Where I live we have this:
http://mostlywater.org/antiolympic_sign ... ties_group
We had a similar situation hosting an Asia-Pacific conference of world leaders a few years back. Some of the bodyguards for some of the world leaders with diplomatic immunity wanted to shoot some of the locals for protesting.
The Ultimate Betrayal
The Chinese leader visited UK a few years ago and was dumbfounded that people were actually allowed to walk around [whilst alive, presumably] waving the Tibetan flag. He was probably wondering why we'd not extracted the protesters' organs on the spot, for transplants to more worthy people.choff wrote:Where I live we have this:
http://mostlywater.org/antiolympic_sign ... ties_group
We had a similar situation hosting an Asia-Pacific conference of world leaders a few years back. Some of the bodyguards for some of the world leaders with diplomatic immunity wanted to shoot some of the locals for protesting.
Am I allowed to say that? What the heck, the Western world as we know it is clearly in a spiral death-dive anyway. In for a penny, in for a pound!.. I presume he can take it as a bit of playful humour - at least its profits they take seriously, rather than prophets.
As long as this is on an American server you can pretty much say anything you want. Within the limits of the whims of the moderators. The consequences in the jurisdiction where you are domiciled is your own account.chrismb wrote:The Chinese leader visited UK a few years ago and was dumbfounded that people were actually allowed to walk around [whilst alive, presumably] waving the Tibetan flag. He was probably wondering why we'd not extracted the protesters' organs on the spot, for transplants to more worthy people.choff wrote:Where I live we have this:
http://mostlywater.org/antiolympic_sign ... ties_group
We had a similar situation hosting an Asia-Pacific conference of world leaders a few years back. Some of the bodyguards for some of the world leaders with diplomatic immunity wanted to shoot some of the locals for protesting.
Am I allowed to say that? What the heck, the Western world as we know it is clearly in a spiral death-dive anyway. In for a penny, in for a pound!.. I presume he can take it as a bit of playful humour - at least its profits they take seriously, rather than prophets.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Just the very act of living in the UK currently carries with it unreasonable and intractable consequences these days.MSimon wrote: The consequences in the jurisdiction where you are domiciled is your own account.
(Just a for-example, I was stopped by an excitable member of the Police 6 months ago for running an amber light. He said he had it on video so I said 'Really!? Good! Show me'. 'No' he says, handling me the ticket 'I'm busy, you won't see it until Court'. 'OK' I say, and make an immediate data-protection request for it the next day, of course. Guess what - the video disappears in the intervening time. But still the State apparatus is pursing this case and I'll be up infront of the Beak next week. How can this carry on! Even when my only objective defense has been deleted by the prosection and they admit to deleting it(!!) the State still thinks it's right to pursue such a case! Civilisation, as we have known it, is ending.)
There's this new law as well:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columb ... r-law.html
So visitors won't see any poor people or addicts on the streets, they're being pushed into hotels.
We do have Lefties that would like to turn the Winter Olympics into "Battle in Seattle" round 2, but that's just another typical day on the Left Coast.
My real security concern for the Games is a container bomb in the harbour. It may sound paranoid, but remember the Dubai ports scandal.
All the US senators and congressmen got all NIMBY about a nuke getting smuggled into their riding. Well, immediately after the same company set up shop at Vancouver port. When the company president, a middle eastern chap was answering questions at the press conference to announce the deal, he made what I considered a Freudian slip. He was asked about the terrorist threat, and his answer was we didn't have to worry because in his country all the 'religious people' had been put in prison.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columb ... r-law.html
So visitors won't see any poor people or addicts on the streets, they're being pushed into hotels.
We do have Lefties that would like to turn the Winter Olympics into "Battle in Seattle" round 2, but that's just another typical day on the Left Coast.
My real security concern for the Games is a container bomb in the harbour. It may sound paranoid, but remember the Dubai ports scandal.
All the US senators and congressmen got all NIMBY about a nuke getting smuggled into their riding. Well, immediately after the same company set up shop at Vancouver port. When the company president, a middle eastern chap was answering questions at the press conference to announce the deal, he made what I considered a Freudian slip. He was asked about the terrorist threat, and his answer was we didn't have to worry because in his country all the 'religious people' had been put in prison.
CHoff
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/200 ... -talk.html
How to handle the police in the USA. There is video. Chilling video.
How to handle the police in the USA. There is video. Chilling video.
From Atlas Shrugged"Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed? We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against . . . We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted -- and you create a nation of law-breakers -- and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I've just watched the first 1 minute of that (will watch the rest later), just to add that (in the case above - I'll delete it in a week as its personal frippery of little relevance here) when I was stopped I did exactly that, to the point that, after a few moments, our representative of the Police State asks me "do you speak english?". He'd been chuntering on to himself about how I had a bad attitude [I hadn't said a word!!] without actually asking me a question, so there was nothing to say until then!MSimon wrote: How to handle the police in the USA. There is video. Chilling video.
I do not think the Police, themselves, realise that they are taught to 'take control' of a situation, and you can see the blood* beginning to boil as they fail to actually get that control over someone else.
(*There were two PC's, one was called "PC Payne" and one "PC Blood". Seems fitting....)
problem is, it's a Police State and there is the Contempt of Court Act, which may mean I shouldn't've written that. You know they'll try to have me one way or another. What does "creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced" - presumably a statement of facts, as above, can't qualify, but there again!!...
In UK, I like the common law offence of 'Sedition' which is defined as any act or writing intended to, or that does subvert the Government. That's OK as it goes, but you should also know that "writing of a seditious nature is called 'Seditious libel', and the truth of what is written is no defence for writing it". I like that bit...
In UK, I like the common law offence of 'Sedition' which is defined as any act or writing intended to, or that does subvert the Government. That's OK as it goes, but you should also know that "writing of a seditious nature is called 'Seditious libel', and the truth of what is written is no defence for writing it". I like that bit...
OK I see your point. In the Colonies truth is a defense. At least for now.chrismb wrote:problem is, it's a Police State and there is the Contempt of Court Act, which may mean I shouldn't've written that. You know they'll try to have me one way or another. What does "creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced" - presumably a statement of facts, as above, can't qualify, but there again!!...
In UK, I like the common law offence of 'Sedition' which is defined as any act or writing intended to, or that does subvert the Government. That's OK as it goes, but you should also know that "writing of a seditious nature is called 'Seditious libel', and the truth of what is written is no defence for writing it". I like that bit...
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I have to say I completely object to that. [I have to say it!]KitemanSA wrote:That is because, for now, we own ourselves, while he is owned by the queen, and her moronic offspring.MSimon wrote: [OK I see your point. In the Colonies truth is a defense. At least for now.
I don't want to get done for sedition and treason in the same instance!
Apparently, as I understand it, because sedition and treason are common law offences, supposedly the death penalty still applies. I believe there is one other offence that still theoretically carries the death penalty in UK and that is piracy.
Just for interest (and don't ask how I know this
) there is only one offence that carries with it an absolutely mandatory custodial sentence, and that is the unlicenced distillation of alcohol. Clearly, this is a far more societally damaging crime than, say, death by reckless driving and under the influence of alcohol, for which I have observed cases where, in one case that stuck in my mind, the individual got a whopping £250 fine and a driving ban for a couple of years! Gee, how could anyone get over a shocking fine of £250 
In point of fact, I would feel much more at ease if the Queen really was in control of all things. At the moment, divine right looks a whole lot more appealing than what we've got now!
chrismb wrote:I have to say I completely object to that. [I have to say it!]KitemanSA wrote:That is because, for now, we own ourselves, while he is owned by the queen, and her moronic offspring.MSimon wrote: [OK I see your point. In the Colonies truth is a defense. At least for now.
I don't want to get done for sedition and treason in the same instance!
Apparently, as I understand it, because sedition and treason are common law offences, supposedly the death penalty still applies. I believe there is one other offence that still theoretically carries the death penalty in UK and that is piracy.
Just for interest (and don't ask how I know this
In point of fact, I would feel much more at ease if the Queen really was in control of all things. At the moment, divine right looks a whole lot more appealing than what we've got now!
So the bottom line is that you can get in possibly serious trouble for what you say or type?
I don't envy you.
Ah yeah, several years ago I blogged about a case of a woman from Vermont who was assaulted and put in a coma by a guy in Scotland when she was hiking, he had just been released from psych custody the week before (for a similar assault on a woman). The Scottish authorities were trying to claim my blog needed to come down because my mentioning the attackers past history of assaulting women would be prejudicial.chrismb wrote:problem is, it's a Police State and there is the Contempt of Court Act, which may mean I shouldn't've written that. You know they'll try to have me one way or another. What does "creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced" - presumably a statement of facts, as above, can't qualify, but there again!!...
In UK, I like the common law offence of 'Sedition' which is defined as any act or writing intended to, or that does subvert the Government. That's OK as it goes, but you should also know that "writing of a seditious nature is called 'Seditious libel', and the truth of what is written is no defence for writing it". I like that bit...
In other words, they don't want people thinking about things ahead of time. No planning, no pondering right and wrong. to me, it seems good for people to be cautiously prejudicial. Just don't be bone-headed about it.IntLibber wrote: The Scottish authorities were trying to claim my blog needed to come down because my mentioning the attackers past history of assaulting women would be prejudicial.
