EBSB52

So where does this so-called search for freeedom include freedom of teh press? Do you really think the soldiers weren't flushing pages of teh Koran down the shitter? Hell, we made them strip and dog-pile, put leashes on them for degradations sake; is ripping pages out of a book and flushing them such a far cry? Our goal is to bring stability to Iraq... Oh, and here I thought it was to find WMD's.... silly me. Oh ya, that was the lie to get us into their country. ...and a democratic government. Democratic, like Nazi Germany? BTW, when are we going to go after England, Australia and many, many other allies that have Monarchies as a form of their gov? Oh ya, as long as they're our allies they can have whatever form they want, but if not, we utilize ethnocentricity, as we did the American Indians. There is a lot of good going on in Iraq. You have GOT to be joking. Why doesn't the press ever print about positive events there? Uh, war based upon lies from the White House (WMD's), 1600 dead US, many more thousands dead Iraqi civilians, 1 billion $ per week to run when our economy needs help, all to revert to the way it was when we leave just as Viet Nam did? Why? Why ask why?

Newsweek was highly pressured from teh White House to retract. As for "You have no proof ..." With Ollie North's can't recall crap, please don't use this absolute standard. BTW, the White Hiuse did pressure them to retract - common knowledge. This is yet another anti-American rant from you. And this is yet another anti-Const rant from you.

And therein lies the problem... if they are one of the most credible, we are all in trouble... Hell, I only took one semester of journalism and I can see that they screwed up... and it got people killed... irresponsible at best, criminal at worst. J You call them irresponsible after printing a story that hasn't been proven nor disproven, yet you support the maggot in chief for entering a war against the head of a country for WMD's that admittedly aren't there, for 9/11 actions that weren't ever the doing of the same. Funny, the same people screaming for Const rights are the ones the busiest burying them.

No, they weren't prevented from printing it, just admonished for doing so and, uh, urged to retract regardless of truth/merit. got the rant out of your system, now? Good; glad you're feeling better. Ahhh, you wouldn't be you w/o having to post attempted distraction/crap like this.

Not your country, huh? The US would never flush a book after all that other torture. See, what American cultured people don't understand is that desecrating their Bible is worse than the actual torture. Our culture finds it the other way, but through ethnocentric application we aren't willing to understand that. I know I don't care if soneone burns, flushes, or whatever a copy of my favorite book, just don't burn my arm or physically harm me. Ya, it couldn't be the good ole US of A; we wouldn't do that.

Are you thinking that Newsweek was forced to retract a story that is actually true? Personally, I think the U.S. government criticizing anyone for deception and/or acting in bad faith is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. If the story is actually false, though, the Newsweek story may have triggered deaths. In this case Newsweek deserves whatever shit that comes their way IMO. Walt Right, theives amongst theives. Although the media at least stirs the pot instead of white-washing everything. Ya, I think there is a grreat deal of believability to the story. I mean, look at what we did that is known, is it so unbelievable that we would desecrate a book after we have already been proven to torture these guys? Furthermore, Newsweek is one of the most credible sources in the American news media.

Well, I agree that alcohol can cause deaths, but mere consumption doesn't cause that, you must add driving to it. The same could be said with smoking, you must add innocent people. What it comes down to is that both are deadly to others, but due to tax incentives for the gov they are allowed. So how do they regulate them so the gov gets their tax and the people don't klll each other? Another hypocrisy is that weed is contraband, a felony and booze is legal. See, the world is full of hypocrisies, but that doesn't justify any of them. IOW's, it's not rational ta say, "hey, he gets to kill others with his habit, why can't I kill others with my habit?" See how that doesn't work? As for protecting us from ourselves, the rules will stop at your doorway most likely. What I wonder si why it takes 50 years? While you shouldn't have to breath second hand smoke, where do they stop taking things away in the name of our protection? The so-called right revocation stops where the offense ends. With all the drunk driving deaths and the associated health problems that arise from drinking... You can bet that the government will have it in their cross-hares CAn't you see that that logic is irrational? It's like saying, "How can they increase the penalties on burglary when there are other people doing only 5 years for some murders?" To defer to some proportion of fairness that your sin kills fewer than other people's sin is just bizzare logic. If you were outside looking into that reasoning you would understand. I'm not against your so-called right to smoke, in fact I'm for the legalization of all drugs, but I'm against your right to impose them on me regardless of whether others get to do it more, as I'm aganst their right to do it as well.

Well put. See, what many folks don't understand is the catch 22 they fabricate when they disavow flag burning. The 1st Amendment covers the essence of free expression, burning a flag is a form of expression, so to outlaw it would be to suppress that expression, hence a very abridged 1st.

I'm sorry, but the American flag is not just a silly symbol to most Americans. Sure, it does piss me off when I see idiots burning it. I'm just wondering what in life would tick you off if burning our flag doesn't. How can you say that to bear our flag means nothing? Maybe I was raised differently than you, but frankly I just don't understand your perspective on this....Steve1 Only idiots burn flags???? I'm just wondering what in life would tick you off if burning our flag doesn't. Oh, watching rich people get away with murder. Watching cops get away with murder. Seeing all the homeless people while the number of multi-kazillionaires increases. Seeing poor families struggle without medical care, then when our current maggot in chief wants to play war games, send those poor kids in, while he retrospcts about how he got out of VN. Ya, those kinds of things - things that matter, not some self-riteous SOB crying about burning fabric. How can you say that to bear our flag means nothing? I'm wrong then, it contemporarily represents classism, Fascism, Imperialism and a few other ideologies. It didn't always represent that, but it has represented those things for a while now. Maybe I was raised differently than you, but frankly I just don't understand your perspective on this.... I don't care how you or I was raised, it bears no weight on what our country now does, just perhaps the tollerance.

lol on the wife stuff. It isn't a matter of being a tough guy. I just couldn't put up with it. Just like I cannot let a man strike a woman in front of me. It's my belief system and I am willing to do jail time to enforce it. I think most men would. I watched a comedian say, "Right now there is some guy in Iowa having sex with another man and I can't take it" as he frantically grabbed his head. When I read you saying you couldn't put up with it; why? It's a piece of cloth that symbolizes a chunk of land, burning it doesn't change whatever meaning the flag has to you. Just like I cannot let a man strike a woman in front of me. Of course, and I wpuld interveine as would you I'm sure, but that's differnt. It's my belief system and I am willing to do jail time to enforce it. There are plenty of prosecutors willing to help you do jail time because some person burned fabric in your presence. I think most men would. So only men defend the flag and if a person fails to go to jail beating someone up that just burned a flag they aren't a man? Dog help us all.

Is that a confession? Espouse the most idle threats, genius.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=1&u=/nm/20050517/pl_nm/religion_koran_dc

So no one has the right to burn a flag in your space - agreed. What if a person burns a flag in their own space or public space (with a permit and obedience to all safety statutes); do you have the right to be offended? Dude, he's not conducting an intellectual exercise in constitutional law. When rights meets physics, physics wins, it's as simple as that. To paraphrase an old saying, don't bring constitutional amendment to a fist fight. Ageed - physics win on the front end, the law works on the backside....forever. The pen is mightier than the sword. Also, the windbags that espouse the most - do the least in most cases.

AnyONE is correct.. I won't declare a tampon war against their whole race for gods sake.. That's correct. Burn a flag in my presence and your "anyones" right to free speech ends at least temporarily. When I'm in cuffs and when "said named person wakes up" he can start blabbing again.. In 6 months when his jaw functions again.. If I flush a Quran down the toilet in front of a Muslim I would expect him to try and whip my ass. Rhino And when you go to prison for agg assault and sit there on a friday evening wondering who might be boning your wife, you'llbe saying to yourself: "That was definately worth it - I would do the same thing again." Don't worry, I know you are just being figurative with all the tough guy stuff.

So no one has the right to burn a flag in your space - agreed. What if a person burns a flag in their own space or public space (with a permit and obedience to all safety statutes); do you have the right to be offended?

And that's why "they" do it - it pisses off guys like you. Nothing wrong with guys like you, just that you are sensitive to it and they know it - so they do it. It is wholly just a silly symbol. With that I mean the flag as well as falg burning. The flag represents 50 states and the original 13 colonies. To burn it means nothing. To bear it means nothing. I would rather spend my time trying to improve the elements that make it what it is than to try to save fabric. As for flag burning, isn't it covered by the 1st via expression? I would never own or burn a flag, but I support the right to do either or both.

The mocking was about mocking you and your passions about wacky conspiracies. 1. The US doesn't conspire anymore, they blanantly change the protocol and dare anyone to cross the line. So you are wrong about me again - I don't think there are nearly as many conspiracies as let's say 40-50 years ago. 2. Are you and John Rich related? You both seem to center your arguments around the messenger / author rather than the issue.... Ad Hominem. Not a conspiracy in itself. That alone is very fun so I need not play here any further. DOn't let the door hit ya in the ass. Frankly, this thread and the one on smoking, we are greatly in line with each other (for the main topic), just not at the same decibel level. Frankly, I think you'd be a blast to talk with in person. It's fine that we are on the same page, just curious why it matters who I am or what I'm about when it comes to substance of issues? In critical thinking, it's more important how you get to a given conclusion than the actual conclusion itself. The idea is that when a body of gov that makes a lot of decisons uses sound reasoning, they will "get it right" most of the time via that consistent sound reasoning.

You have grammar problems too. Pardon me for being a language fascist. My comment was not about this thread topic in particular, but rather about your propensity to label everything you don't like as "fascism". You have grammar problems too. I don't. I may rapid post and make spelling mistakes which I don't bother correcting, but it isn't illiteracy. My comment was not about this thread topic in particular, but rather about your propensity to label everything you don't like as "fascism". So you hijacked yet another thread to pull it off topic...... color me shocked.

I do use that often, because that introduces my subject, and explains where it comes from, so that no one thinks that it is my own writing. Then, after the introduction, I also go on to support or defend my subject matter. When I start a thread, I stick around to defend my position. So, your comment doesn't really say anything, as usual. Even if he had started with "In the news", it wouldn't have done anything towards contributing his own personal opinion. What in the world would make you think that I would EVER want to follow your lead in any thing? You do it your way I’ll do mine. I know we don’t agree about any thing that has to do with politics but do you really think every one should follow YOURWAY when starting a thread too. That’s says a lot about how open your mind is. No wonder I have such a hard time reasoning with some people on here. It’s a fucking thread dude. About news that I thought should be mentioned. Last time I checked your name was not in green thank god and HH for that. Oh one more thing the article is from MSN i did post a link. Seriously. The protocol of Americans, esp conservative Americans is to attack the messenger instead of the issue. I expect some of that in politics, but not in 'real life.' Important decisions are made based on that SOB is a ________, and we all know people that think like that or do that are always wrong. Sorry dude, this country is a toilet largely due to its reasoning inabilities. For example, my argument that Bush is a rotten president is based upon the Ergonomics Bill, Overtime Law, Bankruptcy Law, Iraq War, and many more things of the sort. The fact that he is a rich, spoiled, draft dodging turd makes me think he's a waste of skin, but if the latter atributes were present and the former were not, I wouldn't base my opinion of his presidency on his personla flaws, which I currently do not. I voted for Perot in 92 and he is a typical rich guy, but I felt his policies would have been beneficial to the US. So I agree with you, you posted an article to be bantered about, it offended some people that couldn't defend it based upon merit so they attacked the messenger.

Maybe you should spend some time wondering about the motive of an avowed Muslim who posts anti-American, anti-military threads, and then refuses to answer questions about his "personal opinions". I understand that I will never be able to pry you from your coninual attacking of people versus attacking the arguments, merits, etc. Can you address why it's important for you to assess what a person is about over the merit of their arguments? If I'm getting advice from someone I will weigh their opinions, perspectives, ect., but when arguing issues the person making the assertion is almost always not of importance. I know you don't understand.

Its a shame that people continously ask for the government to step and make new laws for everything that inconviences them in the slightest. Cancer is a slight pain in the ass. Are you friken serious? What if someone walked up and threw water in your kids face? WOuld they be dead? What if they threw something carcinogenic in their face? Granted as a non-smoker people should have the right to not breathe secondhand smoke .... Ya, sort of.... WTF? What's with the passive voice? No, it goes like this: Granted, smokers have a legal right not to be exposed to poisons while in public, and have a right to patronize private establishments with the same rights. the problem with this is that it doesn't stop there because instead of just saying lets not allow smokers to smoke in public there is also a movement to FORCE everyone to quit smoking by increasing taxes to outrageous levels. They're called sin taxes, many sins have these taxes applied. BTW, rental cars have a higher rate of taxes than I believe cigs do, at least in Maricopa County, so what's your point? BTW, I'm not an advocate of high sin taxes or outright prohibition, just that you must kill yourself by yourself. Sorry to all the smokers that can't understand that I want you compulsions to be your compulsions. As an added opinion I think mist contraband drugs should be legalized and sold cheap to reduce the crime rate amongst druggies, so I', not a prohibitionist or a tax freak. Basically this is a prohibition on cigarettes just an economic one rather than a ban in its purest form. Don't act as if you think it's exclusively the people that want clean air that are the same that want high cig taxes. Remember, the cig co's agreed to pay billions to the states over the next number of years to have the right to keep making a dangerous product, so that act is largely past of the increase. What happens when people decide that skydiving or riding motorcycles or eating steak is bad for your health? If we started hurting/killing non-participants then that might be a problem. Let's keep DZO's wise and help them to keep being safe and we will be ok. The arg with cigs is not the poor, poor dead smokers, it's the 2nd hand smoke killijng non-participants. There is an argument with the costs associated with smokers, but I'm willing to bet if the smokers would do so in private that the concern would end. Once again I agree a non-smoker should not have to breathe my secondhand smoke but its a really big mistake to encourage our government to make it happen rather than forcing it to happen on our own. Do you suggest I beat the shit out of a smoker every time I breath their smoke? How about a cursory spit in the face.... ya, I would compromise. I work as an acft mech, and there is no shortage of stupid people in the blue-collar arena, groups of uneducated people probably have a higher rate of smokers, so I get to deal with these people all the time. Something like 20% of all Americans smoke, right? I bet 1/2 the people at work, smoke. So if our gov doesn't make it happen with legislation, then how does it happen? I have yet to see a rally or hear of meetings where smokers get together to talk about preserving "smokers rights" so let's be considerate. Truth is that even with legislation smokers will still break laws, just as they do with speeding, so little will change except restaurants.

Oh, BTW, further getting this story back on topic, Nash scored 48 last night, 23 in the 3rd I believe. His team sucked and he wasn't a Jerk NaBitchski about it. He's a great guy and his team will rally next game. The refs were fucking the team and I think they let down, but he kept fighting.

Let's say the top 200 (random guess) NBA players make over a million a year.... So how much do the top 200 fireman and teachers in the US make per year? If you want a fair comparison, work it with the same numbers, you can't expect to apply a comment to a very small and elite (by whatever nutty definition you want) group to compare to a hugely populated groups like teachers. The top 0.01% of every profession likely does very well. What's wrong with that? I think professional sports is a kind of joke at these levels, but would rather have market forces as is than get some wierd kind of social manipulation to just satisfy a special interest groups's definition of 'fair'. ESBD - As far as joking about 'facist' athletes. It's not a joke about fascism (other than they are ungodly rich and that seems to be a more contemporary source of the fascist label), just your broad-based fascination and passion with subjects that are in the end about specific individuals and your inability to take people one at a time in lieu of generalizations and simplifications and gross stereotyping. But at least you care about something even if it usually is only in the abstract most of the time. ESBD - As far as joking about 'facist' athletes. It's not a joke about fascism (other than they are ungodly rich and that seems to be a more contemporary source of the fascist label), just your broad-based fascination and passion with subjects that are in the end about specific individuals and your inability to take people one at a time in lieu of generalizations and simplifications and gross stereotyping. But at least you care about something even if it usually is only in the abstract most of the time. If this must be about me and not the assertions of some who think Nash was given the MVP via racism, as the thread started out to be, then I would comment on your inability to stick to a topic most of the time an resirt of typical conservative distraction tactics as opposed to answering some tough issues. I have never implied a Fascist component to this thread's phenomenon. Being rich has nothing to do with being Fascist. Plenty of rich people are not Fascist. They could be classist and not Fascist. That's a very flatline criterion for Fascism that oversimplifies the definition. Primarily Fascism is the government's assignment of legislation to the corporations, and I don't see that in this topic. So if this must in turn be about you, you take issues that have zero to do with Fascism and joke about them to distract - then avoid the topics that have plenty to do with Fascism.

I wholly agree. The fact that the NBA keeps a bunch of guys too busy to pursue their criminal careers full-time ... Bahahahaha. Right, the guy feeding the homeless at the shelter is a schuck; the guy dunking a ball or hitting a little ball 300 yards into a cup with the fewest strokes is what's worth celebrating. It's the foundation of this country to celebrate the wrong people for the wrong things, and then we create people like Michale Jackson, OJ, and a myriad of others and wonder why. The emphasis of our priorities is wayyyyy out of whack. Agree 100%!!! I have also noticed that when a black NBA player beats the hell out of his wife or girlfriend and goes to jail, the press praises it as a good thing because it gives him "street cred". Being old as dirt, I remember when that kind of thing was considered completely unacceptable whether committed by a pro athlete or anyone else. Now, it seems to be simply another entry on NBA players' resumes. The team owners probably love all the "free press" that those kinds of incidents generate. I live in Houston and remember seeing the Rockets' coach and players whining on television after citizens voted to NOT fund a new stadium for them. To me, that is an unbelievable level of arrogance. Naturally, the City of Houston found a way to slide the new stadium through by promising that it would not cost the taxpayers a penny. Unbelievable. Personally, I think the city would have been better off paying the Rockets to get the hell out of town and go infect some other city. Walt Hell ya...strett cred The team owners probably love all the "free press" that those kinds of incidents generate. Unless you're Jerry Colangelo, moral monitor of the Phoenix Suns. I live in Houston and remember seeing the Rockets' coach and players whining on television after citizens voted to NOT fund a new stadium for them. To me, that is an unbelievable level of arrogance. Naturally, the City of Houston found a way to slide the new stadium through by promising that it would not cost the taxpayers a penny. That's what a POS this city is. There was Bank One Ballpark measure that wa voted down, the county board of Sup held a private midnight session to pass it.

Yeah it does. But we need our governments to protect us from stuff from time to time. Speed limits are one example of the government deciding what is safe for us. The illegality of crack cocaine is another. Do either of those things concern you? There is already a line drawn. I'd just like it moved so ciggies were on the other side of it. Many lines are drawn and more being drawn every day as people without rational justification call for more laws and regulations to make us safe. We know that of the 6 million auto accidents and 40,000 deaths annually in the US, 40% involve alcohol and 30% involve speeding. So here we have a definite problem and laws that attempt to address the problem. Despite heavy manipulation of SHS studies, no data supports a health hazzard from smoking in open air settings, yet you and the other dancing natives want laws to prevent it. Now if you are pursusing personal or social agendas, just dancing the tribal dance or responding to vocal instructions from your neighbors dog, then be honest about it and do what you must. People plopping their asses down on the slippery slope of govt intervention without rational basis has resulted major atrocities throughout our history and some of us want to keep some of you in check. My advice is stand on your own two feet, face the world, make your own decisions and accept the consequences. Failing that, I guess you could just call for more laws and shelter in the illusion of safety. jen "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers." -Homer Simpson I agree with you that this, "the gov is here to protect us from ourselves" bullshit arguement is crap. If so, they wouldn't allow the sale of 600 hp cars, 200hp bikes, cigs, lottlery tickets, booze, skydiving, Indian Casionos, etc... The gov will decide if there is a profit in it for them when deciding which to ban. With cigs tho, it cuts into their profit when people cost billions in unpaid medical bills acrued primarily or exclusively by cigs. Furthermore, the 115 auto deaths per day has a valid argument: we need to get around to go to school, to work, to deliver things necessary for life - cigs do absolutely zero but to fill hospitals and morgues. There is no benefit gained from cigs, other tham corp profits, so I find your argument void of any substance when compared to auto related deaths. Despite heavy manipulation of SHS studies, no data supports a health hazzard from smoking in open air settings, yet you and the other dancing natives want laws to prevent it. I don't know how open air is open air. Furthermore, smokers do push the limit of what is open and what is not. Inconsiderate assfucks will have a cig hanging from their mouth at the roach-coach spreading that crap around my food. Is it giving me cancer? Probably not. Do I want to smack the silly-looking punks inthe fucking lips? Ok, ya I do. BTW, smokers look incredibly stupid with a cig hanging from their mouth like they're some kind of baby having never left the boob. But that isn't the issue here! If someone smelled incredibly offensive due to refusal to shower, would you find it offensive? Some guys grabbed a guy in basic training and involuntarily showered him due to him refusing to shower. People at work have been fired for stinking due to lack of shower, yet you want to defend something as stinky, irregardless of the dangers of cancer? So this open air thing is void too, as open air should mean at least 50 feet from anyone. I can smell cigs 50 feet or more if downwind, so fifty feet is very conservative. Now if you are pursusing personal or social agendas, just dancing the tribal dance or responding to vocal instructions from your neighbors dog, then be honest about it and do what you must. WHat? This isn't a sheeple thing where person A is following person B. This is about life and health. If I had kids and some jackass lit up around him/her I would let that person know by probably yanking the cig out and stomping it, at the very least, and even if the cops came out for some silly reason I would probably be legally justified thru special relationship contract to protect. That aregument you cast is nothing more than mitigation and distraction. People plopping their asses down on the slippery slope of govt intervention without rational basis... I can agree in part with the first part, but the part about no rational basis is absurd. ....has resulted major atrocities throughout our history and some of us want to keep some of you in check. Don't compare things like slavery and Constitutional deprivation, especially 4th and 14th, to the loss of "smokiing rights." We're not talking about Woman Suffrage here; we're talking about taking a deadly, inconsiderate habit out of the public and into the private as many things have been done. You can't drink in public, why should you be able to smoke in public? I mean, they could allow drinking in public and still maintain "drunk in public" laws. My advice is stand on your own two feet, face the world, make your own decisions and accept the consequences. And when you smoke near me you are making my decision. Can you see this or is your addiction too blinding? Failing that, I guess you could just call for more laws and shelter in the illusion of safety. XX, 000 deaths per year is not an illusion, but I don't want to abridge a perosn's right to kill themselves, just me.