First of all: Happy Birthday April!
[last-minute insertion] TaN: From NBC News, they featured a news item on Toys-R-Us selling a product that some people are claiming to deviate from their “family-friendly” image. The store argues that they are intended for the 15-year-olds or older only.
At first glance, selling a product only to a certain group of customers appears to be a good assurance. However, a closer and more critical (grammatical or semantactial) analysis reveals a “minor” problem. Like many products that are designed for certain age groups or for certain purpose only, there is no guarantee that the appropriate people or purpose will be complied with. Once a product is bought (and leaves the store), the store’s “strict” observance of the screening sales to the appropriate buyers ends.
A case in point would be cigarettes or liquor bought by an adult may, subsequently, end up with a minor. The same is true with a gun, especially if the gun owner is not responsible or even if the gun owner is responsible, every now and then there could be lapses.
Unless there is some way of ensuring things will be used properly, items such as toy stores should refrain from making things that the consuming public does not really need — especially if the only reason for the product is principally for profit — then the product should not be made available on the market. I sincerely doubt that customers of Toys-R-Us really need the “objectionable” toy, after all it is just a toy among the many other toys being sold.
[another last-minute insertion] TaN: I could be wrong but from what I can gather from the press, all the fervor over the killing of the Filipino transgender in Olongapo allegedly (for now) by USA Marine Pfc Joseph Scott Pemberton appears to be missing a very fundamental issue — with respect to custody. As far as I can determine, the provisions in the VFA (Visiting Forces Agreement) specified that, in the event that a USA serviceman is featured in a crime where s/he is the respondent or accused, custody of the said soldier shall be with the Philippine government and that the USA can request for the transfer of custody to the latter, but it will only be a request which may or may not be granted — and not the other way around, which is what is the current situation.
It would appear that we have a repeat situation where a (sovereign) country kowtows to the USA — because the latter is the world’s biggest bully. What the USA wants, it gets and no country can say otherwise nor do anything about it — especially for a toady country like the Philippines, which looks upon the USA as some sort of an almighty master and lord.
And even despite the recent developments where Pemberton has now been detained in a makeshift facility — an air-conditioned cargo container complete with its own toilet and the standard military cot and just the bare necessities — it is still a “slap in the (sovereign) face” of the Philippines to have the suspect not in your custody. For one thing, it reflects the mistrust on the “offended country” to properly observe and provide the appropriate treatment for the accused. Actually, iin truth I suspect that the USA considers it an insult if one of their own will be under the custody of “lesser mortals” — after all, the USA is simply just so full of themselves. Do not expect to get the same privilege when it is the other way around.
In addition, there is so much emotion, biases, slanderous allegations, and unfounded insecurities everywhere. The LGBT community is being oversensitive and overly presumptuous to argue that the killing is a purely hate-crime against them. It is getting to appear that any untoward incident — be it physical violence, verbal abuse, or whatever deemed even the slightest hint of prejudice directed versus the community — .is taken as a hate-crime against LGBTs. Well FYI (i.e., to the LGBT community and their advocates), the world does not revolve around LGBTs and not every undesirable incident involving an LGBT member as a target or recipient is a hate-crime against them. It may be a hate-crime but the trigger or cause may be something else and not necessarily due to their gender orientation. As in the controversial Laude-slay case, it is very probable that there was deception, deliberate or not, on the part of the victim, where the alleged assailant (Pemberton) did not know that Laude was male and female companionship was the objective — as the news item title “Pemberton did not know Laude was a transgender” (The Philippine STAR, October 23, 2014, NEWS section) suggests.
Finally, the media is not only not helping, it is aggravating the whole issue by continuing to fuel the controversy under the guise of news reporting and ensuring the public’s right to know. It is actually all about ratings — especially using interviews (of the family, the alleged “boyfriend”, the LGBT community, and whoever) and milk the issue for all it is worth, showing the tears, the rage, the sorrow, the drama, and all the emotions.
Come one, let us be true to our calling and report the news without “bias”. Let us not masquerade our intentions to get high ratings by hyping controversial issues. During interviews, let us avoid the obvious questions, the rhetorical questions, and (especially) emotional questions. Let us true professionals.
TaN: In the recent controversial case of a USA serviceman involved in the death of a transgender in Olongapo City in the province of Zambales of the Philippines, both parties are at fault, are to blame — assuming that there was some sort of deliberate deception on the part of the victim. Because there is not much details on the controversy — as of this writing — I am taking it that the perpetrator did not know the she is a he while the victim did not “confess” himself properly. [Note: I am using the masculine gender to refer to the victim because that is his true gender. Regardless of what is the status today, (1) the victim was originally a male and no amount of denial can change that and (2) the DNA (deoxyribose nucleic acid) will still show that of a male. No offense meant but people must face up to what they are and not give some kind of flimsy and lame alibi about their so-called “true inner self”. That is just refusing to accept what God has given or made you.]
Even though they say hindsight is 20/20, it is still a lesson to learn. Without further details on the matter and unless there is malicious or criminal intent from the onset, this tragedy would have been avoided or averted had (1) the victom explained clearly what he truly is (because I would not only feel insulted but even enraged if I have been misled into thinking that the victim was a true female, assuming that I am looking for female companionship for the night) and (2) the perpetrator likewise explained what he expected from the victim (whether it is only for a good time or something else more and not certain things, as what Olongapo City is noted for). If there was more honesty and transparency, things would have been a lot more different — and probably better for all parties. But what’s done is done.
TaN: As mentioned in earlier blogs, all is proceeding according to plan — i.e., the Ebola issue. The tried-and-tested Hegelian “strategy” (of thesis-anti-thesis-synthesis”) is working perfectly and with the (great majority of the) majority utterly oblivious to it all or has been “trained” to react (in typical Pavlovian style) and deem any news of contrary or contradictory to the “official” as mere (paranoid) conspiracy.
This dimension of the overall global domination strategy is to sow fear into the populace and reap the benefits. The scenario is:
(1) Set up the premise [thesis] — (i) Weaponize a pathogen, preferrably one that is easy to neutralize but the general public and even most of the experts and specialists in the field are ignorant of (like Ebola, which can easily be neutralize by exposure to UV or ultraviolet light, in case you don’t know); (ii) covertly put up Ground Zero, preferrably somewhere far away (like in a poverty-stricken and conflict-torn country) and sprinkle it (sporadically) around; and, (iii) set up mainstream media to announce that there is difficulty in developing cure protocol — so people will be in constant fear and anticipation, to the point of becoming paranoid;
(2) Put forth a “comprehensive” (but totally inutile) solution [anti-thesis] — (i) make the development of a cure protocol appear to be a painstaking process — so people will “beg” and agree to be human guinea pigs for experimental treatments because they have been “conditioned” to the point of desperation as to accept even the most inane treatments and the most incompetent screening protocol (as can be seen in the unbelievably shoddy and ridiculous airport screening procedures, if there is any at all, especially if the flight came from known and confirmed Ebola countries); (ii) have so-called experts and health authorities recommend that people, while waiting with bated breaths for the (vaccine) cure to be developed, in the meantime just keep washing hands and avoid touching everything; and, (iii) send military personnel into Ebola countries to fight — as if bullets and military strategies are any good against something so small that it is invisible to the naked eye — and, when recalled after their tour of “duty”, may be bringing more infections to Ebola-free areas;
(3) Watch everything fall into place and reap the rewards [synthesis] — (i) people and especially governments will be lining up to stockpile worthless vaccines and cures that will not only prove to be worthless (but none of the obedient and gullible people and government authorities will realize) but will result in numerous adverse reactions that will not be attributed to the hazardous treatment while Big Pharma and Big Vaccine rakes in obscene profits and claim success in the whole fiasco; (ii) watch the long-term plan to depopulate slowly unfold and come to fruition — in the words of William Gates III during his talk in TED sometime ago, “…and if we really do a great job on NEW VACCINES, healthcare, and REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES, we could LOWER that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent…” (capitalization supplied), in line with the global eugenics program to reduce the global population “to more manageable levels”; and, (iii) take opportunity to curtail more civil liberties and rights from the people in order to gain greater control and a tighter grip on any possible consequential or subsequent reactional resistance — like the partial ceding of the right to security and privacy at airports and in buildings and malls when people undergo body searches.
This is a real trifecta where for a single stone (Ebola), they, the global power elite, hit three birds (profit, eugenics, and voluntary reliquishmet of (certain) rights and liberties). This is one of the best ruses the global power elite has schemed to-date — a triple play.
Finally, the whole way this Ebola issue is being handled by the so-called authorities reeks of — in the words of David Nye (I think, because I could not quite make out the name clearly) in an interview on Alex Jones’ InfoWars by host Paul Joseph Watson (again, I think, because I could not also quite make out the name clearly) — “deliberate incompetence” (please refer to the October 7, 2014 program in http://www.infowars.com/listen-to-the-radio/).
TaN: In a recent viral video about someone who decided to announce her intended suicide on November 1 in order to avoid the supposed pain of her terminal (brain) cancer, it is soooooooo pathetic, pitiful, and craven. It is a plain and simple cop out and I would not waste my time on it. If you are too cowardly to continue living, I feel sorry for you.
You (appear to) have too much misplaced and undeserved faith in (quack) physicians who like to play God and predict your last day in this world. Unbeknownst to most, according to a survey finding some years ago, physicians and nurses have the highest rate of cancer victims among the different professions and occupations.
Furthermore, the tweet commenting on how such suicides permit a person to chose a “dignified” death, the tweeter seems not understand that (1) one’s own life is not ours to take and (2) the ending of one’s own life is possible only with the permission of God — as evidenced by numerous instances of failed suicide attempts despite certain death and of so-called “untimely” deaths by perfectly “healthy” individuals.
It is sad that issues such as this is even given attention, much less going viral. What a shame.
TaN: It is important, even vital, that the proper terms are used — especially in reports and mass media. Using words that are closely related but not quite the same can (sometimes) mean the difference between accuracy or mis-information — leading to misconclusions. An example would be the news item regarding the case of the nurse who contracted Ebola and her dog, Excalibur, had to be euthanized — as a precaution to prevent the further spread of Ebola, which the authorities did and were not able to confirm. The title of the news article, which was (supposedly) from the New York Times, was “Spain euthanizes dog of Ebola-infected nurse” — dateline Madrid and dated circa October 9 0r 10 — while the caption of one of the two accompanying photographs read “Excalibur, a mixed-breed mutt, was 12 years old when he died“.
What amd where is the difference? The news text used the word “euthanized” while the caption reported the dog “died”. Although both terms in the end means that Excalibur is no longer alive, “euthanized” implies that the death was caused by another (thing or person) whereas “died” implies that the death was “generic” or not (usually) caused by another. In the news article, it gives the impression that the dog was “put down” or killed, but the photograph caption implies otherwise — that Excalibur died on its own, without any assistance from another.
Although this is somewhat on the trivial side — i.e., how a dog’s life ended, especially one that is not widely known, is not really significant as it does not have an impact on global affairs and events — the issue is the proper use of terminology to ensure accuracy and not cause confusion or misperception. Picture this on news items that report that are of major significance, that have widespread or serious consequences or implications.
TaN: For as long as GREED, disguised as Profit, is the driving force in the world, there will always be strife and chaos and misery and inequality. Ever noticed how (almost) all news items, especially in mainstream media, that concern business and labor seems to always boil down to (the love of) money issues?
Every time something important and urgent needs to be done and it happens to concern the welfare of the public but is not being done, chances are the cause or reason behind it all is funding. It appears that public welfare and humanitarianism is second only in importance to (the almighty) Love of Money — even if what is involved are lives.
A case in point is a news item aired over NBC News two weeks ago where the century-old underground gas lines somewhere — sorry, I forgot — were evaluated to be in such a dilapidated and precarious state that it is perceived to be “an accident waiting to happen”. However, nothing is being done to address the potential disaster and destruction (in both property and human lives) — because There Is NO FUNDING!
TaN: Sharing is more important than giving and the most important thing to share is not money or anything but yourself. Nothing is as priceless in this world as the sharing of oneself with others. In fact, there are several instances mentioned in the Holy Scriptures:
Although “giving” appears to be more altruistic than “sharing” — because giving implies severing all ties and ownership to another while sharing implies that there is still an attachment, that one is not deprived or lessened by sharing — sharing further implies that what is being shared is not only (more) precious but that it is an integral part of one’s being therefore cannot be totally removed from one’s self, whereas giving implies that parting or complete detachment or severence is possible, hence it is not essential or integral to one’s being.
(1) And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, government, diversities of tongues — 1 Corinthians 12:28 [KJV]. Since aposltes are appointed or chosen by God and prophets are determined and sent by God, the first two are completely beyond man’s control and determination. This leaves teachers or teaching as the first among the “worldly” endeavors or acts that man can pour his energies into.
(2) It is likewise mentioned in the Holy Scriptures that: There is no greater love than to give up one’s life for another. This giving up of one’s life is not only to be taken literally but figuratively as well. When one shares wisdom and experiences with another, it is giving up of one’ life. All the wisdom and experiences one has gathered and undergone over the years are passed on to another for the other’s benefit and welfare.
(3) Finally, Jesus Christ came down for only one purpose and that is to offer salvation to man. This He achieves by teaching. He taught us all we need, which is why He is the Light, the Truth and the Way.
Now it must be understood that “teaching” is not the conventional mindset where it merely involves attending (formal) academic sessions and taking (and passing) tests. Teaching embodies both verbal and kinesthetical — i.e., involving also showing (by example) and experiencing (or immersion). It is not teaching if there is a lack of either one.
Jesus taught not only by words but likewise by example and deeds. He walked His talk. As to the recent World Teachers Day, let us hope that, like all the special days being commemorated (such as Mother’s Day, Father’s Day, etc), it is not just lip service and also not let Big Business hijack and commercialize it. Thank you to all my teachers who gave of themselves so selflessly. I am enriched and richer because of your sharing.