Freedom of speech is for the foolish

[Noir]

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j176/jonathan-mcc/9CF1CAC5-A2C1-4719-8701-040D2B0FBE8B.png_zpscxbk4owc.jpeg (http://s80.photobucket.com/user/jonathan-mcc/media/9CF1CAC5-A2C1-4719-8701-040D2B0FBE8B.png_zpscxbk4owc.jpeg.html)
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j176/jonathan-mcc/F86B0989-C0A3-4E1F-A839-C081E3203DF9.png_zpsiy1wfduz.jpeg (http://s80.photobucket.com/user/jonathan-mcc/media/F86B0989-C0A3-4E1F-A839-C081E3203DF9.png_zpsiy1wfduz.jpeg.html)

The first amendment? More like the fools amendment.
amiright?

[Gunny]

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j176/jonathan-mcc/9CF1CAC5-A2C1-4719-8701-040D2B0FBE8B.png_zpscxbk4owc.jpeg (http://s80.photobucket.com/user/jonathan-mcc/media/9CF1CAC5-A2C1-4719-8701-040D2B0FBE8B.png_zpscxbk4owc.jpeg.html)
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j176/jonathan-mcc/F86B0989-C0A3-4E1F-A839-C081E3203DF9.png_zpsiy1wfduz.jpeg (http://s80.photobucket.com/user/jonathan-mcc/media/F86B0989-C0A3-4E1F-A839-C081E3203DF9.png_zpsiy1wfduz.jpeg.html)

The first amendment? More like the fools amendment.
amiright?

I'd take you more seriously if YOUR country had more free laws than ours does. I DON'T agree with Trump. Again. He's just somebody else that wants to tell everyone what to think. The First Amendment is words on paper. We've never had that Right during MY lifetime. Censorship, whether written or social has been around forever, and those that hate it most are afraid to say anything.

Trump is more outrageous each time out and he's not going to win. He might win the GOP nomination, but he won't win the Presidency. Too many conservatives, moderates and independents are going to say "screw this" and stay home.

[jimnyc]

"freedom of speech is for the foolish"

Shame he never said it in that manner. Why twist the words I wonder?

[PixieStix]

:rolleyes:

Have any videos to back up your stupid memes

[jimnyc]

:rolleyes:

Have any videos to back up your stupid memes

He said what was in the meme, just not what is in the title of the thread. And doing what he refers to could be trying to limit ISIS, not limiting the free speech of others. He's saying, that likely some will state that if the geeks take action. And he's saying that those who are dumb enough to think closing up loopholes for groups like ISIS, is somehow killing freedom of speech - are foolish.

[Noir]

He said what was in the meme, just not what is in the title of the thread. And doing what he refers to could be trying to limit ISIS, not limiting the free speech of others. He's saying, that likely some will state that if the geeks take action. And he's saying that those who are dumb enough to think closing up loopholes for groups like ISIS, is somehow killing freedom of speech - are foolish.

Ofcourse, only the terrorists are affected, how foolish of me.

[Gunny]

He said what was in the meme, just not what is in the title of the thread. And doing what he refers to could be trying to limit ISIS, not limiting the free speech of others. He's saying, that likely some will state that if the geeks take action. And he's saying that those who are dumb enough to think closing up loopholes for groups like ISIS, is somehow killing freedom of speech - are foolish.

Going to have to disagree. Trump is creating enemies, but he isn't addressing the true enemy which is within. But take a long look at what he says. No more Mexicans. No more Muslims. And everyone who disagrees with him that is GOP gets hammered via the media.

Now the internet is our enemy. The last bastion of freedom of speech we have. Sound familiar to anyone with a knowledge of history? Not a lot of difference between his tactics and Hitler's in the 30s. Create enemies, divide a nation and conquer it.

Y'all need to take good long look at who and what you think you're fighting for.

[jimnyc]

Ofcourse, only the terrorists are affected, how foolish of me.


Going to have to disagree. Trump is creating enemies, but he isn't addressing the true enemy which is within. But take a long look at what he says. No more Mexicans. No more Muslims. And everyone who disagrees with him that is GOP gets hammered via the media.

Now the internet is our enemy. The last bastion of freedom of speech we have. Sound familiar to anyone with a knowledge of history? Not a lot of difference between his tactics and Hitler's in the 30s. Create enemies, divide a nation and conquer it.

Y'all need to take good long look at who and what you think you're fighting for.

You guys disagree. Perhaps either one of you can show me where he stated what is written in the subject line of this thread? Please post a link to the text where he stated such.

Otherwise, bringing in the best of the best, looking for ways to eliminate ISIS's ways of recruiting and other things, would be wise. And if it's NOT related to ISIS - please show me where he states any intent on closing up the internet in any way that is going to harm the everyday user.

It's not a matter of who someone is fighting for - it's a matter of not misconstruing someone's words and/or outright lying about what someone said, or their intent.

[jimnyc]

Now the internet is our enemy.

Btw, just like the title - u created rhetoric as well where it didn't exist. Unless of course you also post where Trump said this too. Lots of things attributed to Trump that he's never said, and not just this thread. In general, seems like folks like to do that here and elsewhere. Not sure why, if he's so bad, and everyone detests him and such - his own words should have him fall on a sword, not made up phrases and words.

[Gunny]

You guys disagree. Perhaps either one of you can show me where he stated what is written in the subject line of this thread? Please post a link to the text where he stated such.

Otherwise, bringing in the best of the best, looking for ways to eliminate ISIS's ways of recruiting and other things, would be wise. And if it's NOT related to ISIS - please show me where he states any intent on closing up the internet in any way that is going to harm the everyday user.

It's not a matter of who someone is fighting for - it's a matter of not misconstruing someone's words and/or outright lying about what someone said, or their intent.

Fuck you. I get the Deadskins and the Bears. Whatever you said was wrong no matter what if you're watching the Steelers.

[jimnyc]

Fuck you. I get the Deadskins and the Bears. Whatever you said was wrong no matter what if you're watching the Steelers.

Hey, if there's going to be a Trump division, and we need to fix things - I'm just keeping things honest is all. This thread was a portion of a lie to begin with, and I know some would love to run with it. Twist and turn, but he still never said that freedom of speech is for the foolish. Nor did he state anything about shutting anything down for any regular person. But if others read it differently, that's cool, but the actual words certainly aren't there.

Steelers just picked one off and returned for TD. Now up 23-7. I hope you only get that one game and then your TV breaks at 4:00. :lol:

[Gunny]

Fuck you. I get the Deadskins and the Bears. Whatever you said was wrong no matter what if you're watching the Steelers.

As far as the obvious goes ... Trump has created enemies and galvanized aa portion of the population against them. Now how do you suppose aside from all his other massive failure ideas he's going to cut out Islamic extremists from the internet without censoring ALL of US? Another epic fail idea by the Donald.

[Gunny]

Hey, if there's going to be a Trump division, and we need to fix things - I'm just keeping things honest is all. This thread was a portion of a lie to begin with, and I know some would love to run with it. Twist and turn, but he still never said that freedom of speech is for the foolish. Nor did he state anything about shutting anything down for any regular person. But if others read it differently, that's cool, but the actual words certainly aren't there.

Steelers just picked one off and returned for TD. Now up 23-7. I hope you only get that one game and then your TV breaks at 4:00. :lol:

F*cker. Get to watch a Steelers game. I DO get the Cowboys game too. Can't be worse than watching this current "Dance of the Dimwits". One thing I miss about the East Coast is at least I got good football. I'm in football Hell. They don't even have a pro team in ANY sport in NM.

I responded to the thread title and what was posted. Y'all need to knock off this video crap. I'm babysitting and watching the game where I hope both teams lose. I don't have time to watch rhetorical videos. I still stand by what I said. Trump is creating enemies instead of addressing the actual enemy -- the left.

[jimnyc]

As far as the obvious goes ... Trump has created enemies and galvanized aa portion of the population against them. Now how do you suppose aside from all his other massive failure ideas he's going to cut out Islamic extremists from the internet without censoring ALL of US? Another epic fail idea by the Donald.

I can think of several ways, where techs can perhaps block traffic from various points throughout the world in the hopes of blocking groups out. There are many ways of stopping and blocking things that won't harm anyone's freedoms. Blocking and using ways to shut down isis online activities doesn't mean everyone is someone being shut down. Suppose a handful of routers are hit or blocked in yemen, or syria, and it does help, how is that harming your freedom of speech? Not to mention, routers and things are blocked for various protection reasons all the time, for much lesser reasons.

[Gunny]

I can think of several ways, where techs can perhaps block traffic from various points throughout the world in the hopes of blocking groups out. There are many ways of stopping and blocking things that won't harm anyone's freedoms. Blocking and using ways to shut down isis online activities doesn't mean everyone is someone being shut down. Suppose a handful of routers are hit or blocked in yemen, or syria, and it does help, how is that harming your freedom of speech? Not to mention, routers and things are blocked for various protection reasons all the time, for much lesser reasons.

You mean like those techs that kept the Chinese from hacking our internal military stuff? Or you got people like Hillary just giving it away. And what was that bimbo's site that someone hacked and put everyone's crap all over the place?

Not going to be that easy. And I'm looking at his comments and the most likely results. He's not going to work. He offends more people than he appeals to. The right's already proven they aren't going to rally up and vote to stop the enemy. Yeah, they may be letting the enemy win, but the reality is, that is how it IS. They can't see past what they want. But Neither can people who let their emotions control them and want a bigmouth with no chance of fulfilling his hot air promises.

At some point, someone needs to see the practicality of the matter. And I don't want a hate-monger as President. We already have one.

[jimnyc]

You mean like those techs that kept the Chinese from hacking our internal military stuff? Or you got people like Hillary just giving it away. And what was that bimbo's site that someone hacked and put everyone's crap all over the place?

Not going to be that easy. And I'm looking at his comments and the most likely results. He's not going to work. He offends more people than he appeals to. The right's already proven they aren't going to rally up and vote to stop the enemy. Yeah, they may be letting the enemy win, but the reality is, that is how it IS. They can't see past what they want. But Neither can people who let their emotions control them and want a bigmouth with no chance of fulfilling his hot air promises.

At some point, someone needs to see the practicality of the matter. And I don't want a hate-monger as President. We already have one.

Be that is it may. And it's possible any plan in his head about the internet may not come to fruition, or may not be successful - but my initial replies were about his comments and those that ran with it differently, or as in the thread title just outright made up something he didn't say.

[revelarts]

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j176/jonathan-mcc/F86B0989-C0A3-4E1F-A839-C081E3203DF9.png_zpsiy1wfduz.jpeg (http://s80.photobucket.com/user/jonathan-mcc/media/F86B0989-C0A3-4E1F-A839-C081E3203DF9.png_zpsiy1wfduz.jpeg.html)

The first amendment? More like the fools amendment.
amiright?


some foolish people

“If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought — not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.”
— Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., U.S. Supreme Court justice

“The liberty of the press is essential to the security of the state.”
— John Adams, second U.S. president

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear."
[Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, August 8, 1950]”
― Harry S. Truman


“I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
― James Madison


“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”
― Benjamin Franklin, Silence Dogood, The Busy-Body, and Early Writings

“Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech; which is the Right of every Man, as far as by it, he does not hurt or controul the Right of another: And this is the only Check it ought to suffer, and the only Bounds it ought to know.”
― Benjamin Franklin

If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.
George Washington

“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.”

—all the Signers of the U.S. Constitution

[revelarts]

Why does Trump want to swear to defend and protect the constitution of the U.S. if he thinks it's "foolish".

just go sell real estate and use his right to free speech by putting more crap TV shows on, and interviews of his jabberings.

[Black Diamond]

revelarts
Can you please comment on the "greatness" of FDR and Lincoln given the subjects that have been touched on the last week or two ?

[revelarts]

Can you please comment on the "greatness" of FDR and Lincoln given the subjects that have been touched on the last week or two ?

Sure but 1st do you agree with Washington's Franklin's, other's and the Constitution's CLEAR imperative on universal freedom of speech as a non negotiable right?

[Gunny]

Be that is it may. And it's possible any plan in his head about the internet may not come to fruition, or may not be successful - but my initial replies were about his comments and those that ran with it differently, or as in the thread title just outright made up something he didn't say.

My guess would be the thread title is BS. If he's going to run, he needs to learn to deal. And he needs to shut his damned mouth.

What WE need to learn is that WE don't all think alike and this is just another election year. I have an opinion. Y'all are entitled to be as wrong as you want to. :) I'm just not seeing anything coming out of this but another Clinton presidency. I don't know if country can stand another leftwingnut 4 years. I just don't see Trump as the cure either.

[Black Diamond]

Sure but 1st do you agree with Washington's Franklin's, other's and the Constitution's CLEAR imperative on universal freedom of speech as a non negotiable right?

Maybe maybe not. Depends on whether or not the country's survival is in peril. When is it OK to violate the Constitution? It's a question I was hoping Spielberg's Lincoln movie would address. I was thoroughly disappointed in the film.

[Black Diamond]

My guess would be the thread title is BS. If he's going to run, he needs to learn to deal. And he needs to shut his damned mouth.

What WE need to learn is that WE don't all think alike and this is just another election year. I have an opinion. Y'all are entitled to be as wrong as you want to. :) I'm just not seeing anything coming out of this but another Clinton presidency. I don't know if country can stand another leftwingnut 4 years. I just don't see Trump as the cure either.
Everyone assumes trump is going to lose. What happens if he actually wins the whole thing?

[Gunny]

Everyone assumes trump is going to lose. What happens if he actually wins the whole thing?

I'm not concerned with him winning. They'd have to actually charge Hillary with her crimes and leave the left with nothing for that to happen. He's alienated too many people to win. This is going to be 3-peat of the past two elections. Everyone wants to stay home if it isn't "their boy". But Trump best embodies THEM. All about themselves. Not the country.

[Black Diamond]

I'm not concerned with him winning. They'd have to actually charge Hillary with her crimes and leave the left with nothing for that to happen. He's alienated too many people to win. This is going to be 3-peat of the past two elections. Everyone wants to stay home if it isn't "their boy". But Trump best embodies THEM. All about themselves. Not the country.
Unless we are attacked again....

[Black Diamond]

Unless we are attacked again....

Or another financial meltdown. You pick the disaster. It could totally catapult him

[revelarts]

Maybe maybe not. Depends on whether or not the country's survival is in peril. When is it OK to violate the Constitution? It's a question I was hoping Spielberg's Lincoln movie would address. I was thoroughly disappointed in the film.

I think Lincoln and FDR were wrong on their internments and freedom of speech offenses.
And the the U.S. is not "in peril" from a stateless armyless, navyless, airforceless opponent. it's just hype and fear mongering that imagines it so.

"The powers in charge keep us in a perpetual state of fear keep us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real. "
<tbody>




</tbody>
-General Douglas MacArthur

[Black Diamond]

I think Lincoln and FDR were wrong on their internments and freedom of speech offenses.
And the the U.S. is not "in peril" from a stateless armyless, navyless, airforceless opponent. it's just hype and fear mongering that imagines it so.

"The powers in charge keep us in a perpetual state of fear keep us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real. "
<tbody>




</tbody>
-General Douglas MacArthur



Those who jumped to their deaths from 100 stories up would disagree with you re the peril to some (maybe great) extent.

But back to the Lincoln/FDR thing.. The left is comparing trump to Hitler directly or indirectly while you ask any leftist who the greatest presidents are... Lincoln and FDR will be in top five if not top two. Probably more often top two.

Their offenses are far more aggressive than Trumps proposed moratorium.

[jimnyc]

Why does Trump want to swear to defend and protect the constitution of the U.S. if he thinks it's "foolish".

just go sell real estate and use his right to free speech by putting more crap TV shows on, and interviews of his jabberings.

Can you post where he stated that was foolish? Or perhaps where he stated ANYTHING would be foolish?

[Black Diamond]

Can you post where he stated that was foolish? Or perhaps where he stated ANYTHING would be foolish?

It's similar to the "Goddamned piece of paper " accusation directed toward George W.

[jimnyc]

It's similar to the "Goddamned piece of paper " accusation directed toward George W.

But at least with this one we KNOW for sure what he said.

[Noir]

Can you post where he stated that was foolish? Or perhaps where he stated ANYTHING would be foolish?

"Someone will say "freedom of speech" these are foolish people"

[jimnyc]

"Someone will say "freedom of speech" these are foolish people"

Yes, if someone claims that - the people - they would be foolish. As in he disagrees with them.

[Elessar]

fools[/I] amendment.
amiright?

No...You are wrong.

The Crown (England) suppressed free speech when the USA was just
colonies.

There are limitations, however.
Cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded movie house.
Cannot yell "bomb' on an airliner, ferry, or cruise ship.

One has an individual choice: If you do not like it, ignore it.

It is just that simple.

[Elessar]

He said what was in the meme, just not what is in the title of the thread. And doing what he refers to could be trying to limit ISIS, not limiting the free speech of others. He's saying, that likely some will state that if the geeks take action. And he's saying that those who are dumb enough to think closing up loopholes for groups like ISIS, is somehow killing freedom of speech - are foolish.

I do not put words in someone's mouth, Jimmy.

I just answered his question with a resounding "No".

[Black Diamond]

"Someone will say "freedom of speech" these are foolish people"

You're OK with people saying nigger and faggot without repercussions?

[Elessar]

some foolish people

—all the Signers of the U.S. Constitution

Some very good ones, Rev.

But they do not support the OP.

[Drummond]

There are those who are recruited to terrorism over the Internet. Is it so outlandish, so very unreasonable, to so much as THINK of interrupting the process ??

I've said it before, I'll probably say it again: with freedom, comes responsibility. There IS such a thing as abusing freedom.

If your Intelligence services learned of some Internet traffic that would involve the divulging of State secrets to an enemy, AND they were in the position to STOP its flow, wouldn't you expect them to act ?? How critical would people here be if, for the sake of 'freedom of speech', nothing was done about it ?

When your Constitution was worded ... did those responsible have the Internet in mind at the time ? Were they clear about the extent of Jihadist Islamic terrorism America would be facing in the early 21st century ? Somehow, strangely ... I think ... NOT.

It seems to me that, as before, Trump is sounding a note of caution. Just as he did before, so he's doing again, now ... he's highlighting security concerns which endanger Americans. Must he be castigated for it, again, now ?

In times of war, certain freedoms are lost, for the sake of State security. ISIS, and scum like them, consider themselves to be at war with America, and the West more generally. I ask: why is it SO VERY HARD FOR US TO ADAPT TO THAT REALITY ?

Possibly one good reason is that THE LEFT insists we remain in a stupor (I think that's the American spelling ?) about it, and do not act.

[PixieStix]

"Someone will say "freedom of speech" these are foolish people"


You are being daft. How about you stop taking Trumps comments out of context


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmiHx5Yf2I

He is proposing that we do something about internet recruitment. But he is right. Already we have Noir crying Free speech free speech :D

[Elessar]

I think Lincoln and FDR were wrong on their internments and freedom of speech offenses.
And the the U.S. is not "in peril" from a stateless armyless, navyless, airforceless opponent. it's just hype and fear mongering that imagines it so.

"The powers in charge keep us in a perpetual state of fear keep us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real. "
<tbody>




</tbody>
-General Douglas MacArthur




But the threat is already here!
How blind can you be?

They have already announced their intentions to the media,
just not their plans.

Time to wake the hell up!

[Drummond]

"Someone will say "freedom of speech" these are foolish people"

Total freedom of speech at a time of war is INDEED foolish, Noir. How typical of the Left to try and maximise the chances of an enemy to capitalise, eh ...

[Noir]

No...You are wrong.

The Crown (England) suppressed free speech when the USA was just
colonies.

There are limitations, however.
Cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded movie house.
Cannot yell "bomb' on an airliner, ferry, or cruise ship.

One has an individual choice: If you do not like it, ignore it.

It is just that simple.

Can you yell bomb on the Internet?

[Kathianne]

I'm not defending Trump-God forbid! Still, why the uproar over him, but not Hillary saying the same?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/12/07/hillary-clinton-wants-tech-companies-to-help-disrupt-isis-what-does-that-even-mean/

[Elessar]

Can you yell bomb on the Internet?

Why take it out of context?

I would say NO unless you want the FCC, FBI, and INTERPOL hunting you down.

Quit being a child and grow up.

[PixieStix]

I'm not defending Trump-God forbid! Still, why the uproar over him, but not Hillary saying the same?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/12/07/hillary-clinton-wants-tech-companies-to-help-disrupt-isis-what-does-that-even-mean/

Because she is special that way :coffee:

[Drummond]

Can you yell bomb on the Internet?

What you CAN do, Noir, is to place bomb-making instructions on the Internet. Tell me, just how determined would you be - if you had the power to govern these things - to keep communication with such sites fully open to would-be terrorists, so that they can capitalise on it, and start killing innocent people ?

[PixieStix]

What you CAN do, Noir, is to place bomb-making instructions on the Internet. Tell me, just how determined would you be - if you had the power to govern these things - to keep communication with such sites fully open to would-be terrorists, so that they can capitalise on it, and start killing innocent people ?


He would probably take their murdering out of context :thumb:

[Noir]

Why take it out of context?

I would say NO unless you want the FCC, FBI, and INTERPOL hunting you down.

Quit being a child and grow up.

This was my point.
You can't 'scream bomb' in a cinema, plane, or on the Internet. There is already equality in this.

[Drummond]

He would probably take their murdering out of context :thumb:

... and once they've had their murdering spree, fight for their 'human rights', no doubt trying to back it up with statute ...

[Elessar]

This was my point.
You can't 'scream bomb' in a cinema, plane, or on the Internet. There is already equality in this.

You did not make that point originally.

[Drummond]

This was my point.
You can't 'scream bomb' in a cinema, plane, or on the Internet. There is already equality in this.

But, you CAN recruit. You CAN prepare that recruit for a 'life' of terrorism.

That is, if you're a terrorist unfettered by anyone being responsible enough to act to stop you in that process.

[Noir]

But, you CAN recruit. You CAN prepare that recruit for a 'life' of terrorism.

That is, if you're a terrorist unfettered by anyone being responsible enough to act to stop you in that process.

So the plan is to shut down services that help recruit terrorists? Or if not what exactly is the plan?

[Drummond]

So the plan is to shut down services that help recruit terrorists? Or if not what exactly is the plan?

So, suddenly I'm some powerful authority figure operating out of America ?

I can better describe what 'the plan', in Trump's thinking, IS, in very general terms, anyway.

Simply: you make people aware of security deficiencies. You highlight the sorts of actions that'd have a measurable effect on countering those problems. Then, you call for action. Or, show that - if elected - you'd have the frame of mind that wouldn't be afraid to act as necessity demanded !

So, Noir. Tell me, why is this all so very terrible .. and why do the Left want to work so very hard to ensure that Trump's wake-up calls continue to be unheeded ??

[revelarts]

Can you post where he stated that was foolish? Or perhaps where he stated ANYTHING would be foolish?


Really Jim?
So in your mind he said just the people who REPEAT and believe the free speech clause of the constitution should be adhered to are foolish.
So for you that's the big or real distinction? i have to guess since you didn't use those exact words.
but for most objective people it's really not. It's not at all.

[PixieStix]

Really Jim?
So in your mind he said just the people who REPEAT and believe the free speech clause of the constitution should be adhered to are foolish.
So for you that's the big or real distinction? i have to guess since you didn't use those exact words.
but for most objective people it's really not. It's not at all.


That is NOT what he said. Do some of you people just skim past facts
Sigh and again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmiHx5Yf2I

[Drummond]

That is NOT what he said. Do some of you people just skim past facts
Sigh and again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmiHx5Yf2I

Trump's message gets hijacked by opponents following their own agenda. By those who only see what they want to see, and insist that WE see the very same.

[PixieStix]

The reason I like Donald Trump is because he doesn't speak the establishment language. This is why many people love him and why people hate him as well.

He happens to be speaking the language of many millions of Americans. What we have spoken to one another privately, what we have said to our families at the dinner table. So I find it quite disingenuous for people to act as if he is somehow anti freedom of speech, anti Muslim, anti American. He speaks MY language.

I like him and Cruz. All other candidates else can kiss my American butt.

I am paying very close attention. Because we simply can't afford to get this one wrong Hillary would be nothing more than an Obama 3rd term.


Why does Trump not have any specific plans yet? Could it be because he hasn't even been nominated yet. :slap: He is not a stupid man. He will surround himself with good people.

So yeah, at this point I like Trump/Cruz

Those of you who say you are sick of politics as usual, and sick of the establishment of the GOP. I present to you Donald J Trump

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8079&stc=1

[Black Diamond]

Really Jim?
So in your mind he said just the people who REPEAT and believe the free speech clause of the constitution should be adhered to are foolish.
So for you that's the big or real distinction? i have to guess since you didn't use those exact words.
but for most objective people it's really not. It's not at all.

revelarts
It's a question for the ages IMO

[Gunny]

You're OK with people saying nigger and faggot without repercussions?

I am. Most especially to the niggers that call me nigger on a basketball court and to people who call me faggot. Why is it suddenly a crime if I say it back?

[aboutime]

If the title of this thread, and the FOOLISH responses are TRUE.

Every member, including myself, should be saying GOOD-BYE to jim because he is CLOSING DP down.

Otherwise. Unless you live in the USA. You probably have no FREEDOM OF SPEECH. So, count yourself fortunate for being able to use the INTERNET to speak as you wish.....HERE.

[Black Diamond]

I am. Most especially to the niggers that call me nigger on a basketball court and to people who call me faggot. Why is it suddenly a crime if I say it back?

The Left likes to tell us what we can and cannot say. Now the OP is criticizing trump. Irony is ironic.

[LongTermGuy]

Btw, just like the title - u created rhetoric as well where it didn't exist. Unless of course you also post where Trump said this too. Lots of things attributed to Trump that he's never said, and not just this thread. In general, seems like folks like to do that here and elsewhere. Not sure why, if he's so bad, and everyone detests him and such - his own words should have him fall on a sword, not made up phrases and words.


​well said...!

[gabosaurus]

If the title of this thread, and the FOOLISH responses are TRUE.

Every member, including myself, should be saying GOOD-BYE to jim because he is CLOSING DP down.

Otherwise. Unless you live in the USA. You probably have no FREEDOM OF SPEECH. So, count yourself fortunate for being able to use the INTERNET to speak as you wish.....HERE.

You always have the freedom to not say anything. I wish you would embrace it.

Trump is an American mullah waging jihad against common sense. Trump is also a shitmonkey willing to say anything he feels will gain him publicity while firing up his Hominoidea following.

[LongTermGuy]

Trump's message gets hijacked by opponents following their own agenda. By those who only see what they want to see, and insist that WE see the very same.


:clap::clap::clap:

[Elessar]

That is NOT what he said. Do some of you people just skim past facts
Sigh and again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmiHx5Yf2I

Rev occasionally puts words in peoples mouths.

"So what you are saying..."

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You always have the freedom to not say anything. I wish you would embrace it.

Trump is an American mullah waging jihad against common sense. Trump is also a shitmonkey willing to say anything he feels will gain him publicity while firing up his Hominoidea following.

mullahs, muslim assholes-- dont ask for votes, dont ask for permission to give murdering commands.

Instead, they quote the stinking Koran and the believers know it comes directly from Allah to murder non-believers.
You see, their Allah is too weak to do anything except inspire brain-dead , child molesting,animal fornicating idiots to kill for him.--Tyr

[Elessar]

You always have the freedom to not say anything. I wish you would embrace it.

Trump is an American mullah waging jihad against common sense. Trump is also a shitmonkey willing to say anything he feels will gain him publicity while firing up his Hominoidea following.

Where do you come up with this CRAP?

Common sense went out the door when Obama was seated.

[aboutime]

You always have the freedom to not say anything. I wish you would embrace it.

Trump is an American mullah waging jihad against common sense. Trump is also a shitmonkey willing to say anything he feels will gain him publicity while firing up his Hominoidea following.


Gabby. As do you. But you really aren't smart, or intelligent enough to take your own advice. How bout this. Since you seem to hate the freedom of anyone to speak? Why not YOU set an example and STFU yourself?

[jimnyc]

Really Jim?
So in your mind he said just the people who REPEAT and believe the free speech clause of the constitution should be adhered to are foolish.
So for you that's the big or real distinction? i have to guess since you didn't use those exact words.
but for most objective people it's really not. It's not at all.

Really Rev?
Maybe you'll actually read what he said? You know, where he said NOTHING about free speech and/or shutting it down? You know, where he said that those - LIKE YOU RIGHT NOW - would be foolish if they said that. HE SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE CRAP YOU ARE WRITING. NOTHING.

But you would be the last person I would expect to comprehend anyway. Even after I posted earlier what he meant. Even after a video was posted for you of what he said. Because folks like you don't care. You hear what you hear, hate what you hate, and then will run with it and refuse to hear otherwise.

Btw, not surprising that you take words that are not in front of you and completely make different quotes out of them. That's exactly what you've done to me 2,000 times. :rolleyes:

[jimnyc]

Rev occasionally puts words in peoples mouths.

"So what you are saying..."


Best post award! :clap::clap:

[Drummond]

You always have the freedom to not say anything. I wish you would embrace it.

What an obvious thing for a Leftie to say. Lefties DO NOT want people to exercise any freedoms in opposing them - that's a 'given'.


Trump is an American mullah waging jihad against common sense.

Announcing ideas which serve your country's security interests is 'against commonsense', is it, Gabby ?

Islamic terrorism IS a threat .. yes, Gabby, it really is !!! .. or do you think all the terrorist attacks we've seen are their way of just saying 'hello', and it's all a bit of 'high jinks' ??

So, to propose .. and as a TEMPORARY measure .. that those who subscribe to the 'religion' that inspires it all, should be denied entry to the territory where they want to bomb and murder, somehow DOES seem sensible. At least, it does to those looking at this matter with logic.

Which is doubtless why the Left are in such staunch opposition to it ....


Trump is also a shitmonkey willing to say anything he feels will gain him publicity ..

Do you say the same for all patriots who use a public platform ?

And I see you've stooped to gratuitous insulting. The sign of a weak argument ? The sign, in fact, of Leftieism 'at its best' .. ?

[Gunny]

You always have the freedom to not say anything. I wish you would embrace it.

Trump is an American mullah waging jihad against common sense. Trump is also a shitmonkey willing to say anything he feels will gain him publicity while firing up his Hominoidea following.

I think actually most of us wish YOU AND YOUR ilk would embrace it. Listening to incessant illogical stupidity gets old after awhile.

[jimnyc]

I guess I won't be getting links to where he stated the things that some said he did, or thinks he did. Odd that.:slap:

[Gunny]

I guess I won't be getting links to where he stated the things that some said he did, or thinks he did. Odd that.:slap:

He's his own worst enemy here. He's always saying outrageous crap. He needs to learn to cerrada his boca.

[jimnyc]

He's his own worst enemy here. He's always saying outrageous crap. He needs to learn to cerrada his boca.

I agree to an extent. I wish he would have started toning down the rhetoric a few months back.

But he still didn't make the claims that some stated in this thread. He may be his own worst enemy, but those making things up wouldn't be far behind. :)

[Gunny]

I agree to an extent. I wish he would have started toning down the rhetoric a few months back.

But he still didn't make the claims that some stated in this thread. He may be his own worst enemy, but those making things up wouldn't be far behind. :)

I don't disagree. He does a good enough job on his own without outside help. :laugh: But he best belt up. The left has left him alone because they WANT him to be our candidate because he's not going to win. They did the same with McLame. They're enjoying watching him divide the party. Once the primaries are over the left and MSM are going to be all over him and his hot-tempered, fly-off-the-handle act ain't going to sell.

[jimnyc]

I don't disagree. He does a good enough job on his own without outside help. :laugh: But he best belt up. The left has left him alone because they WANT him to be our candidate because he's not going to win. They did the same with McLame. They're enjoying watching him divide the party. Once the primaries are over the left and MSM are going to be all over him and his hot-tempered, fly-off-the-handle act ain't going to sell.

Of course you disagree!! You were one of the ones on the first page - to claim that Trump wanted to take away portions of the internet and our freedom of speech. I asked you to provide where he stated such. Then a few others. None of you backed up your INCORRECT statements about things he NEVER said.

I think THAT kind of stuff hurts the division too.

[jimnyc]

Rev ran with it too, and has now been figuring out how to reply for a day. He won't come back with the link I asked for, nor the words - just screwy paragraphs of goobly gook that doesn't back up anything at all that Trump actually stated.

10-1 odds and I have a dollar!

[Gunny]

Of course you disagree!! You were one of the ones on the first page - to claim that Trump wanted to take away portions of the internet and our freedom of speech. I asked you to provide where he stated such. Then a few others. None of you backed up your INCORRECT statements about things he NEVER said.

I think THAT kind of stuff hurts the division too.

Actually no. I responded to a post. The only things I've claimed about Trump he's actually said or done, or are based on observation. My comment, IIRC, was more about censoring the internet. Doesn't matter to me WHO wants to do it because they ARE out there. Idiots in Congress come up with dumbass ideas all the time. I hate censorship; especially, selective censorship but it IS part of daily lives. I don't want yet another freedom taken away, be it Trump or Billary doing it.

[jimnyc]

Going to have to disagree. Trump is creating enemies, but he isn't addressing the true enemy which is within. But take a long look at what he says. No more Mexicans. No more Muslims. And everyone who disagrees with him that is GOP gets hammered via the media.

Now the internet is our enemy. The last bastion of freedom of speech we have. Sound familiar to anyone with a knowledge of history? Not a lot of difference between his tactics and Hitler's in the 30s. Create enemies, divide a nation and conquer it.

Y'all need to take good long look at who and what you think you're fighting for.


Actually no. I responded to a post. The only things I've claimed about Trump he's actually said or done, or are based on observation. My comment, IIRC, was more about censoring the internet. Doesn't matter to me WHO wants to do it because they ARE out there. Idiots in Congress come up with dumbass ideas all the time. I hate censorship; especially, selective censorship but it IS part of daily lives. I don't want yet another freedom taken away, be it Trump or Billary doing it.

Seems like you were claiming he said somehow that the internet was our enemy, and that somehow our freedom of speech was in danger. Then a comparison to Hitler no less. All on things he simply never said. He has no intent, nor has he, on "censoring" the internet.

[revelarts]

Really Rev?
Maybe you'll actually read what he said? You know, where he said NOTHING about free speech and/or shutting it down? You know, where he said that those - LIKE YOU RIGHT NOW - would be foolish if they said that. HE SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE CRAP YOU ARE WRITING. NOTHING.

But you would be the last person I would expect to comprehend anyway. Even after I posted earlier what he meant. Even after a video was posted for you of what he said. Because folks like you don't care. You hear what you hear, hate what you hate, and then will run with it and refuse to hear otherwise.

Btw, not surprising that you take words that are not in front of you and completely make different quotes out of them. That's exactly what you've done to me 2,000 times. :rolleyes:


...."We're losing a lot of people because of the internet, We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."...



so let me just be clear.

If Hillary said in a campaign speech.
"We're losing a lot of people because of the Handguns, We have to see smith and wesson and other gun manufacturers, We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, confiscating guns in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom to bear arm, freedom to bear arms.' These are foolish people."

Is anyone hear going to tell me with a strait face that they DO NOT see that as an assault on the constitutional right to bear arms? Many would be having unholy conniption fits and quoting the 2nd amendment like it's a bible verse.

Look, I get some folks like Trump but please don't twist yourselves into pretzels trying to make excuses for him.
Or make me the bad guy for pointing out the obvious.

If you quote a phrase directly from the bill of rights and say people are foolish for repeating it to counter something you've proposed then it's clear that there's reason to be concerned about those rights.
simple as that Jim.

But hey, maybe Trump is a constitutional scholar like Obama so we should just trust him no matter what he says or does.:rolleyes:

[jimnyc]

Rev ran with it too, and has now been figuring out how to reply for a day. He won't come back with the link I asked for, nor the words - just screwy paragraphs of goobly gook that doesn't back up anything at all that Trump actually stated.

10-1 odds and I have a dollar!


so let me just be clear.

If Hillary said in a campaign speech.
"We're losing a lot of people because of the Handguns, We have to see smith and wesson and other gun manufacturers, We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, confiscating guns in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom to bear arm, freedom to bear arms.' These are foolish people."

Is anyone hear going to tell me with a strait face that they DO NOT see that as an assault on the constitutional right to bear arms? Many would be having unholy conniption fits and quoting the 2nd amendment like it's a bible verse.

Look, I get some folks like Trump but please don't twist yourselves into pretzels trying to make excuses for him.
Or make me the bad guy for pointing out the obvious.

If you quote a phrase directly from the bill of rights and say people are foolish for repeating it to counter something you've proposed it clear that there's reason to be concerned about those rights.
simple as that Jim.

But hey, maybe Trump is a constitutional scholar like Obama so we should just trust him no matter what he says or does.:rolleyes:

He never said the crap you are implying, try watching the vid that Pixie posted and look for the entire context.

But I win 10-1, who bet me? :)

[revelarts]

Seems like you were claiming he said somehow that the internet was our enemy, and that somehow our freedom of speech was in danger. Then a comparison to Hitler no less. All on things he simply never said. He has no intent, nor has he, on "censoring" the internet.
Why are you putting words in gunny's mouth Jim?

[revelarts]

He never said the crap you are implying, try watching the vid that Pixie posted and look for the entire context....
I quoted him directly and Exactly Jim.

post the full quote yourself to correct me if you like.
somehow you missed it.

[jimnyc]

Why are you putting words in gunny's mouth Jim?

Yes, I was, same as I kinda did with you. When someone makes a claim, and I quote them and ask for backup - and they repeatedly are online buyt don't answer - I'm only left to guess at that point. Maybe some folks should answer, as I always do when I can, and when I know I'm aware of said questions.

[jimnyc]

Why does Trump want to swear to defend and protect the constitution of the U.S. if he thinks it's "foolish".

just go sell real estate and use his right to free speech by putting more crap TV shows on, and interviews of his jabberings.

Rev - you said you quoted him EXACTLY.

PLEASE show me where he said the COTUS is foolish. NONE of your twisting - just please quote where he stated this. Or will you admit it was your lame twisting of words?

[revelarts]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Trump
...."We're losing a lot of people because of the internet, We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."...





so let me just be clear.

If Hillary said in a campaign speech.
"We're losing a lot of people because of the Handguns, We have to see smith and wesson and other gun manufacturers, We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, confiscating guns in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom to bear arm, freedom to bear arms.' These are foolish people."

Is anyone hear going to tell me with a strait face that they DO NOT see that as an assault on the constitutional right to bear arms? Many would be having unholy conniption fits and quoting the 2nd amendment like it's a bible verse.

Look, I get some folks like Trump but please don't twist yourselves into pretzels trying to make excuses for him.
Or make me the bad guy for pointing out the obvious.

If you quote a phrase directly from the bill of rights and say people are foolish for repeating it to counter something you've proposed then it's clear that there's reason to be concerned about those rights.
simple as that Jim.

But hey, maybe Trump is a constitutional scholar like Obama so we should just trust him no matter what he says or does.:rolleyes:

[jimnyc]

You are being daft. How about you stop taking Trumps comments out of context


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmiHx5Yf2I

He is proposing that we do something about internet recruitment. But he is right. Already we have Noir crying Free speech free speech :D

Can someone watch this video - and NOT come away with the fact that he is speaking about the recruiting of terrorism and such? If you think otherwise, so be it.

[Gunny]

Seems like you were claiming he said somehow that the internet was our enemy, and that somehow our freedom of speech was in danger. Then a comparison to Hitler no less. All on things he simply never said. He has no intent, nor has he, on "censoring" the internet.

Our freedom of speech is joke to begin with. The title of the thread is about Freedom of Speech. I don't care if Mickey Mouse is the one behind it. The idea of censoring the net has been out there since whenever. You only have freedom of speech in this country if you're a black mob, pray in a mosque, or come over the border illegally. If you're white, sit in the back and hope no one notices you.

I think Trump's as unqualified to be President as Obama has proven he is. Separate subject. Everything doesn't revolve around him, and I don't really care who likes who. My two favorite candidates dropped so I'm just voting against the virus called the left. AAs a military person, I just HATE watching people making the same mistakes hoping for different results. We've been screwed for 7 years. If Hillary wins, we'll be screwed for more.

But this is about Freedom of Speech and as I and any other vet can tell you, we didn't serve so some dipshit could take that Right away.

[jimnyc]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Trump
...."We're losing a lot of people because of the internet, We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."...





so let me just be clear.

If Hillary said in a campaign speech.
"We're losing a lot of people because of the Handguns, We have to see smith and wesson and other gun manufacturers, We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, confiscating guns in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom to bear arm, freedom to bear arms.' These are foolish people."

Is anyone hear going to tell me with a strait face that they DO NOT see that as an assault on the constitutional right to bear arms? Many would be having unholy conniption fits and quoting the 2nd amendment like it's a bible verse.

Look, I get some folks like Trump but please don't twist yourselves into pretzels trying to make excuses for him.
Or make me the bad guy for pointing out the obvious.

If you quote a phrase directly from the bill of rights and say people are foolish for repeating it to counter something you've proposed then it's clear that there's reason to be concerned about those rights.
simple as that Jim.

But hey, maybe Trump is a constitutional scholar like Obama so we should just trust him no matter what he says or does.:rolleyes:

Repeating this crap doesn't change anything. Bringing Hillary into it doesn't change anything. He spoke of closing up recruitment on the internet, that they are bringing them in by the thousands.

And again, he said IF they made such a claim they would be foolish - as in what he is doing wouldn't affect their speech, so therefore anyone making the claim would be foolish. But if it takes you making things up in order to make yourself correct, have at it.

And if you want to mock Trump on what he quoted - then let's look at it closer. Stopping ANYONE from doing things on the internet would be a problem with freedom of speech? You sure about that Rev? Do you even KNOW what the term means? Does it have anything to do with the internet? Or about government? Do you comprehend that, Rev? He didn't make such claims anyway.

[jimnyc]

Our freedom of speech is joke to begin with. The title of the thread is about Freedom of Speech.

The thread title was a lie. And I agree with everything else you wrote. mostly.

[Gunny]

The thread title was a lie. And I agree with everything else you wrote. mostly.

Here's my thing ... I have ZERO problems with stopping the recruiting. A .308 Winchester works just fine. Lot more cost effective too than thousands and thousands of people spooking on phones and the internet. I've never had a problem with NSA wiretaps because they don't affect me. You mean all 3 of those texts I send a day:

"Need anything from the store?" "What time you going to be home?" "We need more diapers?" If you're wiretapping ME you just officially hit the most bored list. :laugh:

If we can shut THEM down without shutting US down, I'm all for it. I see Rev's argument solely in the perspective of censorship. I also see the need to catch our security up with our technology. No one wants to be the one to say that if you f-ing destroy ISIS they have no recruiters.

[revelarts]

Can someone watch this video - and NOT come away with the fact that he is speaking about the recruiting of terrorism and such? If you think otherwise, so be it.


"Closing the internet in some ways" to stop recruiting
"banning all muslims... 'temporarily'" to figure things out

both are knee jerk, --burn a room in the house to kill the rat-- moves jim.
both have constitutional questions at their base that you seem to want to ignore.
Trump knows this and addresses it by calling people "foolish" who he knows will bring up the constitution as LAW.
you address it by attacking me and ignoring it.

sorry not my style
"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents." James Madison

[jimnyc]

"Closing the internet in some ways" to stop recruiting
"banning all muslims... 'temporarily'" to figure things out

both are knee jerk, --burn a room in the house to kill the rat-- moves jim.
both have constitutional problems attached that you seem to want to ignore.
Trump knows this and addresses it by calling people "foolish" who he knows will bring it up.
you address it by attacking me and ignoring it.

sorry not my style
"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents." James Madison

Stopping muslims temporarily - legal
closing loopholes in internet - legal

Second has no loophole whatsoever. The first I don't know, but it's in US code and apparently constitutional.

And again, still no matter what you say - He never said the COTUS was foolish. He never said FOS was foolish. He never said he was going to stop FOS. Now THAT'S knee jerk.

[jimnyc]

Here's my thing ... I have ZERO problems with stopping the recruiting. A .308 Winchester works just fine. Lot more cost effective too than thousands and thousands of people spooking on phones and the internet. I've never had a problem with NSA wiretaps because they don't affect me. You mean all 3 of those texts I send a day:

"Need anything from the store?" "What time you going to be home?" "We need more diapers?" If you're wiretapping ME you just officially hit the most bored list. :laugh:

If we can shut THEM down without shutting US down, I'm all for it. I see Rev's argument solely in the perspective of censorship. I also see the need to catch our security up with our technology. No one wants to be the one to say that if you f-ing destroy ISIS they have no recruiters.

I don't. Routers and servers and such are blocked, stopped and shut down daily around the world. And for MUCH less reasons. That's not censorship at all. That's preventing problems. No different than if a server is attacked, and then traffic from the offender is blocked from ever being able to reach that server again. Then he may be speaking of getting involved with ISP's in a secure manner - or so many other legal avenues that can be taken to prevent ISIS from recruiting. Unless someone is communicating back and forth with ISIS, I really don't see how this would censor them or deny them ANY speech, let alone our true freedom of speech. I could talk this all day long!! They should be treated as an infection online, or as a DDOS attack, and eliminate their activity. Suppose they find out that 50 ISIS members come from a specific subnet... They may not be able to locate them with this, but they know the outgoing IP's to their handywork. They can then work to have those IP's banned worldwide, or as much as possible. That harms no one at all.

[Perianne]

Regardless, Muslims' access to the internet should be stopped.

[revelarts]

Stopping muslims temporarily - legal
closing loopholes in internet - legal
Second has no loophole whatsoever. The first I don't know, but it's in US code and apparently constitutional.
And again, still no matter what you say - He never said the COTUS was foolish. He never said FOS was foolish. He never said he was going to stop FOS. Now THAT'S knee jerk.

"stopping muslims temporarily - legal"
Religious discrimination is Illegal -conservatives used to know this.

"closing loopholes in internet - legal"
But Jim He never said "closing loopholes" did he? He vaguely said "closing that internet up in some ways" and mockingly indicated that those who like the the bill of rights wouldn't like it. to be exact he said those who quote the "FEEDOM oF SPEECH" from the bill of right are "FOOLISH" to bringing it up and they are "FOOLISH PEOPLE".


not sure how in your mind you've narrowed it down to "closing loopholes" when he didn't say that EXACTLY.

[jimnyc]

Peace out, Rev. I can't get a headache today!! :lol: :coffee:

[Gunny]

"stopping muslims temporarily - legal"
Religious discrimination is Illegal -conservatives used to know this.

"closing loopholes in internet - legal"
But Jim He never said "closing loopholes" did he? He vaguely said "closing that internet up in some ways" and mockingly indicated that those who like the the bill of rights wouldn't like it. to be exact he said those who quote the "FEEDOM oF SPEECH" from the bill of right are "FOOLISH" to bringing it up and they are "FOOLISH PEOPLE".


not sure how in your mind you've narrowed it down to "closing loopholes" when he didn't say that EXACTLY.

So where exactly do you draw the line? I don't worry about me. But I have kids and grandkids. I don't want them blown up at Baskin Robbins. And if you think that's a stretch, you've never been to San Bernardino. Attacking Nowhereville in the middle of the desert is about as brilliant as me trying to whip up an omelet.

We have the capability to shut them down. We need to use it. But it always comes up the same ... At what price freedom? And Rev, you want to have your cake and eat it too. You can't have security AND freedom. It has to be balanced.

[revelarts]

So where exactly do you draw the line? I don't worry about me. But I have kids and grandkids. I don't want them blown up at Baskin Robbins. And if you think that's a stretch, you've never been to San Bernardino. Attacking Nowhereville in the middle of the desert is about as brilliant as me trying to whip up an omelet.

We have the capability to shut them down. We need to use it. But it always comes up the same ... At what price freedom? And Rev, you want to have your cake and eat it too. You can't have security AND freedom. It has to be balanced.

the guy that shot up the movie theater wasn't Muslim and he wasn't from the Middle east. what freedoms are you going to give up to stop him Gunny?

But look it's simple, I draw the line at the constitution.
"Reasonable cause" "search warrants" "congressional declarations of war" etc..
It seems if the immigration officials had just done what's already legal in the background checks that they probably would have caught San Bernardino woman before hand.

the same goes for 9-11, the underwear bomber and others. these people were already on list made because they had been flagged by legal constitutional means and tips that they were potential problems.

former NSA heads have said theres' ZERO need to screen EVERYONE. and created programs that did searches constitutionally. A group of them --after retirement-- using just open source unclassified info created a list of potential terrorist suspects that they gave to the FBI.

All this talk about YOU HAVE TO piss on the constitution to stop terrorist is simply BS.
and just gives politicians a tool to make it look like they are doing something to stop terror. And lettered agencies excuses for more funding. when the fact is just doing the jobs properly UNDER the constitution is more than enough to stop a bunch of stateless, navy-less, air force-less, freelance, psuedo-religious fanatics.

But you know better than to expect perfect safety from all threats any kind. And that any politician that promises it is a liar.

[Gunny]

the guy that shot up the movie theater wasn't Muslim and he wasn't from the Middle east. what freedoms are you going to give up to stop him Gunny?

But look it's simple, I draw the line at the constitution.
"Reasonable cause" "search warrants" "confessional declarations of war" etc..
It seems if the immigration officials had just done what's already legal in the background checks that they probably would have caught San Bernardino woman before hand.

the same goes for 9-11, the underwear bomber and others. these people were already on list made because they had been flagged by legal constitutional means and tips that they were potential problems.

former NSA heads have said theres' ZERO need to screen EVERYONE. and created programs that did searches constitutionally. A group of them --after retirement-- using just open source unclassified info created a list of potential terrorist suspects that they gave to the FBI.

All this talk about YOU HAVE TO piss on the constitution to stop terrorist is simply BS.
and just give politicians a tools to make it look like they are doing something to stop terror. And lettered agencies excuses for more funding. when the fact is just doing the jobs properly UNDER the constitution is more than enough to stop a bunch of stateless, navy-less, air force-less, freelance, psuedo-religious fanatics.

But you know better than to expect perfect safety from all threats any kind. And that any politician that promises it is a liar.

I don't need to give up any rights. I'd have killed him. I don't believe in "gun free zones". Hope that answers your first question.

There is no perfect safety. Only a happy medium. And someone telling the MSM to just shot the hell up and quit beating damned dead horse. I'm almost hoping for the next friggin disaster so I can quit hearing about the San Bernardino BS.