Thread: Freedom of speec--, Oops.

If you want to argue with me about the long term necessity of the war in Iraq

No. Universal. I was pointing out a moral issue. You obviously have concepts of what morals are as you are trying to justify the right for the police to monitor the microphone correctly, while speaking to kerry. However you miss the moral issue of what kerry is a part of and what kerry has done and contributed. This part, the most significant part of the moral issue. Has not clicked for you yet. So you assume the microphone issue is more important. Realistically you don't understand the war and serve mistakes are linked to this.

You said about the war being a 'necessity'. Now if you are living under a rock I forgive you. Otherwise your one sick puppy.

Originally Posted by Neruo

Lets all forget freedom of speech is something good. I kind of forgot too the last few years, since it seemed so normal to be against it. Not like it really matters. Not like democracy is a good thing.

Even better, I am just going to stop thinking all together. Really. Doesn't really matter if politics are a big charade. Nah. I don't care.

Fuck. You. Idiots.

Wow, Neruo, that is an extremely intelligent response to all that has been discussed in your thread.

Doing something with reason is not "non-lethal" force. It is "self-defense." There is a difference.

If you read what I posted that's exactly what I said. So why are you arguing.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

No. Universal. I was pointing out a moral issue. You obviously have concepts of what morals are as you are trying to justify the right for the police to monitor the microphone correctly, while speaking to kerry. However you miss the moral issue of what kerry is a part of and what kerry has done and contributed. This part, the most significant part of the moral issue. Has not clicked for you yet. So you assume the microphone issue is more important. Realistically you don't understand the war and serve mistakes are linked to this.

You said about the war being a 'necessity'. Now if you are living under a rock I forgive you. Otherwise your one sick puppy.

Still not a counterargument. The issue we are discussing is not my morals. The issue we are discussing is the right to steal a microhone, the right to block out a person's presentation and steal everybody else's right to ask the presenter questions, and the right to resist arrest and how the use of a taser relates to it. It looks like you have run out of things to say on that.

Now go find one of the Iraq threads, read what I have written, and debate what I said. Please don't make up your own definition of the word "debate" or any other words when you try it.

Neruo they are heavily conditioned. You must help them snap out of it.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Neruo they are heavily conditioned. You must help them snap out of it.

Nope. That still does not qualify as debate or counterargument. Try again.

Originally Posted by Neruo

Lets all forget freedom of speech is something good. I kind of forgot too the last few years, since it seemed so normal to be against it. Not like it really matters. Not like democracy is a good thing.

Even better, I am just going to stop thinking all together. Really. Doesn't really matter if politics are a big charade. Nah. I don't care.

Fuck. You. Idiots.

I really hate (as I've said before) when the idea of "freedom of speech" is raped like this. People that don't even understand the concept are usually the first ones to defend it.

Freedom of speech means you can say what you want. NOT WHEN AND WHERE YOU WANT. Being in a public forum, that guy had the right to ask Kerry (and I could have sworn I covered this already), whatever he wanted. Whichever questions he wanted to blast Kerry with were absolutely fair game. THAT is freedom of speech.

However, if you are in a forum where people are allowed to have equal time (this goes for Omnius' "allotted time is bullshit" reply as well), you need to take the high road and find a way to consolidate your questions to, in some way, fit that allotted time. People take "freedom of ---" to mean that "I can do what I want, when I want, because I'm an American, and I don't have to face any consequences." That's simply not true.

If we all went to a baseball game, and the special guest invited to sing the national anthem just decided to go off on their own 3 hour rant about politics, we are all obliged to sit there, forfeit the game that we came for, and listened to them? No. That is the type of "freedom of speech" that some of your are advocating. If you go to a free forum, you are allowed to say and ask what you want, but if the issue actually comes down to your disrupting the time-frame (a time frame which is devoted to giving many other people time to respond and ask Kerry questions) you have an obligation to give up the mic within that time, or face whatever consequences were sit to occur, before the event even started. People rushing you off the stand after going over divided time is not a breach of "freedom of speech", and those advocating "freedom of speech" should know this.

By yours (and many others') logic, you can walk into my house and call my mom/cousin/daughter/aunt a "fat fuckin cow" and expect not to get thrown to the curb on your ass because "this country embraces 'freedom of speech." It's not that all-encompassing, and (especially if I've made it clear before you stepped through the door) you can expect to get shown the door for showing such disrespect.

Oneironaut is right, the right to free speech only guarantees what you can say. It is the right to assembly that guarantees you can say it when and where you want.

And the man took like 30 seconds to ask what he wanted to ask, that is not disruptive. You guys act like its a slippery slope from 30 seconds to an hour but its not.

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

And the man took like 30 seconds to ask what he wanted to ask, that is not disruptive. You guys act like its a slippery slope from 30 seconds to an hour but its not.

No, it was not 30 seconds. People were leaving the place because that guy was turning it into the him show. Freedom of assembly does not give him that right. Should it be legal for me to knock on your door to ask to borrow your phone and then hog your phone for as long as I want to? If I get arrested for standing on your porch after you've repeatedly asked me to leave and for refusing to give your phone back, and I resist arrest, would it make sense for me to say, "I'm being repressed! Freedom! Freedom!"? Maybe a bunch of people could take up for me and say I was arrested just for "talking".

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

And the man took like 30 seconds to ask what he wanted to ask, that is not disruptive. You guys act like its a slippery slope from 30 seconds to an hour but its not.

Now that is where I concede to uncertainty. Every clip that I've seen has been a clip from some point in the "middle" of his mic time. I don't know how much time he's had on the mic.

[Edit: Actually, admittedly, I just had a moment to watch the second clip of Neuro's post. That's the first time that I saw him speak from the beginning of his time at the mic. All of the clips that I've seen, before that, were snippets. I agree that (as far as time is concerned) he wasn't up there very long, but it was more than obvious that his objective wasn't to have a 'point-and-counterpoint' exchange with Kerry. He was throwing everything at Kerry that he'd had a question about. Had he any intent on letting Kerry answers those questions, he would have asked them separately (which was the impression that I'd gotten from the snippets as well). But he bombarded Kerry with all those questions (however relevant) without any honest intention to have Kerry answer each one. He was there to throw a monkey wrench in the works, not make civilized conversation, IMO.]

It looks like he might have been just starting his entire question series when he started talking in the version of the video Neruo posted. He thanked Kerry for being there, which makes it look like it was his first question. I thought he had been there for a while at that point, but apparently I might have been wrong about that. The format was apparently supposed to be that you ask a question and let Kerry answer it. That guy was obviously there to give a speech, and that's what he did. I also think the police should have told him to chill out and let Kerry speak before they put their hands on him once the microphone was turned off. It was not their first request, and the turning off of the microphone was a request itself, but it was their first request once the microphone was turned off. Still, he was asking for trouble by giving a long speech instead of playing by the rules of the forum, and his reaction to the police was a hysterical reaction that was way out of line. He should have stayed peaceful and said he was sitting down, and I really think they would have left him alone. He could have filed a complaint about the touching later if it was a big problem for him. No matter how confused the police seem, you don't refuse their demands right in front of their faces and have a temper tantrum on them and resist arrest. You can't do that. There is no room in the law to allow it.

I have had run ins with the law myself, and I was taken to that station twice when I was a teenager. I had a very serious issue with the cops the first time I was taken in. As a matter of fact, I still have an issue with it. The cops can do things that are horribly unjust. But short of demanding oral sex or something like that, you can't just start a war with them when you perceive them as unreasonable. The thing to do is remain still and speak in a peaceful voice and LATER file a complaint against them or sue them or whatever you think makes sense. But there is no room to flip the Hell out on them to their faces and resist arrest. There is no reasonable way to legalize that. Even if the cops are wrong, they don't necessarily realize that, and they are going to do what they have to do to calm you down and get you to be still and go with them out of the assembly or to the station or whatever. That has to be dealt with accordingly, but there are courts for dealing with where they went wrong in that chaotic process.

When did the guy ever even ask a question without answering it himself. He just wanted to get rude points throught. I do hate john kerry but this guy was a douche.

"im not even done yet, i have 2 more questions"... dude u never even asked one...

"I'm going to imform people, then im gonn ask my questions" lol...

"clinton was impeached because.. what... a blowjob" lol again...

"HELP VHELP HELP HELP HELP" rofl now...

"Dont taser me bro! Dont taser me bro!"

"OWWW OWWW OWWW STOP TASERING ME" omg im tearing up from laughter

This was the funniest thing to happen at an assembly for a long time.

He was harming other peoples rights to free speech and at the same time violating his own right to free speech. He was at a university, so disrupting a meeting can result in getting kicked out. and universities arent really public property so they can kick him out at any time. the cops tried to get him to stop several times. that's why they needed to detain him. then he went whining like a little baby and throwing his hands around, and resisting arrest. this gives cops the right to tase. hopefully he got raped in jail.

he could have gotten away with it if he would have actually asked questions and let kerry answer. they still would have stopped him from asking a ton of questions, like at all meetings.

I still hate kerry. I still hate cops. But they did the right thing.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Now that is where I concede to uncertainty. Every clip that I've seen has been a clip from some point in the "middle" of his mic time. I don't know how much time he's had on the mic.

[Edit: Actually, admittedly, I just had a moment to watch the second clip of Neuro's post. That's the first time that I saw him speak from the beginning of his time at the mic. All of the clips that I've seen, before that, were snippets. I agree that (as far as time is concerned) he wasn't up there very long, but it was more than obvious that his objective wasn't to have a 'point-and-counterpoint' exchange with Kerry. He was throwing everything at Kerry that he'd had a question about. Had he any intent on letting Kerry answers those questions, he would have asked them separately (which was the impression that I'd gotten from the snippets as well). But he bombarded Kerry with all those questions (however relevant) without any honest intention to have Kerry answer each one. He was there to throw a monkey wrench in the works, not make civilized conversation, IMO.]

While I agree his intent was obvious to "nail" Kerry I believe if he had just asked his three questions and had been asked to sit down after rather than being told to stop as soon as he mentioned election problems he would have been more civil about it, and sat down and let Kerry attempt to sakte past the issue. Though, considering who this guy is there's no guarantee after Kerry skated past the issue he wouldn't have followed up on it.

Originally Posted by Michael

I still hate kerry. I still hate cops.

I do too. I forgot to mention that. I wish Kerry had acted like that guy so he could have gotten tasered. I don't like being in a position where I feel the need to take up for cops, and this is the first time I have ever taken up for that douchebag John Kerry. I don't hate all cops, but I think most of them are just a notch above the criminals they arrest, and many of them are even lower. But we do need cops, just like we need bacteria.

I agree, too. Kerry is a traitor.

People keep saying that he's hogging the mic and thats why he's asked to leave but judging by the video, the first police officer asks him to stop no more than 30 seconds after he began. 30 seconds is not exactly hogging the mic, and his question was never answered.

Also as for people saying he isn't following the rules of the public forum by asking questions without giving Kerry a chance to answer, it has been my experience that in those situations you get one chance to ask questions and once the speaker answers you don't get to ask another one, so it is likely he was trying to get all his questions in during his turn to talk.

Regardless, he was arrested and then detained without cause (as far as I know, being a dick is not grounds for arrest).

That guy was acting like an idiot. And I agree with Universal that the cops could of handled it better, but that guy was just obnoxious. Also, the secret societys stuff is just stupid. It doesn't matter that they were both in Skull and Bones. The two party system is terrible and all, but the guy got what he deserved.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

People keep saying that he's hogging the mic and thats why he's asked to leave but judging by the video, the first police officer asks him to stop no more than 30 seconds after he began. 30 seconds is not exactly hogging the mic, and his question was never answered.

Also as for people saying he isn't following the rules of the public forum by asking questions without giving Kerry a chance to answer, it has been my experience that in those situations you get one chance to ask questions and once the speaker answers you don't get to ask another one, so it is likely he was trying to get all his questions in during his turn to talk.

Regardless, he was arrested and then detained without cause (as far as I know, being a dick is not grounds for arrest).

I have always hated everything you have to say, and think you are an extreme liberal hippy. Perhaps you're too open minded. Just thought I'd express my freedom of speech.

and his question was never answered because he answered them with his own opinions lol. and it wasnt really a public forum, that's just what they want you to think. He was disturbing the peace and resisting arrest/detainment, thats grounds for arrest.

The anthropomorphic doobie smoking pierced pot leaf calling me a hippy. I'm not sure how to feel about that.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That guy was not right wing by any stretch of the imagination. The loonie land conspiracy stuff he was spouting is completely a left wing phenomenon. Also (I hope everybody pays attention to this because I keep having to say it.), the guy was not arrested for speech, and he was not arrested just for going over his allotted time. It's not like he went over the allotted time and was immediately put in handcuffs. He blatantly refused to give up a microphone that was not his, and he pulled a spectacle that fit the defininition of disturbance of the peace. Then he refused to go with the officers, and then he resisted arrest. That is a lot of things. The taser was not have been completely necessary. People were arrested just fine before the taser was invented. However, it made things easier and safer for the officers, and I have no sympathy for the horrible temper tantrum baby in a college boy's body, so I am all for the use of the taser.

You tossed out the usual insults against my country, so I am going to give my usual response. Let me tell you ahead of time that I don't like having to say this stuff, but I also don't want to just sit there and say nothing when my country is unfairly insulted. If anybody judges the United States based on what a few officers did in the situation I just described and not on the fact that we led the fight to drive the Nazis out of western Europe when they were trying to take over the world and the fight to take down the Soviet Union when they were trying to take over the world and the fight to liberate Eastern Europe and the world record holding in donating foreign aid, then that person is looking for excuses to hate my country.

Then you'll need to explain to me your definition of right/left wing, because I don't get it. Also, you're still arguing that the guy was an idiot, I already told you that I agreed with that, but that doesn't change the bigger picture, fact is everyone still thinks that cops beat up the kid for being a loudmouth.

I apologize if you took my comments about your country as an insult, I was simply trying to point out the fact that the US generalizes these kinds of things everyday as I have described, yet the same thing happens in its own backyard. That just doesn't sit well with me, a country bullying the rest of the world when it can't even deal with its own problems.

Since you raised the issue, I will also mention that (while refraining to comment on when you said "led" the fight) the Soviets were a way bigger factor against the Nazis than the US and that the Taliban almost single handedly defeated the Soviet Union, yet I bet you don't revere either of them. What your country did in 50 year old wars has little impact on its current doctrine and foreign policies.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

The anthropomorphic doobie smoking pierced pot leaf calling me a hippy. I'm not sure how to feel about that.

Yep, smokin pot makes you a hippy. I like the self title you gave yourself. btw, you should feel like shit since you were wondering.

Originally Posted by paperdoll

you can convince people better if you are calm and peaceful. people will be amazed at how peaceful and kind you are, and wonder why. that will have a more profound effect than anger and violence. Omnius, I'm surprised, if not shocked that you said that. you were the one who told me that you have to learn to not be attached, you have to care without caring, which means influencing people in the area around you. you said so yourself, it can cause a ripple and have a profound influence even to the other side of the planet. Buddha himself stayed in place, and meditated, and look at the effect he had on the world. you've just contradicted yourself. what happened?

This guy is not an expert on tao, he is not mature enough to realize that is he acted more peacefully he would have been a lot more successful but instead went about it obnoxiously and because of that... the result is that this forum is split about him. If he had been more peaceful and less attached then how many people in tbhis forum would have had a rebuttle against him? Michael, but that guy is a troll.

I think this exemplifies my point, that the way he went about things so directly pretty much ruined what he was trying to do because very few of us here empathize with him. However that does not mean when people took the mic away he should have let them, he had a point to make and a right to make that point. Just because the guy was being stupid doesn't mean the incident should be ignored because the police weren't escorting him out of the building for being obnoxious, they were escorting him out of the building because he wanted to give background to one of his questions.

He probably could have avoided being tasered if he took a more dignified approach, too.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Then you'll need to explain to me your definition of right/left wing, because I don't get it. Also, you're still arguing that the guy was an idiot, I already told you that I agreed with that, but that doesn't change the bigger picture, fact is everyone still thinks that cops beat up the kid for being a loudmouth.

The Illuminati conspiracy stuff he was spouting off is a very left wing philosophy. The liberal view on things is that the old way of doing things and the historically accepted views on things are wrong and that change away from them is necessary. We don't need to argue about this too much. I am left wing on a lot of issues. I don't hate the guy for being left wing alone. It is his usual far left wing tendency to disrupt speeches and act like a hysterical child that ruins things for speakers and audiences that pisses me off. I have a lot of issues with conservatives, but acting like that guy at public events is not one of their trends.

The cops could have arrested him without using the taser. The taser is a recent invention, and people have been getting arrested for thousands of years. I just think the taser helped the safety of the cops and gave the guy incentive to chill out and be easier to handle. But my personal problem with him probably has a lot to do with my lack of sympathy for him. I am so sick of stunts like his. So many people refuse to give speeches at colleges because somebody like that guy has to pull that bullshit every single time. Sometimes it is large groups of people like him flipping out and ruining people's freedom of speech. I'm glad they all get to see what can happen.

For whatever it might be worth, my brother is a criminal defense attorney, and I just showed him the video. It really pissed him off when he saw it, and he is totally on your side. We got into a long argument about it. He is convinced that my whole deal is that I just hate people like that. It is true that I feel that way and my view on this is shaped by that. But that guy was an out of control disrupter and arrest resister, and out of control behavior calls for extreme control.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I apologize if you took my comments about your country as an insult, I was simply trying to point out the fact that the US generalizes these kinds of things everyday as I have described, yet the same thing happens in its own backyard. That just doesn't sit well with me, a country bullying the rest of the world when it can't even deal with its own problems.

Yes, comments like that are definitely insulting. Insulting people's countries like that is in a category with insulting people's races and sexual orientations. It is very insulting for you to say that my country is "bullying" by going through Hell on Earth to create a future with more freedom, safety, and happiness in the world, especially when your country would have been taken over by the Nazis if we had not helped you save it. Russia was not enough to save you. I will get more into that in my next paragraph. I know people in the military, I knew people in my family who fought in World War II and gave you the freedom to spew insults against nations of people you are talking to on the internet, and I really wish you could see things from my perspective and understand how spoiled and horribly ungrateful you sound. It would blow your mind if you really understood what people from my country have been through to give you what you have and enjoy and take for granted. It is also very illogical for you to judge my country based on what a few cops did when somebody flipped out and resisted arrest.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Since you raised the issue, I will also mention that (while refraining to comment on when you said "led" the fight) the Soviets were a way bigger factor against the Nazis than the US and that the Taliban almost single handedly defeated the Soviet Union, yet I bet you don't revere either of them. What your country did in 50 year old wars has little impact on its current doctrine and foreign policies.

It has a great deal to do with how the world is right now. You are enjoying the benefits of the fact that 1.1 million Americans were either killed or injured in World War II, the most important fight of all time. Without our involvement, the Nazis would have succeeded in taking over the rest of Europe and then the rest of the world. If you know what they were planning to do, you can imagine what the state of the world would be like right now if they had succeeded. You would not be bad mouthing any governments on the internet right now, for one thing. I also said that the United States led the fight to liberate WESTERN Europe. The Soviet Union took care of Eastern Europe. That is why when the war was over, we took control of Western Europe and the Soviets took control of Eastern Europe. The Soviets made Eastern Europe communist and under their control, and we let Western Europe be free and independent. You should show some appreciation for the nightmares people went through to give you the life you have now. And the Taliban did not save the world or even almost save the world. I do appreciate the Soviets' help in the saving of the world. You will not catch me spewing pure insults at a Russian right now just because a few of their cops might have used excessive force. I have a lot of complaints about the Soviet Union, but I give credit where it is due and do not get reckless with my insults against nations that have helped us in the past.

The Illuminati conspiracy stuff he was spouting off is a very left wing philosophy

What the hell? He didn't mention anything about any illuminati. Just facts. So what are you talking about. Even kerry said this is a very important question to answer. When they cut his mike he said thank you, and started to walk away normally. Then the police jumped on him and tasered him. If you support that kind of behavior you belong in some kind of quarantined cell where you can be taught in a proper environment what it means to be human. You need to be somewhere safe where your not a threat to society if you support what happened.