I suppose this is appropriate, given that this song's history began when Lennon was inspired by Timothy Leary's failed gubernatorial campaign for governor of California titled "Come together, join the party" against Ronald Reagan, which promptly ended when Leary was sent to prison for possession of marijuana.

First off - congrats NR on a rare manifestation... Civil dialog. Here's hoping it becomes a habit rather than an exception.

there's a moral problem with military targeting civilian population centers.

Countries don't put production and infrastructure into "military-only zones". Fuel, electricity, steel, plastic, textiles, technology, computers, food, factories, manufacturing plants, and many other commodities are also critical military supplies. Action that effectively impacts the ability of a government to support a military by necessity will target civilian population centers.

We're looking for what amount to organized criminals operating within the borders of sovereign foreign nations. ...We're looking to stop a bunch of Timothy McVeighs in a country that doesn't really have any sort of governmental enforcement of law and order.

Hm - disagree on semantics. McVeigh was a radical that operated AGAINST the government he was within. Terror groups recruit locally by playing on local prejudices, but their heart and soul (and wallet) belong to some other nation. Case in point with the 9/11 bombers. A more accurate comparison would be your second one, where you hypothesized what a foreign government would do if McVeigh blew up their buildings - let's say Saddam's palace. If TMcV did that then the U.S. would have said, "Oh - terrible tragedy... We condemn it utterly..." but behind closed doors they'd pop champaign and maybe sponsor other radical groups in the hopes of getting a few more TMcVs to crop up.

The use of these kinds of 'plausible deniability' terror-ops forces is becoming more and more common. They can't do large-scale damage without nukes (thank goodness) in most areas. However, in Arab nations there are so many tribal rivalries and bad blood that they can do more than just commit random atrocities. They can topple nations, and win wars. And even in the U.S. they did billions in damage and killed thousands. My opinion is when nations in any way support these radicals they are culpable and have no right or expectation of immunity from a response.

@Winstonfield_Pennypacker I think you're still not engaging the central criticism several of us are leveling at you -- there's a moral problem with military targeting civilian population centers.

Add to this that in the case of our "war on terror", what we're really involved in here is a sort of international law enforcement effort. We weren't attacked by the military of Afghanistan, and we're not fighting their military now. We're looking for what amount to organized criminals operating within the borders of sovereign foreign nations. We're not looking to destroy the effectiveness of the Afghani people to wage war on us with their military, we're looking to stop a bunch of Timothy McVeighs in a country that doesn't really have any sort of governmental enforcement of law and order.

What you're talking about is a tactic I would argue was only barely justified to stop the Axis powers in WWII, against a country whose only crime is failing to root out criminals within their midst who merely have aspirations of launching an attack on US soil.

Just imagine if Timothy McVeigh had decided to blow up some important building in China instead of the US. Would China be justified in invading us, overthrowing our government and installing a puppet government, then bombing our infrastructure and civilian centers until they felt sure they'd killed every last member of a militia group in the US?

Blankfist, aren't you an IT guy? Flash programmer or somethign? You should know better. This is AT&T, NBC-Comcast, money flowing right through reason.tv right into the youtube.

Remember how much money people wasted buying myspace and what not?
http://www.observer.com/2010/media/media-companies-have-lost-15-billion-social-networking

I'm not going to say that they want to carve the internet up into little profit ponds. I'm saying I know I would want to. Making billions, doubling your market cap, being a CEO of a glamourous media company. I would carve up the internet if i were them.

As a libertarian you know that large corporations often push regulations thu congress so that smaller, more competitive companies can't enter the market. Deregulation is good.

So why are you posting this shit? This video actually says that the FCC has to regulate content. What a terrible lie.

Just like billionaires got the estate tax repealed by scaring dumfux about some death tax... they sent buses around claiming to be grassroots, trying to pass this flat tax shit. Meanwhile all the dumasses don't know that if you made less than 3.5 million in 2009, you aint paying the death tax.

I guess I'm saying you're as dum as the idiots who let themselves be terrorized into repealing the estate tax. Terrorized by some propaganda a few billionaires bought with their pocket change.

look at the phone and cable companies. They are in backroom deals with the FCC in order to shut out your internet and pipe their internet in. it's happening now. Reason.tv doesn't give a shit about a free internet. They care about keeping the lights on for Reason.tv. They won't report on the backroom deals that will turn your internet connection into a NBC.com pipe. Why do you think comcast is buying NBC? Do you think they like peacocks? No so they can turn your goddamn internet into a shopping mall for NBC.

Anyhow the wall street journal reports on the deal.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/the-fate-of-the-internet_b_620690.html

what do you think will happen if NBC doesn't get it's way? Exactly what is the FCC going to fuck up? Reason.tv would have you think it's going to turn the internet into some kind of communist propaganda newspaper. Really, what exactly is the FCC going to do?

Fine, let's just agree every cop is individually a fascist piece of shit, and to hate their individual guts.

Hating all cops isn't like hating all black people, it's like hating all rapists. They're all criminals, they all joined the same gang for the same reason.>> ^Shepppard:
You don't hate the entire white race because of people like Timothy Mcveigh, or Black people because of John Allen Muhammad, you hate the individual.

I have a bone to pick with this video..

but surprisingly, not with the cop, but rather some of the comments.

People around the sift know me, If there's reasonable doubt or an actual potential explination, I'll generally take the police officers side.

This is not one of those times.

"Another video of a PIG unjustifiably using too much force? What a fucking surprise!"

in a nutshell, this is what I have a problem with.

This man is not 100% of the police force. He's a clearly a dumbass, and doesn't deserve his badge, but just because there are some bad apples in a group, doesn't mean you need to hate all of them.

This is getting to the point where it's almost racism. Some of them are idiots. The same can be said about any race. Some of them are gun-toting morons. The same can be said about people of every race. Some of them abuse their power. The same can be said about any race, or sometimes nationality.

You don't hate the entire white race because of people like Timothy Mcveigh, or Black people because of John Allen Muhammad, you hate the individual.

Maybe it's because I come from outside the united states, or maybe it's because my dad is a cop and I've grown up around them all my life, but most of these people are just like you or me. They do their job to the best of their extent, and almost all of them enjoy the fact that they're helping the community with what they do and would NEVER do something stupid like the people shown in most of the internet videos you see.

However.. you DON'T see the videos of those people. The ones who do their jobs well. Worked their entire career without incident, and the people like that deserve better then hatred for something they've never done.. Again, don't hate an entire group of something.. just because a few of them are idiots.

>> ^lucky760:

I can't decide- Did Timothy McVeigh look more like the first terrorist or the second?


Well, there was the nutjob who killed the guard at the Holocaust museum. If not for the glasses, they'd look nearly identical.

>> ^lucky760:

I can't decide- Did Timothy McVeigh look more like the first terrorist or the second?


timothy mcveigh wasnt a terrorist cuz he wasnt muslim, duh!

I can't decide- Did Timothy McVeigh look more like the first terrorist or the second?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Rachel Maddow, timothy mcveigh, oklahoma city, bombing, terrorism' to 'Rachel Maddow, Timothy Mcveigh, Oklahoma City, bombing, terrorism' - edited by NordlichReiter

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Rachel Maddow, timothy mcveigh, olklahoma city, bombing, terrorism' to 'Rachel Maddow, timothy mcveigh, oklahoma city, bombing, terrorism' - edited by NordlichReiter

I saw this video in a tweet by Timothy Shieff roughly 20h ago. Internet is too bloody small.

Why do I kind of admire this guy even though I think Timothy Treadwell was more of an idiot? (Leaving aside the fact that Treadwell got his girlfriend killed too. Hopefully this guy won't take anyone with him when he goes.)

Anyway, upvote for the clear view of lion genitalia in the final shot.

I'd like to see this guy's emails.

If he's actually interested in science and transparency, and not just influencing public perceptions of climate science, he shouldn't have a problem handing them over.


==================================== ==================================================
Dr. Timothy Ball is Chairman and Chair of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP).[1] Two of the three directors of the NRSP - Timothy Egan and Julio Lagos - are executives with the PR and lobbying company, the High Park Group (HPG).[2] Both HPG and Egan and Lagos work for energy industry clients and companies on energy policy.[3]

Ball is a Canadian climate change skeptic and was previously a "scientific advisor" to the oil industry-backed organization, Friends of Science.[4] Ball is a member of the Board of Research Advisors of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, a Canadian free-market think tank which is predominantly funded by foundations and corporations.[5]

==================================== ==================================================

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tim_Ball

Are you honestly claiming someone who is a fan of Sara Palin is likely to have reasonable thought out beliefs to back up their support of her? ... So WP, can you elaborate more on why you semi-kinda-sorta support Palin?

I VERY much agree with Palin's 'small government' talking point. We need more politicians discussing reductions as opposed to increases. The USA is in a 'government bubble' just as dangerous as the dot.com or housing bubbles. Like it or not, Palin is about the only person in the GOP today that is pushing the 'scale back government' talking point. McCain sure wasn't. I'm a 'fan' of any politician who has a record of cutting, and who considers government scaleback as a major issue.

I also VERY much like it when when Congress is held by the opposing political party to the President. That check & balance works fantastically. When one party is running the whole show it is always a bad thing (Bush & Obama's agendas are prime examples). I'm not a GOP party member. I tend to vote 3rd party. But in off-year elections as a matter of principle I will always vote for the Congressman/Senator who is of the major opposing party to the sitting President. So I'm in favor of anything that gooses the GOP into the House & Senate in 2010 if only to throw the whole system into complete gridlock. If Palin motivates Independants and the GOP base (and it seems that she does) then I support it.

fundamentalist-neo-con camp

The true 'neo-cons' are left-wing politicians who support the military. Joe Liberman is a neo-con. You are using the lazy, propoganda definition of neo-con, which is to use it as an epithet similar to denigratory racial or sexual terms. To a left-wing liberal, 'neo-con' is a word you can slap on anyone who tilts right on any issue. Less spending? Neo-con. Limits on late-term abortion? Neo-con. Tax cuts? Neo-con. This stems from the practice in the 1990s when Bill Clinton's War Room posse would run out and call all political opponents 'neo-cons' in order to conjure of images of Timothy McVeigh or other people that live on compounds. It isn't your fault perhaps to have fallen into this trap. However, now that I've revealed the truth it will be your fault if you choose to remain in the lie. Palin supporters are not 'neo cons'. They are plain folk who agree with her on issues which disagree with radical left-wing politics.

So you too are in the iron grip of Big Fast Food?

I enjoy the occasional indulgence, but as a user of the P90-X system I am not an abuser. At 6 foot 1 and 170 pounds with a 32" waist at age 40, I consider myself in reasonable shape and therefore able to partake of a pizza now and then without shame.