ALINSKY VERSES BECK - WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET CLOSER TO THE TRUTH

WHOSE SIDE IS TRUTH ON?

HOW CAN WE DETERMINE IT?

I have a suggeston. Pick up the brightest, most rational, logical person who you know who holds an opposing political ideology and agree to the following challenge.

The liberal choose the most informative program for liberals which they choose to watch for information and you both watch it and make notes regarding facts, perspective and ideology.

The both of you watch a Glenn Beck program during this week and make notes regarding facts, perspective and ideology.

I expect objective interaction to show that someone is lying and propagandizing and it is time that we recognize what is real. There are good intelligent people on both sides of this political battle and I have what I think is the explanation listed below.

DO WE CARE MORE ABOUT BEING RIGHT THAN WE DO ABOUT THE WELFARE OF THE BEST COUNTRY WHICH HAS EVER EXISTED? MY REQUEST IS A TEST OF THE VALIDITY OF YOUR ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. I AM WILLING TO COME FROM NOT KNOWING BECAUSE I AM CONFIDENT IN MY VERY STRONG OPINIONS. THOSE OPINIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE IF I AM WRONG.

Because there is a campaign to incite the Politicall Correct Gullible Crusaders with morphed meanings of words and out of context information or outright lies and because we were warned by one of America's founders, Samuel Adams, “How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!”, I propose the following definitions to describe our nation's most dangerous enemy.

Thes definitions which have no relationship to party, belief system - only describing an intellectual deficiency and an unwillingness to challenge what they want to believe respectively:

MOOREON refers to an intellectual (thought and reason ability - not intelligence) deficiency and has nothing to do with ideology and beliefs. It rather has to do with an inability to determine whether something is true or false. Mooreon, a definition proposed on factsforreality.net, refers to a person who can see information challenging their beliefs, but does not have the intellectual capacity to process it and challenge that which supports the position that they choose even if their position is based on an illusion rather than what is real.

WIIer is a WILLFULLY IGNORANT INTELLECTUALThose who will keep to a narrow information channel which feeds them information, accurate and complete or not, to substantiate their desired point of view. A WIIer has the intellectual (thought and reason - not intelligence) ability, but is consciously unwilling to look at information which may challenge their desired point of view. A lot of us are going to online versions of foreign newspapers to find out what is happening in our country as well as other online sources.

This saying applies to all humans who fit the three sheeple category described below. The three sheeple:
Hear no other point of view
See no other point of view
Discuss no other point of view

I would suggest to anyone upset with the two definitions that you take some time for introspection because, in my opinion, you are dangerous to yourself , others and our country.

Rossabh
littleguyusa@factsforreality.net
http://factsforreality.blogspot.com
FaceBook Page

Argue for the limitation and it is yours.




My purpose in my website is to have sections with facts

Only facts will be presented; not discussion.
The information displayed may be added to by submission of the fact or a correction and it's source.
This Web site will present facts specific to certain events and organizations such as:

Terrorist attacks on US assets, the president in power, the U.S. response, the perpetrators
Terrorist attacks on non-US assets-Achille Laura, Lockerbee
References to a translation of Osama bin Laden's fatwa
Thwarted terrorist attacks such as multiple planes from Philippines, Milenium LAX from Canadian border
Terrorist Web sites, top 5 or 10 most popular U.S. government officials to quote for anti-American quotes and the message in which the quote is used.
School system statistics such as cost per pupil and the ranking of those pupils
Democracies throughout history, the length of their existence and the cause of their demise.

and other suggested items.
I am a working person who does not yet know how I will do this, but hearing about teachers instructing students that the Iraq war is good or bad rather than teaching them to analyze the information as my 6th grade teacher taught me, scares me. She educated us that we will be exposed to propaganda from all directions and that we should sort out the good information rather than try to indoctrinate us in her beliefs. This paragraph is the result of a conversation several years ago which sounded like our children are indoctrinated rather than taught. Hearing about them being shown An Inconvenient Truth and not hearing about discussions or opposing points of view illustrates the level of indoctrination implemented in America. I would like to see us return to the days where we are taught to question information in any form from the opposition or people with whom we agree.
I had an 11th grade history teacher who said that you cannot get somewhere by being against something. You must have a goal and go for it.
I took a negotiating seminar a long time ago and was put in a role playing exercise. I was the lightweight on a team with a Texas business owner and his three presidents of his companies. We were the tire company and we faced off against the city council. Each side was given secret information and the 15 or 20 sets of business people/city council were instructed to reach a beneficial, negotiated result. A short way into the negotiations, things heated up and the head Texan told the city council that we employed the people who voted for them and if they wanted to maintain their positions, they would give in to our demands. I thought that our set did not succeed because the Texans were used to doing business in that matter. Not one of the sets achieved our goal. These business people, in a lab setting, given the setup to succeed were unsuccessful. Humans are lucky that we do as well as we do if this is a valid sample of human interaction.