What's so "free" about this

[vidcc]

story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html)


Cindy Sheehan was arrested Tuesday in the House gallery after refusing to cover up a T-shirt bearing an anti-war slogan before President Bush's State of the Union address.
the T-shirt said, "2,245 Dead. How many more?" -- a reference to the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq.

When the president is giving a speech and includes a message that "we are fighting the enemies of freedom" why was she not allowed to wear this "statement"?

I will add that I'm not sure if there is a rule barring all political messages so it may be the case that if she was wearing a "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" slogan then she would have suffered the same treatment, however to me this smacks of censorship.

She was not standing up and shouting, she was not causing a disturbance.

Edit:

Apparently the wife of congressman young was asked to leave because she was wearing a "support our troops" t.shirt. So there isn't a bias.

[Sid Hartha]

Edit:

Apparently the wife of congressman young was asked to leave because she was wearing a "support our troops" t.shirt. So there isn't a bias.

At least she wasn't arrested.

[vidcc]

Edit:

Apparently the wife of congressman young was asked to leave because she was wearing a "support our troops" t.shirt. So there isn't a bias.

At least she wasn't arrested.
Perhaps her stance wasn't strong enough to stand (or sit) by.

Sheehan, like her views or not stood on principle.

[j2k4]

Sheehan, like her views or not stood on principle.

What principle?

Free speech?

Certainly.

What else?

[RPerry]

Wish I knew where I saw the story about this, but an apology was issued next day too.

[vidcc]

Sheehan, like her views or not stood on principle.

What principle?

Free speech?

Certainly.

What else?the war and support of the troops

sheehan supports the troops in her way by making sure we know how many died (I don't get how one can support the war and wish to hide such costs) and by campaigning to get them out of harms way. You may not agree with how she supports them but she is not anti troops. In this she stood on principle and refused to cover her shirt or leave.

the other claimed to support the troops and the war but didn't think it worth making a stand.

[vidcc]

Wish I knew where I saw the story about this, but an apology was issued next day too.
yes it was. I do wonder if this would have happened if it wasn't for a republican congressman's wife being removed.

[j2k4]

What principle?

Free speech?

Certainly.

What else?the war and support of the troops

sheehan supports the troops in her way by making sure we know how many died (I don't get how one can support the war and wish to hide such costs) and by campaigning to get them out of harms way. You may not agree with how she supports them but she is not anti troops. In this she stood on principle and refused to cover her shirt or leave.

the other claimed to support the troops and the war but didn't think it worth making a stand.

The "war" is not a principle.

"Support of the troops" is not a principle.

Her refusal to cover her shirt indicates nothing but stubbornness.

Actually, for her to say she "supports the troops" strikes me as a bit specious.

If she hates what they are doing, how can she "support" them, given their volunteer status?

[Busyman]

the war and support of the troops

sheehan supports the troops in her way by making sure we know how many died (I don't get how one can support the war and wish to hide such costs) and by campaigning to get them out of harms way. You may not agree with how she supports them but she is not anti troops. In this she stood on principle and refused to cover her shirt or leave.

the other claimed to support the troops and the war but didn't think it worth making a stand.
Her refusal to cover her shirt indicates nothing but stubbornness.
So did Rosa Parks refusal to change her seat.:wacko:

[j2k4]

Her refusal to cover her shirt indicates nothing but stubbornness.
So did Rosa Parks refusal to change her seat.:wacko:

Nobody was complaining about Rosa's shirt, which was changeable-they had a problem with her skin color, a distinctly different kettle of fish.

Do not let your inclination to refute me mislead you into bitch-ass stupid-fuck reasoning, Busyman.

You do Rosa no credit when you are so undisciplined..

[vidcc]

the war and support of the troops

sheehan supports the troops in her way by making sure we know how many died (I don't get how one can support the war and wish to hide such costs) and by campaigning to get them out of harms way. You may not agree with how she supports them but she is not anti troops. In this she stood on principle and refused to cover her shirt or leave.

the other claimed to support the troops and the war but didn't think it worth making a stand.

The "war" is not a principle.
You don't think that the supporting of the reasoning behind it "because it was the right thing to do" is not?
"Support of the troops" is not a principle.
Support for the troops "because it was the right thing to do" is not?
Her refusal to cover her shirt indicates nothing but stubbornness.
.Think of the principle of the message... what the shirt is saying
Actually, for her to say she "supports the troops" strikes me as a bit specious.

If she hates what they are doing, how can she "support" them, given their volunteer status? Oh... did they all volunteer to fight in Iraq then? Soldiers volunteer to defend their country, that doesn't mean that they all believe every war is just.

[Busyman]

So did Rosa Parks refusal to change her seat.:wacko:

Nobody was complaining about Rosa's shirt, which was changeable-they had a problem with her skin color, a distinctly different kettle of fish.

Do not let your inclination to refute me mislead you into bitch-ass stupid-fuck reasoning, Busyman.

You do Rosa no credit when you are so undisciplined..
Ha! Typical now I'm snubbing Rosa's credit.:lol: :lol:

My ass-fuck stupid-bitch reasoning doesn't have to have a t-shirt to t-shirt comparison.

Pay attention with me now......stubborness and a person's individual rights.

[j2k4]

Those are two of the most cock-eyed posts I've ever seen, and consecutively, at that.

Vid-

When you join an all-volunteer army, you don't get a vote on where you go or what you do.

If your Commander-in-Chief says "Hie thee to Iraq, and don't forget your gun" that is what you do.

What in the world gave you the idea it was otherwise? :huh:

Busyman, have you copyrighted all of your pet phrases or something?

When I reply to you in kind, you react rather heavily...granted, I can't successfully adopt your ebonics-laden slurs, and I surely don't have your "street cred", but I don't need it, either.

I was merely trying to appeal to you as I see you try to appeal to others.

[j2k4]

My ass-fuck stupid-bitch reasoning doesn't have a t-shirt to t-shirt comparison.
.

BTW-

Sorry to have gotten the order wrong; I'll work on that.

[Busyman]

Those are two of the most cock-eyed posts I've ever seen, and consecutively, at that.

Vid-

When you join an all-volunteer army, you don't get a vote on where you go or what you do.

If your Commander-in-Chief says "Hie thee to Iraq, and don't forget your gun" that is what you do.

What in the world gave you the idea it was otherwise? :huh:

Busyman, have you copyrighted all of your pet phrases or something?

When I reply to you in kind, you react rather heavily...granted, I can't successfully adopt your ebonics-laden slurs, and I surely don't have your "street cred", but I don't need it, either.

I was merely trying to appeal to you as I see you try to appeal to others.
When do I appeal to anyone?

Congratulations on your use of curse words. You get an award and whatnot.

Street cred means shit here and fuck ebonics (what a bullshit word).

Everyone knows when the President says go you go.

As a non-military citizen of this country you have the right call him on the rationale for war, exert pressure, and NOT be a partyline bend over.

[JPaul]

The "war" is not a principle.
You don't think that the supporting of the reasoning behind it "because it was the right thing to do" is not?
"Support of the troops" is not a principle.
Support for the troops "because it was the right thing to do" is not?
Her refusal to cover her shirt indicates nothing but stubbornness.
.Think of the principle of the message... what the shirt is saying
Actually, for her to say she "supports the troops" strikes me as a bit specious.

If she hates what they are doing, how can she "support" them, given their volunteer status? Oh... did they all volunteer to fight in Iraq then? Soldiers volunteer to defend their country, that doesn't mean that they all believe every war is just.


That's just silly and hopefully you know it.

You join the Army, you go where your told, everyone knows that before they join.

[vidcc]

Those are two of the most cock-eyed posts I've ever seen, and consecutively, at that.

Vid-

When you join an all-volunteer army, you don't get a vote on where you go or what you do.

If your Commander-in-Chief says "Hie thee to Iraq, and don't forget your gun" that is what you do.

What in the world gave you the idea it was otherwise? :huh:

What has that got to do with what I posted?

Please show me anywhere That I suggested any of this.

[vidcc]

Oh... did they all volunteer to fight in Iraq then? Soldiers volunteer to defend their country, that doesn't mean that they all believe every war is just.


That's just silly and hopefully you know it.

You join the Army, you go where your told, everyone knows that before they join. As with Kev please point to where I said They don't have to go where they are told.

[j2k4]

Please show me anywhere That I suggested any of this.


Oh... did they all volunteer to fight in Iraq then? Soldiers volunteer to defend their country, that doesn't mean that they all believe every war is just.

I think this will do.

This could be fun, too, as I see it offers many opportunities for selective parsing and shading.

When you sign up, you are obligated to fight, whenever and wherever, or you go to the stockade to await your date with a tribunal.

[j2k4]

When do I appeal to anyone?


What I meant by that was your normal method of posting....you know, the bitch-ass, fuck-wit, CaptainObvious, my rod/johnson balls-hanging-out, what-not, partyline bendover stuff that is so inherently you.

It is the way you post, much as I constantly use big words that you object to so often.

It's so endearing.

[vidcc]

Oh... did they all volunteer to fight in Iraq then? Soldiers volunteer to defend their country, that doesn't mean that they all believe every war is just.

I think this will do.

This could be fun, too, as I see it offers many opportunities for selective parsing and shading.

When you sign up, you are obligated to fight, whenever and wherever, or you go to the stockade to await your date with a tribunal. Yes now please show me where i siad they are not obligated. There is no parsing but on your part here.

Read it:

It says Soldiers volunteer to defend their country


Then that doesn't mean that they all believe every war is just.

At no point did it say thay they will refuse to fight or that they feel they are not obligated to fight any war they don't agree with.....you said that not I.

better add this in case you feel i select just parts :

Oh... did they all volunteer to fight in Iraq then?

People join up for many reasons that doesn't mean that they all believe every war is just. not all believe the Iraq war is the kind of war they should be fighting "to defend their country". In other words they feel that Iraq war not a war of need but of political choice etc.

[Skiz]

story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html)


Cindy Sheehan was arrested Tuesday in the House gallery after refusing to cover up a T-shirt bearing an anti-war slogan before President Bush's State of the Union address.
the T-shirt said, "2,245 Dead. How many more?" -- a reference to the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq.

When the president is giving a speech and includes a message that "we are fighting the enemies of freedom" why was she not allowed to wear this "statement"?

I will add that I'm not sure if there is a rule barring all political messages so it may be the case that if she was wearing a "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" slogan then she would have suffered the same treatment, however to me this smacks of censorship.

She was not standing up and shouting, she was not causing a disturbance.

Edit:

Apparently the wife of congressman young was asked to leave because she was wearing a "support our troops" t.shirt. So there isn't a bias.


Obviously you didn't watch the state of the union address, because she was standing up and shouting the moment President Bush was introduced - she couldn't even wait for for his full introduction. When watching, I didn't even see him walking out because the camera moved over to her. Might want to check your facts. :dry:



the war and support of the troops

sheehan supports the troops in her way by making sure we know how many died (I don't get how one can support the war and wish to hide such costs) and by campaigning to get them out of harms way. You may not agree with how she supports them but she is not anti troops. In this she stood on principle and refused to cover her shirt or leave.

the other claimed to support the troops and the war but didn't think it worth making a stand.

Be sure to ask the next male/female troop that you meet whether they agree with Sheehan's "support".

[JPaul]

That's just silly and hopefully you know it.

You join the Army, you go where your told, everyone knows that before they join. As with Kev please point to where I said They don't have to go where they are told.
Where you say they didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq. By any reading that implies that they have some say when they volunteer, rather than it being unconditional.

Oh and they don't voulnteer to defend their country, they volunteer to fight on it's behalf.

[vidcc]

Obviously you didn't watch the state of the union address, because she was standing up and shouting the moment President Bush was introduced - she couldn't even wait for for his full introduction. When watching, I didn't even see him walking out because the camera moved over to her. Might want to check your facts. :dry:
Funny even Limbargh hasn't gone with this..... perhaps this might have been because she was arrested before the speech. Also she made the noise ( this is information after the original post) when she was being challenged by the capitol police, not before.

BTW I did watch it and I didn't see her




Be sure to ask the next male/female troop that you meet whether they agree with Sheehan's "support" I know a few personally, some agree some don't...what's your point?

[vidcc]

As with Kev please point to where I said They don't have to go where they are told.
Where you say they didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq. By any reading that implies that they have some say when they volunteer, rather than it being unconditional.
well I made it clear for those that chose to put their own meaning to what I actually wrote

Oh and they don't voulnteer to defend their country, they volunteer to fight on it's behalf.
snooze

actually they sign up to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;

[Skiz]

BTW I did watch it and I didn't see her

'nuff said.




I know a few personally, some agre some don't...what's your point?


My point is simple. 99% of troops don't care for her to say it lightly. When the troops don't think it's support, it's not support.

[vidcc]

My point is simple. 99% of troops don't care for her to say it lightly. When the troops don't think it's support, it's not support. WHere did you get that figure? Ken melman, dick cheney, karl rove...... or some other well know truth economist? :rolleyes:

[JPaul]

Where you say they didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq. By any reading that implies that they have some say when they volunteer, rather than it being unconditional.
well I made it clear for those that chose to put their own meaning to what I actually wrote


The important thing in communication is what people understand you to have said, not what you thought you said.

[JPaul]

actually they sign up to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
By doing what they are told by their Commander in Chief.

[vidcc]

actually they sign up to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
By doing what they are told by their Commander in Chief. Show me where I disputed that

[vidcc]

The important thing in communication is what people understand you to have said, not what you thought you said.

Here we go again:rolleyes: so you decided something and I cleared it up. Rather than choose to accept it has been cleared up you have to stay with what you decided I said. :sleep1:

[JPaul]

By doing what they are told by their Commander in Chief. Show me where I disputed that
You didn't, it just makes your "they didn't volunteer to fight in Iraq" a non-point and a bit of a silly thing to say, when you are fully aware that they have no choice in the matter.

[JPaul]

The important thing in communication is what people understand you to have said, not what you thought you said.

Here we go again:rolleyes: so you decided something and I cleared it up.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :nob:

[Busyman]

story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html)


When the president is giving a speech and includes a message that "we are fighting the enemies of freedom" why was she not allowed to wear this "statement"?

I will add that I'm not sure if there is a rule barring all political messages so it may be the case that if she was wearing a "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" slogan then she would have suffered the same treatment, however to me this smacks of censorship.

She was not standing up and shouting, she was not causing a disturbance.

Edit:

Apparently the wife of congressman young was asked to leave because she was wearing a "support our troops" t.shirt. So there isn't a bias.


Obviously you didn't watch the state of the union address, because she was standing up and shouting the moment President Bush was introduced - she couldn't even wait for for his full introduction. When watching, I didn't even see him walking out because the camera moved over to her. Might want to check your facts. :dry:



the war and support of the troops

sheehan supports the troops in her way by making sure we know how many died (I don't get how one can support the war and wish to hide such costs) and by campaigning to get them out of harms way. You may not agree with how she supports them but she is not anti troops. In this she stood on principle and refused to cover her shirt or leave.

the other claimed to support the troops and the war but didn't think it worth making a stand.

Be sure to ask the next male/female troop that you meet whether they agree with Sheehan's "support".
I didn't know she was causing a ruckus. Well that's a different thing altogether isn't it? That ain't just a t-shirt.

Also you've got to be kidding me? EVERY single troop I've met disagrees with the war. All of these are not necessarily black or my friends either.

I've gone on AAFB and BAFB often (not recently though) so I've talked to MANY troops. I also have talked to a few (not many) at the Washington Navy Yard and Fort Mcnair but I don't go there often. ALL have the same disagreement. These are men that have been over there and were back. Some had to go back but not all which I thought was weird.

Now on TV the troops talk of support for the war....and it's in their best interest too.

[Busyman]

'nuff said.




I know a few personally, some agre some don't...what's your point?


My point is simple. 99% of troops don't care for her to say it lightly. When the troops don't think it's support, it's not support.
HTH do you know?

TV?

[Busyman]

When do I appeal to anyone?


What I meant by that was your normal method of posting....you know, the bitch-ass, fuck-wit, CaptainObvious, my rod/johnson balls-hanging-out, what-not, partyline bendover stuff that is so inherently you.

It is the way you post, much as I constantly use big words that you object to so often.

It's so endearing.
Big words? You don't use big words.:huh:

I also don't say rod, might have used fuck-wit once, and never say balls hanging out. (count the last sentence though)

I don't post like a stuck-up tuna and am not trying to write a book. I mean you know what a partyline bendover is yet I doubt it's in your thesaurus.

Anyway back on topic...

If Sheehan was creating a ruckus than this whole thing seems like a non-issue.

[vidcc]

she was not silent while being arrested, i have yet to see a report where she was shouting before....... must be the liberal media

[JPaul]

There's a video here http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11120353/ or at least a link to one.

[j2k4]

What I meant by that was your normal method of posting....you know, the bitch-ass, fuck-wit, CaptainObvious, my rod/johnson balls-hanging-out, what-not, partyline bendover stuff that is so inherently you.

It is the way you post, much as I constantly use big words that you object to so often.

It's so endearing.

I don't post like a stuck-up tuna and am not trying to write a book. I mean you know what a partyline bendover is yet I doubt it's in your thesaurus.


Okay.

Glad you've cleared that up.

Whatever your perception is of my posting, then, and whatever mine is of yours.

No one is likely to confuse us with each other nor with anyone else.

BTW-what is the "tuna" reference in aid of?

I am not familiar with it.

[Busyman]

Here's my 2 bits...

1. Sheehan's message was disliked, she was kicked out. She resisted. She was arrested.

2. The congressman's wife was kicked out only 'cause she Sheehan was kicked out. It would have looked like a double standard.

3. Due to the outrage of the congressman's wife and congressman, there was an apology and the Sheehan charges had to be dropped.

4. If "proper attire" is to be worn, then that would mean a blank t-shirt would be improper yet....it isn't.

I'm curious. Did anyone actually watch the State Of The Union address?

I think was watching Supernatural (the Prez never takes over The WB :happy:). The President never says the state of the union is weak. To me it's a huge snorefest.

[JPaul]

The Police have said it was a misunderstanding, based on the fact that "protests" are not allowed there. The Officers on duty took the T-Shirts as constituting a protest.

It is worthy of note that Mrs Sheehan was wearing a black zipper, closed, over the T-Shirt when she was being led to he seat. One suspects she didn't think she would be allowed in wearing the T-Shirt.

[j2k4]

Here's my 2 bits...

1. Sheehan's message was disliked, she was kicked out. She resisted. She was arrested.

2. The congressman's wife was kicked out only 'cause she Sheehan was kicked out. It would have looked like a double standard.

3. Due to the outrage of the congressman's wife and congressman, there was an apology and the Sheehan charges had to be dropped.

4. If "proper attire" is to be worn, then that would mean a blank t-shirt would be improper yet....it isn't.

I'm curious. Did anyone actually watch the State Of The Union address?

I think was watching Supernatural (the Prez never takes over The WB :happy:). The President never says the state of the union is weak. To me it's a huge snorefest.


Ah.

And the tuna?

[vidcc]

It is worthy of note that Mrs Sheehan was wearing a black zipper, closed, over the T-Shirt when she was being led to he seat. One suspects she didn't think she would be allowed in wearing the T-Shirt.
It is possible that she thought as you suggest, however it is also possible that DC is cold this time of year. I tend to wait until I am at my seat before I take my coat off when I go to theatres on cold nights.

[JPaul]

It is worthy of note that Mrs Sheehan was wearing a black zipper, closed, over the T-Shirt when she was being led to he seat. One suspects she didn't think she would be allowed in wearing the T-Shirt.
It is possible that she thought as you suggest, however it is also possible that DC is cold this time of year. I tend to wait until I am at my seat before I take my coat off when I go to theatres on cold nights.Indeed, two possible interpretations. She wore it open on the way out, I suspect you put your coat on before leaving the theatre, what with it being later and probably colder.

[vidcc]

I may put it on before i leave, but wouldnt button up until i reached the door.

deliberatly leaving it unzipped after being ejected is a different matter though

[Busyman]

I may put it on before i leave, but wouldnt button up until i reached the door.

deliberatly leaving it unzipped after being ejected is a different matter though
They gave her more exposure by kicking her out.

[JPaul]

I may put it on before i leave, but wouldnt button up until i reached the door.

deliberatly leaving it unzipped after being ejected is a different matter though
They gave her more exposure by kicking her out.
Part of the plan, perhaps.

[j2k4]

They gave her more exposure by kicking her out.
Part of the plan, perhaps.

Just so.

As long as they're not required to mike her, the media still give her a look.

Funny they won't do the same for a soldier's mother if she's proud of her son or daughter notwithstanding their sacrifice.

Cindy Sheehan's brand of moral authority is more camera-friendly. ;)

[JPaul]

Whilst I have every sympathy for her loss, there can be nothing worse than outliving your child, he joined the armed forces.

[Busyman]

Part of the plan, perhaps.

Just so.

As long as they're not required to mike her, the media still give her a look.

Funny they won't do the same for a soldier's mother if she's proud of her son or daughter notwithstanding their sacrifice.

Cindy Sheehan's brand of moral authority is more camera-friendly. ;)
True since she isn't alone.

One can be proud of their son fighting in our armed forces but can also be disappointed (to say the least) in what they actually fought and died for.

This is evident regardless of the fact that their son joined the armed forces willingly.

I'd be pissed to if I had a son die in Iraq versus say fighting an incursion into the US.

Tbh, I guess the congressman's wife's t-shirt was offensive.....

"Support Our Troops Defending Our Freedom"

I'd like to know what brainwashed fools actually believe that (besides the congressman's wife).

What a piece of trash of a t-shirt.

[Seedler]

story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html)


Cindy Sheehan was arrested Tuesday in the House gallery after refusing to cover up a T-shirt bearing an anti-war slogan before President Bush's State of the Union address.
the T-shirt said, "2,245 Dead. How many more?" -- a reference to the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq.

When the president is giving a speech and includes a message that "we are fighting the enemies of freedom" why was she not allowed to wear this "statement"?

I will add that I'm not sure if there is a rule barring all political messages so it may be the case that if she was wearing a "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" slogan then she would have suffered the same treatment, however to me this smacks of censorship.

She was not standing up and shouting, she was not causing a disturbance.

Edit:

Apparently the wife of congressman young was asked to leave because she was wearing a "support our troops" t.shirt. So there isn't a bias.




Iraq=Oil

America NEEDS oil

America>Iraq

America:nuke: Iraq

Iraq=angel1:

America=:)

America with Oil=:01:

Our quality of life=preserved

So why the fuck do we care? Let those troops die, they die to preserve our quality of life. No one made them go. They enlisted or volunteered. America will collapse without oil, and the only way to get it is to pretty much invade Iraq.

That's the sad thing, everyone in North America is like, "OMG, the world is such a sad place, we have to help people in Africa, Iraq, etc." But they don't really give a fuck because majority of people still don't do enough to stop the war in Iraq because they're afraid of decreasing their quality of life.

I'm not a cold-blooded shitfuck, but really, who gives a shit about couple thousand Americans dying? Their family members? Well, maybe they should have educated their sons better so their sons could have ended up becoming a lawyer or doctor instead of becoming Bush's pawn. It's a cruel world, survival of the fittest and those soldier who died CHOSE to join the army, if they paid more attention in high school they probably could have had more options other than joining the suicidal US Army.

Did you know that the world spends hundreds of billions of dollars on weapons every year while it only takes about a couple hundred million USD to feed everyone in third-world countries? That farmers in Canada would burn crops to lower the supply so the demand and price ratio stays up? To me, that's fucked but that's just the way the world has become. No one, not one person or even a group of people can change that so we just have to live with this fact.

So a simple violation of some random woman's right? That won't even come close to leaving a mark in history. She was stupid to wear such a t-shirt that would potentially get her into shit. She was unlucky and no one can do a thing about it nor give a fuck. End of story.

[Busyman]

story (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html)


When the president is giving a speech and includes a message that "we are fighting the enemies of freedom" why was she not allowed to wear this "statement"?

I will add that I'm not sure if there is a rule barring all political messages so it may be the case that if she was wearing a "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" slogan then she would have suffered the same treatment, however to me this smacks of censorship.

She was not standing up and shouting, she was not causing a disturbance.

Edit:

Apparently the wife of congressman young was asked to leave because she was wearing a "support our troops" t.shirt. So there isn't a bias.




Iraq=Oil

America NEEDS oil

America>Iraq

America:nuke: Iraq

Iraq=angel1:

America=:)

America with Oil=:01:

Our quality of life=preserved

So why the fuck do we care? Let those troops die, they die to preserve our quality of life. No one made them go. They enlisted or volunteered. America will collapse without oil, and the only way to get it is to pretty much invade Iraq.

That's the sad thing, everyone in North America is like, "OMG, the world is such a sad place, we have to help people in Africa, Iraq, etc." But they don't really give a fuck because majority of people still don't do enough to stop the war in Iraq because they're afraid of decreasing their quality of life.

I'm not a cold-blooded shitfuck, but really, who gives a shit about couple thousand Americans dying? Their family members? Well, maybe they should have educated their sons better so their sons could have ended up becoming a lawyer or doctor instead of becoming Bush's pawn. It's a cruel world, survival of the fittest and those soldier who died CHOSE to join the army, if they paid more attention in high school they probably could have had more options other than joining the suicidal US Army.

Did you know that the world spends hundreds of billions of dollars on weapons every year while it only takes about a couple hundred million USD to feed everyone in third-world countries? That farmers in Canada would burn crops to lower the supply so the demand and price ratio stays up? To me, that's fucked but that's just the way the world has become. No one, not one person or even a group of people can change that so we just have to live with this fact.

So a simple violation of some random woman's right? That won't even come close to leaving a mark in history. She was stupid to wear such a t-shirt that would potentially get her into shit. She was unlucky and no one can do a thing about it nor give a fuck. End of story.
:O

[j2k4]

You're kind of young to be so cynical, but I understand the compulsion.

Time will soften your view, unless you choose to retain it out of some sense of pride in your "realistic" outlook.

I wish better for you.

[Seedler]

Time will soften your view, unless you choose to retain it out of some sense of pride in your "realistic" outlook.

I wish better for you.

ouch:O That was some "soft" and "buttered" ownage...:)

[JPaul]

Did you know that the world spends hundreds of billions of dollars on weapons every year while it only takes about a couple hundred million USD to feed everyone in third-world countries?
Could you tell me where these figures come from, particularly regarding the cost of feeding "everyone in third world countries".

[j2k4]

Time will soften your view, unless you choose to retain it out of some sense of pride in your "realistic" outlook.

I wish better for you.

ouch:O That was some "soft" and "buttered" ownage...:)

I specialize in high-cholesterol counseling. :)

[MagicNakor]

Did you know that the world spends hundreds of billions of dollars on weapons every year while it only takes about a couple hundred million USD to feed everyone in third-world countries?
Could you tell me where these figures come from, particularly regarding the cost of feeding "everyone in third world countries".

As an addendum, don't forget to provide evidence on the deliberate price-setting the Canadian farmers are doing...

:shuriken:

[lynx]

Could you tell me where these figures come from, particularly regarding the cost of feeding "everyone in third world countries".

As an addendum, don't forget to provide evidence on the deliberate price-setting the Canadian farmers are doing...

:shuriken:
I think you'll find the evidence here (http://filesharingtalk.com/vb3/t110988.html) :whistling