Soup forgot his password Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 From the NYT article During the three-week trial, defense lawyers acknowledged that a Web site run by Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty posted home addresses and other personal information about animal researchers and others. But the activists said they were simply trying to shame their targets into dissociating themselves from the company, Huntingdon Life Sciences, and they disavowed any involvement with the vandalism, death threats, computer hacking and pipe bombs against those on the Web site. Although federal prosecutors presented no evidence that the defendants directly participated in the vandalism and violence, they showed jurors that members of the group made speeches and Web postings from 2000 to 2004 that celebrated the violence and repeatedly used the word "we" to claim credit for it. Keep in mind that this is coming out of a post 9/11 america where we were directly endangered by people who advocated violence over mass-media. Prosecutors also produced telephone records indicating that the president of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, Kevin Kjonaas, called a man charged with bombing a California biotech lab shortly after the explosion. I knew there was more to this than just a website ran by some humanitarians against dogs being used for scientific research. And you wonder why he has his lawyer present during the interview. While the bill provides an exemption for “lawful public, governmental, or business reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal enterprise,” that exemption applies only to claims of economic “disruption” and not claims of economic “damage.” It also does not necessarily cover the entire range of expression protected by the First Amendment, which covers more than a lawful “reaction” to a “disclosure of information.” Ordinary persons would not understand which activities are prohibited and which are lawful. In other words, the difference would be what Occupy Wallstreet did to the Port of Oakland. It would provide expemption to people who protest on private property and blockade people from doing their work, but that same exemption doesnt apply to damage or loss of property. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 Crap i accidently lost half of my post. Here's the gist (all from that NYT article, btw) Shac 7's president is associated with a convicted bomber Shac 7's director is threatening scientists on tape shouting "The police can't protect you." Shac 7's website condones violence, death threats, and posts the names and home addresses of scientists. Shac 7 was convicted by a jury of piers. Shac 7 was sentenced to 7-21 years. One of whom was out in 31 months. Shac 7 was the ONLY example of any one ever being convicted under AETA, which is a twenty year old law. So why would eliminating this law be important to Obama? Currently he has to deal with missle launches in Korea, nukes in Iran, China's navy threatening US, Healthcare reform, Social Security Reform, Immigration reform, and a million other things. Why would he take a stance that would make him look like he's in defense of a violent and retarded organization against scientific research? The flipside of the coin is that by defending Shac 7's right to make violent threats against Scientific Researchers, you're infringing on the consitutional rights of those scientists. Why put that on Obama? And what politician would do something differently in Obama's shoes? You can think of Obama as being a piece of shit for being a politician, but don't say he's a piece of shit over other politicians. How much sense does that make? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realism Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 Tough shit hippies, AETA rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsmbfan Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 wooooooooo!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McLovin Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 http://www.bloomberg.com/video/91689761 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McLovin Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL7BE34898EFC5C04E Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipod90 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 ^ Unavailable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UPS! Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Rand Paul endoresing Romney almost made me vomit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Why would that make you almost vomit? Isn't Mitt Romney's every libertarian's dream? He comes from a very successful business/financial background. I would think from a libertarian perspective having a wealthy businessman run America would be perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UPS! Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Im not a libertarian. Also anyone who hears Mitt Romney and dosent want to vomit must wipe their ass with dollar dollar bills yall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spambot5000 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Why would that make you almost vomit? Isn't Mitt Romney's every libertarian's dream? He comes from a very successful business/financial background. I would think from a libertarian perspective having a wealthy businessman run America would be perfect. Romney is definitely not a libertarians dream candidate; he is a socially conservative corporate puppet. In other news, Peter Schiff gives a good at the Fraser Institute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsmbfan Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 we have more pages in this thread than we had voters for Ron Paul at my polling place smh The elite bought everything. There's nothing left but ACTUAL REVOLUTION. Grab your brooms everybody! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Romney is definitely not a libertarians dream candidate; he is a socially conservative corporate puppet. In other news, Peter Schiff gives a good at the Fraser Institute. You're only proving my point. Libertarians are conservatives who believe in the rights of corporations. Edit: and to add to that video that you posted, greece didnt fail because of government stimulus. It failed because the government lied about its finances when it entered the EU. Germany, Great Britain, all the other countries in the EU that are trying to keep greece afloat have stimuluses as well, so you can't logically come to Pete's conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McLovin Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 .... Most who are voting for romney feel it is their only chance to boot obama out. Most dont even like romney but prefer him to obama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spambot5000 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 You're only proving my point. Libertarians are conservatives who believe in the rights of corporations. Edit: and to add to that video that you posted, greece didnt fail because of government stimulus. It failed because the government lied about its finances when it entered the EU. Germany, Great Britain, all the other countries in the EU that are trying to keep greece afloat have stimuluses as well, so you can't logically come to Pete's conclusion. facepalm.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Why are you facepalming? Milton Friedman was an economic advisor for Ronald Reagan. Conservatism: Limited government spending Fewer taxes Small government Limited state wellfare Fewer corporate restrictions Libertarianism: Limited government spending Fewer taxes Small government Limited state wellfare Fewer corporate restrictions You're in australia so you might not understand what our political parties believe. "Conservatism" isnt a universal term across every country. Then again if you don't know something you shouldn't be arguing either. Most who are voting for romney feel it is their only chance to boot obama out. Most dont even like romney but prefer him to obama. If that's the case then why isnt Santorum or Ron Paul winning in polls? Mitt Romney's a more popular canidate for a reason. People like the idea of placing a businessman in the oval office. Mitt Romney takes bankrupt businesses and helps them turn a profit again. He downsizes them, trims fat, restructures the management and then flips them for a profit. A lot of people want that to happen to the American Government. They also like the idea that he's a self made man and has spoken out against lobbiest's influence in congress. I'm not saying those are reasons to vote for a president. Im just saying that's a libertarian's wet dream. Ron Paul's a talking head/politician. Mitt Romney's an actual businessman. Oh and that depiction of what it means to be libertarian is retarded. That's a false dychotomy. Republicans and democrats both attempt to give americans personal and economic freedom. They just have different ways of doing it. The way libertarians go about it is identical to conservative republicans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spambot5000 Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Why are you facepalming? Milton Friedman was an economic advisor for Ronald Reagan. Conservatism: Limited government spending Fewer taxes Small government Limited state wellfare Fewer corporate restrictions Libertarianism: Limited government spending Fewer taxes Small government Limited state wellfare Fewer corporate restrictions You're in australia so you might not understand what our political parties believe. "Conservatism" isnt a universal term across every country. Then again if you don't know something you shouldn't be arguing either. I wrote a reply explaining the shared interests and then the differences between American libertarians and conservatives, as well as why Romney is not even remotely a favourable candidate for libertarians. Then I had a sharp realisation; you are a retard and I would be wasting my time to rebut such a stupid point. Go read a wiki page or something... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Easy there tiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILOTSMYBRAIN Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 http://lewrockwell.com/yk/ron-paul-wont-endorse-romney.html Romney is not a Libertarian dream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 ^I guess that is a well thought out article with valid points from both sides of the spectrum.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILOTSMYBRAIN Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Not even an article, but I don't think it's advertised to be unbiased, everything on that website is delivered from a biased perspective. Which would actually work in the case of Romney being a dream candidate if he actually was one because he would be endorsed by Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell. So what exactly is your point? And if you can please support the opinion that he is in fact a dream candidate for Libertarians other then he's made a lot of money in the private sector. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CILONE/SK Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Your blind obedience to ronnie paulie is quite amusing. My point is that you made a statement and provided a link that does nothing to back up that statement. I never said that he was a dream candidate. I actually have not said anything for awhile here. i have not needed to, Ronnie Paulie is failing on his own. So, what was your point again in your previous post? :lol: :lol: :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Skimmed the video looking for where they talked about WHY ron paul wasnt going to endorse Mitt Romney and I couldnt find it. Sifted through the ramblings of a half dozen topics and called it quits. Went through old GOP footage instead and found myself captivated by Ron Paul's foreign defense plan to dismantle FBI, CIA and every other intelligence gathering service America has.. And he wants congress to decide what military action happens where. He literally has no idea what's been going on in the middle east for the last 40 years. Still nothing on why Mitt Romney's not a great canidate for libertarians. Maybe I should run for president. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Boris Johnson for President (he was born in the US) he is the retard London Mayor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realism Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Guys, you uninformed sheep can't say the libertarian system will fail without any proof. But I can say it will flourish, and be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.