gg free speech

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
Fender
Posts: 5876
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 8:00 am

gg free speech

Post by Fender »

+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

after reading the article, i'm glad they were not talking about Billy.

Image



btw, free speech indeed.
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

i can play the bass better with my cock and balls...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

Freakaloin wrote:i can play the bass better with my cock and balls...
just like the drums?
diego
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:25 pm

Post by diego »

Billy and I e-mail each other from time to time. jellus..?
User avatar
mrd
Posts: 4289
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2000 8:00 am

Post by mrd »

Freakaloin wrote:i can play the bass better with my cock and balls...
hah..unlikely. Billy is a fckin mind-bending bassist.
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

if u say so...reminds me of that steve vai style...prentious gayness...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Geebs
Posts: 3849
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:56 pm

Post by Geebs »

Stu Hamm is much funkier
+JuggerNaut+
Posts: 22175
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:00 am

Post by +JuggerNaut+ »

i agree - so is Les.
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

les really can play with his cock and balls...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

Yea, saw the story this morning, it's pretty ridiculous. She was there on invite from a Senator, and got roughly arrested for a t-shirt, which she was never warned about or even asked to cover up (as if that would really be any better).

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020106Z.shtml
I had just sat down and I was warm from climbing 3 flights of stairs back up from the bathroom so I unzipped my jacket. I turned to the right to take my left arm out, when the same officer saw my shirt and yelled, "Protester." He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat, and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs. I said something like "I'm going, do you have to be so rough?" By the way, his name is Mike Weight.

The officer ran with me to the elevators, yelling at everyone to move out of the way. When we got to the elevators, he cuffed me and took me outside to await a squad car. On the way out, someone behind me said, "That's Cindy Sheehan." At which point the officer who arrested me said, "Take these steps slowly." I said, "You didn't care about being careful when you were dragging me up the other steps." He said, "That's because you were protesting." Wow, I got hauled out of the People's House because I was "Protesting."

I was never told that I couldn't wear that shirt into the Congress. I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things ... I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later. I was immediately and roughly (I have the bruises and muscle spasms to prove it) hauled off and arrested for "unlawful conduct."
I guess nobody tells soldiers that they are dying for Bush's version of Freedom(tm) instead of the real thing.

How many soldiers would still sign up and fight, if they knew the President would have their mother arrested for a t-shirt?
Dave
Posts: 6986
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Dave »

Free speech or not, the galleries have a dress code. Some republican congressman's wife was asked to cover up too for wearing a "support our troops" shirt according to the article.

As far as believing the government's claim that they asked Sheehan to cover up verus her claim they didn't is irrelevant because without some kind of video, you can't prove it either way.
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

the dress code is for the public officials...not the public moron...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
diego
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:25 pm

Post by diego »

what is a public moron, moron?
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

Dave wrote:Free speech or not, the galleries have a dress code. Some republican congressman's wife was asked to cover up too for wearing a "support our troops" shirt according to the article.

As far as believing the government's claim that they asked Sheehan to cover up verus her claim they didn't is irrelevant because without some kind of video, you can't prove it either way.
There we have it - there was a good reason for her being roughly arrested, and free speech doesn't apply in this case. :icon14:

Who cares that it was a dead soldier's mother, who probably represents as many Americans as any Congressman in the room? It all sounds very reasonable.
Dave
Posts: 6986
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Dave »

Freakaloin wrote:the dress code is for the public officials...not the public moron...
I've been there.. I was told I had to dress properly
Dave
Posts: 6986
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Dave »

R00k wrote:
Dave wrote:Free speech or not, the galleries have a dress code. Some republican congressman's wife was asked to cover up too for wearing a "support our troops" shirt according to the article.

As far as believing the government's claim that they asked Sheehan to cover up verus her claim they didn't is irrelevant because without some kind of video, you can't prove it either way.
There we have it - there was a good reason for her being roughly arrested, and free speech doesn't apply in this case. :icon14:

Who cares that it was a dead soldier's mother, who probably represents as many Americans as any Congressman in the room? It all sounds very reasonable.
I'm not supporting either side. All I'm saying is that I dont think we can really know what happened. I don't believe her and I don't believe the Capitol Police
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

Dave wrote:
Freakaloin wrote:the dress code is for the public officials...not the public moron...
I've been there.. I was told I had to dress properly
well when u cum in wearing half a dress and half a football uniform...uh yeah they r gonna say that...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

and why would cindy lie about what happened?...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Dave
Posts: 6986
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Dave »

Freakaloin wrote:and why would cindy lie about what happened?...
Why not? Sympathy? Agenda? n e questions?
Freakaloin
Posts: 10620
Joined: Tue May 07, 2002 7:00 am

Post by Freakaloin »

but there were witnesses and pictures and film of it...those lies too?...
a defining attribute of a government is that it has a monopoly on the legitimate exercise of violence...
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

Dave wrote:Free speech or not, the galleries have a dress code. Some republican congressman's wife was asked to cover up too for wearing a "support our troops" shirt according to the article.

As far as believing the government's claim that they asked Sheehan to cover up verus her claim they didn't is irrelevant because without some kind of video, you can't prove it either way.
That fascist dress code can suck a fat mule cawk.

"Did you know that in 1971, the Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional to arrest a man who wore a "F--- the Draft" T-shirt into the courthouse? (Cohen v. California, you can look it up.) "

source: http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytoo ... 02734.html
Nightshade[no u]
Dave
Posts: 6986
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Dave »

I dont know if the code even exists.. I was looking for some evidence of it, but I don't see anythingt hat jumps out on the site. I don't have a problem with it... I'm not suggesting these buildings are 'sacred' or whatever,but the idea of a dress code does not bother me
Last edited by Dave on Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dave
Posts: 6986
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Dave »

Freakaloin wrote:but there were witnesses and pictures and film of it...those lies too?...
Pictures tell you an instance, not a story. You can't tell from a picture if she was asked to cover her shirt. You can tell from a video, however. Since video/still cameras aren't allowed in the galleries, all you see is what happened after she was removed from the gallery.

As far as witnesses, I haven't read enough statements, nor do I know who the witnesses are. Are they Sheehan's friends? Do they have an interest in the anti-war movement? Are they impartial third parties? I have to answer those questions before I can belive or not believe their testimony.
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

Dave wrote:but the idea of a dress code does not bother me
It bothers the shit right out of me when it's used as an excuse to arrest someone that doesn't march in lockstep with the powers that be. Why wasn't congressman cuntface's wife arrested?
Nightshade[no u]
Post Reply