decent cast, getting a budget for a good looking production... and then leaves the shows to writers who have no idea on where they are going to take it, so it ends up a confusing mess that never has a satisfying pay-off.


I was thinking the same thing. When the preview first started I was like 'oh this is a good idea!' But by the end I was thinking 'contrite, cliched, waste of an idea with some useless Hunger Games adaptations.'

I just have a feeling this is Walking Dead all over again. For fans of that show this is IMHO but they took a great comic and a good starting point and threw it out of the window in favor of horrid acting, massive plot-holes and soap opera style cliched writing.

And people wonder why I prefer british TV. Better writing, better acting, shows actually feature mature plot lines with depth and character. Shows like Walking Dead would have been fantastic if a UK producer had gotten a hold of it.

Upon looking at this YT account (unbanhippelove - Now called "Truth Fairy Media"),
Her videos are quite political - from occupy, hunger strikes, and toxic soap to chem trails, liberty and toxic water. It is quite possible she has gotten her name flagged from some sort of list from a possible protest or something.

I could just be reading into it but it is possible. She may have done nothing wrong at the border except question, though it may have been what came up on screen before that which gave the patrol some doubt. disregarding a request may have been all they needed to set them off.

So then, the question is, "Is it necessary for them to be unprofessional and unkind without a crime actually being in progress?" I don't doubt their authority but I do doubt their methods.

I too have been stopped at a border crossing and had our car searched - it was simple and efficient. The officers were professional. I was very worried and nervous but knew I had nothing to hide. There was no incident and we were sent on our way.

So, ya, it is possible there were other reasons but at what point do they go from professional to inappropriate?