spacefrog 0 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I am sorry but the worst part is when the crowd applauded as he was dragged off. A so called Liberal crowd not even republicans, really disgusting no matter what way you see it. Universities are supposed to be centre for debate. And really why else would he be dragged off. He was voicing a very valid point, ok so he`s a journalism student but at least he was passionate enough to try to elicit answers from Bush`s cousin. He really got done for saying blowjob, why does Clinton get impeached over a BJ and Bush doesn`t for defrauding black votes in the most corrupt state in the US. This was the point, if don`t think this is valid then please state in coherent logical fashion. And he was confronting what the rest of bleeding heart liberals don`t even have balls to do. Respect to him for caring. And to prove that the social conditioning towards police authoritarian rule is highly successful, we only have to look at the people who think this is ok that he is dragged away. The guy even says I am not doing anything while they drag him away. And really guys this is censorship in it`s purest form.Free speech is fine as long as it`s not directed against the government is the statement. Link to post Share on other sites
samurai 0 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Originally Posted By: spacefrog I am sorry but the worst part is when the crowd applauded as he was dragged off. A so called Liberal crowd not even republicans, really disgusting no matter what way you see it. Universities are supposed to be centre for debate. And really why else would he be dragged off. He was voicing a very valid point, ok so he`s a journalism student but at least he was passionate enough to try to elicit answers from Bush`s cousin. He really got done for saying blowjob, why does Clinton get impeached over a BJ and Bush doesn`t for defrauding black votes in the most corrupt state in the US. This was the point, if don`t think this is valid then please state in coherent logical fashion. And to prove that the social conditioning towards police authoritarian rule is highly successful, we only have to look at the people who think this is ok that he is dragged away. The guy even says I am not doing anything while they drag him away.[ And really guys this is censorship in it`s purest form.Free speech is fine as long as it`s not directed against the government is the statement. What... not far enough left for you? I apologize for the duplicated request, but could you please cite the "valid point" he was making? I never heard it. And WTF?- Kerry is Bush's cousin? And dude, clinton never got impeached. WTF is wrong with you? Also... politicians are standing on the sidelines with radios directing the cops when to go in. lay off the weed, dog. you're so fricking paranoid it's downright insane. Link to post Share on other sites
spacefrog 0 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Yes kerry and Bush are distant cousins. same lineage! http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/04/politics/main604163.shtml http://www.chickenmcnugget.com/pics/bushkerry.htm And yes they impeached Clinton, but obviously your memory doesn`t go back that far. He was impeached but not convicted. And as for his valid point, well if you are all going to repeat yourselves what can I say? Clinton gets impeached(but not convicted) for a BJ and why doesn`t bush get impeached for stealing an election from kerry and disenfranchising black voters. So basically you think that it is ok to defraud voters and rig elections as it`s not a valid point. As for overzealous tasering read this http://newsguru.newsvine.com/_news/2007/02/13/566356-woman-in-wheelchair-tasered-10-times-for-2-min And UK just followed suit by passing legislation to be able to taser pregnant women and children. And as for being paranoid well don`t understand how you get to that conclusion. Please enlighten me why he makes no valid point and why the overzealous use of force was justified Link to post Share on other sites
Mantas 3 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 >Universities are supposed to be centre for debate< This wasn't a debate! It was a shit fight, a protest. Leave the politics and opinions out of it. He was thrown out for being a RUDE PRICK!..........period. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Which was why most people applauded when he was finally taken away... Link to post Share on other sites
samurai 0 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 I mistook Clinton Impeached as Clinton removed from office. For some reason I thought impeachment meant removal. I always thought they tried to impeach clinton but failed. My semantics are twisted. my bad. "So basically you think that it is ok to defraud voters and rig elections as it`s not a valid point." huh? Is that what the guy was yelling at Kerry about? WTF does kerry have to do with that? You've completely lost me. But that's okay, just keep rambling on. Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 What Kerry has to do with that is that he was the rightful winner of the election but he just rolled over and didn't contest the eventual verdict. I think thats the jist of what the guy was saying Link to post Share on other sites
66jzmstr 0 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Everyone here needs to have a beer. I was your surrogate beer imbiber tonight. I think I nearly had one for each of you. I drank them while watching a SNOWboard dvd, too. But to not be too off-topic, I say we agree to agree: The dude was a total c*ckgoblin, and security was way too over the top, like that arm-rastlin' movie with Sylvester Stallone. Socio-political climate and off-the-cuff First Ammendment musings aside, it's as simple as this: Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 hahaha, Over the top, Stallone, what were you thinking??!! Link to post Share on other sites
66jzmstr 0 Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 He thinks? Link to post Share on other sites
spacefrog 0 Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 Yup TB that was exactly the point why did he roll over and just accept it. and the guy made a stand which more than others would do and in a country that prides itself on freedom and democracy he excercised his rights to free speech. He was denied his right to protest about bush stealing his way to power. And what`s scary is that everyone has been socially conditioned to think this is ok. It`s totally justified he was pinned down and after he was subdued he was then tasered , but it`s ok because he was downright rude. Link to post Share on other sites
soubriquet 0 Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Back sack and crack....is that thing a use once, cos there is no danger I'd shave again with it after dragging it along my sack and crack!!! I hope it washes itself Link to post Share on other sites
thursday 1 Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Like I said before, I'd like my taser in SJ blue with the SJ logo. Link to post Share on other sites
Ezorisu 0 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Anyone see the news about the MIT student who was arrested at Logan Int'l Airport wearing a sweatshirt with a circuit board and 9V battery stitched to the front while allegedly carrying balls of a claylike substance? Authorities said it appeared to be a bomb. She described the shirt as "art" and was on her way to "career day" after picking up someone from the airport. Last friday here, Thursday there. Might have flown under the radar of some news services. We got buried in it here because she was from Hawaii. Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 even if it was "art", pretty stupid to go to the airport with it. Link to post Share on other sites
Ezorisu 0 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 Agreed. It's really hard to tell if she was simply unaware, or purposely trying to provoke an incident. If she was unaware, then it again goes to show how someone can be really book-smart (she's enrolled in MIT!), but have absolutely no common sense. If she was trying to start something, then she's really lucky that none of the security personnel discharged any of their drawn sidearms. Stupid is an understatement. Link to post Share on other sites
spacefrog 0 Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I am sorry but this needed to be dragged up again for the people who thought this was justified. I am very sorry for those people, it`s not their fault but the rest of us who have some notion of right or wrong then please watch all of the following. http://prisonplanet.com/articles/september2007/210907_b_brutality.htm the people who thought it was ok to be tasered like that then they have been indoctrinated beyond recompense and there is absolutely no hope for them. Please pity them and don`t hold it against them. Link to post Share on other sites
samurai 0 Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 ......... ....... ..... ... .. . signed, the silent majority. Link to post Share on other sites
nippontiger 8 Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Of course, the "Tasing" was totally unnecessary. It is the job of the police to arrest suspects and put together evidence, not to issue punishments - thats the job of the courts. Anyway, I like to think that this wouldnt ever happen in my country, England. We dont have such laws as "Three strikes and your out", because, as we might say in England, well, its just not cricket (sorry!). The laws pertaining to the police use of such powerfull and potentially lethal weapons as Tasers, are quite clear - officers should only use them as an alternative to lethal force - ie in a potentially life-threatening situation. If this happened to the guy in England, I imagine he could press charges against the offending officers. But what crime, would the "Tasing bro'" be charged with? Assault? I dont think so, as the attack actually involved the use of a material object, so I think it would be... . . . Wait for it.. . . . Assault with Battery!! Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 The winds are a-changing gary mate, Police will start to use them much more as more forces around the country get them. There'll be no comeback I suspect Link to post Share on other sites
Ken of Kentropolis 0 Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 If you live your life without causing trouble, there is no need to be worried about stuff like this. Surely. Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Who defines what is troublesome behaviour though? Link to post Share on other sites
Mantas 3 Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Originally Posted By: spacefrog the people who thought it was ok to be tasered like that then they have been indoctrinated beyond recompense and there is absolutely no hope for them. Please pity them and don`t hold it against them. I dont think too many people agreed with the tasering. Did they? There are 2 seperate issues here. 1) Should he have been thrown out? Yes. Absolutely. 2) Should he have been tasered? No. Absolutely not. IMO Link to post Share on other sites
Ken of Kentropolis 0 Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Common sense, perhaps. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts