LAPD and Nazis Work Hand In Hand Against People of Los Angeles

[lord of flies]

more nonsense. more rhetoric. you gots some silly notion that fascism is inherent different and requires different rules to prevent? why?

Because I've cracked open a history book.

besides which, there is a considerable number o' examples o' fundamental rights being protected in the U.S. in spite of opposition of the Leaders of government. where the heck did you go to school that you ain't aware that the Judiciary has opposed Congress and the Executive on numerous occasions? every time the Court strikes down a law or executive order as unconstitutional it is acting in opposition of the leaders of government. somebody needs a reintroduction to their high school civics lessons.... is too many such examples to list individually. yeah, there is some noteworthy examples o' the Executive functionally ignoring the Court, but such examples is noteworthy 'cause o' their rarity.

lol high school civics gives the most childish view of American politics in the world.

 

Remember when the courts decided that Abraham Lincoln arresting all those dissidents wasn't OK, and when the court decided that jailing all those socialists wasn't OK, and when the court decided that jailing all those Japanese people wasn't OK? Because I sure don't.

again, tell us the legal mechanic utilized in Germany to prohibit nazi participation. once you learn the mechanic, many o' your mistakes and preconceptions will evaporate.

Ban their party, ban their slogans, ban their symbols.

btw, we can direct you to numerous sources that indicate a rise in the popularity o' neo-nazi groups w/i modern Germany.

btw don't care

Yes LoF. We all know you hate civil rights. Interestingly enough, though, you condemn them for murder (as well you should), but I'm not quite sure why; is it just Commies who can rightfully kill in your ****ed-up world?

Violence is part of politics, this is a fact. But neo-nazis apply violence against minority groups and LGBT people; it's not part of some sort of defensible larger policy or goal, just reactionary behavior. Were the Founding Fathers wrong for fighting against the British imperialists with violence? What about the people of Africa when they tried to defend themselves from imperialism?

[Amentep]

Now, lets not be too cruel to LoF. Let him do his ranting and raving. Free speech and all that.

 

There isn't, as I recall, any guarantee of Free Speech in private places, only against the government (as opposed to private parties) preventing you exercising Free Speech.

 

As Obsidian owns these forums and requires us to register to have posting privileges, the argument can be made that this message board is a private place and just like you can't go to a nearby Mall and practice your Free Speech rights or into an individual's home and practice your Free Speech rights, you can't come here and expect the same. Ergo we all post at the discretion of the admin and mods, no Free Speech necessary.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Well, why don't everyone do this. Place LoF on Ignore.

[Gromnir]

*sigh*

 

ban slogans is not the legal mechanic... please, try again. furthermore, the fact that you do not care whether or not Germany's ban is effective or not is indeed telling. you is convinced by the token show?

 

as for your examples of Lincoln and the ww2 Japanese internment... so? lord knows that we ain't gonna suggest that the Courts is always as just as we might wish, but your examples undercut your own argument... again. if you assume Judicial, Executive and Legislative impropriety, then what is the point o' banning neo-nazi activity? after all, those corrupt institutions may simply ignore the ban, no? maybe you not learn anything from our Chinese Constitution example?

 

nevertheless, we can name dozens o' alternatives to your examples... in fact, we has already pointed you in the direction o' a number o' such cases above. throw in Brown v. Board, Marburry v. Madison, Miranda v. Arizona, Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton, not to mention the literally HUNDREDS of additional cases in which the Court has declared acts of Congress or the Exec unconstitutional. cracking open that history book not help if you only read selected chapters... and maybe you should try reading a few more history books... makes you sound a bit like Tom Cruise ranting about modern psychiatry.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Walsingham]

Violence is part of politics, this is a fact. But neo-nazis apply violence against minority groups and LGBT people; it's not part of some sort of defensible larger policy or goal, just reactionary behavior. Were the Founding Fathers wrong for fighting against the British imperialists with violence? What about the people of Africa when they tried to defend themselves from imperialism?

 

Surely any deaths incurred by nazis could be written off as 'miniscule' by fundamentally insane people many years later in another country?

 

Seriously, chaps, I'm starting to feel like this is bullying. LoF's clearly mental, and only a teenager. It's not as if anyone even remotely buys what he's selling. Maybe we should just ease off.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Or put him on ignore.

[lord of flies]

as for your examples of Lincoln and the ww2 Japanese internment... so? lord knows that we ain't gonna suggest that the Courts is always as just as we might wish, but your examples undercut your own argument... again. if you assume Judicial, Executive and Legislative impropriety, then what is the point o' banning neo-nazi activity? after all, those corrupt institutions may simply ignore the ban, no? maybe you not learn anything from our Chinese Constitution example?

Here, let me put it this way: even if we assume such a ban would be ineffectual (btw it wouldn't), how could it possibly hurt?

nevertheless, we can name dozens o' alternatives to your examples... in fact, we has already pointed you in the direction o' a number o' such cases above. throw in Brown v. Board, Marburry v. Madison, Miranda v. Arizona, Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton, not to mention the literally HUNDREDS of additional cases in which the Court has declared acts of Congress or the Exec unconstitutional. cracking open that history book not help if you only read selected chapters... and maybe you should try reading a few more history books... makes you sound a bit like Tom Cruise ranting about modern psychiatry.

Whoa, cool, irrelevant cases. The fact that I have established is that the Supreme Court can and has overridden the rights of the populace in the interests of the ruling class, especially in times of war. Coincidentally, the Holocaust occurred during a time of war.

[Gromnir]

as for your examples of Lincoln and the ww2 Japanese internment... so? lord knows that we ain't gonna suggest that the Courts is always as just as we might wish, but your examples undercut your own argument... again. if you assume Judicial, Executive and Legislative impropriety, then what is the point o' banning neo-nazi activity? after all, those corrupt institutions may simply ignore the ban, no? maybe you not learn anything from our Chinese Constitution example?

Here, let me put it this way: even if we assume such a ban would be ineffectual (btw it wouldn't), how could it possibly hurt?

nevertheless, we can name dozens o' alternatives to your examples... in fact, we has already pointed you in the direction o' a number o' such cases above. throw in Brown v. Board, Marburry v. Madison, Miranda v. Arizona, Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton, not to mention the literally HUNDREDS of additional cases in which the Court has declared acts of Congress or the Exec unconstitutional. cracking open that history book not help if you only read selected chapters... and maybe you should try reading a few more history books... makes you sound a bit like Tom Cruise ranting about modern psychiatry.

Whoa, cool, irrelevant cases. The fact that I have established is that the Supreme Court can and has overridden the rights of the populace in the interests of the ruling class, especially in times of war. Coincidentally, the Holocaust occurred during a time of war.

 

how can it hurt? is not a serious question, is it? btw, you still have not answered our query 'bout the legal rationale and mechanic utilized to ban nazi participation. (honestly... look the info up instead o' spouting the senseless party line. this is a situation where you could learn something, and if we simple give you the answer you will do your typical nonsensical rhetorical reply. Look It Up... figure out how the Germans ban nazi participation.)

 

as for irrelevant cases... HA! is only irrelevant 'cuse you don't know 'em or didn't bother to look 'em up... though is kinda embarrassing if you is not familiar with most of 'em. regardless, you still not seem to get that you is sabotaging your own argument by suggesting that govt. can't be trusted in any event.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 4, 2010 by Tigranes
consistency

[Gorth]

A couple of posts became the victim of evil censorship

 

Lets drop the personal stuff and discuss ideology.

[Walsingham]

Quite. In which spirit may I reiterate my opposition to an ideology which sacrifices millions of people in pursuit of a goal which never occurs, and can never occur. I am also against the ideology of pursuing the previous ideology out of a pathological sense of wounded megalomania. And I'm against the ideology of ignoring historical fact.

 

You're right. That feels much better.

[Morgoth]

Meanwhile, in America...

 

[HoonDing]

Did the Nazis beat up Rodney King?

[Walsingham]

Meanwhile, in America...

 

 

As I believe Bill Hicks may have said: why is it that exponents of the ubermensch are always such pathetic specimens?

[lord of flies]

Quite. In which spirit may I reiterate my opposition to an ideology which sacrifices millions of people in pursuit of a goal which never occurs, and can never occur. I am also against the ideology of pursuing the previous ideology out of a pathological sense of wounded megalomania. And I'm against the ideology of ignoring historical fact.

 

You're right. That feels much better.

Agreed. Capitalism and imperialism suck.

[Junai]

A couple of posts became the victim of evil censorship

 

Lets drop the personal stuff and discuss ideology.

 

Free speech!

[Enoch]

In case the legal principles need any further explanation, click here.

[Orogun01]

Meanwhile, in America...

 

 

Maybe they are just looking for Kyle

 

[Gromnir]

In case the legal principles need any further explanation, click here.

 

we never realized that Ruth's hands were so mannish.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Walsingham]

Quite. In which spirit may I reiterate my opposition to an ideology which sacrifices millions of people in pursuit of a goal which never occurs, and can never occur. I am also against the ideology of pursuing the previous ideology out of a pathological sense of wounded megalomania. And I'm against the ideology of ignoring historical fact.

 

You're right. That feels much better.

Agreed. Capitalism and imperialism suck.

 

 

Are you five years old?

[Calax]

The kyle pic makes me remember