U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-06-2009, 07:41 AM
 
4,608 posts, read 6,622,306 times
Reputation: 1237

Advertisements

You Can't Say That
At the UN, the Obama administration backs limits on free speech.
by Anne Bayefsky
10/05/2009 12:00:00 AM

Quote:
The newly-minted American policy was rolled out at the latest session of the UN Human Rights Council
Quote:
The EU also distanced itself from the American compromise on the media, declaring that "the notion of a moral and social responsibility of the media" goes "well beyond" existing international law and "the EU cannot subscribe to this concept in such general terms."
Quote:
In 1992 when the United States ratified the main international law treaty which addresses freedom of expression, the government carefully attached reservations to ensure that the treaty could not "restrict the right of free speech and association protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States."
Obama will be remembered as the most disastrous head of state in the Americas since Montezuma
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2009, 07:45 AM
 
23,852 posts, read 17,023,867 times
Reputation: 9354
Of course he does. Why should it surprise us that someone who loses sleep at night because of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would find it concionable to suppress freedom of expression? I, for one, am not surprised.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 07:47 AM
 
Location: Chicago Suburbs
3,194 posts, read 3,408,622 times
Reputation: 1161
Obama is consistent in this regard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 09:13 AM
 
4,608 posts, read 6,622,306 times
Reputation: 1237
And now the FTC steps in to regulate product endorsements, not just in advertisements but also on blogs.

Quote:
...the FTC assumes – as media people do – that the internet is a medium. It’s not. It’s a place where people talk. Most people who blog, as Pew found in a survey a few years ago, don’t think they are doing anything remotely connected to journalism.

Can expression in forums be far behind?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 09:19 AM
 
Location: Earth
247 posts, read 300,285 times
Reputation: 232
Unfricken believable! It begs the question, WTF was Obama thinking?!

I'm for making consessions to get along with others in the global community. However, I do not support caving in and throwing out any rights declared in the Bill of Rights, or anything that opposes our Constitution. Is there nothing that is too great a price to pay in order to be embraced by the Islamic countries? Where does it stop ... or, doesn't it?

So what's next? Sharia law? Shall our women don burkas? Will traditional religions be tossed out too and all places of worship be declared Mosques? Will husbands and Fathers be required to have their women folk circumcised?

If all of this sounds extreme, it's because it is extreme. I spent 2 tours of duty in Iraq. I've seen what goes on there. There's no way I'd ever support that kind of oppression in this country.

Military men and women take an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, and to defend the country against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. If anyone thinks for a moment that eliminating our freedoms and circumventing the US Constitution will be taken lightly by Americans, they have greatly underestimated the American people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 09:20 AM
 
18,416 posts, read 11,495,886 times
Reputation: 4448
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillysB View Post
You Can't Say That
At the UN, the Obama administration backs limits on free speech.
by Anne Bayefsky
10/05/2009 12:00:00 AM

Obama will be remembered as the most disastrous head of state in the Americas since Montezuma
Agreed, the guy is a fascist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Of course he does. Why should it surprise us that someone who loses sleep at night because of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would find it concionable to suppress freedom of expression? I, for one, am not surprised.
It does not surprise me that 0bama would share the views of China, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia and other oppressive Islamic states, but it saddens me. 2010 can not come soon enough, but 2012 may come too late.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 09:34 AM
 
18,416 posts, read 11,495,886 times
Reputation: 4448
The concept is un-American, for 0bama to side with these people and allow governments to curtail freedom of speech, there is no other way to say it.

Quote:
Pakistan's Ambassador Zamir Akram, speaking on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, made it clear that they understand the resolution and its protection against religious stereotyping as allowing free speech to be trumped by anything that defames or negatively stereotypes religion. The idea of protecting the human rights "of religions" instead of individuals is a favorite of those countries that do not protect free speech and which use religion--as defined by government--to curtail it.


What protection, fines, penalties or imprisonment, loss of radio, TV, cable, or satellite broadcast license, confiscation of property?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 09:38 AM
obo
 
926 posts, read 764,880 times
Reputation: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie Ho View Post
Unfricken believable! It begs the question, WTF was Obama thinking?!

I'm for making consessions to get along with others in the global community. However, I do not support caving in and throwing out any rights declared in the Bill of Rights, or anything that opposes our Constitution. Is there nothing that is too great a price to pay in order to be embraced by the Islamic countries? Where does it stop ... or, doesn't it?

So what's next? Sharia law? Shall our women don burkas? Will traditional religions be tossed out too and all places of worship be declared Mosques? Will husbands and Fathers be required to have their women folk circumcised?

If all of this sounds extreme, it's because it is extreme. I spent 2 tours of duty in Iraq. I've seen what goes on there. There's no way I'd ever support that kind of oppression in this country.

Military men and women take an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, and to defend the country against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. If anyone thinks for a moment that eliminating our freedoms and circumventing the US Constitution will be taken lightly by Americans, they have greatly underestimated the American people.

I'm with Eddie on this one. The American people will not stand for much more of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 10:20 AM
 
8,907 posts, read 10,044,321 times
Reputation: 11224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Agreed, the guy is a fascist.


It does not surprise me that 0bama would share the views of China, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia and other oppressive Islamic states, but it saddens me. 2010 can not come soon enough, but 2012 may come too late.
They guy is a commnist. Not a socialist but a Marxist communist and while I knew in November he wouldn't be good for the nation I had no idea he would be this bad.

Was anyone so stupid as to believe he shared any core values with our founding fathers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2009, 11:51 AM
 
2,715 posts, read 4,840,388 times
Reputation: 713
which include taking action against anything meeting the description of "negative racial and religious stereotyping." It also purports to "recognize . . . the moral and social responsibilities of the media" and supports "the media's elaboration of voluntary codes of professional ethical conduct" in relation to "combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance."


About 1 month ago, when the AP printed a photo of a dying Marine (against the family's wishes) I was pissed.

I don't believe I understand the scope of this undertaking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $99,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top