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.
The topic of discussion is not to actually do it, it's about the possibility of a military coup happening as the article laid out. There is nothing wrong at all with discussing what the article said, nobody is advocating it or planning it. I saw one thread where someone said they hope it does happen, that's freedom of speech, they didn't say they were going to do it, there's a difference. If by saying "I hope it happens" is worthy of being arrested or investigated, then anyone who says that they hope someone dies or gets hit by a train should be arrested for murder... Again, nobody is advocating anything here, so I still don't see where you are going with this.
Keep on with those "technicalities" Obo. See how far they get you in the real world.
There are intelligent people posting here, and it is not difficult to see by reading the posts of different individuals what they really believe and support. Someone who says "I hope it happens" meaning they hope that the government is overthrown by a military coup or otherwise has clearly stated their support for the overthrow of this government by whatever means. I think that goes beyond free speech, and it is in no way the equilavent to someone saying they hope a person get hit by a train being the same as murder. Get real!
And what would you call offering support to those who would try to overthrow the government?
Who is offering support? I didn't see anyone say that they were going to contact the military and see if they needed a hand pulling this off. So you would call that one poster who said "I hope it happens" as offering support? How so? The last time I checked, "hope" is not aiding and abetting. I think your arguments are weak and you're just trying to stir things up in this thread.
Keep on with those "technicalities" Obo. See how far they get you in the real world.
There are intelligent people posting here, and it is not difficult to see by reading the posts of different individuals what they really believe and support. Someone who says "I hope it happens" meaning they hope that the government is overthrown by a military coup or otherwise has clearly stated their support for the overthrow of this government by whatever means. I think that goes beyond free speech, and it is in no way the equilavent to someone saying they hope a person get hit by a train being the same as murder. Get real!
Laws are written on technicalities, so once you prove that by someone saying something as silly as "I hope it happens" is breaking the law, your argument goes nowhere. So....What about when news casters and politicians themselves made remarks about killing Bush? Or the protesters holding signs about killing him, should they have been investigated too? I don't think they were.
Who is offering support? I didn't see anyone say that they were going to contact the military and see if they needed a hand pulling this off. So you would call that one poster who said "I hope it happens" as offering support? How so? The last time I checked, "hope" is not aiding and abetting. I think your arguments are weak and you're just trying to stir things up in this thread.
Well I was talking about the article itself and while he did say it wasn't an ideal option, Perry was basically calling for an overthrow of the government. As far as the I hope it happens comment, completely and utterly deranged.
Well I was talking about the article itself and while he did say it wasn't an ideal option, Perry was basically calling for an overthrow of the government. As far as the I hope it happens comment, completely and utterly deranged.
Deranged maybe, yes.....I don't think the author of that article was advocating any of this to happen, I think he was just pointing out something that is not impossible to happen. I see that the article got pulled anyway.
Laws are written on technicalities, so once you prove that by someone saying something as silly as "I hope it happens" is breaking the law, your argument goes nowhere. So....What about when news casters and politicians themselves made remarks about killing Bush? Or the protesters holding signs about killing him, should they have been investigated too? I don't think they were.
So what are investigations for anyway? You can be investigated and never arrested. Did you know that? How do you know that protesters who held signs advocating the killing of Bush were NOT investigated?
By the way, which "news casters" made remarks advocating the killing of Bush? I missed those.
Deranged maybe, yes.....I don't think the author of that article was advocating any of this to happen, I think he was just pointing out something that is not impossible to happen. I see that the article got pulled anyway.
If the article was as "harmless" as you think it was, why do you suppose it got "pulled"?
It is obvious that Obama has no choice but to escalate the Afghan war and start a new war with Iran.
That is why the news was leaked today about the Iran ties to the Taliban.
More Drumbeating by hawks.
Amazing how much has changed since W left.
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.