StarDestroyer.Net BBS

IG-88E wrote:What

the

FUCK?!

Say it like this:
WHAT THE FUCK ARE THOSE BASTARDS THINKING! KILL THEM ALL!!!
Grrr....

How far away are we from Black listing again?

theski wrote:Hector...to continue my thoughts, there are many things in history that have not been forgotten, nor have people been able to move on from them.

Ah, like slavery, where no reparations have ever been made?

theski wrote:If it was an easy fix such as finding those who who did this and make them face prosecution, then I say lets do it. Unfortunately the people who caused 9/11 are still out there and growing, causing a real threat to our way of life.

The FBI's ability to secretly wiretap at will won't affect it, then?

theski wrote:Just as I enjoy all of the freedoms this country has, such as having this website, everything as we know it could be changed forever.

Yes, by those same policies I mentioned in my last post, which you didn't respond to.

theski wrote:Our Country is the greatest in the world because of peace, freedom, etc. I'm not for putting any American's in danger, but one thing I can say for sure, Our government officials have families and lives of there own at stake, so my belief is, they would not want to put their loved ones in jeopardy either.

Ah, a strawman argument...those same families were at risk before, also. Your point?

theski wrote:I am an American and I feel I have to trust in what they know, we have left Irag alone for 12 years, enough time to produce, hide and help those who took 2500 lives on 9/11, which effected many, many lives in this Country.

I'm American, too. One branch of my family came over on the Mayflower, and another traces its roots to an indian tribe. Your point?

So, because the leaders say that secret domestic wiretapping should be legal, it's OK?

theski wrote:My comment about seeing the site of 9/11...you'll know what I mean if you saw the site.

How will this affect my expierence of it? As I said, I nearly lost my father, and he wasn't able to contact me for three days. A long three days, that was...

Please respond to some of the points I made earlier.

Dalton, if I'm flaming, please tell me. The material is, admittedly, incendiary, and I'm trying not to blatently flame.

Montcalm wrote:No they [the LAPD] just managed to be filmed while they beat a black guy

Yeah, I actually had personal experience with Koon and Powell; they paid our house a visit back in about '88 (our neighbor, an old-time KKK supporter who was in her seventies at the time, had a personal vendetta against my mother, and knew how to pull strings in the Foothill Division at the time... ) Anyway, Koon was the worse of the two, while Powell was more of a "me-too" man.

The LAPD has seriously been working on fixing the corruption since the Rodney King beating, probably because they've got the entire fucking LA City Council breathing down the backs of their necks. They're far from perfect, though.

Grrr. Internet Explorer's being a bitch and not letting me cut and paste, so no quotes.

Response to the article:
How many anti-war protesters were there? The fact that three of them are assholes shouldn't suprise anyone. Was the display -explicitly- 9-11 or just a bunch of flags, with such sentiments as "God is on our side" and the like, easily mistakable for pro-war sentiment?

On police behaviour: It's beyond comprehension that the police would stand by for something like this. A "Peacnik cop" perhaps? Yea, fucking likely. For any moderate sized rally there will be a dozen cops on hand, more plain clothes officers in the crowd, and a lot more available if anything ugly starts. There are only two possible reasons this wasn't stopped:
1: The police thought stopping it would have incited a riot
-Possible, but I don't think this is likely. There are always a couple assholes trying to stir things up, and most of the protesters would understand, if not applaud, that the people doing blatently illegal shit and defaming the movement were arrested. The worst case scenario would be some other protestors forming a human chain around the three vandals. Note that this is the only property damage mentioned in the article, the rest of the action apparently was non-destructive.

2: The police want them to make a bad name for the peace folks. Whether they're government plants (more credible than y'all seem to think) or dumb communist/anarchist/whatevers co-opting the movement they're doing what the government wants.

From the Tuesday, March 11, 2003 Whittier Daily News:

"LA HABRA -- Antiwar protesters burned and ripped up flags, flowers and patriotic signs at a Sept. 11 memorial that residents erected on a fence along Whittier Boulevard days after the terrorist attacks in 2001 and have maintained ever since."

The first question that enters my mind is, what good is done for the antiwar movement when vandals trash a memorial to thousands of slaughtered civilians? The answer is none, and that's why it seems like less an antiwar protest and more the act of saboteurs. This incident can be seized upon as a defining characteristic of the antiwar movement (a bunch of anti-American vandals) by the War Party and pulled out whenever a point needs to be made about our convictions.

This whole thing smacks of COINTELPRO-type tactics. It seems to me that someone really wanted to smear the antiwar movement...how do we know that this wasn't a horde of pro-war thugs with "Peace" buttons on their shirts and some time to kill?

Another curious side of this already-odd story, is the fact that this was done in plain view of La Habra police officers. And they weren't stopped or warned – they were protected. La Habra Police Capt. John Rees said the vandals were "exercising the same freedom of speech that the people who put up the flags were." The problem is that destroying private property isn't free speech, and the memorial's builders and caretakers had the permission of the site's owner.

No comment as of right now from the La Habra Police Dept., but I am waiting for a callback.

So cops hurl obscenities and throw us in jail if we open our mouths or slip off the sidewalk in a herded protest, but if you actually destroy someone's property, they stand by and call it free speech! Is this what we have police for? To beat the peaceful and protect the violent!?

We condemn this action no matter who is responsible, but the bottom line is, we have no evidence that these are actually antiwar protesters. It simply doesn't make sense. As peace activists try to gain recognition from mainstream America as something other than just a bunch of anti-American patchouli-drenched semi-communist granola-crunchers, an incident like this has the potential to throw a giant wrench into the gears of the Antiwar Machine.

In short- "I didn't do it".

I also agree with Hameru's sentiments entirely.

Gandalf wrote:How far away are we from Black listing again?

oh please! If anything, Hollywood blacklists the right. name me some entertainers on the right? there are a few tokens, Arnold, Ted Nugent and a scant handfull of others but almost everyone else is some vaccuous hatfucker who mindlessly recites Noam Chomsky pamphlets verbatum.

Vympel wrote:From the Tuesday, March 11, 2003 Whittier Daily News:

"LA HABRA -- Antiwar protesters burned and ripped up flags, flowers and patriotic signs at a Sept. 11 memorial that residents erected on a fence along Whittier Boulevard days after the terrorist attacks in 2001 and have maintained ever since."

The first question that enters my mind is, what good is done for the antiwar movement when vandals trash a memorial to thousands of slaughtered civilians? The answer is none, and that's why it seems like less an antiwar protest and more the act of saboteurs. This incident can be seized upon as a defining characteristic of the antiwar movement (a bunch of anti-American vandals) by the War Party and pulled out whenever a point needs to be made about our convictions.

This whole thing smacks of COINTELPRO-type tactics. It seems to me that someone really wanted to smear the antiwar movement...how do we know that this wasn't a horde of pro-war thugs with "Peace" buttons on their shirts and some time to kill?

Another curious side of this already-odd story, is the fact that this was done in plain view of La Habra police officers. And they weren't stopped or warned – they were protected. La Habra Police Capt. John Rees said the vandals were "exercising the same freedom of speech that the people who put up the flags were." The problem is that destroying private property isn't free speech, and the memorial's builders and caretakers had the permission of the site's owner.

No comment as of right now from the La Habra Police Dept., but I am waiting for a callback.

So cops hurl obscenities and throw us in jail if we open our mouths or slip off the sidewalk in a herded protest, but if you actually destroy someone's property, they stand by and call it free speech! Is this what we have police for? To beat the peaceful and protect the violent!?

We condemn this action no matter who is responsible, but the bottom line is, we have no evidence that these are actually antiwar protesters. It simply doesn't make sense. As peace activists try to gain recognition from mainstream America as something other than just a bunch of anti-American patchouli-drenched semi-communist granola-crunchers, an incident like this has the potential to throw a giant wrench into the gears of the Antiwar Machine.

In short- "I didn't do it".

I also agree with Hameru's sentiments entirely.

Respectfully, that sounds awfully paranoid. Don't get me wrong, i'm not naieve enough to believe that the government is always a happy benevolent benefactor. There is a very slim chance of these people being CIA, that i will conceide, but could there not be an equally slim chance that these people are iraqi psy-ops guys attempting to demoralize? wow, that sounds just as crazy. no, these are most likely run of the mill anti-war anarchists venting their frustrations in a very misguided way.

EDIT:spelling

These vandals shoud be arrested and treated just like any vandals. I really wish more of these types of violent/destructive protestors were arrested at all such protests, not just when it hits something that stikes a nerve with many people. Somebody's house/business/possessions might be of equal importance to that person (as the memorial is to many) for reasons that they need not justify to anyone.

theski wrote: I am an American and I feel I have to trust in what they know, we have left Irag alone for 12 years, enough time to produce, hide and help those who took 2500 lives on 9/11, which effected many, many lives in this Country.

Can you send me the source that prooves the above comment?

The Bob Dylan song "With God on Our Side?"

Funny, I'll bet my right nut that the terrorists believe God is on their side.

I am less concerned with whether God is on my side then whether am on God's side.

To Hector, and Next of Kin, My apologies I left my computer on last night and my girlfriend thought she could do a better job with the topic then I could.. she doesn't understand the rules of proof on the Bbs. I will try and your points today..

Col. Crackpot wrote:

Gandalf wrote:How far away are we from Black listing again?

oh please! If anything, Hollywood blacklists the right. name me some entertainers on the right? there are a few tokens, Arnold, Ted Nugent and a scant handfull of others but almost everyone else is some vaccuous hatfucker who mindlessly recites Noam Chomsky pamphlets verbatum.

Erm... Hollywood left-winged??

When was the last time you saw a spy movie that portrayed the Soviet Union in a positive light??

theski wrote:To Hector, and Next of Kin, My apologies I left my computer on last night and my girlfriend thought she could do a better job with the topic then I could.. she doesn't understand the rules of proof on the Bbs. I will try and your points today..

no prob, thanx.

Simon H.Johansen wrote:

Col. Crackpot wrote:oh please! If anything, Hollywood blacklists the right. name me some entertainers on the right? there are a few tokens, Arnold, Ted Nugent and a scant handfull of others but almost everyone else is some vaccuous hatfucker who mindlessly recites Noam Chomsky pamphlets verbatum.

Erm... Hollywood left-winged??

When was the last time you saw a spy movie that portrayed the Soviet Union in a positive light??

Wow, that's your best evidence?

IG-88E wrote:

Simon H.Johansen wrote:

Col. Crackpot wrote:oh please! If anything, Hollywood blacklists the right. name me some entertainers on the right? there are a few tokens, Arnold, Ted Nugent and a scant handfull of others but almost everyone else is some vaccuous hatfucker who mindlessly recites Noam Chomsky pamphlets verbatum.

Erm... Hollywood left-winged??

When was the last time you saw a spy movie that portrayed the Soviet Union in a positive light??

Wow, that's your best evidence?

Read these Communist Movie Reviews.

If Hollywood isn't generally right-winged (although not right-winged in a John Birch Society way), then these political movie reviews are just part of a Communist conspiracy out to mislead the public about Communist infiltration of society!! (the theme from "The Hunt For Red October" starts playing)

Col. Crackpot wrote:

Gandalf wrote:How far away are we from Black listing again?

oh please! If anything, Hollywood blacklists the right. name me some entertainers on the right? there are a few tokens, Arnold, Ted Nugent and a scant handfull of others but almost everyone else is some vaccuous hatfucker who mindlessly recites Noam Chomsky pamphlets verbatum.

Drew Carrey, Dwayne Johnson, Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis, Patricia Heaton, Nicholas Cage, Harrison Ford, Kid Rock, Spielberg, etc. All are either conservatives or liberals that have expressed support for Bush. There are probably many others.

I hate how it is so horribly wrong for a liberal celebrity to express his viewpoint, yet no one complains when conservative celebrities and figures express their rightwing opinions.

theski wrote:To Hector, and Next of Kin, My apologies I left my computer on last night and my girlfriend thought she could do a better job with the topic then I could.. she doesn't understand the rules of proof on the Bbs. I will try and your points today..

Not a problem. Thanks for telling us.

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Respectfully, that sounds awfully paranoid. Don't get me wrong, i'm not naieve enough to believe that the government is always a happy benevolent benefactor. There is a very slim chance of these people being CIA, that i will conceide, but could there not be an equally slim chance that these people are iraqi psy-ops guys attempting to demoralize? wow, that sounds just as crazy. no, these are most likely run of the mill anti-war anarchists venting their frustrations in a very misguided way.

EDIT:spelling

Lemme clarify- I don't think they were anti-war protestors, and whether or not this was done for the purpose (of that I'm not sure)- it will now be used as an example of the mentality of the anti-war group.

Hector, Next, Lets try this again: I am a Libertarian by heart. The less gov involvement in my life the better. That being said WTF do I care if the NSA decides that I am a national secruity risk and needs to tap my phone. If you think the gov has nothing better to do than care about community watch programs and listen to phone conversations than you need a little Black Helicopter Therapy. Ideology is what this comes down to. Some of us are willing to put up with some BS wating lines at airports or a file on us somewhere in Maryland for the security that may or may not come with it. We just need to decide which side of the fence you sit on. Do you trust the gov to do the right thing or not?? Hector.. My point on the visit to NY was not to diminish your feelings but to maybe make it a little more real. I was living in Boston at time. I went down to Ny a week later 9/18 I will never forget the sight the sounds and the smells. I will give up some personal freedoms, to advert the next one..

Simon H.Johansen wrote:

IG-88E wrote:

Simon H.Johansen wrote: Erm... Hollywood left-winged??

When was the last time you saw a spy movie that portrayed the Soviet Union in a positive light??

Wow, that's your best evidence?

Read these Communist Movie Reviews.

If Hollywood isn't generally right-winged (although not right-winged in a John Birch Society way), then these political movie reviews are just part of a Communist conspiracy out to mislead the public about Communist infiltration of society!! (the theme from "The Hunt For Red October" starts playing)

bullshit! for every movie that does that there are 10 that portray corporations as evil incarnate and American southerners as backwater hillbilly rednecks. Oh, and newsflash: the Soviet Union didn't deserve to be portrayed in a positive light, killing tens of millions of innocent political activists kinda disqualifies them from that.

Simon H.Johansen wrote:

IG-88E wrote:

Simon H.Johansen wrote: Erm... Hollywood left-winged??

When was the last time you saw a spy movie that portrayed the Soviet Union in a positive light??

Wow, that's your best evidence?

Read these Communist Movie Reviews.

If Hollywood isn't generally right-winged (although not right-winged in a John Birch Society way), then these political movie reviews are just part of a Communist conspiracy out to mislead the public about Communist infiltration of society!! (the theme from "The Hunt For Red October" starts playing)

Um, hello? Did you miss a little thing called the COLD WAR? Everybody was told Soviets were evil and out to get them. The fact that Soviets are potrayed in a less-than-friendly light in Hollywood is NOT evidence of a right-wing slant.

theski wrote: We just need to decide which side of the fence you sit on. Do you trust the gov to do the right thing or not??

I doubt the motivations of Bush and co. When they couldn't catch Bin Laden, Mullah Omar, or any of the other high ranking Al-Qaeda personnel and then switched their attention to Iraq, I thought it was a smoke screen to divert attention and blame. Has any evidence come forward to link Saddam to September 11 or Al-Qaeda?

Saw news of this before I went to work this morning, I felt sick to my stomach.

They actually managed to get an on-camera interview with one of the protesters. She said that they did it to promote peace, togetherness, and unity. I'm paraphrasing, but that's essentially what she said their motives were. How these goals were accomplished by destroying a monument to 9/11, she didn't answer.

Thats retarded. Not offensive, not sick, not illegal, just retarded.


Way to go guys, gathering people for your cause!