U.S. SOLDIER BURNED IN EFFIGY AT PORTLAND ANTI-WAR PROTEST...

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Can anyone give an argument for why this is not okay? Who cares if they don't like the troops? If I saw one getting burned in effigy today, I wouldn't think twice about it... this halo around our "men and women in uniform" is one I'll never understand. Remember: they are in Iraq not to protect freedom, but because they are getting paid lots and lots of money. (way more then the average for their level of education)

You my friend have no clue what you are talking about several statements you make are totally false...

The enilsted personnel are making nothing.....even people working at places like McDonald`s 40 hrs a week make more than our troops......
We put a Halo around our troops because regardless of if its right or wrong these yourng men and women defend our country and even when the conflict is wrong they still are asked by our government to serve....

I feel sorry for you....

Wow, you're really really wrong. Don't even ask me, look at the tables provided by DoD. I've been in the military you retard, I know how much they make because I've made it myself. Maybe you could enlighten me about what I said that was false. I'm waiting.

Here's your mission that I give to you: Make a post more insanely wrong then the one I'm quoting you. I challenge you. I know it won't be easy... but considering your posting history I have great faith in you.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,752
2,525
126
I'd pay about as much attention to this as to that nutjob religious family/cult that protests at military funerals because God hates gays.

There will always be those with a few screws loose around. Frankly I strongly suspect that giving them publicity would encourage them. Ignore them is the best advice.
 

shadow9d9

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2004
8,132
2
0
Originally posted by: kedlav
Originally posted by: alien42
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: alien42
who cares, it is a couple of 'nobodies'. congratulations on giving the attention they are seeking.

I'd say Facebook is doing that.

Otherwise, way to go (golf clap) attack the OP instead of those idiots or Facebook for allowing the photos to remain up.

Fern.
the protestors have freedom of speech to do what they please, which is purely symbolic. making a big deal out of it is the problem i see here.

Freedom of Speech does not mean a lack of responsibility for your moronic statements/actions. While they are legal actions, legal is not moral, nor is it acceptable within mainstream society. These are the same actions we deride many other protest groups for...

Moral is subjective. They didn't do anything immoral in my eyes. Misguided, but not immoral.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Here's what I think about this whole thing: Don't care. I didn't care when the college Republicans burned the sacred flags of Allah and I don't care when a bunch of ignorant fscks in the Middle East burn our flag while stomping around like a bunch of goons. It's protected free speech (at least in this country) and people should get over their irrational attachment to inanimate objects.
 

dyna

Senior member
Oct 20, 2006
813
61
91
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Here's what I think about this whole thing: Don't care. I didn't care when the college Republicans burned the sacred flags of Allah and I don't care when a bunch of ignorant fscks in the Middle East burn our flag while stomping around like a bunch of goons. It's protected free speech (at least in this country) and people should get over their irrational attachment to inanimate objects.

What if they were having a demonstration of burning a image of a minority? Burning babies? Would that make you care?
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Yeah, so say the Bush cheerleaders who were funded with $10 million worth of conservative money. And then they only go so far as to say it could "possiblly" have started then. Keep trying though, with enough money you'll figure out how to get water to flow uphill.

It's just a coincidence that the common man is always struggling under the so called conservatives, but does fine under Clinton, who isn't really even a liberal. You must think most people are quite stupid?
Try to explain this away please.
From Business Week, written in December of 2000 while Clinton was still President.
link
Talk about the Grinch who stole Christmas. Until recently, it was possible to indulge in some humor about the decline in the stock market and shortfalls in corporate earnings. No longer, it seems. Signs that the economy is weakening are cropping up everywhere: Consumer confidence has tumbled during the holiday season, and government statisticians report that retail sales fell sharply in November. The unemployment rate has ticked up, and housing activity has slumped. So a growing number of Wall Street traders and analysts are convinced (mistakenly, I believe) that the recent decline in the stock market is forecasting a recession for next year.
I suppose Bush spent part of that $10 million on a time travel machine so he could 'plant' this story?
And here, from February 2, 2001 a whole 12 days after Bush took office.
link
The U.S. unemployment rate edged up to 4.2 percent last month, its highest level in 16 months, as the slowing economy triggered big layoffs in the auto and other manufacturing industries, the government reported Friday.
For the last 6 months of 2000 there were only 191,000 jobs created, that compares to an average of 153,000 per month last year (and people complained about how low that rate was.)
Do you still deny that the economy was on the way down before Bush took office?

Clinton was probably the luckiest President in history when it comes to the timing of economic cycles. When he took office the US was on the way out of a mild recession and when he left office the country was heading towards a recession which means his entire 8 year occurred during an economic up-turn.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Here's what I think about this whole thing: Don't care. I didn't care when the college Republicans burned the sacred flags of Allah and I don't care when a bunch of ignorant fscks in the Middle East burn our flag while stomping around like a bunch of goons. It's protected free speech (at least in this country) and people should get over their irrational attachment to inanimate objects.

What if they were having a demonstration of burning a image of a minority? Burning babies? Would that make you care?

Nope. I'd chalk it up to a bunch of idiots exercising their free speech rights. Why? Are you for a suppression of our Constitutional rights?
 

dyna

Senior member
Oct 20, 2006
813
61
91
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Here's what I think about this whole thing: Don't care. I didn't care when the college Republicans burned the sacred flags of Allah and I don't care when a bunch of ignorant fscks in the Middle East burn our flag while stomping around like a bunch of goons. It's protected free speech (at least in this country) and people should get over their irrational attachment to inanimate objects.

What if they were having a demonstration of burning a image of a minority? Burning babies? Would that make you care?

Nope. I'd chalk it up to a bunch of idiots exercising their free speech rights. Why? Are you for a suppression of our Constitutional rights?

Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.

 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p
 

catnap1972

Platinum Member
Aug 10, 2000
2,607
0
76
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p

I'm sure if the protesters were burning a "token lib" (doll) they'd have no problem with it.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Actually no. The economy started tanking the minute Bush was elected

No, it happen in Clinton's last year. IIRC, it tanked March 2000 with the "dot.com bust"

Fern
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,736
1,377
126
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Actually no. The economy started tanking the minute Bush was elected

No, it happen in Clinton's last year. IIRC, it tanked March 2000 with the "dot.com bust"

Fern

Yep, and to be fair, the economy was pretty decent up to that point. It wasn't Clinton's fault that speculators overinflated tech stocks, and it wasn't Bush's fault either. Economies go up and down, and other than direct decisions that have critical results (expensive wars, anyone?), the President doesn't have an overwhelming influence on day to day economics.
 

Sinsear

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2007
6,439
80
91
Originally posted by: catnap1972
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p

I'm sure if the protesters were burning a "token lib" (doll) they'd have no problem with it.

I don't really care what people burn in effigy. While some of it is in my opinion bad taste they still have a right to do it. It has no bearing on who I am or what I do.
 

dyna

Senior member
Oct 20, 2006
813
61
91
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p


I'm assuming you would say, I'm a bad American!

Maybe I am or am not being a great american by wanting to restrict offending/racist/unpatriotic burnings in our town centers. Its interpreted as free speech but its more of an "free action" in my opinion and its crossed the line for being consider free speech. They could have easily posted a sign that said, "All soldiers should burn in hell." While I don't support that, I think that should be protected as free speech.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p


I'm assuming you would say, I'm a bad American!
.
Nah just ignorant which would place you right in the middle as an average American.

 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p


I'm assuming you would say, I'm a bad American!

Maybe I am or am not being a great american by wanting to restrict offending/racist/unpatriotic burnings in our town centers. Its interpreted as free speech but its more of an "free action" in my opinion and its crossed the line for being consider free speech. They could have easily posted a sign that said, "All soldiers should burn in hell." While I don't support that, I think that should be protected as free speech.

I wouldn't call you a "bad American," rather I'd call you someone who has a dangerously misinformed opinion on the First Amendment.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p


I'm assuming you would say, I'm a bad American!

Maybe I am or am not being a great american by wanting to restrict offending/racist/unpatriotic burnings in our town centers. Its interpreted as free speech but its more of an "free action" in my opinion and its crossed the line for being consider free speech. They could have easily posted a sign that said, "All soldiers should burn in hell." While I don't support that, I think that should be protected as free speech.

I wouldn't call you a "bad American," rather I'd call you someone who has a dangerously misinformed opinion on the First Amendment.
... or perhaps just a different opinion on it, or a varied interpretation? "dangerously misinformed" seems a bit extreme, doesnt it?

After all, how "dangerous" is this online disagreement?

what a crock.

that said, I happen to agree that the 1st amendment gives them to right to burn the effigy... but that also doesnt change the fact that I think it was nonetheless an ignorant disgrace.
 

dyna

Senior member
Oct 20, 2006
813
61
91
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p


I'm assuming you would say, I'm a bad American!

Maybe I am or am not being a great american by wanting to restrict offending/racist/unpatriotic burnings in our town centers. Its interpreted as free speech but its more of an "free action" in my opinion and its crossed the line for being consider free speech. They could have easily posted a sign that said, "All soldiers should burn in hell." While I don't support that, I think that should be protected as free speech.

I wouldn't call you a "bad American," rather I'd call you someone who has a dangerously misinformed opinion on the First Amendment.


Many attempts have been made to amend the Constitution to allow Congress to prohibit the desecration of the flag. Since 1995, the Flag Burning Amendment has consistently mustered sufficient votes to pass in the House of Representatives, but not in the Senate. In 2000, the Senate voted 63?37 in favor of the amendment, which fell four votes short of the requisite two-thirds majority. In 2006, another attempt fell one vote short.

I may be misinformed but the majority of congress was in favor of banning flag burning its just that 2/3 weren't. And burning soliders etc... isn't far off from that.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: dyna
I may be misinformed but the majority of congress was in favor of banning flag burning its just that 2/3 weren't. And burning soliders etc... isn't far off from that.
Just another example of folks overly attached to little squares of fabric. Get over it.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: dyna
Its sounds like you have a more anarchist view to free speech. I do think there should be some restrictions, especially in a public venue.
Oh, I'm quite sure you do! You're probably eager to suppress anything you don't agree with. As Sean Hannity would say, you're a great American!

:p


I'm assuming you would say, I'm a bad American!

Maybe I am or am not being a great american by wanting to restrict offending/racist/unpatriotic burnings in our town centers. Its interpreted as free speech but its more of an "free action" in my opinion and its crossed the line for being consider free speech. They could have easily posted a sign that said, "All soldiers should burn in hell." While I don't support that, I think that should be protected as free speech.

I wouldn't call you a "bad American," rather I'd call you someone who has a dangerously misinformed opinion on the First Amendment.
... or perhaps just a different opinion on it, or a varied interpretation? "dangerously misinformed" seems a bit extreme, doesnt it?

After all, how "dangerous" is this online disagreement?

what a crock.

that said, I happen to agree that the 1st amendment gives them to right to burn the effigy... but that also doesnt change the fact that I think it was nonetheless an ignorant disgrace.

It's dangerous in the sense that there are American citizens as badly misinformed on reality as you are who actually believe it. You, for example, still have the gall to post in a thread where you got completely neutered on the reality of military pay. Fake GI Joes are not cool.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
64,144
12,461
136
While I am totally against Bush's war, (thi one will go down in history as HIS war, not America's) I don't support the idea of burning our soldiers in effigy. YES, it's their right, under freedom os speech laws, and I don't take umbrage at that part of it, but rather that their anger is severely misplaced. The VAST majority of US troops are there trying to do the right thing, rather than to become some killers unleashed on the Islamic populace. Blaming them for the wrongs in Iraq is like blaming the stock boy at Wal-Mart for corporate greed...
When we came home from Vietnam in 1972, we was spit on, and called "baby-killers...LOTS of fvcking hippies got introduced to pain over that...(Your freedom of speech doesn't include spitting on me)
While I personally wouldn't burn an American flag, I defend their right to do so under the Freedom of Speech laws and rights of protest....
If they want to hang effigies of Bush, Cheney, and Condasleezy, that's fine with me, as THEY are the architects of this fiasco, and should bear the brunt of the blame...
 

dualsmp

Golden Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,627
45
91
Anyone remember the Piss Christ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Come on folks, don't fall down the dark hole of restricting free speech because some symbol is used or displayed in someway you don't like. I'm sure if it was the Piss Swastika lots of folks would support it, however I'm sure some would be offended regardless. It's a two way street, so depending on your perspective some will see things in a different way.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
I remember reading a comment by Moonbeam a few years ago...

"The day you can't burn the flag is the day you should."
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,736
1,377
126
When you boil it down here, these idiots pretty much just managed to make themselves look like moron malcontents.

On the bright side, this is an example of one of the great features of our country. In many places in the world, behavior like what is described in the article will land you in jail, a hospital, or even the morgue. Thankfully, our country hasn't reached that point yet, unless someone notices that these fools get themselves 'disappeared' :)