What is your Free Speech worth to you? (mirror)

[curtis7690]

it's nice to hear criticism covering A to Z not just of the trillion dollar junkfood ind..

[gjc82071]

This post should have 100+ million views. Americans are asleep @ the wheel. The're going to wake up one day (too late), & find themselves careening off a cliff, & discover that quietly & covertly, many of the basic freedoms/rights they take for granted, are already long gone. I hear/read comments where people jokingly exclaim "is it still legal to say that? haha". THAT is a sign that the 1st amendment is in jeopardy. Nothing is guaranteed, NOT even basic rights. They must be defended.

[gjc82071]

I'm going to sue George Bush. Who has more influence than a US president? I am a broccoli farmer, & has remarks stating that he doesn't like broccoli, has made people biased against it. In turn, it has hurt my business & I want to be compensated. Pretty ridiculous eh? Or is it? I mean, is it really THAT much more far fetched than current food disparagement laws? I never thought such a law, 1 so plainly in blatant violation of the 1st, not 2nd, 9th, but 1st amendment, could be enacted! WTF

[longfootbuddy]

keep trusting in your gun toting nanny slavemaster government...its what all dim-witted, spineless idiots should do

[SomethingSea1]

OMG she closed her account! ;_;

[Carnuss]

It's all goin' down man.

[hotspur2514]

Strangeholm...

Sorely missed.

[vearheart42]

Amazing Video, this stuff is happening ever where and every one should hear about this and many other things that are threatening our rights!

My own mother admittted to being for wiretaps and I don't know how anyone can even justify such a thing. I thought we learned something from George Orwell but I guess I was wrong.

[openaircathedral]

Viva Le Revolution!!!!!!!!!!

[SAsgarters]

I hope you all realize that this video is not about free speech.

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters Did you watch a different video than the rest of us?

[SAsgarters]

@Joe11Blue No.

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters So how can you not understand the point being made?

[SAsgarters]

@Joe11Blue How can you not understand the point being missed?

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters She made two point's. One about free speech, which you are gleaming over, and the second about GMO's. She is correct on both.

[SAsgarters]

@Joe11Blue First off, the comment I left was in connection with a broader debate here on YT. Second, this video is about one thing: fear mongering. That she talked about free speech is not the least bit interesting.

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters I don't care about some broad Youtube debate. This is not a philosophy discussion on what free speech is.

The Video is about Free Speech. It was clearly and demonstrative. You wish to simply attack her on her view's on GMO's, that is called Ad Hom, and truly means you have no rational upon countering her point's being made. That's the same tactic used to sweep away view's counter to your own without discussion.

That my good sir is a Logical Fallacy.

[SAsgarters]

@Joe11Blue "I don't care about some broad Youtube debate."

You don't seem to get it, you're whining about a comment that you don't understand.

Obviously you don't know what an ad hominem is, either. In fact, you just made yourself guilty of it.

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters You have mistaken something here. You think because I discard some philosophical debate that I don't understand it. There also is no whining, just pointing out that you are using some ground's that you are thinking of the big picture when in fact, there is no bigger picture. Her view was concise and to the point. If there's a problem with it, you should counter the point's, not try to redirect

I do know what an Ad Hom is, and you are still using them here.

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters Here, I'll make this easy for you:

–adjective

1.

appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.

2.

attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

You are guilty of the first definition. Would you like me to clarify it more so? I could pull the Thesaurus out and show you more.

[SAsgarters]

@Joe11Blue Wow, you are a fucking retard, if you think you have anything to back that up with. And like I said 15 hours ago, between the two of us, you're the only one who's actually guilty of it. In fact, you're doing it again and my guess is that your reply to this will be another ad hominem attack.

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters Congratulation's, I will now bow out. I will not argue against your logical fallacy.

Yes, I did use Ad Hom. It was clearly in response to your's. Not only are you arrogant, you're ignorant. Have nice day.

[Joe11Blue]

@SAsgarters The argument started in '90's about GMO. It's still going, or did you not pay attention to the fact that she was referring to case law from the '90's. Just because your attention span can't cover a long enough period of time to understand that encroachment is gradual, doesn't mean it's invalidated.

That mentality that nothing matter's unless it's happening right now is why the country is such a mess. The history of tomorrow is written today.

[SAsgarters]

@Joe11Blue Swing and a miss.

[fullmetalfunk]

Sometimes I think...what would happen if all the people in the US one day just didn't go to work. They said, until we get what we want, what is safe for us, what is healthy, and until we know that we actually hold power and not corporations or government we will not go into work. If everybody just mentally got on the same page. The system would crash overnight and the government would basically be forced to do what the public as a whole told it to do. That's not going to happen though.

[fullmetalfunk]

What's scary about this is that these people make and sell your food. Food...one of our necessities. Everything is a business, it's all about money. One day we can't question our food, the next we can't question our laws. You give government and corporations an inch, they'll take a mile.

[woodyrimshotrealized]

More people should learn about Monsanto! The cracks within false integrity go deep.

[AsheIsTheRaven]

This is ironic. I am working on a comedy animation about a little Martian's concerns about Human Blood shortly before their invasion in war of the worlds. He is abruptly sued by the Corporation adverting human blood to the martian populaton...

Well any one who's read the book knows what happened to them in the end.

[TheZeaf]

her eyes are CRAZY

[bamboo4tameshigiri]

This is the FASCIST states of amerika. Corporations have tremendously more rights than the people of this country. That's just a fact.

[darkdragonsoul99]

I'd like to point out the genetic engineering in our food is far from new and it's far safer now. We know what we are doing instead of just dicking around with them. Our food crops wouldn't even exist today if it wasn't for genetic engineering in a broad sense. Because non of them are nature we breed them to be the way they are.

[gothatfunk]

i generally disagree with the notion that our crops wouldn't exist without GMO.

but that's not what this video is about, & i'm really not inclined to argue the point.

agri-business would not be what it is today without GMO, but crops existed before it, and would continue to exist without it. practices in agriculture are the crux of the issue as pertains to GMO. i'm glad i live in a country where its illegal.

if GMO is nothing to worry about, why do manufacturers lobby against labelling?

[darkdragonsoul99]

I'll name off some crops WE didn't have lets say 6000 years ago.

wheat didn't exist in it's modern form

corn

bananas

Cabbage

broccoli

brussels sprouts

cauliflower The list could go on every thing we farm did not exist before we started selectively breeding them. Which is the basis form of genetic engineering. We did all this without even knowing what we were doing at least now days we know.

[gothatfunk]

selective breeding is so far from genetic engineering that i am at a loss as to how i can reply.

Luther Burbank, to name just one, created dozens of new kinds of plants and fruits. selective breeding, cross pollination, grafting, and so on.

that's light years away from creating something that will resist poisons.;

if we spent the same energy finding alternatives to using poison on food, i'd be more comfortable.

let's save this debate for another time.

[darkdragonsoul99]

Selective breeding isn't as far off as you'd think.

You are still actively messing with the plant or animals DNA . Trying to make it into what you want it to be just in a less direct way.

Remember selective breeding is how we turned a wolf into a poodle.

[darkdragonsoul99]

the troll in me refuses to let me shut up lol

[gjc82071]

@gothatfunk Yea, lets compare selective breeding to cloning while we're at it. F$&%ing idiot. (not you Gotha, but darkdragon) Food disparagement laws are unconstitutional, regardless of whether that were enacted or not. These "laws" are "legislation by lobbying", & NOT by/for the people. You're mentioning a food, NOT a specific food company! What's next? If (I said IF!, not does!) I claim that bottled water is basically the same as tap water, will I get sued by Evian, Poland springs, etc?

[AnonEyeMouse]

Considering the manufactured outcry in Britain over GM products, who wouldn't be against labelling that admitted to having GM ingredients - even if those ingredients were completely harmless or even far healthier than non-gm alternatives.

Don't get me wrong - Monsanto are moustache-twirlingly evil in their application of the technology and their abuses of their workforce and business practice (both legal and ilegal) but the two-dimensional view that binds the technology to the company is wrong.

[darkdragonsoul99]

lol I'd love them to try and sue me I don't need a lawyer and they sure wont get a dime out of me

You can't get lemonade from a rock

[ravenslaves]

Great video. It just doesn't go quite far enough though. The reason that these corporations are able to get their way, isn't because of the money. It's because they are a defacto part of the government. They are mostly government controlled, and are in a partnership with the government. This ties into food production, illegal imigration, energy policy, and international policy. Food is used as a tool, and if need be, a weapon. It's often the (ironic) carrot on the end of the stick.

[gothatfunk]

it IS a massive web of mutual dependence - government/big business, and i agree the knock on effects are legion.

[gjc82071]

@ravenslaves I know it'd never happen, but I wish millions of people would rally & continuously chant, what ever phrase would constitute a violation of food disparagement laws. The fact that these unconstitutional "laws" (illegally) exist, only helps prove the current level of corruption that exists in our courts/government! How can it be liable, to "slander" a neutral food object?? I don't mean a "product". What's next, mineral, vitamin, wood, water, fiber, smell, etc, disparagement laws?

[musicgeniusno1]

Quite disturbing.

Thanks for posting Paul.

It's becoming more and more difficult for the ordinary person to be able to make informed choices where food is concerned. " You are what you eat " is something we should all know.

[gothatfunk]

i'm a definite fan. 100% of her videos are really good.

that, plus the fact that one may intelligently disagree with her without expecting to lose respect, speaks very well.

[StrangeGlobal]

You mirrored, AWESOME :) biggest love from me to you!

[gothatfunk]

it just struck me that there's a lot of talk about the right to protest against governments and so forth, but perhaps not enough attention gets paid to the issue in a wider context, and you've outlined one such instance so well.

corporations in the USA have, since the 19th century, had the same constitutional rights as individuals. this all by itself needs to be revisited in the popular consciousness, since their power is completely out of proportion to their accountability.

[ArtificialCleverenAI]

Couldn't agree more. Excellent mirror, Mr Funk, and thank you for it.

If you haven't already watched it, I HIGHLY recommend the documentary "The Corporation" - funny as well as highly enlightening and straightforward disturbing. In part of it they look at the legal merry-go-round surrounding a 60 Minutes program and Fox's outright lying (nothing unusual there) about hormones in milk. Also they look at the privatisation of water in Bolivia. Corps patenting DNA sequences. And much more.