ABOUT SOUTH ASIA.
category: general [glöplog]
Different, but still the same, in that when you peel away the politics both cases boil down to human loss.
I know enough Swedish to understand the concept, and admittedly even those who don't know swedish at all would be able to make the connection. Perhaps I came forward a bit more offensive than was called for myself, but you still can see how someone who has things such as the 9/11 thread (which, after all, WAS potentially offensive, even though I must admit I did get a mild chuckle out of it myself) in fresh memory would be led to question the validity of this thread even after the eventual clarification, no?
I don't read the Finnish sensationalist press or visit their websites, but I too have been forced to catch a glimpse of their front pages every time I've went to pick up groceries during the past few days. Of course I'm also offended, and I wish those vultures would get no revenue. However, if advertising to the sensationalist-press-supporting bulk population returns more funds for the cause than it costs, I guess the good outweighs the evil.
I personally donated a few euros and I'm also supporting the Artists Support Asia project. I also regularly donate to, for example, Amnesty, so at least in my case this is not a media frenzied thing.
I know enough Swedish to understand the concept, and admittedly even those who don't know swedish at all would be able to make the connection. Perhaps I came forward a bit more offensive than was called for myself, but you still can see how someone who has things such as the 9/11 thread (which, after all, WAS potentially offensive, even though I must admit I did get a mild chuckle out of it myself) in fresh memory would be led to question the validity of this thread even after the eventual clarification, no?
I don't read the Finnish sensationalist press or visit their websites, but I too have been forced to catch a glimpse of their front pages every time I've went to pick up groceries during the past few days. Of course I'm also offended, and I wish those vultures would get no revenue. However, if advertising to the sensationalist-press-supporting bulk population returns more funds for the cause than it costs, I guess the good outweighs the evil.
I personally donated a few euros and I'm also supporting the Artists Support Asia project. I also regularly donate to, for example, Amnesty, so at least in my case this is not a media frenzied thing.
jobe:
I think anyone with their mind straight would know the difference between this and 9/11 threads (wich btw where all over the web and quite alot of them with same style as mine, so it wasnt even THAT original).
The screenshoots i posted about wasnt all tabloidjunk media. It was also DN/GP who is the big "serious" newspapers in Sweden. They act the same. I feel disgusted.
Personally I feel that volunteer organisations shouldnt be needed at all when it comes to hurt swedes in a rather-peacefull country who lets our government financed support into their country to help.
Medics across borders etc serves a good purpose when it comes to a warsituation with civil causalties where you need a political liberated organisation to help the civils. It has NOTHING to do with this, and it makes me disgusted that media thinks it does, it just proves they only want money and pretend to be moral-correct, where they in reality is so far from straight moral anyone ever possibly could get.
I think anyone with their mind straight would know the difference between this and 9/11 threads (wich btw where all over the web and quite alot of them with same style as mine, so it wasnt even THAT original).
The screenshoots i posted about wasnt all tabloidjunk media. It was also DN/GP who is the big "serious" newspapers in Sweden. They act the same. I feel disgusted.
Personally I feel that volunteer organisations shouldnt be needed at all when it comes to hurt swedes in a rather-peacefull country who lets our government financed support into their country to help.
Medics across borders etc serves a good purpose when it comes to a warsituation with civil causalties where you need a political liberated organisation to help the civils. It has NOTHING to do with this, and it makes me disgusted that media thinks it does, it just proves they only want money and pretend to be moral-correct, where they in reality is so far from straight moral anyone ever possibly could get.
Smart way to start a discussion.
irvin: i would just say its stupid to reply to a topic in a bashing tone if you have no clue about what the thread is about. i guess its the pouet style, and i dont really care its refreshing :)
i.e. Stefan likes to tread reeeeeeally close to the line when it comes to posting, and he stepped over it again.
He's not apologizing for something he didn't do, however.
I also remember at BP04 when we were standing next to each other, and someone said 'Truck, that's Stefan, now pummel him' and we looked at each other and went 'um, why?' and continued discussing... drinks, I think.
Anyway, Stefan likes to provoke and he's damned good at it, but taking him at face value is akin to using me as the anorexia poster child.
Also, BASS.
He's not apologizing for something he didn't do, however.
I also remember at BP04 when we were standing next to each other, and someone said 'Truck, that's Stefan, now pummel him' and we looked at each other and went 'um, why?' and continued discussing... drinks, I think.
Anyway, Stefan likes to provoke and he's damned good at it, but taking him at face value is akin to using me as the anorexia poster child.
Also, BASS.
Damned good at provocation? Dunno. I don't think provocation is a particularly difficult task. You just need a feeling for consensual moral belief and write something that violates it. Anyone with half a brain can do that. It's just that sensible people refrain from actually doing it because they know it leads nowhere. Unless they have a sneaking suspicion that there's something wrong with the moral consensus. I cannot see what should possibly be wrong with compassion for a suffering human being, so why try to ridicule this emotion?
jazzman:
Point is, only people who didnt understand the meaning of the thread got offended. People who knew peopler down there (like myself) wouldnt get offended by this topic if they got the point of the thread.
Hopefully they would feel the same about how disturbing the media reactions has been tho, but thats up to each one of you to make that decision.
Point is, only people who didnt understand the meaning of the thread got offended. People who knew peopler down there (like myself) wouldnt get offended by this topic if they got the point of the thread.
Hopefully they would feel the same about how disturbing the media reactions has been tho, but thats up to each one of you to make that decision.
megadelux: well, and my point was that it is impossible to understand the real meaning without knowing you or being psychic.
or perhaps try to read the posts before making up your mind?
ojee flipje van tiel heeft een eigen mening
don't fuck with flipje! flipje was wel mooi een pionier van de geanimeerde media:
"De eerste echte Flipje doet zijn intrede in het boekje "Flipje en zijn vriendje de aap" (1935). In 1936 worden de boekjes vervangen door ca. één meter lange "filmstroken", die in een eigen maar zelf in elkaar te zetten "huisbioscoop" kunnen worden vertoond. Bij elke pot Betuwe jam krijgt de koper één "film". De Flipposcoop is verkrijgbaar op Flipje-bonnetjes. Er zijn in totaal 50.000 Flipposcopen gemaakt."
"De eerste echte Flipje doet zijn intrede in het boekje "Flipje en zijn vriendje de aap" (1935). In 1936 worden de boekjes vervangen door ca. één meter lange "filmstroken", die in een eigen maar zelf in elkaar te zetten "huisbioscoop" kunnen worden vertoond. Bij elke pot Betuwe jam krijgt de koper één "film". De Flipposcoop is verkrijgbaar op Flipje-bonnetjes. Er zijn in totaal 50.000 Flipposcopen gemaakt."
ik zou zeggen.. sue die Looney Tunes flippos alsnog :)
megadelux:
1st:
how much have you spent to the people there?
2nd:
im NOT a violent person, so forget about what i told you yesterday. we should do better and come to peace. im still not in so good mood.
if the 2nd point does not count for you:
you can still come down to Bingen am Rhein and i will give you a new meaning of "BREAK-point"
1st:
how much have you spent to the people there?
2nd:
im NOT a violent person, so forget about what i told you yesterday. we should do better and come to peace. im still not in so good mood.
if the 2nd point does not count for you:
you can still come down to Bingen am Rhein and i will give you a new meaning of "BREAK-point"
flipje rocks.. en om het nog botter te maken, hier een plaat!
Nuke:
"how much have you spent to the people there?"
Nothing, even if i would donate money to the redcross now it shouldn't mean anything to the people savaged,murdered or injured by the tsunami. The Red Cross is economically liberated for 20 years, and was so even before this happent. Now that a big distaster stroke and got alot of victims from the westworld they are richer than ever before. Did they get rich because of people just felt "lets donate money" - no. In Sweden: the first days after the happening they got in approx. 1 Million euros. After they started to campgain together with massmedia on the same pages with killed babies floating around in the water: 30Million euros!
Personally that just makes me sick, i personally thinks its degrading to see them succeed with a campaign like that, (see this thread for reference).
For the people I know who visited Thailland and lived to tell the thale i will act like i did before, I dont think they want me to try to act as a psychologist or a funder for their lifes.
As i read in the other thread you think everybody should quit their lives and stay home and spend all money on the victims of this catastophy.
Personally ive always thought it brings more pain to the relatives etc by being noticed by how much everyone is sad for people they dont know. In gothenburgh we had a -for us- big catastrophy for some years ago where youths got killed in a discothec who caught fire. I knew people who got killed there, however i never enjoyed how people around me reacted, all claiming to be so-sad they couldnt go on with their lives. Even if they didnt know anyone or having met them at all the world just couldnt go on.
Half a year after this happent the educated people in the pshycology area where very sceptical about how the society had threatened this happening. The relatives to the victims didnt feel any better, and it made shitloads of people feel REALLY bad even if they really shouldnt. I mean there must be some kind of SENSE in sorrow otherwise it just boils down to rotten up and die.
I'd say: for those who CAN go on with their lives: DO IT. For others i just hope the professional help can help them.
"how much have you spent to the people there?"
Nothing, even if i would donate money to the redcross now it shouldn't mean anything to the people savaged,murdered or injured by the tsunami. The Red Cross is economically liberated for 20 years, and was so even before this happent. Now that a big distaster stroke and got alot of victims from the westworld they are richer than ever before. Did they get rich because of people just felt "lets donate money" - no. In Sweden: the first days after the happening they got in approx. 1 Million euros. After they started to campgain together with massmedia on the same pages with killed babies floating around in the water: 30Million euros!
Personally that just makes me sick, i personally thinks its degrading to see them succeed with a campaign like that, (see this thread for reference).
For the people I know who visited Thailland and lived to tell the thale i will act like i did before, I dont think they want me to try to act as a psychologist or a funder for their lifes.
As i read in the other thread you think everybody should quit their lives and stay home and spend all money on the victims of this catastophy.
Personally ive always thought it brings more pain to the relatives etc by being noticed by how much everyone is sad for people they dont know. In gothenburgh we had a -for us- big catastrophy for some years ago where youths got killed in a discothec who caught fire. I knew people who got killed there, however i never enjoyed how people around me reacted, all claiming to be so-sad they couldnt go on with their lives. Even if they didnt know anyone or having met them at all the world just couldnt go on.
Half a year after this happent the educated people in the pshycology area where very sceptical about how the society had threatened this happening. The relatives to the victims didnt feel any better, and it made shitloads of people feel REALLY bad even if they really shouldnt. I mean there must be some kind of SENSE in sorrow otherwise it just boils down to rotten up and die.
I'd say: for those who CAN go on with their lives: DO IT. For others i just hope the professional help can help them.
havoc: hmm je hebt gelijk ik had megadelux niet met flipje moeten vergelijken. zeker nu ik zie dat flipje niet eens echt dik is tegenwoordig.
megadelux: Can you back up your claims with evidence? Even if the red cross doesn't spend all the money for the victims (which is actually impossible, there is always administration overhead), you'll still do a lot of good by donating.
And remember - there's a competition between lots of care organisations. If one turns out corrupt, choose another one.
It's your choice - you can do something if you want to. Nobody expects you to "quit your live" as you put it. Why do you think these extremes? Giving a lot is better than giving a little is better than giving nothing.
And remember - there's a competition between lots of care organisations. If one turns out corrupt, choose another one.
It's your choice - you can do something if you want to. Nobody expects you to "quit your live" as you put it. Why do you think these extremes? Giving a lot is better than giving a little is better than giving nothing.
can't we just conclude that scandinavian media sucks whereas the dutch doesn't? in holland there's like one bank account where all the aid orgs work together for asia (red cross, oxfam, bladibla many more), they have one modest ad on every newspaper's front or second page every day (same ad every day), and the papers have had, only for a few days, one normal sized picture, except for the one 'real' tabloid-ish paper that we have. also the free papers ("metro" seems quite known europe-wide) that live on ads weren't all too sensational at all.
is that so exceptional? does holland really rock so much? or am i just an ignorant fool that doesn't see the obvious misbehavings of our media?
is that so exceptional? does holland really rock so much? or am i just an ignorant fool that doesn't see the obvious misbehavings of our media?
it doesn't always have to be red cross, just donate somewhere where it seems reasonable!
jazzman: Maybe you missed it, official sorrowday in sweden 1st january. "Charity" concerts all day on tv etc. Nuke (in his other trhead) said that everyone else than him should stay home and spend all their money on charity...
About redcross: Its official information by themselves for some months ago... About the same time when they had a nice tv show about their president who btw drives ferrari, or wait was it porsche? Couldnt care less, a president of a big company should be well paid... Doesnt make me like them any better tho.
About redcross: Its official information by themselves for some months ago... About the same time when they had a nice tv show about their president who btw drives ferrari, or wait was it porsche? Couldnt care less, a president of a big company should be well paid... Doesnt make me like them any better tho.
"one more thing: i was not out on new years eve, i stayed home, and will spend the money to the people there. i would also do this if i had not been there at that moment.
you should do the same..." / Nuke
you should do the same..." / Nuke
have you?
Mr. Megadelux (hah), I'm not really sure what your argument is that you're trying to get across...
Because a non-profit relief organization has overhead costs to stay afloat, we shouldn't donate to them to save others lives who NEED OUR HELP?
Yeaaaaah, that makes plenty of sense.
Because a non-profit relief organization has overhead costs to stay afloat, we shouldn't donate to them to save others lives who NEED OUR HELP?
Yeaaaaah, that makes plenty of sense.
skrebbel, yeah you are so totally right! dutch media and relief organisations totally rule! first i wanted to waste my 13th month in the casino, but now i'm giving it all to the "postcodeloterij miljoenenjacht"! what could feel better than spending your money on charity and a chance to win the "postcodeklapper van 13.7 miljoen" at the same time? not to mention the joy they must be bringing to people's lifes by sending georgina verbaan, martin gaus and caroline tensen to areas recovering from disaster... ;)
\o/ that's very generous of you havoc!