BF2S Forums DAST Chat

youre either ranting against hate crimes or trying to be provacative again with your antimilitary tirades.  either way, with a post like that you are begging for a response.  so heres your response.  however you feel about the military I dont care.  If you are against the concept of hate crimes, thats debatable. if not, then you are just really trying to stir the pot with your resentment for veterans/members of the military again, which is boring to read.


A hate crime is a crime against someone because they fit a specific profile that is causing the criminal to act whether it be race, religion, sexual orientation or, get this, even occupation.  Hate crime legislation is ambiguous enough where you could almost fit any crime under that category.  So, if some asshole wants to go out and kill every single garbage collector he sees, that would be a hate crime.  so dont be disingenuous to your argument.  But really its clear you just want to spout off some more boring anti military shit.zzzzzzzzzzz

I am not antimilitary. I am against how society expects us to sing God bless America, donate to veteran causes, cry every time something bad happens to Americans, support the troops no matter what they do, celebrate whenever a terrorist in killed, tie yellow ribbons around trees, have yellow ribbon bumper magnets, and a million other things. I am sick and tired of the expected patriotism this hypocritical country demands of me and how we are expected to defer to the military is the most extreme expression of this. America is a hateful evil imperialistic country and I refuse to play along and sing about how awesome it is.

america worships the individual monad, and in so doing, yields and bends to the power of militarism and technology, which everywhere objectify the subject.

quite surprised you're not circulating this video, macbeth

rutgers looks like a really intellectual place

I'd wonder why they weren't doing anything productive, but then I'm here, so...

the venezuelan military is burning ballots right now

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

quite surprised you're not circulating this video, macbeth

rutgers looks like a really intellectual place

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL-0aHdovHk

I am in class playing on ny phone. When I get home I will watch the video and post other highlight videos from RutgersFest. It was an end of year party that the school sponsored and had concerts and other things. They had to stop it because blacks were coming in and starting fights and causing other issues. The straw that broke the camels back was when a few people got shot.

In any case, as I posted elsewhere- I am mentally dropped out. I don't care anymore

Macbeth wrote:

I am not a fan of nonviolent protest. I think the Occupy Wallstreet group would have made some progress if they assassinated politicians and business leaders. Don't even bother mentioning Ghandi or MLK. Both of those movements were backed with a threat of violence.

The only time violence is justified is if the population does not have access to democracy - IMO

Lone nuts or fringe groups trying to impose their ideology on the majority through violence because democracy doesn't work for them  - no.

I am neither an organic food safety hippy nor am I some kind of health-fitness nut.  But this is kinda crazy

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/15/health/meat-drugs/

(CNN) -- CNN) -- When you shop for turkey burgers for dinner tonight, you may be buying more than meat.  A recently released report from Food and Drug Administration found that of all the raw ground turkey tested, 81% was contaminated with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. 

Also, according to the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, or NARMS, Retail Meat Annual Report, ground turkey wasn't the only problem. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria were found in some 69% of pork chops, 55% of ground beef and 39% of chicken.  In the meat NARMS tested, scientists found significant amounts of salmonella and Campylobacter -- bacteria that cause millions of cases of food poisoning a year.  Of the chicken tested, 53% was tainted with an antibiotic-resistant form of E.coli, the report said.  Certain strains of E.coli can cause urinary tract infections, pneumonia and other illnesses. Antibiotic resistance means if you were to become ill, doctors would have fewer drug options to treat you.

Antibiotics are used in livestock to prevent disease, but they are also used as a protectant and to help growth. Some 29.9 million pounds of antibiotics were sold in 2011 for meat and poultry production, compared with the 7.7 million sold for human use, according to the Pew Charitable Trusts, and that number has been on the rise.  "Antibiotic use in animals is out of hand," said Dr. Gail Hansen, a veterinarian and senior officer for the Pew Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming, a project aimed at phasing out overuse of antibiotics in food production.  "We feed antibiotics to sick animals, which is completely appropriate, but we also put antibiotics in their feed and in their water to help them grow faster and to compensate for unhygienic conditions. If you have to keep the animals healthy with drugs, I would argue you need to re-examine the system. You don't take antibiotics preventively when you go out into the world."

Free market amirite?

Last edited by Spearhead (2013-04-16 20:12:11)

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Gandhi and MLK's success was both off of the back of the cold war. Had the U.S. not had the fear of racial warfare during the Cold war and a 10th of its population picking up communism, the civil rights movement wouldn't have accomplished its goals. Secondly, Gandhi's nonviolence campaign was the last step before a full on Sepoy rebellion. One that a post WW2 U.K. would have not been able to stop especially with the inevitable support of the rebellion by the USSR. During the same period there were examples of violent resistance working such as the wars against the French in Algeria and Vietnam. I can post some historical examples of violence producing results on a domestic level if you would like.

As for the principle of nonviolence I am just going to quote this block of text from elsewhere that puts makes my case better than I could.

You're tiny. Lets not make it personal little man.

It has been almost a week and you still haven't made your case against killing people for political reasons, Ken. I'm eagerly awaiting your update.

Fear of racial warfare?  There were violent protests, race riots, black panthers (that acheived less through violence even AFTER MLK) that did little to move the nation.  The idea of nonviolent protest is to get the public on your side - people who aren't normally invested in your cause.  MLK and Gandhi did that.  Gandhi was killed before the cold war even escalated - and Gandhi didn't even accomplish his stated goal of creating a unified subcontinent - he was devastated at the creation of Pakistan.

Sure violence works sometimes - but violence in those two instances you cited actually didn't work.  It's easier to gain sympathizers when a dude is beating a peaceful protester with a stick than it is when that protester is firing off a molotov cocktail.

What about the farm workers rights boycotts led by Cesar Chavez?  The CIW protest against Taco Bell for a living wage?  Both are closer to our life time than MLK and the workers rights organizing led by Cesar helped your lovely Filipinos...you'd think you'd be a bit more knowledgeable about that one specifically.

Re: MLK and Cesar I defer to Mary L. Dudziak a USC professor. Her book Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy lays out how the Cold War pushed much of the civil rights movement. Sorry to drop the ad text of the book but I'm just pointing out that among academic and scholars the idea that the civil rights movement was pushed by the cold war is popular.

In 1958, an African-American handyman named Jimmy Wilson was sentenced to die in Alabama for stealing two dollars. Shocking as this sentence was, it was overturned only after intense international attention and the interference of an embarrassed John Foster Dulles. Soon after the United States' segregated military defeated a racist regime in World War II, American racism was a major concern of U.S. allies, a chief Soviet propaganda theme, and an obstacle to American Cold War goals throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Each lynching harmed foreign relations, and "the Negro problem" became a central issue in every administration from Truman to Johnson.

In what may be the best analysis of how international relations affected any domestic issue, Mary Dudziak interprets postwar civil rights as a Cold War feature. She argues that the Cold War helped facilitate key social reforms, including desegregation. Civil rights activists gained tremendous advantage as the government sought to polish its international image. But improving the nation's reputation did not always require real change. This focus on image rather than substance--combined with constraints on McCarthy-era political activism and the triumph of law-and-order rhetoric--limited the nature and extent of progress.

I would quote right out of it if I still had a copy.

Like I said before Gandhi was the last stop before another Indian revolt. Do you honestly think that the U.K. would have been able to stop it? Had WW2 not happened the British and the rest of the Euros would have held onto their colonies since they would have had the power to keep control of them. Please cite some preWW2 examples of European decolonization that didn't involve violence but instead were won by appealing to European's sympathy and compassion.

Holding up nonviolence as the thing that really won both of those movements is an attempt to push a worldview that sustains existing power structures. Violence shouldn't be the first thing people go to obviously. But politically oppressed people shouldn't shy away from using violence. The overwhelming majority of people, especially in America, don't care about what happens to other people as long as it doesn't affect them. Hell in this country the majority of citizens and the segment of the group that holds the power are actually in support of political oppression in many cases. How often do you hear people complaining about the industrial prison complex on T.V. or in public other than a few liberals? Now how often do you hear support for things like "get tough on crime"? Or how about people rattling off race and crime stats in order to support putting black people in prison? Should black people just sit back patiently and wait for American to find it in its her to stop destroying their communities for money just because it feels bad? I think they have a case for using violence to add some pressure for their cause.

If we are using science to kill them it is only fair they evolve to kill us.

Jay wrote:

Do you eat it raw? No. Bacteria is present no matter what.

And how is it a free market when food is the most heavily regulated industry in America? Moron.

Isn't it FDA regulation to process meat in a certain way? Food inc talked about how a guy was killing chicken in the fresh outdoors was considered "unhygienic" because of FDA regulations. and you guys can't get french cheese in America xD