Banned from the US

You think something similar wouldn't have happened had this come from the U.S.?

No, but it doesn't matter, as I explained above:

Nihil wrote:well, if you think about it, this kid isn't technically, and i use that term loosely, covered under the constitution, though these are values we hold up, only the citizens of the united states are granted them specifically.

Nihil wrote:So you assume its the president then because it is easier to make a conspiracy theory out of it and demonize the president?

Let me make this clearer than Rachel Maddow did, FOX NEWS CAN HAVE A BIAS! However, when it starts TWISTING THE NEWS and ACTIVELY SUPPORTING A POLITICAL MOVEMENT/GROUP, A.K.A the Tea Party, remember that Fox News Tea Party thing? THEN IT IS NOT A LEGITIMATE NEWS CORPORATION.

I don't care if Fox has a bias, but since it twists the news, I can't trust it, simple as that, everyone knows that it does. Also, O'Rielly is NOT a liberal

Did i mention that Fox News made a million dollar donation to a political candidate?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008270018
http://www.mediaite.com/online/fox-news-to-run-media-matters-ad-critical-of-news-corp-1-million-gop-donation/
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=100


edit: I forgot to mention that facts inherently have a liberal bias

First off, I am NOT a conspiracy theorist nor am I presenting this as a conspiracy. That's stupid to assume anything without facts hence why I said it was presumptuous of me to say it was Obama and retracted my statement. Give me facts that prove Fox news has twisted the news... I have never EVER seen it and I watch it regularly and cross reference their stories with other news networks. Who cares if they made a donation? What does that matter? They can do what they want just like CNN OR MSNBC. They're supporting a candidate. O' Rielly isn't a true liberal but he has some liberal ideas. I said he was 60% conservative. Nowhere did I say he was a full liberal...

I am glad we have this tea party going on. It's good to see people who are standing against a social President who is running this country into the ground. I know I don't like watching as Obama raises the deficit to 9 trillion nor that he is not delivering on what he said he would by raising taxes.

Does it matter if the kid isn't a US citizen? Are we gonna let terrorists out of prison because it's unethical? OH WAIT...

Aragorn wrote:

Nihil wrote:So you assume its the president then because it is easier to make a conspiracy theory out of it and demonize the president?

Let me make this clearer than Rachel Maddow did, FOX NEWS CAN HAVE A BIAS! However, when it starts TWISTING THE NEWS and ACTIVELY SUPPORTING A POLITICAL MOVEMENT/GROUP, A.K.A the Tea Party, remember that Fox News Tea Party thing? THEN IT IS NOT A LEGITIMATE NEWS CORPORATION.

I don't care if Fox has a bias, but since it twists the news, I can't trust it, simple as that, everyone knows that it does. Also, O'Rielly is NOT a liberal

Did i mention that Fox News made a million dollar donation to a political candidate?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008270018
http://www.mediaite.com/online/fox-news-to-run-media-matters-ad-critical-of-news-corp-1-million-gop-donation/
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=100


edit: I forgot to mention that facts inherently have a liberal bias

First off, I am NOT a conspiracy theorist nor am I presenting this as a conspiracy. That's stupid to assume anything without facts hence why I said it was presumptuous of me to say it was Obama and retracted my statement. Give me facts that prove Fox news has twisted the news... I have never EVER seen it and I watch it regularly and cross reference their stories with other news networks. Who cares if they made a donation? What does that matter? They can do what they want just like CNN OR MSNBC. They're supporting a candidate. O' Rielly isn't a true liberal but he has some liberal ideas. I said he was 60% conservative. Nowhere did I say he was a full liberal...

I am glad we have this tea party going on. It's good to see people who are standing against a social President who is running this country into the ground. I know I don't like watching as Obama raises the deficit to 9 trillion nor that he is not delivering on what he said he would by raising taxes.

Does it matter if the kid isn't a US citizen? Are we gonna let terrorists out of prison because it's unethical? OH WAIT...

mmk, i'm going to respond by paragraph, paragraph to paragraph

first off, here is the twisting teh news part
http://mediamatters.org/research/200407140002
Making a donation matters as I stated above, because they aren't just telling the news, they are MAKING it.

You don't want to engage me in an economic debate, trust me, but if you do, we can start another topic.

lastly, that is a good point, however, depriving someone of visiting america and holding someone in a prison without any founded reasoning are two different concepts. Even though we aren't expected to extend our rights of citizenship, there is both an American moral basis to do so, as well as the famous Geneva Convention, reason of doing so. lol, moral basis just looked like meatball to me

It does. If you think this would have happened to a citizen of the U.S. then it shows how much our lose of Freedom of Speech doesn't phase people anymore. The single most important freedom in the U.S. is under threat and everyone is just, "Meh". It's a bit sickening.

AH! Humanity sucks....if you want freedom of speech, stop improving your government's ability to oppress it. 9/11 was such a perfect excuse to kick in the might and power of Homeland Security...

Aardvark wrote:It does. If you think this would have happened to a citizen of the U.S. then it shows how much our lose of Freedom of Speech doesn't phase people anymore. The single most important freedom in the U.S. is under threat and everyone is just, "Meh". It's a bit sickening.

I don't think I said that it could have happened to a citizen of the U.S.

Also, which one you want more freedom of speech or freedom to live, tell me, because I'd rather live than have something that is not possible to have when you are dead.

Freedom of speech. I'd rather dying believing what I want then live in a cell being told what I can and cannot believe. The man who sacrifices freedom in the name of security deserves neither.

And you said you didn't doubt something similar would happen when I asked which is as good as saying you think it would have.

So you are for stagnation Nihil? For the principle of ceasing development and evolution for having a more luxurious life? What is the point of existing if not to further our advancement in search of a higher meaning? There is no point in having a life if your mind is not free to think and help mankind overcome every obstacle that is posed upon us? Sure youll be happy, but what is the meaning of having a brief meanigless existence if you did not even attempt to eternalize yourself and help others find in the future the ultimate answers?

Dray The Fingerless wrote:So you are for stagnation Nihil? For the principle of ceasing development and evolution for having a more luxurious life? What is the point of existing if not to further our advancement in search of a higher meaning? There is no point in having a life if your mind is not free to think and help mankind overcome every obstacle that is posed upon us? Sure youll be happy, but what is the meaning of having a brief meanigless existence if you did not even attempt to eternalize yourself and help others find in the future the ultimate answers?

I don't know how you got that from my question, but, assuming that you say that you want to die to have something which will be meaningless to you since you will have died, that is, freedom of speech, then you don't understand what my question was. Everyone would be dead except those who decided to abort the freedom of speech in my hypothetical situation.

Also, the question you pose dray, in being happy or advancing? We inherently have free-will, though I accept that in a metaphysical sense I just don't believe that if we go back in time to an event 500 times that the outcome will change, so, having free-will, we will always be unhappy and will always have a voice to share, and this is how we define ourselves and find happiness. Otherwise, not having a voice, we wouldn't be able to feel at all.

Also, I'm not defending the action, but then again, I can't argue for or against it since I don't have all the facts that the FBI keep secret for security, but, I believe that the freedom of speech for non americans, though not in our constitution, should be as such with minimal restrictions.

Edit: Forgot to address Aard

Aardvark wrote:Freedom of speech. I'd rather dying believing what I want then live in a cell being told what I can and cannot believe. The man who sacrifices freedom in the name of security deserves neither.

And you said you didn't doubt something similar would happen when I asked which is as good as saying you think it would have.

I don't remember saying that, I obviously must have misread it because I don't believe that the U.S Gov. will go in and do these things to American citizens, we all stand up for each other, well, at least when we feel scared taht something similar might happend to us.

Also, we shouldn't take everything the founders say, yes I know that quote, as mana from heaven

"The improvement of the blacks in body and mind, in the first instance of their mixture with the whites, has been observed by every one, and proves that their inferiority is not the effect merely of their condition of life." Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson was iffy on slavery, but, to be clear, the fight for the constitution included a three/fifths compromise, just to let you know.

You cannot regulate what non americans do, unless it affects americans. speech and opinion are not counted among things abranged in it.

Oh noes, so many different topics to respond to...which one to pick?

1. Every single newscaster in the entire freaking world twists the news. Newspapers, Media Outlets ALL OUTRIGHT LIE OR MISLEAD. I've got so many examples of this its not even funny. I've known people who went through a horrible murder in the family who showed me how the provincial newspaper completely bullshitted the story. To assume that Fox news or any other media outlet is trustworthy and posts the real story is retarded. Humans lie and twist all the time, they even lie to themselves for craps sake. It doesn't matter if they are "Liberals" or "Republicans" or whatever other faction of collective stupidity there is, they will all twist the truth. Either to further their own viewpoint, to appease the masses with a sensational story, or simply because their to stupid to get their facts straight. You'll see one perfect example of this in point 3.

2. Maybe Obama is Darth Sidious in disguise, slowly manipulating America to give him absolute power. But I'm sure he doesn't have time to read and /amban every single person that sends him a naughty email. I mean seriously, do you really think he actually reads his emails? If you were president of one of the most loud-mouthed countries in the world, would you?

3. I've watched only a few clips of O'rielly, and he looks like a total dick. Continuing on from point 1, look out how clearly the media twists the facts:



Side Note*

Stephen Colbert is so freaking awesome:


4. Freedom of speech? More like Freedom to Bullshit. For the 10% of people who actually have something important and unbiased to say, the other 90% spew out deceit, prejudice, arrogance, foolishness, selfishness, ignorance, and outright immorality. If so much of humanity weren't the self-centered and ignorant demons they are, freedom of speech would have furthered mankind in untold ways. The way superior authorities have suppressed speech throughout history is vile, and it caused mankind to be in mental darkness for a long time. But our current state of "Freedom of Speech" is an illusion, democracy is as corrupt and as conflicted as other forms of government are. Giving absolute freedom to people, letting them spew whatever shit they want from pro-pedophilia to legalizing drugs, will not result in mankind banding together to search for a higher meaning. It will result in them turning on each other and tearing each other apart, each one fighting for his own desires. Just look at America, a country completely torn apart, its people fighting and arguing over every little thing. This is but a tickle compared to what is going to come.

The government that sacrifices freedom for security will gain neither. The government that sacrifices security for freedom will lose everything. In ancient times, a government was as corrupt as its leaders. Now, the government is as corrupt as its people. No government, no level of freedom, no philosophical stand, no amount of suppression, can stop the corruption of this repulsive race.

...In other words...

Were all screwed, go enjoy the world now, because its going to look like Fallout 3 pretty damn soon.

I've seen multiple articles posted that had valid points and when I go to show someone a couple days later it's gone and you can't find it. I don't care if it's utter bull shit, you have to let people have their say otherwise you stagnate.

Aardvark wrote:I've seen multiple articles posted that had valid points and when I go to show someone a couple days later it's gone and you can't find it. I don't care if it's utter bull shit, you have to let people have their say otherwise you stagnate.

The 10% of people who have something important to say are usually ignored. They may expose the real truth behind an event, or contain a genuine answer for a problem the world has, or they may contain actual sound advice on life. But they are inevitably ignored, whether its because their message cannot reach many people, or because people scoff at the idea and ignore it out of ignorance, or because the people are misled and put their trust in the "Mainstream" opinion.

Its not the freedom of speech is a bad idea, its just that even with it, humanity will still ignore or suppress whatever good thing is mentioned.

Not always, most of the suppression you see of good ideas is business and the media down-playing it so that their jobs are not endangered. This is a restriction to freedom of speech and shows how our rights are slowly but surely being eroded.

Moneyman wrote:

Aardvark wrote:I've seen multiple articles posted that had valid points and when I go to show someone a couple days later it's gone and you can't find it. I don't care if it's utter bull shit, you have to let people have their say otherwise you stagnate.

The 10% of people who have something important to say are usually ignored. They may expose the real truth behind an event, or contain a genuine answer for a problem the world has, or they may contain actual sound advice on life. But they are inevitably ignored, whether its because their message cannot reach many people, or because people scoff at the idea and ignore it out of ignorance, or because the people are misled and put their trust in the "Mainstream" opinion.

Its not the freedom of speech is a bad idea, its just that even with it, humanity will still ignore or suppress whatever good thing is mentioned.

That is actually not true. If you want proof, look at the transition between the Dark Ages and the Renaissance, when ideas were flourishing and no longer being ignored. People started communicating and coming up wih theories. Capitalism and the search for profit primarily and ideals second have come to give the idea of biased and ignorant advancement, but it isnt true. There is bias in idea revelation but it is impossible as imperfect beings for media and people to be unbiased. The number of people in the world are so big thou that it counterbalances the biased view of humanity.

obama's job = sign random papers then live like a pimp =D...I mean If I were president I would just sign all the crap they send at me and have fun with the monies =D

Presidents don't actually make that much monies.

true they don't BUT they also do not have the normal bills that you or i do. No utilities, house payment, insurance, cars, gas/tires/oil, travel. the US picks up these tabs. That big vacation that Mrs Obama took to Spain for her the kids and 7 - 8 close friends? US paid for... So as a monetary portion they do not get as much but the benefits they do get doubles or triples the actual salary.

everyone knows you work for the bonuses.

Ptolemy wrote:true they don't BUT they also do not have the normal bills that you or i do. No utilities, house payment, insurance, cars, gas/tires/oil, travel. the US picks up these tabs. That big vacation that Mrs Obama took to Spain for her the kids and 7 - 8 close friends? US paid for... So as a monetary portion they do not get as much but the benefits they do get doubles or triples the actual salary.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/president-obamas-vacation-days/

NO NOT THE FACTS, THEY HURT! Must be a liberal site?

Nihil wrote:

Ptolemy wrote:true they don't BUT they also do not have the normal bills that you or i do. No utilities, house payment, insurance, cars, gas/tires/oil, travel. the US picks up these tabs. That big vacation that Mrs Obama took to Spain for her the kids and 7 - 8 close friends? US paid for... So as a monetary portion they do not get as much but the benefits they do get doubles or triples the actual salary.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/president-obamas-vacation-days/

NO NOT THE FACTS, THEY HURT! Must be a liberal site?

OOOoooo

Just like you tell me when i cite a resource? are we really still playing that game?

I was talking about MICHELLE not Barry, The piece cited has to do with the number of 'vacation' days the President has taken not who paid for them... Care to come up with something relevent to the discussion?

Ptolemy wrote:

Nihil wrote:

Ptolemy wrote:true they don't BUT they also do not have the normal bills that you or i do. No utilities, house payment, insurance, cars, gas/tires/oil, travel. the US picks up these tabs. That big vacation that Mrs Obama took to Spain for her the kids and 7 - 8 close friends? US paid for... So as a monetary portion they do not get as much but the benefits they do get doubles or triples the actual salary.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/president-obamas-vacation-days/

NO NOT THE FACTS, THEY HURT! Must be a liberal site?

OOOoooo

Just like you tell me when i cite a resource? are we realy still playing that game?

I was talking about MICHELLE not Barry, course i have not read the piece yet.

Your sources are Fox News, I do not read anything owned by that man, Rupert Murdoch. Especially not since Fox News was exposed as having twisted the news.

Give me another source, anything but fox news, or, for that case, a well respected site.

edited my post above for content and accuracy