The War On Free Expression

[jetdawgg]

Sounds familiar? <br />
<br />
Stephen Lendman <br />
5-9-7 <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
&lt;CENTER&gt;&lt;TABLE height=57 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=551 border=0&gt;&lt;TBODY&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD vAlign=top width=&quot;601%&quot; height=56&gt;&lt;DL&gt;&lt;DT&gt;In a post-9/11...

[jetdawgg]

<DT>Congressional Efforts to Criminalize Speech <DT><DT>Legislation is being introduced in Congress in the form of an Orwellian "hate crimes" bill that's being supported by organizations like People for the American Way (PFAW), Human Rights Campaign (HRC), and other action groups for civil and human rights everyone should support. PFAW makes a credible case on its web site "urging Congress to expand the current federal (hate crimes) law to protect victims of hate crimes based on disability, sexual orientation, gender, or gender identity. In addition, we have advocated extending the protections of present law to 'all' hate crimes victims." <DT><DT>These stated aims are noble, but the problem is Congress will likely pass a hate crimes bill other than what PFAW wants though it may appear otherwise, although it won't likely override a George Bush veto. Hate and all other crimes are abhorrent, and laws are needed protecting us from them, but not ones that harm more than they help. That's what's likely to emerge from the 110th Congress with legislation on a hate crimes bill called The Hate Crimes Prevention Act (H.R. 1592) already passed in the House with the Senate soon to take it up. In an effort to criminalize preaching hate against gays, minorities and all other targeted groups, Congress is likely to produce a "Thought Crimes Act" that may make dissent a crime and/or ban any exercise of free expression government wishes to deny making it punishable by heavy fines, imprisonment or both. <DT><DT>The 110th Congress will pass a hate crimes bill because all Democrats will vote for it, and no Democrat-led body ever failed not to. But what's likely to emerge, if it becomes law, may turn out to be another blow to our First Amendment rights eroding them further that's not what PFAW, HRC, other civil and human rights groups and ones supporting free and open expression want or should tolerate. In the age of George Bush, anyone may be prosecuted for terrorist-related activities without corroborating evidence because repressive laws were passed making it possible. If hate crimes legislation gives government similar latitude against unacceptable speech it calls "hate," another serious blow will have been struck against our First Amendment freedoms already reeling under so many others. <DT><DT>John McCain's Assault On the First Amendment <DT><DT>Republican presidential candidate John McCain proposed his "Stop the Online Exploitation of Our Children's Act" on December 6, 2006 as another example of what this hawkish, anti-democratic figure would do if elected in 2008. If this act becomes law, it will fine bloggers up to $300,000 for posting offensive statements, photos and videos online as a thinly veiled hardball effort exploiting the issue of child abuse to suppress anti-war voices. This is another intrusive effort to regulate speech allowing the federal government the right to decide when our First Amendment rights apply and when not to stifle criticism by imposing heavy fines on dissenters. In John McCain's world, only government-supportive voices will be allowed online while critics Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff calls "disaffected people living in the United States (with) radical ideologies and potentially violent skills" will be heavily fined and effectively banned. <DT><DT>The War On Free Expression We Can't Afford to Lose <DT><DT>A play on Thomas Jefferson's words might be that "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience" to be denied their First Amendment rights to speak, write and otherwise communicate freely and openly without fear of recrimination in a state they want to remain democratic but won't without that right. Today our freedoms are jeopardized in an atmosphere of heightened fear with too few people aware how threatened their most important one of all is at a time there's risk they all may be lost without a concerted effort to save them. <DT><DT>It starts by propping up our First Amendment one without which none of the others are guaranteed or safe. Freedom of expression is the foundation of a free society, or as Jefferson put it: "Information is the currency of democracy (and) If a nation expects to be ignorant (uninformed or misinformed) and free....it expects what never was and never will be." <DT><DT>Potentially, it's never been easier if we can hold what we have and act to restore what's eroding. There's never been more ways to do it including an expanding and amazing online world of web sites, databases, portals, subject gateways, desktops, laptops, palmtops, "begged and borrowed new and used-tops," remote access, authentication protocols, logins, iPods, eservices, ebooks, eresources, eworld-at-our-fingertips, and a wondrous almost limitless future online world connecting potentially everyone to almost anything with a click provided we're the gatekeepers, not the corporate predators out to get what belongs to us. <DT><DT>They'll do it unless we're mobilized and energized enough to stop them in a mega-struggle where they have the resources and friends in high places, and we're the people potentially empowered as famed Chicago community organizer Sol Alinsky noted saying: "The only way to beat organized money is with organized people," and with enough of them committed they'll win. It's our choice, and the stakes are too great not to go all out for what we can't afford to lose. <DT><DT>It starts at the grass roots with a well-coordinated massive outreach effort to bring together educators; human and civil rights groups; labor; the clergy; alternative media journalists; writers; artists; women's groups; small business; your friends, family and neighbors; and other organizations and activists of all stripes concerned enough to build a collective mass-action movement in numbers too large to be stopped. History's lessons are clear. Whenever enough determined people are set on achieving something and go about it effectively, no power of government anywhere can deter them. Is saving our Republic not incentive enough to go for it? It starts with saving and preserving our most precious of all First Amendment rights to speak freely and openly and be able to spread our ideas, thoughts and beliefs widely for the things we hold most dear - our rights as free people. <DT><DT>Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. <DT><DT>Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on The Micro Effect.com each Saturday at noon US central time. </DT><DT> </DT>Part two

[jinelson]

Thanks but no thanks Ward Churchill spit your venom some where else!

Jim


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v660/jinelson/KoolAid.jpg

Drink Up!

[jetdawgg]

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago

That Bastion of left wing money strikes again....

[killerinstinct]

there is a war on free expression.. but i guess i cant run around calling people at work and say nappy headed ho's anymore or say a woman cant do things a man cant?

this wasnt because of 9/11 though bsh is secretive these problems are with society and not one man.

[David Jameson]

No more drugs

[003XXMarineDAD]

Tin Foil Alert!!!!!!!:banana:

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u295/dparris/DSC00243.jpg

[jetdawgg]

There is a whole picture thread here ridiculing Americans for using their freedoms. :usmc:

[003XXMarineDAD]

Jet
If the dems have their way and bring back the Fairness Doctrine then the only voices that will be heard is yours.
In the free market place of radio and others if Limbuagh , Hannity,and Fox news that give a differnet veiw point , they will have to be shut down to give your side free time to wile their left veiw point that they have a free market on all big three networks.
If they could make money on talk crap the Air America would have not had to be in trouble.:banana:

[jinelson]

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u295/dparris/DSC00243.jpg

Is this comrad jetdawgg in the flesh uh fur?

Drink your kool aid and go destroy someone elses internet community. Be the troll that you are and maybe find a catholic website and play the anti-christ, that should give you a much bigger thrill.

Jim

[jetdawgg]

Troll, the word republicans call people on websites when they can't comprehend the scope of the science:flag:

[David Jameson]

A few people have been asked to shut the **** up.They confuse that with having their rights taken away because nobody ever told them that before.
As for myself,I think old ward and you are traitors.You have the same rap as our enemies.Then again ,I think old Ward :thumbdown a major mental health problem to go along with his treason.

[hrscowboy]

Next time someone calls me a whiteboy or a cracker does that mean i can file for a hate crime??

[OLE SARG]

Too white cowboy - now if you are black and get called a ****** that's different!!!!!!!!!!!!! EXCEPT if'n yo' rev sharpass or mushmouth jackson, THE JUSTICE BROTHAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Two turds in a toilet bowl!!!!!

SEMPER FI,

[DevilDogHEMech]

Is exercising your right to free speech in a public forum always okay if it arguably CAUSES more Americans to die and aids our enemy? Americans aren't tired of the war, we're tired of being told that we're losing this war.

[Dave Coup]

Everone knows the old saying, 'The Cream always rises to the top',right? If you read enough of this junk you will see that, "The turd always floats to the surface'. ie Palestinian, rather 'Peace loving Palestinians' (read Terrorists) that the Right Wingers are keeping in prisons or out of the hereditary homeland by the Jews. That whole piece was Jew bashing or the control that the Jews have over the media. No I'm not Jewish but Ican smell a Jihadist, Holocaust Denier a mile away. Maybe I'm wrong, that's my take though.

[10thzodiac]

Is exercising your right to free speech in a public forum always okay if it arguably CAUSES more Americans to die and aids our enemy? Americans aren't tired of the war, we're tired of being told that we're losing this war.

I liked USMC General Zinni "malfunctioning rifle" analogy that he used to counter the idea that we all should just "shut up now and support the troops." I wonder if putting it into such easy to understand terms will resonate with people.......probably not.

"Suppose you went to war with a rifle that malfunctioned and got your soldiers killed, would you just keep your mouth shut and let your men be killed or would you speak up?" he asked. "We have a policy in this war that is worse than a malfunctioning rifle, and it is our American duty to speak up"

"Heads should roll at the Pentagon--Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith and those who foisted the Iraq war on the U.S. despite my objections and those of most U.S. Generals including Schwartkopf, Skowcroft, Clark, Shinseki and others."

The war plan itself, General Zinni said, "was wrong, it was the wrong war, the wrong place and the wrong time--with little or no planning." There were "derelictions of duty" and "criminal negligence," and US administrator Paul Bremer has made "mistake after mistake after mistake."

[FistFu68]

:evilgrin: HO CHI MINH,MADE A HUGE MISTAKE ALSO;GOT A COUPLE MILLION OF HIS FINEST COMMUNIST COMRADES DIC IN THE DIRT :evilgrin: :iwo:

[bootlace15]

lucky thing for cutting and pasting on the computer....After all you went to college and know all the short cuts on having someone else speak for you. Don't you have the time and brains to say what is really on YOUR mind. Sounds like YOU are a follower not a leader Sgt.

pfc bootlace15 out

[HOLM]

Yeah frign right... Jet I am sure has huge problems with siliencing free speech...

Watch this...


Jet... How do you honestly feel about the "Fairness Doctorine"

[Zulu 36]

Certain people (mostly liberals, socialists, and communists) have a problem with being told to shut up, or that what they said was stupid, etc. They think someone is "depriving" them of their right to free speech.

No, they had their chance to freely say what they wanted. Now, someone else is freely speaking to tell them to shut up, that they are ignorant, treasonous, etc.

It seems to me that the offended liberal, socialist, communist, whatever, has a choice at that point. Either shut up, or freely re-present their argument in a different way which might convince the other party.

Of course, re-presenting your argument via name calling, use of inaccurate data, dredging up out-of-context quotes from ancient history, and so forth, doesn't really convince anyone of the validity of the argument.

But, because it seems that liberals, socialists, communists, etc, have difficulties presenting any argument in a logical, polite, factual, erudite fashion, they have to resort to smoke screens via vulgarities, insults, out-of-context information, and of course, the good old fashioned, "How dare you deprive me of my rights (real or imagined)."

Thus several of our fellow correspondents.

[jetdawgg]

Yeah frign right... Jet I am sure has huge problems with siliencing free speech...

Watch this...


Jet... How do you honestly feel about the "Fairness Doctorine"

If you are talking about the one presented by the current admin, it is certainly not fair

[jetdawgg]

Certain people (mostly liberals, socialists, and communists) have a problem with being told to shut up, or that what they said was stupid, etc. They think someone is "depriving" them of their right to free speech.

No, they had their chance to freely say what they wanted. Now, someone else is freely speaking to tell them to shut up, that they are ignorant, treasonous, etc.

It seems to me that the offended liberal, socialist, communist, whatever, has a choice at that point. Either shut up, or freely re-present their argument in a different way which might convince the other party.

Of course, re-presenting your argument via name calling, use of inaccurate data, dredging up out-of-context quotes from ancient history, and so forth, doesn't really convince anyone of the validity of the argument.

But, because it seems that liberals, socialists, communists, etc, have difficulties presenting any argument in a logical, polite, factual, erudite fashion, they have to resort to smoke screens via vulgarities, insults, out-of-context information, and of course, the good old fashioned, "How dare you deprive me of my rights (real or imagined)."

Thus several of our fellow correspondents.

Zulu, there are whole threads here presented with insults from the right wingers about the left. How could you have missed that. I have constantly attempted to invite debate without name-calling you mentioned.

It is just not possible with this group it appears. I am all for a good joke and when they are presented I get a great laugh from them even if they are about me.

[HOLM]

If you are talking about the one presented by the current admin, it is certainly not fair


I am still assuming that you have no problem with this then...

As of early 2007 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007), Senator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) Bernie Sanders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders) (I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_%28politician%29)-VT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont)), along with Representatives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives)Dennis Kucinich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Kucinich) (D (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29)-OH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio)), Maurice Hinchey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Hinchey) (D-NY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York)), and Louise Slaughter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_McIntosh_Slaughter) (D-NY) have announced their support of legislation which would reverse the 1987 FCC decision and restore the Fairness Doctrine

[HOLM]

Zulu, there are whole threads here presented with insults from the right wingers about the left. How could you have missed that. I have constantly attempted to invite debate without name-calling you mentioned.

It is just not possible with this group it appears. I am all for a good joke and when they are presented I get a great laugh from them even if they are about me.
Oh please... How long would it take for me to find quotes of you calling people names..

You are so full of it..

I mean right here..




It is just not possible with this group it appears.


Duh... Debate my ass.. Everytime the coversation evolves into debate you run and hide.. Changing the subject with a new thread...


The "Progressive Party" you say is going to Truimph...


Henry Wallace was a racist, scumbag.... Backed by the Communists of course....


Which frign team are you on again?

[jetdawgg]

I am for a doctrine that would allow many news outlets to be independently owned and operated. We now have that with the web.

The current corporate media is owned by a few corporations. Some even are directly in the defense industry (GE/NBC). How can you get Fairness when the deck is that stacked.

The corporations paid for the right to squeeze more profit from the MSM via buying congress. The 1996 act that Clinton signed into law has presented this very dangerous problem that we face today.

Change is coming. As I have stated before, Murdoch (FOX) tried to buy the WSJ last week. He was rebuffed, by the major stockholders because of the integrity of his FOX productions.

The FOX Noise Channel is the bigest conspiritor in the MSM feeding propaganda frenzy that mislead the public on the war in Iraq.

If the current trend continues, the MSM, may be a small slice of the public media in the future. I could be happy with that right now.

[rktect3j]

Dumb. Sorry I looked.

[OLE SARG]

Well, the arseholes sharpton and jackson damn sure ain't cream!!!!!!!!!!!!! Scum sometimes rises to the top and these two are real heavy SCUM!!!!!!!!!

SEMPER FI,

[Sgt Leprechaun]

Interesting. Jet complains about debate, and the lack thereof, but, when someone (such as ...moi) attempts to actually ENGAGE in debate, without cutting and pasting, no responses, or very few responses, are given. The points made are not refuted. However, as soon as a thread showing not doctored, not messed with, not photoshopped pictures of real, live, left wing nuttery in action, suddenly, it's "boo-hoo" you are 'stifiling debate'.

I don't get it. I have certainly 'called a spade, a spade' (left/progressive/liberal/anti-war etc etc) and don't deny it. I am man enough, however, to use my OWN words, instead of something I cut and pasted from some left wing socialist website. I could cut and paste all sorts of stuff from various right wing blogs, sites, etc, but, really, where is the fun in doing that?

Stifling debate? Heck, if anything, debate here is ENCOURAGED! However the left only wants things 'their way'. In other words, those who actually DO debate, and win, are ignored or 'eliminated'. Until, of course, we post some pictures of the hard core lefties 'in action', which leaves the 'progressive' folks to do one of two things: Shut up and be embarrassed, or Jump in with both feet and support the nutters.

So, which is it? What say you? If you are, in fact, a nutter, heck, good on ya! Be a proud nutter! Come out of the closet and really, really, debate this, in your own words! Let fly, let it go, let it out of the closet nutter!!!! Why be on the fence?~! Be proud! You obviously don't think you are wrong, so why hide it any further?

As much as folks here give 10Z hell, I respect him, simply because his position is unwavering. He might be a nutter, but, dangit, he's the RESIDENT nutter! (No offense 10Z). He keeps the site in balance. He's comfortable being 10Z and has fun with it.

In closing, stop whining about 'restrictions' on 'freedom of speech' or blahblahblah. The only one putting any restrictions on you here, is you. The rest of us are engaging in 'freedom of speech', which includes the freedom to disagree with nutters, post photos of nutter behavior, and so on. 'Freedom of speech' goes both ways.

[FistFu68]

:evilgrin: NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE SAY'S 10TH.Z,IS A GOOD MAN;MISGUIDED A LITTLE BUT CAN SEE WHERE HE IS COMING FROM.HELL, I LIKE THE MARINE;SO MUCH.THAT I STOOD UP FOR HIM.A PERSON SAID 10TH ATE CHIT SANDWICHE'S,I TOLD THE SOB;THAT WAS A FRIGGING LIE! Z,DOES NOT LIKE BREAD!!!:D

[10thzodiac]

Interesting. Jet complains about debate, and the lack thereof, but, when someone (such as ...moi) attempts to actually ENGAGE in debate, without cutting and pasting, no responses, or very few responses, are given. The points made are not refuted. However, as soon as a thread showing not doctored, not messed with, not photoshopped pictures of real, live, left wing nuttery in action, suddenly, it's "boo-hoo" you are 'stifiling debate'.

I don't get it. I have certainly 'called a spade, a spade' (left/progressive/liberal/anti-war etc etc) and don't deny it. I am man enough, however, to use my OWN words, instead of something I cut and pasted from some left wing socialist website. I could cut and paste all sorts of stuff from various right wing blogs, sites, etc, but, really, where is the fun in doing that?

Stifling debate? Heck, if anything, debate here is ENCOURAGED! However the left only wants things 'their way'. In other words, those who actually DO debate, and win, are ignored or 'eliminated'. Until, of course, we post some pictures of the hard core lefties 'in action', which leaves the 'progressive' folks to do one of two things: Shut up and be embarrassed, or Jump in with both feet and support the nutters.

So, which is it? What say you? If you are, in fact, a nutter, heck, good on ya! Be a proud nutter! Come out of the closet and really, really, debate this, in your own words! Let fly, let it go, let it out of the closet nutter!!!! Why be on the fence?~! Be proud! You obviously don't think you are wrong, so why hide it any further?

As much as folks here give 10Z hell, I respect him, simply because his position is unwavering. He might be a nutter, but, dangit, he's the RESIDENT nutter! (No offense 10Z). He keeps the site in balance. He's comfortable being 10Z and has fun with it.

In closing, stop whining about 'restrictions' on 'freedom of speech' or blahblahblah. The only one putting any restrictions on you here, is you. The rest of us are engaging in 'freedom of speech', which includes the freedom to disagree with nutters, post photos of nutter behavior, and so on. 'Freedom of speech' goes both ways.

Sergeant Lep, thanks for the kind words. I was always rebelling against what other people wanted for me. I guess somewhere up my evolution tree a few of my ancestors had the smarts to think for themselves and passed a limited amount of those genes onto me.

During and after the Marines slowly I became aware of all the lies I've been brainwashed with, in school, media and entertainment. Other than boot-camp my first epiphany was, "The Bay of Pigs". We didn't use terms left or right back then in the sixties in the Corps, but by todays standards a "lefty corpsman" friend of mine told me how Kennedy fuked the Cuban freedom fighters at the "Bay of Pigs" after he promised them air support and then denied it after the invasion started. Needless to say I let this poor corpsman have it, just like some of you do Murtha, foaming at the mouth and all ! Unknowingly it was true and being an 19 year old ******* corporal, I think I never really apologized the way I should of to this corpsman; well, the ****** lefty did blow my mind about my government.

When it was my turn to go to Cuba (Missile Crisis) I saw how my big mouth nasty platoon sergeant feigned injury to get out of it (went) and our 1st sergeant never went. I seen the same for Vietnam how some S/NCO's didn't want to go, feigning illness, hardships and not re-enlisting. My point is, were they cowards, most were decorated war veterans or did they know something I didn't know ? I came to the conclusion they knew something and I was catching on real fast what it was.

Then you have your company grade officers, creaming in their jeans to go to war and shoot somebody. I seen it first hand working in battalion. Pre-War my Comm-O told me that the colonel at regiment told him the next time he comes to Regiment make sure it is for battalion comm business not angling to go to Vietnam as an adviser. This guy actually told us he prayed for war http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/34.gif Saying that you can't get promoted to a field grade rank, major or higher without combat experience.

One highly decorated former DI, Gunnery Sergeant and contrarin that took everybody on, including company grade officers told us we were going to loose the Vietnam War in August of 1964 and the battalion commander was right there when he told us ! WTF ??? He had just came back as an adviser there; he didn't want to go then either and tried getting out of it, I saw it with my own eyes.

When I first joined these Marine web-sites (second one) I had no idea that I'd be doing what I'm doing.

When I worked at Brach Candy Company for ten years in the '70's I was the union steward for a 250 man shop. I locked horns both with management and the Teamsters. I was fired as the Teamster Union steward, my attorney telling me they [union] have the right to protect themselves (from me, lol). My attorney went on to tell me that the VP from American Home Products (parent Company of Brach's, Bayer Aspirin, Chef Boyardee, Woolite etc.) said that I was the biggest labor problem they had since the Teamsters got in.

The Brach industrial relations manger told me I had the reputation of a 'stand up guy'. He is now the VP of Newly Weds, the world`s largest manufacturer of food coating systems.

The above Industrial Relations manager was sympathetic to the union grievances I filed and lower managed ganged up on him and was trying to discredit him. I told him if they fired him I'd call a wild cat strike and keep them out until they brought him back (this is the guy that fires people too, huh ?). He's been a good friend ever since.

Allot of my thinking in these posts mostly came from paying attention to main-stream TV news, some magazines and newspapers over the years. Very recently I've been renting Noam Chomsky DVD's through Netflix and this guy is blowing my mind how brainwashed even I'm yet.

Noam Chomsky can't get but 5 minutes of air time (once & canceled) in the United States. The government and big business do not want you to listen to him, they are ****** terrified of him.

I know why: http://www.chomsky.info/index.htm

<TABLE class=tborder cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR title="Post 243289" vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 align=middle width=125>FISTFU68</TD><TD class=alt2>:evilgrin: NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE SAY'S 10TH.Z,IS A GOOD MAN;MISGUIDED A LITTLE BUT CAN SEE WHERE HE IS COMING FROM.HELL, I LIKE THE MARINE;SO MUCH.THAT I STOOD UP FOR HIM.A PERSON SAID 10TH ATE CHIT SANDWICHE'S,I TOLD THE SOB;THAT WAS A FRIGGING LIE! Z,DOES NOT LIKE BREAD!!!</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Thanks FISTFU68, actually I get sick and throw up the bread :D

[Sgt Leprechaun]

Anytime Z. I can't stand Chomsky, I think he's generally anti-American.

Hilarious, YOU were fired as the shop steward. I was a President of a Local Union (Police) back in the 90's. I didn't get fired, but quit after 2 years...stress was killing me. So, I kinda know that feeling.

[HOLM]

10z... I have read quite a bit of Noam.

And Marx.. and Kant and all the rest.... It all looks the same to me.. Kudos and praises for the guy that hides communism the best in fancy words.. At least to me Noam is nothing new or spectacular from a intellectual standpoint.


Not to sound like you going after that Corpsman here... but


Other than boot-camp my first epiphany was, "The Bay of Pigs". We didn't use terms left or right back then in the sixties in the Corps, but by todays standards a "lefty corpsman" friend of mine told me how Kennedy fuked the Cuban freedom fighters at the "Bay of Pigs" after he promised them air support and then denied it after the invasion started

Is that not the same style of promises that Clinton and GW made to the Iraqi "freedom fighters"?

We had funded the Iraqi (Saddam) resistance for years, and now we are fix'n to turn tail and run when they need us the most..

What am I missing?

I don't and won't see "the war for oil" stuff You have to have something better than all that..

Honest question here... Not an attack.. Please don't misunderstand. I think you and I are both a little bored with trying to find ways to bash each other.




and I sure hope you are done questioning my "Marinehood"

Some Ball pictures of me and my lovely wife.. These were 2002.. she was out just before the ball.

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x236/ronholm/MarineCorpBall005.jpg

[bootlace15]

holy sh!t!!!!!!!!!!!!Drop all this bullsh!t. Your all moonbats....Those Aholes hate each other and the world. They want their views for everyone. It is not oil or money,its Allah dickweeds.....Take your money and oil and stick it up Osamamas ass..........................

bootlace15 out

[10thzodiac]

10z... I have read quite a bit of Noam.

And Marx.. and Kant and all the rest.... It all looks the same to me.. Kudos and praises for the guy that hides communism the best in fancy words.. At least to me Noam is nothing new or spectacular from a intellectual standpoint.

Noam Chomsky made it onto a 1993 list of the Top 10 arts and humanities authorities. At number eight, after Freud and before Hegel, he joined other luminaries: Marx, Lenin, Shakespeare, Aristotle, the Bible, Plato, and Cicero.

Do you think intellectually all of the above were commies too ?

Not to sound like you going after that Corpsman here... but

Is that not the same style of promises that Clinton and GW made to the Iraqi "freedom fighters"?

You are 100 % right ! But then, unlike now, I didn't know it is was de facto interventionism either, which I oppose ! The question is moot.

We had funded the Iraqi (Saddam) resistance for years, and now we are fix'n to turn tail and run when they need us the most..

What am I missing?

Good foreign policy ! Look at it this way, can and should America go after every repressive regime on the face of the ****** earth ? There are worse things happening, Darfur for example over 400,000 killed as of 9/06. Who has de facto killed more Iraqis, Saddam or U.S. Policy ? They need us like they need the ****** hole we are putting in their head. Iraq was a 1st World Country, now they are a devastated 3rd World Country. Iraqi Freedom ?

I don't and won't see "the war for oil" stuff You have to have something better than all that..

That's funny ! Especially since I have this under your nose every-time you read a post of mine: “See that our Congress writes into law a command that no American soldier, sailor or Marine be used for any purpose except to protect the coastline of the United States, and protect his home-and I mean, his home-not an oil well in Iraq - in short, not an American investment anywhere except at home! . . . Let Congress say to all foreign investors: “Come on home or let your money stay out of the country-we will not defend it." ~ General Smedley D. Butler

And Smedley saw it coming in 1933. But you are entitled to your opinion, otherwise we both served for nothing !


Honest question here... Not an attack.. Please don't misunderstand. I think you and I are both a little bored with trying to find ways to bash each other.

HOLM, an honest answer, do the history, who started this ? Actually I'm getting pretty busy myself remodeling (I imagine you are too, pun intended) and I have to get off this 'puter.

and I sure hope you are done questioning my "Marinehood"

Can't tease you anymore Marine ! The two of you look great, a beautiful bride and a one squared away handsome Marine.

If it makes you feel any better I caught my lunch at another alleged Marine web-site. The guys over there attacked me relentlessly as a wannabe because my medals didn't match the norm for that era. The attacks (bad) started after some anti-foreign policy posts by me.

Just to show you how bad it was, a Captain Friend of mine (mustang) CoffeeHead20 (http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/member.php?u=33961) (here) had 94 different Marines attack him over there at one time for a anti-foreign policy post. A record witnessed by my bro DOCFITZ67 (http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/member.php?u=33938) (here).

Before I joined that web-site and sent my dues in, I asked the open forum who owns this site ? I got responses either and/or from the un-informed or shills: "The Major and Sergeant Major are the man they said ! Bull-sh!t, after they p!ssed me off I did some checking at Dunn & Bradstreet, I found out the sole owner is a non-military, multi-millionaire oil-man, that lives in a multi-million dollar home in Beverly Hills, who thanks God every night for Marines sending him money to his "Marine Only" web-site http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/18.gif

I finally challenged those *******s accusing me of being a wannabe to a bet, put their money where their mouth is or shut the fuk up ! Well, they didn't shut up and no one would take me up on the bet. I then told them I wasn't going to teach them for free and left. I know how Custer felt at his last stand, excepting I could retrograde.

Some Ball pictures of me and my lovely wife.. These were 2002.. she was out just before the ball.

You are one lucky Marine, take good care of her, which I'm sure you will !

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x236/ronholm/MarineCorpBall005.jpg

Not quite my wedding picture (none) but this is my princess. Both her Grandfathers were Samurai.

Semper Fidelis Ron

See you around the base

10th

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s143/10thzodiac/MeTsu1965.jpg

[mark king]

holy sh!t!!!!!!!!!!!!Drop all this bullsh!t. Your all moonbats....Those Aholes hate each other and the world. They want their views for everyone. It is not oil or money,its Allah dickweeds.....Take your money and oil and stick it up Osamamas ass..........................

bootlace15 out

100% correct!!!!!

[Sgt Leprechaun]

Impressive photos guys.

[HOLM]

Thanks 10z... We disagree on Iraq policy Iraq was no first world place under Saddam... But whatever.. you and I are both to stubborn to get anywhere with each other on that issue.... Duh...

Thank you for the compliments on my wife..




Just because Noam was tossed onto that list with some "greats" doesn't mean diddly squat to me.. (personal opinion, nothing more)

Time Mag. was the one that had the top 100 out recently right.. They threw in a couple that would certainly be considered more than controversial for anyone... But hey,.. It is their magazine.. They are free to do as they wish... But so am I:p


Noam lost me with the manner in which he spoke of the Bible and Christians in general... Of course that is nothing new in the "philosopher" circles.. But I just don't like the taste or the smell of it...

Not from a man that is given so much credit and "power". Kant pulled that same BS.. I never understood just why Kant changed the spelling of his first name.. Both versions are used by Christians... Oh well...


And Smedley saw it coming in 1933. But you are entitled to your opinion, otherwise we both served for nothing

LOL.... Don't forget that Smedley was not the first to fight the system in such a manner. And some of his predecessors made way better arguments than he did...


Have a great day 10z

[MOUNTAINWILLIAM]

Well now, I keep hearin' all of this "free expression" stuff and all of the blowviators keep mentioning the Constitution. I've read this document several times and have yet to find "free expression" in it. I can only conclude these airheads are talkin' about the Freedom of Speech clause. The way I understand it is..........all Americans have the right to speak their minds on any subject, OR have the right to keep their mouths shut if they wish.

As for speech...the way I understand it, it is communicating your thought process (to others) by way of the spoken word, sign language, writing or any other acceptable method of communication. I don't consider "a picture is worth a thousand words" an acceptable form of communication. Anyone can create an offensive (to some) picture.

The general populace has allowed all manner of idiots (yes, they walk among us) to bastardize the Constitution to the point that it is no longer relevant.

I will stop my rant here, but take all of these experts opinions with a grain of salt.

Semper Fi

[10thzodiac]

Anytime Z. I can't stand Chomsky, I think he's generally anti-American.

Hilarious, YOU were fired as the shop steward. I was a President of a Local Union (Police) back in the 90's. I didn't get fired, but quit after 2 years...stress was killing me. So, I kinda know that feeling.

Sergeant Lep, I was fired as the elected shop steward by the Secretary Treasurer of The International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 738, Mr. Raymond Dominic (the man). The reason he fired me, I filed a decertification petition from the Teamsters with the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board). Un-fortunately the NLRB was Republican administered then and the company argued that they rather have the Teamsters Union than deal with me [new union]; we lost. In the meantime the union appointed their own steward, a company brown nose.

Money talks, bullsh!t walks.

I quit my electrician job at age 40 and started my own home refrigerator repair business and retired at 53. Fuk 'em all http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/03.gif

[bootlace15]

mountainwilliam what the fuk...... read your own response to the airheads who were expressing their thoughts.

the way you see speech is freedom of expression dickweed....pay attention to what is being said,and read what you are expressing.....

bootlace15 out

[DougRagan]

I love the people who say that GW is using 9-11 to supress speech. Guess what leftist tardos of the world. If he was supressing speech, your thread would be deleted and you would be in prison.

[10thzodiac]

I love the people who say that GW is using 9-11 to supress speech. Guess what leftist tardos of the world. If he was supressing speech, your thread would be deleted and you would be in prison.


We go into lethal Harm's way so as to "preserve" these rights.

Active duty and deployed military personnel are using their rights as citizens to express their outrage at the present wars and, despite the fact that the military is trying to silence active duty by telling them they have no rights, many brave men and women are speaking out. Active duty military DO HAVE RIGHTS and are allowed to speak out against illegal wars - and many more are beginning to do just that!

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19,is the sharpest restriction on troops' online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say.

Military officials have been wrestling for years with how to handle troops who publish blogs. Officers have weighed the need for wartime discretion against the opportunities for the public to personally connect with some of the most effective advocates for the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq
-- the troops themselves. The secret-keepers have generally won the argument, and the once-permissive atmosphere has slowly grown more tightly regulated. Soldier-bloggers have dropped offline as a result.

The new rules require a commander be consulted before every blog update.

The most honest voices out of the war zones are being silenced."

The new prohibitions require "an OPSEC review
prior to publishing" anything -- from "web log (blog) postings" to comments on internet message boards, from resumes to letters home.

Failure to do so could result in a court-martial, or
"administrative, disciplinary, contractual, or criminal action."

Active-duty troops aren't the only ones affected by the new guidelines. Civilians working for the military, Army contractors -- even soldiers' families -- are all subject to the new directives as well.

We fight and die for free speech under the U.S. Constitution.

[m543a260tons]

Born and raised in and around Washington,D.C. i know when a "story" is chewing on my Butt folks.And this one has chew thru to my zipper,call Navy Damage Control ASAP!!! One's the fairness reg's" are another infringement of free speech .fairness is the eye of the control freaks.there are a number of restrictions on free speech,you are not allow to arrange a duel,holler fire in a crowded theater,call for the murder of another person.private companies and schools do not have to have free speech.thurgood marshall sided with the school admin that "minors"have highly resticted rights.if you don't trusted the press then start looking for info.get off whining wagon and vote for who you
think is best for president.please remember the mess the democrats left in korea,1945 to now.this country has abandon an army in the field and fleet at
sea before the u.s. involved.see phillipines,guam,wake and china station marines and sailors.i am ignore of any honest and honor politicians.

[DougRagan]

And it looks like Doug will lay the smackdown yet again.

The absolute majority of the blogs by military members in Iraq support the efforts there. This is why Malkin was one of the biggest objectors to the new rules. The reason for the rule is of course to prevent critical info from landing in the hands of the enemy.
Those being silenced if this rule is enforced improperly will be people like Cpl Rock (http://thenewpundit.blogspot.com/2007/04/cpl-rock-is-freaking-famous-ooh-rah.html), who referred to Harry Reid as a douche. The many others who wrote Malkin (http://thenewpundit.blogspot.com/2007/04/troops-in-iraq-slam-democrats-again.html)in protest. The 3,000 who wrote and signed the Appeal For Courage (http://thenewpundit.blogspot.com/2007/04/all-active-duty-military.html).

By the way, before you IM me any more stupidity, please try and read the section of the Patriot Act you are complaining about. Thanks.

[Sgt Leprechaun]

Amen Sgt Doug!!

Personally, I think if you want to see "restriction of free speech" in action, this is a perfect example. Of the DEMS doing it.

No doubt they complained to higher ups in DoD about military people expressing what they think of their 'losermania' ideas, and thus, you get the censorship you see now.

I'm a believer in censoring for OpSec reasons, but not for this. If the troopies were posting all 'anti-war' crap, and they were 'supressed', no doubt the good little libs would be screaming about censorship!

[Dave Coup]

Sgt Lep, Sgt Doug RIGHT ON.!
Gold Meihr (Forgive thespelling) once said "The Palestinians will stop attacking us when they learn to love thier children more than they hate us."sic. Well, the Dems will support the troops when the learn to love thier country more than they hate Bush. I don't mean to say that they aren't patriotic, just that they are blinded by hatred. Just my take.

SF
Dave

"We're surronded. That simplifies the problem." Chesty Puller

[Sgt Leprechaun]

Sgt Dave, I believe you've got it.