Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

CFR's Jolie has both breast removed without yet having cancer. Didn't anyone slip her the memo?

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 14 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Just because an ugly organization sticks some pretty faces doing nice things out front for us to swoon over doesn't make it pretty and nice as a whole. Or are we to judge books by their covers now?




posted on May, 14 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Just because an ugly organization sticks some pretty faces doing nice things out front for us to swoon over doesn't make it pretty and nice as a whole. Or are we to judge books by their covers now?


You still havent answered the questions I have posed. I can see your whole position here is based upon "CFR BAD, so JOLIE BAD", so I dont see a lot of point in continuing this. This is just downright shameful, and foolish.

Throwing as many theories as you can against a wall in the hopes that one sticks is not a legitimate research method.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Watch the videos. She's already said shes essentially done lead acting.

Correct, she's leading women to obsess over living (forever is the zeitgeist of the era in case you missed the memo) and to go out and get DNA tested to make sure they all can too. And who is quite likely to be the ones helping all the lovely ladies? 23andMe (Google DNA Databanking social networking side project; the same Google that wants every human beings DNA searchable on Google).

Is it a coincidence that on a conspiracy site 23andMe's banner is the first one I see just by chance this morning within 20 minutes of seeing the Jolie headline? You tell me.

NOTE: If you log out, you might see that banner ad too.
edit on 14-5-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


What questions are so important that clearly I'm so dumbfounded (that they didn't seem to me of much relevance)?



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 





Watch the videos. She's already said shes essentially done lead acting
As she has said for quite a while now. Brad Pitt has also spoken of really stepping back, and not making many movies anymore. Choosing to step away and 'throwing away your career', as you claimed, are two very different things.




Correct, she's leading women to obsess over living (forever is the zeitgeist of the era in case you missed the memo) and to go out and get DNA tested to make sure they all can too.
All I can say is "good lord"....this is complete and utter nonsense.




And who is quite likely to be the ones helping all the lovely ladies? 23andMe (Google DNA Databanking social networking side project; the same Google that wants every human beings DNA searchable on Google).
Care to provide a source that they are the ones? No? So its nothing but empty speculation? And really, would you expect a little startup company to be the ones leading it?




Is it a coincidence that on a conspiracy site 23andMe's banner is the first one I see just by chance this morning within 20 minutes of seeing the Jolie headline? You tell me.
No its not, its a search based ad engine. The fact that you google searched it is the EXACT reason it showed up on your ad banner. Go google 'kitchen sinks'. You'll start to see ad banners for them, too. CONSPIRACY!!!!!!

Seriously, you are basing this whole thing on the fact that you dont understand how the ads on websites work?
edit on 14-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


What questions are so important that clearly I'm so dumbfounded (that they didn't seem to me of much relevance)?
Ill repost them, so you can take a second shot:

A)Why is it a conspiracy when a celeb does it, but not when thousands of other women do it and speak out about it?

B)Are you pondering the idea that it is nothing more than a case of someone who can reach an audience choosing to be the face of those that are faced with this choice? That she is doing something GOOD?



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Throwing as many theories as you can against a wall in the hopes that one sticks is not a legitimate research method.


And what is then? Look at headline; pretty woman; trembled so bad she must be brave; yay; women rejoice; pink ribbons; next topic.

I'll stick to looking at all the angles that might have connections.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   
If Angelina actually CARED what one person, or even a host of them, thought about her breasts one way or the other, she wouldn't have displayed them proudly on film.
Geeze, get over your sensibilities, would ya? She has awesome lung protectors. She knows it and she couldnt care less if someone points it out on the net.

I too agree she shouldn't have jumped the gun on this.
Especially considering they just announced a cure for all known types of tumors.

She IS into mutilation though...
So its whatever.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Throwing as many theories as you can against a wall in the hopes that one sticks is not a legitimate research method.


And what is then? Look at headline; pretty woman; trembled so bad she must be brave; yay; women rejoice; pink ribbons; next topic.

I'll stick to looking at all the angles that might have connections.


You provide no connections. You have nothing but assumption. Not one bit of evidence. And you use it to put down a woman who is doing something good. As I said, its shameful.

At least you admit, though, that this is nothing more than throwing theories at walls and hoping they stick. You could have done this whole site a favor and put that in your OP...would have saved a lot of people the time wasted reading it.
edit on 14-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


A> Because this pretty celebrity is the public face of an organization that is very ugly. If you know little of this 'cabal', are you arguing based on ignorance? I'd rather argue based on informed assumptions.

B> Who says its good? I've been pointing out potential reasons that there might be more than meets the eye.

If you read the thread, and look into some of these things you might not have yet heard much about, you wouldn't have to insist on me directly answering these convoluted questions. No biggie tho.
edit on 14-5-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
You provide no connections. You have nothing but assumption. Not one bit of evidence. And you use it to put down a woman who is doing something good. As I said, its shameful.

At least you admit, though, that this is nothing more than throwing theories at walls and hoping they stick. You could have done this whole site a favor and put that in your OP...would have saved a lot of people the time wasted reading it.


Wow. The backwardsness we have going on here is outstanding. Look, if the most/all of the various things I and others might mention might be worth considering, all goes over your head completely, that's fine, unless you start posturing in prickly form over it. This doesn't only apply to this discussion here.
edit on 14-5-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 




A> Because this pretty celebrity is the public face of an organization that is very ugly. If you know little of this 'cabal', are you arguing based on ignorance? I'd rather argue based on informed assumptions.

Can you provide one single piece of evidence that this has anythign to do with the CFR? The evidenec is there to back the idea that she did it because of a high risk of cancer. If you can provide nothing to refute that, your assumption is irrelevant.




B> Who says its good? I've been pointing out potential reasons it isn't.
Lets see, SCIENTIFIC studies suggest that doing this can greatly reduce the chances of getting breast cancer. But you *think* *maybe* they *might* *possibly* be doing this for DNA mining ; and "I dont understand how internet ad banners work, so it must be a conspiracy!"

Which one is more accurate, I wonder....



If you read the thread, and look into some of these things you might not have yet heard much about, you wouldn't have to insist on me directly answering these convoluted questions. No biggie tho.
Or you could simply provide some evidence.
edit on 14-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
edit on 14-5-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I saw this too. I was thinking what the heck? How could you have a double mastectomy without at least having cancer?
So I'm guessing she'll be replacing those aged goodies with some new plastic ones? Nice. Kill 2 birds with one stone.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Has anyone here seen what breast reduction surgery looks like? I have, a long time ago on TV, and its remains to this day, even after all these wars that have happened in the meantime, one of the most horrifing things I've ever seen.

Here you go take a look:
www.youtube.com...

I can't even watch it, and there's hardly a controversial gory movie I haven't seen. Cannibal Holocaust, Faces of Death, Texas Chainsaw Massacres, House of 1000 Corpses, Hannibal Lektor, squirm a bit maybe. The gore going on down at the local plastic surgeons mad science laboratory, now that's scary & repulsive.

Doing it for her family? She put herself in harms ways going to a hospital and having them butcher her like that. Ever hear of a staph infection?

And its all over a maybe. Maybe she'll get it. Maybe they wont be able to beat it when she does. Maybe there wont be any advances in the meantime.

Maybe she could have died, over what ifs that haven't happened. And guess what, she could have waited until she got Stage 1 or 2 and then did this. Then put her life out there on the limb.

Maybe she was paid millions to do it. Is that an outlandish possibility? Would such be any more outlandish over doing it out of nothing but worry-wartism alone?

So yes, whether or not this is partially a publicity stunt, of which actors tend to live by, should be considered, and I have put forth some reasons that might fill such a void. Who benefits? Jolie's Final Act, a publicity stunt? NO WAY I MUST BE A NUTTER KOOK. Shoot the messenger.

Mark my words: many many womens DNA will end up in the DNA Databank system as a result of this, any many mens too. The precident has been set folks. Care to place a wager?

"I say lets stop being perfect... let the chips fall where they may." -Tyler Durden
edit on 14-5-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots


Is it a coincidence that on a conspiracy site 23andMe's banner is the first one I see just by chance this morning within 20 minutes of seeing the Jolie headline? You tell me.
No its not, its a search based ad engine. The fact that you google searched it is the EXACT reason it showed up on your ad banner. Go google 'kitchen sinks'. You'll start to see ad banners for them, too. CONSPIRACY!!!!!!

Seriously, you are basing this whole thing on the fact that you dont understand how the ads on websites work?


Who said I searched for anything? I've known about 23andMe for years, since right after it was founded (see link in OP).

I did however mention 23andMe in Skype to a friend (hows that for transparent).



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   

* * * * * * * ENOUGH! * * * * * * *



Enough with the personal snipes and back and forth off-topic jibes and insults. The topic is "Jolie has both breast[s] removed without yet having cancer", not each other, your personalities nor other celebrities or their cancers.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
 


And? No surgery is pretty. What is it to you, if its what she thinks is right? nobody is asking you to watch, nor is it a topic that 'shock' tactics have any place in.




Doing it for her family? She put herself in harms ways going to a hospital and having them butcher her like that. Ever hear of a staph infection?
You're trying extremely hard to find something wrong with this. Youve gone from "CFR BAD!", to "I dont know how ad banners work but its evidence" to "Its dangerous!" You're all over the board, and none of it has any merit.

Child birth is extremely dangerous. I guess thats not for the family either. Or heart surgery. Or, heck, exercise. She did what she thinks is right for her family. No matter how hard you try to find something wrong with it, it doesnt change a think. Its about HER, and her family. Not you and the fact that you are grossed out by it.




And its all over a maybe. Maybe she'll get it. Maybe they wont be able to beat it when she does. Maybe there wont be any advances in the meantime.
As opposed to this thread, which is based ENTIRELY on maybies? 'Maybe' this is about data mining. 'Maybe' this has something to do with her work with the CFR. 'Maybe' shes doing evil deeds.


The difference is, her 'MAYBE' has some scientific data to back it up. Yours has none.




Maybe she could have died, over what ifs that haven't happened. And guess what, she could have waited until she got Stage 1 or 2 and then did this. Then put her life out there on the limb.
Again, what is it to you when she does this? If she thinks this is the right move for her and her family, who are you do question it?




Maybe she was paid millions to do it. Is that an outlandish possibility? Would such be any more outlandish over doing it out of nothing but worry-wartism alone?

Wow. I hope you see how hypocritical you are.




So yes, whether or not this is partially a publicity stunt, of which actors tend to live by, should be considered, and I have put forth some reasons that might fill such a void. Who benefits? Jolie's Final Act, a publicity stunt? NO WAY I MUST BE A NUTTER KOOK. Shoot the messenger.
Ill leave it with what you said in the second to last line.




Mark my words: many many womens DNA will end up in the DNA Databank system as a result of this, any many mens too. The precident has been set folks. Care to place a wager?
You probably ought to do a bit more research. DNA data mining has been going on for quite a while, with or without Jolie's boobs.


Every time you go to the doctor they have the ability to get your DNA. Every time you go to the bank. to the DMV. To the mall. To the bathroom. This seems like a pretty inefficient way to get DNA from a pretty insignificance portion of the population, statistically speaking, dontcha think?




"I say lets stop being perfect... let the chips fall where they may." -Tyler Durden
And yet you go to all this trouble to call out the fact that she changed her body to 'less than perfect'. You described her, a few pages ago, as 'goddess-esque'. The quote you choose to post does not fit with your arguments. Fight Club is one of the most important pieces of literature in generations-its too bad so many kids completely miss the point of it.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Now that the thread is done being scrubbed...

In review, I've pointed out several interests that should be quite excited about this media spectacle:

1. Google (their dream of everybodies DNA being searchable in Google)
2. 23andMe (Google social networking via DNA databanking, pet project)
3. U.S. Federal Government (DNA databank megalomaniacs rejoice)
4. Cancer Industry (great news everyone, see this proves all is open in the cancer industry and you can count on dying)
5. Transhumanists / Immortalists (risk death to live forever by having your self butchered by plastic surgeon mad doctors, everyone)
6. Corporate Media (who says they wouldn't kill for a good story)
7. Council on Foreign Relations (pretty much all of the above tie nicely into this slot)

I'd say there's just about all of the worlds money tied up across the above network.
edit on 14-5-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Just to show how unusal of a publicity this is, I had my genetic testing done 8 years ago and had inherited from both parents the genes for colon cancer. I think I will have my colon removed to prevent me from developing colon cancer.
As defensive everyone is of Angelina to go public with this, I feel there is a hidden motive, promoting a new trend in preventing breast cancer. Let just get rid of our breasts?





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join