NationStates Jolt Archive

He's got the right to try! Within the law. And petitioning MySpace is within the law.
Unless you count the laws of common-sense :D
No, he has the right to denounce and condemn it. Not the right to silence it.

What about freedom of petition?
The entire lesson from this situation, I think, is that we are free to do a lot of stupid things, and that our freedom to do those stupid things does not make them any less stupid.

I happen to think it's stupid to make a site like the "Fuck Our Troops" site. It's unimaginative and silly, about on par with the kids who tried to wear Nazi emblems in my high school. That kind of shock-play has been done to death.

However, it is even stupider to petition to have a site like "Fuck Our Troops" shut down. Yes, it's your right to do so. No, that doesn't make it any less stupid.

Wow, I think it this the most militantly PC person I have ever found.
SNIP



You mean: counter-PC.
If an argument of the other side annoys you, turn it around and make it a blade aimed at their very heart.
PC is a lame attempt of a troublesome semi-intelectual minority to gain power by seeking to control linguistics.
Turn it around, and use linguistics to mute them.
Legal - and thoroughly democratic.

No, he has the right to denounce and condemn it. Not the right to silence it.
Let's be clear: MySpace.com has the right to "silence" the site in question. Viewers of MySpace.com have the right to request that MySpace "silence" a site that they find objectionable. Everybody in this situation is totally within their rights.

But, again, this doesn't make any of them any less stupid. :D

My space is not piblicly owned. No free speech issue involved...just like this place , they can moderate whatever they feel is innapropriate .

My space is not piblicly owned. No free speech issue involved...just like this place , they can moderate whatever they feel is innapropriate .
Exactly.

Which is why "Fuck Our Troops" is as stupid as the trolls who come into this forum and want to spam or flame without letup. There's no "free speech" here, any more than there is "free speech" if you go into somebody else's private home. They get to throw you out whenever they please, and they get to censor whatever they want (within their home). This is Max's House, so you play by Max's Rules. MySpace is no different.

Exactly.

Which is why "Fuck Our Troops" is as stupid as the trolls who come into this forum and want to spam or flame without letup. There's no "free speech" here, any more than there is "free speech" if you go into somebody else's private home. They get to throw you out whenever they please, and they get to censor whatever they want (within their home). This is Max's House, so you play by Max's Rules. MySpace is no different.

Except the name is Tom.

Except the name is Tom.Wait, are you saying that Max doesn't control all the internets?

That sort of thing can get you banned, around here.

;)

Wait, are you saying that Max doesn't control all the internets?

That sort of thing can get you banned, around here.

;)

I just said the name is Tom. Max's Myspace psuedonym.

:D

Words have no power. Axes do.


Ever heard of, 'the pen is mightier than the sword'? Or in this case, mightier than the axe.

Back on topic, freedom of speech has to have a limit for society to function properly. However, 'fuck the troops' makes no impact at all (except maybe annoying a few pro-war fanatics) and is best ignored.

I think you're acting like a bunch of jackasses.

.
Please define who you mean by "you."
One jackass a bunch does not make.
I think I know who you mean by you (in the plural), but it doesn't necessarily coincide with what you think you mean. Let alone the randomly headbutting jackasses I'm so carefully avoiding around here, who may decide that being part of a bunch is more attractive than being part of a herd.
"Herd of jackasses" works, I hope :confused:

Please don't let me be part of a bunch of jackasses. That's ... uh ... bad?

Damn, I'm so longwinded. Just: define "you're" or stfu.

There is a group on myspace now called Fuck Our Troops. There has been a petition set electronically. This will end tomorrow. Anyway it has over 300 replies, I was number 313, that we're going to petition to Tom, the creator of Myspace, to remove the group. I mean, even if I don't support the war I'll still support the troops. I really hope we're able to put a stop to them. That's just my opinion, what do you guys think?

Maybe they are just promoting sex with soldiers. :)

Maybe they are just promoting sex with soldiers. :)

Done already. When you're hot, you're hot, but when you're not, you're snot.

Exactly.

Which is why "Fuck Our Troops" is as stupid as the trolls who come into this forum and want to spam or flame without letup. There's no "free speech" here, any more than there is "free speech" if you go into somebody else's private home. They get to throw you out whenever they please, and they get to censor whatever they want (within their home). This is Max's House, so you play by Max's Rules. MySpace is no different.
Well at least I was saying that it was not a legal issue but seems very “PC” of the right.

There is a group on myspace now called Fuck Our Troops. There has been a petition set electronically. This will end tomorrow. Anyway it has over 300 replies, I was number 313, that we're going to petition to Tom, the creator of Myspace, to remove the group. I mean, even if I don't support the war I'll still support the troops. I really hope we're able to put a stop to them. That's just my opinion, what do you guys think?

Not at all. Whilst I may not be American, I consider the UK forces, omitting the officer corps, with contempt. Why should we be obliged to support an organisation whose actions we oppose?

Frankly, I don't give a "fuck" about MySpace. I treat crap there the same way I treat crap at any of the other 1,000,001 sites I don't go to; I ignore it.

Regarding freedom of speech: whoever posted that has the right to free speech, but not neccesarily at that website. If the guy running the site wants to axe that, that's his right.

Regarding the message: I support the troops. I happen to think their boss is an idiot, but I have no problem with the troops. I think the person who posted that is an idiot and a jerk.

Frankly, I don't give a "fuck" about MySpace. I treat crap there the same way I treat crap at any of the other 1,000,001 sites I don't go to; I ignore it.

Regarding freedom of speech: whoever posted that has the right to free speech, but not neccesarily at that website. If the guy running the site wants to axe that, that's his right.

Regarding the message: I support the troops. I happen to think their boss is an idiot, but I have no problem with the troops. I think the person who posted that is an idiot and a jerk.

I agree completley with all your statements.

You mean: counter-PC.
If an argument of the other side annoys you, turn it around and make it a blade aimed at their very heart.
Elaborate. You find the work fuck offensive thus, it's bannable. How is it not PC?

PC is a lame attempt of a troublesome semi-intelectual minority to gain power by seeking to control linguistics.
Don't you endorse locking people up for having anti-social thoughts?

Your point is ( I think ) that you can't (mis)treat people for the thoughts in their heads.
I must politely disagree: I think we can, and we should.
A bit hypocritical of you.

so you just said it cannot and then you gave a clear example of how it can consist of words. How about " I wish harm on American soldiers". How about "I hope al-queda kills the troops" How about "fuck the troops"...slippery slope to treason town. Surely myspace has not imploded so severely as to have less than two people aboard?

Has anyone here mentioned Lord Haw-Haw yet?

What he did was mostly words. However, I think he was actively colluding with Hitler at one point and hoped to be rewarded if the Fuhrer ever did take old Blighty for his own.

So, words == treason? Methinks not. It takes a little more than a MySpace group and a catchy phrase. If you think "fuck the troops" is treason and should be removed/taken down/punished for that reason, then you're the kind of person I really don't want defending my "freedom".

Yep, let's bitch at Tom whenever we see something that pisses us off.

Don't look at this stupid little group if you don't want to. No one is forcing you to say "Fuck Our Troops".

Unless they are plotting to actually hurt someone, it should be allowed.

1.Elaborate. You find the work fuck offensive thus, it's bannable. How is it not PC?


2.Don't you endorse locking people up for having anti-social thoughts?


3.A bit hypocritical of you.

1. I have no problem with declaring each and every instance of 'language' deemed inappropriate in either a Mind-centre or the Lambeth Conference to be out of bounds, and therefore, punishable. Dreadfully sorry, but I don't indulge in such frivolities as semantic discussions, unless I happen to be bored.

2. Yes. Why not? As long as it gets the job done.

3. Possibly you mean a bit cynical. Regardless of that, I think you should explain this novel use of the word hypocritical

There's no "free speech" here, any more than there is "free speech" if you go into somebody else's private home. They get to throw you out whenever they please, and they get to censor whatever they want (within their home). This is Max's House, so you play by Max's Rules. MySpace is no different.

though the analogy to a private residence would seem to lose quite a bit of it's force when you open up access to it to 96 million people. its really a de facto public space then. and private rule of public spaces seems blatantly unjust.

though the analogy to a private residence would seem to lose quite a bit of it's force when you open up access to it to 96 million people. its really a de facto public space then. and private rule of public spaces seems blatantly unjust.
It's not a "de facto" public space. It's just a very large private space, where the owners allow many people to come in...as long as they follow the rules.

A buddy of mine owns a club that sees thousands of customers each week. It's about as "public" a place as you can get, in that respect. But it's his place. He has rules, and people who break the rules get to leave. No matter how strongly you believe in "free speech," you just try wearing a Stroke t-shirt in his place...you'll learn a thing or two about the difference between "public place" and "private property." :D

It's not a "de facto" public space. It's just a very large private space, where the owners allow many people to come in...as long as they follow the rules.

A buddy of mine owns a club that sees thousands of customers each week. It's about as "public" a place as you can get, in that respect. But it's his place. He has rules, and people who break the rules get to leave. No matter how strongly you believe in "free speech," you just try wearing a Stroke t-shirt in his place...you'll learn a thing or two about the difference between "public place" and "private property." :D


And possibly I'd understand this a lot better if I had the slightest idea of what was so special about a Stroke t-shirt...

A buddy of mine owns a club that sees thousands of customers each week. It's about as "public" a place as you can get, in that respect. But it's his place. He has rules, and people who break the rules get to leave.

and it would be right and just to limit the sorts of rules your buddy could make

and it would be right and just to limit the sorts of rules your buddy could make


Which limits? He owns the place, remember?

and it would be right and just to limit the sorts of rules your buddy could make
I don't agree. I believe he has the absolute right to make any rules he likes, so long as everybody is free to either not enter his club, or to leave if they choose.

I feel the same way, although I've never served in the military(yet).

Thank you for your service. It means a lot to me.
You're very welcome. I consider it an honor to have been able to do so.

Meh...I don't like the sound of the group, but why bother with something as puny as a MySpace bulletin. I betcha over half that group is emo. ;)

No, hatespeech directed at American soldiers in a time of war is treason.
Not at all. It's the free exercise of that for which American military personnel are suppose to be fighting.

Not at all. It's the free exercise of that which American military personnel are suppose to be fighting.
Agreed … though I find this group to be in bad taste

The entire point of the group is to say that you do not care what happens to our soldiers (fuck em'). Think about what an allie of al-queda and the Iraq insrurgency that makes the members. It is a direct assault on the patriotic men and women who are risking their lives over seas and is highly offensive. That is why "myspace" should destroy it.
So Myspace should destroy the very thing for which American military personnel are fighting? Interesting viewpoint! :rolleyes:

Agreed … though I find this group to be in bad taste
As do I, but free speech should, IMHO, be truly "free."

As do I, but free speech should, IMHO, be truly "free."
Agreed but they do have a point that myspace IS a privately owned website

what kind of fool posts on myspace in any case?

and what kind of fool browses myspace?

what kind of fool posts on myspace in any case?

and what kind of fool browses myspace?

What kind of fool debates, argues, and posts about issues from political ideologies, economics, to sex, pets, stupid people, ect. on a website called nationstates?

What kind of fool debates, argues, and posts about issues from political ideologies, economics, to sex, pets, stupid people, ect. on a website called nationstates?

There's a difference, I believe.

It's pretty obvious, for instance, that extreme trolling is perfectly acceptable on myspace.

Agreed but they do have a point that myspace IS a privately owned website
The "free speech" argument is fast becoming one of the most exasperatingly out-of-context defenses in modern debate. Several Senators called for a boycott of Ann Coulter's "Godless" due to the comments she made about the four 9/11 widows, the "Jersey Girls", and Fox News cried "free speech!" Too bad a boycott entails people exercising their freedom to abstain from buying something and encouraging others to do the same, which does nothing to infringe upon the rights of the author to say whatever she wants. I criticized one of my friends for making degrading comments about a mentally retarded person, and another friend of mine cried "free speech!" Too bad that's it a part of that right that I'm allowed to criticize the speech of my fellow citizens. Now this. It's a private website -- the webmasters may remove the page if they want to, and people have every right to ask them to do so. This has nothing to do with such free speech being made illegal. When you make a page on a private website, you are subject to the wishes out of its owners, period.

Agreed but they do have a point that myspace IS a privately owned website

But most actions deemed politically correct are done by private agents. The show Politically Incorresct was canceled cuz private businesses would no longer sponser it. A Christian school recently banned a Beatle's song. So what if they're done by private agents?

If you want "fuck the troops" banned, then you should want the "fuck Al Quaida" or "fuck Saddam" or "fuck whoever is the US enemy du jour" groups banned, too. Anything else is hypocrisy.

The "free speech" argument is fast becoming one of the most exasperatingly out-of-context defenses in modern debate. Several Senators called for a boycott of Ann Coulter's "Godless" due to the comments she made about the four 9/11 widows, the "Jersey Girls", and Fox News cried "free speech!" Too bad a boycott entails people exercising their freedom to abstain from buying something and encouraging others to do the same, which does nothing to infringe upon the rights of the author to say whatever she wants. I criticized one of my friends for making degrading comments about a mentally retarded person, and another friend of mine cried "free speech!" Too bad that's it a part of that right that I'm allowed to criticize the speech of my fellow citizens. Now this. It's a private website -- the webmasters may remove the page if they want to, and people have every right to ask them do so. This has nothing to do with such free speech being made illegal. When you make a page on a private website, you are subject to the wishes out of its owners, period.

Just because it can does not mean its right.

If you want "fuck the troops" banned, then you should want the "fuck Al Quaida" groups banned, too. Anything else is hypocrisy.
It's a privately owned website. They can do as they please.

I think we should fuck our troops, but only anally with giant cocks. :p

I think we should fuck our troops, but only anally with giant cocks. :p
No, that's called "reaming".

Just because it can does not mean its right.
How is removing an extremely offensive and malicious page from your website "not right?"

It's a privately owned website. They can do as they please.

Right. Myspace can ban anything it wants, but should it?

How is removing an extremely offensive and malicious page from your website "not right?"
It's not any different from having a mod on NS General delete an offensive thread.

I don't agree. I believe he has the absolute right to make any rules he likes, so long as everybody is free to either not enter his club, or to leave if they choose.

such a concept, taken to it's logical conclusion, results in the abolition of liberty from essentially all spheres of life. me, i prefer more libertarian systems.

How is removing an extremely offensive and malicious page from your website "not right?"

Because lots of things are very offensive. All the gay, lesbian, bisexual groups are very offensive to people against those people. The fuck the terroristsgroups are extremely offensive to the terrorists. The business groups are offensive to the socialists. The socialist groups are offensive to the capitalists. Ecetera

Right. Myspace can ban anything it wants, but should it?

There are legal liabilities to owning your own website.

You can't post certain things on the web for outright legal reasons (so, if someone made a MySpace kiddie porn site, they would have to take it down).

And, there are lawsuits. You can be sued for your website's content if you're the owner.

So, in addition to ass-covering doublespeak in the Terms of Service, any website that allows people to post really needs to have some guidance from their legal department about what will keep them out of trouble.

There only seem to be a fairly small number of people on NS General, and look how often they have to delete threads.

Now imagine the millions of idiots on myspace.

It's a privately owned website. They can do as they please.

Of course the owner can. The people signing this petition remain hypocrites, though, unless they at the same time want the other side banned, too.

But for some reason, I get the feeling that they don't. That they want to have their "fuck the sand monkeys" or whatever groups to be allowed, but will hypocritically want the "fuck the troops" group banned. Let's hope the owner of the site is a bit more smart and will dismiss this, or not a hypocrite and will ban all the "fuck the whoever" groups and not just this one.

Because lots of things are very offensive. All the gay, lesbian, bisexual groups are very offensive to people against those people. The fuck the terroristsgroups are extremely offensive to the terrorists. The business groups are offensive to the socialists. The socialist groups are offensive to the capitalists. Ecetera
OK...and your point is what...

It's not any different from having a mod on NS General delete an offensive thread.

Like an offensive thread like one that contains the word "fuck" in it?

Of course the owner can. The people signing this petition remain hypocrites, though, unless they at the same time want the other side banned, too.

But for some reason, I get the feeling that they don't. That they want to have their "fuck the sand monkeys" or whatever groups to be allowed, but will hypocritically want the "fuck the troops" group banned. Let's hope the owner of the site is a bit more smart and will dismiss this, or not a hypocrite and will ban all the "fuck the whoever" groups and not just this one.

The owner of myspace is Rupert Murdoch. What do you think they'll do?

OK...and your point is what...

That if we follow your logic that offensive groups should be banned then almost all groups should be banned because any group is probably offensive to somebody.

The owner of myspace is Rupert Murdoch. What do you think they'll do?

I thought the owner was some old guy named Tom.

I thought the owner was some old guy named Tom.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4697671.stm

The owner of myspace is Rupert Murdoch. What do you think they'll do?

I doubt he'll get involved.

That if we follow your logic that offensive groups should be banned then almost all groups should be banned because any group is probably offensive to somebody.
Nope. Not my logic at all. This page is particularly offensive due to its outright attack on good people and we can only hope that the webmaster sees the page as being as distasteful as we see it.

I doubt he'll get involved.
You can say that all you like. But his imprint is on every company he's purchased - an indelible imprint on their policies.

Fox News, etc.

Which limits? He owns the place, remember?

limits to ensure the survival and flourishing of liberty in a world that would otherwise be run as tyrannical fiefdoms. in particular, the level of protection would have to increase as the level of 'publicness' increased. strange arbitrary rules in a private residence? i guess. in the modern version of the public square? hell no.

back when it was held that the king owned the entire country, were all of the rules just?

Just because it can does not mean its right.

Dead on! And I can still feel and say that the people who called for it's removal need to A) get a life and B) realize that troops are tough S.O.Bs (or D.O.Bs I suppose) and aren't likely to be bothered by a shitty little group of people who start some insignificant group called "fuck our troops".

It's a privately owned website. They can do as they please.

can does not lead to either 'ought to do' or 'ought be allowed to do'

Nope. Not my logic at all. This page is particularly offensive due to its outright attack on good people and we can only hope that the webmaster sees the page as being as distasteful as we see it.

All groups can be particularly offensive to somebody. To the Fuck our troops people any support our troops group is particularly offensive due to its support of BAD people.

can does not lead to either 'ought to do' or 'ought be allowed to do'
You seem happy with the Terms of Service for NS General.

You can say that all you like. But his imprint is on every company he's purchased - an indelible imprint on their policies.

Fox News, etc.

Really? His entire, global empire is like Fox News? Sure... :rolleyes:

the people who called for it's removal need to...realize that troops are tough S.O.Bs (or D.O.Bs I suppose) and aren't likely to be bothered by a shitty little group of people who start some insignificant group called "fuck our troops".

you must have missed it - we conclusively proved that hearing people say bad words kills more troops than homemade bombs a few pages back.

You seem happy with the Terms of Service for NS General.

not really, no

Really? His entire, global empire is like Fox News? Sure... :rolleyes:
He's certainly had the same conservative effect in other news organizations he's purchased.

Kind of hard to make Sky Sport conservative, but the rest is pretty solid.

All groups can be particularly offensive to somebody. To the Fuck our troops people any support our troops group is particularly offensive due to its support of BAD people.
And yet, with those groups, there are a number of people who support them, so it counterbalances those offended by them. With this group, I think it goes without saying that an extremely large number of people are offended by their statement, with there being only a few who actually agree with them. Hopefully the webmaster, seeing the large volume of opponents and deficit of supporters, will recognize that the page has little support and will remove it due to its overwhelmingly offensive message.

Where do I sign?

I'm pro war, pro troops, pro Iraqi...If you've been on NS long enough you know my rants.

I have a whole lot of four letter words I'd like to spew out at those ornery little cusses but I'll hold my tongue.

I'm sorry, which is it? You can't be for the troops and the Iraqis and for getting them killed. It's like being a pro-CEO communist, or a pro-union fascist.

And yet, with those groups, there are a number of people who support them, so it counterbalances those offended by them. With this group, I think it goes without saying that an extremely large number of people are offended by their statement, with there being only a few who actually agree with them. Hopefully the webmaster, seeing the large volume of opponents and deficit of supporters, will recognize that the page has little support and will remove it due to its overwhelmingly offensive message.

The people wouldn't be offended by it if they didn't look it, right?

Wouldn't that be a simpler solution. Just don't look at it?

You know, I think I've seen some porn vids by this group, lemme just say some of our troops are severely fuckable, and I'm sure it'd ease their tension.

Originally Posted by DesignatedMarksman
Where do I sign?

I'm pro war, pro troops, pro Iraqi...If you've been on NS long enough you know my rants.

I have a whole lot of four letter words I'd like to spew out at those ornery little cusses but I'll hold my tongue.
I'm sorry, which is it? You can't be for the troops and the Iraqis and for getting them killed. It's like being a pro-CEO communist, or a pro-union fascist.
he's pro war (glad it happened.
pro US troops (go USA)
pro Iraqi (go new Iraqi gov't)

he doesn't like the foreign fighters or the iraqi's who fight against the occupation....
thought it was pretty easy.

I must say that I completely disagree with their message. I'm not signing a petition however - the best way to deal with groups like this is to let them hang themselves with their own rope, so to speak.

To all those freedom od speech supporters (and I consider myself one too), you should also consider that MySpace is a privately owned website. You are only free to speak your mind to the extent that the owner(s) decide to allow you to on their site. Now, if this were a government-run, publicly funded message board, that would be a different story. If the powers that be at MySpace decide that removing that group best serves their interests, then it is within their right to do so and it does not constitute a violation of First Amendment rights (I'm assuming that it is a U.S. site).

In this case, I really don't care. Partly because of my first statement at the beginning of the post, and also because I've never visited that site and don't intend to. I don't need to see alot of pre-teens screaming "look at me!, look at me!" and the smelly 40 year old fat guys trying to meet them under false pretenses.

The people wouldn't be offended by it if they didn't look it, right?

Wouldn't that be a simpler solution. Just don't look at it?
You're probably right...that's a better way to kill something. Giving attention to it will only help it.

sequence of events:
1) we go against the wishes of the soldiers on the ground, the generals, the penatagon, the senate, the President, and the government of Iraq and pull out right now
2) Iraq decends into further chaos and full blown civil war
3) the democratic government collapses
4) Iraq is your next mass murder site and a new dictator takes over
5) the United States loses a war
6) al-queda learns that they can bully us into submission
7) terrorist attacks on U.S. soil for the first time since 911
8) all of the soldiers who have died have died for nothing, any thing that they did accomplish is destroyed
9) you are proud and continue to lose elections

Holy shit. Are you part-man part-rabbit? Because I've never seen such huge bounds of logic...

OH DEAR, SOMEONE EXERCIZING THEIR 1st AMENDMENT RIGHTS WHAT EVAR SHALL WE DOO?!!?!??!!1/

What kind of fool debates, argues, and posts about issues from political ideologies, economics, to sex, pets, stupid people, ect. on a website called nationstates?
LMAO! Excellent point! :D

what the hell? baked squerrels dident even give a link, so theres no way i could know. but i still think they have the right to be on the internet.

I cleary asked if anyone wanted to see the link but I didn't get a clear response, look before you accuse

no, I went to sleep and just found that I've missed >300 replies, I'd better start reading

The "free speech" argument is fast becoming one of the most exasperatingly out-of-context defenses in modern debate. Several Senators called for a boycott of Ann Coulter's "Godless" due to the comments she made about the four 9/11 widows, the "Jersey Girls", and Fox News cried "free speech!" Too bad a boycott entails people exercising their freedom to abstain from buying something and encouraging others to do the same, which does nothing to infringe upon the rights of the author to say whatever she wants. I criticized one of my friends for making degrading comments about a mentally retarded person, and another friend of mine cried "free speech!" Too bad that's it a part of that right that I'm allowed to criticize the speech of my fellow citizens. Now this. It's a private website -- the webmasters may remove the page if they want to, and people have every right to ask them to do so. This has nothing to do with such free speech being made illegal. When you make a page on a private website, you are subject to the wishes out of its owners, period.
All true. So your point is???

No way of telling, unless you can find a Google cache of the page or something.

EDIT: I think it speaks volumes that the anti-group petition has 13 signatures. 13! This is a load of trollop droppings about absolutely fuck-all. It's fucking stupid.

the petition I signed had over 310

Meh, who's afraid of a bunch of kids on Myspace? They're probably just mad about being grounded so they decided to create this group for shock value. "Fuck the Troops" is so edgy and rebellious that their parents might let them borrow the car next weekend.

mmmm the troops are often hot, I'd like to fuck them.


to the OP, you wish to silence someone because you dont like what they are saying? How very Iranian of you. I hope the mods ban you for saying something I disagree with because your opinions shoudl not be heard by the general public.

finally done reading all the responses

he's pro war (glad it happened.
pro US troops (go USA)
pro Iraqi (go new Iraqi gov't)

he doesn't like the foreign fighters or the iraqi's who fight against the occupation....
thought it was pretty easy.
Remember that article in the Onion by a guy who supported the war, but did not support the troops. Roflcopters.

I'm a little confused over here. So, they do have the right to hate our soldiers, but they don't?
They have the right to hate our troops, but MySpace has the right to remove the site if they feel its inappropriate. That's part of being a private business owner. So, freedom of speech has limits, and in this case it is possible to get this site removed. Why? Because its on a privately owned site. Some people just need to learn a little more about constitutional rights before they start blabbering on about freedom of speech.

They have the right to hate our troops, but MySpace has the right to remove the site if they feel its inappropriate. That's part of being a private business owner. So, freedom of speech has limits, and in this case it is possible to get this site removed. Why? Because its on a privately owned site. Some people just need to learn a little more about constitutional rights before they start blabbering on about freedom of speech.
All true. And your point???

All true. So your point is???
So, the free speech defense doesn't apply here. I thought that was pretty clear.

Baked Squirrels, can you post a link to that petition, or tell me what page I can find the link on if its already been posted.

hold on, I'll find it

http://bulletin.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=bulletin.read&messageID=1304326727&Mytoken=7835C6CA-6E54-115C-C75613675FBF40D67611321
I think that'll work

So, the free speech defense doesn't apply here. I thought that was pretty clear.
There is never a time when "free speech" does NOT apply.

There is never a time when "free speech" does NOT apply.

Well, it doesn't here old chum. If Max Barry decided that the word 'Banana' was to be banned and anyone who said it DEATed, the Mods would enact it and we'd have no say in the matter.

There is never a time when "free speech" does NOT apply.
Skinny's right. I don't know what magical imaginary world you live in, but in the real world any private business/establishment can restrict your freedom of speech, since you use their facilities etc. voluntarily. You may not like it, but tuff.

If Max Barry decided that the word 'Banana' was to be banned and anyone who said it DEATed, the Mods would enact it and we'd have no say in the matter.
I never indicated otherwise, but the principle of free speech is absolute. Just as Max might decide to ban the word "banana," so can I decide to use it despite any sort of "ban." I also have to be prepared to deal with the consequences, something that many who advocate what they style as "free speech" often seem unwilling to do.

A group called "Fuck our troops"?

The triumvirate of Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, I presume?

Some people just need to learn a little more about constitutional rights before they start blabbering on about freedom of speech.

the fact that the u.s. constitution fails to adequately defend freedom just means that the u.s. constitution sucks

A group called "Fuck our troops"?

The triumvirate of Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, I presume?


No. Its a bunch of gay men with a fetish for military men. :P

the fact that the u.s. constitution fails to adequately defend freedom just means that the u.s. constitution sucks
And just as you have the freedom to say that "the u.s. constitution sucks," I have the freedom to say that so do your allegations.

See how that works? Kewl, eh? :D

No. Its a bunch of gay men with a fetish for military men. :P
Or a massive cabal of former military men with a fetish for former military women! :D

No. Its a bunch of gay men with a fetish for military men. :P

There are a lot of gay guys that do just that. Infact I could give some URLs.

Military dudes are hot!

And just as you have the freedom to say that "the u.s. constitution sucks," I have the freedom to say that so do your allegations.

See how that works? Kewl, eh? :D

they're right though, you don't technically have any sort of protected right to freedom of speech around here at all. as far as the u.s. constitution is concerned, in the vast majority of physical spaces and essentially the entirety of internet space we can speak at all only because our lords allow it. it's fucking retarded heldover feudalist bullshit, and just one of the many ways that the constitution blows.

Only 200 millions of Usians?
And make it less who understand that rubbish...

That's a world majority in term of democracy.

But who cares... apart that minority?

There is a group on myspace now called Fuck Our Troops. There has been a petition set electronically. This will end tomorrow. Anyway it has over 300 replies, I was number 313, that we're going to petition to Tom, the creator of Myspace, to remove the group. I mean, even if I don't support the war I'll still support the troops. I really hope we're able to put a stop to them. That's just my opinion, what do you guys think?
Removing the group doesn't sound like agreeing with the "free speech" to me.

Counter-speak, don't petition to remove. Idiots like that are usually there for shock value and evanesce of their own accord in a short time.

I am sorry but I will deny the liberty of sombody to form a group called "fuck our troops" any day of the week. Seems like we are now getting back to the old vietnam mentality of throwing rocks and piss balloons at combat veterans. Back then , in the early years of Vietnam it was ....oh we oppose the war but support the troops. The Conservatives knew that it was total shit. Soon, by 68' or so....3 years in, the anti-war left realized that it was the "troops" who were committing all of the "evils" that they were rallying against. Now, 3 years into Iraq, we can already see that complete support for the troops witnessed just 2 short years ago evaporating. Bottom line, the chocie is clear, the best way to support the troops is to support the mission for which they are putting their lives on the line, to bring peace and order to Iraq. If you cannot do that, you belong in that myspace group. It is a disgraceful thing.
Thanks, BG. I was waiting for someone to overreact besides the OP. You were right on time. It's almost like you enjoy being impotently infuriated. Or infuriatingly impotent. Either way.

The entire point of the group is to say that you do not care what happens to our soldiers (fuck em'). Think about what an allie of al-queda and the Iraq insrurgency that makes the members. It is a direct assault on the patriotic men and women who are risking their lives over seas and is highly offensive. That is why "myspace" should destroy it.
As a percentage of the US public, do you have any idea how tiny a minority that group is? And how many of them don't really share that opinion but enjoy being a part of something that gets a majority pissed off and seeks that attention?

Come on, BG, freedom's a great game. Put on your helmet and cup and get into the game!

Your name is an oxymoron. Your posts lack specifics and are not very pithy. Sounds like a parody to me. Not a funny one either. I am thinking recent SNL.
Whoa.

Pot just called the kettle black BIG time.

Your name is an oxymoron of even greater magnitude.

And "pithy" isn't always "good".

woah dudes, chill, (yeah I'm a hippy, doesn't change anything) mm'kay, so like the soldiers in Iraq are fine (if a little clueless as to the laws of warfare) they need to be there cos such a s**t-storm was created by the invasion by America, so like keep the troops there but protest the reasons for the war itself...

Whoa.

Pot just called the kettle black BIG time.

Your name is an oxymoron of even greater magnitude.

And "pithy" isn't always "good".

Uh-oh...

"No, you're an oxymoron!"
"No, you are!"
"Oh yeah, well you're a paradox!"
"Oh, don't get me started, you logical fallacy!"

:D

Uh-oh...

"No, you're an oxymoron!"
"No, you are!"
"Oh yeah, well you're a paradox!"
"Oh, don't get me started, you logical fallacy!"

:D

Well, at least they did not swear.

Well, at least they did not swear.

True. The whole debacle I found to be...humorous, though.

"Fuck Our Ratty, Would-Be Junior Hall-Monitors & Fuck Their Misapprehensions Regarding Freedoms And Human Rights"

There OP, that oughtta just about cover it.

He's certainly had the same conservative effect in other news organizations he's purchased.
This is correct. He's not able to get away with the same shameless outright promotion of right-wing views here, but there is a more subtle bias to the right on Sky News, etc.

I never indicated otherwise, but the principle of free speech is absolute. Just as Max might decide to ban the word "banana," so can I decide to use it despite any sort of "ban." I also have to be prepared to deal with the consequences, something that many who advocate what they style as "free speech" often seem unwilling to do.
If there is punishment for speech then it can't be called free speech.

If there is punishment for speech then it can't be called free speech.
The hell it can't.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean, "The freedom to say whatever you want without there being any consequences." It means you are free to say what you want (with a few critical exceptions), and nobody gets to send you to jail for it. There are still going to be consequences, though, and that doesn't mean you lack freedom of speech.

If you call me a cockbag while you're standing in my living room, I'm damn well going to throw you out of my house. (Well, actually, I'll probably just slug you and then offer you a beer, but that fucks up the example.) My place is fucking awesome, so believe me...getting thrown out of it is a real punishment. But I'm not infringing on your freedom of speech by doing it.

When you are on private property, you abide by the owner's rules. You're free to go call me a cockbag on public property, or on your own property, or on somebody else's property if they're ok with you calling me a cockbag.

If you act like a dickhead, other humans will punish you. That's just how it is. Racist fucks who exercise their freedom of speech are going to get screamed at and insulted; doesn't mean they lack freedom of speech just because their fellow humans are punishing them for the stupid shit they are saying.

freedom of speach

he can say / think what he wants

if you dont like it, dont read it

Pot just called the kettle black BIG time.

Your name is an oxymoron of even greater magnitude.

how is the name 'barrygoldwater' an oxymoron at all?

and how is this kettle black in the first place?

Freedom of speech doesn't mean, "The freedom to say whatever you want without there being any consequences."

they didn't say 'consequences', they said 'punishment'

"fuck our troops"

hmm.

Well yes, they have the right to say what they want. Unles of course they are saying something which might "tend to lead to an immediate breach of the peace" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words) Chaplinsky v New Hampshire. This is the 'fighting words' exception to freedom of speech. Basically, you can't say something that you know will provoke the person your saying it into a fight. Kind of like the forum rules on baiting I believe.

What I find most interesting about these kids, and I will call them kids because I haven't seen their page but I'm willing to bet an e-cookie that they are in highschool, maybe college, is that they don't seem to understand or care that our troops have been fighting for 200+ years around the globe in order to protect their right to say whatever they want. They are like someone who might say "I have a right to breathe, so fuck oxygen!" Is it so hard to show a little respect and gratitude to the men and women in uniform, no matter what country they are serving?

freedom of speach

he can say / think what he wants

if you dont like it, dont read it
Sigh...this has been addressed many times in this thread. Myspace is a private website. The webmasters can add and remove pages as they please. Yes, they can say what they want, but that doesn't mean that a mainstream web server should be hosting their hate-speech, and I have every right to petition the site to take their page down.

"fuck our troops"

hmm.

Well yes, they have the right to say what they want. Unles of course they are saying something which might "tend to lead to an immediate breach of the peace" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words) Chaplinsky v New Hampshire. This is the 'fighting words' exception to freedom of speech. Basically, you can't say something that you know will provoke the person your saying it into a fight. Kind of like the forum rules on baiting I believe.

What I find most interesting about these kids, and I will call them kids because I haven't seen their page but I'm willing to bet an e-cookie that they are in highschool, maybe college, is that they don't seem to understand or care that our troops have been fighting for 200+ years around the globe in order to protect their right to say whatever they want. They are like someone who might say "I have a right to breathe, so fuck oxygen!" Is it so hard to show a little respect and gratitude to the men and women in uniform, no matter what country they are serving?


No but some people do not wish to act in the PC manor. You are right they are probably kids/early collage students, and they are rebelling against a society that wishes to treat those in uniform as they can do no wrong.

I don’t agree with their choice of statement but I can understand their wish to not be controlled in what is an acceptable view

But of course social pressurized “PC” is only bad when the left does it. I just find it funny that the right is pushing their own PC agenda

they don't seem to understand or care that our troops have been fighting for 200+ years around the globe in order to protect their right to say whatever they want. They are like someone who might say "I have a right to breathe, so fuck oxygen!" Is it so hard to show a little respect and gratitude to the men and women in uniform, no matter what country they are serving?

fuck that bullshit. no troops have ever protected my right to free speech. the only groups it's ever in serious danger from are the bosses and the state. and since the troops work for those groups, when it comes to blows they are typically on the wrong side.

Sigh...this has been addressed many times in this thread. Myspace is a private website. The webmasters can add and remove pages as they please.

though again, can does not equal should, or even 'should be allowed to'

fuck that bullshit. no troops have ever protected my right to free speech. the only groups it's ever in serious danger from are the bosses and the state. and since the troops work for those groups, when it comes to blows they are typically on the wrong side.

Thank you.:)

Yes, they can say what they want, but that doesn't mean that a mainstream web server should be hosting their hate-speech, and I have every right to petition the site to take their page down.

1) How does the KKK hold rallies without them getting shut down?

Hint: Amendment I.

2) Yes, you have every right to petition, also in accordance to Amendment I, but it will probably fail.

Thank you.:)

you're welcome?

you're welcome?

Thanks?

since baked squirrels couldent give a link, i took a look myself. big deal! i do not think they should be deleated for expressing their opinion, no matter how offensive the averige excessively patriotic american finds it to be.

One thing is clear on this thread. Anybody who would say "fuck the troops" is ignorant of the nature of the very people who are on the front lines of their own f*ing defense. What jerks.

One thing is clear on this thread. Anybody who would say "fuck the troops" is ignorant of the nature of the very people who are on the front lines of their own f*ing defense. What jerks.
or they are against war in general.

Anybody who would say "fuck the troops" is ignorant of the nature of the very people who are on the front lines of their own f*ing defense.

what defense are you babbling about?

One thing is clear on this thread. Anybody who would say "fuck the troops" is ignorant of the nature of the very people who are on the front lines of their own f*ing defense. What jerks.
They aren't my troops. They are doing fuck all for me. I can say what I like about them- good, bad or indifferent.

One thing is clear on this thread. Anybody who would say "fuck the troops" is ignorant of the nature of the very people who are on the front lines of their own f*ing defense. What jerks.

Firstly, don't indirectly flame. Bad form.

Secondly, defending "them" against what precisely? Those damn Iraqi insuregents whose self-interest in Iraq evidently extends to the USA?

This thread is dumb. Myspace is the cause of this thread. Fuck myspace.

Thanks?

knock knock?

One thing is clear on this thread. Anybody who would say "fuck the troops" is ignorant of the nature of the very people who are on the front lines of their own f*ing defense. What jerks.

Speaking of "Ignorant"...

Comrade Bushevik, do you have that documented evidence that Fuck The Troops are Ames and Hansen-class Traitors? You were so insistent they were, it sounded like... a slam dunk.

:D

since baked squirrels couldent give a link, i took a look myself. big deal! i do not think they should be deleated for expressing their opinion, no matter how offensive the averige excessively patriotic american finds it to be.

I admit I was a little pissed about other things, but I did give a link, it's on of the the pages so look before you accuse me of something

Uh-oh, someone on myspace violated the PC POLICE!

Its called freedom of speech, even freedom to say politically incorrect things like "fuck the troops" or "fuck the sand monkeys."

Oh Oh...Freedom of Speech wont work here if Tom decides to pull the site.

One thing is clear on this thread. Anybody who would say "fuck the troops" is ignorant of the nature of the very people who are on the front lines of their own f*ing defense. What jerks.
Yup. And, seeing as Myspace is a private website, it is fair, just, and legal for people to petition the site to take down such a hateful page; let them spread their bullshit on their own server, with their own money. That has nothing to do with all of this bullshit about freedom of speech, a right that people seem to be very confused about and what exactly it entails...

it stinks around...

Yup. And, seeing as Myspace is a private website, it is fair, just, and legal for people to petition the site to take down such a hateful page; let them spread their bullshit on their own server, with their own money. That has nothing to do with all of this bullshit about freedom of speech, a right that people seem to be very confused about and what exactly it entails...
It is also perfectly alright for us to partition the site to keep its own freedoms as broad as possible as well.

It is also perfectly alright for us to partition the site to keep its own freedoms as broad as possible as well.
Fuck that.

Fuck that.

the terrorists hate our freedoms
you apparently hate our freedoms
therefore you apparently are the terrorists

the terrorists hate our freedoms
you apparently hate our freedoms
therefore you apparently are the terrorists

It's not that Verve Pipe hates your freedoms. He/she just wants them put up against a wall and shot. If anything (s)he's Anti-Wall.

Fuck that.
What an eloquent point :rolleyes:

It's not that Verve Pipe hates your freedoms. He/she just wants them put up against a wall and shot. If anything (s)he's Anti-Wall.

man, i hate wallists and their segregation