supercanuk

Is somebody I really like on the bored.

You really didn't. In fact Jerry Falwell spent most of his time bashing gay people and demanding the United States, essentially, become a theocracy, or a Christian tyranny. I am generalizing here but essentially he was calling for the most regressive possible of reforms to a "democracy". Anyway, im fucking GLAD HAPPY, ELATED, he's dead. I have actually not been so happy at one persons death in a long, long time. lol Ahh.. feels kinda nice. p.s. for good measure i realize he was a human being, but c'mawn... he was one of the worst.

lol fair enough. But i dont think they went out to study if this guy was an asshole or not lol he clearly is. More of the type of propaganda techniques he uses.

Same here, i'm sure he's calling Indiana University a liberal, America hating institution filled with intellectuals who also hate America, ergo hate him as well. He tends to put himself as America's golden boy who if their against him, are against America lol.

I'm not, but I think its rather hilarious that this was an actual study - and that what was assumed to be the truth, was. Often studies will totally change or at least slightly change assumed, or intuitive thoughts/opinions. This one simply made it concrete.

Link Bill O

Thats just it, racial profiling is actually (In Canada at least) illegal. Police are not suppose to use it, of course there is profiling, but they cannot look simply for race. But of course, how do you prove it? That's the whole quandry.

If i didn't have to do jobs i hated.

International Noise Conspiracy is amazing i totally forget to mention them!

Ah kimmy... i'd probably smuggle in.. possibly Rage Against the Machine... but thats really hard to choose, theres Rise Against, Anti-Flag, Stike Anywhere, all kinds of great artists with good anti-statist songs...

ppfftt its still a fact lol

Fact: I just got an interview for a piece im writing with my old professor - im happy because it's about propaganda and the war on terror and he's a leading expert in propaganda ;) yay!

Salmon sandwhich

I believe it starts with baby powder on the palm, proceeded by a hard slap. lol And then telling the person they just got slapped by the baby powder pimp.

That is the dumbest product i have ever seen.

Racial profiling, what you are describing is wrong, but is a tactic used by the police all the time. There's way too many variables here for you to simplify the issue, are the police officers white? Are they black? Are the people acting out of the ordinary? What's the power of discretion of the police officers viz-a-vi the ability to get redress for arbitrary search and seizure? Racial profiling tends to be more a phenomenon of racism, also, it's a statistics thing. Criminality cannot be reduced to race, there are economic variables, psychological, sociological(in the broad sense), they at times can be cultural (in the early 1800's the use of opium by Asian communities became "illegal" when it suited social control of an oppressed population. This is in Canada btw, so i dont know what it was like in the U.S. But anyway, my point is, criminality has more to do with archaic laws that are a source of social control rather then deviant behavior (a lot of people are in jail on petty drug crimes, not anything violent). So back to the point, racial profiling, again it's not a race thing, it's a statistics thing as well. If you have more police officers, you will have higher crime rates. It's simple statistics, a politician says they have a crime problem, they hire more officers, and there is more crime, because more people are being arrested. It's not that it's necessarily violent, it's just all the little things, remember police officers have to meet a quota, so they have a vested interest in crime control (i.e. conviction and aprehension). So when people say one racial group gets stopped more then another, you have to ask yourself what is beneath this. What are the police ignoring when they're busy focusing time on one racial group? And what are the consequences of this, continued stigmatization of one racial group, and the ommiting of real crime rates of another racial group? Racism is an issue that effects the criminal justice system quite a bit, and racial profiling keeps the status quo that white people, who are generally the judges sentencing people, maintain. This isn't something i think is conscious either, i think the long term stigmatization of the black community has lead to an unconscious racism that people don't like to talk about and therefore continues this presupposition which at its heart is racist. But this is a rant, and i'll leave it at this, but i can tell you as a law student, for a fact, that racial profiling not only doesn't work, because it just ignores other crime, but that it continues a racism of colonial roots that can only lead to continued racism between both races (white and black).

.He's an amazing orator, i urge you guy's to listen to him!

Keep in mind him saying "rich people" or whatever caused him to do it, ought not to be taken at face value. Clearly he had a history of mental illness and was completely off his rocker, he didn't just hate rich people and go on a shooting rampage, it takes a lot more then that. I find this society doesn't deal with "deviant" behaviour properly - this kid's history of apparently "scary" plays and writing he would hand into his teachers should have set off alarm bells long ago. Also, he was a social outcast type, i mean there are a lot of things that could have been addressed with this guy before this occured.

i see... vista is such shit.

lol then why'd you post?

So you don't think the same thing would happen with rifles? Listen, you can't solve murderers with banning guns, it will cause more crime, just like the war on drugs. The more you push something underground, especially something that has been previously readily availible you will create a HUGE criminal network of gun traders and sellers. Even if it was successfully executed people would find other ways to harm life in large ways, they will use bombs, and whatever else if they want to kill. Allowing people to defend themselves from psychos i cannot see as an over-arching cause of the violence. Yes, guns have a huge factor in it, im not arguing that, im arguing a total ban is not going to work. Make the hand gun laws like we have in Canada, they're far superior and far more stringent. But a total ban on hand-guns is an offence to the liberty of those who do not act in such ways and treats people like children. We can deal with our problems without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

So a blanket ban on guns so only the authorities have them? Well your correct in saying that your more likely to shoot a family member then a "bad guy". However, with this logic, we should be then locking up one in five males for beating their spouses, whether they do or not, that's the statistic and family violence is just as bad as gun violence. See statistics tend to leave out common sense, sure your more likely to shoot a family member, obviously a terrible consequence of what is a violent tool. However, if only the police had the guns, or "authorities" then the citizens of a country can never defend themselves from the government itself. Which i am completely opposed to, i think that citizens have to have the right and ability to take back their government, by force if need be. I know this isn't like the 1700's but let's be realistic, it's harder to quell a population of semi-armed layman, then to quell a completely defenceless population entirely. I think we like to believe that we are safe from fascist governments but its a false sense of security. Germany was at the height of western civilization when Hitler came to power, sure the people were desperate because of the war sanctions put on them, but it didn't make them all idiots. They got caught up in something that went out of control and a lot of people in the resistance to Hitler were killed. Now if nobody had guns where would be the resistance? This is really hypothetical but its just an example of why guns are not always bad, and why a blanket ban cannot ever really be useful to protecting people from violence. Let's just say we banned guns, what next? Will people just stab one another? Theres no way to completely stop people from killing and hurting each other, you can bring it down obviously, but it won't dramatically stop criminal behavior, there are other more horrific ways to hurt people. Finding a solution to illegal gun sale is no simple matter by the way, i think you might be too hasty on that point. Take the illegal drug trade as an example, they've had a "war on drugs" for decades and it has done nothing, hardly a dent in the drug trade. If guns were made illegal i can bet that same scenario would come to fruition.

I'd just like to step in here and make a brief comment. What Dan is essentially calling for is a blanket ban on most weapons, am I right? Or is it just hand-guns that are semi-automatic? If I have your argument straight, then you're calling for a pretty large infringement on people's liberty to own a weapon for personal protection. There's problems with this, do you think that people should be able to own a weapon in their homes for self-protection? What if they live in a sketchy neighborhood? The police certainly cannot be everywhere at once, and their response time ain't the greatest in many districts. And more police on the streets isn't an answer either, that's proven by the U.S. who have tons of police and far higher crime rates (generally speaking) then we do, so clearly that doesn't work. I think there needs to be a lot more common sense being thrown into the arguments for and against gun's. I'd like to know (I think its Switzerland?) the country in Europe where everyone has to have a gun in their house (because everybody has to spend a year in military service there i believe) - i'd like to know their crime rates with hand guns. It would make for an interesting case study into gun control. Again, what I believe Colin is saying here is that with the training needed for it, it can be a benefit to security if people were armed and trained because the few who did go insane would be.. "neutralized" so to speak before they could do much harm. I don't whole-heartedly agree with him either but it's not a rediculous argument.

Plotting a new revolution, the fix is in, who killed Litvinenko?, undermining global security, independence for Kosovo Berezovsky Threatens Armed Coup Never one to shy away from the media spotlight, fugitive Russian business tycoon Boris Berezovsky announced late last week that he was actively involved in a plot to overthrow Russian President Vladimir Putin. In an interview with the Guardian newspaper which, was subsequently published around the globe, he claimed to be mentoring a rogue group of government officials seeking to forcibly dispel the KGB from the Kremlin. Questioned as to whether his intent was in fact to spark a revolution, Berezovsky left no doubt, replying

The U.S.'s levels of corruption and totalitarian values are comparable to Russia's. For the record im not saying that any of these other countries are any better. But that doesn't make what Russia does justified. It is set by degree's though, and other countries are worse then Russia, and other countries are better then Russia in certain social aspects. The west criticisms are just another way to get people to look the other way when they anaylze their own countries.