It's time.
POSTED BY: Jonus
UPDATED: Monday, March 27, 2006 00:25
VIEWED: 15488
PAGE 6 of 14
Quote:
.Fact - Violence does work as a tool of revolution, you think our forefathers were acting "within the law" when they committed an outright act of treason against the crown
your absolutely right, and we are so beyond the point of trying to get something done in a lawful manner, because it won't work. I'm not avocating violence myself but I do agree especaially at this point in time, thats the only way to get something done,maybe to get the attention of our government, but it would have to be on a massive scale with hundreds of thousands of people involved if not more, at least in agreement on a consious level.
Somewhere we forgot that we are the government, that its not them but us.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jonus:
This is really sad. I never knew that all of you were such whores. I thought Browncoats were actually brave enough to fight for something.
Just remember when the end of your life comes that you weren't brave enough to fight for anything. Not strong enough to fight for yourself, your friends or your children.
Jonus, thats because most of these people aren't true browncoats, they would be working for the Alliance, they like to fancy themselves as browncoats but its just not so IMO.
just keep on speaking out!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by WhoMe:
Calls to violence are not protected by free speech laws. (Acceptable: The government stinks, so let's change it. Not Acceptable: The government stinks, so lets get some guns and start shootin'.) Consider editing your post. Or getting some serious anger management and impulse control therapy.
There are lots of ways to "overthrow" a government. I saw a news report on the changing state of Belarus wherein a young Belorussian man explained that he thought the revolution in his country would be economic, rather than political or military. If you don't like the way your government governs, try organizing citizens to vote for someone else, run for office, print your own publication, do SOMETHING besides encouraging violence. Aside form putting yourself on Homeland Security's radar screen (Hi guys! How's the war on "terror" going? We winning yet?), you're making people think you're a little crazy.
Do you really believe there is a WAR ON TERROR?? I mean do you really believe that, have you seen the administration go after any terroist..tell me who does homeland security effect, does it effect U.S citizens or does it effect terrorist.?
so far I only see it effecting U.S citizens, so that must make us the terrorist, you know if you wear a T-shirit that someone doesn't like you can be arrested and locked up, or spied on for daring to having an opinon and speaking it. so you tell me who is the enemy..?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Jonus:
I believe I know the purpose of my life. It is to overthrow the government. How did I figure this?
I saw V for Vendetta on Saturday and heard the story of Guy Fawkes and his plan to blow up parliament and in the process kill the king. It struck a chord and deeply inspired me and I have NEVER been so inspired by anything in my life. I've lived my whole life being a fucking couch potato, but I've always hated the government and any man who thinks he's better than another man. Complacent with the shit that goes on. Playing video games all day and watching movies to escape the shit of the world. Working jobs I hate and not being appreciated. Now I don’t want to kill the president. I just want to put the government “out of business”. I’ve been wracking my brain thinking of all that’s wrong with the country and thinking of what to do.
I thought of getting everyone to stop paying taxes. Without the people and their support the government can’t exist. They need us. This would take years to take effect. So we keep our fucking money and use violence if necessary. I've become so sick and fucking tired of accepting the world the way it is. It's time the people take back what's theirs. I'll follow God's laws but not some super conservative fuck who justifies his actions in the name of God.
I can't do it alone. I need everyone. We can take back everything and give it back to the people.
WE ARE NOT FREE. BUT WE CAN BE. It's time to stop being complacent. ACT NOW.
I'm a Jedi.
I'm a Ringer.
I'm a BROWNCOAT.
The realy scary thing is that you have decided to become a revolutionary based on watching V for Vendetta. Maybe you should read some Revolutionary literature; Marx, Engels, Trotsky, Lenin, people who actualy took part in revolutions. Then sit back and re-think your agenda.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Perhaps I'm becomning overly suspicious in my old age, but this just occurred to me, so don't call me stupid just because you already thought of it.
Jonus is a mole. His incendiary posts serve to bait out the fish, like Pirate Jenny, no offense, but you bit the hook, to action to see who here was a potential terrorist. Normally I don't care, I mean, seriously, we chat daily on an open forum about the real world application of the ideas of a TV show and Movie which essentially advocate treason (against the alliance, which they most certainly do.)
So that taken into account, if aomeone was a terrorist, and they decided to forward that position in such an open forum, they are either a) a dumb ass, or b) a plant.
I've never been on an adult forum, but if someone were to go on such a thing, and someone came on and posted "20 bucks for f^&k, Call me candy" with an address, one have to would assume that such a person was a plant for law enforcement. WHy wouldn't the same apply here?
But then again, the more I think about it, the more the dumb ass possibility seems more likely.
Anyway, on to more important things:
Fletch,
They don't have to wait two years, getting rid of Bush could be accomplished right now, you can contact your congressmen and organize an impeachment. Clinton was impeached, and though that failed, it did so mainly because the impeachment came from the opposition party, and that is always too suspect a motive. In a same party situation, I say again, the GOP has everything to gain and nothing to lose by sinking Bush themselves.
I just want to reflect on the possibility that was missed: President Gore or President Gingrich?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by piratejenny:
Jonus, thats because most of these people aren't true browncoats, they would be working for the Alliance, they like to fancy themselves as browncoats but its just not so IMO.
just keep on speaking out!!
Here we see kommandant Jenny of Browncoat Zentralverwaltung deciding who is and who isn't a Browncoat.
Thus we see that Jenny has learned nothing from either Firefly or Serenity, though I'm confident that she may very well respond to me with how I'm an Alliance stooge and she heard Joss's call to bring down all governments.
All Alliance types are too wear little yellow badges to signify their evil.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Free Speech is Free Speech,
And a french fry is a french fry. What's your point?
Quote:
that means puttin up with folks spouting stuff ya don't agree with, which has seemed to slip right by most folks these days..
That's a common, but completely erroneous, belief. There's a difference between what's just annoying and what's illegal.
Quote:
you won't hear me callin for someone to apply some duct-tape to Ann Coulter or Pat Robertsons mouth, they got every right to say what they please - cause in order to demand that right for myself, to demand that it be *universal*, it means I must then accept that others can do so, too.
Er, no. I took some communications law classes in college (as a journalism major, I was required to learn exactly what my limits would be), and one of the things we covered was what is and is not covered by freedom of speech laws. I know you don't see any ideological division between different types of speech, but those divisions really do exist. For instance, slander and libel laws curb freedom of speech, as do laws addressing imminent violence. It's all very nice that you "demand" this or that, but limits do exist.
This website neatly addresses some of those issues:
http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/410/410lect08.htm
The section most relevant to this discussion is part 3 under "Unprotected Speech."
Excerpt:
There's a long history of cases involving citizens calling cops "assholes" and other terms, which usually results in some altercation with later allegations of police brutality. Of course, speech that directly threatens the officer's safety ("I'm coming down to the station and kill you") or clearly hinders the officer's performance of their duties is criminal, but certain types of profanity, name calling, and obscene gestures are also not constitutionally protected.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by WhoMe:
That's a common, but completely erroneous, belief.
No it isn't. If you don't agree with what someone is saying you can't shut them up. There are limits like inciting racial hatred, sure but that's a completely different thing.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by WhoMe:
That's a common, but completely erroneous, belief.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No it isn't. If you don't agree with what someone is saying you can't shut them up. There are limits like inciting racial hatred, sure but that's a completely different thing.
Actually, WhoMe is correct. It is not protected by the constitution if you say for example "lets all kill the president". You can say how much you despise the president or want him out of office. Hell, you can even say that you wish he was dead, but announcing that you are going to commit an illegal act that threatens someone's safety, or telling someone else to commit such an act is probable cause for you to be searched and/or watched and/or detained. In fact, I can guaruntee that the NSA boys down at Project Echelon (the NSA's communication monitoring division; yes it does exist; the government has never officially admitted its there, but they haven't really bothered to keep it secret)are getting a red flag on their computer screens because I used the phrase "kill the president"(oops, another red flag; right about now, they are probably reading this to check the context to see if its a real threat).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverman:
Actually, WhoMe is correct. It is not protected by the constitution
Respectively...
No he is not.
Yes it is.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Do you see the words slander, or libel, or threat, in there ?
I surely don't.
Anything beyond this basic context is not constitutional in nature, but in proper observance of Amendments IX and X, within the jurisdiction of the states themselves to decide what is and isn't proper, for example espousing profanity in front of women and children in michigan is a no-no in michigan, but that is a state decision, not a federal one.
So, while announcing a direct threat against a person may indeed constitute probable cause for action, that action is not in the province of the federal government, nor legally it's jurisdiction and any law, act or executive order that would say so fails the test of constitutional trump on the spot and is then invalid.
In short, the Constitution does indeed protect said speech - whether your state does or does not is between you and your state government.
It would really, really help a discussion like this if folks would GO READ THE FREAKIN THING.
And I've said my piece, no sense kickin a dead horse over it, and it's not my job to educate folk who don't seem the least bit interested.
Oh, and Jen ? c'mon, the right to dissent is universal, kid, if you want to be able to state your opinion, ya gotta let other people state theirs, otherwise it's a pointless exercise that just swaps out which side gets to oppress the other.
Respect - gotta bring some, to get some.
-Frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME