H'WOOD MORONS

[incanada1234 0]

But there's no proof whatsoever that people are influenced by those views to any significant degree.

But because the MSM kisses the @sses of celebrities, we have to hear about them all the time. You can't escape them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

But there's no proof whatsoever that people are influenced by those views to any significant degree.

But because the MSM kisses the @sses of celebrities, we have to hear about them all the time. You can't escape them.

So what's the point - you hate celebrities for being rich and appearing in the media? Noone forces you to watch or listen to them. Not to mention that hardly constitutes proof that they directly influencing the views of the general public.

[Yodrak 7]

Alex+R,

My expectation is that they foiled the plot by infringing on the individual's right to privacy, giving the public's right to life a higher priority.

Yodrak

Charles, do you think Scotland Yard foiled the plot with violent tactics?

...

[Alex+R 0]

Alex+R,

My expectation is that they foiled the plot by infringing on the individual's right to privacy, giving the public's right to life a higher priority.

Yodrak

Charles, do you think Scotland Yard foiled the plot with violent tactics?

...

Within or outside the bounds of the law? We just don't know yet. Hence the silence.

[incanada1234 0]

But there's no proof whatsoever that people are influenced by those views to any significant degree.

But because the MSM kisses the @sses of celebrities, we have to hear about them all the time. You can't escape them.

So what's the point - you hate celebrities for being rich and appearing in the media? Noone forces you to watch or listen to them. Not to mention that hardly constitutes proof that they directly influencing the views of the general public.

So I have no right to be annoyed by the stupid ####### they say? Especially when they know that the stupid ####### they say is going to be read by millions of people? I can't be angry when celibrals, made rich by the United States of America, made famous by the United States of America - bash the United States of America and Americans?

You know what, I don't even CARE whether or not they're "influencing the public." I never even brought that up anyway. I'm just flat out pissed that they say such damn stupid things about my country and the people IN this country.

Edited August 15, 2006 by incanada1234

[Alex+R 0]

can't be angry when celibrals, made rich by the United States of America, made famous by the United States of America - bash the United States of America and Americans?

You know what, I don't even CARE whether or not they're "influencing the public." I never even brought that up anyway. I'm just flat out pissed that they say such damn stupid things about my country and the people IN this country.

What, in your opinion, is the difference between "criticism of policy" and "America bashing"?

I just want to understand how you differentiate the two.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

But there's no proof whatsoever that people are influenced by those views to any significant degree.

But because the MSM kisses the @sses of celebrities, we have to hear about them all the time. You can't escape them.

So what's the point - you hate celebrities for being rich and appearing in the media? Noone forces you to watch or listen to them. Not to mention that hardly constitutes proof that they directly influencing the views of the general public.

So I have no right to be annoyed by the stupid ####### they say? Especially when they know that the stupid ####### they say is going to be read by millions of people? I can't be angry when celibrals, made rich by the United States of America, made famous by the United States of America - bash the United States of America and Americans?

You know what, I don't even CARE whether or not they're "influencing the public." I never even brought that up anyway. I'm just flat out pissed that they say such damn stupid things about my country and the people IN this country.

You have the right to be "annoyed". But its highly contentious that the views of celebrities in any way constitute some sort of sustained ideological attack on America. In fact, I'm highly suspicious of the current trend of thought that dispenses with criticisms of government entirely, focussing instead on the people who making the claims and suggesting that they are some sort of "internal enemy".

It would nice to see some specific quotes - so we know what we are working with, rather than baseless postulating and vitriol.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

Alex+R,

My expectation is that they foiled the plot by infringing on the individual's right to privacy, giving the public's right to life a higher priority.

Yodrak

Charles, do you think Scotland Yard foiled the plot with violent tactics?

...

Within or outside the bounds of the law? We just don't know yet. Hence the silence.

would it make a difference to you?

[incanada1234 0]

It would nice to see some specific quotes - so we know what we are working with, rather than baseless postulating and vitriol.

Unlike the evolution thread, I don't feel like doing the homework here. Go to http://www.celiberal.com/theWhineRack.php and click on any name.

[Alex+R 0]

Alex+R,

My expectation is that they foiled the plot by infringing on the individual's right to privacy, giving the public's right to life a higher priority.

Yodrak

Charles, do you think Scotland Yard foiled the plot with violent tactics?

...

Within or outside the bounds of the law? We just don't know yet. Hence the silence.

would it make a difference to you?

Of course.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It would nice to see some specific quotes - so we know what we are working with, rather than baseless postulating and vitriol.

Unlike the evolution thread, I don't feel like doing the homework here. Go to http://www.celiberal.com/theWhineRack.php and click on any name.

About what I expected. Says a lot more about the site itself than the people it quotes (out of context I might add).

Edited August 15, 2006 by erekose

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

Alex+R,

My expectation is that they foiled the plot by infringing on the individual's right to privacy, giving the public's right to life a higher priority.

Yodrak

Charles, do you think Scotland Yard foiled the plot with violent tactics?

...

Within or outside the bounds of the law? We just don't know yet. Hence the silence.

would it make a difference to you?

Of course.

so if it was outside the bounds of law that they were caught, what do you suggest be done with the terrorists?

[incanada1234 0]

It would nice to see some specific quotes - so we know what we are working with, rather than baseless postulating and vitriol.

Unlike the evolution thread, I don't feel like doing the homework here. Go to http://www.celiberal.com/theWhineRack.php and click on any name.

About what I expected. Says a lot more about the site itself than the people it quotes (out of context I might add).

Not at all surprised you're sticking up for them.

[Alex+R 0]

Alex+R,

My expectation is that they foiled the plot by infringing on the individual's right to privacy, giving the public's right to life a higher priority.

Yodrak

Charles, do you think Scotland Yard foiled the plot with violent tactics?

...

Within or outside the bounds of the law? We just don't know yet. Hence the silence.

would it make a difference to you?

Of course.

so if it was outside the bounds of law that they were caught, what do you suggest be done with the terrorists?

They just caught another guy. From the methods described (by some man from Guinea who was just in the office), it sounds like they used pretty standard tactics, right? I would like to be able to trust my government not to infringe on the rights of the general populace to catch terrorists. It looks like the British people can do that right now.

If they were caught outside the bounds of the law, the plot could be thwarted, but the punishments just could not be the same. That's why it's important that we have some sort of contract between people and government.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

All I see on that site are some quotes that goes against the Republican party agenda and some mild Bush bashing, some of them more eloquently expressed than others. What is the problem?