if ur up to the entire read.....Quote:
Originally Posted by whyamiwhite
http://www.ourcrowdedplanet.org/america.htm
Printable View
if ur up to the entire read.....Quote:
Originally Posted by whyamiwhite
http://www.ourcrowdedplanet.org/america.htm
ive been doing that, for the most part, the whole time this thread has been going.Quote:
Originally Posted by UnViaje
probably not but i'll give it a shot.........and if i don't finish it i'll bookmark it and go back to it later.Quote:
Originally Posted by UnViaje
He's unknowingly added another pro to our table:
The ability to debate without having anything of value to add. :)
I see only one pro thing I like about my country is that we can still bash our Good President and CONgress without geting the shit beat out of us for doing so(I just hope It dont become like that after the next staged terrorist attack)....Just havin funn no flamein :upsidedow :upsidedow :upsidedow :thumbsup: :glugglug:
i can already tell ya just from scrolling to the bottom that i'm not up for it but will be, possibly soon.
just wanted u to take a gander homie :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by whyamiwhite
lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
but we can't say we wanna kill him tho...that i think happens to be something badQuote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
Free speech, eh?
How 'bout libel? ;]
to be honest, i dont care about the ignorant and brainwashed people of america. i dont feel like arguing with you. i just felt like pointing out all the cons of this so called "great country".Quote:
Originally Posted by UnViaje
i've already proved my own point
ur all being pessimistic
just say it
and i see your point and because i try to see both sides and what not, i'll eventually read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by UnViaje
Some examples of free speech in America:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel
i actually feel good about that after reading all this nonsenseQuote:
Originally Posted by whyamiwhite
fukk this stupid shit, shame on all u ungrateful fukkers
peace
now you accuse me of being pessimistic, what are the pros? where is the good?
The CONS of America has to be the stolen elections of 2000 & 2004-The way LordBush gets away with the things he does--9-11 with all its oddites----The Iraq war all lies----The way the swat teams at Waco burn alive women & children just because the men knew too much about the CIA--That just a few things that make me feel bad for my country......
that still doesn't mean that i'm not ungrateful............(but i'm not)Quote:
Originally Posted by UnViaje
you are suddenly remindin me of a member of ats(above top secret)
i don't particularly like any of that either.........Quote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
me??? and wtf is "above top secret"?Quote:
Originally Posted by king kong bong
oh and the list goes on throughout history.
no i was talkin about unviaje. www.abovetopsecret.com is a website/forum dealin with conspiracies, etc... a lot of the people on there act all superior and elite just cuz they may have read something some else hasnt.Quote:
Originally Posted by whyamiwhite
Heres another bad thing about america that lordbush sign into law last thursday
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20060105-3.html
Create an e-annoyance, go to jail
By Declan McCullagh
http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-ann..._3-6022491.html
Story last modified Mon Jan 09 04:00:00 PST 2006
Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.
This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.
"The use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else."
It's illegal to annoy
A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you must disclose your identity. Here's the relevant language.
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."
To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.
The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.
There's an interesting side note. An earlier version that the House approved in September had radically different wording. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an "interactive computer service" to cause someone "substantial emotional harm."
That kind of prohibition might make sense. But why should merely annoying someone be illegal?
There are perfectly legitimate reasons to set up a Web site or write something incendiary without telling everyone exactly who you are.
Think about it: A woman fired by a manager who demanded sexual favors wants to blog about it without divulging her full name. An aspiring pundit hopes to set up the next Suck.com. A frustrated citizen wants to send e-mail describing corruption in local government without worrying about reprisals.
In each of those three cases, someone's probably going to be annoyed. That's enough to make the action a crime. (The Justice Department won't file charges in every case, of course, but trusting prosecutorial discretion is hardly reassuring.)
Clinton Fein, a San Francisco resident who runs the Annoy.com site, says a feature permitting visitors to send obnoxious and profane postcards through e-mail could be imperiled.
"Who decides what's annoying? That's the ultimate question," Fein said. He added: "If you send an annoying message via the United States Post Office, do you have to reveal your identity?"
Fein once sued to overturn part of the Communications Decency Act that outlawed transmitting indecent material "with intent to annoy." But the courts ruled the law applied only to obscene material, so Annoy.com didn't have to worry.
"I'm certainly not going to close the site down," Fein said on Friday. "I would fight it on First Amendment grounds."
He's right. Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else.
It even shields our right to do it anonymously. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case involving an Ohio woman who was punished for distributing anonymous political pamphlets.
If President Bush truly believed in the principle of limited government (it is in his official bio), he'd realize that the law he signed cannot be squared with the Constitution he swore to uphold.
And then he'd repeat what President Clinton did a decade ago when he felt compelled to sign a massive telecommunications law. Clinton realized that the section of the law punishing abortion-related material on the Internet was unconstitutional, and he directed the Justice Department not to enforce it.
Bush has the chance to show his respect for what he calls Americans' personal freedoms. Now we'll see if the president rises to the occasion.
It's been fun, but it's time to take a shower and indulge in the pleasures of consumption, the number one pro of America! I shall return.
:emo face:
member?Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvesthetic
:) noQuote:
Originally Posted by king kong bong
I'm a dick though.
well atleast you arent a dick member.
This guy up in NewYork I think, got 60days in jail for raping a child, But another guy got busted for marijuana and got 55 years. I like the justice we have here as well<sarcasm....Justice is blind....
If you want to see what your country is like all you need to do is watch some TV. At the time, it will show you your culture and as far as I've seen, it's all Ipods and useless shit like that... oh yeah, and the Iraq war. Um... no interesting stories have come up in awhile, so why are they still covering it 24/7? That and the weather systems heading your way or all these politcians getting put away or fired/retired. All it is buying, cheap prices, convenience, thousands of products most of which have at least 10 different versions, war and violence, damn the list just doesn't end.
So hows the kids doin'? This has to be one of the funniest threads I've read for a while. Thanks for the laughs people....or should I say sheeple? :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
Wassup PSY I had a feeling you come along..I only have two left and they are doing good...How about yours?
No! its SHEOPPLE, psy get it right man
LOL..gotta forgive this poor ol' Neo-Con..LOL!!! :dance:Quote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
Goin' real slow for some odd reason :confused: . Got 11 goin' still.....see how it goes when they reach puberty. Unlike the Chinese, I shall kill the male children and laugh!!! :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
You baby killer you---lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Actually, the rapist got something like 6 years, it became public because the judge was feeling so bad about the stupidity of the sentencing guidelines he was forced to adhere to. (i think he might even have retired after that one) Seems the weed guy was carrying a gun when he sold a small amount (think it was an ounce) to a fed. It was the gun that did him in since the penalties are quite a bit harsher if you sell when armed.Quote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
Thanks I didnt know they overturned it...Quote:
Originally Posted by bonsaiguy
Don't tell Alex Jones...he could loose thousands on video sales! LOL :dance:Quote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne