Supporting The Troops

The way Liberals do:

a closer look at the flag-burning and US soldier effigy-burning party in Portland.

Comments

[seekeronos]

Absolutely sickening.

By the same stretch of logic the hippies like to use for people who make bash gays, burning soldiers in effigy should be a hate crime.

I still say we should revive COINTELPRO to put these un-American, traitorous lunatics under lock and key, preferably at Gitmo.

[seekeronos]

And for that matter, these scum are a very thind shade away from their terrorist brethren in Somalia who dragged our soldiers through the streets of Mogadishu, beating them and flaying the skin from their bodies, only to burn them alive afterward.

[yyy]

At least you are honest and you admit that you don't care about free speech.

You want speech that you don't agree with, that you personally find repugnant to be punished by prison time.

While I personally find that viewpoint to be fascist in the extreme, at least it is honest and doesn't pretend to embrace a value--freedom of speech--that you don't believe in.

[Darth Malice]

Way to go liberals.....I knew that they could not hold that hate the war love the troops bs.

[Hard Right]

"At least you are honest and you admit that you don't care about free speech."

Says the guy who is all for suppressing free speech HE doesn't approve of.
BTW, what do you think of their actions?

[BCMG]

This is why I'm all for free speech. Keep them out there making fools of themselves and the left will never disappoint. And YYY I'm curious; are you against the "Fairness Doctrine" or hate crimes legislation?

[vetter]

HR, let me answer for y3: "I support the troops but it's about the FREE SPEECH. But not for Dan Riehl, we have to come here and talk trash 24/7/365 to try to silence HIM, but burning soldier effigies=Good, trashing the flag=Good, the Fairness Doctrine=Good (gotta get rid of that Rush, too, cause we don't like that free speech.) But I hate the pictures cause they make me and my leftard pals look the obvious ameriKKKa haters we are. But I love free speech. But not that FAUX NEWS hosting a debate. But I love free sppech..except, except, except"
Give up, HR: legal, zif, y3, bis---not one of the lefties here cares to engage in rational debate, they just wanna bug people. You know, to enhance all the free speech...

[yyy]

I am against hate crimes legislation and 'hate speech' rules. If someone is raped, killed or robbed that is enough of a crime. I could see using 'hate crime' e.g. racially/sexually motivated being used as an aggravating factor in sentencing but it should not be a crime on its own. I also believe that 'hate crimes' are disproportionately prosecuted against whites.

I am a little rusty on the Fairness Doctrine, but as I remember it is about trying to equalize access to air time to various sides of an issue, which I don't have a problem with. Given the inordinate power of broadcast, it seems a reasonable safeguard, if I am remembering it correctly.

[Capitalist Infidel]

Liberal child abuse on display

[Hard Right]

YYY, what do you think of what they did?

[Hard Right]

Vetter, you're right about them, but it's fun to inject reality into their fantasy world and see them fall apart.

[yyy]

Hard Right,

I rarely see you post anything but personal insults, if that is your idea of 'injecting reality' in the debate, I'm not surprised. People like you are the biggest threat to this country and its historic values than all the terrorists combined. All you do is blather on and on saying the same stupid stuff over and over.

There is never any actual CONTENT in your posts, they are recycled, disjointed winger talking points combined with an unhealthy does of insults.

If you are the best the wingers have to offer its' no wonder they're all hunkered down in their bunkers, shaking in fear that America has finally woken up to their lies and fear mongering.

[vetter]

HR, you mean like y3's non-answer above? Hysterical! Even when they attempt to appear rational they evade, avoid and, in the case of it's fairness doctrine answer ("I'm a bit rusty...") pretty much just lie. Every lib asshat boner-izes the FD to take down Rush, Hannity, etc, but here old y3 can't quite remember what it is...Oh, okay. Hmm.
So what is it Y? You support the "free speech" we see here in Portland? Yes or no...

[Hard Right]

YYY, what do you think of what they did?

[vetter]

Classic:
"I rarely see you post anything but personal insults,...People like you are the biggest threat to this country and its historic values than all the terrorists combined."
Amazingly, the irony of the inanity of this very statement will be utterly loist on Y, zif, et al. Oh but WAIT, he was practicing free speech whereas you, Hard Right, are "the biggest threat."
And, again, Y: DO YOU SUPPORT WHAT WAS DONE IN PORTLAND?

[yyy]

I think it is stupid and destrucive to burn a soldier in effigy, but it is protected free speech, just like burning the flag.

Again, I know you wingers aren't able to comprehend that Freedom of Speech has to extend to speech that the majority or minority finds offensive, that includes speech that denigrates the troops, blacks, gays, jews, 'baby killers' the KKK, the Aryan Nation, you name it.

[vetter]

Well, we got an almost-answer outta Y. Now here's the other shor dropping on it's head:
NO ONE herre is suggesting anything be done to these folks! All Dan did was expose the pictures and all the "winger" commentors are doing are VOICING OUR DISGUST! It's freedom of speech IN ACTION. And you don't see that? Astounding.

[yyy]

By the same stretch of logic the hippies like to use for people who make bash gays, burning soldiers in effigy should be a hate crime.

I still say we should revive COINTELPRO to put these un-American, traitorous lunatics under lock and key, preferably at Gitmo.

----------------------------------------------------

Again, I realize I am a stupid, uneducated, leftist, Marxist, Commie, retard, but the above posts sure reads to me like the poster wants to jail the protesters on a hate crime charge and send them to Gitmo.

That reads to me like a lot more than showing outrage or condeming it.

It reads to me like the poster wants to classify soldier effigy burning and flag burning as a crime punishable by prison.

But I must just be too stupid to understand the meaning of 'under lock and key' and 'hate crime'

Whatever.

[BCMG]

So you're for a governmental committee being formed to decide what's "fair" as far as what's broadcast? More governmental control over what you can read/see etc? How is that fair? And why do you trust the government to decide for you? That's the difference between liberals and conservatives; liberals - who aren't very liberal at all as it turns out - want more government in their lives, telling them what's fair and what to think. They don't trust themselves to decide for themselves, in the same way they don't trust themselves to make their own laws, (which is basically the point of having a democratic republic.) Conservatives do trust themselves to govern themselves and we know how to use the "off" button or turn the channel. We also fight ignorance, (such as the flag burning and the Dixie Chicks,) by countering with our own speech. You really don't support free speech if you support the Fairness Doctrine.

[BCMG]

I personally don't want the flag burners etc to be jailed. As I stated earlier; keep them out where we can see them.

[seekeronos]

"While I personally find that viewpoint to be fascist in the extreme, at least it is honest and doesn't pretend to embrace a value--freedom of speech--that you don't believe in."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Y³, there are limits to free speech. Even you must see this.

Dislike gays? Feel free to preach against it. But don't pistol whip them and leave them chained to a fence to die.

Criticize the war? Go right ahead. But don't spit and urinate upon our soldiers, or deface monuments to their sacrifices.

Harrassing rich white women wearing fur coming out of Neimann-Marcus? It is in bad taste, but it's your call.

Criticize Bush and call him a moron? I'll live with that. Sometimes even I think the man could have surrounded himself with some better advisors, or chosen much more wisely in his policymaking.

But burning an effigy of a brother or sister American - a __soldier__ - though nameless or faceless, it is a very crime against their sacrifice.

It is on equal level with such "free speech" as defacing government property, or blowing up an abortion clinic, or calling for the assassination of public officials.

Folks, those protesters in Portland have crossed far over the lines of decency or even "just making a point". They have joined hands and are marching lockstep with our enemies, and in so doing, have themselves become enemies of America, fit only to be dealt with as such: with internment or perhaps even a hangman's noose.

[Hard Right]

Gee YYY, considering the stupidity your posts, is it any wonder I just insult you anymore? You can't even answer a simple question.

[yyy]

I answered it you FUCKING RETARD. I answered it VERY CLEARLY.

What about my ANSWER was beyond your powers of comprehension?

[yyy]

Dislike gays? Feel free to preach against it. But don't pistol whip them and leave them chained to a fence to die.
--------------------------

Pistol whipping them and tying them to a fence to die would constitute aggravated assault and attempted murder. No speech issue there.
----------------------------------------

Criticize the war? Go right ahead. But don't spit and urinate upon our soldiers, or deface monuments to their sacrifices.
-------------------------------

Spitting or urninating on anyone would be considered assault.
Defacing monuments is vandalism.
Already illegal and nothing to do with speech.
------------------------------

Harrassing rich white women wearing fur coming out of Neimann-Marcus? It is in bad taste, but it's your call.
-----------------------------

Harassment would be tough to prove, but if you are throwing paint on the white woman, then that would count as assault, you might also win on a stalking charge.

Again, No speech issue.
-----------------------------

Criticize Bush and call him a moron? I'll live with that. Sometimes even I think the man could have surrounded himself with some better advisors, or chosen much more wisely in his policymaking.
----------------

But burning an effigy of a brother or sister American - a __soldier__ - though nameless or faceless, it is a very crime against their sacrifice.

It is on equal level with such "free speech" as defacing government property, or blowing up an abortion clinic, or calling for the assassination of public officials.
----------------------------------

You are conflating speech with actions. Defacing government property and blowing up an abortion clinic are crminal activities already, burning a flag or image of a soldier is just that.

Calling for the assassination of public officials might be considered a crime given the specific circumstances and how likely it was that you were actually trying to move your listener to make an assassination attempt.

[Hard Right]

"I think it is stupid and destrucive to burn a soldier in effigy..."

Like vetter said, almost an answer. I'm not surprised. YYY tried to convince me that torture was going on at Gitmo based on what happened at an Afghanistan prison involving American soldiers. He didn't tell me the torture happened in Afghanistan, though. He's also Pro Palestinian.

[Cindi]

I answered it you FUCKING RETARD

Freedom at it's best?

[Hard Right]

You think it's stupid and destructive. I take that to mean it doesn't bother you much. In fact, it seems that you find it more disturbing because it hurts your "movement"- hence the destructive remark.

Most decent people would call the action dispicable-free speech or not.

[vetter]

yyy, here's how someone who is mature handles getting called out:
Yes, I totally admit to missing the "revive COINTELPRO" comment and DO NOT AGREE WITH IT. That's how one of integrity advances a debate! Looky looky! You pointed out a flaw in my comment and I owned it! Yahoo!
See! YYY...you too can admit when you are wrong and live to comment another day!
I shan't hold my breath.

[seekeronos]

Actually, Y³... in most cities, there are ordinances concerning the burning/setting on fire of things.

Violating those ordinances are generally misdemeanor crimes.

I can't imagine that they sauntered up to city hall to get permits to burn flags and effigies, now, hmmm...?

[Hard Right]

EDIT: In fact, it seems what you find disturbing is that it hurts your "movement"- hence the destructive remark.

[yyy]

Hmm, well since you take 'pro-Palestinian' to mean 'pro-terrorist, anti-semite' and 'anti-war' to mean 'hate America and the troops' I can safely say, that what you think is deeply irrelevant to me.

[yyy]

you too can admit when you are wrong and live to comment another day!
----------------------------------------------------

What am I wrong about? That flag burning and burning of soldiers in effigy is protected speech? Or that flag burning and burning of soldiers in effigy is destructive and stupid?

[seekeronos]

Also, Y³... the conflation is relevant, in that the first part is free speech, and the second part is where free speech gives feet to illicit action and becomes crime.

Hate all you like, but let not that hatred become an incitement to crime.

You may see a flag as a mere scrap of cloth, a rag to be trodden underfoot as much as some would callously tread upon our fathers' and grandfathers' sacrafices on the hills of Normandy, the forests of Bastogne, or the jungles of Tarawa, Guadalcanal, Korea, and Vietnam, and our brothers and cousins in Iraq now.

Indeed, such a wretched thing commited by miserable excuses for humanity bearly deserve to be called Americans.

At the very least, they should have their citizenship revoked and put on the next plane to Venezuela or some other place that will take their Che Geuvara worshipping carcasses.

[yyy]

No, I don't see the flag as a scrap of cloth, my grandfather landed at Normandy so I will thank you not to question my patriotism or my understanding of the symbolic meaning of the American flag.

It may be abhorant to you, it may trample and disrespect this country and be a perversion of your idea of America and American values but it is a SYMBOLIC ACT, it does not incite anyone to violence or treason, and it has to be protected.

The sacrifices were made to protect America, and American values, one of those values is the ability of our citizens to express themselves freely, it is MOST important to protect speech that the majority funds unacceptable, otherwise the 'tyranny of the majority' that the Founding Fathers wrote about would destroy everything this country is alleged to stand for.

[Hard Right]

"Hmm, well since you take 'pro-Palestinian' to mean 'pro-terrorist, anti-semite' and 'anti-war' to mean 'hate America and the troops' I can safely say, that what you think is deeply irrelevant to me."

I merely go by your other posts. I'm being mean and using your own words against you. Awful of me, I know.

[yyy]

You really are an idiot. I am done here.

Pro-Palestinian means just what it says. It is YOU and YOUR HATRED that assumes that inherent in support of the Palestinian people is support for terrorism or hate for Jews.

Because you are narrow minded and stupid, apparently.

In fact, you are too fucking stupid for me to bother with anymore.

Rage on, nutjob.

[seekeronos]

I see a little bit of scope creep here.

I did not question your (Y³) patroitism, but rather, the notion that people think they can disgrace the honor, the sacrifice, and memory of our ancestors and living fellow citizens now serving our nation.

My main ax to grind here is with the burning of the soldiers in effigy. While I personally find burning of the American flag (with the exception of a proper, respectful disposal of a retired flag in accordance with protocol) to be extremely repugnant, I will no longer contend that burning it is a form of free speech - as long as the proper permits have been obtained per city ordinance and fire code, nor would I see someone deported or denationalized on account of burning a flag.

However, I do regard burning soldiers' effigies as a very grave insult against our brother and sister Americans in uniform, and as an extremely unpatriotic hate crime against this nation.

[Hard Right]

Conceding defeat? Darn. I was just getting warmed up Mr. "most of the Gitmo inmates are innocent" and are being "tortured".

BTW, to help your cause you should go with something that has a little more decency than being Pro-Palestinian. Like, pro child molestation.

[seekeronos]

EDIT: I will no longer contend against the position of burning it (the flag) is a form of free speech.

[yyy]

It IS a grave insult to Americans in uniform, no doubt about that. I mean, I would have to take burning in effigy to be a symbolic destruction of American soldiers. It would be tenuous to argue that you were 'symbolizing' the 'military' or the 'war' when you specifically chose a human replica, you might have been better off burning a tank.

Like I said, it's destructive and stupid. But, to my mind one of the most important areas of speech that has to be protected is that which criticizes the government. I don't know what else to say. Destruction of rights and freedom almost always starts with the low hanging fruit, the things and people that most would find objectionable...flag burning, soldier effigy burning, Muslims, Communists...and then it extends into an ever widening list of forbidden acts and forbidden people, and before you know it, your next door neighor is flipping the switch on a shower full of naked women and children, all the while telling himself he's doing is duty to protect his country and his beliefs and they are traitors and subhumans anyway, the goverment told me so...........

It all starts with the first right that is lost.

[bloodrage bob]

aaaaaaand once again, y3 demonstrates for us the fundamental liberal hypocrisy: they'll stand up & fight for *rights*, ("it all starts with the first right that is lost")(cue sousa march), so long as it's a right that the left wants protected we're talking about.

should the issue be a *right* that the left *doesn't like*: the right to keep & bear arms; the right to drive whatever size SUV i want and keep my house as cold as i can afford to in the summer; the right to point out that muslims are stone-age wife-beating suicide bombers who've demonstrated they can't be trusted in a free society....

well, that's different. we'll need to pass us some laws to curtail THOSE rights. sorry. "we're going to take things from you for the common good", as the asshole liberal queen hillary once admitted. she doesn't talk like that anymore - her advisors told her not to - but you know she still dreams of the day she can run your life.

what a pack of control-freak hypocrites they are.

[yyy]

What a pathetic, selfish crybaby.

"..But, it's my RIGHT to pollute the environment, see!! My right, my right..."

Stamp your foot too you little brat.

PS. The right to bear arms is right there in the Constitution, just like freedom of speech and assembly.

[charles]

I am done here. Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 01:22 PM

yay!

26 minutes later,,,,,Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 01:48 PM

boo!

no self discipline, surprised?

[charles]

You really are an idiot. I am done here.Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 01:22 PM

What a pathetic, selfish crybaby Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 04:00 PM

[Jeff]

"I answered it you FUCKING RETARD. I answered it VERY CLEARLY."

And

"I rarely see you post anything but personal insults,"

Guess who said both of these.

So YYY, you have said its insulting, and not nice, but you never said it was wrong to burn an effigy of a troop (didn't say much about buring the Flag)... but never condemned it... You would get along with Ibrahim Hooper.

[bloodrage bob]

more of the finest 180-proof liberal logic demonstrated here today for us by the blithering halfwit, y3.

so when us irksome *conservatives* wanna get in on the fun, and demand that *our* rights be protected and fought for TOO, just like the liberals defending the flag-burning assholes in portland, well.....it seems the paradigm changes a tad.

the liberal sage y3 droolingly explains it for us: "what a pathetic selfish crybaby".

game,set,match. liberals retain the asshole hypocrites crown, yet again.

[yyy]

I said it was insulting, stupid and destructive. If that isn't enough condemnation for you, too bad.

Charles and Hard Right do nothing but post childish taunts and the same exact worthless points over and over again. No facts, no analysis just juvenile bullshit.

While I do call a moron a moron, if you read my posts you will find that insults are a relatively small part of them.

But whatever. You all are unable to think for yourselves. You're preprogrammned Bushbots who spew the same discredited lies every day.

[yyy]

You know what, when a selfish crybaby winger posts that it's his RIGHT TO pollute the environment to his heart's content, I'm going to call him a selfish crybaby loser.

But, see, I already know that none of you give a rat's ass about the environment, so of course you think it's your right as an AMERICAN to drive an SUV, turn up your air conditioner, shoot some endangered species or whatever the fuck comes into your moronic retard minds at any given moment. I'm sure if you thought you could get away with it you would go out and shoot some dirty Arabs, too.

Ugh.

[charles]

I am done here. Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 01:22 PM

Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 01:48 PM

Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 04:17 PM

Posted by: yyy | Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 04:20 PM

Charles and Hard Right do nothing but post childish taunts and the same exact worthless points over and over again. No facts, no analysis just juvenile bullshit.

don't go away mad, just go away

[bloodrage bob]

wait. i thought you "were done" here, o foulmouthed hypocrite control-freak. you mean you were lying?

imagine that: a lying liberal. who'da thunk it?