Coffeehouse Thread

51 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

George Bush Outlaws Freedom of Speech

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    sysrpl

    While analyzing the reporting of the current conflict between Israel and Lebanon I was surprised to learn the following fact: the airing of any footage from Lebanese television networks in the United States is a crime.

  • User profile image
    Larsenal

    Hey look... I can cut and paste too:

    SELECT
    COUNT([Employee_SSN]) AS Emp_Count
    FROM [Tbl04_Emplyr-Emplee]
    INNER JOIN [Tbl03_Employees]
    ON [Tbl04_Emplyr-Emplee].Employee_ID = [Tbl03_Employees].Employee_ID
    WHERE [Tbl04_Emplyr-Emplee].Employer_ID = 11

    </sarcasm>

    Edit: I think you'll get more traffic from digg than C9 on this.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Larsenal wrote:
    Hey look... I can cut and paste too:

    SELECT
    COUNT([Employee_SSN]) AS Emp_Count
    FROM [Tbl04_Emplyr-Emplee]
    INNER JOIN [Tbl03_Employees]
    ON [Tbl04_Emplyr-Emplee].Employee_ID = [Tbl03_Employees].Employee_ID
    WHERE [Tbl04_Emplyr-Emplee].Employer_ID = 11

    </sarcasm>

    Edit: I think you'll get more traffic from digg than C9 on this.


    It's the same person who submitted it here as on Digg, and C9 is vocal about freedom of expression/speech.

  • User profile image
    DCMonkey

    Wrong.

    Al-Manar is banned because it is considered by the US and the EU to be the mouthpiece of Hezbollah.

    There are other TV networks in Lebanon that are not banned. I was just watching a report from one via Link-TV.

    PS: Your website still makes IE6 freeze for several seconds when loading.

     

  • User profile image
    dahat

    Now where's that moderation feature when you need it.

    I'm so sick and tired of this political framing and taking advantage of horrible events just to bash the side you don't like.

  • User profile image
    sysrpl

    It freezes for a second because that how IE handles javascript executed on page load.  Also IE doesn't properly implement document.getElementsByName. I have to use a fallback method calling document.getElementsByTagName to get a temp array and check elements[i].getAttribute("name") as a work around.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    sysrpl wrote:
    It freezes for a second because that how IE handles javascript executed on page load.  Also IE doesn't properly implement document.getElementsByName. I have to use a fallback method calling document.getElementsByTagName to get a temp array and check elements[i].getAttribute("name") as a work around.


    The name="" attribute was deprecated long ago, why are you still using it?

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    DCMonkey wrote:
    

    Wrong.

    Al-Manar is banned because it is considered by the US and the EU to be the mouthpiece of Hezbollah.

    There are other TV networks in Lebanon that are not banned. I was just watching a report from one via Link-TV.

    PS: Your website still makes IE6 freeze for several seconds when loading.



    Wrong in that other networks can be viewed, but right in that it is considered illegal to view Al-Manar. 

    It isn't the point that there are other networks out there. 

    I may be losing my memory here, but what other broadcasts are illegal?

    And what would be the point?

  • User profile image
    sysrpl

    DCMonkey wrote:
    Al-Manar is banned because it is considered by the US and the EU to be the mouthpiece of Hezbollah.


    So George Bush has decided the American people are incapable of independent thought. Ban the speech because we are unable to resist it. Is our American position so weak that it cannot withstand the voice of the enemy? Who could possibly disagree with that logic?

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    dahat wrote:
    

    Now where's that moderation feature when you need it.

    I'm so sick and tired of this political framing and taking advantage of horrible events just to bash the side you don't like.



    This is a clear case of censorship and doesn't require a 'side', so try and read between the lines and pull out the meaning of the post.

    I do find it funny, though, that your solution to a post about censorship was moderating it (presumably censoring it).



  • User profile image
    dahat

    sysrpl wrote:
    
    DCMonkey wrote: Al-Manar is banned because it is considered by the US and the EU to be the mouthpiece of Hezbollah.


    So George Bush has decided the American people are incapable of independent thought. Ban the speech because we are unable to resist it. Is our American position so weak that it cannot withstand the voice of the enemy? Who could possibly disagree with that logic?


    To answer that... why don't you do some more reading on the subject and you might just find a quote like this:

    "It's not a question of freedom of speech," State Department spokesman Richard A. Boucher said. "It's a question of incitement of violence. We don't see why, here or anywhere else, a terrorist organization should be allowed to spread its hatred and incitement through the television airwaves."

    Do you also think it is a freedom of speech issue if you say... threaten the life of the president?

    Also, by your own admission only airing of video from the network is against the law... quoting it is not, and you can find such a quote in this recent Fox News article for instance.

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    dahat wrote:
    
    sysrpl wrote: 
    DCMonkey wrote: Al-Manar is banned because it is considered by the US and the EU to be the mouthpiece of Hezbollah.


    So George Bush has decided the American people are incapable of independent thought. Ban the speech because we are unable to resist it. Is our American position so weak that it cannot withstand the voice of the enemy? Who could possibly disagree with that logic?


    By your own admission only airing of video from the network is against the law... quoting it is not, and you can find such a quote in this recent Fox News article for instance.


    Quoting can be easily taken out of context and I'm willing to bet that Fox News will not be impartial about the content.  But, the real problem is that a transcript is not the same as viewing the video. 

    I'm 100% positive that there is very little use to al-Manar, but so what?  Speech is Speech.

  • User profile image
    Larsenal

    sysrpl wrote:
    
    DCMonkey wrote: Al-Manar is banned because it is considered by the US and the EU to be the mouthpiece of Hezbollah.
    So George Bush has decided the American people are incapable of independent thought. Ban the speech because we are unable to resist it. Is our American position so weak that it cannot withstand the voice of the enemy? Who could possibly disagree with that logic?


    I personally don't care if this particular organization has a voice in America.  Their support of the Intifada and other terrorist-like activities speaks much louder than any of their TV broadcasts ever will.

  • User profile image
    sysrpl

    ScanIAm wrote:
    I'm 100% positive that there is very little use to al-Manar, but so what?  Speech is Speech.


    I would like to see for myself how the news of the current conflict between Israel and Lebabon is being reported to the people of Lebabon. I think it's reasonable that our new neworks be allowed to air portions of Al-Manar news. Currently they are not.

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    dahat wrote:
    
    sysrpl wrote: 
    DCMonkey wrote: Al-Manar is banned because it is considered by the US and the EU to be the mouthpiece of Hezbollah.


    So George Bush has decided the American people are incapable of independent thought. Ban the speech because we are unable to resist it. Is our American position so weak that it cannot withstand the voice of the enemy? Who could possibly disagree with that logic?


    To answer that... why don't you do some more reading on the subject and you might just find a quote like this:

    "It's not a question of freedom of speech," State Department spokesman Richard A. Boucher said. "It's a question of incitement of violence. We don't see why, here or anywhere else, a terrorist organization should be allowed to spread its hatred and incitement through the television airwaves."


    That quote was in the article referenced by the original post.  It is a silly quote if for no other reason that it says: "We reserve the right to ban any speech that we deem inflamatory."

    dahat wrote:


    Do you also think it is a freedom of speech issue if you say... threaten the life of the president?


    Yes and no.  It is your right to say whatever you want.  If, however, you've committed assault (look it up before you answer) then you can expect to go to jail.

    Same for yelling 'fire' in a theater. 

    dahat wrote:


    <snip>


    You chose to edit your post, so my previous post will seem out of place.  I leave it to the reader to figure out why I don't respond to the Fox New info.

  • User profile image
    dahat

    sysrpl wrote:
    I would like to see for myself how the news of the current conflict between Israel and Lebabon is being reported to the people of Lebabon. I think it's reasonable that our new neworks be allowed to air portions of Al-Manar news. Currently they are not.


    So why don’t you quit griping about the administration, the law or the weather and hop on an airplane with a video camera and see it for yourself and report back to us when you are back.

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    First, the title of this thread is obviouly meant to incite a reaction.  If it were mine, I'd change it.  That said:

    It simply amazes me that any of you are comfortable with the banning of this or any other speech.  It is infinitely better to know what we are up against and blind trust in our government, regardless of who is in charge, is never a good idea.



  • User profile image
    Larsenal

    sysrpl wrote:
    I would like to see for myself how the news of the current conflict between Israel and Lebabon is being reported to the people of Lebabon.


    Maybe start here with ">http://www.alanwar.com/&"> Al Anwar. (works best in IE)

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.