Freedom of speec--, Oops.

This is pretty sick. Guy getting censored (arrested) and tazered for asking some questions at a John Kerry speech, or whatever it is.

I like the part where he screams for help, and then gets tazered for asking why he is being arrested.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=G505aKlYyd4

Different angle, but crappy quality.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=iqAVvlyVbag

Pretty good case of censorship and police brutality right there.

Also, I know some people are going to say "He had it coming (the tazering), he shouldn't have resisted so much". I think that if you say that, you forget what happened. He got arrested for no reason at all, I would be pissed and confused too, if I did something I knew was legal, and got arrested for it.

(For people that think the guy is insane, like for saying Kerry (like Bush) was a member of the secret 'skull and bones' society: http://youtube.com/watch?v=rcZig9Fkr1A . They are/were both members.)

I guess I was wrong for being pro-democrat in the past. Republicans, democrats, all the same aristocrats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neruo

I guess I was wrong for being pro-democrat in the past. Republicans, democrats, all the same aristocrats.

---

Welcome... to the real world.

It is a world where our "betters" believe they have a born privilege to rule us. Right and left, liberal and conservative are all ruses, useful only in keeping a conquered people divided and distracted.

We are peasants in the eyes of our leaders, nothing more. The deepest fears of our founding fathers have come to pass - that a government Of, By and For the People would break free of its Constitutional limitations and turn into a powerful, wealthy monster beyond the control of the governed.

The U.S. was the last, best bastion of hope for human liberty. Sadly, we failed over a hundred years ago. Now it is just a matter of history playing out and us keeping the slide down the slippery slope happening a slowly as possible.

Have a lovely day!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neruo

I guess I was wrong for being pro-democrat in the past. Republicans, democrats, all the same aristocrats.

---

Of course they are. In case you never noticed, neither party has an underlying principle or philosophy, and they really aren't any different. They have agreed to split up the voters in a certain way and share power, meanwhile keeping everyone else out. They've designed the system so no one else has a chance.

They could vote in the Soviet Union too, right, but there was only one party. Here we have two--not much better. Stupid Party vs. Evil Party, take your pick.

Who do you want as president. A member of skull and bones. Or a member of skull and bones. Either way skull and bones wins. How on earth did 2 members of skull and bones get into the 2 positions you are allowed to vote for? What are the chances?

And yes 911 caused a greater slide into the police state. Now terrorist laws are going to make everyone a terrorist for no reason and no more basic rights. 911 was such a unfortunate 'accident'. But a pretty profitable one for those gaining from all this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwTNuucgtuo

This is why I don't get out much. I am too dangerous. Anyone tries to taze me and they lose an eye at least. Those pigs had no cause to attack someone who was obviously harmless.

stupid fucking 'peasant' doesn't he know how much money there is to be made? the cops fought and he lost. no one can stop it. don't even try. give up...and instead go to church or watch celebrities on tv and forget about it.

liberal, conservative, communist, counterculture hippies.. fuuck that. don't get caught up in the opposition of the spectacle, kill the spectacle.

I think the guy who got tazered is a schmuck rotten punk who should be in jail right this second. He is such a typical example of personality disordered far leftists who were raised to believe you can get your way by being a loud cry baby and screaming, "I want that toy! I want that toy! You are repressing me! Waaaaaaaaaa!!!! :(" I despise people who act like that guy. He had his turn to talk to John Kerry about his Flying Spaghetti Monster ideas concerning the Illuminati and the Loch Ness Monster. He went over the time EVERYBODY was given to talk. He was politely asked to give somebody else a turn, but he was too narcissistic and sociopathic and histrionic to give a damn. He grabbed the microphone back when it was not his turn to talk and acted very obnoxious with it. He was politely asked to stop his tantrum. He would not do it. So security put their hands on him and calmly asked him to step away. He would not do it. So they physically drug him away. He resisted and started trying to make even more of a spectacle of himself and moved in that unstable and out of control state toward a senator. That cannot just be allowed. Then several security people got on him and tried to drag him out. He just resisted and screamed even more. THEN he got tazered. And he overreacted and acted hysterical about that and made it obvious that he is a selfishly obnoxious attention craver. Screw that punk. He deserved much worse than that.

http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/c...full/39/1/25-a

http://www.ptypes.com/histrionicpd.html

http://www.fortunecity.com/campus/ps...81/bpd-dsm.htm

http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html

Quote:

---

He had his turn to talk to John Kerry about his Flying Spaghetti Monster

---

You are officially in love with the flying spaghetti monster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

You are officially in love with the flying spaghetti monster.

---

I don't believe in things like that. I'm not you.

haha, I do, I've been touched by his noodly appendage!


no, really, at first I was like "what the hell" like everyone else, but Universal Mind has made a very good observation...I admit I didn't notice that.

It's only reality if we accept it, we accept each and every freedom getting taken away piece by piece and it happens so slowly we don't even see it coming. This ought to outrage us, 10 years ago this would have caused idictments but they change has been so slow all it causes is a mere, "welcome to reality" response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I think the guy who got tazered is a schmuck rotten punk who should be in jail right this second. He is such a typical example of personality disordered far leftists who were raised to believe you can get your way by being a loud cry baby and screaming, "I want that toy! I want that toy! You are repressing me! Waaaaaaaaaa!!!! :(" I despise people who act like that guy. He had his turn to talk to John Kerry about his Flying Spaghetti Monster ideas concerning the Illuminati and the Loch Ness Monster. He went over the time EVERYBODY was given to talk. He was politely asked to give somebody else a turn, but he was too narcissistic and sociopathic and histrionic to give a damn. He grabbed the microphone back when it was not his turn to talk and acted very obnoxious with it. He was politely asked to stop his tantrum. He would not do it. So security put their hands on him and calmly asked him to step away. He would not do it. So they physically drug him away. He resisted and started trying to make even more of a spectacle of himself and moved in that unstable and out of control state toward a senator. That cannot just be allowed. Then several security people got on him and tried to drag him out. He just resisted and screamed even more. THEN he got tazered. And he overreacted and acted hysterical about that and made it obvious that he is a selfishly obnoxious attention craver. Screw that punk. He deserved much worse than that.

---

I agree. Since the first time I saw this(these) clips on the news, I wasn't at all surprised that he got tasered. Believe me, I am definitely not one to side with an abuse of power, but this guy was a complete overact. He (according to subsequent newscasts) has a history of disrupting events, playing pranks and causing scenes to make a statement. His screaming out and flailing around (not to mention the complete rape of the concept of "freedom of speech") is evidence of that. He was wrong to dismiss when people (cops or otherwise) asked him to give up the mic after, obviously, having taken more than his share of time, he provoked his own physical removal from a public mic that EVERYONE is supposed to have time to share, and his screams for "help" were completely overacted attempts for sympathy. If he would have had the time, I'm sure he would have stood up there for an hour and asked Kerry every question he'd spent the last five days compiling.

That being said, I think that the cops MIGHT have been able to handle the situation without tasering him. With there being so many cops there, they probably could have gotten him out of the building without resorting to all that. However, he was jumping around, fighting and flailing like a nutcase, and it was a taser, it was not a lethal weapon. They didn't exactly shoot him in the knee cap with a Berretta.

I'm on the fence on this one. It could have been handled without the taser, but it was completely that guys fault for provoking their decision to use one.

He's only protesting his society. The cops arbitrarily arrested him, I would be freaking out if I got arrested for asking a question, too. What, are you trying to tell me he was just being escorted outside before he started freaking out? That's still unjust.

Universal mind makes a very good point. I was like "This is unacceptable" when I first saw it, but now I do not think it was bad at all. The video only gives us so much information. If it is true that he went way over the time, then there is obvious reason to arrest him. He did NOT get tazered and arrested for asking a question. He got tazered for reacting hostiley when asked politely to stop, because he went over the allotted time (if this is not true, then my opinion would change), and then tazered because he resisted arrest and - more importantly - acted like a threat to the senator in the room.

It's important to realize why the police did what they did. It is not a matter of freedom of speech, it's simply him being a jackass and escalating that to a level of being a threat by acting hostily. They asked him to let others speak -- this wasn't simply a request. It was a polite demand. He refused to leave, so they escorted him, but he resisted. It escalated from there.

As he says in the clip "Clinton was impeached for what, a blowjob?" Seen in this (fallicious) viewpont, it is obvious absurd. Just as it is unacceptable looking at the video as being arrested for a question. But Clinton was not impeached for a blowjob. He was impeached for lying about a blowjob. It is definitly a big difference. I'm not sure if adultery is a crime, but purjury sure is! That is what he was arrested for.

In regards to Oneironaut's concern: is tazering really necessary? I think the key factor here was him struggling to get away, flailing and making threatening movements towards a senator. He resisted multiple cops. Though I suppose I should note that it is not as if the man punched any of the cops or anything like that, but he certainly made threatening movements. I think the point of the tazering was to get him into a position where he could be handcuffed. The other way would be tripping him and put him on the ground, or slamming him against a wall, or holding him tight and twisting his arms into position, which would not work very well (why do you think they make people get against a car to be handcuffed). However, this leads them open to be attacked when the man realizes he is being handcuffed. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but tazing does not cause any long term damage. All it does is hurt like a bitch and paralyze you temporarily. This seems like a very good method of subduing him in a safe way both for the man (painful -- but safe) and more importantly the innocent people, cops, and senator there.

Nonetheless, my opinion would completely change if I found out he had not yet passed the maximum time limit for speaking, or he was indeed arrested (as in, the cops testify to this) for what he *said.*

Before making any thoughts on this, though, even if he was not over the time limit... realize that he had a very hostile tone. He was asked to step down, and became inreasingly hostile. This only escalated.

I appreciate the support I have here. I thought I might be alone on this.

I didn't know the guy had a history of obnoxious public outbursts. It doesn't surprise me at all.

I think we need more obnoxious people like him that are willing to be instigators. Abbie Hoffman was doing the exact same thing as this guy pretty much and he ended up becoming one of the Chicago 7 which actually catalyzed a change in society. Until the few that are willing to get themselves in trouble can prove to the masses its fight now or wait until its too late, we're just going to keep drifting.

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?

Haha, America, land of hypocrites... Let's just face it, democracy (especially representative) isn't freedom, it's just an illusion of freedom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Haha, America, land of hypocrites... Let's just face it, democracy (especially representative) isn't freedom, it's just an illusion of freedom.

---

I challenge you to counter my first post in this thread.

Mere speech is legal, with certain exceptions, such as encouraging the breaking of laws and defamation. However, disrupting a forum is not legal. Do you think it should be legal to show up at a Dave Matthews concert and blare some speakers you brought with you? What about taking Dave Matthews' microphone and yelling into it while refusing to give it back? Hogging a microphone that does not belong to you is not legal. Resisting arrest is not legal. He was not arrested merely for speaking what he believed, and it is dishonest to suggest that he was.

While I agree with UM in that the guy is a schmuck, and was totally in the wrong, I also think the cops didn't handle it correctly. Their job is, first and foremost, to ensure the SAFETY of everyone there. If they would have let him run his mouth, and ticketed him afterwards for his behaviour, things would not have escalated the way they did, and overall, things would have been safer. Instead, 5 cops teamed up on him, which made him panic, and ultimately made it necessary to resort to something more brutal... but I don't think any of that was necessary, and the fact that they let it escalate to that point means more people were endangered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Replicon

While I agree with UM in that the guy is a schmuck, and was totally in the wrong, I also think the cops didn't handle it correctly. Their job is, first and foremost, to ensure the SAFETY of everyone there. If they would have let him run his mouth, and ticketed him afterwards for his behaviour, things would not have escalated the way they did, and overall, things would have been safer. Instead, 5 cops teamed up on him, which made him panic, and ultimately made it necessary to resort to something more brutal... but I don't think any of that was necessary, and the fact that they let it escalate to that point means more people were endangered.

---

The cops don't have an obligation to let somebody disrupt a presentation. I am also convinced that the guy's #1 goal was attention every step of the way. I don't think he panicked. He was being like those toddlers who lie on their backs and beat their hands and feet while screaming because they want their ways. I bet he was one of those toddlers earlier in his life, and I bet his parents rewarded that behavior.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4xm4OwPd7xc

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lUV2jCFwuk4

Yes, they have an obligation to allow a guy to ask a fucking question, Um, sorry to disappoint you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neruo

I guess I was wrong for being pro-democrat in the past. Republicans, democrats, all the same aristocrats.

---

The American 2 party system right here
Guy 1 - "I think the puppet on the left shares my beliefs."
Guy 2 - "The puppet on the right is more to my liking"
Both - "HEY! Both puppets are being held by the same guy!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I challenge you to counter my first post in this thread.

---

First of all, I wrote a good reply to this just before my computer crashed :bang:... *take 2*

I don't believe that what I posted had much to do with what you said, but I'll humour you anyways...

If you are arguing that the guy was a jerk, then I agree. The only thing you posted that I don't agree with is when you said that he was a leftist (A leftist complaining about oppression? Yeah right... (no pun intended)), he was as right-wing as they get.

I'll also take the time to explain my previous post a little further. What is America's view of itself on the world? The land of opportunity, free of any form of oppression and bursting at the seams with freedom, right? Well, when the rest of the world (which is pretty tired of America's righteous, high and mighty attitude, by the way...) sees something like this, it doesn't think "Wow, that loudmouth asshole disrupted a well organized political speech, how dare he surpass his allotted time!". No, instead it thinks "Wow, officers of the law violently subdued a man for speaking his mind!". So you can't blame us for finding it a little hypocritical when the US criticizes every little human rights violation that takes place abroad (which you generalize in the same out of context way that we generalize this incident).

As for why I don't believe in democracy, that's another topic for another time (but I'd be more than happy to present my arguments if you started a thread about it)...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The cops don't have an obligation to let somebody disrupt a presentation. I am also convinced that the guy's #1 goal was attention every step of the way. I don't think he panicked. He was being like those toddlers who lie on their backs and beat their hands and feet while screaming because they want their ways. I bet he was one of those toddlers earlier in his life, and I bet his parents rewarded that behavior.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4xm4OwPd7xc

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lUV2jCFwuk4

---

They don't have an obligation to allow someone to disrupt a presentation, but they DO have an obligation to maintain public safety, and I feel they violated it by escalating it. Yes, he's like a toddler, which means his reaction was predictable, and yet they chose to cause things to escalate to the scene we see in those videos. That poor judgment endangered people a lot more than letting him disrupt the presentation. If he had taken out a sword and started waving it around frantically, then sure, zap him, but this was just taken to a point where it didn't need to go.

Yeah I agree, it seems like as soon as he started talking about how Kerry won the election and started present the facts on the 2004 election that was it, two seconds later people were asking him to sit down again, and that is censorship that he had the right to resist, but then it was the police that escalated it. Do you honestly expect an average guy to pull a Martin Luther King Jr and just let himself get non-violently arrested while spouting out that they cannot strip him of his dignity? Most people just aren't that sophisticated, and most activists just aren't that good but they still want to do something. He was just trying to do something and he came off a little bratty just because we're used to activists being these very strong, dignified people but not all of them are.

There is such a thing as a non lethal weapon against crime. There is such a thing as intelligence to create them. To say this kind of stuff is ultimately something that is needed is blinded. You wouldn't have spastics in society in the first place if we did it correctly. A taser hurts anyway. Therefore it's not non lethal. Because it's painful and causes damage.

When people are not educated then you have these kinds of tyranny and crime blossoming around the place with ignorance and immoral people rampant. What do you expect in a degraded society. That is what we deserve.

To argue that. "it's great". Or "it's his fault". Or "It's the police fault". Or "I'm on the fence I don't know but I know why I don't know here because I'm pretty intelligent that it's fairly balanced to a certain extent". And this kind of crap. Is all part of the dumbed down stupidity we face.

Bottom line. He got in the line of fire, and police are trained that we are the enemy.

Quote:

---

Bottom line. He got in the line of fire, and police are trained that we are the enemy.

---

Not sure what you mean there; being that we are the police. Those police just happen to be idiots with no patience and probably hate their jobs.

In the end, the punishment did not fit the "crime". Hell, I wish more people were obnoxious like this guy. Anything is better than the silent ignorance we face everyday. Who cares if he disturbed the stupid presentation. I am sure it was pointless anyway like everything these days.

Quote:

---

Not sure what you mean there; being that we are the police.

---

The police force gets orders to preach that no-one should take the law into their own hands, Let the 'police' decide. Even when they are not doing their job. Never question. We say "oh they are the police". Not really they are who we give our power away to. That's why they have all the power. And the police are puppets of other regulations. So the police is certainly not representing collective humanity. But the illusion that they are is pretty strong. If you think about it generally this has hi-jacked our ability to think for ourself and defend ourself.

The punishment may not fit the crime. That's because we aren't the ones involved in the justice of it or it would fit the crime. It fits the crime to those abusing power. Now It makes sense who is policing. If you get the picture it should be clear already.

Seriously, there were like 6 guards standing there and they couldn't have taken him down without using the taser? Doesn't say much for their abilities as officers...

It almost seemed like that guy was on drugs or something, the way he was yelling and flailing around. And everyone else is just sitting there, really amused at what they are seeing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

First of all, I wrote a good reply to this just before my computer crashed :bang:... *take 2*

I don't believe that what I posted had much to do with what you said, but I'll humour you anyways...

If you are arguing that the guy was a jerk, then I agree. The only thing you posted that I don't agree with is when you said that he was a leftist (A leftist complaining about oppression? Yeah right... (no pun intended)), he was as right-wing as they get.

I'll also take the time to explain my previous post a little further. What is America's view of itself on the world? The land of opportunity, free of any form of oppression and bursting at the seams with freedom, right? Well, when the rest of the world (which is pretty tired of America's righteous, high and mighty attitude, by the way...) sees something like this, it doesn't think "Wow, that loudmouth asshole disrupted a well organized political speech, how dare he surpass his allotted time!". No, instead it thinks "Wow, officers of the law violently subdued a man for speaking his mind!". So you can't blame us for finding it a little hypocritical when the US criticizes every little human rights violation that takes place abroad (which you generalize in the same out of context way that we generalize this incident).

As for why I don't believe in democracy, that's another topic for another time (but I'd be more than happy to present my arguments if you started a thread about it)...

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

Yes, they have an obligation to allow a guy to ask a fucking question, Um, sorry to disappoint you.

---

He had his allotted amount of time. Why do you keep acting like the guy was up there for five seconds and had the microphone snatched before he even asked a question? Why do you keep acting like that not only happened but is also the only thing that happened?

Anyone aware observing properly can see the cops now getting more and more brutal using this taser weapon on people over and over for petty stuff. It's known as increasing tyranny and police state. Don't think they wont use the taser on you. If you don't stand up quick enough, or give them a wrong look.

HA! I think the tazer is a good harmless crowd control. If they just let every ignorant Tom, Dick and Harry speak their mind they'd never get anything accomplished. You think they have the time to sit around and listen to millions of opinions? Get a life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeerJunkie

HA! I think the tazer is a good harmless crowd control. If they just let every ignorant Tom, Dick and Harry speak their mind they'd never get anything accomplished. You think they have the time to sit around and listen to millions of opinions? Get a life.

---

I think you hit the nail on the head. I read the police report. The prick was arrested for speaking, and Saddam Hussein was arrested for digging a hole in the sand. Bill Clinton was impeached for oral sex, Charles Manson was arrested for insulting The Beatles, Ted Bundy was arrested for womanizing, O.J. Simpson was arrested for yelling at his wife and the other day for being too loud at a hotel, Richard Ramirez was arrested for trespassing, Michael Jackson was arrested for jaymoonwalking, and Usaman Bin Laden is wanted for not wearing shoes in a restaurant.

Everybody here is speaking, so I am sure you are trembling right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beerjunkie

you think they have the time to sit around and listen to millions of opinions? Get a life.

---

The tazer is not harmless it's a integration of police brutality under the disguise of so called category of 'non lethal weapons'. Which can be seen used in rather lethal ways in far too many cases. And you don't sit around and listen to millions of opinions. You design a system that integrates millions of opinions and sorts the most intelligent. It's called democracy. And you have no concept of freedom to suggest free expression would cause nothing to get accomplished.

That guy is how your suppose to act when your normal. Ok. He wanted to say something and he had basically no means to express it properly so he got frustrated and desperate. Just crying out for help really. You would be too if you understood a thing or 2 of what's going on. This is what happens when you have backbone. When you stand up for what is right. While everyone else sits there afraid of the police state. To brainwashed to get out of their seats. The entire event is a ridiculous thing to begin with. Kerry's speech is stupid. He doesn't deserve to be a speaker in the first place. Only a couple in the video cry out something is seriously wrong. You either know it by now, or your brainwashed. Pick a category. You'd rather call yourself a BeerJunkie and then tell others to get a life when they say something sensible.

While this guy was getting pretty loud, I still think he had every constitutional right to be up there asking that question. I don’t see why the cops rushed him so quickly either, I’m a criminal justice major in college currently, and from a family of cops, and I don’t really see what the guy did that was so wrong. Sure he was getting somewhat aggressive sounding, and maybe slightly disruptive, but that was no reason to go and take him down like that. The police just can’t get a good image on a college campus; remember the thing at UCLAs library? It was a pretty similar situation. I think a lot of it is police on a college campus either feeling very afraid of feeling as if they need to assert their authority over “kids”.

Don’t get me wrong, as I stated earlier, I’m pretty pro-police especially when they do need to step in, I think everyone has to agree that there are some situation that the police are extremely helpful in, but things like this is just getting them a bad image. It almost seems like the police are heading back toward the public image they had in the 60’s or so, more of the aggressive robots rather than community policing for the good of the neighborhood. Every time I see something like this and hear cops yelling “Get back, get back!” to on lookers, I just wish they would get overran by everyone watching, I’m sure that sounds pretty aggressive, but like Omnius said earlier, Abbie Hoffman was doing this same sort of thing, while violence can’t solve anything, just accepting what happens to people who assert their freedom of speech won’t either. It really does seem like freedom is slowly getting taken away while people just allow it to, and want to call anyone who hangs on to freedom “silly liberals”

Aldrich, your dam right. Now think even more outside the box and we are getting somewhere.

How is the tazer harmful?

Aldrich, he went over his allowed time. Would it have been a problem if he held the microphone for the next two days? It wasn't his. If you let somebody borrow your lighter or your make up mirror, they don't get to hold it for as long as they feel like it. That was just one of the problems.

Mystic. Just to clear one thing up, the taser is not a "lethal" weapon. It hurts like a bitch, yes, but (though things have gone wrong in a handlful of situations) it is not a lethal weapon. A lethal weapon is something that is used to cause fatal harm. A gun is a lethal weapon. A knife is a lethal weapon. A taser is not.

And I have no qualms about this guy standing up and asking his questions to Kerry. Whatever he wanted to ask, if you ask me, is fair game. I don't know how many of you have actually been to functions like this one, but I know that there is absolutely nothing more annoying than a guy that thinks he has all the right in the world to take all the time in the world to hog the mic. (There were people actually getting up and leaving because of this guy hogging the mic. I doubt that was because of the questions he was asking.) These things are scheduled events that operate on a time-table. This is something that everybody knows, before coming to said function. I don't care who you are, or how many good questions you have, in a democractic society (since the concept is being thrown around so much), if rules are set so that everyone should get an allotted time at a mic to ask their questions it is not in your authority to say "fuck you, I'll be here until I get done." Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

Now, again, I think the cops could have handled it a little differently. I don't think these clips show it, but the reason he was tasered (or, the final reason as it was admittedly escalated) was that the lady cop was asking him to put his arm down. After everything that had happened, they had him on the ground and were, yes, arresting him (whether or not that was right is not what I'm touching on), but the lady cop made a clear order for him to put his arm down, and he had one hand still in the air, refusing to put it behind his back. (I'll watch these clips again to see if they show that, but I saw that on FOX, from another angle.)
He refused to put his arm down, obviously defiant. Even when he was screaming "don't tase me bro, don't tase me" he still had his arm in the air and refused to put it down. So..they tased him.

In the beginning, had he told them, politely "Ok, give me 15 more seconds, and let me ask these final questions and I'll be done" things might not have escalated. But he gave the cops, even when being asked quietly to leave the mic, a "step the fuck back, I can ask my questions" attitude, and things got out of hand from there. I don't think the questions that he was asking had much to do with it, it was his hostility and the subsequent reactions to it, that caused the whole thing.

Yep.

Quote:

---

It hurts like a bitch, yes

---

The only difference between a gun and a taser is the way it's used and designed. I would rather not experience a taser would you? Both can result in harm and death. And sorry but intense pain is my definition of lethal use of a weapon. If you don't think a taser is harmful. Use it over and over. You will soon realize.

And I'm really tired of people who think they should defend events like the speech of kerry. This is just dumb defending that. Who cares if the timetable is disrupted. lol. So it should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

And sorry but intense pain is my definition of lethal use of a weapon.

---

Though it is not the actual definition of a lethal weapon. I understand your sympathy, but let's be real, here. You do not define something as something it is not. A weapon is used to hurt like a bitch. A lethal weapon is designed to kill. There are situations to where a non-lethal weapon can cause death, both those are anomalies. My mom carries a stun-gun (she also carries a gun, but that's beside the point :P), so if she stunned some drunken guy that was trying to force himself on her, would you accuse her of using lethal force?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

And I'm really tired of people who think they should defend events like the speech of kerry. This is just dumb defending that. Who cares if the timetable is disrupted. lol. So it should be.

---

I'm not defending Kerry's speech. You should really pay attention. I'm defending the rights of other Americans to get their allotted time to speak, over one guy that wants to hog the fucking mic. What does that have to do with Kerry?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

And I'm really tired of people who think they should defend events like the speech of kerry. This is just dumb defending that. Who cares if the timetable is disrupted. lol. So it should be.

---

So you are for freedom of speech, except for John Kerry's? Kerry deserves freedom of speech too, and that idiot was infringing on it and the freedom of speech of the other people in that room who were waiting to ask questions. Freedom of speech is not the freedom to steal a microphone and talk over a presenter for an hour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Would it have been a problem if he held the microphone for the next two days? It wasn't his.

---

Would it be a problem the Iraq war is started based on a lie and now still is killing masses of people and costing a fortune and overall a massive disaster. And your worried about the microphone? Where is your brains. This is not about ethics with these people. They already are murdering everyone. Don't worry about someone using a microphone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Would it be a problem the Iraq war is started based on a lie and now still is killing masses of people and costing a fortune and overall a massive disaster. And your worried about the microphone? Where is your brains. This is not about ethics with these people. They already are murdering everyone. Don't worry about someone using a microphone.

---

That does not qualify as a counterargument. You went off on a tangent and let my point stand. The issue is not my worry. The issue is a supposed injustice concerning a nut at a Kerry speech.

If you want to argue with me about the long term necessity of the war in Iraq which was partly influenced by WMD intelligence from six governments and the United Nations, read what I have said in the threads started for that issue and counter the arguments. You might want to take some lessons on what counterarguing is first.

Quote:

---

so if she stunned some drunken guy that was trying to force himself on her, would you accuse her of using lethal force?

---

Lethal force is when you do something for no reason to someone. It has nothing to do with defending yourself against an attack. So no that is not lethal force of a weapon. Police use the taser with lethal force though. Haven't you noticed? That makes it a lethal weapon. Each generation gets worse. They wouldn't want to increase to full strength tyranny right away without proper preparation. It's the frog boiling in pot effect. That's why your accepting this so easily today. Having been conditioned for generations.

I like how Um thinks that the heroic efforts by our armed forces during WW2 excuses the criminals activity of the Police today. Listen to the founding fathers, Um, they said dissent is necessary to maintain this country in a state of liberty and equality. Dissenters have maintained this country's equilibrium since the beginning, and without them in the 1890s forming workers unions companies would practically have slave labor. If it weren't for them in the 1960s America may have very well swung into fascism as everybody had feared. Without them NOW we're going to continue to watch our elections manipulated, tragedies covered up and given fake stories, and our tax dollars going to death and destruction.

I called the cops criminal because they are breaking people's rights and slowly taking away people's dignity. We are slowly being run by a police state as free speech becomes "free speech zones" and as they escalate situations far beyond necessary means to maintain control.

And alloted time is bullshit. He had a question, he should be able to relate background info, ask a question and hear an answer. What world are we living in where the politicians get two hours and the citizens are limited to 10 seconds? The worst of it is if it was just about breaking time cutting his mic off would have been sufficient. The fact is the cops were acting pre-emptively before he even showed a single sign of disturbing the Peace. They were already there before even seeing his reaction to a cut off mic. If he had refused to leave the microphone stand on the basis that he deserved to be heard out (which I would still find justified) I could understand escorting him out of the building.

But they decided to be trigger happy and go in there... pretty much directly after the mention of Skull and Bones.

I wish I could be braver in protests and I always tell myself next time the police come to take away our rights and dignity I'm just going to be steadfast, non-violent, not resistant, but also in complete refusal to comply. Unfortunately I'm human, just like this guy, and if I really were brave enough to be arrested I'd probably be freaking out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Lethal force is when you do something for no reason to someone. It has nothing to do with defending yourself against an attack. So no that is not lethal force of a weapon. Police use the taser with lethal force though. Haven't you noticed? That makes it a lethal weapon. Each generation gets worse. They wouldn't want to increase to full strength tyranny right away without proper preparation. It's the frog boiling in pot effect. That's why your accepting this so easily today. Having been conditioned for generations.

---

Mystic...seriously...:wtf:

I'm sorry to have to say this, but you have absolutely no concept of the meaning of the word "lethal." You have simply taken a word that you consider as "bad" and tacked it on to a definition that doesn't fit it. Doing something with reason is not "non-lethal" force. It is "self-defense." There is a difference.

You really need to look up the word lethal in a dictionary before you decide to ever use it again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

I like how Um thinks that the heroic efforts by our armed forces during WW2 excuses the criminals activity of the Police today.

---

You really need to start reading my posts more carefully or else being more honest about what you know I said. You just micharacterized my words yet again. Why do you do that? You also keep giving responses that show you refuse to take into account points I have made repeatedly. If you are not going to read my posts, then please don't respond to them.

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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".

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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. :P

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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. :P :P :P :P :P :P

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Leftist Blogs Defend Police Brutality In Student Tazering
Partisan bickering obscures heart of the issue as Fox News, MSNBC set up phony debate by making Kerry's behavior focus of story, not oppressive actions of thug cops

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Media coverage of a University of Florida student being tazered by cops for asking a question didn't spark a debate about ongoing police brutality and political persecution, but instead prompted partisan bickering and mindless ninnying about John Kerry's behavior during the incident, while leftist blogs defended the actions of the police.

Andrew Meyer was grabbed by cops yesterday after he asked the former presidential candidate why he didn't challenge the rigged election of 2004 and about his membership of the skull and bones secret society. Meyer asked police what he was being arrested for as they dragged him to the back of the University Auditorium before manhandling him to the ground.

As the photo above shows, two female officers, one with some kind of gangland tattoo on her arm, seem to be smiling with pleasure as they move in to seize Meyer.

Only when Meyer was immobile and had five officers on top of him did the police decide to send 50,000 volts of electricity coursing through his prostrate body, seemingly waiting until Meyer begged them not to do it so as to enjoy the maximum power trip from administrating the torture.

Fox News, MSNBC and others relentlessly replayed the video yesterday - not as a shocking indictment of the police's actions during the incident, but to discuss John Kerry's behavior and the fact that he continued taking questions while Meyer was being brutalized.

This prompted leftist blogs like News Hounds to slam Fox for endlessly showing the footage as Democrat websites closed ranks and either ignored what was a savage act of police brutality and political persecution or simply claimed Fox News were hyping the story.

They even defended the actions of the police in stating the cops were right to tazer Meyer as he lay on the floor. Imagine if this had happened during a town hall meeting with Bush - liberals would have screamed bloody murder and rightly so - but in this instance they applaud the police for their act of torture simply because Meyer dared question their idol John Kerry.

Another detail left out of press reports is Meyer's political affiliation - he is not a Neo-Con who was attempting to put John Kerry on the spot as Fox News has tried to portray - he was a 9/11 truther. Meyer links to the 9/11 Mysteries documentary from the home page of his website.

Beyond the mindless partisan ninnying, the heart of the issue is that this was another act of wanton police brutality and torture by means of tazering.

The police are now trained that "pain compliance," a euphemism for torture, is acceptable in apprehending anyone even if that person poses no physical danger.

In many cases, cops will tazer someone even if they offer no resistance whatsoever, simply for the sick enjoyment of the power trip as the victim begs and pleads not to be tortured. They also seem to get a kick out of tazering young children and even toddlers.

Take the case of UCLA student Mostafa Tabatabainejad (video above) , who was stunned over and over again for refusing to show his ID at a campus library.

Tabatabainejad agreed to leave and was on his way out of the building before cops tazered him and then proceeded to order him to get back on his feet just so they could shock him over and over again as he cried and moaned for them to stop.

The bottom line is that Taser use is being abused by police all over the country as cops are trained that torture is a perfectly acceptable response to somebody who asks the wrong question or refuses to show their papers.

I agree with you up until here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

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.

---

Not half as insulting as meddling in other nations' affairs, throwing around your political weight to get the world to fall inline with the american view of "freedom" and invading vastly inferior countries on very questionable motives. Plus, these countries that America has "helped", seem to be falling into civil war and disrupting enitre regions, rather than being all prosperous and safe. If I take Iraq as an example, there is no denying that there would have been far less deaths there over the last few years had the US never entered the country. It seems that you guys have sparked the middle-eastern version of the powder keg, and I can't picture stability in the region anywhere in the foreseeable future.

Quote:

---

especially when your country would have been taken over by the Nazis if we had not helped you save it.

---

Whaaat? Your country has never saved mine, in fact, it invaded it a few times. I'm from Canada by the way, you know, we were your first line of defense against a soviet nuclear attack for fifty years or so...

Quote:

---

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.

---

I also have familly members that served in WW2, my grandfather for one. You don't need to emphasize how much we owe to the soldiers that saved us from oppression in the 40s. And while I don't think that most american soldiers these days are doing anything close to saving the world, I still admire them for performing there jobs despite all the adversity. Keep in mind that I am criticizing the politics and the people who make them, not the people who follow orders.

Quote:

---

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.

---

I doubt your country had mine in mind when it was doing whatever heroic thing you are talking about.

Quote:

---

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.

---

I'm using this as an example, your country has done far worse things to tick me off (but you probably figured that out by now).

Quote:

---

It has a great deal to do with how the world is right now.

---

Not really, different times, different politicians, different politics.

Quote:

---

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.

---

OK, if you want to bring statistics into this, then I'll mention that due to military deaths during the Second World War, my country lost 0.40% of its population while the United States lost 0.34% of there's (source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ww2_casualties). That's keeping in mind that we only served in the europeen theatre against the Nazis, while the US had a large proportion of its forces in the pacific theatre, so the europeen death count is way less than what you stated. We fought for our freedom too, it wasnt given to us.

Quote:

---

Without our involvement, the Nazis would have succeeded in taking over the rest of Europe and then the rest of the world.

---

They pretty much did. The US sat on its ass until Pearl Harbour, and if the UK hadn't won the Battle of Britain, then no amount of US intervention would have saved Europe.

Quote:

---

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.

---

Let's get back to the fact that I'm criticizing today's politics, you can't justify your current actions with past deeds.

Quote:

---

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.

---

That doesn't change the fact that Germany would have won the war had it not been for the Soviets, yet America didn't give them the right to do what they wanted on account of their deeds. So why is it that when I criticize your foreign politics, your response is "We "saved" the world in WW2, be grateful and let us do what we want."?

Quote:

---

And the Taliban did not save the world or even almost save the world.

---

My mistake, I meant the Afghan Mujahideen, which (led by Osama Bin Laden) crushed the Soviets in a severely demoralizing occupation, which was a catalyst for events that brought the end of the Soviet Union. Again, I bet you don't praise them as heros, even after their successful stand against foreign oppression.

Uhm, that's that for now I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Not half as insulting as meddling in other nations' affairs, throwing around your political weight to get the world to fall inline with the american view of "freedom" and invading vastly inferior countries on very questionable motives. Plus, these countries that America has "helped", seem to be falling into civil war and disrupting enitre regions, rather than being all prosperous and safe. If I take Iraq as an example, there is no denying that there would have been far less deaths there over the last few years had the US never entered the country. It seems that you guys have sparked the middle-eastern version of the powder keg, and I can't picture stability in the region anywhere in the foreseeable future.

---

The war in Iraq is about the long term future. It is not all about the first few years after the invasion. That is an inevitable transition period. Still, Hussein killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, was an international terrorist (I am so sick of having to explain this.), had used WMD's in a terrorist attack, violated our ceasefire for 12 years on mulitiple terrorism grounds, and lots of other things. His horrific government that did not allow people to participate in real elections and made people terrified of having their families tortured and killed for breathing the wrong way fell under the Bush doctrine and we had to overthrow them for many reasons. If you call that mere bullying, you are lying.

If you want to argue with me about this, find one of the Iraq threads in Extended Discuss, read all I have written, and address it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Whaaat? Your country has never saved mine, in fact, it invaded it a few times. I'm from Canada by the way, you know, we were your first line of defense against a soviet nuclear attack for fifty years or so...

---

Oh, you are from Canada. No wonder. I could have sworn you said something somewhere about being British. Now that I know the truth, I am far less surprised by your anti-American venom. Canada is our fat little sister, and you know damn well you feel much safer than you would without our protection. Thank you for protecting us against the Soviet Union, badasses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I also have familly members that served in WW2, my grandfather for one. You don't need to emphasize how much we owe to the soldiers that saved us from oppression in the 40s. And while I don't think that most american soldiers these days are doing anything close to saving the world, I still admire them for performing there jobs despite all the adversity. Keep in mind that I am criticizing the politics and the people who make them, not the people who follow orders.

---

Nice to see that. But you are still insulting Americans by making blanket statements about our country because of what a few campus cops did. It is not like they were head generals or senators in the federal government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I doubt your country had mine in mind when it was doing whatever heroic thing you are talking about.

---

They had the future of the entire world in mind. If they didn't have yours in mind specifically, it is because we often forget you exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I'm using this as an example, your country has done far worse things to tick me off (but you probably figured that out by now).

---

Like being much smaller yet worlds more powerful. That seems to get the goat of a lot of you. It's always cute when people despise the hand that protects them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Not really, different times, different politicians, different politics.

---

If the Nazis had taken over the world, what would have made them lose their power? A world of countries couldn't stop them, but zero opposing countries could? And you do know what they wanted to do to all non-whites, gays, crippled, and opposition, right? Their plan was to wipe them all out, like they had done to six million jews. Would the dead have magically grown back from extinction because it is a few decades later?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

OK, if you want to bring statistics into this, then I'll mention that due to military deaths during the Second World War, my country lost 0.40% of its population while the United States lost 0.34% of there's (source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ww2_casualties). That's keeping in mind that we only served in the europeen theatre against the Nazis, while the US had a large proportion of its forces in the pacific theatre, so the europeen death count is way less than what you stated. We fought for our freedom too, it wasnt given to us.

---

I appreciate the Hell out of that, but let's face it. You were not that important of a force. The United States was necessary in driving the Nazis out of Western Europe. Canada helped, but we could have done it without you, just not as easily.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

They pretty much did. The US sat on its ass until Pearl Harbour, and if the UK hadn't won the Battle of Britain, then no amount of US intervention would have saved Europe.

---

"Pretty much did." That is what happened instead of "did". But yes, Britain was an awesome and necessary ally in WWII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Let's get back to the fact that I'm criticizing today's politics, you can't justify your current actions with past deeds.

---

I didn't try to. I said you shouldn't be so quick to talk about the United States like we are school yard bullies and nothing else, especially based on some non-federal campus cops. You used the word "bully" to describe us earlier. If the United States were a bully, there would be another name for Canada. We would call it the United States.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

That doesn't change the fact that Germany would have won the war had it not been for the Soviets, yet America didn't give them the right to do what they wanted on account of their deeds. So why is it that when I criticize your foreign politics, your response is "We "saved" the world in WW2, be grateful and let us do what we want."?

---

You are misconstruing my words, which is very typical of America haters. I never said anything about being able to do whatever we want. I said you should show some appreciation, which you did not do at all when you spewed your sick hate against us in your post before last. I never said the United States single handedly won World War II. I said it could not have been done without us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

My mistake, I meant the Afghan Mujahideen, which (led by Osama Bin Laden) crushed the Soviets in a severely demoralizing occupation, which was a catalyst for events that brought the end of the Soviet Union. Again, I bet you don't praise them as heros, even after their successful stand against foreign oppression.

---

They saved Afghanistan from the Soviets, but they did not save the world. Then the Taliban ruled Afghanistan with far worse oppression than the Soviets would have. We, on the other hand, saved the world. You are welcome. ;-)

If Canadians and others would stop saying such absurd crap against us, we would have plenty of respect for you. We love your landscape and your comedians and musicians, like Joni Mitchell and Neil Young. But when you dog us for our military history, it is very obvious to us why you are doing it, and we start talking like I just did in this post. We would never even think about your military standing if Canadians like you would stop spewing your hate and making yourselves look pathetic.

Universal Mind, notice how I'm still writting in a calm and civilized matter, I implore you to do the same. Could it be that I'm not your typical american flag burner? I was hoping that maybe you would figure out why people dislike the States so much, but instead, you just went and flamed me in the typical american way. People here and abroad just want to coexist with you without having to suffer your influence in our daily lives. Now if you don't mind, put your gloves back on so we can do this the right way. Frankly, I think you are deluding yourself if you think that your country's current foreign agenda has anything to do with the promotion of world peace and freedom. That being said, what gives you the right to meddle with other nations' affairs? And I swear to god if your answer is "we saved the world",...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Universal Mind, notice how I'm still writting in a calm and civilized matter, I implore you to do the same. Could it be that I'm not your typical american flag burner? I was hoping that maybe you would figure out why people dislike the States so much, but instead, you just went and flamed me in the typical american way. People here and abroad just want to coexist with you without having to suffer your influence in our daily lives. Now if you don't mind, put your gloves back on so we can do this the right way. Frankly, I think you are deluding yourself if you think that your country's current foreign agenda has anything to do with the promotion of world peace and freedom. That being said, what gives you the right to meddle with other nations' affairs? And I swear to god if your answer is "we saved the world",...

---

You call my country a "bully" against the world, misconstrue things I said so you can riducule me and further insult my country, claim the people who fought and died from my country in WWII didn't give a damn about Canada, and tell me I am "deluding" myself, and you still want to play the self-righteous card by acting like you have been civil? I'm not buying it. I explained the necessity of sometimes meddling in other countries' affairs (like Canada did in World War II), particularly the ones that try to take over the world and ruin it and the ones that use WMD's for terrorist purposes and could get WMD's into the hands of suicide bombers that want to make my country extinct and then the rest of the West. Now counter the points I made in my last post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Frankly, I think you are deluding yourself if you think that your country's current foreign agenda has anything to do with the promotion of world peace and freedom. That being said, what gives you the right to meddle with other nations' affairs? And I swear to god if your answer is "we saved the world",...

---

I live in an area surrounded by 2 of the biggest military bases. I talk to people in the military every single day. ALL of them support the war on terror/iraq and they ALL agree that nobody can understand how shitty it is over there and how terrible some of the people are there. Actually make that MOST of the people. How can you say we are doing the wrong thing when you live in Canada, and don't know anything that's going on? lol

It is definatly a necessity to continue this war if you want the next generation to live in peace, period. We are doing nothing but helping the good people and stopping the bad. It is sad that most people don't see this because they are too liberal and think everything is good. They think things like poverty and world hunger and "global warming" bullshit is more important. I believe that civilization and peace is more important. And it's true if you want peace prepare for war. 'Course Canada won't help with that, but if someone were to wage war against yall, America would surely save your ass.

What is your opposition for the war? All you go on saying is how it is bad we are and how we are bullying or w/e. What is your actual reason for believing we are wrong? I think trying to rid the world of terrorists and evil people, and trying to establish decent countries is a good enough reason to be for it.

Lol, you think we never saved your country? Your country wouldn't exist without us wtf are you thinking?

PS: my neighbor was just killed from a roadside bombing in july. And btw, We are saving the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Now counter the points I made in my last post.

---

If you wish, but I must mention that this argument has lost much of its value to me, arguing with a patriotic american is like asking a blind man to see. It would be far too simple for you to give humility a try and start clean like I did, free of childish insults and the like, but no, you're american, better to die than to lose face! Anyways...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The war in Iraq is about the long term future. It is not all about the first few years after the invasion. That is an inevitable transition period. Still, Hussein killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, was an international terrorist (I am so sick of having to explain this.), had used WMD's in a terrorist attack, violated our ceasefire for 12 years on mulitiple terrorism grounds, and lots of other things. His horrific government that did not allow people to participate in real elections and made people terrified of having their families tortured and killed for breathing the wrong way fell under the Bush doctrine and we had to overthrow them for many reasons. If you call that mere bullying, you are lying.

If you want to argue with me about this, find one of the Iraq threads in Extended Discuss, read all I have written, and address it.

---

A few things, first of all, Iraq was an example among many others, I used it because it is the most popular one right now. Second of all Hussein may have been pretty bad, but the deaths under his reign definately didn't climb into the hundreds of thousands. You don't seem to like him now, but you were fully backing him in the 80s. Only when he screwed you over in Kuwait did his government become "horrific". The bullying I was referring to was more along the lines of the US putting pressure on other countries to participate in the invasion. Significant diplomatic strain was created because countries refused to back up the US invasion.

Quote:

---

Oh, you are from Canada. No wonder. I could have sworn you said something somewhere about being British. Now that I know the truth, I am far less surprised by your anti-American venom. Canada is our fat little sister, and you know damn well you feel much safer than you would without our protection. Thank you for protecting us against the Soviet Union, badasses.

---

How mature of you, and you think what I said was insulting? I called your country's mistakes, you blatantly stereotyped mine. And I do thank you for protecting us against are many enemies, fortunately for us, we have none, so your work is kind of easy! Once you actually defend us from something, you can say that you're our watchdog. And you didn't like our protection? Then maybe we should have torn down all our radar systems and air force bases in the arctic, it's not like you needed them.

Quote:

---

Nice to see that. But you are still insulting Americans by making blanket statements about our country because of what a few campus cops did. It is not like they were head generals or senators in the federal government.

---

Glad you understand that, now can you see why it is wrong for America to generalize foreign affairs?

Quote:

---

They had the future of the entire world in mind. If they didn't have yours in mind specifically, it is because we often forget you exist.

---

Uhm, I don't want to risk putting my foot in my mouth until you tell me what event you're talking about here. And if canadians are so inexistant to you, maybe we should cut off our supplies of natural resources to the States for a few days, it's probably painful for you to hear, but there is no way the States would survive without us (vice versa too).

Quote:

---

Like being much smaller yet worlds more powerful. That seems to get the goat of a lot of you. It's always cute when people despise the hand that protects them.

---

You think I'm jealous of the States? In many ways, it is a godsend for a low population naturaly rich country like mine to be next to a heavily populated and powerful country like yours, but if we were just good trading partners, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead, your country is knee deep into my country's politics, often influencing the outcome of legislation. You frequently refute our claims to territorial waters and use them to illegally ferry warships. Due to air currents, all of the crap spewed by your dirty unregulated power plants falls in the form of acid rain over most of eastern Canada. My grudge against the States has nothing to do with petty rivalries,
those kinds of things are best left for sports, not politics.

Quote:

---

If the Nazis had taken over the world, what would have made them lose their power? A world of countries couldn't stop them, but zero opposing countries could? And you do know what they wanted to do to all non-whites, gays, crippled, and opposition, right? Their plan was to wipe them all out, like they had done to six million jews. Would the dead have magically grown back from extinction because it is a few decades later?

---

So let me get this right, you're comparing America's current military involvement around the world with WW2?

Quote:

---

I appreciate the Hell out of that, but let's face it. You were not that important of a force. The United States was necessary in driving the Nazis out of Western Europe. Canada helped, but we could have done it without you, just not as easily.

---

You're right, I just wanted to make sure you understood that we were ready and willing to fight for our beliefs, wether or not the americans would have decided to join the war. It was Commonwealth pilots that made the difference during the Battle of Britain, which we barely won. This was long before America ever set foot into Europe.

Quote:

---

"Pretty much did." That is what happened instead of "did". But yes, Britain was an awesome and necessary ally in WWII.

---

My point was that the US didn't decide to intervene until long after the start of the war. The UK and its Commonwealth stood alone against the might of the Nazi war machine while the US looked on. It could very easily had gone the other way, and all of Europe would have been conquered while the US stood by.

Quote:

---

I didn't try to. I said you shouldn't be so quick to talk about the United States like we are school yard bullies and nothing else, especially based on some non-federal campus cops. You used the word "bully" to describe us earlier. If the United States were a bully, there would be another name for Canada. We would call it the United States.

---

At this point, we are so far beyond the speech incident, we're scratching at the root of the problem. And by the way, "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" kind of refutes what you just said. You are asking me to judge the United States based on its exploits during WW2 rather than its current situation. Even you must admit that today's America isn't the same as 1940s America. Also, it's not like you didn't try to take over Canada in the 19th century. America even had a warplan against us until the outbreak of WW2. I do find it interesting though that one of Canada's nicknames is the 51st state...

Quote:

---

You are misconstruing my words, which is very typical of America haters. I never said anything about being able to do whatever we want. I said you should show some appreciation, which you did not do at all when you spewed your sick hate against us in your post before last. I never said the United States single handedly won World War II. I said it could not have been done without us.

---

Oh sorry, I didn't catch any of that, I was to busy burning an american flag. I still don't get what I said that offended you so much, it's not like anything was without basis. Now how about you stop using how many of your countrymen died in a 60 year old war as an analogy for what is going on right now. WW2 has barely anything to do with today's events. If all you wish is appreciation for your veterans, then I shall give it to you and then some.

Quote:

---

They saved Afghanistan from the Soviets, but they did not save the world. Then the Taliban ruled Afghanistan with far worse oppression than the Soviets would have. We, on the other hand, saved the world. You are welcome. ;-)

---

The Soviet afghan war was pretty much the undoing of the USSR, so you can say that they had an integral part in destroying the Soviet Union. My point was that views on these groups are relative, they are heroic when fighting with you and they are evil when fighting against you. Like the saying goes, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You may think you saved the world in your eyes, but from another point of view, you are simply meddling where you do not belong.

Quote:

---

If Canadians and others would stop saying such absurd crap against us, we would have plenty of respect for you. We love your landscape and your comedians and musicians, like Joni Mitchell and Neil Young. But when you dog us for our military history, it is very obvious to us why you are doing it, and we start talking like I just did in this post. We would never even think about your military standing if Canadians like you would stop spewing your hate and making yourselves look pathetic.

---

Nothing I have said has been without basis. We aren't looking for respect, just a little privacy, stop poking us and we'll stop twitching. As I have stated, I don't really care about your military history, it isn't relavent to today's problems. What your soldiers (and everybody elses) did 60 years ago was admirable, but hardly similar to current issues. In fact, I believe that things will go much smoother if WW2 wasn't brought up again. And I wasn't aware that our respective armed forces were being criticized, I thought we were discussing your country's foreign policies. I see you ended your post with an insult, well I would like to clarify that my father is stronger than your father.

I thought I'd point out that after weeks of stepping out of these debates "Universal Mind" talks in so many circles it's dizzying. Just be forewarned, It'd be wise to rethink wasting your time stepping into the vacuous void of a debate with UM.

Now that I think of it...his avatar makes a lot of sense in describing his debating method. It's kind like a spirograph or blackhole from which no light or rationale can escape. :chuckle:
http://junki.main.jp/fungraphics/Spirograph1.gif



[Edit: On topic, I think the boy had it coming by essentially pulling a filibuster without the pulpit to do so. You can't just spout your mouth whenever and however you feel like it. You gotta be smart about it, which is exactly why he got tazed. He didn't think. We have freedom of speech, yes, but not the freedom to run amok. Just like all people, you would need permits and planning in order to protest, or go on that kind of diatribe. Perhaps, the use of the tazer was excessive and a sign of the times, but the guy just wouldn't shut up or calm down after being escorted away so it serves him right for not picking the right battles, I think.]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael

I live in an area surrounded by 2 of the biggest military bases. I talk to people in the military every single day. ALL of them support the war on terror/iraq and they ALL agree that nobody can understand how shitty it is over there and how terrible some of the people are there. Actually make that MOST of the people. How can you say we are doing the wrong thing when you live in Canada, and don't know anything that's going on? lol

It is definatly a necessity to continue this war if you want the next generation to live in peace, period. We are doing nothing but helping the good people and stopping the bad. It is sad that most people don't see this because they are too liberal and think everything is good. They think things like poverty and world hunger and "global warming" bullshit is more important. I believe that civilization and peace is more important. And it's true if you want peace prepare for war. 'Course Canada won't help with that, but if someone were to wage war against yall, America would surely save your ass.

What is your opposition for the war? All you go on saying is how it is bad we are and how we are bullying or w/e. What is your actual reason for believing we are wrong? I think trying to rid the world of terrorists and evil people, and trying to establish decent countries is a good enough reason to be for it.

Lol, you think we never saved your country? Your country wouldn't exist without us wtf are you thinking?

PS: my neighbor was just killed from a roadside bombing in july. And btw, We are saving the world.

---

Of course they support the war, it's their job! And it is definately not the soldiers that I am criticizing, but rather the policy makers. Unfortunately, I think that now that you have gotten yourselves into this mess, you are obligated to see it to the end, so I am definately for the continuation of the occupation of Iraq. The place has become such a violence ridden warzone since the US invasion, that to leave it now would be to condemn it to certain chaos for the next few decades. As for going there in the first place, offer me some irrefutable proof that invading Iraq was necessary to counter an immediate threat. The war on terror started off great in Afghanistan. All you need to do is drop a few laser guided bombs on key terrorist targets (you guys supposedly have the best intelligence service in the business). But then people started occupying these places and the shit hit the fan. Now you find yourselves in an unwinnable war against an invisible foe. And if that wasn't bad enough, you sparked the worst civil war in the area since the Middle Ages.

Hehe, I guarantee you that global warming will be cooking this planet before there will be peace in the Middle-East. Anyways, I'm sick of all this America protects Canada stuff. Can anyone name one time where the States saved my country from an invasion? Due to the conditions of NATO, we are obligated to assist the United States if they are attacked, but nothing obliges us to follow them if they feel like running off into their own little private war. What if Canada decided to invade Jamaica all of a sudden "just because", do you really think we would have the States supporting us?

My opposition to the war is in the way it is being fought. If it was just about the terrorists, then like I said, drop a bomb and that's that. But when you take control of countries and threaten those who don't support you, you can't help to think that there are some kind of ulterior motives at play. I honestly can't believe how stupid it was for american strategists to get themselves into another guerilla warfare scenario, didn't they learn their lesson from Viet-Nam? You just can't win a war like that, it's not conventional. So instead, people sit around and people die, needlessly.

Please get your facts straight about my country before you pretend to know things about it.

I'm sorry about your neighbor. And, unfortunately, despite your opinion, to many people you are making the world far worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

If you wish, but I must mention that this argument has lost much of its value to me, arguing with a patriotic american is like asking a blind man to see. It would be far too simple for you to give humility a try and start clean like I did, free of childish insults and the like, but no, you're american, better to die than to lose face! Anyways...

---

How could you possibly miss hypocrisy that is that enormous? Also, stop shutting your mind to the possibility that I want to understand your view. I have been on-point the whole way. You, on the other hand, keep running off on bizarre tangents about your mere assumptions of what I believe. I disagree with my government on a lot of things, and I am annoyed by the Pledge of Allegience and our national anthem. I have also burned a few flags because I think it is hilarious that people want to make it illegal to do that, so go ahead and drop the blind patriotism assumption right away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

A few things, first of all, Iraq was an example among many others, I used it because it is the most popular one right now. Second of all Hussein may have been pretty bad, but the deaths under his reign definately didn't climb into the hundreds of thousands. You don't seem to like him now, but you were fully backing him in the 80s. Only when he screwed you over in Kuwait did his government become "horrific". The bullying I was referring to was more along the lines of the US putting pressure on other countries to participate in the invasion. Significant diplomatic strain was created because countries refused to back up the US invasion.

---

Alliance is not proof of liking, and the Hussein regime really went bad after that. His killings did climb into the hundreds of thousands, even with the mass graves alone. But that alone would not have been enough for the war. There were many reasons for it. We did not bully any countries to help us. We just highly encouraged them because what we are doing is in the interest of the entire world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

How mature of you, and you think what I said was insulting? I called your country's mistakes, you blatantly stereotyped mine. And I do thank you for protecting us against are many enemies, fortunately for us, we have none, so your work is kind of easy! Once you actually defend us from something, you can say that you're our watchdog. And you didn't like our protection? Then maybe we should have torn down all our radar systems and air force bases in the arctic, it's not like you needed them.

---

You do have enemies. The Islamofascists hate your guts and want you dead as dirt. But the protection I was mainly talking about was the protection against invaders who want to take over countries, which nobody would dare do to Canada now that the United States is so powerful. Look at how the world worked before we existed. Take over happened all the time. I can assure you that if dictators didn't believe we would tear them to shreds, Canada would be called something else right this very second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Glad you understand that, now can you see why it is wrong for America to generalize foreign affairs?

---

I have no idea what you are talking about there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Uhm, I don't want to risk putting my foot in my mouth until you tell me what event you're talking about here. And if canadians are so inexistant to you, maybe we should cut off our supplies of natural resources to the States for a few days, it's probably painful for you to hear, but there is no way the States would survive without us (vice versa too).

---

The soldiers were thinking about saving the world from the Nazis, not just the United States, and that thought had a lot to do with their morale. The Canada crack was a joke. It concerned the fact that you do a Hell of a lot more thinking about us than we do about you. An American comedian once said that she talked to a Canadian who asked her what Americans think of Canadians, and her response was, "We don't."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

You think I'm jealous of the States? In many ways, it is a godsend for a low population naturaly rich country like mine to be next to a heavily populated and powerful country like yours, but if we were just good trading partners, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead, your country is knee deep into my country's politics, often influencing the outcome of legislation. You frequently refute our claims to territorial waters and use them to illegally ferry warships. Due to air currents, all of the crap spewed by your dirty unregulated power plants falls in the form of acid rain over most of eastern Canada. My grudge against the States has nothing to do with petty rivalries,
those kinds of things are best left for sports, not politics.

---

I really wish people would keep that stuff to sports, but they don't. The truth is that people do despise my country for our power and wealth, just like they despise schools and individuals for their success. I really wish the entire world would adopt the systems we used to get us where we are. I don't want us to stand out as the most successful. I want everybody to be successful, and everybody can be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

So let me get this right, you're comparing America's current military involvement around the world with WW2?

---

No. I could do that, but I have not done that in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

My point was that the US didn't decide to intervene until long after the start of the war. The UK and its Commonwealth stood alone against the might of the Nazi war machine while the US looked on. It could very easily had gone the other way, and all of Europe would have been conquered while the US stood by.

---

That shows how cautious we are about something as serious as war, contrary to much public opinion. But I agree that we were way too cautious about entering WWII and should have done it much earlier. I think pretty much all of our current military leaders agree with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

At this point, we are so far beyond the speech incident, we're scratching at the root of the problem. And by the way, "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" kind of refutes what you just said. You are asking me to judge the United States based on its exploits during WW2 rather than its current situation. Even you must admit that today's America isn't the same as 1940s America. Also, it's not like you didn't try to take over Canada in the 19th century. America even had a warplan against us until the outbreak of WW2. I do find it interesting though that one of Canada's nicknames is the 51st state...

---

I was saying that your earlier comments showed a lack of gratitude and that a few campus cops who probably make a little above minumum wage and would be working in diners if they got fired are not the people to judge the U.S. on. I gave you a better group of people to do that with and mentioned that our history is reason for you to show respect and not act like a calmer version of the guy in the taser video.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Oh sorry, I didn't catch any of that, I was to busy burning an american flag. I still don't get what I said that offended you so much, it's not like anything was without basis. Now how about you stop using how many of your countrymen died in a 60 year old war as an analogy for what is going on right now. WW2 has barely anything to do with today's events. If all you wish is appreciation for your veterans, then I shall give it to you and then some.

---

How many different ways are you going to misinterpret my point? I have listed your offensive comments, which I have argued are false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

The Soviet afghan war was pretty much the undoing of the USSR, so you can say that they had an integral part in destroying the Soviet Union. My point was that views on these groups are relative, they are heroic when fighting with you and they are evil when fighting against you. Like the saying goes, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. You may think you saved the world in your eyes, but from another point of view, you are simply meddling where you do not belong.

---

I majorly disagree with you on that. The arms race in the midst of communism was the undoing of the Soviet Union. Ronald Reagan gets the MVP award, not Usama Bin Laden. BL just gets a participation ribbon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Nothing I have said has been without basis. We aren't looking for respect, just a little privacy, stop poking us and we'll stop twitching. As I have stated, I don't really care about your military history, it isn't relavent to today's problems. What your soldiers (and everybody elses) did 60 years ago was admirable, but hardly similar to current issues. In fact, I believe that things will go much smoother if WW2 wasn't brought up again. And I wasn't aware that our respective armed forces were being criticized, I thought we were discussing your country's foreign policies. I see you ended your post with an insult, well I would like to clarify that my father is stronger than your father.

---

Oh, you haven't used any insults, so I can't imagine why I would use any. You are so righteous even though you are not. Are you a Baptist preacher by any chance? I am tired of correcting you on your misconceptions about my WWII point, so I am not going to do it again here. You know what it is by now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

haha the war in Iraq is definitely a mistake no matter how you look at it. My conclusion is that UniversalMind has some weird intentions for debating. Every time I try to talk to him he is unreasonable and others would have experienced the same effect.

---

Every time I corner you, which is every time you have the balls to try to debate me, you resort to posting silly pictures. Calling me unreasonable must be really convenient when you can't prove it.

haha the war in Iraq is definitely a mistake no matter how you look at it. My conclusion is that Universal Mind has some weird intentions for debating. I find it pretty disturbing he does not care that they lied and that is proven, to get America into that mess. And every time I try to talk to him he is unreasonable and others would have experienced the same effect. What kind of disturbed person supports the war in Iraq? Even Bush said that he will take troops out soon. Hell even bush admits that things have not gone as planned. Most people in the white house already understand the war cannot be won! If the war cannot be won. Then how is that beneficial? How dumb do you have to be. Bush knows what everyone wants to hear, is to get the troops out. But again he's blatantly deceiving with these lies as usual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

haha the war in Iraq is definitely a mistake no matter how you look at it. My conclusion is that Universal Mind has some weird intentions for debating. I find it pretty disturbing he does not care that they lied and that is proven, to get America into that mess. And every time I try to talk to him he is unreasonable and others would have experienced the same effect. What kind of disturbed person supports the war in Iraq? Even Bush said that he will take troops out soon. Hell even bush admits that things have not gone as planned. Most people in the white house already understand the war cannot be won! If the war cannot be won. Then how is that beneficial? How dumb do you have to be. Bush knows what everyone wants to hear, is to get the troops out. But again he's blatantly deceiving with these lies as usual.

---

I am seriously starting to question your age.

I know you back down to pretty much every point I ever make, but I have a challenge for you. Explain how reporting the highly relevant intelligence of six governments and the United Nations is "lying". Do you think you can do that? Posting a silly picture does not qualify.

If you think the evidence to invade Iraq was not fabricated you got your facts mixed up. Colin Powell already apologized for getting the evidence wrong. And he has a black mark on his record for it. The only problem is he is suppose to be fired as it's impossible to accidentally lie about evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Explain how reporting the highly relevant intelligence of six governments and the United Nations is "lying".

---

Do you even know what they reported? Your question is absurd. Calling it relevant is a joke and the lies and fabrications are worse than not relevant. It's deceiving. If they had so much intelligence and support. How do they screw up so badly. I know exactly why. Be more precise about your assumptions. As what I am saying is facts. Prove facts wrong before you ask me to debunk your question with no basis.

And you have not debunked one of my 'silly photos'. They are silly maybe because you don't understand them. I'm not the one posting planes everywhere and making jokes about how to hide them. And then you call my pictures silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

If you think the evidence to invade Iraq was not fabricated you got your facts mixed up. Colin Powell already apologized for getting the evidence wrong. And he has a black mark on his record for it. The only problem is he is suppose to be fired as it's impossible to accidentally lie about evidence.



Do you even know what they reported? Your question is absurd. Calling it relevant is a joke and the lies and fabrications are worse than not relevant. It's deceiving. If they had so much intelligence and support. How do they screw up so badly. I know exactly why. Be more precise about your assumptions. As what I am saying is facts. Prove facts wrong before you ask me to debunk your question with no basis.

And you have not debunked one of my 'silly photos'. They are silly maybe because you don't understand them. I'm not the one posting planes everywhere and making jokes about how to hide them. And then you call my pictures silly.

---

Where did they get the intelligence? Let's see if you have enough intellectual honesty to answer that question correctly. Then answer the qutestion you just dodged.

The silly pictures I am talking about are the ones with ostriches and comical Bush pictures and stuff. My silly pictures are responses to yours. At least the airplane pictures illustrate the absurdity of your la la land ideas about military planes subsituted in for commercial airplanes that nobody ever reported missing. My point was that you post your silly pictures as though they counter my points, but they don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Where did they get the intelligence? Let's see if you have enough intellectual honesty to answer that question correctly. Then answer the qutestion you just dodged.

The silly pictures I am talking about are the ones with ostriches and comical Bush pictures and stuff. My silly pictures are responses to yours. At least the airplane pictures illustrate the absurdity of your la la land ideas about military planes subsituted in for commercial airplanes that nobody ever reported missing. My point was that you post your silly pictures as though they counter my points, but they don't.

---

It's not where they got their intelligence it's how they used it. Your questions and statements don't seem to serve any greater purpose but to bring us back to square one.

arrhhhhh. It's sucking me into it's circle hole again.


http://junki.main.jp/fungraphics/Spirograph1.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

It's not where they got their intelligence it's how they used it. Your questions and statements don't seem to serve any greater purpose but to bring us back to square one.

---

the intelligence: The Hussein regime has stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, such as x,y, and z.

the way the intelligence was used: That is one more reason to overthrow the Hussein regime, which was the stated consequence of noncompliance with our ceasefire.

Now post one of your nonresponsive animal pictures instead of debating.

But they funded sadam to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

But they funded sadam to begin with.

---

How did that make us any safer in 2003? What is your point?

Some alliances go really bad.

:offtopic:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

:offtopic:

---

:rolllaugh:

Listen, tickle me Elmo. The reason your country went to war was not the same reason they made up during and at the end of the sadam saga. And had nothing to do with 911. This does not seem to worry you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Listen, tickle me Elmo. The reason your country went to war was not the same reason they made up during and at the end of the sadam saga. And had nothing to do with 911. This does not seem to worry you.

---

Miss Piggy, 9/11 influenced the Bush Doctrine, which the Hussein regime fell under. We had many reasons for overthrowing the Hussein regime. You lefties on the silly trendy hippy wagon with a purple Kool-Aid bar keep committing the fallacy of claiming that any reasons stated at one moment are supposed to compose the entire list. That is illogical.

Quote:

---

the silly trendy hippy wagon with a purple Kool-Aid bar

---

:clap:

Very funny

as appose to your tunnel of light. Look I'm going to bed this is ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Look I'm going to bed this is ridiculous.

---

http://youtube.com/watch?v=wYLDH4vBK...related&search=

Good night tunnel of light.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dNbRjOE6sGc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Good night tunnel of light.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dNbRjOE6sGc

---

Good night, prophet of numerological prophecy conspiracy.

You guys are too wordy. I dream of a forum where every single topic and reply consists of just youtube links. :chuckle:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Replicon

You guys are too wordy. I dream of a forum where every single topic and reply consists of just youtube links. :chuckle:

---

I know where you can find a lot of posts like that. Just search under "Mystic7", unless you want links that actually prove something. He might not know how to debate points, but one thing he can do is post a picture of an ostrich.

I feel as though this would help shine a new light on the whole situation.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wasup

I feel as though this would help shine a new light on the whole situation.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc

---

:lol: That's hilarious.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dIMeVj-Rb7g

yeah we are too cowardly so lets just make fun of it.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nQbTSC0zjac

http://youtube.com/watch?v=EqRf8odn7Xk


But wait, not everyones a coward.The Recoil

How about the video of the cop shooting the guy three times for obeying orders? Or the cops tackling and breaking the ankle of a priest who just wanted to watch General Petreaus speak?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaasum

How about the video of the cop shooting the guy three times for obeying orders? Or the cops tackling and breaking the ankle of a priest who just wanted to watch General Petreaus speak?

---

I haven't seen them, but I have a feeling you might be sugarcoating the Hell out of what they did. Maybe not. I know I saw how some speech freedom infringers acted when our top general was trying to speak at a majorly important meeting with Congress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

How could you possibly miss hypocrisy that is that enormous? Also, stop shutting your mind to the possibility that I want to understand your view. I have been on-point the whole way. You, on the other hand, keep running off on bizarre tangents about your mere assumptions of what I believe. I disagree with my government on a lot of things, and I am annoyed by the Pledge of Allegience and our national anthem. I have also burned a few flags because I think it is hilarious that people want to make it illegal to do that, so go ahead and drop the blind patriotism assumption right away.

---

Very well, I will take you more seriously, but only if you drop the assumption that I'm some disgruntled misfit that's out to get you or your country.

Quote:

---

Alliance is not proof of liking, and the Hussein regime really went bad after that. His killings did climb into the hundreds of thousands, even with the mass graves alone. But that alone would not have been enough for the war. There were many reasons for it. We did not bully any countries to help us. We just highly encouraged them because what we are doing is in the interest of the entire world.

---

I see your point, my enemy's enemy is my friend, right? Nonetheless, one day you were supporting them, and the next you were calling them evil. The government of Iraq had committed many atrocities while they were still backed by the US. It's a bit hypocritical to suddenly denounce Iraq as evil just because it switched sides, but lets not get to caught up into this, as I said, Iraq was just an example. As for bullying, how about all that controversial pressure you put on countries like Pakistan in the days following 9/11? Or what about that whole "we hate France" phase when they declined to participate in the invasion of Iraq?

Quote:

---

You do have enemies. The Islamofascists hate your guts and want you dead as dirt. But the protection I was mainly talking about was the protection against invaders who want to take over countries, which nobody would dare do to Canada now that the United States is so powerful. Look at how the world worked before we existed. Take over happened all the time. I can assure you that if dictators didn't believe we would tear them to shreds, Canada would be called something else right this very second.

---

A big part of the reason that islamic extremists dislike Canada is because we (mostly) support the US. Nonetheless, the US keeps blaming Canada as an entry point for terrorists, yet we managed to prevent a major homegrown terrorist attack that could have been on par with the London or Madrid bombings (http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/to...lot/index.html), whereas you failed to prevent 9/11. And as for invasions, Canada has never been invaded for the same reason that Australia or Greenland have never been invaded, because of its harsh climate and isolation. There is no country today that could launch and support an invasion of Canada (except the US). Come to think about it, one of the reasons that the US is so powerful is its geographical location in North America.

Quote:

---

I have no idea what you are talking about there.

---

That was my original point. You accuse me of generalizing the situation that happened on the campus into something that applied to the whole country. Yet the States do the same thing all the time with events that happen abroad, I'm just saying that it's a two way street.

Quote:

---

The soldiers were thinking about saving the world from the Nazis, not just the United States, and that thought had a lot to do with their morale. The Canada crack was a joke. It concerned the fact that you do a Hell of a lot more thinking about us than we do about you. An American comedian once said that she talked to a Canadian who asked her what Americans think of Canadians, and her response was, "We don't."

---

OK, well if you're talking about the Second World War, then that brings me back to one of my old arguments, which is that you can't justify your current political actions with past deeds. Everyone did what they could back then to fight for their values. The reason that canadians think so much more about americans than the opposite is that we feel your influence in our everyday lives, a lot. One of our prime ministers compared relations between our countries to "sleeping with an elephant. No matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast, if I can call it that, one is affected by every twitch and grunt." So when the US goes off and does something stupid, it pisses us off.

Quote:

---

I really wish people would keep that stuff to sports, but they don't. The truth is that people do despise my country for our power and wealth, just like they despise schools and individuals for their success. I really wish the entire world would adopt the systems we used to get us where we are. I don't want us to stand out as the most successful. I want everybody to be successful, and everybody can be.

---

People like those you stated do exist, here and abroad, but I am not one of them. I just mentioned a few reasons I have for being angry at your government, it's the interventionist position on foreign policies that your country takes that bothers me. Also, I have my qualms with America's internal politics, but it is not my place to debate them. However, I don't think that the US should be used as a model for other countries, there's a reason you're going through a recession and that your people are losing faith in their government.

Quote:

---

No. I could do that, but I have not done that in this thread.

---

OK, then let's drop this point.

Quote:

---

That shows how cautious we are about something as serious as war, contrary to much public opinion. But I agree that we were way too cautious about entering WWII and should have done it much earlier. I think pretty much all of our current military leaders agree with that.

---

The fact that you were overly cautious in WW2 doesn't necessarily mean that you aren't a little trigger happy in the 21st century.

Quote:

---

I was saying that your earlier comments showed a lack of gratitude and that a few campus cops who probably make a little above minumum wage and would be working in diners if they got fired are not the people to judge the U.S. on. I gave you a better group of people to do that with and mentioned that our history is reason for you to show respect and not act like a calmer version of the guy in the taser video.

---

When I made those comments, I was thinking about America's present actions which irritated me, not every action it has taken since its inception. When you think of Britain today, do you see an ally or an oppressive enemy?

Quote:

---

How many different ways are you going to misinterpret my point? I have listed your offensive comments, which I have argued are false.

---

Please list them again, just to make sure. Be certain that there is only one possible way to interpret them.

Quote:

---

I majorly disagree with you on that. The arms race in the midst of communism was the undoing of the Soviet Union. Ronald Reagan gets the MVP award, not Usama Bin Laden. BL just gets a participation ribbon.

---

OK, here we have a difference of opinion, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe that the Soviet Afghan War (which was pretty much the Soviet equivalent of the Vietnam War) severely depleted public morale and tolerance for the USSR. It had a major impact on the break-up of the Soviet Union. In any case, do you understand my point about how "saving the world" is subjective?

Quote:

---

Oh, you haven't used any insults, so I can't imagine why I would use any. You are so righteous even though you are not. Are you a Baptist preacher by any chance? I am tired of correcting you on your misconceptions about my WWII point, so I am not going to do it again here. You know what it is by now.

---

OK, for the sake of argument, I'm going to ignore all that unproductive sarcasm. It's not like I hate America and its people, nor am I trying to dictate what is right and what is wrong. I'm a perfectly reasonable guy that is open to other people's point of view, as long as they don't force it on others. If I met you in the streets tomorrow, I would shake your hand and be more than happy to talk with you, not go on some rant about how I dislike America. Your country isn't making too many friends right now, and your foreign politics are pissing off a lot of people. Doesn't it bother you that people around the world have such a negative opinion of americans? Wouldn't your time be better spent trying to fix your public image rather than infuriating people further with your one-sided view of things (referring to your country, not you)? But that's America's problem, it speaks but it doesn't listen, which is pretty much the stereotype for americans, loud and obnoxious. If it's not the american way, it's not the right way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Very well, I will take you more seriously, but only if you drop the assumption that I'm some disgruntled misfit that's out to get you or your country.

---

When in the Hell did I say that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

I see your point, my enemy's enemy is my friend, right? Nonetheless, one day you were supporting them, and the next you were calling them evil. The government of Iraq had committed many atrocities while they were still backed by the US. It's a bit hypocritical to suddenly denounce Iraq as evil just because it switched sides, but lets not get to caught up into this, as I said, Iraq was just an example. As for bullying, how about all that controversial pressure you put on countries like Pakistan in the days following 9/11? Or what about that whole "we hate France" phase when they declined to participate in the invasion of Iraq?

---

As I illustrated, sometimes we ally with our enemies. That does not mean we believe in how they do things. Of course we put pressure on countries to to the right thing for the world. Bullies put pressure on people to do things for selfish reasons. We had the safety of the entire world, mainly the western hemisphere, in mind. It's like putting pressure on witnesses to testify. It is moral, and it does not qualify as "bullying".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

A big part of the reason that islamic extremists dislike Canada is because we (mostly) support the US. Nonetheless, the US keeps blaming Canada as an entry point for terrorists, yet we managed to prevent a major homegrown terrorist attack that could have been on par with the London or Madrid bombings (http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/to...lot/index.html), whereas you failed to prevent 9/11. And as for invasions, Canada has never been invaded for the same reason that Australia or Greenland have never been invaded, because of its harsh climate and isolation. There is no country today that could launch and support an invasion of Canada (except the US). Come to think about it, one of the reasons that the US is so powerful is its geographical location in North America.

---

Dictators would not dare invade any of the countries you mentioned mainly because they know we would blow them off the face of the map if they did it. I didn't say there are not other factors involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

That was my original point. You accuse me of generalizing the situation that happened on the campus into something that applied to the whole country. Yet the States do the same thing all the time with events that happen abroad, I'm just saying that it's a two way street.

---

I am completely lost on your point on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

OK, well if you're talking about the Second World War, then that brings me back to one of my old arguments, which is that you can't justify your current political actions with past deeds. Everyone did what they could back then to fight for their values. The reason that canadians think so much more about americans than the opposite is that we feel your influence in our everyday lives, a lot. One of our prime ministers compared relations between our countries to "sleeping with an elephant. No matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast, if I can call it that, one is affected by every twitch and grunt." So when the US goes off and does something stupid, it pisses us off.

---

How many times do I need to tell you that I was not trying to justify current actions with past deeds? Will twenty more times do the trick?

You might hate us, but you need us. I hope that when Iraq and Afghanistan evolve into the countries they have the potential of being, and the region is no longer such a hopeless Hell hole breeding ground for desparate losers who want to die to kill innocents and the governments are obviously far less dangerous than the old regimes, then Canadians will understand why we did what we did. Until then, I guess you are just going to be pissed off at us and too many of you will never show a spec of gratitude for the trade and protection we offer you or what we have done for you in the past. Bitch all you want, but show some understanding for the insane nightmare we are facing and some respect for what we have done and do for you now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

People like those you stated do exist, here and abroad, but I am not one of them. I just mentioned a few reasons I have for being angry at your government, it's the interventionist position on foreign policies that your country takes that bothers me. Also, I have my qualms with America's internal politics, but it is not my place to debate them. However, I don't think that the US should be used as a model for other countries, there's a reason you're going through a recession and that your people are losing faith in their government.

---

Our intervention is necessary, like it has been in the past. We are not in a recession, and one country's recession is another country's paradise period. We are still the wealthiest country in the world. I invite you to join our way of doing things so you can have a wealthy country too. I wish the whole world would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Please list them again, just to make sure. Be certain that there is only one possible way to interpret them.

---

You first said my WWII point was meant to justify current actions. Then you later said it was meant to be used as an analogy to current situations. Both interpretations are false. The point was that you showed a disrespect and lack of gratitude concerning my country when you called it a "bully" and later talked about burning flags and other things. Criticism and discussion are fine, but you get a little carried away with your middle finger in the air. I haven't lost any sleep over it, but that stuff really does hurt people who have had their faces blown off so they could protect the world you live in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

OK, here we have a difference of opinion, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. I believe that the Soviet Afghan War (which was pretty much the Soviet equivalent of the Vietnam War) severely depleted public morale and tolerance for the USSR. It had a major impact on the break-up of the Soviet Union. In any case, do you understand my point about how "saving the world" is subjective?

---

That of course played some kind of role in the big picture, but it was not as significant as you are making it out to be. Even if it were, the result was inadvertent. The United States had the specific goal of stopping Nazi world conquest, not to merely drive Nazis out of the United States. So your analogy leaves out my issue. People from my country went through Hell to save your planet. That is why I am saying you should show some respect. If you read anything else into my point on that, you are reading incorrectly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartiate

OK, for the sake of argument, I'm going to ignore all that unproductive sarcasm. It's not like I hate America and its people, nor am I trying to dictate what is right and what is wrong. I'm a perfectly reasonable guy that is open to other people's point of view, as long as they don't force it on others. If I met you in the streets tomorrow, I would shake your hand and be more than happy to talk with you, not go on some rant about how I dislike America. Your country isn't making too many friends right now, and your foreign politics are pissing off a lot of people. Doesn't it bother you that people around the world have such a negative opinion of americans? Wouldn't your time be better spent trying to fix your public image rather than infuriating people further with your one-sided view of things (referring to your country, not you)? But that's America's problem, it speaks but it doesn't listen, which is pretty much the stereotype for americans, loud and obnoxious. If it's not the american way, it's not the right way.

---

While you are at it, please ignore your own unproductive sarcasm about burning flags and stuff. We are not going to drop doing the right thing just because it is not popular. I am so glad the current administration does not think like that. What needs to be done needs to be done, and it is not about a popularity contest. With Bill Clinton, you would have had much more luck with that. The disrespect we have right now mostly comes from jealousy that is pathetically in the place of gratitude. I have no sympathy or respect for it whatsoever. Most of it is just a junior high mentality assholishness parade that makes people feel self important. It is stupid and pathetic. I am not sure how far into that mentality you are, so I won't make any assumptions beyond what I have said. I will just tell you for future reference that the way you approach the subject of our foreign policy concerning a very complex and freaky nightmare we have on our hands can have the potential of making it look like that is what you are in this for, so stay respectful and discuss the stuff rationally, and we won't feel the need to say things that you might consider patriotic bragging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I haven't seen them, but I have a feeling you might be sugarcoating the Hell out of what they did. Maybe not. I know I saw how some speech freedom infringers acted when our top general was trying to speak at a majorly important meeting with Congress.

---

Not really, I don't know the situations entirely. I just know they seem to have more merit than this Kerry kid.

For example the one where the cop shot the guy three times was completely bullshit and his charges were dropped (the cops). The guy was a passenger in a police chase, the cop approached him screaming and cussing, the passenger screamed back trying to get the cop to calm down, then the cop says "stand up" so the guy puts down both hands on the ground to pull himself up and the cop shoots him three times point blank. It's horrifying to watch but I can post the link if you all want to see it, I would have to find it again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaasum

Not really, I don't know the situations entirely. I just know they seem to have more merit than this Kerry kid.

---

Maybe so. Post them.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...54162700568157

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaasum

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...54162700568157

---

It was hard to see what all was happening, but the cop's action looks pretty messed up from where I am sitting. If it happened like it seems, that cop should go to prison for a very long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaasum

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...54162700568157

---

Wow. I can't believe the cop won the case. That is sick.

Okay so they show someone get shot in the chest 3 times, but are afraid of broadcasting the word "Fuck."

Stupid cowards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It was hard to see what all was happening, but the cop's action looks pretty messed up from where I am sitting. If it happened like it seems, that cop should go to prison for a very long time.

---

The officail report I read was basically what I said above. The cop was trying to handle this speed chase by himself, approached the car by himself and then though the guy who was complying was reaching for a gun, instead he was just getting up and got shot three times for it.

Did you guys know that it is increasingly common practice when a police officer will assault you, and then file an assault charge on you, and claim you attacked them first. Like I said. Cowardly behavior. This is the same thing really a cop claiming he was about to be shot and so shot the guy 3 times. That's even worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97EjT26E04s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhghKcf3H6w

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Just found something else today. People here might be interested in this cop's totally unlawful behavior. Just more random examples of the developing police state. No kidding.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhghKcf3H6w

---

The police are not our law makers. We have zillions of cops, and some of them break the law. Some of yours do too. Try harder.

We'll if you want to talk about the law. If you really need to be told. Here it is.

Question the law

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

We'll if you want to talk about the law. If you really need to be told. Here it is.

Question the law

---

Studies have shown that a complete absence of law is the best way to run a country.

I would like to point something out that has been overlooked by all you people (no, I did not read the entire thread if this has already been posted). In the video, you can hear John Kerry saying that he would answer the question.

EDIT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

We'll if you want to talk about the law. If you really need to be told. Here it is.

Question the law

---

Oh what the hell is this? I simply can't believe that people think the world would be better without the law. There has to be some degree of propaganda here.

Quote:

---

I simply can't believe that people think the world would be better without the law.

---

Oh I can't live without the law it's telling me what to do. Like Jorden Maxwell said. I'll think I'll be in charge of myself. And stick the law up your ass. It's for retarded people who need to be told what is right and wrong. The only law is the laws of nature. Anything else is a stupid trick that you fell for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Oh I can't live without the law it's telling me what to do. Like Jorden Maxwell said. I'll think I'll be in charge of myself. And stick the law up your ass. It's for retarded people who need to be told what is right and wrong. I think I'll be in charge of me. The only law is the laws of nature. Anything else is a stupid trick that you fell for.

---

EDIT: I agree with you on this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Oh I can't live without the law it's telling me what to do. Like Jorden Maxwell said. I'll think I'll be in charge of myself. And stick the law up your ass. It's for retarded people who need to be told what is right and wrong. The only law is the laws of nature. Anything else is a stupid trick that you fell for.

---

We shouldn't have laws against posssession of plants, but what about laws against murder, rape, armed robbery, child molestation, burglary, grand larceny, car jacking, arson, kidnapping, forgery, identity theft, wife beating, child beating, aggravated assault, and financial fraud? Should we not have laws against any of those things?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael

I agree with you on this one.

---

It's pretty simple to understand that one doesn't need to be told what to do.

Like, even that plant in your avatar. If you have this plant it's illegal.
The law is so dumb.:rolllaugh:

It's not illegal at all. It just grows because that's how plants exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

It's pretty simple to understand that one doesn't need to be told what to do.

Like, even that plant in your avatar. If you have this plant it's illegal.
The law is so dumb.:rolllaugh:

It's not illegal at all. It just grows because that's how plants exist.

---

Interesting issue. What is your answer to my question?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

We shouldn't have laws against posssession of plants, but what about laws against murder, rape, armed robbery, child molestation, burglary, grand larceny, car jacking, arson, kidnapping, forgery, identity theft, wife beating, child beating, aggravated assault, and financial fraud? Should we not have laws against any of those things?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

We shouldn't have laws against posssession of plants

---

And yet we do. I wouldn't call it a law. You don't get it. There is no such thing as a law, other than the laws of nature.

We are the law. It's patriotic to think. Take the law into your hands. Don't neglect your responsibility to think. Even if it's illegal to take the law into your own hands. That's a trick ok? It's tricking you.......Get more smart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UNiversal Mind

what about laws against murder....[goes on to explain all the other horrible acts]

---

If you don't want to murder someone. Don't do it....If you are scared of others. Protect yourself. See this is thinking about life now....Something you have not done for a while yeah? Laws of nature are real. :imslow:

UM, I don't mind those things being laws. But I don't like the cop system and things like that. I think we as a people should take law into out own hands and deal with criminals how we want to. If someone gets murdered, we murder them. If someone gets raped.... we kill the rapist... Laws are good, cops, FBI, DEA, etc. are BAD! Especially the DEA, I hate them from personal experience.

Although, without people in the criminal justice system or whatever you wanna call it, we might not have the forensic technology that we have. So that's one benefit???

But if anyone tries any of these things on me, they better have an army. I'll go down like scarface.

Dont forget the laws againt fungi!!! those bastards! fungi isn't a plant right? iono... i ate some a few hours ago!

If cops or military come up to start some crap for no reason. Better have the weapons to fight them or deter them from abusing you. They sure as hell got the weapons to fight you.

It's like a bully who tells you. "we need to protect you, give us all these weapons, you don't need them we are the authority".

Then when your totally defenseless.

"Your breaking the law which I made up. I'm going to use these weapons on you now"

It's about abuse and control. Just everyone wake up and do something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

If cops or military come up to start some crap for no reason. Better have the weapons to fight them or deter them from abusing you. They sure as hell got the weapons to fight you.

It's like a bully who tells you. "we need to protect you, give us all these weapons, you don't need them we are the authority".

Then when your totally defenseless.

"Your breaking the law which I made up. I'm going to use these weapons on you now"

It's about abuse and control. Just everyone wake up and do something.

---

I know the military would obliterate me. I'm talking about murders. I've had a few people try to rob me with guns, and it didn't work. So my confidence is waaay up. :)

http://piratenews.org/policestate-seattle-vs-wto.jpg
http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/u...lice-state.jpg
http://www.internationalist.org/seattlecopscwww.JPG
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Famil...o_06-23-03.JPG
http://www.greenleft.org.au/images/database/lrg_253.jpg
http://pics.livejournal.com/drugoi/pic/001za5ez

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

And yet we do. I wouldn't call it a law. You don't get it. There is no such thing as a law, other than the laws of nature.

We are the law. It's patriotic to think. Take the law into your hands. Don't neglect your responsibility to think. Even if it's illegal to take the law into your own hands. That's a trick ok? It's tricking you.......Get more smart.

If you don't want to murder someone. Don't do it....If you are scared of others. Protect yourself. See this is thinking about life now....Something you have not done for a while yeah? Laws of nature are real. :imslow:

---

Do you call that an answer? It looks more like a 13 year old having a temper tantrum because he got caught sneaking out of his room to use the computer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael

UM, I don't mind those things being laws. But I don't like the cop system and things like that. I think we as a people should take law into out own hands and deal with criminals how we want to. If someone gets murdered, we murder them. If someone gets raped.... we kill the rapist... Laws are good, cops, FBI, DEA, etc. are BAD! Especially the DEA, I hate them from personal experience.

Although, without people in the criminal justice system or whatever you wanna call it, we might not have the forensic technology that we have. So that's one benefit???

But if anyone tries any of these things on me, they better have an army. I'll go down like scarface.

---

Then who will make sure that murderers get murdered (etc.)? Who will have the ability to even catch them without forensics experts? How we will know if they are guilty? Most people are not even equipped to act like vigilantes, and it is a big inconvenience having to do it. I think a vigilante system would be ineffective and a big clusterfuck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Do you call that an answer? It looks more like a 13 year old having a temper tantrum because he got caught sneaking out of his room to use the computer.



Then who will make sure that murderers get murdered (etc.)? Who will have the ability to even catch them without forensics experts? How we will know if they are guilty? I think a vigilante system would be ineffective and a big clusterfuck.

---

Yea, that's why I said forensics is one good thing about it. But besides that, they find out who the murderer is most of the time because family and friends care enough and know what's been going on, and I would be more than happy to kill a few murderers.

I agree it would be a clusterfuck, and I have nothing against these laws, because if you get caught, you deserved it. I admit I've done other illegal things besides drugs but never got caught and I feel like if I did get caught, my life would be ruined more than it is just from gettin caught with drugs. The criminal system is a bitch and they make it damn near impossible to get out of. That's why I hate it.

Quote:

---

Then who will make sure that murderers get murdered (etc.)? Who will have the ability to even catch them without forensics experts? How we will know if they are guilty?

---

People who will deal with the murderers are you, me, and everyone else. Or are you too chicken to make things right? Forensic experts are not going to be inhibited. They will be even more free to do their job properly for once.

If you allow one silly law to be made for everyone. You open everyone up to more abuse. Look at the world and realize it can't get much worse anyway. So forget the idea that things would screw up. Things are already screwed up and this would be a step forward not back. It would destroy one major tool of control. And that's worth something.

Individual freedom comes first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

People who will deal with the murderers are you, me, and everyone else. Or are you too chicken to make things right? Forensic experts are not going to be inhibited. They will be even more free to do their job properly for once.

---

Am I too chicken? Good God. Would you like to play with my Star Wars figures? I will blow a murderer's head off in a second if I don't have to face the law for it. (Case in point of the ineffectiveness of a vigilante system.) However, most people are too chicken to handle things that way. And like I said, it would be is a huge inconvenience for the average citizen. And who makes sure the forensics experts are correct and not just making shit up for money? At some point, people need to be accountable to large bodies connected to elected officials who fear losing the next election. What you are pushing for would be far more chaotic than our wild West.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

If you allow one silly law to be made for everyone. You open everyone up to more abuse. Look at the world and realize it can't get much worse anyway. So forget the idea that things would screw up. Things are already screwed up and this would be a step forward not back. It would destroy one major tool of control. And that's worth something.

---

The fact that things are screwed up does not mean they cannot be much more screwed up. They have been here in the past, and they presently are in many countries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Individual freedom comes first.

---

I am all for that, but I am against legal victimization. We have to have a system for dealing with victimization, and it has to be one that is subject to organized, large scale scrutiny. The little gangs of vigilantes have no hope of comparing to the effectiveness of governments in terms of correctly capturing, proving guilt, and punishing in an answerable manner.

What you are supporting is anarchy, in the literal sense of the word. Another huge problem with anarchy is that governments inevitably rise up when there are no governments or laws to stop them. The ones who are the most powerful and ruthless are the ones that prevail. It has happened all throughout history, and it has happened in recent years in Afghanistan. Anarchy is a disaster and something that cannot even last. Anarchy provides its own destruction through the inevitable empowerment of the most ruthless of governments. It's an absolute disaster.

I'm mainly just a pissed off american who got into trouble for having weed. And then they pinned me for manufacturing and distributing and the judge believe them. So, that's why I hate the system. Plus, since I have money, I have to pay a shitload for rehab, money for just being on probation, drug tests, court fees, all sorts of BS.

When the poor ass real criminals get off free of charge...

I said yall are fuckin up my life (after I got my punishment of course) and guess what they said? No... you fucked it up from smoking pot and selling it! hahaha.. I didn't even sell it.

That's why I hate the entire system.

Can't live with it, can't live without it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by universal mind

We have to have a system for dealing with victimization, and it has to be one that is subject to organized, large scale scrutiny. The little gangs of vigilantes have no hope of comparing to the effectiveness of governments in terms of correctly capturing, proving guilt, and punishing in an answerable manner.

---

That isn't the system you have now. And what about responsibility? That's a good system. I don't need people to govern me. The government is not effective at all. Hasn't done anything for me or anyone. It's held everyone back. It's the main problem causing all this. This is what I mean by the term waking up to reality. Speak from experience not from the television.

History is just one big boot on the face of humanity. Why do you think this age is any different with it's governments? Stand up for freedom.

Quote:

---

What you are supporting is anarchy, in the literal sense of the word. Another huge problem with anarchy is that governments inevitably rise up when there are no governments or laws to stop them.

---

Governments rise up when people are apathetic uneducated, selfish and foolish enough to be abused by them.

Quote:

---

The ones who are the most powerful and ruthless are the ones that prevail.

---

The most powerful is the most loving. But ruthless acts never prevail. Exploiters tumble down a rabbit hole of increasing pain. For every damaging act they do. And the wrath of those abused comes back to haunt them.

Quote:

---

It has happened all throughout history, and it has happened in recent years in Afghanistan. Anarchy is a disaster and something that cannot even last. Anarchy provides its own destruction through the inevitable empowerment of the most ruthless of governments. It's an absolute disaster.

---

Anarchy is already happening. It's already started. Something else that is better is coming into view from destruction of the old. There has always being changes. This discussion is part of moving forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael

I'm mainly just a pissed off american who got into trouble for having weed. And then they pinned me for manufacturing and distributing and the judge believe them. So, that's why I hate the system. Plus, since I have money, I have to pay a shitload for rehab, money for just being on probation, drug tests, court fees, all sorts of BS.

When the poor ass real criminals get off free of charge...

I said yall are fuckin up my life (after I got my punishment of course) and guess what they said? No... you fucked it up from smoking pot and selling it! hahaha.. I didn't even sell it.

That's why I hate the entire system.

Can't live with it, can't live without it.

---

That really sucks, and it pisses me off that it happened. That is the war on drugs, not law itself. The war on drugs makes my blood boil every time I talk about it. It is so fucking irrational and evil, yet so accepted. I am completely convinced that it is going to go down in history as one of the most illogical and atrocious policies the United States government ever had. It will be looked at the way we look at the Salem Witch Trials now. It is so outrageous and full of so many unbelievable injustices I don't even know where to start with them. And to top it all off, the sons of bitches fighting the war on drugs celebrate big drug busts and expansion legislation by drinking alcohol together. My jaw is on the floor over how insane the whole thing is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

And what about responsibility? That's a good system.

---

That sounds nice. How do you make sure society is responsible? Just leave it up to them and do a luck dance?

Study history. When there is no central government, lots of ruthless governments rise up. The most powerful of those becomes the central government.

We have laws right now. I can promise you that.

I think the way our founding fathers tried to set up the country, had it perfect. But it slowely turned into a goverment ruling the people type thing, instead of the people ruling the government. This, I think is the main problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael

I think the way our founding fathers tried to set up the country, had it perfect. But it slowely turned into a goverment ruling the people type thing, instead of the people ruling the government. This, I think is the main problem.

---

One thing the war on drugs has done is destroy some of the original principles of our government. If you are in a car, you really have no 4th Amendment protection any more. A cop can pull you over for supposedly swerving or driving too closely to another car or throwing a wrapper out the window or whatever he feels like making up. It's his word against yours. If he thinks you like like a pot smoker, he can falsely claim he smells pot and then search your car. If he finds none, he can just let you go and never face any consequences since there was no arrest. If he finds pot, or anything else at that point, he can just say he obviously had a good reason to search because, "Well, I found it, didn't I? It was there, just like I knew." Originally, and according to the Constitution even now, a cop cannot search anthing without probable cause plus a warrant. The federal courts have dumbed that down in the cases of cars, and now warrants are not even required for car searches because of some stupid gun case and and a case about evidence that could have gotten away since cars can move, and the search criterion is now "reasonable suspicion", which is a lower standard than "probable cause". For people in cars, there is no 4th Amendment. The war on drugs is a disease, and it has to go.

The founding fathers were totally genius. Much more smarter than I'll ever be in this lifetime. They did the best they could. And everyone should know the constitution and bill of rights. Not only should they know it. But they should do something to protect it. It's slipping away in front of your eyes. What is happening is exactly what they feared. It is more serious than you think. If you have never resisted, you don't know how tyrannical things are. Until you get arrested for your free speech when you know the truth.

Government should be afraid of the people if it exists. And not the other way around.

Michael, I had my car searched at Pensacola Beach a few years ago. I was at the public beach with two friends. One of my friends sat in the car because he didn't want to get more sun burned and because he wasn't in the mood for the beach, so he said. I and the other one went to the beach and hung out for about an hour. Then my friend went back to the car to check on the other one. About thirty minutes later, I headed back to my car. When I got near it, I saw my friends being questioned by two deputies. So I just tried to act like I didnt' know them and kept walking. One of my friends pointed at me and said, "There he is." He supposedly thought I could get them out of the situation and that they were going nowhere until the owner of the car showed up. One of the deputies said, "Is this your car?" I said it was. He said that my friend had been sitting in my car for a really long time and that that is "not normal behavior". He told me that people had been doing that as a method of scoping out the parking lot and stealing stuff out of cars. He asked if he could search my car. (This is another area where the Fourth Amendment is worth about as much as a dead slug now.) I knew that saying they could search my car would take away any possible claim of unlawful search, and I also was worried that if I said they couldn't that I would really piss them off and be taking a chance on having something planted. I looked at my friends to see if they knew of anything illegal in there because I didn't know of anything. They didn't give me the look that says that's a bad idea, so I told the deputies they could search. (Obviously there is no such thing as a consentual search.)

The pricks found absolutely nothing and let us go. I think they were looking for drugs and using that theft stuff as an excuse. I was wigged the Hell out for a little while because I really didn't know what my friends had in my car. They were both addicts who were really secretive about their addictions, and I didn't trust them to tell the truth if anything was found. They would have denied the Hell out of any accusation that the drugs were theirs, and I knew that. Apparently, they were out of drugs, and I think that's why they were such weenies about the beach. They wanted to get back to Jackson to buy more drugs. All of those possibilities were flashing through my head when my car was being searched, and it was freaky as Hell. I hadn't broken a single damn law and didn't even do anything to sufficiently look like I had, but I had to be put through that shit any way. I was infuriated the whole way back to Jackson. I am still pissed off about it talking about it now.

Universal what happened to you. That is just wrong. You don't need to put up with that just because they think they are policing. I don't believe in this kind of authority holding people back. We should all just have a gun and means to defeat their authority and they should be scared of us. We are the ones that should have the ability to enforce punishment from disrespectful acts like this. The fact you had to go along with that crap indicates they are not respectful because they know they can get away with it looking for profit. They don't even think anything of you they just treat you as an enemy as use law best they can as a game to exploit you.

How soon we forget history. Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

How soon we forget history. Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force.

---

What type of system should we put in place to maintain a state of anarchy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by universal mind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic

How soon we forget history. Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force.

---

What type of system should we put in place to maintain a state of anarchy?

---

Um, Do you even know who said what I quoted here.

Good story UM. I feel your anger x100. I've been THC free since my probation. Imagine that... I dont know how much of a pothead you are, but going from smoking an ounce a day for years, to zip, was pretty crazy for me. I didn't sleep for 5 days and lost 10 pounds from not eating because food tasted like shit. I didn't need to lose that weight either, I'm skinny lol.

Good thing you didn't have anything on you, coming back to florida to go to court would have sucked, expecially because our laws a more harsh than ol miss. But as for the cop searching, he was rigth about the theft from cars at beach parking lots. It is very common around here and just a growing problem. Now they have signs that say something like "lock your doors, we will not help if you have something stolen". But, he probably noticed your friend looked like an addict, and stereotyped him. Notice I'm stereotyping him as looking like an addict, since you said he was one. :P

In florida, assume that everytime you get pulled over you're gettin searched. I've been pulled over 3 times, and all three times I've gotten searched. Of those 2 times, I was underage so got off lucky, released to my parents and the stuff confiscated. But the third time involed the DEA, and a big huge story.... so no getting off that time. I've learned my lesson though.

March 4th, will be a good celebration. :) If I don't relapse or something... Nah, thats what alternatives are for. only thc, opiates, meth, and cocaine show up on my drug tests, so you can imagine what I've been doing.

If you plan on coming down over the next summer, I'll be free then, so up for whatever haha. Plus I've started mycology, ;)

Quote:

---

In florida, assume that everytime you get pulled over you're gettin searched. I've been pulled over 3 times, and all three times I've gotten searched.

---

Good preparation. Assume your getting searched. :goodjob2:
Soon enough it will be. Assume your being executed for no reason. :?

In Australia they don't want to search your car for no reason. We aren't that stupid yet. But we are catching up to you guys quickly.

Let tyranny rain you reckon....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

In Australia they don't want to search your car for no reason. We aren't that stupid yet. But we are catching up to you guys quickly.

---

That's because in Australia, you don't have a lot of drugs that the cops worry about soooo much. The supply is of drugs is very low, one could make a lot of money smuggling stuff over there. :)

Heres some video of cops pretending to be protester's to incite violence and attack a bunch of peaceful people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kce1QdbMq0Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP4sSPKn-K0

Out Of Control School Security Guard Assaults Camerawoman

Prison Planet | October 4, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

More out of control school security guards have been accused of assaulting children and also the media, as a camerawoman who wasn't even on school property had her equipment shoved in her face by an aggressive guard during filming.

Action 10 News were investigating reports of guards and police beating children at a school in Robstown, Corpus Christi.

The film crew were not even on school property as they recorded shots of the building before a security guard walked up and forcefully shoved the camera in video journalist Brandy Dunfee's face.



Action 10 News have now filed a police report regarding the assault.

"If he's willing to do that to me for the world to see on camera, then what is he willing to do when no one is looking," said Dunfee.

Uncut video of the assault.

Allegations of police and security guards beating up students in the school have been met with a wall of silence from school authorities who have refused to talk to Action 10 News.

Students report being beaten by police and security guards at the school.

Last week, a video showing a school security guard arresting and breaking a girl's arm for dropping cake made national headlines.

The last couple of months have produced an epidemic of police and security guard brutality which seems to be spiraling out of control as cops are trained that the public is their enemy.

Don't tase me bro remix:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc
Enjoy!
~

I prefer this one.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=taE8kUfN1lQ

This thread has no appreciation for the system of government. We have two parties with varying beliefs (don't believe me? Check their definitions). Of course candidates are going to have similarities, because the population prefers a candidate that is as non-partisan as possible. They both want your money, true, but they use it. For health care. For schools. For infrastructure. For an assload of other stuff that makes America the world's leader in the economy and technology (also, we're pretty close to first when it comes to lifespan, literacy, and employment).

Yeah, I think they could focus a bit more on environmental issues. But it's my responsibility to tell them about that. As it is your responsibility to tell your representatives about the issues that have been gnawing at you.

Also, regarding the police brutality. We all know that Kerry himself struck that poor man, and not the police.

It's our responsibility to govern ourself. Including our education and everything else that is our responsibility. It was the police that did it, not kerry.

This is your system of government.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y44...t/sheep_tv.jpg