Re: What's so "free" about this
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.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
Ah.
And the tuna?
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
Re: What's so "free" about this
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
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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
They gave her more exposure by kicking her out.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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
They gave her more exposure by kicking her out.
Part of the plan, perhaps.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
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. ;)
Re: What's so "free" about this
Whilst I have every sympathy for her loss, there can be nothing worse than outliving your child, he joined the armed forces.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
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.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
story
Quote:
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.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seedler
Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
story
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
Re: What's so "free" about this
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.
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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...:)
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seedler
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".
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seedler
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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. :)
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seedler
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:
Re: What's so "free" about this
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicNakor
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
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 :whistling
