RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice"

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice"

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 10:32:18 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Well, she's a bimbo (Barbarella), symbolically speaking, and her humanist politics were too complex for the era, her goal was was not pro-NVA, it was antiwar, her crime was attempting to humanize the enemy, it could be more accurately characterized as a peace envoy, Nixon was already trying to find a way to wind it all down, so it's hard to say it hindered the war effort.

The charge that she informed on American prisoners to the NVA is repudiated on snopes.

http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.asp

Sorry. I would argue that by going there, wearing their uniform, and telling the world what wonderful humanitarians they were she committed the treasonous act of giving aid and comfort to the enemy. I'm not sure about "comfort" although, I'd wager she fucked a few of 'em just to prove what a humanitarian she is but, propagandizing is certainly giving aid.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

OK. Here's where I stop taking you seriously.

Off to be productive. Enjoy.

You can, if you like but Tokyo Rose was convicted of treason for propagandizing. So, you'd be foolish to not take that argument seriously.

Yes, she was pardoned, thirty years later, a dying woman that shed tears of remorse but she was convicted and I still think that speaking out for an enemy is giving aid to that enemy.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 41

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 10:52:30 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

That's not what I mean, and you know it.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 42

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 10:55:15 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Convenient salves to ease the conscience like dehumanization are often necessary to war, humanization is typically necessary for Peace.

Another way of looking at it is the perception by many that the NVA was an enemy of choice, they were not attacking us, we were attacking them, and the Russians, by proxy - it was not a war at all, it was a "police action" justified by "containment" policy, the relevant threat was that the Soviets would acquire Cam Rahn bay as a year round Naval base.

They did get that base after we withdrew, but had pretty much mothballed it by 1990.

Had Fonda made that trip earlier in the war, she probably would have been prosecuted for treason - at the time she did, it was pretty much moot.

Granted, Vietnam resurrectionists are a lot like Civil War resurrectionists, it's always going to be us vs. them, so perceptually, I'm pretty sure none of these geopolitical complexities matter much to you.

It may comfort you to know that we essentially won in the end anyway, through the less costly expedient, in terms of live and taxes, of carpet bombing them with toaster ovens and DVD's, and it's basically just another Pacific Rim maquiladora now - one of those geopolitical complexities.

I don't suppose you have any equally passionate denouncements about Prescott Bush, or Dick Cheney - Iraq and Iran both get most of their WMD infrastructure through Halliburton, or or that matter, Ronnie Raygun and Ollie North who sold antiship missiles to Iran?

Oh wait, they all made money at it, very different.

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 43

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 10:56:15 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That's not what I mean, and you know it.

I swear, I didn't. I thought that's what you were arguing. I detest when people straw man me but, since you had all of that quoted, I didn't know what you objected to. I apologize, sincerely for misinterpreting you.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 3/14/2012 11:09:49 AM >

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 44

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:02:26 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

I don't suppose you have any equally passionate denouncements about Prescott Bush, or Dick Cheney - Iraq and Iran both get most of their WMD infrastructure through Halliburton, or or that matter, Ronnie Raygun and Ollie North who sold antiship missiles to Iran?

Oh wait, they all made money at it, very different.

You'd be wrong. While I said that I believe that President Bush was taken in by an ally's intelligence report, I felt that there were WMDs and that we were responsible for Saddam so, we needed to do something.

Once the WMDs weren't found (in a reasonable amount of time) and Saddam was no longer in power, we needed to get out.

I have constantly brought up that our last shipment of APMs to Iraq was on 01 AUG 91 so I throw King George I under the bus, too. The first Gulf war was a desire for the US to have a permenant military installation in the Middle East. That's all it was about.

President Reagan and Col. North broke the law. While North shielded Reagan from legal fall-out (he was an exemplary Marine), they were both guilty of circumventing sanctions and committed illegal acts. I've said as much, recently on these boards.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to xssve)

Post #: 45

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:03:47 AM

fucktoyprincess

Posts: 2337
Status: offline

FR

I don't like Rush's message, but I do believe in the First Amendment which protects his right to say what he wants to say.

What the First Amendment does NOT protect is someone's right to say whatever they want to say on the radio. That is a separate matter entirely. And so that will have to be battled out. Just as you are not allowed to broadcast anything you want on a tv station, it is the same with radio, and commercial interests and speech are NOT protected in the same way as other forms of speech. Rush's show is a commercial enterprise. The show exists because advertisers pay to reach an audience. But no one wants to listen to nothing but ads, so radio stations put in music, or talk shows, or something, in between, as "entertainment". That is the economics of radio broadcasting. Why does the government have an interest in this? Because there are a limited number of radio frequencies, and therefore only a limited number of radio stations can operate within a given locale. So radio waves are subject to government regulation.

Even if it were determined that Rush's show should be pulled (I don't agree with that outcome, I'm just saying if that were the outcome), then Rush is still free to say whatever he wants to say in other ways.

I think liberals would do better to leave this one alone. As has been pointed out in another thread, Rush actually helps liberals. As a liberal myself, I do not want to be associated with trying to prevent someone from speaking their mind. I don't have to like their speech, and I can do other things to voice my disagreement, but I don't believe in putting the muzzle on anyone.

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 46

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:40:42 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

I thought that's what you were arguing.

That's because you've got a hard-on about Jane, and you're not reading/seeing anything else.

By the way, you turned to scopes when it served your purpose, and dismissed it when it didn't.

You detest straw man, but you've got Jane in a NK orgy.

This isn't a discussion---it's a rant. And it's not about Rush or the FCC--it's about your feelings from 40 years ago.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 47

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:42:45 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

I thought that's what you were arguing.

That's because you've got a hard-on about Jane, and you're not reading/seeing anything else.

By the way, you turned to scopes when it served your purpose, and dismissed it when it didn't.

You detest straw man, but you've got Jane in a NK orgy.

This isn't a discussion---it's a rant. And it's not about Rush or the FCC--it's about your feelings from 40 years ago.

Nice of you to read my mind for me ... and all without a magnifying glass. Well, your assessment was correct.

We're done, here "sir".

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 48

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:48:26 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

No mind reading involved, Michael--you've been making that clear for three pages now.

If that calls for condescension in your view, then reading comprehension is my crime.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 49

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:52:54 AM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Forbes Online

quote:

Imagine this scenario: you are a lifelong liberal. You pretty much hate everything Rush Limbaugh stands for, and says. You are really glad that the times have finally seemed to have caught up to him, and that people are outraged by his callous, gross comments. So what do you do next? You do the one thing that will make him a sympathetic figure. You call on the FCC to remove him.

You're welcome for the gift of an actually journalistic news source to use in you baseless rants. just don't wear it out.

_____________________________

Looking forward to The Dead Singing The National Anthem At The World Series.

Tinfoilers Swallow

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 50

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:55:33 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

quote:

I have constantly brought up that our last shipment of APMs to Iraq was on 01 AUG 91 so I throw King George I under the bus, too. The first Gulf war was a desire for the US to have a permenant military installation in the Middle East. That's all it was about.

That and for one reason or another, Iraq's oil reserves remain largely untapped compared to the other ME reserves; the oil on the top is easier to extract: as you go deeper, the oil is increasing trapped in the rock matricies, hence fracking. Iraq's glass is still half full, where everybody else's glass is half empty.

quote:

President Reagan and Col. North broke the law. While North shielded Reagan from legal fall-out (he was an exemplary Marine), they were both guilty of circumventing sanctions and committed illegal acts. I've said as much, recently on these boards.

Exemplary - unless you count arms dealing to the enemy.

As ex-Navy, I can tell you I'm not too fond of Ollie, he was furnishing Iran with, among other things, Silkworms that have been fired at at least 3 U.S. ships - Silkworms that Saddam fired at coalition forces during Desert Storm were probably obtained through similar collusion during the Iran-Iraq war when he was our ally.

< Message edited by xssve -- 3/14/2012 11:58:03 AM >

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 51

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:56:04 AM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

No mind reading involved, Michael--you've been making that clear for three pages now.

If that calls for condescension in your view, then reading comprehension is my crime.

I can't make up my mind if he does that because it's a standard low hanging fruit method of debate, or if he actually believes these misinterpretations. Either way, it's SOP.

_____________________________

Looking forward to The Dead Singing The National Anthem At The World Series.

Tinfoilers Swallow

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 52

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:57:16 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

Now that would be mind reading.

(in reply to SternSkipper)

Post #: 53

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:57:47 AM

BitaTruble

Posts: 9779
Joined: 1/12/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

FR

I don't like Rush's message, but I do believe in the First Amendment which protects his right to say what he wants to say.

What the First Amendment does NOT protect is someone's right to say whatever they want to say on the radio.

SCOTUS upheld that the 'right' goes to the individual to speak and to listen via radio in stating that individuals are not 'carriers'. Carriers are restricted in certain aspects and there are differing levels for 1st protection. Individuals are not held to those differing standards and are protected in any media and on the Internet. The 1st is still there for carriers, just at (3) differing levels.

"In CBS, Inc. v. Democratic National Committee, for example, the Court examined the legislative history of the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934 and found that Congress “firmly … rejected the argument that the broadcast facilities should be open on a nonselective basis to all persons wishing to talk about public issues.” It found great significance in the act’s command that a person “engaged in radio broadcasting shall not … be deemed a common carrier.” (my bold)

Here is the standard for a common carrier:

"It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage."

Broadcast radio is limited in the protection offered by the 1st but talking heads are not as it is considered personal preference rather than policy of the broadcasting station.

Examples:

A telemarketer calls you on the phone and goes into the spiel.. he is then acting as an agent of policy and not as an individual so his 1st protections are at a differing level and must adhere to the Communications Act of 1934. Unscripted talk shows would not be an 'agent of policy', radio commercials would be an agent of policy. Being a guest on David Letterman - not an agent of policy, trying to sell advertising for David Letterman.. agent of policy.

Your statement has some merit when it comes to agents of policy.. you can't just say anything you want without violation. Rush doesn't fall under the same level of scrutiny in 1st protection as far as SCOTUS though.

_____________________________

"Oh, so it's just like
Rock, paper, scissors."

He laughed. "You are the wisest woman I know."

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)

Post #: 54

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 11:58:52 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve
Exemplary - unless you count arms dealing to the enemy.

As ex-Navy, I can tell you I'm not too fond of Ollie, he was furnishing Iran with, among other things, Silkworms that have been fired at at least 3 U.S. ships - Silkworms that Saddam fired at coalition forces during Desert Storm were probably obtained through similar collusion during the Iran-Iraq war when he was our ally.

I meant exemplary in that he followed orders from his commander-in-chief, knowing full well that the whole thing could blow up in his face and fell on his sword, when the time came.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to xssve)

Post #: 55

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 12:01:20 PM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

You can, if you like but Tokyo Rose was convicted of treason for propagandizing.

"Toguri was pardoned by U.S. President Gerald Ford in 1977."

REPUBLICAN'S ....go figure

_____________________________

Looking forward to The Dead Singing The National Anthem At The World Series.

Tinfoilers Swallow

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 56

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 12:02:42 PM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

No mind reading involved, Michael--you've been making that clear for three pages now.

If that calls for condescension in your view, then reading comprehension is my crime.

I can't make up my mind if he does that because it's a standard low hanging fruit method of debate, or if he actually believes these misinterpretations. Either way, it's SOP.

Fonda is mainly a lightning rod for all the disgruntlement about the Vietnam war, which as I say, is roughly approximate to Southern Civil War mythmaking - Kerry stepped in it too, the truth is not relevant, in spite of the Swiftboater mythology being repudiated on a regular basis on the Six O'Clock news: yes, atrocity and excess do frequently occur in war, on both sides - who knew?

< Message edited by xssve -- 3/14/2012 12:06:00 PM >

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to SternSkipper)

Post #: 57

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 12:04:17 PM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve
Exemplary - unless you count arms dealing to the enemy.

As ex-Navy, I can tell you I'm not too fond of Ollie, he was furnishing Iran with, among other things, Silkworms that have been fired at at least 3 U.S. ships - Silkworms that Saddam fired at coalition forces during Desert Storm were probably obtained through similar collusion during the Iran-Iraq war when he was our ally.

I meant exemplary in that he followed orders from his commander-in-chief, knowing full well that the whole thing could blow up in his face and fell on his sword, when the time came.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

A Myrmidon, in other words: "he vas only followink orurs".

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 58

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 12:07:51 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve
A Myrmidon, in other words: "he vas only followink orurs".

That's not what I was saying but, I guess, with a gun to my head, I would have to say that that is how I feel about what he did. You don't believe for a half a second that he acted on his own?

I'm not saying it obsolves him of criminality. I'm saying that he did what he thought was his duty in that situation. He behaved as a Marine. He followed an order that he may not have believed was illegal since it came from C-I-C and when the shit hit the fan, he stood in front of it, without a slicker.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to xssve)

Post #: 59

RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice" - 3/14/2012 12:20:04 PM

hlen5

Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline

The "Unholy Trio" were doing what plenty of other people did when people were screaming for Don Imus's head.

Bita split a pretty fine hair between individual vs carrier rights of free speech.

Do I wish Rush was off the air? Yes.

Do I think a petition to get him off the air was right? Maybe not.

Do I think people can speak with the pocketbooks (don't buy his sponsors crap)? Absolutely, and they should. I personally was LOOOOOOOving the upward tally of sponsors kicking Rush to the curb.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Unholy Trio Demand "Justice"

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109