what do you like or hate about being british american canadian or austrailian ? be honest now ! ( Archived) (50)

I will have to read back, because I don't think I made that connection. Will check though~

Unless you're seeing something that I'm not, I don't see where I made an IRA connection to Normandy. Point it out at your leisure.

Are you suggesting the United States has unlimited free speech? As I said, ALL countries have exceptions including the United States to what is considered acceptable free speech.

There is little to no investigative reporting when it comes to U.S. foreign policy unless you get your news from various sources including places like Human Rights Weatch who does have a headquarters in New York and one in Geneva. News agencies merely report government statements, they don't investigate them. In that sense, television news is very much a tool for government propoganda and to garner support for its initiatives. You are only getting one side of the story, not an unbiased view.

The average American doesn't get to see on an International level the amount of bullying going on with U.S. foreign policy. Some countries are forced into bilateral agreements which basically make it so the U.S. can't ever be prosecuted for misdeeds. They have tried to undermine the International Criminal Court because they don't want to be subjected to the same rules many other countries are which put them on equal footing. It's more about power and dictatorship, not democracy. The U.S. has historically only got involved in conflicts when there was a direct benefit for them. They weren't really doing any altruistic favours. There were definitive economic and strategic benefits to their involvement.

So Bill Mahar got kicked off the air when he suggested that maybe, Americans were doing something to provoke other counties into feeling the way they were. He wasn't saying those people in the towers deserved to die, he was just showing a different perspective as to the possible causal factor as to why it happened. If you never question why, you are doomed to repeat.

I don't think you heard me say that we have "unlimited" free speech by any means, as we don't. I would prefer more freedom of speech. Hate speech is subjective and controlled by the party in power.
A recipe for disaster.

Mahar was free to say whatever he wanted, as were the millions who contacted Mahar's sponsors.
That, my dear, is free speech too.

I think that you will find that 77 to 90% of news commentators consider themselves Democrats, according to the stats one reviews...so the media has pretty open access to slap around any administration. It's just more fun when it's a more conservative president in office. JMO

The outcome though was, a vocal group squashed another's right to free speech. They could have publically told him off and opened up a whole new level of debate. Instead, they silenced him and took him off the air so they didn't have to hear something which made them feel bad.

To me, that violates free speech if only some have it.

You're side-stepping..and intellectually out gunned..

He was free to continue his comments anywhere he wanted. That tv channel isn't the only one in the States. He had/has all sorts of venues.


Were you as upset when Imus got kicked off the air for his "nappy" comment? Or would that be "hate speech" in Canada? Just curious?

Not at all. It's how one desires to see the United States actually. Generally, people opposed to capitalism will derive all of their view from that...and then construct their views to coincide. It's all how we're indoctinated in our given country. The same goes for Canada, European nations, etc.