Here Today... Gone To Hell!

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4939

If history is any indication, I can't wait for people here to start attacking me, or America, or whatever other twisted thing they find to be outraged about, except the real outrage...

O Reilly had this on his show a few nights ago, This guy should be denounced by the African American race.

There is no place for hatred and idiots like this guy.

He has his first amendment rights, just like anyone else...

The fact that this guy was a professor at a big state University, and the fact that he was invited to speak at Howard Law School shows how far out there our education system has become.

and you think other countries have extremists...

well here is a contradiction for you...the US denounces Iran's leader's comments to wipe israel from the map yet allow people with similar pro-genocidal and pro-racist comments to exist in their country...

So you think they shouldn't have a right to exist?! There's a huge difference between a state leader giving a rousing speech to an entire nation to a single individual looking for attention. It's not a contradiction at all.

Hell ya lets burn those motherfucking crackers to the ground!

*looks at self*
*sees skin color*

... wait.. lets not..

First, I agree with Walk, there is a huge difference.? Hardly a contradiction.? Second, in the United States you have the freedom to be stupid and have unpopular beliefs.? Look at NAMBA, the ACLU defends their First Amendment rights.

It's scary that someone so intelligent can be so ignorant and hateful.

I think unbalanced would be the way to describe this kook.

Its funny cause I wonder how the world would react if it were a white man on TV talkin about exterminating all the blacks.

Look at Ohio and how the Neo Nazis were gonna do a parade, their rights were infringed upon big time and whats even funnier is the fact that they left and let the black people they preach against prove some of their points correct.

Hatred against any race is wrong and shouldnt be tolerated.

I dont think this is what our forefathers had in mind when they wrote the first amendment.

We live by a double standard, unfortunately.

There is no doubt about that.  This man would have never been invited to speak if he were white and advocating the extermination of blacks.  But in any case, he has the right to speak.  If I were a student at Howard Law, I would be expressing my extreme displeasure with the people who invited him, however.


As far as the education system, I always thought it depended on the school.  I don't know where Howard Law is, but I went to school in San Francisco and actually had a teacher who was an editor for NAMBLA's magazine.  He wouldn't express what his own beliefs were, but we all kind of guessed.  But in that class if you expressed the belief that anyone's sexual preferences were wrong or immoral, you would have been thrown out.  I really didn't think it was that crazy at other schools, however.  I just thought San Francisco was extreme. 

I hear ya about the bay area thing, I went to school there also.  I also went to school in southern CA, where it was the same.  I know many people that have gone to schools all across the country; most institutions tend to lean this way.  My wife went to school on the east coast, where it certainly was the same.  I think these people are a result of the lack of diversity in Universities in this country.  Guys like this can basically write whatever he wants for a long time without anyone challenging him, then all of the sudden a quote gets thrown out in the media where there are people from all sides of the spectrum.  Just like that chump at the University of Colorado.

Here is something I read the other day about law school diversity.  Check out this chart:
http://www.professorbainbridge.com/2005/10/law_school_dive.html

You couldn't even imagine some of the things I heard professors saying while I was in school.  All of them were Ivy league educated and teaching at the premier public schools in our country.  It was actually quite disturbing.  They make SLC look like George W.Bush.  (I just wanted to compare SLC to GW, I am sure he would like that :hihi:).


 

Fill us in, what kind of stuff would they say?

When my antro teacher was talking about slavery, she didn't mention one non-white people who ever had slaves.  Not even one mention of the modern day slavery in Africa.  Now, that is a tad intellectually dishonest.

Do you know anything about law?  Free speech does have legal limits.  If I went up on stage and told the audience to go to the local jail and hang someone, I would be in a heap of legal trouble.

so you think its ok to have unpopular beliefs so long as they stay unpopular?  after all the difference is that the belief is popular in iran and not in the USA...the funny thing is if the guy who voiced these comments downloaded songs illegally he would be fined or jailed...you think thats ok?...it's morally unjustifiable imho

We were talking about this in another thread.  But yes, he has the right to say whatever his beliefs are.  If someone were to walk out of his speech and kill someone, he most likely would be sued, but not arrested on criminal charges.  If he made a specific threat against a specific person, then I think he would be guilty of an actual crime. 

Thats fucken right D, i wonder if the mods  would allow a subject called...'We have to exterminate black people'...........

Popmetal, i dont give a fuck what that black bastard thinks of my white arse....FUCK HIM!!!

chris rock - "no white man would trade places with a black man. noone in this audience would trade places with me and im rich"  :hihi: chris rock is rocktastic  : ok:

Stupid people are protected in what say despite their beliefs.  There is a difference between thinking that someone shouldn't have the right to say it, and thinking that someone shouldn't say it or is stupid for saying it.  It becomes unprotected once there is an imminent threat.

Well, the person downloading the music illegally is stealing someone elses product.  They are getting something for free without paying anything for it.  Getting free music is no more of a free speech issue than me wanting to get a free BMW.

On the other hand, what crime is this guy committing?  Certainly you would not suggest that we treat political speech the same as we treat protection of intellectual property.  Where do we draw the line as to what is acceptable speech?  Some may say calling for the destruction of Israel draws the line; others may say calling Bush Hitler or calling 911 victims Nazis is drawing the line.   

We all know the answer to that one.



So, does telling an audience to exterminate white people qualify?  How do you know one of those brainwashed fucks aren't going to take him up on his plea once they leave.

Ahhh my dear ole nightrain, how could it be anyone else...

on the issue of political speech and intellectual property, why not, there may be profit in it...after all intellectual property law has certainly made a dramatic appearance over the last decade since there was a great deal of profit in it...or course this comment is reality singed with sarcasm

as for acceptable speech, where do we draw the line...well im one for voicing where it should be, and you are one for voicing where it is...i believe laws should change for the better...i draw the line at people who instil fear and hatred on others while the ordinary person has to suffer such abuse...all in the name of "free speech" or should that be called the "right to spread hatred"...free speech is a concept people cant get their head around because they cannot perceive its effects on the whole...to me the effects are obvious, to others like you they are not...

your system of law states that stealing someone's online mp3 product is worthy of a jail sentence while spreading such hatred is not...what about racist comments? are you saying they are a denial of free speech? isnt that a restriction? there are plenty of restrictions, people are just blind to them until someone points them out, and that goes for other countries too

thats wrong idealogy. It shouldn't matter what skin colour you are and unfortunately, even different white people hate each other such as a lot of people in my school hate the French, German, Italians and other races mostly. I feel sorry for the French kikds who come to visit our school and get shredded. It really isn't funny

You and SLC.  Next you will call me Popmetal or Charity Case

Actually intellectual property made an appearance in our Constitution which was over 200 years ago.  Intellectual property has always been around, but it is just now applying to the average person because it is so easy to steal the property of others via the internet.

Nice characterization ::)

Is this the type of posts Jarmo was referring to?  You seem to characterize my posts and my position as you see fit.  I agree that there are great effects to these things.  But there are also effects to chilling speech.  I doubt if we broke it down we would really disagree on what should be restricted.

Again, you did not listen to the distinction I wrote in the last thread.  I agree that racist comments to someone's face should be banned.  However, what is a racist comment?  Our country tends to believe that truth prevails.  It is better to attack hate speech with counter speech than to chill overall speech.  I think there are great arguments on both sides. 

Comparing free speech, as in racist speech, to intellectual property is ridiculous.  That is like comparing it to burglary or speeding on the highway.  They are two different things.

Nope...There can be only one GNRNighttrain pal.........

easy to steal over the internet? have you heard of a black market? theyve existed for centuries...

as for trying to point my comment out, i merely stated an observation...just like you did in this post...i could have found your comment offensive too but imo that achieves nothing...and yes we would disagree

you can compare anything...anything else is limiting your mind

Are you telling me that if you put millions and millions of dollars into developing a car that ran on water and then all of the sudden became successful, that you would not care if all of the other manufacturers stole your idea and produced the cars for the same costs without all of the R&D?

We are a capitalist society; stealing ideas hinders capitalism because it makes it so people won't put the money into developing new ideas if they can't get back the money they put in to develop the ideas.  It's really pretty simple.

Seems like a good enough reason to do it then.

Oh those poor mega-corps - theft means no bonus for the CEO this year! :'(

Oh, so you don't like technology?  What incentive does someone have to invent something if they won't be properly compensated.

I guess they just don't understand.  One big reason why a lot of inovation comes from the US is because of such laws.  It doesn't get realized in other countries as much.  Luckily, the US market is big enough that other countries can free-ride off our innovation to little effect.  It is a form of subsidizing other countires: ie, prescription drugs etc.  You can argue about whether the laws extend such protection too long, but to argue that they aren't necessary is just absurd IMHO.

alas your logic imo isnt sound...stealing ideas hinders capitalism? open source programming is very strong in europe as well as having developed linux which is seen as a superior product to windows...what microsoft has done is that they have kept their ideas to themselves, by your logic that is ok, my mine is stunts development of programs which could be made better and more secure and with far more innovation than keeping the ideas to yourself...for a long time there were no viable alternatives to Windows, thats why Windows is so slow, because of poor programming!

and thats why the PC has become so popular, IBM tried to trademark/copyright the idea of a PC, unfortunately the way they did it left the PC open to copycat machines...and from then on the PC popularity has continued and will continue well into the future...now just imagine if IBM got their trademark/copyrighting of the PC's correct...a world where IBM could only release PC's and noone else...the boom in PC's would not have happened and everything else that has come from that...and you wouldnt be sitting in from of the easily accessible internet today


a lot of innovation comes from the US?  a statement with no basis in fact and no statistics to back it up...i see plenty of innovation everywhere...its human nature to invent, not American nature...and there is plenty of idea stealing in the US as well as everywhere else...free ride off of american technology, now that's completely naive...i wondering who is copying ideas from linux? hmmmm, who invented computers? the British

on another note, one of my friends who works and studies chemical combustion told me that some large oil companies own patents for cleaner technologies which in turn stops other people from developing those ideas/technology...stunted growth i would call it, not innovation...