NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/TV/07/21/cbs.janet.jackson/index.html

Wardrobe malfunctions win again! The world is now a slightly less uptight place.


What I find most interesting about their decision is that the form letter campaigns that certain censorship groups are famous for were scrutinized by the judge and found to carry considerably less weight than if those same complaints were send by the same number of self-motivated individuals. I approve of this. *nod*

Tis a blow for bosoms. Mind you, she looks far too like her brother fer my liking......

Eh. Maybe it'll go somewhere.

Tempest in a teapot.

Well there's two things here:

First, did CBS knowingly, and with forethought, allow this to gain profit - as in, did they intend to cause offense?

Second, and more pertinent, was it actually offensive - just because people say it was offensive, and especially when the majority of those people write from special interest, doesn't mean it was - the answer can only be judged on societal expectations no?

Hence the law is always about society's expectations rather than some hard and fast ruling for eternity - which is why questioning 'what the constitution really means' is pointless and outdated.

I leap from point to point.

I like an nice "Up yours!" to the FCC. :D

finally, some common sense.

It's a funny place, America. On the one hand you have massive fines for exposing a breast, on the other, the porn industry. How on earth do you all get along?

It's a funny place, America. On the one hand you have massive fines for exposing a breast, on the other, the porn industry. How on earth do you all get along?
Well, we keep the porn industry separate from public broadcast during family hour... if you want to see it there are plenty of theaters, DVDs, and pay per view channels you can find it on.

I think that the fine was ridiculous, and if anyone should have been censured at all, it should have been Jackson and Timberlake --as private contractors -- if for no other reason than they demonstrably knew they were going to do this and did it.

It's a funny place, America. On the one hand you have massive fines for exposing a breast, on the other, the porn industry.

You forget the violence industry and gun culture. Those are dandy, but boobies are the lactation devices of the devil.

It's a funny place, America. On the one hand you have massive fines for exposing a breast, on the other, the porn industry. How on earth do you all get along?

We don't. Luckily it's a big country, though. ;)

You forget the violence industry and gun culture. Those are dandy, but boobies are the lactation devices of the devil.
Yes, the violence industry. We just walk into markets and blow people up... oh wait.
No, we kill them for religious differences.... damn it....
Well, we kill them for daring to have a different colored... um...
We kill them for rooting for the wrong footie league!

Pot, meet kettle. And contrary to what you imply, I would say MOST people do not, nor wish to, own a gun.

Yes, the violence industry. We just walk into markets and blow people up... oh wait.

You do.

No, we kill them for religious differences.... damn it....

You do.

Well, we kill them for daring to have a different colored... um...

Well, for being differently "colored"...

We kill them for rooting for the wrong footie league!

You don't watch football. You watch padded rugby, a very violent sport that all those children who saw those wretched boobies that traumatised them seemed to be allowed to see.

Pot, meet kettle.

You misuse that idiom so often, I have stopped believing you ever knew its meaning.

And contrary to what you imply, I would say MOST people do not, nor wish to, own a gun.

Of course not most people. Most USA-people, though?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJoh7TSICls

Family Guy sums up the FCC.

You do.



You do.



Well, for being differently "colored"...



You don't watch football. You watch padded rugby, a very violent sport that all those children who saw those wretched boobies that traumatised them seemed to be allowed to see.



You misuse that idiom so often, I have stopped believing you ever knew its meaning.



Of course not most people. Most USA-people, though?

Really? When do we walk into markets and blow people up?
When do we kill people for rooting for the wrong sports team?
When do we kill people for having a different religion?
When do we kill people for having differently colored skin?

I await your answers.

Pot meets kettle, for those who are ignorant, means "Hypocrite, thou are ascribing to others things which you do yourself."

Plenty of other people do the things they criticize the US for, don't they?

And no, most USA-people DON'T have guns. I don't know anyone who owns one: not in my family, not in my circle of friends, not my colleagues....

Your turn.

Huzzah for boobies!

shouldn't these people be in museums?

if you want to see it there are plenty of theaters, DVDs, and pay per view channels you can find it on.

I can't name any in my town or any that I have ever seen :(

Huzzah for boobies!

this should be a lesson that nobody can defeat the powers of the boob

Really? When do we walk into markets and blow people up?
You don't count domestic terrorism anymore no?

When do we kill people for rooting for the wrong sports team?
Lakers riots, no?

When do we kill people for having a different religion?
Really? I mean, honestly.

When do we kill people for having differently colored skin?
..... oh wait. Satire. I get it now.

Really? When do we walk into markets and blow people up?
When do we kill people for rooting for the wrong sports team?
When do we kill people for having a different religion?
When do we kill people for having differently colored skin?

I await your answers.

Pot meets kettle, for those who are ignorant, means "Hypocrite, thou are ascribing to others things which you do yourself."

Plenty of other people do the things they criticize the US for, don't they?

And no, most USA-people DON'T have guns. I don't know anyone who owns one: not in my family, not in my circle of friends, not my colleagues....

Your turn.

You are wrong! Americans do all of those things much more often than other people. Its because we are so uncouth and boisterous, and we eat fast food. And I know lots of people that have guns! wait, well, I am the president of the gun club at Georgia College... But still.

You don't count domestic terrorism anymore no?


Lakers riots, no?


Really? I mean, honestly.


..... oh wait. Satire. I get it now.
I'm looking forward to all those European US-critics posting copious statistics that prove that Americans in general -- meaning a large number of Americans -- do these things, to a greater proportion of the population than Europeans. You know, numbers that would justify saying "Americans" do these things, as if they don't also happen in Europe. I mean, you all have to know this about us somehow, right? So I look forward to the proofs.

Unless, of course, it's just the same bunch jumping on Fass's bitch-bandwagon for a quick chance to play the "you suck worse than us" game.

I'm looking forward to all those European US-critics posting copious statistics that prove that Americans in general -- meaning a large number of Americans -- do these things, to a greater proportion of the population than Europeans. I mean, you all have to know this about us somehow, right? So I look forward to your proofs.

actually fass was pointing out the issue within western culture where violence is regarded as more sound than nakedness

Kat is the one who has jumped to generalizations without realizing that its an Anglo problem that has led to Britain's obsession with Sadomasochism

I am the president of the gun club at Georgia College... But still.

bloody hell I bet the teachers are scared of you! : P

Well, we keep the porn industry separate from public broadcast during family hour... if you want to see it there are plenty of theaters, DVDs, and pay per view channels you can find it on.

I think that the fine was ridiculous, and if anyone should have been censured at all, it should have been Jackson and Timberlake --as private contractors -- if for no other reason than they demonstrably knew they were going to do this and did it.

And your proof?

Honestly, this was a pretty proper ruling. Shouldn't hold a company responsible for what unaffiliated individuals do on their own.

actually fass was pointing out the issue within western culture where violence is regarded as more sound than nakedness
Really? You read that in his remark? It struck me as being exactly the same in effect as everything else I've seen him post this year so far in every thread on every topic -- basically a snipe that leads nowhere. But Fass is not the topic of this thread.

Kat is the one who has jumped to generalizations without realizing that its an Anglo problem that has led to Britain's obsession with Sadomasochism
Wow, you see a lot of things in other things. Makes me want to go looking for pictures in clouds with you.

I'm looking forward to all those European US-critics posting copious statistics that prove that Americans in general -- meaning a large number of Americans -- do these things, to a greater proportion of the population than Europeans. You know, numbers that would justify saying "Americans" do these things, as if they don't also happen in Europe. I mean, you all have to know this about us somehow, right? So I look forward to the proofs.

Unless, of course, it's just the same bunch jumping on Fass's bitch-bandwagon for a quick chance to play the "you suck worse than us" game.

Kat was the one generalising. Until I saw she was taking the piss.

bloody hell I bet the teachers are scared of you! : P

Actually, most of them think its cool. I've gone shooting with 2 of my professors. One of them is trying to sell me his Colt woodsman but I can't afford it and I've already got a Ruger anyways.:mp5:

Can you believe that? All these people, young and old, black and white, rich and poor, with guns(gasp), living in trust and harmony. It blows your mind. BOOM!

Really? You read that in his remark? It struck me as being exactly the same in effect as everything else I've seen him post this year so far in every thread on every topic -- basically a snipe that leads nowhere.

It just goes to show that some people are pathologically unable to avoid going on a nationalistic pissrant no matter how irrelevant it may be to the topic.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/TV/07/21/cbs.janet.jackson/index.html

Wardrobe malfunctions win again! The world is now a slightly less uptight place.
The US anyway, of course they were the most uptype industrialized nation.

Philly court to Puritan US: Go fork yourselves.

Now if only the anti-abortion, anti-planned parenthood, anti-sex ed people's self-righteousness was water and we could legally drown them in it...

Can you believe that? All these people, young and old, black and white, rich and poor, with guns(gasp), living in trust and harmony. It blows your mind. BOOM!
They have black people in Georgia outside Atlanta?

Of course not most people. Most USA-people, though?

"Most" means over 50%.
And unless 26% is greater than 50%, it's not most. (http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/13/1/15)

They have black people in Georgia outside Atlanta?

Nope.

In related news, there are no mustaches in Tijuana, either.

They have black people in Georgia outside Atlanta?

You don't really know anything about America do you? Well, certainly nothing about the Southeast.

And your proof?

Have you watched the video of it? He grabbed her, he hesitated, and he yanked off part of her costume, which just happened to break away perfectly to expose just her breast and not tear further -- under which she just happened to have a pasty.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=EPIbdS6W2yc at 4:00
If that doesn't scream "planned" I don't know what does.

actually fass was pointing out the issue within western culture where violence is regarded as more sound than nakedness

Kat is the one who has jumped to generalizations without realizing that its an Anglo problem that has led to Britain's obsession with Sadomasochism



bloody hell I bet the teachers are scared of you! : P

Really? Hmmm, I suggest you reread?
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13854691&postcount=10

Have you watched the video of it? He grabbed her, he hesitated, and he yanked off part of her costume, which just happened to break away perfectly to expose just her breast and not tear further -- under which she just happened to have a pasty.

If that doesn't scream "planned" I don't know what does.


I agree completely. It was obviously staged. Though I really didn't care then and I don't care now either.

Yes, the violence industry. We just walk into markets and blow people up... oh wait.
No, we kill them for religious differences.... damn it....
Well, we kill them for daring to have a different colored... um...
We kill them for rooting for the wrong footie league!

Pot, meet kettle. And contrary to what you imply, I would say MOST people do not, nor wish to, own a gun.
Although the last part might be disputable, especially in the thick forests in parts of the east coast ('Specially 'round hunting season:D), I agree.
You do.

Not really.

You do.

Hate to shatter your view of the USA Fass, but no.
Well, for being differently "colored"...

...
You don't watch football. You watch padded rugby, a very violent sport that all those children who saw those wretched boobies that traumatised them seemed to be allowed to see.

...

You misuse that idiom so often, I have stopped believing you ever knew its meaning.

I don't think you ever knew the meaning. Kat's calling you a hypocrite. And you know what? She's right.
Of course not most people. Most USA-people, though?
Ah, yes, the sweet smell of ignorance.

boobies are the lactation devices of the devil.

Siggable.

We don't. Luckily it's a big country, though. ;)

QFT. They talk about building fences between the US and Mexico... I might pay to build on between NorCal and the rest of the country.

You don't watch football. You watch padded rugby, a very violent sport that all those children who saw those wretched boobies that traumatised them seemed to be allowed to see.

I have to stand by the FCC on this one. Not because children saw a boob, but because it was Janet Jackson's boob. I'm still traumatized.

I have to stand by the FCC on this one. Not because children saw a boob, but because it was Janet Jackson's boob. I'm still traumatized.
So true. The idea that that ... object ... is going to go down as the first boob flashed on American tv -- not counting all the medical shows and tribal tourism documentaries -- is just pathetic. That was NOT a boob, and if there are little kids out there being led to believe it was, well...something needs to be done about that. We need some REAL boobs on US tv, STAT!

So true. The idea that that ... object ... is going to go down as the first boob flashed on American tv -- not counting all the medical shows and tribal tourism documentaries -- is just pathetic. That was NOT a boob, and if there are little kids out there being led to believe it was, well...something needs to be done about that. We need some REAL boobs on US tv, STAT!

Are you offering? I have a camera...

Are you offering? I have a camera...
When I said "on US tv", I didn't mean on just your tv when you watch your personal perv collection, you PERV! :D

for a quick chance to play the "you suck worse than us" game.

I like the original "you suck" game a lot more.

actually fass was pointing out the issue within western culture where violence is regarded as more sound than nakedness

Kat is the one who has jumped to generalizations without realizing that its an Anglo problem that has led to Britain's obsession with Sadomasochism

I have to agree. That's how I read it.

Really? You read that in his remark? It struck me as being exactly the same in effect as everything else I've seen him post this year so far in every thread on every topic -- basically a snipe that leads nowhere.

I think that's probably the problem. It happens so much that when he does make a valid point, it's easy to overlook.

Kat was the one generalising. Until I saw she was taking the piss.

I'm not sure if she was or not. If she was, it was a bit of confusing double-sarcasm.

That was NOT a boob, and if there are little kids out there being led to believe it was, well...something needs to be done about that. We need some REAL boobs on US tv, STAT!

It shouldn't have happened this way. The First Boob on Primetime should have been a Baywatch malfunction.

It would be interesting to see the top 10 complaints of respective countries to see what really offends people.

I'd put a small wager that the biggest complaints are moving a sports program without notice but, if you can get past those, I'd say it would be an interesting peek into the sensibilities of a country.

You don't watch football. You watch padded rugby, a very violent sport that all those children who saw those wretched boobies that traumatised them seemed to be allowed to see.


I didn't say football, did I, I said footie -- to distinguish between grid iron and what we call soccer.

Oh, and as for not playing footie:
http://web.mlsnet.com/index.jsp

Once again, demonstrating your ignorance.

I think that's probably the problem. It happens so much that when he does make a valid point, it's easy to overlook.

Just to be clear: I got it. I understand what he was trying to say. However, I do not think his remark was offered to add to or expand the conversation. Therefore, I do not consider it a valid point, because I don't consider it a point in the first place.

There's a whole lot of context missing from this - it should be remembered that this wasn't just a nipple on air, it was during the Superbowl, possibly one of the biggest family time TV events of the year.

Second, is it really about the FCC? Is it not more about the amount of complaints it received - does anyone know at what point the FCC has to take action given a certain number of complaints.

What we're really talking about here is, as Fass pointily pointed out, is the skewed interests of of certain groups in America who think a naked nipple stands for the brink over which America will fall to it's doom - available in all countries in fact, the Colonel Pickering's from Chelmsford are represented in every country, they live to complain, especially about the values of society and the effect on da liddly childwen.

It's the puritanical part of America that is offended by anything that doesn't conform to an extremely narrow point of view. It's nice to see the court took this into account, that a special interest group - and I don't mind which - does not have the sway in numbers as a genuine, individual complaint does.

I'm sure 90% of Americans couldn't really give a damn aside from the fact that it was, and remains, a cultural event, if only because of the size of the audience.

No complaints, just something to talk about.

As is bitching between the US and Europe, I don't understand why the US don't just accept their place as 'wrong in all things™', it would shorten many threads.

EDIT: Having said that, it really bugs me to find these articles on Sweden when I want to prove a point.

Swedish national broadcaster SVT has been left red-faced by a newsroom blunder which saw 30 seconds of explicit hardcore pornography being aired during a news broadcast.

A monitor behind anchor Peter Dahlgren began showing the porno film when the five-minute broadcast began at midnight on Saturday night, and although a producer quickly spotted it - and ran round in desperation to switch it off - at least 30 seconds of Czech porn was shown in all its, uh, glory.

The kicker? There wasn't one single complaint from the public.

Can we sticky a thread devoted to simply finding bad stuff from Sweden, just as a resource for future debates?

As is bitching between the US and Europe, I don't understand why the US don't just accept their place as 'wrong in all things™', it would shorten many threads.
I can't tell if that was sarcasm or ignorance...

I can't tell if that was sarcasm or ignorance...

In your case it's probably quite applicable but, for the most part, it was...well not sarcasm, I'm not sure of the correct word, somewhere below parody I suspect.

Only joking about 'quite applicable' in your case....

...I meant 'totally'.

No, just joking, honest....

...not.

No, seriously.

Not really.
You practically worship military service, half your movies are mindless brain fucks of explosions and gun shoot outs, and somehow, a good number of you somehow managed to equate servicing in the army with good presidency.


Hate to shatter your view of the USA Fass, but no.


Are you sure? there has been domestic cases of terrorism in the United States before hand, targeting abortion clinics, for example.

While you could argue that it wasn't about different religious views, it is hard to ignore the religious component that factored into these attacks.

...


Do you honestly believe your country is free of violent racists? That no killings could possibly have been motivated, at least in part, by racism?


I don't think you ever knew the meaning. Kat's calling you a hypocrite. And you know what? She's right.

You're committing a logical fallacy CM; even if he is a hypocrite, that doesn't invalidate his arguments.

If I say, don't drink the koolaid, and then I drink the koolaid, that doesn't mean you should also drink the koolaid.

I can't tell if that was sarcasm or ignorance...

Here's a tip that will make the time you spend on NSG much more pleasant. When someone says something extremely silly or odd like that just go ahead and assume they're joking. 99% of the time they'll actually be joking and if they're not you're protecting your sanity by assuming they are.

You practically worship military service, half your movies are mindless brain fucks of explosions and gun shoot outs, and somehow, a good number of you somehow managed to equate servicing in the army with good presidency.

You have obviously rarely been to the US and subscribe to the usual "America consists of a bunch of backwards idiots" touted by many Europeans in political debate forums online, and Yahtzee (Possibly jokingly for him)

Are you sure? there has been domestic cases of terrorism in the United States before hand, targeting abortion clinics, for example.

Are YOU sure? I'm sure that in a nation of 300 million it's a miracle we don't have as many crackpots as we should. Besides, I don't recall anything about people running into marketplaces/Supermarkets and setting off a bomb.
While you could argue that it wasn't about different religious views, it is hard to ignore the religious component that factored into these attacks.

No, actually, there are plenty of anti=abortion atheists. His religion doesn't matter, at all. There is nothing in the bible against abortion. NEXT!
Do you honestly believe your country is free of violent racists? That no killings could possibly have been motivated, at least in part, by racism?

Do you honestly believe the same about your country? Fass probably does.
You're committing a logical fallacy CM; even if he is a hypocrite, that doesn't invalidate his arguments.
...
I never said it did. I did say however, that Fass was ignorant about the USA.
If I say, don't drink the koolaid, and then I drink the koolaid, that doesn't mean you should also drink the koolaid.
See above.
Here's a tip that will make the time you spend on NSG much more pleasant. When someone says something extremely silly or odd like that just go ahead and assume they're joking. 99% of the time they'll actually be joking and if they're not you're protecting your sanity by assuming they are.
See the following:

Andaras, Fassitude, several others whose name I cannot remember.

Eh. Maybe it'll go somewhere.

I wouldn't say this is exactly ground breaking.

Good. FCC needs to get into the real world.

Good. FCC needs to get into the real world.

Totally. That show has a bad influence on our kids.

Totally. That show has a bad influence on our kids.

God, I remember the very first with the punk skateboarder - Pug, or Puck - who knew it heralded the start of reality TV - I loved it, there was the girl who met the AIDS guy on the train and had a crush only to find out that he was gay and then compensated for feeling shallow by being all miss-I'm-so-okay-with-it-all-best-friends-la-la when inside she was gutted.

Ah the mid-90's were good times.

God, I remember the very first with the punk skateboarder - Pug, or Puck - who knew it heralded the start of reality TV - I loved it, there was the girl who met the AIDS guy on the train and had a crush only to find out that he was gay and then compensated for feeling shallow by being all miss-I'm-so-okay-with-it-all-best-friends-la-la when inside she was gutted.

Ah the mid-90's were good times.

Puck wasn't on it until season 3 or 4. He was on after the bitch Beth.

You practically worship military service, half your movies are mindless brain fucks of explosions and gun shoot outs, and somehow, a good number of you somehow managed to equate servicing in the army with good presidency.

True. Of the roughly 300 million people living in the United States, some percentage of them--hell, I'll get outrageous and give you 5%!--fall into that stereotype. And the other 95% I suppose aren't True Americans.

In case you thought you were helpfully informing us about the country we live in, it's cool, we already know. Because we live there.

Puck wasn't on it until season 3 or 4. He was on after the bitch Beth.

Beat me to it. That was the first one I saw, too, but I'm pretty sure it was season 3. Puck and Pedro and Judd, and Judd wrote a graphic novel about it later that might have made me cry. :$

Are YOU sure? I'm sure that in a nation of 300 million it's a miracle we don't have as many crackpots as we should. Besides, I don't recall anything about people running into marketplaces/Supermarkets and setting off a bomb.

The closest thing I can think of recently was a guy who drove his car through a farmer's market in S.F. a year or so ago. He mowed down quite a few people. I don't think he had a purpose or message behind it, though, I think he may have been schizophrenic.

The closest thing I can think of recently was a guy who drove his car through a farmer's market in S.F. a year or so ago. He mowed down quite a few people. I don't think he had a purpose or message behind it, though, I think he may have been schizophrenic.

Wasn't he like a senile old guy? He looked like he either enjoyed running over people or didn't have a fucking clue what was going on when the police got him out of the car.

Wasn't he like a senile old guy? He looked like he either enjoyed running over people or didn't have a fucking clue what was going on when the police got him out of the car.

Whoops, you're right, I was combining stories. The old guy hit people in Santa Monica, and he was indeed senile. Now I have to go figure out what the other thing I was talking about was.

EDIT: Ah, here it is. It was a guy driving over people in SF, just not at a farmer's market.

The Fremont man arrested after a hit-and-run rampage through the streets of San Francisco is due in court today to face a long list of charges.

Omeed Popal is scheduled to be arraigned at 9:00 this morning on 18 counts of attempted murder and other charges.

The 29-year-old Popal has been held in the jail ward of San Francisco General Hospital under psychiatric care after being taken into custody Tuesday.

At least 19 people were hurt in the rampage. Witnesses say Popal intentionally tried to hit people along several blocks of a residential San Francisco neighborhood.

Puck wasn't on it until season 3 or 4. He was on after the bitch Beth.

Ah, well it was the only one I saw, I caught the start of the London one, which I guess now is season 4 but only the first two episodes or so.

The closest thing I can think of recently was a guy who drove his car through a farmer's market in S.F. a year or so ago. He mowed down quite a few people. I don't think he had a purpose or message behind it, though, I think he may have been schizophrenic.

Could the Federal Building in Oklahoma be considered a market of sorts?

Could the Federal Building in Oklahoma be considered a market of sorts?

Depends on how many vending machines they had. I suppose this could work for certain parts of Montana, too.

Really? When do we walk into markets and blow people up?

Not in the US. Bombs are national headline news...even little ones. However I hear on the news every night about somewhere in the middle east this happening (and back in the 80's I remember this happening in Ireland a lot)

When do we kill people for rooting for the wrong sports team?

To be honest, not that often. Usually you can get your ass beat if you wave your jersey at the losing team's fans if your team won the national whatever...but that usually only happens if your a dick and the other guys are drunk. I personally can only remember one time in the News when this happened in the US and that was 8 years ago after the World Series.

Now in Central and South America? You bet your ass you better keep your mouth shut after the game (and in japan too).

When do we kill people for having a different religion?

Hasn't happened in the US for a LONG time. People here would more likely burn down your church than hurt you personally...and even THAT is rare as hell.

Now Serbia/Bosnia/Croatia comes to mind. So does Somali and the rest of Africa for that matter. In fact, the Middle-east countries are big on that. Iraq used to, Iran still does.

When do we kill people for having differently colored skin?

To be honest, the new violence is between gang members in the big cities (LA comes to mind with the Blacks and Latinos starting gang/race wars. The white/black thing kinda went out of style. The black/latino hatred is the new thing, and again...that's mainly between the gangs)

And no, most USA-people DON'T have guns. I don't know anyone who owns one: not in my family, not in my circle of friends, not my colleagues....

I'm an avid gun owner and rights activist, and I will back her up on this. Most people in the US don't own guns, and those that legally own a gun are not the ones committing the crimes. I know it's tired but honestly, it's the gangs that cause the problems. You could take away all the guns from registered gun owners in the US and make guns illegal, but the gun violence rates would most likely stay the same or only drop slightly.

The guy that bought his .45 at a gun shop and got his concealed carry permit isn't the guy that will walk into your wal-mart to steal from the till, or mug you on the way home. The guy that went through the background check and legally purchased a 12guage shotgun for hunting isn't the guy that is going to walk into work and shoot his co-workers.

Point is, statistics show that most guns crimes are committed with weapons that are not registered or are stolen. That means its the criminals...not the guy who owns a gun to hunt with or the guy that legally has a gun for personal protection.

Could the Federal Building in Oklahoma be considered a market of sorts?

No, not close, but you know, I'll give you that one anyway just to make our euro friends feel special (and you know, I have friends from overseas that don't have the stereotypical beliefs about americans that I see on NS. I think the internet anonymity has a lot to do with it.)

Are you sure? there has been domestic cases of terrorism in the United States before hand, targeting abortion clinics, for example.

Last time an abortion clinic was bombed was the late 90's or very early 2000's, and no one was killed if I recalled correctly. The people setting the bombs were having them go off when no one was around, late at night. They respected the lives of the people at the clinic, but wanted the clinics to just go away (a few went so far as to hunt down doctors, but those were the loonies).

When is the last time you heard of some American strapping a few pounds of C4 to their chest, walking into a mall and then blowing up the bomb? Yeah, doesn't happen.

How often do you see this happen in the middle east (Israel an Iraq come to mind)?

Hasn't happened in the US for a LONG time. People here would more likely burn down your church than hurt you personally...and even THAT is rare as hell.

Where I'm from there's actually a fair bit of violence between members of the Nation of Islam and the rest of the community. However, most of the homicides in these cases are more related to organized crime than religion.

To be honest, the new violence is between gang members in the big cities (LA comes to mind with the Blacks and Latinos starting gang/race wars. The white/black thing kinda went out of style. The black/latino hatred is the new thing, and again...that's mainly between the gangs)

Actually, there was a small but significant backlash of violence against Afghans and those who were perceived to be Afghani (apparently many people have trouble telling the difference between a muslim and a Sikh :rolleyes:). In my city, which has the largest Afghani population in the world outside of Afghanistan, two Afghani women were brutally beaten to death by a group of boys a few years ago. One could argue this was due to both religion and race, along with a lot of other things.

Just out of curiosity, what part of the country are you from? It just sounds like there isn't a lot of interracial violence or gang activity where you come from. In Northern California there is norteno-sureno violence, but there's also a lot of violence between Vietnamese gangs.

When is the last time you heard of some American strapping a few pounds of C4 to their chest, walking into a mall and then blowing up the bomb? Yeah, doesn't happen.

How often do you see this happen in the middle east (Israel an Iraq come to mind)?

I don't know if this is a point for us or against us. True, the U.S. doesn't have suicide bombers, but we do have people who tote guns into malls and onto campuses and gun down 20 people. It's not typical, of course--these are usually disturbed individuals who decide to go out in a spray of gunfire. The idea of strapping a bomb to oneself to blow a place (and oneself) up for a cause is distinctly unAmerican, and I don't think it's because we're less violent or more reasonable--I think we're just too concerned with our own lives to give them up for a cause.

You have obviously rarely been to the US and subscribe to the usual "America consists of a bunch of backwards idiots" touted by many Europeans in political debate forums online, and Yahtzee (Possibly jokingly for him)
Who said anything about you being idiots? I'm merely pointing out that, in general, you tend to assign a great deal of reverence to your military.

Are YOU sure? I'm sure that in a nation of 300 million it's a miracle we don't have as many crackpots as we should. Besides, I don't recall anything about people running into marketplaces/Supermarkets and setting off a bomb.
Not really, the United States is a very stable country, but if it wasn't, it's likely a lot of those crackpots would be coming out and performing terrorist acts.

edit: However, now that I think about it, there have been incidents (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centennial_Olympic_Park_bombing).

No, actually, there are plenty of anti=abortion atheists. His religion doesn't matter, at all. There is nothing in the bible against abortion. NEXT!
That maybe, but that doesn't stop religion from being used as a supporting 'fact' to justify the pro-life position, too pretend otherwise is foolish.


Do you honestly believe the same about your country? Fass probably does.


Hardly, but you're the one trying to tell me they don't exist in your country.

...
I never said it did. I did say however, that Fass was ignorant about the USA.

Ah, but rather then address his argument, you give a series of one or two word answers, followed by two sets of ellipsises, followed by claiming that Fass was a hypocrite. if you weren't trying to make it into an counter argument, what was it's purpose? Are you honestly arguing that that Fass secretly loves America, but posts anti-american statements on this forum, as per the definition of hypocrisy?

It's clear you meant your statement as an ad hominem attack, rather then a factual rebuttal of Fass's statement of being countered so many times [with the pot & kettle saying] that it's lost all meaning to him. Both of which, have nothing to do with whether or not Fass is ignorant of the United States, or not.

The question I want to know about this incident (which happened years ago and it is only solved now WTF) is that JT unbuckled Jackson's clothes to expose the breast and it was Jackson that got a lot of shit from the media not JT what was with that?

True. Of the roughly 300 million people living in the United States, some percentage of them--hell, I'll get outrageous and give you 5%!--fall into that stereotype. And the other 95% I suppose aren't True Americans.

Well, I've been completely miss informed then, surely more then 15 million people belong to, or vote for, the Republican party?

Whether or not you want to admit it, military service seems to be a large talking point on your political campaigns.

The question I want to know about this incident (which happened years ago and it is only solved now WTF) is that JT unbuckled Jackson's clothes to expose the breast and it was Jackson that got a lot of shit from the media not JT what was with that?

JT was suppose to rip off the piece of clothing, but she was suppose to be wearing something under it.

JT was suppose to rip off the piece of clothing, but she was suppose to be wearing something under it.A pasty is something.

The guy that bought his .45 at a gun shop and got his concealed carry permit isn't the guy that will walk into your wal-mart to steal from the till, or mug you on the way home. The guy that went through the background check and legally purchased a 12guage shotgun for hunting isn't the guy that is going to walk into work and shoot his co-workers.


This one needs reconsideration. Although a 12 gauge makes a lousy concealed weapon to bring to the workplace, there have been cases of people legally buying firearms and then going nuts with it later.

Well, I've been completely miss informed then, surely more then 15 million people belong to, or vote for, the Republican party?

Whether or not you want to admit it, military service seems to be a large talking point on your political campaigns.

You are misinformed, but that's okay. I'm not very well informed about the vast range of political ideologies in nations I don't live in, either.

Yes, there are many registered Republicans. They span the political spectrum from middle-of-the-road to "let's blow up all the gays, muslims and immigrants and erect a giant burning cross on their ashes". There are also many registered Democrats that cover an equal amount of ground. That's what happens when you have a two-party system. Republican does not equal gun-toting, gay-bashing Bush supporter. In fact, the current President is nearly as unpopular in his own party as he is with Democrats.

Yes, military service is one of the qualifications most Presidents are expected to have, though it doesn't seem to have made much difference in the past couple of decades. There are a few reasons for this.

1) The U.S. was at war (or in a "conflict") while most current presidential candidates were of age to serve. Those who seek a position of power in the U.S. government where they will have to deploy troops and risk lives are expected to have shown the same willingness at some time to put their own lives on the line.

2) The U.S. is in a god damn war. Most people want someone who has experienced war to lead them out of it. You don't want to hire a chef who's read a ton of books about cooking but has never actually been in a kitchen.

Where people (in my opinion) go wrong is in assuming that it is better to hire a person who has a reputation for being a horrendous cook over one who's studied cooking but never tried. The latter is an unknown quantity; with the former, you know it's going to suck.

A pasty is something.

It was a nipple ring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipple_shield_(jewelry))

Even better, then.

Amazing, and it only took 4 years to work out.

Last time an abortion clinic was bombed was the late 90's or very early 2000's, and no one was killed if I recalled correctly. The people setting the bombs were having them go off when no one was around, late at night. They respected the lives of the people at the clinic, but wanted the clinics to just go away (a few went so far as to hunt down doctors, but those were the loonies).

Try 2007. People would have died had the bomb not been discovered.

JT was suppose to rip off the piece of clothing, but she was suppose to be wearing something under it.

Oh ok, I always wondered why JT got away with that.

I wouldn't say this is exactly ground breaking.

Same here, but ya gotta take what you can get.

Try 2007. People would have died had the bomb not been discovered.

Link. Please. Not that I doubt you (quite the opposite in fact) but that sort of things makes for great fodder in some discussions.

Sadly, the source wikipedia gives is no longer around. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion-related_violence#Arson.2C_bombing.2C_and_property_crime)

Sadly, the source wikipedia gives is no longer around. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion-related_violence#Arson.2C_bombing.2C_and_property_crime)

Still quite a few sources to recent bombing attempts. Thanks.