Cindy Sheehan ends protest

24567

Comments

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    sure they want the "occupiers" out of Iraq. but for what reason? to set up their own form of democracy that gives freedom to all? I don't think so.

    What they decide to do once the occupiers leave is irrelevant. The above definition still stands. Because one persons idea of freedom isn't the same as someone else's doesn't mean it isn't their 'freedom'. Many would argue that the U.S isn't a free country and that you only have the pretense of a Democracy.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    What they decide to do once the occupiers leave is irrelevant. The above definition still stands. Because one persons idea of freedom isn't the same as someone else's doesn't mean it isn't their 'freedom'. Many would argue that the U.S isn't a free country and that you only have the pretense of a Democracy.

    well they would be wrong. america is free. and if your definition of freedom fighters = those fighters not fighting for freedom, then I guess you can call them whatever you want.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    Byrnzie wrote:
    True. See 'Nicaragua'.
    Why Nicaragua? Might as well be as direct as possible - see "Osama bin Laden."

    But it's O.K. when Reagan calls them freedom fighters. He's a right winger, after all.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    jlew24asu wrote:
    well they would be wrong. america is free. and if your definition of freedom fighters = those fighters not fighting for freedom, then I guess you can call them whatever you want.
    You mean I can buy a doob from the local convenience store? Or a prostitute from my friendly neighborhood pimp?

    Or is it that "freedom" is just a word?
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    RainDog wrote:
    You mean I can buy a doob from the local convenience store? Or a prostitute from my friendly neighborhood pimp?

    Or is it that "freedom" is just a word?

    you cant be serious
  • even flow?
    even flow? Posts: 8,066
    It had to come to an end sooner or later. I could not imagine her camped out by the ranch even after Bush isn't president anymore and the years and years and years after that that the troops are still in Iraq.

    She made her statement and it has ran its course.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    jlew24asu wrote:
    you cant be serious
    I can't? Damn, yet another freedom I've lost. Well, if I can't be serious, can I be solemn and sober? What about jovial?
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Kann wrote:
    I don't understand. What do people blame her for?


    they blame her for being stronger than they are...

    plus they are fuckign idiots that despise anyone that tells the truth about their precious little uncle sam
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    RainDog wrote:
    I can't? Damn, yet another freedom I've lost. Well, if I can't be serious, can I be solemn and sober? What about jovial?
    when you stop acting like a 9 year old we can talk.

    but anyway, you think american isnt free? and you want to use the example of walking into a store and buying drugs? or fucking a hooker?
  • hailhailkc
    hailhailkc Posts: 582
    It sounds like Rosie O'Donnel part deux is getting tired of the Democrats promising everything and delivering on nothing. People like Rosie O'Donnel part deux will never be convinced that any of our troops have died for anything other than a "facist corporate state". It makes you wonder how their sons and daughters even decide to go into the military. I'd like to know what cause or agenda Rosie O'Donnel part deux would consider worthy of dying for.
    MOSSAD NATO Alphabet Stations (E10)
    High Traffic ART EZI FTJ JSR KPA PCD SYN ULX VLB YHF
    Low Traffic CIO MIW
    Non Traffic ABC BAY FDU GBZ HNC NDP OEM ROV TMS ZWL
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist


    that doesnt excuse their methods, but you have to remember there is more than one perspective. especially considering our military presence and "meddling" in the area. remember the reaction to the soviet (or communist) presence in the western hemisphere? we almost fucking nuked each other
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    hailhailkc wrote:
    It sounds like Rosie O'Donnel part deux is getting tired of the Democrats promising everything and delivering on nothing. People like Rosie O'Donnel part deux will never be convinced that any of our troops have died for anything other than a "facist corporate state". It makes you wonder how their sons and daughters even decide to go into the military. I'd like to know what cause or agenda Rosie O'Donnel part deux would consider worthy of dying for.

    so i guess bush gets a free pass on that veto? he is the commander in chief, he pushed for this war, and now he wont end it. he is the "decider" after all. ok, now you can go back to blaming democrats for whatever you choose this week, sorry to interupt

    and yes, this is obviously a war for petroleum and influence in the energy rich region. lets just be fucking honest folks. and if you think this shit is still about sadaam, wmd, or freedom your just a fucking idiot. end of story. time to stop being nice about that part.

    and yes, this current war is certainly not a cause worth dying for. not even close, and if you think it is then sign up chief and shut the fuck up already.


    sorry hhkc to get in your face, i actually do like you, but some of the shit your talking there is just bullshit. plain and simple
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    jlew24asu wrote:
    when you stop acting like a 9 year old we can talk.

    but anyway, you think american isnt free? and you want to use the example of walking into a store and buying drugs? or fucking a hooker?

    Why wouldn't that be a good example? You can buy weed in the Netherlands, a few European countries have very lenient laws about marijuana use... And many people consider that a freedom.

    I remember a thread about some silly law which says you couldn't buy alcohol on Sundays (please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not quite sure exactly). That's not very free now, is it?
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Collin wrote:
    Why wouldn't that be a good example? You can buy weed in the Netherlands, a few European countries have very lenient laws about marijuana use... And many people consider that a freedom.
    because american lawmakers voted and made it illegal. this is fully backed by the high majority of the american people. get it?
    Collin wrote:
    I remember a thread about some silly law which says you couldn't buy alcohol on Sundays (please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not quite sure exactly). That's not very free now, is it?
    what dont you people understand. these laws are voted on by congress or local law makers. if ANYONE has a problem with these laws they can protest, write letters, pressure lawmakers for a change. but they dont, these laws are in places because thats what the american people want. (the majority)
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    jlew24asu wrote:
    when you stop acting like a 9 year old we can talk.

    but anyway, you think american isnt free? and you want to use the example of walking into a store and buying drugs? or fucking a hooker?
    You're saying they can't be called freedom fighters because they are not fighting for the freedom to do; however, you seem to disregard to the broader definition of freedom which can also mean freedom from. Now, Reagan called these people freedom fighters. Was he confused, or was he using a broader definition of the word "freedom" like Sheehan?

    But if you want to talk strictly about freedom to do, then let's. Remember, though, I'm a deconstructionist at heart. Wait. I meant to say I'm a fucking 9 year old.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    jlew24asu wrote:
    because american lawmakers voted and made it illegal. this is fully backed by the high majority of the american people. get it?

    what dont you people understand. these laws are voted on by congress or local law makers. if ANYONE has a problem with these laws they can protest, write letters, pressure lawmakers for a change. but they dont, these laws are in places because thats what the american people want. (the majority)
    What about when states want to legalize marijuana but the feds say "No" ? It's happened.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    RainDog wrote:
    What about when states want to legalize marijuana but the feds say "No" ? It's happened.
    then write your to senator and tell him you want it legalized. I cant spend all day explaining to you how our government works.
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    jlew24asu wrote:
    because american lawmakers voted and made it illegal. this is fully backed by the high majority of the american people. get it?

    what dont you people understand. these laws are voted on by congress or local law makers. if ANYONE has a problem with these laws they can protest, write letters, pressure lawmakers for a change. but they dont, these laws are in places because thats what the american people want. (the majority)
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Because one persons idea of freedom isn't the same as someone else's doesn't mean it isn't their 'freedom'. Many would argue that the U.S isn't a free country and that you only have the pretense of a Democracy.

    My idea of freedom includes marijuana being legal. A lot of people feel the same way... The majority of the American people don't...

    So people say the people in the Netherlands are more free than the people in the US (because they are free to buy weed). The point is Byrnzie was right there are different definitions of freedom... doesn't mean you or the US isn't free, though.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    jlew24asu wrote:
    then write your to senator and tell him you want it legalized. I cant spend all day explaining to you how our government works.
    I was providing an example, not an intent. But that's beside the point. Why is it that you believe freedom can only mean to do and not from? And, if it only means to do, why disregard instances where there is no freedom to do?
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    RainDog wrote:
    I was providing an example, not an intent. But that's beside the point.
    but it is the point. your example was trying to prove america isnt free. you failed miserably.
    RainDog wrote:
    Why is it that you believe freedom can only mean to do and not from? And, if it only means to do, why disregard instances where there is no freedom to do?
    this makes no sense.

Categories