Why are partisans so loud and obnoxious? Why are they ruining our political culture? What purpose could this #####-hat in the article possibly have in doing these things? Somone needs to beat his petty little butt... I hope the Dean of the school gets into his email and finds out that some party agent put him up to it. Little ambitious prick.
If more people knew their history, they'd know that the early republican theorists warned that a system such as ours requires virtue on the part of both those in power and those with the vote... It requires mutual respect and a committment to uphold the honor and signity of the system and the country. Even some of our early leaders knew this... They frowned on blatant partisanship like this... My, how far we've come from our noble roots.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071025/ap_on_...ideo_ambushes_2
Student Hounds Prof Running for Congress
MOUNT PLEASANT, Mich. - A politically conservative student armed with a video camera and a Web site is trying to force a Democratic congressional candidate out of his teaching job at Central Michigan University.
Dennis Lennox, a 23-year-old junior, has posted videos on YouTube of himself questioning assistant professor Gary Peters about campaigning for office while holding a prestigious position at the university.
Some say Lennox is persistent. Others accuse him of pandering for attention.
"What I'm doing isn't about getting media attention," said Lennox, a political science major. "I'm speaking for the hundreds of students, alumni, taxpayers and even legislators who have complained because Gary Peters won't pick between Congress and campus."
In one video Lennox posted online, Peters is seen walking to his car while Lennox asks him several questions, including whether he is angry about his campaign not getting "positive press." Peters doesn't respond.
Peters said in an interview this week with The Associated Press that his university position is part-time and privately funded.
"The bottom line is that people who run for public office still need to pay the bills and still need to work," he said. He drives 130 miles from a Detroit suburb to Mount Pleasant to teach class once a week.
Peters, 48, is seeking the Democratic nomination to face Republican U.S. Rep. Joe Knollenberg in Oakland County, one of the top congressional targets for Democrats nationally in 2008.
"If I was running for Congress in a seat where I had no chance of winning, I probably wouldn't have any attention put on me at all," said Peters, a former state senator who lost a close race for Michigan attorney general in 2002.
He acknowledges it would be difficult to keep his $65,000-a-year job at the university if he gets elected to Congress, but says he will worry about that if he wins. Peters holds the Griffin Endowed Chair in American Government — named for a former Republican U.S. senator and Michigan Supreme Court justice.
Lennox helped start the group Students Against Gary Peters and created a Web site for what he calls "Petersgate." He insists that he isn't targeting Peters because he's a Democrat.
But some see it differently.
"Basically, he's just an extreme partisan. Anybody that's a Democrat, he's going to try to get at," said fellow political science major Eric Schulz.
Lennox's anti-Peters campaign shows no sign of slowing down, though his tactics have generated complaints.
Both Lennox and college Dean Pamela Gates filed police complaints against each other after Lennox requested Peters' e-mails under the Freedom of Information Act. At one point in the brief video, also posted online, Gates it seen gesturing into the camera at close range, and it then goes out of focus, as if it has been struck.
Lennox is heard saying, "Don't touch my camera," suggesting that Peters either touched it or attempted to.
Lennox said he started videotaping Gates after she refused to take the request and ordered him out of her office.
"She accosted, assaulted and battered me," Lennox said. "Whether you're a liberal or conservative, we all have to live and play by the same rules. I seemed to learn something in first grade that you keep your hands to yourself."
No charges have been filed and the university is investigating the incident. But spokesman Steve Smith said that "people get very uncomfortable when a camera is shoved in their face. Employees and students have a reasonable expectation to privacy."
When the school told Lennox he couldn't record employees or students without their permission, he filed a censorship complaint with the American Civil Liberties Union, which is reviewing it.
Peters says requiring permission before filming is reasonable when it involves students' privacy, though he stops short of saying it should apply to public figures such as himself.
"When you run for public office, you've got to have a thick skin," he said.
Peters says somewhat ruefully that he has fulfilled his job description of bringing practical politics to campus.
"Students are definitely seeing what happens when somebody runs for public office in a high-profile race, the types of things they have to confront," he said.
http://indoctrinate-u.com/pages/welcome.html
Mr. Left you really find that moronic do you?
Perhaps you should speak to those who banter and monger in your namesake before casting a stone in a leftist glass house full speech denying mongering fascists who claim free speech rights, while wholly denying others theirs, often and frequently.
Those on the left who in propensity of premeditation and willfulness, shout down and or physically attack, the thoughts and speech of any and all, they disagree with without a qualm or concern, is far extensive and common place act of leftist liberal these days than ever by rightist or conservatives in the USA.
Beyond an obvious fanatical leftist ideology pretension fallaciously principled in democratic values is this obtusely hidden Socialist Marxist fascism, inherent self defined as having exclusivity to and of the 1st Amendment, while wholly willing to deny that Constitutional right to those they disagree with frequently and often.
Oh by the way, that great anti-war gathering of moon bats and freaks, managed to barely get 21,000 in lefty song birds in the haven of lefty’s San Francisco, where a butt smelling contest would draw more. The totals nation wide were pitiful. Dude, that is more than pathetic, is purely exampled as detached self-absorbed apathetic-ism.
The Infamous moron “Don’t Taze me bro!” member of Students for Democratic action, is a professional heckler who has done this type action before several times having been arrest 6 times for attacking speakers at University activities in Florida.
WSU ends ‘hecklers veto’ aid but threatens conservative student’s graduation
It shouldn’t have taken a threatened law suit and being held up to nationwide public scorn but Washington State University officials have stopped paying student hecklers who shout down speakers with whom they disagree.
Unfortunately, the stench remains strong at Washington State University of a Stalinist suppression of political views that deviate from the politically correct academic liberal orthodoxy.
Regular readers of this space will recall from this July column that the controversy began when it was learned university administrators were paying students to heckle the production of a controversial play by a student author.
Intifada Comes to the University of California, Irvine
During a speech at UC Irvine on January 31, 2007, Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes was interrupted by a mob of students (or their sympathizers) from that university’s Muslim Student Union. This incident, which was caught on the hidden video above, was the latest disturbing event in what some are calling the “Irvine Intifada.”
Anarchy at Columbia: Protestors Storm Minuteman's Stage
October 05, 2006
- Protestors stormed the stage at Columbia University Wednesday night, yelling, waving banners and ending the speech from Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrest minutes after it began.
As Gilchrest started to deliver his remarks at a speech sponsored by the CU College Republicans, members of the audience began yelling and cheering. He watched quietly as students rushed the stage with fists raised and displayed banners proclaiming, "No One Is Illegal."
Protesters shout down anti-Islam speaker at MSU
Audience uses chants, obscenities to interrupt British Nationalist's speech
Brendan Bouffard
Lansing State Journal
EAST LANSING - When British Nationalist Nick Griffin took the podium at a Friday night Michigan State University event, he tried to explain how Islam is a threat to Western civilization.
Protesters wouldn't have it.
Hurling obscenities and using chants to interrupt his address, rambunctious student organizations forced Griffin to abandon his speech and allow an informal question and answer session.
Leftist Brown Shirts Shut Down Horowitz Speech at Emory
By Ruth Malhotra and Orit Sklar
10/26/2007
On Wednesday evening, the Emory University Chapter of the College Republicans hosted acclaimed author and activist David Horowitz for a lecture on radical Islam as part of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. From the beginning of Horowitz’s speech, rowdy protesters continually interrupted him and less than half an hour into the event, the crowd became so disruptive that police were called in and Horowitz had to be escorted off stage.
Over 300 people – what appeared to be a cross-section of students, professors, and Atlanta community members – packed into White Hall where the event was held. The audience included a wide range of Leftists from Amnesty International, Veterans for Peace, and Students for Justice in Palestine, as well as Muslim groups such as the Muslim Student Association. In addition, members of “National Project to Defend Dissent & Critical Thinking in Academia,” an organization dedicated to opposing Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week events throughout the country, participated in the protests dressed in orange attire as a reference to Guantanamo Bay. There was also a sizable group of men and women dressed in traditional Muslim garb as well as students wearing Kafiyehs, a symbol of Arab solidarity.
Before Horowitz came onto the stage, the audience members were respectfully asked that if they were going to wave signs or stand up that they move to the back as to not disrupt the view of others. Signs were abundant. Some had pictures of bloodied, bandaged children; others read “Stop Islamophobia.” Another sign read “Axis of evil” and had pictures of Horowitz along with Rick Santorum and Ann Coulter.
Throughout the lecture, many protesters were waving their signs, and yelling “Does George Bush respect anybody’s rights?” and “Are we going to talk about who killed JFK?” The colorful expressions shouted by protesters included the generic, “Racist, sexist, anti-gay. David Horowitz, go away!” and “stop the war for oil,” as well as more creative “why don’t we talk about fascism in America?” and “no more torture in our name.” When Horowitz warned the audience of the threat of a nuclear attack, someone yelled, “Be afraid, be very afraid,” nearly bursting out into an impromptu dance. The audience used a lot of rancorous laughter to disrupt the speech.
As soon as Horowitz commented on radical Islam waging war against the West, someone predictably yelled, “do you think it has anything to do with Israel’s treatment of Palestine?” When Horowitz talked about Christians burning Jews at the stake during the crusades and Jews finding Muslims to be more hospitable, someone shouted “That’s exactly what Ann Coulter is calling for now.” When Horowitz mentioned that Jews and Christians are now treated as second class citizens in much of the Muslim world, a loud applause shot up from the audience. When Horowitz tried to bring up the treatment of women and issues such as female genital mutilation (FGM), the audience chanted, “That’s not Islam.”
“I’ve spoken at Emory University several times and I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Horowitz responding to the crowd as they shouted and jeered. “This is exactly what the fascists did in Germany in the 1930s.” The loud chants, sign-waving, and disruptive gestures continued to escalate from audience members until the atmosphere was so chaotic that even the police present were unable to subdue the crowd.
Horowitz was led off stage and left the campus under tight security, and the event came to an abrupt end. After Senior Vice Provost for Community and Diversity Ozzie Harris announced that audience members should sit down and let the speech continue or risk being forcibly removed, protesters shouted, “Everybody stand up, they can’t take us all!” and “Stand up in solidarity!” At the end, when Horowitz’ speech could no longer continue, chants of “This is what democracy looks like” shot up throughout the audience…
(Color=red] Odd they phased it that way indeed, in Munich in 1934, the Germans said "This is way National Socialism looks like," as marched attacking an shouting down all in opposition to their views who dared stand up to them.[/color]
Although the actions of campus leftists culminated during David Horowitz’s lecture, in reality what transpired is indicative of what has become a toxic environment on today’s university campuses. Conservative viewpoints are repeatedly stifled and censored, and often those who dare to question the left-wing orthodoxy are treated as second-class citizens on campus. Emory University is no exception, and has once again demonstrated the campus community’s utter intolerance and inability to engage in civil debate.
In the days leading up to the event, Students for Critical Thinking mobilized for the lecture and asked students to “Turn Your Back on Horowitz” and “Wear Orange Arm Band for the color of victims of torture in Guantanamo and color of opposition.” Presuming not only the content of Horowitz’s speech but even the motives of Emory’s College Republicans, they stated, “Promoting an atmosphere of fear and prejudice, promoters of the event plan to smear Muslim Student Associations and Women’s Studies Departments as un-American terrorist sympathizers.”
The National Project to Defend Dissent & Critical Thinking in Academia, which was present in full force at Emory, asserts that “David Horowitz and Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week must be thoroughly exposed, repudiated and politically defeated” and has stated that their goal is to “Expose and Defeat This Reactionary Offensive.” Thee posters they were handing out at Emory’s lecture included photos of Horowitz, Rick Santorum, Michael Ledeen, and Ann Coulter, and stated that, “Horowitz has enlisted some of the most extreme, and dangerous, ideologues as spokespeople, and is working with Christian fundamentalists, military and veteran’s groups, and the entire range of conservative and reactionary student organizations in an attempt to hold what he says will be the largest conservative university protest in US history.” …
Of course the similarities are uncanny:
Meanwhile, our freedoms are being thrown away by the handfuls. And for what?
To appease a handful of professional thugs from the same old fronts like Amnesty International, Veterans for Peace, Students for Justice in Palestine and the Muslim Student Association?
Oh, and the so aptly named National Project to Defend Dissent & Critical Thinking in Academia? — What a laugh.
At the very least every one of these groups should have their 501c3 “charity” tax status pulled. Otherwise, isn’t what is happening here unconstitutional?
Aren’t government funds (however indirectly) being used to suppress free speech?
And where, for the love of Allah, is the ACLU?
Oh, here they are, fighting as usual for the rights of the enemies of this country.
From an approving Associated Press:
Thursday, March 09, 2006
The academic freedom campaign could not have paid for a better publicity stunt than the one three leftist professors at Duke University gave it for free Tuesday night. In this case, a cross-dressing feminist professor and her cohorts tried to talk 20 students – male and female – into stripping during the middle of David Horowitz’s speech. With one move, they stripped away any pretense that certain academic departments are anything other than political parties – complete with street theater aimed at undermining their critics.
March 14, 2001
WHAT HAPPENED to David Horowitz at Berkeley was an aberration. No, the censoring of his ideas was not out of the ordinary. As evidenced by last semester's student-mob action to prevent Benjamin Netanyahu from speaking in the city of Berkeley and the shouting down of a talk given by this writer and the subsequent book-burning of a booklet that I had authored, censorship is quite common at Berkeley.
What is truly an aberration is that Horowitz's ad appeared at all in The Daily Californian. As student editor
Daniel Hernandez quite candidly admits, the ad snuck into the issue's publication only because of a major oversight on the part of the student editors. Had they been performing their duties, the editors would have certainly screened out Horowitz's apostate views.
If censorship of conservative ideas is a frequent occurrence at Berkeley, how commonplace is it at other universities around the country?
Burn, Baby, Burn…Newspaper Inferno! A mob of activists stole hundreds of copies of The Cornell Review and held a burning at the Ithaca, NY-campus in 1997.
Censorship, Texas Style Henry Kissinger was scheduled to speak at the University of Texas on February 1, 2000. About 48 hours before Kissinger was to lecture, UT pulled the plug on the event. [I]The move came in reaction to a planned disruption of the lecture by a group of students and professors who call themselves the Radical Action Network. UT Journalism Professor Bob Jensen, a leader of the group, held a "teach-in" about Kissinger to about 200 students prior to the planned address and branded the longtime diplomat and scholar a "war criminal."
Hecklers Cause Coulter to Cut UConn Speech
STORRS, Conn. (AP) - Conservative columnist Ann Coulter gave up trying to finish a speech at the University of Connecticut on Wednesday night when boos and jeers from the audience became overwhelming. Coulter cut off the talk after 15 minutes and instead held a half-hour question-and-answer session. "I love to engage in repartee with people who are stupider than I am," Coulter told the 2,600 people at Jorgensen Auditorium.
That is all, but there are many more examples of not moronic thought, but willful fascist thought, done by our liberals of the left!!!
Thanks, trader, I had these links posted before I noticed that you did as well.
Looks like ML is deaf, as well as dumb..........to atrocities committed by his compatriots.
Errrrr......what were you sayin', Mr. Left?
Looks like ML is deaf, as well as dumb..........to atrocities committed by his compatriots.
Errrrr......what were you sayin', Mr. Left?
No offense, ustrader, but I'm guessing you have a lot of time on your hands?
Frankly, I think you're just very adept with the copy-and-paste function. As for this:
What has been omitted from this snippet is that Nick Griffin and the British National Party deny the Holocaust. That was an issue to many of the hecklers who interrupted his speech. And it was a right wing student organization, Young Americans for Freedom, who invited Griffin to speak at MSU. What does that say about the YAF?
All of which does not excuse the behavior of the hecklers. They are obnoxious, and if their behavior constitutes disorderly conduct, then both the university and the city should take legal action against them. But they are not censors and they are not a threat to the First Amendment. What some people are missing here is that only the government can take away freedom of speech. When request for demonstrations are denied and protest are broken up by police, when people wearing protest tee-shirts are ejected from government hearings and "free-speech pens" are erected to cage anti-government protesters, then we have censorship and threats to the First Amendment.
And what happened in pre-Nazi Germany was that right leaning judges looked askance from the illegal activities of the Nazis. The laws and the Weimar Constitution were not enforced when it came to right wing law breakers. Comparing US college kids heckling an anti-Semetic speaker to brown shirts is no less disengenous than comparing right wing Republicans to brown shirts.
Frankly, I think you're just very adept with the copy-and-paste function. As for this:
QUOTE
Protesters shout down anti-Islam speaker at MSU
Audience uses chants, obscenities to interrupt British Nationalist's speech
Brendan Bouffard
Lansing State Journal
EAST LANSING - When British Nationalist Nick Griffin took the podium at a Friday night Michigan State University event, he tried to explain how Islam is a threat to Western civilization.
Protesters wouldn't have it.
Hurling obscenities and using chants to interrupt his address, rambunctious student organizations forced Griffin to abandon his speech and allow an informal question and answer session.
Audience uses chants, obscenities to interrupt British Nationalist's speech
Brendan Bouffard
Lansing State Journal
EAST LANSING - When British Nationalist Nick Griffin took the podium at a Friday night Michigan State University event, he tried to explain how Islam is a threat to Western civilization.
Protesters wouldn't have it.
Hurling obscenities and using chants to interrupt his address, rambunctious student organizations forced Griffin to abandon his speech and allow an informal question and answer session.
What has been omitted from this snippet is that Nick Griffin and the British National Party deny the Holocaust. That was an issue to many of the hecklers who interrupted his speech. And it was a right wing student organization, Young Americans for Freedom, who invited Griffin to speak at MSU. What does that say about the YAF?
All of which does not excuse the behavior of the hecklers. They are obnoxious, and if their behavior constitutes disorderly conduct, then both the university and the city should take legal action against them. But they are not censors and they are not a threat to the First Amendment. What some people are missing here is that only the government can take away freedom of speech. When request for demonstrations are denied and protest are broken up by police, when people wearing protest tee-shirts are ejected from government hearings and "free-speech pens" are erected to cage anti-government protesters, then we have censorship and threats to the First Amendment.
And what happened in pre-Nazi Germany was that right leaning judges looked askance from the illegal activities of the Nazis. The laws and the Weimar Constitution were not enforced when it came to right wing law breakers. Comparing US college kids heckling an anti-Semetic speaker to brown shirts is no less disengenous than comparing right wing Republicans to brown shirts.
SoloNav... you're not a very sophisticated thinker, are you? Think about the debate in this thread, and post something of value... Your pointless one-liners may add to your post-count, but they make this forum dumber and more cumbersome. Put an end to it, bro.
I have no problem with you adding the above article to the thread, ustrader... It is valuable and on topic. Just as the professor in the original post is being harassed by a jack-azz partisan, many conservative-leaning scholars are harassed and silenced by legions of young hipster neo-liberals. The problem is that these people, from both sides of the aisle simply don't know how to participate in the discussion we need to have in this country. I think its part of the problem and it undoubtedly falls under the category of my post about partisans being obnoxious. It doesn't matter the degree to which I agree or disagree with a given party or group - but its the fashion in which the overall discourse is occurring that I have a problem with. I would be a hypocrite to exclude the muzzling of any person or group who, in good faith, speak their minds and present their research. The scholars mentioned above are people I might not agree with - but they have a right to speak and be heard. Honest people should listen to them and take them on based on the merits of their arguments.
There was a guest on Colbert recently who wrote a book on the political discourse in the country; George Saunders, who wrote a book called Braindead Megaphone. I think he's exactly right in his book... we're all talking and debating about contraversial things, and we're trying to be the loudest and biggest. For one purpose - to drown the other out. We're abrasive when we ask questions. We're masters of techniques that put those we disagree with on the defensive. We aim to win arguments and dominate the discourse - no matter how cheaply and easily. Like these Amnesty-wannabe protesters and undergraduate freshman neo-liberals - they're doing the same thing that guys like O'Reilly and Rush do all the time... they just don't have a platform in the media to let it loose on...
I think ustrader is right to point out that the loud, partisan obnoxiousness is coming from all angles and elevations.
I have no problem with you adding the above article to the thread, ustrader... It is valuable and on topic. Just as the professor in the original post is being harassed by a jack-azz partisan, many conservative-leaning scholars are harassed and silenced by legions of young hipster neo-liberals. The problem is that these people, from both sides of the aisle simply don't know how to participate in the discussion we need to have in this country. I think its part of the problem and it undoubtedly falls under the category of my post about partisans being obnoxious. It doesn't matter the degree to which I agree or disagree with a given party or group - but its the fashion in which the overall discourse is occurring that I have a problem with. I would be a hypocrite to exclude the muzzling of any person or group who, in good faith, speak their minds and present their research. The scholars mentioned above are people I might not agree with - but they have a right to speak and be heard. Honest people should listen to them and take them on based on the merits of their arguments.
There was a guest on Colbert recently who wrote a book on the political discourse in the country; George Saunders, who wrote a book called Braindead Megaphone. I think he's exactly right in his book... we're all talking and debating about contraversial things, and we're trying to be the loudest and biggest. For one purpose - to drown the other out. We're abrasive when we ask questions. We're masters of techniques that put those we disagree with on the defensive. We aim to win arguments and dominate the discourse - no matter how cheaply and easily. Like these Amnesty-wannabe protesters and undergraduate freshman neo-liberals - they're doing the same thing that guys like O'Reilly and Rush do all the time... they just don't have a platform in the media to let it loose on...
I think ustrader is right to point out that the loud, partisan obnoxiousness is coming from all angles and elevations.
QUOTE (LooseCannon @ Oct 30 2007, 05:43 PM) 
No offense, ustrader, but I'm guessing you have a lot of time on your hands?
Frankly, I think you're just very adept with the copy-and-paste function. As for this:
What has been omitted from this snippet is that Nick Griffin and the British National Party deny the Holocaust. That was an issue to many of the hecklers who interrupted his speech. And it was a right wing student organization, Young Americans for Freedom, who invited Griffin to speak at MSU. What does that say about the YAF?
All of which does not excuse the behavior of the hecklers. They are obnoxious, and if their behavior constitutes disorderly conduct, then both the university and the city should take legal action against them. But they are not censors and they are not a threat to the First Amendment. What some people are missing here is that only the government can take away freedom of speech. When request for demonstrations are denied and protest are broken up by police, when people wearing protest tee-shirts are ejected from government hearings and "free-speech pens" are erected to cage anti-government protesters, then we have censorship and threats to the First Amendment.
And what happened in pre-Nazi Germany was that right leaning judges looked askance from the illegal activities of the Nazis. The laws and the Weimar Constitution were not enforced when it came to right wing law breakers. Comparing US college kids heckling an anti-Semetic speaker to brown shirts is no less disengenous than comparing right wing Republicans to brown shirts.
Frankly, I think you're just very adept with the copy-and-paste function. As for this:
What has been omitted from this snippet is that Nick Griffin and the British National Party deny the Holocaust. That was an issue to many of the hecklers who interrupted his speech. And it was a right wing student organization, Young Americans for Freedom, who invited Griffin to speak at MSU. What does that say about the YAF?
All of which does not excuse the behavior of the hecklers. They are obnoxious, and if their behavior constitutes disorderly conduct, then both the university and the city should take legal action against them. But they are not censors and they are not a threat to the First Amendment. What some people are missing here is that only the government can take away freedom of speech. When request for demonstrations are denied and protest are broken up by police, when people wearing protest tee-shirts are ejected from government hearings and "free-speech pens" are erected to cage anti-government protesters, then we have censorship and threats to the First Amendment.
And what happened in pre-Nazi Germany was that right leaning judges looked askance from the illegal activities of the Nazis. The laws and the Weimar Constitution were not enforced when it came to right wing law breakers. Comparing US college kids heckling an anti-Semetic speaker to brown shirts is no less disengenous than comparing right wing Republicans to brown shirts.
Nice try at trying to change the focus, which was that left-wingers are as obnoxious as ML is trying to complain about. I read far more about conservatives being heckled to the point of not being able to speak, and on a continual basis. Aren't liberals in FAVOR of free speech???? MrL needs to look into his own back yard first before putting his face out there to be slapped with the truth.
But, as I say......nice try............to change the focus by focusing on just one example.
QUOTE (LooseCannon @ Oct 31 2007, 07:43 AM)
No offense, ustrader, but I'm guessing you have a lot of time on your hands?
No offense taken. Odd, does it bother you that I have a lot of time to do as I want, when I will, as I will, uninhibited by finances, deadlines, timetables and paces not suited to my needs and purposes?
Thought I have been 100% disabled since 1969, I have worked mostly as a professional contractor for various Federal Agencies including the Dept of Homeland Security. I have also created and sold three businesses, the last one I sold my share in 1998. It was a software company that did technical analysis on Stocks and Financial Markets.
So yes I have all the time I need. is that a problem or a solution to a problem, I long ago solved? Have you done so?
In fact, I probably spend less than 40 minutes here every day or so to be that ONE VOICE that I wish to be. I do not post anywhere else nor desire to. When this site goes away, so will I, perhaps to my blog exclusively, perhaps not, I have the freedom to do what I wish, do you?
I am an investigator, trouble shooter and a problem solver by trade and inclination. You are likely to be amazed at all I do in 24 hrs. I usually like to look at the Hong Kong and Singapore Market openings and then later the European Market openings to see "ahead" as to what I might like to look at the the next day.
Opening Bells
Tokyo 2000-2200 then 2330-0200
Frankfurt 0300-1400 (stay open till 2000)
Paris 0300-1100
London 0300-1100
New York 0930-1600
(All EST)
Frankly, I think you're just very adept with the copy-and-paste function.
Perhaps, Perhaps not. But even with that minor aptness there is much one can say and or prove and disprove in this shallow surfacing dwellings world of willful or ignorantly misinformed or ill informed urban myths and minutia diluted by this generational attention deficit disorder driven by Utopian ideals, yet proven affective, in a far from ideal, rational and utopian's world eh LC?
As for this:
What has been omitted from this snippet is that Nick Griffin and the British National Party deny the Holocaust. That was an issue to many of the hecklers who interrupted his speech. And it was a right wing student organization, Young Americans for Freedom, who invited Griffin to speak at MSU. What does that say about the YAF?
All of which does not excuse the behavior of the hecklers. They are obnoxious, and if their behavior constitutes disorderly conduct, then both the university and the city should take legal action against them. But they are not censors and they are not a threat to the First Amendment. What some people are missing here is that only the government can take away freedom of speech. When request for demonstrations are denied and protest are broken up by police, when people wearing protest tee-shirts are ejected from government hearings and "free-speech pens" are erected to cage anti-government protesters, then we have censorship and threats to the First Amendment.
And what happened in pre-Nazi Germany was that right leaning judges looked askance from the illegal activities of the Nazis. The laws and the Weimar Constitution were not enforced when it came to right wing law breakers. Comparing US college kids heckling an anti-Semetic speaker to brown shirts is no less disengenous than comparing right wing Republicans to brown shirts.
You misrepresent National Socialism entirely, it was in fact a mixture of leftist and rightist purposes and agenda but primarily it was a nationalist and Racist movement, breed from humiliation and defeat seeking a sense of self in a world of despair. It acted leftist in some ways and rightist in others. But in focus it was nationalist totalitarianism using fascist tactics to achieve an end driven by hero worship and national idealism and a dream of utopia where the voice of descent where either silenced and or shouted down.
Sound vaguely familar, there, LC?
Please explain the difference in either example, where subjective prejudgment of what some think should be heard is prevented from being heard and replaced by the presumed proper position by those presuming they know what that is?
In one, for differing reasons, they deny another a right to be heard and to be as they lawful could be, while in the other, they do exactly the same to the affect of not letting them be heard and be lawfully in what they desire to be, merely because it is disagreeable and not in fashion by these enablers of selective free speech descent.
It is not the one but the many willing to silence those they disagreed with that brought the Brown shirts to silence those they disagreed with. Just like it is these college enablers that indoctrinate what is acceptable and not acceptable selectively as if solely what they think is your right and sole privilege to do so. IT IS NOT and it will not stand the test of true Democrats and Republicans, your socialist dreams are doomed here in America but you have yet to get that message beyond your idealist of dwindling numbers consumed by clearly transparent apathetic narcissism.
No offense taken. Odd, does it bother you that I have a lot of time to do as I want, when I will, as I will, uninhibited by finances, deadlines, timetables and paces not suited to my needs and purposes?
Thought I have been 100% disabled since 1969, I have worked mostly as a professional contractor for various Federal Agencies including the Dept of Homeland Security. I have also created and sold three businesses, the last one I sold my share in 1998. It was a software company that did technical analysis on Stocks and Financial Markets.
So yes I have all the time I need. is that a problem or a solution to a problem, I long ago solved? Have you done so?
In fact, I probably spend less than 40 minutes here every day or so to be that ONE VOICE that I wish to be. I do not post anywhere else nor desire to. When this site goes away, so will I, perhaps to my blog exclusively, perhaps not, I have the freedom to do what I wish, do you?
I am an investigator, trouble shooter and a problem solver by trade and inclination. You are likely to be amazed at all I do in 24 hrs. I usually like to look at the Hong Kong and Singapore Market openings and then later the European Market openings to see "ahead" as to what I might like to look at the the next day.
Opening Bells
Tokyo 2000-2200 then 2330-0200
Frankfurt 0300-1400 (stay open till 2000)
Paris 0300-1100
London 0300-1100
New York 0930-1600
(All EST)
Frankly, I think you're just very adept with the copy-and-paste function.
Perhaps, Perhaps not. But even with that minor aptness there is much one can say and or prove and disprove in this shallow surfacing dwellings world of willful or ignorantly misinformed or ill informed urban myths and minutia diluted by this generational attention deficit disorder driven by Utopian ideals, yet proven affective, in a far from ideal, rational and utopian's world eh LC?
As for this:
What has been omitted from this snippet is that Nick Griffin and the British National Party deny the Holocaust. That was an issue to many of the hecklers who interrupted his speech. And it was a right wing student organization, Young Americans for Freedom, who invited Griffin to speak at MSU. What does that say about the YAF?
All of which does not excuse the behavior of the hecklers. They are obnoxious, and if their behavior constitutes disorderly conduct, then both the university and the city should take legal action against them. But they are not censors and they are not a threat to the First Amendment. What some people are missing here is that only the government can take away freedom of speech. When request for demonstrations are denied and protest are broken up by police, when people wearing protest tee-shirts are ejected from government hearings and "free-speech pens" are erected to cage anti-government protesters, then we have censorship and threats to the First Amendment.
And what happened in pre-Nazi Germany was that right leaning judges looked askance from the illegal activities of the Nazis. The laws and the Weimar Constitution were not enforced when it came to right wing law breakers. Comparing US college kids heckling an anti-Semetic speaker to brown shirts is no less disengenous than comparing right wing Republicans to brown shirts.
You misrepresent National Socialism entirely, it was in fact a mixture of leftist and rightist purposes and agenda but primarily it was a nationalist and Racist movement, breed from humiliation and defeat seeking a sense of self in a world of despair. It acted leftist in some ways and rightist in others. But in focus it was nationalist totalitarianism using fascist tactics to achieve an end driven by hero worship and national idealism and a dream of utopia where the voice of descent where either silenced and or shouted down.
Sound vaguely familar, there, LC?
Please explain the difference in either example, where subjective prejudgment of what some think should be heard is prevented from being heard and replaced by the presumed proper position by those presuming they know what that is?
In one, for differing reasons, they deny another a right to be heard and to be as they lawful could be, while in the other, they do exactly the same to the affect of not letting them be heard and be lawfully in what they desire to be, merely because it is disagreeable and not in fashion by these enablers of selective free speech descent.
It is not the one but the many willing to silence those they disagreed with that brought the Brown shirts to silence those they disagreed with. Just like it is these college enablers that indoctrinate what is acceptable and not acceptable selectively as if solely what they think is your right and sole privilege to do so. IT IS NOT and it will not stand the test of true Democrats and Republicans, your socialist dreams are doomed here in America but you have yet to get that message beyond your idealist of dwindling numbers consumed by clearly transparent apathetic narcissism.
What is odd about your ilk, like those who play the race card and or the out to get me cards to often without remote cause and or effect, is you play the 1st amendment card as if your kind had a selective and exclusive right to it alone and that your own inabilities of inactions are the not the root cause of your crying wolf once to often to an affect which makes your voices less heard and significant, not more.
As I pointed out, in total and in context, it is not the students that are the problem it is the enablers of indoctrination, right and left, that are the problem. Where they indoctrinate free speech is a right to deny free speech if it is presumed disagreeable by these elite enabling indoctrinators of the few who assume the doctrine of being PC is a nature right solely endowed on them.
You expunge in some illogical rationality as if your are BI-speeching, excepting in exclusion of speech that is unacceptable to the Loser genre. As if that BI-speech you perch on so right, is good enough for one, but not the other...
I give you facts you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing. No offense intended.
QUOTE
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is afraid of its people.
- John Fitzgerald Kennedy
There is no more fundamental axiom of American freedom than the familiar statement: In a free country we punish men for crimes they commit but never for the opinions they have.
- Harry S. Truman
- John Fitzgerald Kennedy
There is no more fundamental axiom of American freedom than the familiar statement: In a free country we punish men for crimes they commit but never for the opinions they have.
- Harry S. Truman
As I've said on many an occasion...when the righties get their way...someone else gets screwed.
This declaration is partisan, true...but that's beside the point...the real issue is...is it true?
Here are just a few examples...recently Bush vetoed the SCHiP bill... some children and families screwed.
Guest worker program...guest workers screwed(gets to work for a pittance, gets no rights or protections for it).
Bush elected...gays screwed...Iraq screwed, Iran about to be screwed.
Cheney elected...anybody paying anything for fuel or energy screwed, BIG TIME!
Reps elected...US attorneys who refused to do republican party dirty work screwed.
Brownie given job he wasn't qualified for( cronyism)...New Orleans screwed.
Wilson calls bs on Bush's lies during WMD invasion build up...Wilson and wife screwed.
Bush starts war in Iraq...soldiers screwed(Walter Reed is but the tip of the iceberg folks)
Is there partisanship? Yes.
Too much of it? Probably.
But to dismiss the above, the sheer preponderance of it itself, staggering, would be severely negligent and misguided.
After many years of following politics in this country...I don't believe the dems have this level of corruption in them...I'm sure they aren't angels...but I've yet to see them sink to this level of abuse.
Is it possible? Certainly.
Is it likely? I seriously, seriously doubt it.
This declaration is partisan, true...but that's beside the point...the real issue is...is it true?
Here are just a few examples...recently Bush vetoed the SCHiP bill... some children and families screwed.
Guest worker program...guest workers screwed(gets to work for a pittance, gets no rights or protections for it).
Bush elected...gays screwed...Iraq screwed, Iran about to be screwed.
Cheney elected...anybody paying anything for fuel or energy screwed, BIG TIME!
Reps elected...US attorneys who refused to do republican party dirty work screwed.
Brownie given job he wasn't qualified for( cronyism)...New Orleans screwed.
Wilson calls bs on Bush's lies during WMD invasion build up...Wilson and wife screwed.
Bush starts war in Iraq...soldiers screwed(Walter Reed is but the tip of the iceberg folks)
Is there partisanship? Yes.
Too much of it? Probably.
But to dismiss the above, the sheer preponderance of it itself, staggering, would be severely negligent and misguided.
After many years of following politics in this country...I don't believe the dems have this level of corruption in them...I'm sure they aren't angels...but I've yet to see them sink to this level of abuse.
Is it possible? Certainly.
Is it likely? I seriously, seriously doubt it.
QUOTE (ustrader @ Oct 30 2007, 10:42 PM)
Perhaps, Perhaps not. But even with that minor aptness there is much one can say and or prove and disprove in this shallow surfacing dwellings world of willful or ignorantly misinformed or ill informed urban myths and minutia diluted by this generational attention deficit disorder driven by Utopian ideals, yet proven affective, in a far from ideal, rational and utopian's world eh, LC?
Sound vaguely familar, there, LC?
Please explain the difference in either example, where subjective prejudgment of what some think should be heard is prevented from being heard and replaced by the presumed proper position by those presuming they know what that is?
In one, for differing reasons, they deny another a right to be heard and to be as they lawful could be, while in the other, they do exactly the same to the affect of not letting them be heard and be lawfully in what they desire to be, merely because it is disagreeable and not in fashion by these enablers of selective free speech descent.
It is not the one but the many willing to silence those they disagreed with that brought the Brown shirts to silence those they disagreed with. Just like it is these college enablers that indoctrinate what is acceptable and not acceptable selectively as if solely what they think is your right and sole privilege to do so. IT IS NOT and it will not stand the test of true Democrats and Republicans, your socialist dreams are doomed here in America but you have yet to get that message beyond your idealist of dwindling numbers consumed by clearly transparent apathetic narcissism.
What is odd about your ilk, like those who play the race card and or the out to get me cards to often without remote cause and or effect, is you play the 1st amendment card as if your kind had a selective and exclusive right to it alone and that your own inabilities of inactions are the not the root cause of your crying wolf once to often to an affect which makes your voices less heard and significant, not more.
As I pointed out, in total and in context, it is not the students that are the problem it is the enablers of indoctrination, right and left, that are the problem. Where they indoctrinate free speech is a right to deny free speech if it is presumed disagreeable by these elite enabling indoctrinators of the few who assume the doctrine of being PC is a nature right solely endowed on them.
You expunge in some illogical rationality as if your are BI-speeching, excepting in exclusion of speech that is unacceptable to the Loser genre. As if that BI-speech you perch on so right, is good enough for one, but not the other...
I give you facts you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing. No offense intended.
Sound vaguely familar, there, LC?
Please explain the difference in either example, where subjective prejudgment of what some think should be heard is prevented from being heard and replaced by the presumed proper position by those presuming they know what that is?
In one, for differing reasons, they deny another a right to be heard and to be as they lawful could be, while in the other, they do exactly the same to the affect of not letting them be heard and be lawfully in what they desire to be, merely because it is disagreeable and not in fashion by these enablers of selective free speech descent.
It is not the one but the many willing to silence those they disagreed with that brought the Brown shirts to silence those they disagreed with. Just like it is these college enablers that indoctrinate what is acceptable and not acceptable selectively as if solely what they think is your right and sole privilege to do so. IT IS NOT and it will not stand the test of true Democrats and Republicans, your socialist dreams are doomed here in America but you have yet to get that message beyond your idealist of dwindling numbers consumed by clearly transparent apathetic narcissism.
What is odd about your ilk, like those who play the race card and or the out to get me cards to often without remote cause and or effect, is you play the 1st amendment card as if your kind had a selective and exclusive right to it alone and that your own inabilities of inactions are the not the root cause of your crying wolf once to often to an affect which makes your voices less heard and significant, not more.
As I pointed out, in total and in context, it is not the students that are the problem it is the enablers of indoctrination, right and left, that are the problem. Where they indoctrinate free speech is a right to deny free speech if it is presumed disagreeable by these elite enabling indoctrinators of the few who assume the doctrine of being PC is a nature right solely endowed on them.
You expunge in some illogical rationality as if your are BI-speeching, excepting in exclusion of speech that is unacceptable to the Loser genre. As if that BI-speech you perch on so right, is good enough for one, but not the other...
I give you facts you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing. No offense intended.
While I found your first paragraph to be incomprehensible, I don’t disagree the general description of the National Socialist movement you quoted. The Nazis attracted followers from both the totalitarian right and the totalitarian left, and it appealed to the anger many Germans felt over the conditions of the Versailles treaty. Where the Nazis differed from the conservatives on the right and the communists on the left was in their virulent nationalism and their extreme anti-Semitism. The Nazis embraced the Dolchstosslegende, the “stab-in-the-back” theory that the German army, exhausted after fighting on several fronts for over four years, didn’t lose the war on the battlefield. It was lost because of traitors at home; the liberals, socialists, free-masons, and of course, the Jews. And so, by feeding the German people this brand of hatred, it harnessed that anger, rode to power, and took the nation and the world into a 12 year nightmare. That’s a simple, one sentence synopsis of a very complex historical condition. I’m just trying to save space.
What I am calling you on, however, is your use of one type of behavior—shouting down speakers with whom one disagrees—and using that to make a sweeping analogy to Nazism. There were a multitude of conditions that made up the National Socialist movement and it was much more complicated than one tactic. And left leaning students on American college campus today are much more diverse and complicated than the few who shout down speakers.
I will repeat; making analogies between Nazism and any political faction in present day America discredits the argument. To be sure, there are elements on both the right and the left in America that hold anti-democratic and authoritarian views. But the legions loyal to Hitler were unique in history, and to throw around comparisons to them is a disservice to the millions who were victims of Hitler’s followers.
You also used one curious phrase; “the right to be heard.” While the constitution grants us freedom of speech, no where does it mention that everyone who speaks has a right to be heard. If someone were out on a street corner, exclaiming that the 9-11 terrorists were heroic martyrs and that the people working in the WTC deserved to die, that person would undoubtedly be heckled and shouted down.(I also suspect that person would also be picked up and detained indefinitely as an enemy combatant.) That’s a consequence of expressing nonsense in a free society. One risks being called out on it.
Again, if freedom of expression is a concern, we should all be much more watchful of what the government does to infringe upon that freedom, than what a few college students do vis-à-vis some fringe speaker.
And while you are right, Americans should never be afraid of ideas, no matter how odious they are, the expressions of certain ideas don't necessarily deserve a hearing. I would put the expression of Holocaust denial in this category. Some notions are so disgusting and discredited by history that they don’t deserve to be listened to, let alone debated in a civil manner.
Finally, you say you deal only in facts, but much of what you posted is pure conjecture. Without addressing anything specific in my post, you make empty claims like the following: “I give you facts and most of you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing.” You also claim to know what I believe in because you’re familiar with my “ilk.” That kind of straw man argument may fit compartmentalized thought processes, but you’re wrong. I’m not part of any ilk and you don’t know what I believe in. And I will certainly admit that I don’t know what you believe in either.
QUOTE (MrLeft @ Oct 31 2007, 03:14 PM)
As I've said on many an occasion...when the righties get their way...someone else gets screwed.
Hyperbola (Greek ὑπερβολή literally 'overshooting' or 'excess' to the point of evident fault and flaw, afar from, provable fact and evidence of support…except in realm of nutroot leftist's supposition bred in urban legends, created by leftist's mythology to merely sustain their existences. CAN NOT be proven, if so, DO IT THERE LEFT HAND JOB!)
This declaration is partisan, true...but that's beside the point...the real issue is...is it true?
TRUE; “that which consists of provable incontestable fact and or reality.” Thus, a statement is said to be true, when and only when, it is a known incontestable fact easily discernible. Or follows from some other true incontestable statement by means of a supportable valid argument. Or is considered to be self-evident by those incontestable facts and or supportable arguments. Otherwise, there is no such thing as A HALF TRUE or a PARTIALLY TRUE statement, fact or supporting evidence to such.
Here are just a few examples...recently Bush vetoed the SCHiP bill... some children and families screwed.
It is true Bush vetoed the earmarked Pork for votes for illegals and adults, the democrats tried to push through the Congress with their version of SCHIP. You must prove who and how, the Children get screwed if Schip already exists and will be passed, but not as a giveaway pork earmark for democratic votes.
Guest worker program...guest workers screwed(gets to work for a pittance, gets no rights or protections for it).
Now who was the first to offer a quest worker program in the last 6 years, again you must prove how guest workers got screwed and by whom and for what purpose. You have not even come close.
Bush elected...gays screwed...Iraq screwed, Iran about to be screwed.
I await the facts of how you surmise gays, are being screwed, figuratively and literally, only since Bush, and only by Bush, and, not ever before him or by others, even so called progressives?
Second, I await how you can prove what you say is true and deny in proof the Iraqi and Iranians, have not previously been screwed by their own and Colonial Europe far worst and far more often than under Bush. THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER..
Cheney elected...anybody paying anything for fuel or energy screwed, BIG TIME!
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER. Prove by fact who is getting the Iraqi Oil and who is getting most of the worlds oil increases in consumption.
It is true the US uses 20% of the world’s oil produced. Ye,t it is also true we are the third largest producer of oil in the world and produce 40% of all we use as well. While, producing, in trade exports and imports, a full 25% of all the worlds trade, while representing only 5% of its population.
Reps elected...US attorneys who refused to do republican party dirty work screwed.
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER, prove this is MORE than supposition and political allegations or is in fact provably illegal.
Prove this tactic of Presidential privilege has not been more used by your lexicon of LIB-ER ATE-ONS, many more times and even criminally in history.
Brownie given job he wasn't qualified for( cronyism)...New Orleans screwed.
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER,
Prove that in fact New Orleans has not always been and was not a Human incursion disaster merely awaiting the opportunity of nature to reclaim what man had taken from her, like the California fires and Mud slides, the Florida and East coast beach Hurricane targets, that are down range of Mother natures revenge every year.
Prove unquestionably, that it was any more Brown’s and or the federal government’s, fault and duty to be prepared for the possible and in fact, the likely. Than it was even more so for those of the Governor and people of Louisiana, or the mayor and the people of New Orleans and in fact all those affected over the entire Gulf Coast. When nature, has she has proven time and time again, deciding humans had taken to much from her and she wanted it back, as she has done and will do again and again.
Wilson calls bs on Bush's lies during WMD invasion build up...Wilson and wife screwed.
Let me see, how did the Wilson get screwed exactly, they have made many more times the money since their gaming. They are far richer than they ever would have been since their gaming. So prove how they got screwed exactly here, and by whom, and when, and how, if you can.
Bush starts war in Iraq...soldiers screwed(Walter Reed is but the tip of the iceberg folks)
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER,
Prove Bush DID NOT act without UN and Congressional authority written in the usual Congressional and UN ambiguous double speak, leaving the legality provable and as the facts have shown, by no impeachment and or international crimes being charged, all legally done under the law of the nation and of nations.
Is there partisanship? Yes.
PERHAPS TRUE, yet even that is questionable as to whom and to what the partisanship is and is about, eh?
Too much of it? Probably.
But to dismiss the above, the sheer preponderance of it itself, staggering, would be severely negligent and misguided.
(NILE, NATA, NOTHING has no meaning within the intellectual scope of “Too much” meaning more than necessary, now does it?
After many years of following politics in this country...I don't believe the dems have this level of corruption in them...I'm sure they aren't angels...but I've yet to see them sink to this level of abuse.
Perhaps your years on earth have not been long enough to view history or perhaps even bother to look at it, for to say this is to say nothing when you match ineptness and corruption to that majority party who has reigned as much as 70 or more percent of the time, as the majority, not only in Congress but in both the executive and legislative branches of the country, since it has existed.
Convenient truth is afar from real truth and facts, both being something you obviously prefer to demure from as often as possible.
Is it possible? Certainly.
Is it likely? I seriously, seriously doubt it.
That is all!!!
Hyperbola (Greek ὑπερβολή literally 'overshooting' or 'excess' to the point of evident fault and flaw, afar from, provable fact and evidence of support…except in realm of nutroot leftist's supposition bred in urban legends, created by leftist's mythology to merely sustain their existences. CAN NOT be proven, if so, DO IT THERE LEFT HAND JOB!)
This declaration is partisan, true...but that's beside the point...the real issue is...is it true?
TRUE; “that which consists of provable incontestable fact and or reality.” Thus, a statement is said to be true, when and only when, it is a known incontestable fact easily discernible. Or follows from some other true incontestable statement by means of a supportable valid argument. Or is considered to be self-evident by those incontestable facts and or supportable arguments. Otherwise, there is no such thing as A HALF TRUE or a PARTIALLY TRUE statement, fact or supporting evidence to such.
Here are just a few examples...recently Bush vetoed the SCHiP bill... some children and families screwed.
It is true Bush vetoed the earmarked Pork for votes for illegals and adults, the democrats tried to push through the Congress with their version of SCHIP. You must prove who and how, the Children get screwed if Schip already exists and will be passed, but not as a giveaway pork earmark for democratic votes.
Guest worker program...guest workers screwed(gets to work for a pittance, gets no rights or protections for it).
Now who was the first to offer a quest worker program in the last 6 years, again you must prove how guest workers got screwed and by whom and for what purpose. You have not even come close.
Bush elected...gays screwed...Iraq screwed, Iran about to be screwed.
I await the facts of how you surmise gays, are being screwed, figuratively and literally, only since Bush, and only by Bush, and, not ever before him or by others, even so called progressives?
Second, I await how you can prove what you say is true and deny in proof the Iraqi and Iranians, have not previously been screwed by their own and Colonial Europe far worst and far more often than under Bush. THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER..
Cheney elected...anybody paying anything for fuel or energy screwed, BIG TIME!
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER. Prove by fact who is getting the Iraqi Oil and who is getting most of the worlds oil increases in consumption.
It is true the US uses 20% of the world’s oil produced. Ye,t it is also true we are the third largest producer of oil in the world and produce 40% of all we use as well. While, producing, in trade exports and imports, a full 25% of all the worlds trade, while representing only 5% of its population.
Reps elected...US attorneys who refused to do republican party dirty work screwed.
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER, prove this is MORE than supposition and political allegations or is in fact provably illegal.
Prove this tactic of Presidential privilege has not been more used by your lexicon of LIB-ER ATE-ONS, many more times and even criminally in history.
Brownie given job he wasn't qualified for( cronyism)...New Orleans screwed.
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER,
Prove that in fact New Orleans has not always been and was not a Human incursion disaster merely awaiting the opportunity of nature to reclaim what man had taken from her, like the California fires and Mud slides, the Florida and East coast beach Hurricane targets, that are down range of Mother natures revenge every year.
Prove unquestionably, that it was any more Brown’s and or the federal government’s, fault and duty to be prepared for the possible and in fact, the likely. Than it was even more so for those of the Governor and people of Louisiana, or the mayor and the people of New Orleans and in fact all those affected over the entire Gulf Coast. When nature, has she has proven time and time again, deciding humans had taken to much from her and she wanted it back, as she has done and will do again and again.
Wilson calls bs on Bush's lies during WMD invasion build up...Wilson and wife screwed.
Let me see, how did the Wilson get screwed exactly, they have made many more times the money since their gaming. They are far richer than they ever would have been since their gaming. So prove how they got screwed exactly here, and by whom, and when, and how, if you can.
Bush starts war in Iraq...soldiers screwed(Walter Reed is but the tip of the iceberg folks)
THERE IS NOTHING PROVEN TRUE HERE EITHER,
Prove Bush DID NOT act without UN and Congressional authority written in the usual Congressional and UN ambiguous double speak, leaving the legality provable and as the facts have shown, by no impeachment and or international crimes being charged, all legally done under the law of the nation and of nations.
Is there partisanship? Yes.
PERHAPS TRUE, yet even that is questionable as to whom and to what the partisanship is and is about, eh?
Too much of it? Probably.
But to dismiss the above, the sheer preponderance of it itself, staggering, would be severely negligent and misguided.
(NILE, NATA, NOTHING has no meaning within the intellectual scope of “Too much” meaning more than necessary, now does it?
After many years of following politics in this country...I don't believe the dems have this level of corruption in them...I'm sure they aren't angels...but I've yet to see them sink to this level of abuse.
Perhaps your years on earth have not been long enough to view history or perhaps even bother to look at it, for to say this is to say nothing when you match ineptness and corruption to that majority party who has reigned as much as 70 or more percent of the time, as the majority, not only in Congress but in both the executive and legislative branches of the country, since it has existed.
Convenient truth is afar from real truth and facts, both being something you obviously prefer to demure from as often as possible.
Is it possible? Certainly.
Is it likely? I seriously, seriously doubt it.
That is all!!!
QUOTE (LooseCannon @ Oct 31 2007, 03:39 PM)
While I found your first paragraph to be incomprehensible, I don’t disagree the general description of the National Socialist movement you quoted. The Nazis attracted followers from both the totalitarian right and the totalitarian left, and it appealed to the anger many Germans felt over the conditions of the Versailles treaty. Where the Nazis differed from the conservatives on the right and the communists on the left was in their virulent nationalism and their extreme anti-Semitism. The Nazis embraced the Dolchstosslegende, the “stab-in-the-back” theory that the German army, exhausted after fighting on several fronts for over four years, didn’t lose the war on the battlefield. It was lost because of traitors at home; the liberals, socialists, free-masons, and of course, the Jews. And so, by feeding the German people this brand of hatred, it harnessed that anger, rode to power, and took the nation and the world into a 12 year nightmare. That’s a simple, one sentence synopsis of a very complex historical condition. I’m just trying to save space.
What I am calling you on, however, is your use of one type of behavior—shouting down speakers with whom one disagrees—and using that to make a sweeping analogy to Nazism. There were a multitude of conditions that made up the National Socialist movement and it was much more complicated than one tactic. And left leaning students on American college campus today are much more diverse and complicated than the few who shout down speakers.
I will repeat; making analogies between Nazism and any political faction in present day America discredits the argument. To be sure, there are elements on both the right and the left in America that hold anti-democratic and authoritarian views. But the legions loyal to Hitler were unique in history, and to throw around comparisons to them is a disservice to the millions who were victims of Hitler’s followers.
You also used one curious phrase; “the right to be heard.” While the constitution grants us freedom of speech, no where does it mention that everyone who speaks has a right to be heard. If someone were out on a street corner, exclaiming that the 9-11 terrorists were heroic martyrs and that the people working in the WTC deserved to die, that person would undoubtedly be heckled and shouted down.(I also suspect that person would also be picked up and detained indefinitely as an enemy combatant.) That’s a consequence of expressing nonsense in a free society. One risks being called out on it.
Again, if freedom of expression is a concern, we should all be much more watchful of what the government does to infringe upon that freedom, than what a few college students do vis-à-vis some fringe speaker.
And while you are right, Americans should never be afraid of ideas, no matter how odious they are, the expressions of certain ideas don't necessarily deserve a hearing. I would put the expression of Holocaust denial in this category. Some notions are so disgusting and discredited by history that they don’t deserve to be listened to, let alone debated in a civil manner.
Finally, you say you deal only in facts, but much of what you posted is pure conjecture. Without addressing anything specific in my post, you make empty claims like the following: “I give you facts and most of you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing.” You also claim to know what I believe in because you’re familiar with my “ilk.” That kind of straw man argument may fit compartmentalized thought processes, but you’re wrong. I’m not part of any ilk and you don’t know what I believe in. And I will certainly admit that I don’t know what you believe in either.
What I am calling you on, however, is your use of one type of behavior—shouting down speakers with whom one disagrees—and using that to make a sweeping analogy to Nazism. There were a multitude of conditions that made up the National Socialist movement and it was much more complicated than one tactic. And left leaning students on American college campus today are much more diverse and complicated than the few who shout down speakers.
I will repeat; making analogies between Nazism and any political faction in present day America discredits the argument. To be sure, there are elements on both the right and the left in America that hold anti-democratic and authoritarian views. But the legions loyal to Hitler were unique in history, and to throw around comparisons to them is a disservice to the millions who were victims of Hitler’s followers.
You also used one curious phrase; “the right to be heard.” While the constitution grants us freedom of speech, no where does it mention that everyone who speaks has a right to be heard. If someone were out on a street corner, exclaiming that the 9-11 terrorists were heroic martyrs and that the people working in the WTC deserved to die, that person would undoubtedly be heckled and shouted down.(I also suspect that person would also be picked up and detained indefinitely as an enemy combatant.) That’s a consequence of expressing nonsense in a free society. One risks being called out on it.
Again, if freedom of expression is a concern, we should all be much more watchful of what the government does to infringe upon that freedom, than what a few college students do vis-à-vis some fringe speaker.
And while you are right, Americans should never be afraid of ideas, no matter how odious they are, the expressions of certain ideas don't necessarily deserve a hearing. I would put the expression of Holocaust denial in this category. Some notions are so disgusting and discredited by history that they don’t deserve to be listened to, let alone debated in a civil manner.
Finally, you say you deal only in facts, but much of what you posted is pure conjecture. Without addressing anything specific in my post, you make empty claims like the following: “I give you facts and most of you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing.” You also claim to know what I believe in because you’re familiar with my “ilk.” That kind of straw man argument may fit compartmentalized thought processes, but you’re wrong. I’m not part of any ilk and you don’t know what I believe in. And I will certainly admit that I don’t know what you believe in either.
I have to give you credit for wading through ustrader's nearly incomprehensible diatribe of mangled english and garbled syntax in order to make an intelligent response...
The question I have is why bother?
QUOTE (MrRight @ Oct 31 2007, 09:36 PM)
I have to give you credit for wading through ustrader's nearly incomprehensible diatribe of mangled english and garbled syntax in order to make an intelligent response...
The question I have is why bother?
The question I have is why bother?
Of course.............................
And in an alternate universe were Trader a liberal and a poster on moveon or democratic underground you would worship the ground he walks on. You fools are soooooooooo transparent.......
QUOTE (MrRight @ Nov 1 2007, 11:36 AM)
I have to give you credit for wading through ustrader's nearly incomprehensible diatribe of mangled english and garbled syntax in order to make an intelligent response...
The question I have is why bother?
Perhaps because you couldn't from the shallow end of the pool, eh brother. A man of minutia is just that, eh bro, now don't taze me!!!
The question I have is why bother?
Perhaps because you couldn't from the shallow end of the pool, eh brother. A man of minutia is just that, eh bro, now don't taze me!!!
QUOTE (LooseCannon @ Nov 1 2007, 05:39 AM)
While I found your first paragraph to be incomprehensible,
May I help you, it seems obvious and clear, what part is past you?
Perhaps, Perhaps not. But even with that minor aptness there is much one can say and or prove and disprove in this shallow surfacing dwellings world of willful or ignorantly misinformed or ill informed urban myths and minutia diluted by this generational attention deficit disorder driven by Utopian ideals, yet proven affective, in a far from ideal, rational and utopian's world eh, LC?
Cut and paste – minor aptness, does that help.
Cut and past minor aptness = (a tool) there is much one can say or prove and disprove.
Shallow surface dwellings world of willful or ignorantly misinformed or ill informed urban myths and minutia diluted (Meaning willingly dumb downed)
by generational Attention deficit disorder, (meaning trained or bred willingness to surface dwell far from the depth of facts only on the convenient surface instead)
driven by utopan ideals (surely you grasp what that is, your mantra, your core being, then perhaps you do recognize it?)
yet unproven, in a far from ideal, rational and utopian’s world, eH LC? (Meaning Utopian ideals are none existent in this world, you think they exist in eh LC?)
Now does that help?
I don’t disagree the general description of the National Socialist movement you quoted. The Nazis attracted followers from both the totalitarian right and the totalitarian left, and it appealed to the anger many Germans felt over the conditions of the Versailles treaty. Where the Nazis differed from the conservatives on the right and the communists on the left was in their virulent nationalism and their extreme anti-Semitism. The Nazis embraced the Dolchstosslegende, the “stab-in-the-back” theory that the German army, exhausted after fighting on several fronts for over four years, didn’t lose the war on the battlefield.
What planet are you from exactly, they, the German Military got their arse reamed BIG TIME, by the Russian and the western allies militarily beginning in 1942, In North Africa, then in Sicily, then in Itlay, then in late 1941 at gates of Moscow then at Stalingrad, at the battle of Battle of Kursk, followed by devastating defeats at Battle of Normandy, Drive to the Siegfried Line and Battle of the Bulge.
The German Military lost over 5 million dead in the Russian theater alone and another 3 million fighting the Southern and west fronts. They had 80% of their aircraft, tanks and ships destroyed and their entire military industrial complex mostly obliterated and you say they did NOT LOSE THE WAR ON THE BATTLEFIELD, come on, I though you had some intelligence but this insults all here’s intelligence..
It was lost because of traitors at home; the liberals, socialists, free-masons, and of course, the Jews. And so, by feeding the German people this brand of hatred, it harnessed that anger, rode to power, and took the nation and the world into a 12 year nightmare. That’s a simple, one sentence synopsis of a very complex historical condition. I’m just trying to save space.
If you saying that dictatorial Totalitarians bred enemies within that when possible act to defeat them, like your better than now Saddamists, those Islamo-Fascists like, Hamas, Hezbullha, Al queda, The Taliban and those core Islamist enablers the Wahabists and those Islamic totalitarian theocrats in Iran, like the Maxist’s in Cuba and now Venezuela and those hybrid communalist now Elitist Totalitarian controllers in China. You are right, they by their nature suppress the human spirit and will and thus it seeks to be relived from the death grip yoke on their backs of the domination and control.
What I am calling you on, however, is your use of one type of behavior—shouting down speakers with whom one disagrees—and using that to make a sweeping analogy to Nazism.
You can not call out a fact, look up the earlier years of National Socialism and the Ordnertruppen, a body of ex-soldiers and beer hall brawlers used by the earlier Nazis in order to protect gatherings of the Nazi party from disruptions from Social Democrats and Communists but as well to disrupt them in physical and verbal attacks. It was this core who INDOCTRINATED the coming groups as they grew and became more aggressive by denying a voice to those they opposed in disguised descent, then out right thuggery, as they grew in numbers and power.
There were a multitude of conditions that made up the National Socialist movement and it was much more complicated than one tactic. And left leaning students on American college campus today are much more diverse and complicated than the few who shout down speakers.
But I keep saying it you teachers and I know you are one or have been one, of whom I speak, you indoctrinators you enablers like the early Brown shirts who provoke the right to descent as long as it is your acceptable dogma that voices that descent. YOU GET THAT INDOCTRINATE U!
I will repeat; making analogies between Nazism and any political faction in present day America discredits the argument. To be sure, there are elements on both the right and the left in America that hold anti-democratic and authoritarian views. But the legions loyal to Hitler were unique in history, and to throw around comparisons to them is a disservice to the millions who were victims of Hitler’s followers.
Look, I was born, but not yesterday, you pretend this is disparagingly different but if its effect is to disavow and disallow other voices to be heard for what ever reason, that is more Nazi like than American like and you can not spin your indoctrination any other way. To stop another speech no matter the cause or reason is as un-American and Nazi like as it gets.
It is the same duck quacking, seeking to silence voices, not acceptable to a few, as was the truth back then. You ever here your idealist, environmental and anti-globalist’s Nazi terror ist, anti-war anti- everything propagandist you Indoctrinators turn out as they banter the same evil Nazi analogies with as much zealotry and zeal as any early 1920’s and early 1930’s Nazis ever did. Of course you don’t that would be an inconvenient truth and a dishonor to your cause of indoctrination, hoping for idealism with utopan values in world filled with exactly, in the vast majority, the polar opposite, in fact and reality, every where, every day.
You also used one curious phrase; “the right to be heard.” While the constitution grants us freedom of speech, no where does it mention that everyone who speaks has a right to be heard. If someone were out on a street corner, exclaiming that the 9-11 terrorists were heroic martyrs and that the people working in the WTC deserved to die, that person would undoubtedly be heckled and shouted down.(I also suspect that person would also be picked up and detained indefinitely as an enemy combatant.) That’s a consequence of expressing nonsense in a free society. One risks being called out on it.
Again for an indoctrinator U, you are poorly informed as usual. I like the rat trap hyperbolic of 9/11 it was so typical of left brain dementia and academic do nothing brain freeze.
The constitution is more than the sum of its literal words, but as an academic indoctrinator, you would not know that convenient truth, eh? It is a living adaptable thought process reflected and redrawn, adapted and re-constituted to fit changing times through our courts over time.
In that living adaptability which is a clear linage of decisions that demure, the right of speech, generalized in the 1st Amendment. For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants [B]absolute freedom, placing the burden upon the state to demonstrate when (if) a limitation of this freedom is necessary. In almost all liberal democracies, it is generally recognized that restrictions should be the exception and free expression the rule; [/B]
Nevertheless, its boundaries are always being challenged, by new dimensions, in yet addressed specifics of changing times and circumstance. Specific such as the never address before issue, like we are finding out in this new paradigm with the rights enablers of non-state, para-militarism and its operations of terror. That is working its way to be dealt with under the constitution on several levels. International combat by non-state enablers is an issue the world has never had to deal with beyond the boundaries of where it happened before, now in a world were mass death is but a flight away, accountability to those harmed has become a paramount issue to all the world.
Even soon as to the right of those Kansas religious zealots to assemble and disgrace dead US Soldiers at their Funerals. Which oddly was very common in the Vietnam war, but as it was popular to blame and attack the troops then, its agitators and indoctrinators, like yourself, were never challenged legally on that.
They have been now and now owe a soldiers father $11 million. This will be heard and finally we will see how far the left will allow it to go, for the left and its Communalist ACLU, have a vested interest in attack and hate speech protection to valuable to lose to a bunch of Christian religious zealots from Kansas. They will defend them, I am sure.
You are mistaken as to a right to be heard in that your other indoctrinators those Communalist ACLU has ensured that legal privilege endures in many ways but not in all ways.
Courts demurred restrictions on speech that are sometimes characterized as assaults on freedom of speech include the following:
· Defamation (slander and libel)
· Product defamation (criticism of commercial products; sometimes called product libel or product disparagement; for example, the Texas False Disparagement of Perishable Food Products Act)
· Obscenity
· Lying in court (perjury)
· Talking out of turn during a trial, or talk that causes contempt of court
· Speaking about a trial outside the court room after the judge forbids it (subjudicy).
· Speaking publicly without a permit
· Speaking publicly outside of a free speech zone
· Limits on the size of public demonstrations
· Profanity on television
· Hate speech that is defamatory or causes incitement to violence
· Noise pollution
· Speech that contains a copyright infringement
· Company secrets (trade secrets), such as how a product is made or company strategy (Example: Seven herbs and spices of KFC chicken)
· Political secrets: campaign strategies, dirty past/deeds of a politician, etc.
· Classified information: sensitive or secret to protect the national interest.
· Lies that cause a crowd to panic or causes Clear and present danger or Imminent lawless action, such as Shouting fire in a crowded theater
· Fighting words doctrine:(U.S. 1942) "insulting or 'fighting words', those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace"
· Sedition: speech or organization (vs Freedom of Assembly) that is deemed as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws.
· Treason: to talk publicly of the death of all countrymen or the overthrow of the government
So you see, you were wrong, the limitations are relative few and rational. While shouting down speakers because you disagree with them is not one of exception to free speech except where dictators, elitist zealots, and totalitarian governance exists, like among the vast majority of communalist Indoctrinators on our college campus these days.
I find your negativity obtuse but very reflective of your America, the one I will fight against until my last breath. That might be your cynical view that the world is doomed in your putrefied world of gloom values of America and about Americans. It is not mine. We have enough thought police PC.
Again, if freedom of expression is a concern, we should all be much more watchful of what the government does to infringe upon that freedom, than what a few college students do vis-à-vis some fringe speaker.
Some notions are so disgusting and discredited by history that they don’t deserve to be listened to, let alone debated in a civil manner.
I here this rat mongering speech about our liberty being denied all the time. Yet when one asked can you show specifics as to who, what and how these people, like yourself, who vocally reproach in false claims that their freedoms have been infringed upon, there is a silence of deafness and understanding omitted only occasionally by deflections of speculation, supposition, where provable facts and realities are none existent. SHOW ME THE MONEY, LOONEY INDOCTRINATOR!!!
And while you are right, Americans should never be afraid of ideas, no matter how odious they are, the expressions of certain ideas don't necessarily deserve a hearing. I would put the expression of Holocaust denial in this category.
Some notions are so disgusting and discredited by history that they don’t deserve to be listened to, let alone debated in a civil manner.
See that is the Elitist I have inalienable rights mentality where you speak as an elitist indoctrinator who presumes you are so endowed as to decide what deserves to be heard and what is civil or not. Exactly as an indoctrinator, you would assume you could or should put something in the box that does not deserve hearing, that is what your kind, on the left and right, are doing every day.
I would not, no better proof of how the light of truth shines on the darkness of ignorance and evil thought, can be realized and deduced as was the trite expunged at Columbia U by that totalitarian Fascist Iranian Looney and Holocaust and Homosexual denial monger’s own words. Proving the right to be heard is better than selective judgment by a few who assume they have a right to decide.
It is the light that brings us from the darkness, not selective elitist light switchers who assume they are endowed in some way to decide when to have light and darkness…
That is my America, the one were I have confidence that we know better as a group what is right and wrong than some elitist academic and immature indoctrinated narcissistic never sacrificed for anything, socialist inclined professor and or student on our college campuses and or in our government.
Finally, you say you deal only in facts, but much of what you posted is pure conjecture.
LC it is there, you just don’t want to see it. I gave you strong specifics as to what I spoke about, you ignore it, that is your problem, or perhaps more like your intent.
Without addressing anything specific in my post, you make empty claims like the following: “I give you facts and most of you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing.” You also claim to know what I believe in because you’re familiar with my “ilk.”
I think your rant of non-substance just got ransacked there, I gave you now and originally plenty of specifics but you do not want to hear them, LC
That kind of straw man argument may fit compartmentalized thought processes, but you’re wrong. I’m not part of any ilk and you don’t know what I believe in. And I will certainly admit that I don’t know what you believe in either.
As opposed to your Reductio Ad Absurdum and False Compromise deferred on me eh, LC, come on, that a ploy of the obvious.
Actually as you have proven by your posts, you are not a person that seek context and comprehensive views. Proven clearly by your cut and paste past persona that you laid on me that has been always you mantle more than mine.
It is in total a show that reflects you do have an ilk and in that it reflects a great deal more than you think about what you support and thus in that who you are in part but not in whole.
You just live in the shallows of convenient truths and urban myths, seeking out the worst to prove your view of the worst. It is a depth where you avoid diving to a depth for comprehensive enlightenment that shows in a man’s views of what is and is not important, is insight into who he is really and mostly.
Mines here and so is yours as well to a limited degree. But in the darkness of selective elitism you can't see yours, let alone mine.…
That is all!!
May I help you, it seems obvious and clear, what part is past you?
Perhaps, Perhaps not. But even with that minor aptness there is much one can say and or prove and disprove in this shallow surfacing dwellings world of willful or ignorantly misinformed or ill informed urban myths and minutia diluted by this generational attention deficit disorder driven by Utopian ideals, yet proven affective, in a far from ideal, rational and utopian's world eh, LC?
Cut and paste – minor aptness, does that help.
Cut and past minor aptness = (a tool) there is much one can say or prove and disprove.
Shallow surface dwellings world of willful or ignorantly misinformed or ill informed urban myths and minutia diluted (Meaning willingly dumb downed)
by generational Attention deficit disorder, (meaning trained or bred willingness to surface dwell far from the depth of facts only on the convenient surface instead)
driven by utopan ideals (surely you grasp what that is, your mantra, your core being, then perhaps you do recognize it?)
yet unproven, in a far from ideal, rational and utopian’s world, eH LC? (Meaning Utopian ideals are none existent in this world, you think they exist in eh LC?)
Now does that help?
I don’t disagree the general description of the National Socialist movement you quoted. The Nazis attracted followers from both the totalitarian right and the totalitarian left, and it appealed to the anger many Germans felt over the conditions of the Versailles treaty. Where the Nazis differed from the conservatives on the right and the communists on the left was in their virulent nationalism and their extreme anti-Semitism. The Nazis embraced the Dolchstosslegende, the “stab-in-the-back” theory that the German army, exhausted after fighting on several fronts for over four years, didn’t lose the war on the battlefield.
What planet are you from exactly, they, the German Military got their arse reamed BIG TIME, by the Russian and the western allies militarily beginning in 1942, In North Africa, then in Sicily, then in Itlay, then in late 1941 at gates of Moscow then at Stalingrad, at the battle of Battle of Kursk, followed by devastating defeats at Battle of Normandy, Drive to the Siegfried Line and Battle of the Bulge.
The German Military lost over 5 million dead in the Russian theater alone and another 3 million fighting the Southern and west fronts. They had 80% of their aircraft, tanks and ships destroyed and their entire military industrial complex mostly obliterated and you say they did NOT LOSE THE WAR ON THE BATTLEFIELD, come on, I though you had some intelligence but this insults all here’s intelligence..
It was lost because of traitors at home; the liberals, socialists, free-masons, and of course, the Jews. And so, by feeding the German people this brand of hatred, it harnessed that anger, rode to power, and took the nation and the world into a 12 year nightmare. That’s a simple, one sentence synopsis of a very complex historical condition. I’m just trying to save space.
If you saying that dictatorial Totalitarians bred enemies within that when possible act to defeat them, like your better than now Saddamists, those Islamo-Fascists like, Hamas, Hezbullha, Al queda, The Taliban and those core Islamist enablers the Wahabists and those Islamic totalitarian theocrats in Iran, like the Maxist’s in Cuba and now Venezuela and those hybrid communalist now Elitist Totalitarian controllers in China. You are right, they by their nature suppress the human spirit and will and thus it seeks to be relived from the death grip yoke on their backs of the domination and control.
What I am calling you on, however, is your use of one type of behavior—shouting down speakers with whom one disagrees—and using that to make a sweeping analogy to Nazism.
You can not call out a fact, look up the earlier years of National Socialism and the Ordnertruppen, a body of ex-soldiers and beer hall brawlers used by the earlier Nazis in order to protect gatherings of the Nazi party from disruptions from Social Democrats and Communists but as well to disrupt them in physical and verbal attacks. It was this core who INDOCTRINATED the coming groups as they grew and became more aggressive by denying a voice to those they opposed in disguised descent, then out right thuggery, as they grew in numbers and power.
There were a multitude of conditions that made up the National Socialist movement and it was much more complicated than one tactic. And left leaning students on American college campus today are much more diverse and complicated than the few who shout down speakers.
But I keep saying it you teachers and I know you are one or have been one, of whom I speak, you indoctrinators you enablers like the early Brown shirts who provoke the right to descent as long as it is your acceptable dogma that voices that descent. YOU GET THAT INDOCTRINATE U!
I will repeat; making analogies between Nazism and any political faction in present day America discredits the argument. To be sure, there are elements on both the right and the left in America that hold anti-democratic and authoritarian views. But the legions loyal to Hitler were unique in history, and to throw around comparisons to them is a disservice to the millions who were victims of Hitler’s followers.
Look, I was born, but not yesterday, you pretend this is disparagingly different but if its effect is to disavow and disallow other voices to be heard for what ever reason, that is more Nazi like than American like and you can not spin your indoctrination any other way. To stop another speech no matter the cause or reason is as un-American and Nazi like as it gets.
It is the same duck quacking, seeking to silence voices, not acceptable to a few, as was the truth back then. You ever here your idealist, environmental and anti-globalist’s Nazi terror ist, anti-war anti- everything propagandist you Indoctrinators turn out as they banter the same evil Nazi analogies with as much zealotry and zeal as any early 1920’s and early 1930’s Nazis ever did. Of course you don’t that would be an inconvenient truth and a dishonor to your cause of indoctrination, hoping for idealism with utopan values in world filled with exactly, in the vast majority, the polar opposite, in fact and reality, every where, every day.
You also used one curious phrase; “the right to be heard.” While the constitution grants us freedom of speech, no where does it mention that everyone who speaks has a right to be heard. If someone were out on a street corner, exclaiming that the 9-11 terrorists were heroic martyrs and that the people working in the WTC deserved to die, that person would undoubtedly be heckled and shouted down.(I also suspect that person would also be picked up and detained indefinitely as an enemy combatant.) That’s a consequence of expressing nonsense in a free society. One risks being called out on it.
Again for an indoctrinator U, you are poorly informed as usual. I like the rat trap hyperbolic of 9/11 it was so typical of left brain dementia and academic do nothing brain freeze.
The constitution is more than the sum of its literal words, but as an academic indoctrinator, you would not know that convenient truth, eh? It is a living adaptable thought process reflected and redrawn, adapted and re-constituted to fit changing times through our courts over time.
In that living adaptability which is a clear linage of decisions that demure, the right of speech, generalized in the 1st Amendment. For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants [B]absolute freedom, placing the burden upon the state to demonstrate when (if) a limitation of this freedom is necessary. In almost all liberal democracies, it is generally recognized that restrictions should be the exception and free expression the rule; [/B]
Nevertheless, its boundaries are always being challenged, by new dimensions, in yet addressed specifics of changing times and circumstance. Specific such as the never address before issue, like we are finding out in this new paradigm with the rights enablers of non-state, para-militarism and its operations of terror. That is working its way to be dealt with under the constitution on several levels. International combat by non-state enablers is an issue the world has never had to deal with beyond the boundaries of where it happened before, now in a world were mass death is but a flight away, accountability to those harmed has become a paramount issue to all the world.
Even soon as to the right of those Kansas religious zealots to assemble and disgrace dead US Soldiers at their Funerals. Which oddly was very common in the Vietnam war, but as it was popular to blame and attack the troops then, its agitators and indoctrinators, like yourself, were never challenged legally on that.
They have been now and now owe a soldiers father $11 million. This will be heard and finally we will see how far the left will allow it to go, for the left and its Communalist ACLU, have a vested interest in attack and hate speech protection to valuable to lose to a bunch of Christian religious zealots from Kansas. They will defend them, I am sure.
You are mistaken as to a right to be heard in that your other indoctrinators those Communalist ACLU has ensured that legal privilege endures in many ways but not in all ways.
Courts demurred restrictions on speech that are sometimes characterized as assaults on freedom of speech include the following:
· Defamation (slander and libel)
· Product defamation (criticism of commercial products; sometimes called product libel or product disparagement; for example, the Texas False Disparagement of Perishable Food Products Act)
· Obscenity
· Lying in court (perjury)
· Talking out of turn during a trial, or talk that causes contempt of court
· Speaking about a trial outside the court room after the judge forbids it (subjudicy).
· Speaking publicly without a permit
· Speaking publicly outside of a free speech zone
· Limits on the size of public demonstrations
· Profanity on television
· Hate speech that is defamatory or causes incitement to violence
· Noise pollution
· Speech that contains a copyright infringement
· Company secrets (trade secrets), such as how a product is made or company strategy (Example: Seven herbs and spices of KFC chicken)
· Political secrets: campaign strategies, dirty past/deeds of a politician, etc.
· Classified information: sensitive or secret to protect the national interest.
· Lies that cause a crowd to panic or causes Clear and present danger or Imminent lawless action, such as Shouting fire in a crowded theater
· Fighting words doctrine:(U.S. 1942) "insulting or 'fighting words', those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace"
· Sedition: speech or organization (vs Freedom of Assembly) that is deemed as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws.
· Treason: to talk publicly of the death of all countrymen or the overthrow of the government
So you see, you were wrong, the limitations are relative few and rational. While shouting down speakers because you disagree with them is not one of exception to free speech except where dictators, elitist zealots, and totalitarian governance exists, like among the vast majority of communalist Indoctrinators on our college campus these days.
I find your negativity obtuse but very reflective of your America, the one I will fight against until my last breath. That might be your cynical view that the world is doomed in your putrefied world of gloom values of America and about Americans. It is not mine. We have enough thought police PC.
Again, if freedom of expression is a concern, we should all be much more watchful of what the government does to infringe upon that freedom, than what a few college students do vis-à-vis some fringe speaker.
Some notions are so disgusting and discredited by history that they don’t deserve to be listened to, let alone debated in a civil manner.
I here this rat mongering speech about our liberty being denied all the time. Yet when one asked can you show specifics as to who, what and how these people, like yourself, who vocally reproach in false claims that their freedoms have been infringed upon, there is a silence of deafness and understanding omitted only occasionally by deflections of speculation, supposition, where provable facts and realities are none existent. SHOW ME THE MONEY, LOONEY INDOCTRINATOR!!!
And while you are right, Americans should never be afraid of ideas, no matter how odious they are, the expressions of certain ideas don't necessarily deserve a hearing. I would put the expression of Holocaust denial in this category.
Some notions are so disgusting and discredited by history that they don’t deserve to be listened to, let alone debated in a civil manner.
See that is the Elitist I have inalienable rights mentality where you speak as an elitist indoctrinator who presumes you are so endowed as to decide what deserves to be heard and what is civil or not. Exactly as an indoctrinator, you would assume you could or should put something in the box that does not deserve hearing, that is what your kind, on the left and right, are doing every day.
I would not, no better proof of how the light of truth shines on the darkness of ignorance and evil thought, can be realized and deduced as was the trite expunged at Columbia U by that totalitarian Fascist Iranian Looney and Holocaust and Homosexual denial monger’s own words. Proving the right to be heard is better than selective judgment by a few who assume they have a right to decide.
QUOTE
When you deny a voice to be heard, you give it, in that act of denial, support, relevance, and importance, often as not, far beyond what the light of its expression might ever do on its own. – Trader
It is the light that brings us from the darkness, not selective elitist light switchers who assume they are endowed in some way to decide when to have light and darkness…
That is my America, the one were I have confidence that we know better as a group what is right and wrong than some elitist academic and immature indoctrinated narcissistic never sacrificed for anything, socialist inclined professor and or student on our college campuses and or in our government.
Finally, you say you deal only in facts, but much of what you posted is pure conjecture.
LC it is there, you just don’t want to see it. I gave you strong specifics as to what I spoke about, you ignore it, that is your problem, or perhaps more like your intent.
Without addressing anything specific in my post, you make empty claims like the following: “I give you facts and most of you give me, well nothing of affect nor substances, except to use your common mantra of fault, blame, doom and gloom and misdirection in minutia as the essences of all things that you stand for and are, which is what you gave me, in return, nothing.” You also claim to know what I believe in because you’re familiar with my “ilk.”
I think your rant of non-substance just got ransacked there, I gave you now and originally plenty of specifics but you do not want to hear them, LC
That kind of straw man argument may fit compartmentalized thought processes, but you’re wrong. I’m not part of any ilk and you don’t know what I believe in. And I will certainly admit that I don’t know what you believe in either.
As opposed to your Reductio Ad Absurdum and False Compromise deferred on me eh, LC, come on, that a ploy of the obvious.
Actually as you have proven by your posts, you are not a person that seek context and comprehensive views. Proven clearly by your cut and paste past persona that you laid on me that has been always you mantle more than mine.
It is in total a show that reflects you do have an ilk and in that it reflects a great deal more than you think about what you support and thus in that who you are in part but not in whole.
You just live in the shallows of convenient truths and urban myths, seeking out the worst to prove your view of the worst. It is a depth where you avoid diving to a depth for comprehensive enlightenment that shows in a man’s views of what is and is not important, is insight into who he is really and mostly.
Mines here and so is yours as well to a limited degree. But in the darkness of selective elitism you can't see yours, let alone mine.…
That is all!!
QUOTE (MrRight @ Oct 30 2007, 06:49 PM)
SoloNav... you're not a very sophisticated thinker, are you? Think about the debate in this thread, and post something of value... Your pointless one-liners may add to your post-count, but they make this forum dumber and more cumbersome. Put an end to it, bro.
Sorry, just noticed this.The mark of a good communicator is to say something short and terse. Sophisticated thinker?
You're a newbie and haven't been around long enough............ I know because you weren't here when I started and then quit before coming back. And, whodehell but a naive young man would be concerned about anything so trivial as post count?BTW, I'm not a bro. Sorry to disappoint your more "sophisticated" form of thinking. Perhaps, you should brush up on your deductive reasoning.
"The end" should be the sacrilegious use of your avatar to hide your malevolent intent. The "eye" of Sauron would be more appropriate.
You have no idea of my thinking process, do you? I make my living at using thinking processes....... I'm just very busy right now............using my thinking process at my job. I delve into people's minds, and yours is most readable.
Does this satisfy you? Bro.
US Trader thanks for the list. When you see it in sequence, you get a good idea of the rising red tide of facism in the US. The anti-free speech, idea police seem to have beenstrapping on their jack boots as of late.
Next thing you know they'll be trying to disarm citizens during an emergency situation...
Next thing you know they'll be trying to disarm citizens during an emergency situation...
QUOTE (Gore_Lost @ Nov 2 2007, 06:15 AM)
US Trader thanks for the list. When you see it in sequence, you get a good idea of the rising red tide of facism in the US. The anti-free speech, idea police seem to have beenstrapping on their jack boots as of late.
Next thing you know they'll be trying to disarm citizens during an emergency situation...
Next thing you know they'll be trying to disarm citizens during an emergency situation...
LOL, Good one, would that be a run of the mill dictatorial emergency or one where, we just bend over and Kiss or arses goodbye emergency?
QUOTE (Nomad @ Nov 1 2007, 12:11 PM)
Of course.............................
And in an alternate universe were Trader a liberal and a poster on moveon or democratic underground you would worship the ground he walks on. You fools are soooooooooo transparent.......
No, when liberals post incomprehensible gibberish in mangled syntax, they resemble a poor, slobbering Alzheimers victim in an old folks' home who found a computer. You are soooooo transparently supportive of any old slobbering fool who is conservative.And in an alternate universe were Trader a liberal and a poster on moveon or democratic underground you would worship the ground he walks on. You fools are soooooooooo transparent.......
And now, before SoloNav accuses me of smearing a smearer who supports a smearer, I'll admit I wasn't totally respectful to poorly phrased partisan statements poorly expressed by the posters.
QUOTE (ustrader @ Oct 31 2007, 11:58 PM)
What planet are you from exactly, they, the German Military got their arse reamed BIG TIME, by the Russian and the western allies militarily beginning in 1942, In North Africa, then in Sicily, then in Itlay, then in late 1941 at gates of Moscow then at Stalingrad, at the battle of Battle of Kursk, followed by devastating defeats at Battle of Normandy, Drive to the Siegfried Line and Battle of the Bulge.
The German Military lost over 5 million dead in the Russian theater alone and another 3 million fighting the Southern and west fronts. They had 80% of their aircraft, tanks and ships destroyed and their entire military industrial complex mostly obliterated and you say they did NOT LOSE THE WAR ON THE BATTLEFIELD, come on, I though you had some intelligence but this insults all here’s intelligence..
If you saying that dictatorial Totalitarians bred enemies within that when possible act to defeat them, like your better than now Saddamists, those Islamo-Fascists like, Hamas, Hezbullha, Al queda, The Taliban and those core Islamist enablers the Wahabists and those Islamic totalitarian theocrats in Iran, like the Maxist’s in Cuba and now Venezuela and those hybrid communalist now Elitist Totalitarian controllers in China. You are right, they by their nature suppress the human spirit and will and thus it seeks to be relived from the death grip yoke on their backs of the domination and control.
You can not call out a fact, look up the earlier years of National Socialism and the Ordnertruppen, a body of ex-soldiers and beer hall brawlers used by the earlier Nazis in order to protect gatherings of the Nazi party from disruptions from Social Democrats and Communists but as well to disrupt them in physical and verbal attacks. It was this core who INDOCTRINATED the coming groups as they grew and became more aggressive by denying a voice to those they opposed in disguised descent, then out right thuggery, as they grew in numbers and power.
But I keep saying it you teachers and I know you are one or have been one, of whom I speak, you indoctrinators you enablers like the early Brown shirts who provoke the right to descent as long as it is your acceptable dogma that voices that descent. YOU GET THAT INDOCTRINATE U!
Look, I was born, but not yesterday, you pretend this is disparagingly different but if its effect is to disavow and disallow other voices to be heard for what ever reason, that is more Nazi like than American like and you can not spin your indoctrination any other way. To stop another speech no matter the cause or reason is as un-American and Nazi like as it gets.
It is the same duck quacking, seeking to silence voices, not acceptable to a few, as was the truth back then. You ever here your idealist, environmental and anti-globalist’s Nazi terror ist, anti-war anti- everything propagandist you Indoctrinators turn out as they banter the same evil Nazi analogies with as much zealotry and zeal as any early 1920’s and early 1930’s Nazis ever did. Of course you don’t that would be an inconvenient truth and a dishonor to your cause of indoctrination, hoping for idealism with utopan values in world filled with exactly, in the vast majority, the polar opposite, in fact and reality, every where, every day.
Again for an indoctrinator U, you are poorly informed as usual. I like the rat trap hyperbolic of 9/11 it was so typical of left brain dementia and academic do nothing brain freeze.
The constitution is more than the sum of its literal words, but as an academic indoctrinator, you would not know that convenient truth, eh? It is a living adaptable thought process reflected and redrawn, adapted and re-constituted to fit changing times through our courts over time.
In that living adaptability which is a clear linage of decisions that demure, the right of speech, generalized in the 1st Amendment. For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants absolute freedom, placing the burden upon the state to demonstrate when (if) a limitation of this freedom is necessary. In almost all liberal democracies, it is generally recognized that restrictions should be the exception and free expression the rule;
Nevertheless, its boundaries are always being challenged, by new dimensions, in yet addressed specifics of changing times and circumstance. Specific such as the never address before issue, like we are finding out in this new paradigm with the rights enablers of non-state, para-militarism and its operations of terror. That is working its way to be dealt with under the constitution on several levels. International combat by non-state enablers is an issue the world has never had to deal with beyond the boundaries of where it happened before, now in a world were mass death is but a flight away, accountability to those harmed has become a paramount issue to all the world.
Even soon as to the right of those Kansas religious zealots to assemble and disgrace dead US Soldiers at their Funerals. Which oddly was very common in the Vietnam war, but as it was popular to blame and attack the troops then, its agitators and indoctrinators, like yourself, were never challenged legally on that.
They have been now and now owe a soldiers father $11 million. This will be heard and finally we will see how far the left will allow it to go, for the left and its Communalist ACLU, have a vested interest in attack and hate speech protection to valuable to lose to a bunch of Christian religious zealots from Kansas. They will defend them, I am sure.
You are mistaken as to a right to be heard in that your other indoctrinators those Communalist ACLU has ensured that legal privilege endures in many ways but not in all ways.
Courts demurred restrictions on speech that are sometimes characterized as assaults on freedom of speech include the following:
· Defamation (slander and libel)
· Product defamation (criticism of commercial products; sometimes called product libel or product disparagement; for example, the Texas False Disparagement of Perishable Food Products Act)
· Obscenity
· Lying in court (perjury)
· Talking out of turn during a trial, or talk that causes contempt of court
· Speaking about a trial outside the court room after the judge forbids it (subjudicy).
· Speaking publicly without a permit
· Speaking publicly outside of a free speech zone
· Limits on the size of public demonstrations
· Profanity on television
· Hate speech that is defamatory or causes incitement to violence
· Noise pollution
· Speech that contains a copyright infringement
· Company secrets (trade secrets), such as how a product is made or company strategy (Example: Seven herbs and spices of KFC chicken)
· Political secrets: campaign strategies, dirty past/deeds of a politician, etc.
· Classified information: sensitive or secret to protect the national interest.
· Lies that cause a crowd to panic or causes Clear and present danger or Imminent lawless action, such as Shouting fire in a crowded theater
· Fighting words doctrine:(U.S. 1942) "insulting or 'fighting words', those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace"
· Sedition: speech or organization (vs Freedom of Assembly) that is deemed as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws.
· Treason: to talk publicly of the death of all countrymen or the overthrow of the government
So you see, you were wrong, the limitations are relative few and rational. While shouting down speakers because you disagree with them is not one of exception to free speech except where dictators, elitist zealots, and totalitarian governance exists, like among the vast majority of communalist Indoctrinators on our college campus these days.
I find your negativity obtuse but very reflective of your America, the one I will fight against until my last breath. That might be your cynical view that the world is doomed in your putrefied world of gloom values of America and about Americans. It is not mine. We have enough thought police PC.
I here this rat mongering speech about our liberty being denied all the time. Yet when one asked can you show specifics as to who, what and how these people, like yourself, who vocally reproach in false claims that their freedoms have been infringed upon, there is a silence of deafness and understanding omitted only occasionally by deflections of speculation, supposition, where provable facts and realities are none existent. SHOW ME THE MONEY, LOONEY INDOCTRINATOR!!!
See that is the Elitist I have inalienable rights mentality where you speak as an elitist indoctrinator who presumes you are so endowed as to decide what deserves to be heard and what is civil or not. Exactly as an indoctrinator, you would assume you could or should put something in the box that does not deserve hearing, that is what your kind, on the left and right, are doing every day.
I would not, no better proof of how the light of truth shines on the darkness of ignorance and evil thought, can be realized and deduced as was the trite expunged at Columbia U by that totalitarian Fascist Iranian Looney and Holocaust and Homosexual denial monger’s own words. Proving the right to be heard is better than selective judgment by a few who assume they have a right to decide.
It is the light that brings us from the darkness, not selective elitist light switchers who assume they are endowed in some way to decide when to have light and darkness…
That is my America, the one were I have confidence that we know better as a group what is right and wrong than some elitist academic and immature indoctrinated narcissistic never sacrificed for anything, socialist inclined professor and or student on our college campuses and or in our government.
LC it is there, you just don’t want to see it. I gave you strong specifics as to what I spoke about, you ignore it, that is your problem, or perhaps more like your intent.
I think your rant of non-substance just got ransacked there, I gave you now and originally plenty of specifics but you do not want to hear them, LC
As opposed to your Reductio Ad Absurdum and False Compromise deferred on me eh, LC, come on, that a ploy of the obvious.
Actually as you have proven by your posts, you are not a person that seek context and comprehensive views. Proven clearly by your cut and paste past persona that you laid on me that has been always you mantle more than mine.
It is in total a show that reflects you do have an ilk and in that it reflects a great deal more than you think about what you support and thus in that who you are in part but not in whole.
You just live in the shallows of convenient truths and urban myths, seeking out the worst to prove your view of the worst. It is a depth where you avoid diving to a depth for comprehensive enlightenment that shows in a man’s views of what is and is not important, is insight into who he is really and mostly.
Mines here and so is yours as well to a limited degree. But in the darkness of selective elitism you can't see yours, let alone mine.…
That is all!!
The German Military lost over 5 million dead in the Russian theater alone and another 3 million fighting the Southern and west fronts. They had 80% of their aircraft, tanks and ships destroyed and their entire military industrial complex mostly obliterated and you say they did NOT LOSE THE WAR ON THE BATTLEFIELD, come on, I though you had some intelligence but this insults all here’s intelligence..
If you saying that dictatorial Totalitarians bred enemies within that when possible act to defeat them, like your better than now Saddamists, those Islamo-Fascists like, Hamas, Hezbullha, Al queda, The Taliban and those core Islamist enablers the Wahabists and those Islamic totalitarian theocrats in Iran, like the Maxist’s in Cuba and now Venezuela and those hybrid communalist now Elitist Totalitarian controllers in China. You are right, they by their nature suppress the human spirit and will and thus it seeks to be relived from the death grip yoke on their backs of the domination and control.
You can not call out a fact, look up the earlier years of National Socialism and the Ordnertruppen, a body of ex-soldiers and beer hall brawlers used by the earlier Nazis in order to protect gatherings of the Nazi party from disruptions from Social Democrats and Communists but as well to disrupt them in physical and verbal attacks. It was this core who INDOCTRINATED the coming groups as they grew and became more aggressive by denying a voice to those they opposed in disguised descent, then out right thuggery, as they grew in numbers and power.
But I keep saying it you teachers and I know you are one or have been one, of whom I speak, you indoctrinators you enablers like the early Brown shirts who provoke the right to descent as long as it is your acceptable dogma that voices that descent. YOU GET THAT INDOCTRINATE U!
Look, I was born, but not yesterday, you pretend this is disparagingly different but if its effect is to disavow and disallow other voices to be heard for what ever reason, that is more Nazi like than American like and you can not spin your indoctrination any other way. To stop another speech no matter the cause or reason is as un-American and Nazi like as it gets.
It is the same duck quacking, seeking to silence voices, not acceptable to a few, as was the truth back then. You ever here your idealist, environmental and anti-globalist’s Nazi terror ist, anti-war anti- everything propagandist you Indoctrinators turn out as they banter the same evil Nazi analogies with as much zealotry and zeal as any early 1920’s and early 1930’s Nazis ever did. Of course you don’t that would be an inconvenient truth and a dishonor to your cause of indoctrination, hoping for idealism with utopan values in world filled with exactly, in the vast majority, the polar opposite, in fact and reality, every where, every day.
Again for an indoctrinator U, you are poorly informed as usual. I like the rat trap hyperbolic of 9/11 it was so typical of left brain dementia and academic do nothing brain freeze.
The constitution is more than the sum of its literal words, but as an academic indoctrinator, you would not know that convenient truth, eh? It is a living adaptable thought process reflected and redrawn, adapted and re-constituted to fit changing times through our courts over time.
In that living adaptability which is a clear linage of decisions that demure, the right of speech, generalized in the 1st Amendment. For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants absolute freedom, placing the burden upon the state to demonstrate when (if) a limitation of this freedom is necessary. In almost all liberal democracies, it is generally recognized that restrictions should be the exception and free expression the rule;
Nevertheless, its boundaries are always being challenged, by new dimensions, in yet addressed specifics of changing times and circumstance. Specific such as the never address before issue, like we are finding out in this new paradigm with the rights enablers of non-state, para-militarism and its operations of terror. That is working its way to be dealt with under the constitution on several levels. International combat by non-state enablers is an issue the world has never had to deal with beyond the boundaries of where it happened before, now in a world were mass death is but a flight away, accountability to those harmed has become a paramount issue to all the world.
Even soon as to the right of those Kansas religious zealots to assemble and disgrace dead US Soldiers at their Funerals. Which oddly was very common in the Vietnam war, but as it was popular to blame and attack the troops then, its agitators and indoctrinators, like yourself, were never challenged legally on that.
They have been now and now owe a soldiers father $11 million. This will be heard and finally we will see how far the left will allow it to go, for the left and its Communalist ACLU, have a vested interest in attack and hate speech protection to valuable to lose to a bunch of Christian religious zealots from Kansas. They will defend them, I am sure.
You are mistaken as to a right to be heard in that your other indoctrinators those Communalist ACLU has ensured that legal privilege endures in many ways but not in all ways.
Courts demurred restrictions on speech that are sometimes characterized as assaults on freedom of speech include the following:
· Defamation (slander and libel)
· Product defamation (criticism of commercial products; sometimes called product libel or product disparagement; for example, the Texas False Disparagement of Perishable Food Products Act)
· Obscenity
· Lying in court (perjury)
· Talking out of turn during a trial, or talk that causes contempt of court
· Speaking about a trial outside the court room after the judge forbids it (subjudicy).
· Speaking publicly without a permit
· Speaking publicly outside of a free speech zone
· Limits on the size of public demonstrations
· Profanity on television
· Hate speech that is defamatory or causes incitement to violence
· Noise pollution
· Speech that contains a copyright infringement
· Company secrets (trade secrets), such as how a product is made or company strategy (Example: Seven herbs and spices of KFC chicken)
· Political secrets: campaign strategies, dirty past/deeds of a politician, etc.
· Classified information: sensitive or secret to protect the national interest.
· Lies that cause a crowd to panic or causes Clear and present danger or Imminent lawless action, such as Shouting fire in a crowded theater
· Fighting words doctrine:(U.S. 1942) "insulting or 'fighting words', those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace"
· Sedition: speech or organization (vs Freedom of Assembly) that is deemed as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws.
· Treason: to talk publicly of the death of all countrymen or the overthrow of the government
So you see, you were wrong, the limitations are relative few and rational. While shouting down speakers because you disagree with them is not one of exception to free speech except where dictators, elitist zealots, and totalitarian governance exists, like among the vast majority of communalist Indoctrinators on our college campus these days.
I find your negativity obtuse but very reflective of your America, the one I will fight against until my last breath. That might be your cynical view that the world is doomed in your putrefied world of gloom values of America and about Americans. It is not mine. We have enough thought police PC.
I here this rat mongering speech about our liberty being denied all the time. Yet when one asked can you show specifics as to who, what and how these people, like yourself, who vocally reproach in false claims that their freedoms have been infringed upon, there is a silence of deafness and understanding omitted only occasionally by deflections of speculation, supposition, where provable facts and realities are none existent. SHOW ME THE MONEY, LOONEY INDOCTRINATOR!!!
See that is the Elitist I have inalienable rights mentality where you speak as an elitist indoctrinator who presumes you are so endowed as to decide what deserves to be heard and what is civil or not. Exactly as an indoctrinator, you would assume you could or should put something in the box that does not deserve hearing, that is what your kind, on the left and right, are doing every day.
I would not, no better proof of how the light of truth shines on the darkness of ignorance and evil thought, can be realized and deduced as was the trite expunged at Columbia U by that totalitarian Fascist Iranian Looney and Holocaust and Homosexual denial monger’s own words. Proving the right to be heard is better than selective judgment by a few who assume they have a right to decide.
It is the light that brings us from the darkness, not selective elitist light switchers who assume they are endowed in some way to decide when to have light and darkness…
That is my America, the one were I have confidence that we know better as a group what is right and wrong than some elitist academic and immature indoctrinated narcissistic never sacrificed for anything, socialist inclined professor and or student on our college campuses and or in our government.
LC it is there, you just don’t want to see it. I gave you strong specifics as to what I spoke about, you ignore it, that is your problem, or perhaps more like your intent.
I think your rant of non-substance just got ransacked there, I gave you now and originally plenty of specifics but you do not want to hear them, LC
As opposed to your Reductio Ad Absurdum and False Compromise deferred on me eh, LC, come on, that a ploy of the obvious.
Actually as you have proven by your posts, you are not a person that seek context and comprehensive views. Proven clearly by your cut and paste past persona that you laid on me that has been always you mantle more than mine.
It is in total a show that reflects you do have an ilk and in that it reflects a great deal more than you think about what you support and thus in that who you are in part but not in whole.
You just live in the shallows of convenient truths and urban myths, seeking out the worst to prove your view of the worst. It is a depth where you avoid diving to a depth for comprehensive enlightenment that shows in a man’s views of what is and is not important, is insight into who he is really and mostly.
Mines here and so is yours as well to a limited degree. But in the darkness of selective elitism you can't see yours, let alone mine.…
That is all!!
Actually as you have proven by your posts, you are not a person that seek context and comprehensive views. Proven clearly by your cut and paste past persona that you laid on me that has been always you mantle more than mine.
It is in total a show that reflects you do have an ilk and in that it reflects a great deal more than you think about what you support and thus in that who you are in part but not in whole.
You just live in the shallows of convenient truths and urban myths, seeking out the worst to prove your view of the worst. It is a depth where you avoid diving to a depth for comprehensive enlightenment that shows in a man’s views of what is and is not important, is insight into who he is really and mostly.
You give me an appreciation for Nomad. He can state in 10 words what takes you 1,000.
Also it appears you are confused. I was referring to the German military in World War ONE, not World War Two. Perhaps I should have made that more clear for you.
But let’s see if I can accurately sum up your position. Students who heckle speakers are the equivalent of Nazi Brown Shirts, and anyone who disagrees with your characterization is an enabler of these present-day Nazis. And such an enabler belongs to a cabal, an “ilk” who pose one of the worst threats to the freedoms of this great republic. I suggest that this is not a matter of fact, but an act of faith on your part, a personal religion that doesn’t merit debate.
But the next time an anti-war rally is held and counter-demonstrators are chanting pro-war slogans in an attempt to drown out a speaker, or the next time a Democratic candidate is speaking and is interrupted by a heckler, I’ll remember your characterization. Or does it only apply one way?
I’ll sum up my position. If someone were to stand before me and proclaim that the Holocaust never happened, I would exercise my first amendment rights and reply, “You’re full of sh!t.” I wouldn’t sit there and nod and think to myself, ‘Hmmm, that’s interesting. I’ll have to give that some consideration and look at all sides of this issue.’ If that makes me an elitist or a brown shirt, or an enabler of brown shirts in your eyes, I can live with that. I won’t give up my own sense of what is worth listening to and what isn’t, even at the risk of your admonishment.
On the other hand, if federal marshals were to arrest someone for saying the Holocaust never happened, or to arrest me for telling a Holocaust denier he’s full of sh!t, then we would have a First Amendment issue. That is the hypothetical. The historical fact is that many, many people have been harassed, detained, lost employment, been blackballed or imprisoned by the government for what they said, published, advocated or because of whom they associated with. The imprisonment of Eugene Debs, the Palmer Raids, McCarthyism, COINTELLPRO, and the Chicago police riot of 1968 are examples of the government taking away First Amendment Rights. I’m sorry for you that you are unable to concede that simple fact.
As for the rest of your post, expounding upon what I am, what I represent, what I think and who I’m in league with, (see your red, italized words above), it isn’t worth replying to. I’ll only state, since you probably don’t think of me as a friend, your repeated use of the diminutive “LC” or "Lost Cant" is only too obviously condescending. Not that it matters; condescension seems to be your trademark on this board.
You give me an appreciation for Nomad. He can state in 10 words what takes you 1,000.
That is good, I am sure he will be prideful of such praise as you guys seldom stop walking on the water of your self consumed hubris to appreciate much of anything unacceptable to you. As for me, well you always have the shallow in of the pool to wade in protectively like Mr. Right, eh LC?
Also it appears you are confused. I was referring to the German military in World War ONE, not World War Two. Perhaps I should have made that more clear for you.
Perhaps you and Mr Right there in your shallow end of the pool’s attention deficit fixation, need to use a few more words to clarify the subject to which you speak. For looking back, the words linked to your sentence about that do not reflect clearly such a subject literally. Then again, defined extrasensory deception has always been the great asset of those on the left of left, eh?
Nonetheless, if that is what you meant, I accept it, in part, your overview analysis of the WWI German defeat. But, would caveat your absolute statement of NO German Army defeat, as not exactly accurate. In that I agree the German Army was not annihilated as in WWII in defeat, but I would add merely some factual context from the German’s themselves they were facing certain defeat, by reciting “Ludendorff, who decided, on 1 October, that Germany had two ways out — total annihilation or an armistice. He recommended the latter at a summit of senior German officials.” During the entire month of October 1918 Allied pressure did not let up and annihilation was soon to knock the German Army door down, so they capitulated, before the inevitable annihilation that was already standing in their trenches came.”
With the weight of the 100 days offensive, the straining burden of 10,000 a day new fresh Americans troops and importantly equipment, being pressed against a declining Army with no fresh recruiter base at home left. Added to their losses of 6 million troops, along with the national industrial exhaustion of their military Industrial complex, very acutely hastened, when their lost the Balkans, that great and near total source of supplies of oil and food for them, they had only the two choices Ludendorf conclude they had.
So to say they even in WWI the German Army was NOT defeated is a misnomer of their reality and the facts they faced and distorts history as it was.
But let’s see if I can accurately sum up your position. Students who heckle speakers are the equivalent of Nazi Brown Shirts, and anyone who disagrees with your characterization is an enabler of these present-day Nazis.
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously you have not read my post or have selectively preformed a saintly divining of what I said in a Ward Churchill spoofing of “duff-ic-ity.”
I have said it twice clearly and yet you pretend I did not say it, so there is this term perhaps I am sure far over your head.
It is called a pardon and pattern of disparaging treatment that set forth a pattern of behavior wherefrom one incident is not clear as to the intent, but the body of that pattern of incidents, in total and in context, are proof of the intent. So off to shallow end you go. Eh LC?
And such an enabler belongs to a cabal, an “ilk” who pose one of the worst threats to the freedoms of this great republic. I suggest that this is not a matter of fact, but an act of faith on your part, a personal religion that doesn’t merit debate.
B] The way, pray tell are you debating it, get to shallow end with where attention deficit pretense of faux descent is easily defensible, with Mr Right and FIT’s the “hypo-cri-an-ate-or? I did like the Cabal twist to Ilk though, it was telling.. Good show..
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously see one’s willingness to claim a inalienable right of freedom of speech as a dictatorial measure by elitists of whose speech it is that is eligible. As long as those elitists who pretended to stand, in solid American principles, decide which ones are applicable and acceptable to your Indoctrinate U mantra and idioms of Ward Churchill-ian “duff-ic-ity.”[/B]
But the next time an anti-war rally is held and counter-demonstrators are chanting pro-war slogans in an attempt to drown out a speaker, or the next time a Democratic candidate is speaking and is interrupted by a heckler, I’ll remember your characterization. Or does it only apply one way?
You know LC, you are not very good at this game, in fact you are more than bad at it. I would be against ANYONE like that and have said so, as I have the experience and wisdom to appreciate the wisdom of Americans to be able to judge by what is said, whether it has merit or not, but then again in our climate of disunity, who cares what best for all of us, as long as “we are right,” eh, Comrade Indoctrinate U enabler?
I’ll sum up my position. If someone were to stand before me and proclaim that the Holocaust never happened, I would exercise my first amendment rights and reply, “You’re full of sh!t.”
So in doing so, to prove what that you and any others there already did not know, your right in your indoctrination.
Now exactly who is that about eh, Indoctrinator, you or them and or what they said. How elitist, how self-involved of you, to presume anyone else there did not grasp the merit of that person’s argument without your assistance. So by doing so and exalting the obvious, you are speaking to whom, those like you who already know the answer, not those who believe what was said, so in the end you see your right to be ALL ABOUT YOU and your Narcissism as self evidently righteous to deny a voice whose mere thoughts defeat them to the majority to begin with.. SEE you guys don’t do well outside the shallow end of the pool.
I wouldn’t sit there and nod and think to myself, ‘Hmmm, that’s interesting. I’ll have to give that some consideration and look at all sides of this issue.’ If that makes me an elitist or a brown shirt, or an enabler of brown shirts in your eyes, I can live with that.
Obviously in hubris of its al about me, that’s long been transparent only not realized by you perhaps.
I won’t give up my own sense of what is worth listening to and what isn’t, even at the risk of your admonishment.
Now that was a joke right, I mean did you get that one at the anti-war rally fizzle and droop, or sit up a while to deliver it as a coupe de grate to me. LOL
On the other hand, if federal marshals were to arrest someone for saying the Holocaust never happened, or to arrest me for telling a Holocaust denier he’s full of sh!t, then we would have a First Amendment issue. That is the hypothetical.
LOL, Now, do you have such an example to share with the class of these feared abridgment of civil liberties as you so punditry spin then in true Indoctrinate U form and substance?
The historical fact is that many, many people have been harassed, detained, lost employment, been blackballed or imprisoned by the government for what they said, published, advocated or because of whom they associated with.
The imprisonment of Eugene Debs, the Palmer Raids, McCarthyism, COINTELLPRO, and the Chicago police riot of 1968 are examples of the government taking away First Amendment Rights. I’m sorry for you that you are unable to concede that simple fact.
Eugene, really you spin GREAT MULTITUDES and say a little bitty few from the shallow end of the pool. This minutia of few you example are unworthy of being put into a class afar from non-provocateurs who willfully are seeking purposeful confrontation to media spin their positions as if the sky is falling and big brother and all evils government has descended upon us.
Eugene Debs- Your kidding, that socialist Unionist, you think he did not provoke his fate somehow? Hellfire, LC, how dishonest, I mean Pullman was a welfare capitalist who indisputably principled himself on giving fair wages to his workers, then this socialist during the economic panic of 1893, instead of trying maintain a healthy company for long term struck at the worst time when company need concessions to survive. Eugenes rally caused riots and the burning of other peoples property, the President Hoover had to call a national emergency to quile the riots and economic disruption where a few selfish presumptive likes of entitlement, like yourself, would bring many down to please a few.
Palmer Raids- left me see, the theme of hubris is becoming transparent, left wing radicals during WWI using bomb attacks on court buildings, police stations, churches and homes attributed to violent immigrant anarchist groups and radical left wingers.. same song different verse…From them and their deeds came the 1917 Espionage Act… so cry LC, cry hard radicals who bring onto themselves their own demise.
Mccarthyism Now exactly what part of anti-communalism and leftist radicalism do you not grasp that Americans are not going to accept there Indoctrinate U enabler with leftist sympathy?
I think you means COINTELPRO
Again with the idea we should not be proactive in dealing with internal as well as external enemies who act and do things that could be and far more often as not are set in intent to do harm to the country.
Organizations that were (at the time) considered to have politically radical elements. Groups ranging from those whose stated goal was the violent overthrow of the U.S. government (such as the Weathermen, the Original Black Panthers and even elements of the SDS, Students for a Democratic Society), as well as other violent groups like the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party, the Philadelphia MOVE group.
But as and well non-violent civil rights groups such as Martin Luther King Jr.'s Southern Christian Leadership Conference;
Perhaps you prefer we had more activists like Timothy McVeigh, the Simbanese Liberation front, and or more “Inside Job 9/11’s” wink,wink, along along with perhaps several other violent prone groups like them.
Let me guess you are devotee of Noam Chomsky.
Give me a break, you actually think the Chicgo 7, really 8, was not a planned riot of Abby Hoffman’s SDS, the weathermen and the National Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam (MOBE). Who are you kidding…
They provoked the confrontation to get on the news, like terrorist learned to emulate even today, by blowing up large numbers of people, to get on TV.
This is pathetically it was and is far to easy to rebuke, back to shallow end LC, your way out of your depth..
Contraire, I concede you of Indoctrinate U live in a world of fear, paranoia and constancy, searching and hoping for the worst and the most gloom you can monger up. That has been long self-evident.
As for the rest of your post, expounding upon what I am, what I represent, what I think and who I’m in league with, (see your red, italized words above), it isn’t worth replying to. I’ll only state, since you probably don’t think of me as a friend, your repeated use of the diminutive “LC” or "Lost Cant" is only too obviously condescending.
Actually, your right it is emasculating and condescending. But laid beside what you and many who think like you have spewed down range in my AO, my taze is mildly so, at worst, come you’re a big girl you can take it, cause your group have no problem sending rounds down range in my AO, now do you?
Yet when laid beside your persona here, as that is all we have, your elitism and willingness to thrust your views to silence in denial of another’s, is well, at best elitist indifference founded in Indoctrinated elitist Hubris only found in the extremes of the left and right.
Not that it matters; condescension seems to be your trademark on this board.
, now LC, opinions are like arse holes, everyone has one, and truth is most stink as bad as the next, eh LC?
Now you hurt my feelings. Cause I see you think somehow I should think of you as a being, and you, in privilege, you can think of me as an ignorant, wingnut, tazer of condescension only. How trite of me, or was that you? How unsettling and undemocratic of me, or was that you?
I rebuke you, but give you voice, where, if your were to disagree with me, you admit freely, like all liberal boards and especially those at your Indoctrinate U out there, would give me none. Now which is substantially American and condescending in that context, eh LC?
That is all!!
That is good, I am sure he will be prideful of such praise as you guys seldom stop walking on the water of your self consumed hubris to appreciate much of anything unacceptable to you. As for me, well you always have the shallow in of the pool to wade in protectively like Mr. Right, eh LC?
Also it appears you are confused. I was referring to the German military in World War ONE, not World War Two. Perhaps I should have made that more clear for you.
Perhaps you and Mr Right there in your shallow end of the pool’s attention deficit fixation, need to use a few more words to clarify the subject to which you speak. For looking back, the words linked to your sentence about that do not reflect clearly such a subject literally. Then again, defined extrasensory deception has always been the great asset of those on the left of left, eh?
Nonetheless, if that is what you meant, I accept it, in part, your overview analysis of the WWI German defeat. But, would caveat your absolute statement of NO German Army defeat, as not exactly accurate. In that I agree the German Army was not annihilated as in WWII in defeat, but I would add merely some factual context from the German’s themselves they were facing certain defeat, by reciting “Ludendorff, who decided, on 1 October, that Germany had two ways out — total annihilation or an armistice. He recommended the latter at a summit of senior German officials.” During the entire month of October 1918 Allied pressure did not let up and annihilation was soon to knock the German Army door down, so they capitulated, before the inevitable annihilation that was already standing in their trenches came.”
With the weight of the 100 days offensive, the straining burden of 10,000 a day new fresh Americans troops and importantly equipment, being pressed against a declining Army with no fresh recruiter base at home left. Added to their losses of 6 million troops, along with the national industrial exhaustion of their military Industrial complex, very acutely hastened, when their lost the Balkans, that great and near total source of supplies of oil and food for them, they had only the two choices Ludendorf conclude they had.
So to say they even in WWI the German Army was NOT defeated is a misnomer of their reality and the facts they faced and distorts history as it was.
But let’s see if I can accurately sum up your position. Students who heckle speakers are the equivalent of Nazi Brown Shirts, and anyone who disagrees with your characterization is an enabler of these present-day Nazis.
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously you have not read my post or have selectively preformed a saintly divining of what I said in a Ward Churchill spoofing of “duff-ic-ity.”
I have said it twice clearly and yet you pretend I did not say it, so there is this term perhaps I am sure far over your head.
It is called a pardon and pattern of disparaging treatment that set forth a pattern of behavior wherefrom one incident is not clear as to the intent, but the body of that pattern of incidents, in total and in context, are proof of the intent. So off to shallow end you go. Eh LC?
And such an enabler belongs to a cabal, an “ilk” who pose one of the worst threats to the freedoms of this great republic. I suggest that this is not a matter of fact, but an act of faith on your part, a personal religion that doesn’t merit debate.
B] The way, pray tell are you debating it, get to shallow end with where attention deficit pretense of faux descent is easily defensible, with Mr Right and FIT’s the “hypo-cri-an-ate-or? I did like the Cabal twist to Ilk though, it was telling.. Good show..
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously see one’s willingness to claim a inalienable right of freedom of speech as a dictatorial measure by elitists of whose speech it is that is eligible. As long as those elitists who pretended to stand, in solid American principles, decide which ones are applicable and acceptable to your Indoctrinate U mantra and idioms of Ward Churchill-ian “duff-ic-ity.”[/B]
But the next time an anti-war rally is held and counter-demonstrators are chanting pro-war slogans in an attempt to drown out a speaker, or the next time a Democratic candidate is speaking and is interrupted by a heckler, I’ll remember your characterization. Or does it only apply one way?
You know LC, you are not very good at this game, in fact you are more than bad at it. I would be against ANYONE like that and have said so, as I have the experience and wisdom to appreciate the wisdom of Americans to be able to judge by what is said, whether it has merit or not, but then again in our climate of disunity, who cares what best for all of us, as long as “we are right,” eh, Comrade Indoctrinate U enabler?
I’ll sum up my position. If someone were to stand before me and proclaim that the Holocaust never happened, I would exercise my first amendment rights and reply, “You’re full of sh!t.”
So in doing so, to prove what that you and any others there already did not know, your right in your indoctrination.
Now exactly who is that about eh, Indoctrinator, you or them and or what they said. How elitist, how self-involved of you, to presume anyone else there did not grasp the merit of that person’s argument without your assistance. So by doing so and exalting the obvious, you are speaking to whom, those like you who already know the answer, not those who believe what was said, so in the end you see your right to be ALL ABOUT YOU and your Narcissism as self evidently righteous to deny a voice whose mere thoughts defeat them to the majority to begin with.. SEE you guys don’t do well outside the shallow end of the pool.
I wouldn’t sit there and nod and think to myself, ‘Hmmm, that’s interesting. I’ll have to give that some consideration and look at all sides of this issue.’ If that makes me an elitist or a brown shirt, or an enabler of brown shirts in your eyes, I can live with that.
Obviously in hubris of its al about me, that’s long been transparent only not realized by you perhaps.
I won’t give up my own sense of what is worth listening to and what isn’t, even at the risk of your admonishment.
Now that was a joke right, I mean did you get that one at the anti-war rally fizzle and droop, or sit up a while to deliver it as a coupe de grate to me. LOL
On the other hand, if federal marshals were to arrest someone for saying the Holocaust never happened, or to arrest me for telling a Holocaust denier he’s full of sh!t, then we would have a First Amendment issue. That is the hypothetical.
LOL, Now, do you have such an example to share with the class of these feared abridgment of civil liberties as you so punditry spin then in true Indoctrinate U form and substance?
The historical fact is that many, many people have been harassed, detained, lost employment, been blackballed or imprisoned by the government for what they said, published, advocated or because of whom they associated with.
The imprisonment of Eugene Debs, the Palmer Raids, McCarthyism, COINTELLPRO, and the Chicago police riot of 1968 are examples of the government taking away First Amendment Rights. I’m sorry for you that you are unable to concede that simple fact.
Eugene, really you spin GREAT MULTITUDES and say a little bitty few from the shallow end of the pool. This minutia of few you example are unworthy of being put into a class afar from non-provocateurs who willfully are seeking purposeful confrontation to media spin their positions as if the sky is falling and big brother and all evils government has descended upon us.
Eugene Debs- Your kidding, that socialist Unionist, you think he did not provoke his fate somehow? Hellfire, LC, how dishonest, I mean Pullman was a welfare capitalist who indisputably principled himself on giving fair wages to his workers, then this socialist during the economic panic of 1893, instead of trying maintain a healthy company for long term struck at the worst time when company need concessions to survive. Eugenes rally caused riots and the burning of other peoples property, the President Hoover had to call a national emergency to quile the riots and economic disruption where a few selfish presumptive likes of entitlement, like yourself, would bring many down to please a few.
Palmer Raids- left me see, the theme of hubris is becoming transparent, left wing radicals during WWI using bomb attacks on court buildings, police stations, churches and homes attributed to violent immigrant anarchist groups and radical left wingers.. same song different verse…From them and their deeds came the 1917 Espionage Act… so cry LC, cry hard radicals who bring onto themselves their own demise.
Mccarthyism Now exactly what part of anti-communalism and leftist radicalism do you not grasp that Americans are not going to accept there Indoctrinate U enabler with leftist sympathy?
I think you means COINTELPRO
Again with the idea we should not be proactive in dealing with internal as well as external enemies who act and do things that could be and far more often as not are set in intent to do harm to the country.
Organizations that were (at the time) considered to have politically radical elements. Groups ranging from those whose stated goal was the violent overthrow of the U.S. government (such as the Weathermen, the Original Black Panthers and even elements of the SDS, Students for a Democratic Society), as well as other violent groups like the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party, the Philadelphia MOVE group.
But as and well non-violent civil rights groups such as Martin Luther King Jr.'s Southern Christian Leadership Conference;
Perhaps you prefer we had more activists like Timothy McVeigh, the Simbanese Liberation front, and or more “Inside Job 9/11’s” wink,wink, along along with perhaps several other violent prone groups like them.
Let me guess you are devotee of Noam Chomsky.
Give me a break, you actually think the Chicgo 7, really 8, was not a planned riot of Abby Hoffman’s SDS, the weathermen and the National Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam (MOBE). Who are you kidding…
They provoked the confrontation to get on the news, like terrorist learned to emulate even today, by blowing up large numbers of people, to get on TV.
This is pathetically it was and is far to easy to rebuke, back to shallow end LC, your way out of your depth..
Contraire, I concede you of Indoctrinate U live in a world of fear, paranoia and constancy, searching and hoping for the worst and the most gloom you can monger up. That has been long self-evident.
As for the rest of your post, expounding upon what I am, what I represent, what I think and who I’m in league with, (see your red, italized words above), it isn’t worth replying to. I’ll only state, since you probably don’t think of me as a friend, your repeated use of the diminutive “LC” or "Lost Cant" is only too obviously condescending.
Actually, your right it is emasculating and condescending. But laid beside what you and many who think like you have spewed down range in my AO, my taze is mildly so, at worst, come you’re a big girl you can take it, cause your group have no problem sending rounds down range in my AO, now do you?
Yet when laid beside your persona here, as that is all we have, your elitism and willingness to thrust your views to silence in denial of another’s, is well, at best elitist indifference founded in Indoctrinated elitist Hubris only found in the extremes of the left and right.
Not that it matters; condescension seems to be your trademark on this board.
, now LC, opinions are like arse holes, everyone has one, and truth is most stink as bad as the next, eh LC?
Now you hurt my feelings. Cause I see you think somehow I should think of you as a being, and you, in privilege, you can think of me as an ignorant, wingnut, tazer of condescension only. How trite of me, or was that you? How unsettling and undemocratic of me, or was that you?
I rebuke you, but give you voice, where, if your were to disagree with me, you admit freely, like all liberal boards and especially those at your Indoctrinate U out there, would give me none. Now which is substantially American and condescending in that context, eh LC?
That is all!!
QUOTE (ustrader @ Nov 2 2007, 09:32 PM)
You give me an appreciation for Nomad. He can state in 10 words what takes you 1,000.
That is good, I am sure he will be prideful of such praise as you guys seldom stop walking on the water of your self consumed hubris to appreciate much of anything unacceptable to you. As for me, well you always have the shallow in of the pool to wade in protectively like Mr. Right, eh LC?
Also it appears you are confused. I was referring to the German military in World War ONE, not World War Two. Perhaps I should have made that more clear for you.
Perhaps you and Mr Right there in your shallow end of the pool’s attention deficit fixation, need to use a few more words to clarify the subject to which you speak. For looking back, the words linked to your sentence about that do not reflect clearly such a subject literally. Then again, defined extrasensory deception has always been the great asset of those on the left of left, eh?
Nonetheless, if that is what you meant, I accept it, in part, your overview analysis of the WWI German defeat. But, would caveat your absolute statement of NO German Army defeat, as not exactly accurate. In that I agree the German Army was not annihilated as in WWII in defeat, but I would add merely some factual context from the German’s themselves they were facing certain defeat, by reciting “Ludendorff, who decided, on 1 October, that Germany had two ways out — total annihilation or an armistice. He recommended the latter at a summit of senior German officials.” During the entire month of October 1918 Allied pressure did not let up and annihilation was soon to knock the German Army door down, so they capitulated, before the inevitable annihilation that was already standing in their trenches came.”
With the weight of the 100 days offensive, the straining burden of 10,000 a day new fresh Americans troops and importantly equipment, being pressed against a declining Army with no fresh recruiter base at home left. Added to their losses of 6 million troops, along with the national industrial exhaustion of their military Industrial complex, very acutely hastened, when their lost the Balkans, that great and near total source of supplies of oil and food for them, they had only the two choices Ludendorf conclude they had.
So to say they even in WWI the German Army was NOT defeated is a misnomer of their reality and the facts they faced and distorts history as it was.
But let’s see if I can accurately sum up your position. Students who heckle speakers are the equivalent of Nazi Brown Shirts, and anyone who disagrees with your characterization is an enabler of these present-day Nazis.
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously you have not read my post or have selectively preformed a saintly divining of what I said in a Ward Churchill spoofing of “duff-ic-ity.”
I have said it twice clearly and yet you pretend I did not say it, so there is this term perhaps I am sure far over your head.
It is called a pardon and pattern of disparaging treatment that set forth a pattern of behavior wherefrom one incident is not clear as to the intent, but the body of that pattern of incidents, in total and in context, are proof of the intent. So off to shallow end you go. Eh LC?
And such an enabler belongs to a cabal, an “ilk” who pose one of the worst threats to the freedoms of this great republic. I suggest that this is not a matter of fact, but an act of faith on your part, a personal religion that doesn’t merit debate.
B] The way, pray tell are you debating it, get to shallow end with where attention deficit pretense of faux descent is easily defensible, with Mr Right and FIT’s the “hypo-cri-an-ate-or? I did like the Cabal twist to Ilk though, it was telling.. Good show..
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously see one’s willingness to claim a inalienable right of freedom of speech as a dictatorial measure by elitists of whose speech it is that is eligible. As long as those elitists who pretended to stand, in solid American principles, decide which ones are applicable and acceptable to your Indoctrinate U mantra and idioms of Ward Churchill-ian “duff-ic-ity.”[/B]
But the next time an anti-war rally is held and counter-demonstrators are chanting pro-war slogans in an attempt to drown out a speaker, or the next time a Democratic candidate is speaking and is interrupted by a heckler, I’ll remember your characterization. Or does it only apply one way?
You know LC, you are not very good at this game, in fact you are more than bad at it. I would be against ANYONE like that and have said so, as I have the experience and wisdom to appreciate the wisdom of Americans to be able to judge by what is said, whether it has merit or not, but then again in our climate of disunity, who cares what best for all of us, as long as “we are right,” eh, Comrade Indoctrinate U enabler?
I’ll sum up my position. If someone were to stand before me and proclaim that the Holocaust never happened, I would exercise my first amendment rights and reply, “You’re full of sh!t.”
So in doing so, to prove what that you and any others there already did not know, your right in your indoctrination.
Now exactly who is that about eh, Indoctrinator, you or them and or what they said. How elitist, how self-involved of you, to presume anyone else there did not grasp the merit of that person’s argument without your assistance. So by doing so and exalting the obvious, you are speaking to whom, those like you who already know the answer, not those who believe what was said, so in the end you see your right to be ALL ABOUT YOU and your Narcissism as self evidently righteous to deny a voice whose mere thoughts defeat them to the majority to begin with.. SEE you guys don’t do well outside the shallow end of the pool.
I wouldn’t sit there and nod and think to myself, ‘Hmmm, that’s interesting. I’ll have to give that some consideration and look at all sides of this issue.’ If that makes me an elitist or a brown shirt, or an enabler of brown shirts in your eyes, I can live with that.
Obviously in hubris of its al about me, that’s long been transparent only not realized by you perhaps.
I won’t give up my own sense of what is worth listening to and what isn’t, even at the risk of your admonishment.
Now that was a joke right, I mean did you get that one at the anti-war rally fizzle and droop, or sit up a while to deliver it as a coupe de grate to me. LOL
On the other hand, if federal marshals were to arrest someone for saying the Holocaust never happened, or to arrest me for telling a Holocaust denier he’s full of sh!t, then we would have a First Amendment issue. That is the hypothetical.
LOL, Now, do you have such an example to share with the class of these feared abridgment of civil liberties as you so punditry spin then in true Indoctrinate U form and substance?
The historical fact is that many, many people have been harassed, detained, lost employment, been blackballed or imprisoned by the government for what they said, published, advocated or because of whom they associated with.
The imprisonment of Eugene Debs, the Palmer Raids, McCarthyism, COINTELLPRO, and the Chicago police riot of 1968 are examples of the government taking away First Amendment Rights. I’m sorry for you that you are unable to concede that simple fact.
Eugene, really you spin GREAT MULTITUDES and say a little bitty few from the shallow end of the pool. This minutia of few you example are unworthy of being put into a class afar from non-provocateurs who willfully are seeking purposeful confrontation to media spin their positions as if the sky is falling and big brother and all evils government has descended upon us.
Eugene Debs- Your kidding, that socialist Unionist, you think he did not provoke his fate somehow? Hellfire, LC, how dishonest, I mean Pullman was a welfare capitalist who indisputably principled himself on giving fair wages to his workers, then this socialist during the economic panic of 1893, instead of trying maintain a healthy company for long term struck at the worst time when company need concessions to survive. Eugenes rally caused riots and the burning of other peoples property, the President Hoover had to call a national emergency to quile the riots and economic disruption where a few selfish presumptive likes of entitlement, like yourself, would bring many down to please a few.
Palmer Raids- left me see, the theme of hubris is becoming transparent, left wing radicals during WWI using bomb attacks on court buildings, police stations, churches and homes attributed to violent immigrant anarchist groups and radical left wingers.. same song different verse…From them and their deeds came the 1917 Espionage Act… so cry LC, cry hard radicals who bring onto themselves their own demise.
Mccarthyism Now exactly what part of anti-communalism and leftist radicalism do you not grasp that Americans are not going to accept there Indoctrinate U enabler with leftist sympathy?
I think you means COINTELPRO
Again with the idea we should not be proactive in dealing with internal as well as external enemies who act and do things that could be and far more often as not are set in intent to do harm to the country.
Organizations that were (at the time) considered to have politically radical elements. Groups ranging from those whose stated goal was the violent overthrow of the U.S. government (such as the Weathermen, the Original Black Panthers and even elements of the SDS, Students for a Democratic Society), as well as other violent groups like the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party, the Philadelphia MOVE group.
But as and well non-violent civil rights groups such as Martin Luther King Jr.'s Southern Christian Leadership Conference;
Perhaps you prefer we had more activists like Timothy McVeigh, the Simbanese Liberation front, and or more “Inside Job 9/11’s” wink,wink, along along with perhaps several other violent prone groups like them.
Let me guess you are devotee of Noam Chomsky.
Give me a break, you actually think the Chicgo 7, really 8, was not a planned riot of Abby Hoffman’s SDS, the weathermen and the National Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam (MOBE). Who are you kidding…
They provoked the confrontation to get on the news, like terrorist learned to emulate even today, by blowing up large numbers of people, to get on TV.
This is pathetically it was and is far to easy to rebuke, back to shallow end LC, your way out of your depth..
Contraire, I concede you of Indoctrinate U live in a world of fear, paranoia and constancy, searching and hoping for the worst and the most gloom you can monger up. That has been long self-evident.
As for the rest of your post, expounding upon what I am, what I represent, what I think and who I’m in league with, (see your red, italized words above), it isn’t worth replying to. I’ll only state, since you probably don’t think of me as a friend, your repeated use of the diminutive “LC” or "Lost Cant" is only too obviously condescending.
Actually, your right it is emasculating and condescending. But laid beside what you and many who think like you have spewed down range in my AO, my taze is mildly so, at worst, come you’re a big girl you can take it, cause your group have no problem sending rounds down range in my AO, now do you?
Yet when laid beside your persona here, as that is all we have, your elitism and willingness to thrust your views to silence in denial of another’s, is well, at best elitist indifference founded in Indoctrinated elitist Hubris only found in the extremes of the left and right.
Not that it matters; condescension seems to be your trademark on this board.
, now LC, opinions are like arse holes, everyone has one, and truth is most stink as bad as the next, eh LC?
Now you hurt my feelings. Cause I see you think somehow I should think of you as a being, and you, in privilege, you can think of me as an ignorant, wingnut, tazer of condescension only. How trite of me, or was that you? How unsettling and undemocratic of me, or was that you?
I rebuke you, but give you voice, where, if your were to disagree with me, you admit freely, like all liberal boards and especially those at your Indoctrinate U out there, would give me none. Now which is substantially American and condescending in that context, eh LC?
That is all!!
That is good, I am sure he will be prideful of such praise as you guys seldom stop walking on the water of your self consumed hubris to appreciate much of anything unacceptable to you. As for me, well you always have the shallow in of the pool to wade in protectively like Mr. Right, eh LC?
Also it appears you are confused. I was referring to the German military in World War ONE, not World War Two. Perhaps I should have made that more clear for you.
Perhaps you and Mr Right there in your shallow end of the pool’s attention deficit fixation, need to use a few more words to clarify the subject to which you speak. For looking back, the words linked to your sentence about that do not reflect clearly such a subject literally. Then again, defined extrasensory deception has always been the great asset of those on the left of left, eh?
Nonetheless, if that is what you meant, I accept it, in part, your overview analysis of the WWI German defeat. But, would caveat your absolute statement of NO German Army defeat, as not exactly accurate. In that I agree the German Army was not annihilated as in WWII in defeat, but I would add merely some factual context from the German’s themselves they were facing certain defeat, by reciting “Ludendorff, who decided, on 1 October, that Germany had two ways out — total annihilation or an armistice. He recommended the latter at a summit of senior German officials.” During the entire month of October 1918 Allied pressure did not let up and annihilation was soon to knock the German Army door down, so they capitulated, before the inevitable annihilation that was already standing in their trenches came.”
With the weight of the 100 days offensive, the straining burden of 10,000 a day new fresh Americans troops and importantly equipment, being pressed against a declining Army with no fresh recruiter base at home left. Added to their losses of 6 million troops, along with the national industrial exhaustion of their military Industrial complex, very acutely hastened, when their lost the Balkans, that great and near total source of supplies of oil and food for them, they had only the two choices Ludendorf conclude they had.
So to say they even in WWI the German Army was NOT defeated is a misnomer of their reality and the facts they faced and distorts history as it was.
But let’s see if I can accurately sum up your position. Students who heckle speakers are the equivalent of Nazi Brown Shirts, and anyone who disagrees with your characterization is an enabler of these present-day Nazis.
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously you have not read my post or have selectively preformed a saintly divining of what I said in a Ward Churchill spoofing of “duff-ic-ity.”
I have said it twice clearly and yet you pretend I did not say it, so there is this term perhaps I am sure far over your head.
It is called a pardon and pattern of disparaging treatment that set forth a pattern of behavior wherefrom one incident is not clear as to the intent, but the body of that pattern of incidents, in total and in context, are proof of the intent. So off to shallow end you go. Eh LC?
And such an enabler belongs to a cabal, an “ilk” who pose one of the worst threats to the freedoms of this great republic. I suggest that this is not a matter of fact, but an act of faith on your part, a personal religion that doesn’t merit debate.
B] The way, pray tell are you debating it, get to shallow end with where attention deficit pretense of faux descent is easily defensible, with Mr Right and FIT’s the “hypo-cri-an-ate-or? I did like the Cabal twist to Ilk though, it was telling.. Good show..
NO, Indoctrinate U enabler, you obviously see one’s willingness to claim a inalienable right of freedom of speech as a dictatorial measure by elitists of whose speech it is that is eligible. As long as those elitists who pretended to stand, in solid American principles, decide which ones are applicable and acceptable to your Indoctrinate U mantra and idioms of Ward Churchill-ian “duff-ic-ity.”[/B]
But the next time an anti-war rally is held and counter-demonstrators are chanting pro-war slogans in an attempt to drown out a speaker, or the next time a Democratic candidate is speaking and is interrupted by a heckler, I’ll remember your characterization. Or does it only apply one way?
You know LC, you are not very good at this game, in fact you are more than bad at it. I would be against ANYONE like that and have said so, as I have the experience and wisdom to appreciate the wisdom of Americans to be able to judge by what is said, whether it has merit or not, but then again in our climate of disunity, who cares what best for all of us, as long as “we are right,” eh, Comrade Indoctrinate U enabler?
I’ll sum up my position. If someone were to stand before me and proclaim that the Holocaust never happened, I would exercise my first amendment rights and reply, “You’re full of sh!t.”
So in doing so, to prove what that you and any others there already did not know, your right in your indoctrination.
Now exactly who is that about eh, Indoctrinator, you or them and or what they said. How elitist, how self-involved of you, to presume anyone else there did not grasp the merit of that person’s argument without your assistance. So by doing so and exalting the obvious, you are speaking to whom, those like you who already know the answer, not those who believe what was said, so in the end you see your right to be ALL ABOUT YOU and your Narcissism as self evidently righteous to deny a voice whose mere thoughts defeat them to the majority to begin with.. SEE you guys don’t do well outside the shallow end of the pool.
I wouldn’t sit there and nod and think to myself, ‘Hmmm, that’s interesting. I’ll have to give that some consideration and look at all sides of this issue.’ If that makes me an elitist or a brown shirt, or an enabler of brown shirts in your eyes, I can live with that.
Obviously in hubris of its al about me, that’s long been transparent only not realized by you perhaps.
I won’t give up my own sense of what is worth listening to and what isn’t, even at the risk of your admonishment.
Now that was a joke right, I mean did you get that one at the anti-war rally fizzle and droop, or sit up a while to deliver it as a coupe de grate to me. LOL
On the other hand, if federal marshals were to arrest someone for saying the Holocaust never happened, or to arrest me for telling a Holocaust denier he’s full of sh!t, then we would have a First Amendment issue. That is the hypothetical.
LOL, Now, do you have such an example to share with the class of these feared abridgment of civil liberties as you so punditry spin then in true Indoctrinate U form and substance?
The historical fact is that many, many people have been harassed, detained, lost employment, been blackballed or imprisoned by the government for what they said, published, advocated or because of whom they associated with.
The imprisonment of Eugene Debs, the Palmer Raids, McCarthyism, COINTELLPRO, and the Chicago police riot of 1968 are examples of the government taking away First Amendment Rights. I’m sorry for you that you are unable to concede that simple fact.
Eugene, really you spin GREAT MULTITUDES and say a little bitty few from the shallow end of the pool. This minutia of few you example are unworthy of being put into a class afar from non-provocateurs who willfully are seeking purposeful confrontation to media spin their positions as if the sky is falling and big brother and all evils government has descended upon us.
Eugene Debs- Your kidding, that socialist Unionist, you think he did not provoke his fate somehow? Hellfire, LC, how dishonest, I mean Pullman was a welfare capitalist who indisputably principled himself on giving fair wages to his workers, then this socialist during the economic panic of 1893, instead of trying maintain a healthy company for long term struck at the worst time when company need concessions to survive. Eugenes rally caused riots and the burning of other peoples property, the President Hoover had to call a national emergency to quile the riots and economic disruption where a few selfish presumptive likes of entitlement, like yourself, would bring many down to please a few.
Palmer Raids- left me see, the theme of hubris is becoming transparent, left wing radicals during WWI using bomb attacks on court buildings, police stations, churches and homes attributed to violent immigrant anarchist groups and radical left wingers.. same song different verse…From them and their deeds came the 1917 Espionage Act… so cry LC, cry hard radicals who bring onto themselves their own demise.
Mccarthyism Now exactly what part of anti-communalism and leftist radicalism do you not grasp that Americans are not going to accept there Indoctrinate U enabler with leftist sympathy?
I think you means COINTELPRO
Again with the idea we should not be proactive in dealing with internal as well as external enemies who act and do things that could be and far more often as not are set in intent to do harm to the country.
Organizations that were (at the time) considered to have politically radical elements. Groups ranging from those whose stated goal was the violent overthrow of the U.S. government (such as the Weathermen, the Original Black Panthers and even elements of the SDS, Students for a Democratic Society), as well as other violent groups like the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party, the Philadelphia MOVE group.
But as and well non-violent civil rights groups such as Martin Luther King Jr.'s Southern Christian Leadership Conference;
Perhaps you prefer we had more activists like Timothy McVeigh, the Simbanese Liberation front, and or more “Inside Job 9/11’s” wink,wink, along along with perhaps several other violent prone groups like them.
Let me guess you are devotee of Noam Chomsky.
Give me a break, you actually think the Chicgo 7, really 8, was not a planned riot of Abby Hoffman’s SDS, the weathermen and the National Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam (MOBE). Who are you kidding…
They provoked the confrontation to get on the news, like terrorist learned to emulate even today, by blowing up large numbers of people, to get on TV.
This is pathetically it was and is far to easy to rebuke, back to shallow end LC, your way out of your depth..
Contraire, I concede you of Indoctrinate U live in a world of fear, paranoia and constancy, searching and hoping for the worst and the most gloom you can monger up. That has been long self-evident.
As for the rest of your post, expounding upon what I am, what I represent, what I think and who I’m in league with, (see your red, italized words above), it isn’t worth replying to. I’ll only state, since you probably don’t think of me as a friend, your repeated use of the diminutive “LC” or "Lost Cant" is only too obviously condescending.
Actually, your right it is emasculating and condescending. But laid beside what you and many who think like you have spewed down range in my AO, my taze is mildly so, at worst, come you’re a big girl you can take it, cause your group have no problem sending rounds down range in my AO, now do you?
Yet when laid beside your persona here, as that is all we have, your elitism and willingness to thrust your views to silence in denial of another’s, is well, at best elitist indifference founded in Indoctrinated elitist Hubris only found in the extremes of the left and right.
Not that it matters; condescension seems to be your trademark on this board.
, now LC, opinions are like arse holes, everyone has one, and truth is most stink as bad as the next, eh LC?
Now you hurt my feelings. Cause I see you think somehow I should think of you as a being, and you, in privilege, you can think of me as an ignorant, wingnut, tazer of condescension only. How trite of me, or was that you? How unsettling and undemocratic of me, or was that you?
I rebuke you, but give you voice, where, if your were to disagree with me, you admit freely, like all liberal boards and especially those at your Indoctrinate U out there, would give me none. Now which is substantially American and condescending in that context, eh LC?
That is all!!
1. Here was my post about the German Army: The Nazis embraced the Dolchstosslegende, the “stab-in-the-back” theory that the German army, exhausted after fighting on several fronts for over four years, didn’t lose the war on the battlefield. Since the discussion was about the factors that led to the rise of Nazism, it seemed obvious that my reference was to World War I, not World War II. Moreover, knowledge of German history, which I assumed you possessed because of your previous post, would include recognition that the Dolchstosslegende only applied to post-WWI, not post-WWII German politics. Finally, German participation in WWI lasted from August, 1914 to November, 1918—over four years—whereas German participation in WWII lasted from September, 1939 to April, 1945—almost seven years. So when you mistakenly assumed my above statement referred to the German Army in WWII, I’m puzzled by your subsequent complaint that
QUOTE
“Perhaps you and MrRight there in your shallow end of the pool’s attention deficit fixation, need to use a few more words to clarify the subject to which you speak. For looking back, the words linked to your sentence about that do not reflect clearly such a subject literally. Then again, defined extrasensory deception has always been the great asset of those on the left of left, eh?”
2. As for summing up, this discussion was initially about students who heckle speakers. I tried to make clear that, if these hecklers violated any laws or university rules, I thought they should be dealt with appropriat