LAMO such propaganda and fear mongering.

The left do not care about saving people from getting shot or killed. Its only a political tool to spread over hyped fear to take all guns away from the public.

Generally speaking:
99% of all gun shooting are illegally obtained guns of Democrat controlled cities.

99% of of shooting are non NRA members.


School - mall- etc shootings represent less that 1% of shootings but get 80% of the national press coverage.

>> ^enoch:

this is pure fear-mongering and nothing more.
be afraid of the brown people and while we do that lets ignore the massive amounts of information giving context to the current situation and lets instead focus on the things that will instill fear.
gingrich is part of the problem.
perpetuating a false dichotomy based on misinformation and hyperbolic language which is meant solely to incite fear and offers absolutely nothing in the form of a resolution or even a modicum of contextual understanding.
gingrish is a consumate politician who pounds the fear drum like a pro.
fuck that opportunistic whore.
he would sell your grandmothers dentures if he thought it would further his relevancy.


You forgot to mention that the National Press Club is a group of persons organized for a political purpose-to hell with those reporting, taping, editing, and broadcasting this treasonous dribble. Create the terrorists then demand action against them??
Americans created this monster through complacency, self-indulgence, and submission to faulty programming. Anyone with an opinion other than that have been bamboozled into thinking there is any other form of terrorism than domestic (by the way, even more so under the current administration), needs their heads scrubbed.

>> ^dag:
I don't know Choggie- although the setting of that video at the National Press Club lends it a lot of credibility- I didn't see any really persuasive evidence. My feelings are that actual in-the-flesh alien visitation is possible, but highly unlikely.
>> ^choggie:
Now....those of you who choose to, go back to sleep.
@dag-Their agenda,according to those in the know, is a benevolent, transformative awakening from our current rush to render this planet uninhabitable-
Individuals have not done it, save through complicity with thise who have created this framework for the destruction of our planet through the raping of her resources.
Corporations and governments must be eliminated before we can take the next step.



As unlikely as free energy? As unlikely as self-replicating nanorobotic manufacture of anything? As unlikely as anything that would render your current world view extinct should you suddenly be able to see 50 years into the future of the planet?

Why since this very public and formidable testimony to the press,has this issue not been placed before congress? Ask yourself this and afford yourself cushy answers until your brain explodes, they are scared shitless of what panic may occur-The world is so much bigger than what we as peons have access to-so much bigger.....


I personally knew a SAC pilot who when asked what he had seen during his over 40 years flying everything there is to fly for the military, he used the nick-name they used in the force for a UFO, said he saw them, then would speak no more on the matter-These people who came forward from the military in the NPC event a few years back, did so knowing that the people who swore them to secrecy could and would easily have taken everything from them, including family and friends.

Hiding shit is the only way people like the Bushs' can go on living-If we knew half of what Bush senior has done he would immediately be arrested, and sumarilly executed,by an enraged world.....You people think he was bad for the shit we DO know??!! Jesus man, truth is ALWAYS far stranger than fiction.

The logistics of disclosure include the inevitability of widespread panic on the part of the masses should they be shocked into consciousness with information hidden from them by their governments....UFO's are mild compared to the crimes commited by our so-called leaders past and present, some of them still breathing air thanks to files classified for over 40 years(assainations, coops, etc). The truth is not that hard to find, but people need to sto beingprogrammed like cattle by the machine(television,wage-slavery,endless legalism, etc.) The world is groaning for information..they are given half-truths, infotainment,and flat-out bullshit to shape their world views.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I don't know Choggie- although the setting of that video at the National Press Club lends it a lot of credibility- I didn't see any really persuasive evidence. My feelings are that actual in-the-flesh alien visitation is possible, but highly unlikely.

>> ^choggie:

Now....those of you who choose to, go back to sleep.
@dag-Their agenda,according to those in the know, is a benevolent, transformative awakening from our current rush to render this planet uninhabitable-
Individuals have not done it, save through complicity with thise who have created this framework for the destruction of our planet through the raping of her resources.
Corporations and governments must be eliminated before we can take the next step.

ah, I see.. shame. thanks for the promote on the Huxley doc, btw!

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
Back in the old days, before pq's, videos went into your discard pile if they didn't get enough votes.

In reply to this comment by EndAll:
Why'd you discard this?

Back in the old days, before pq's, videos went into your discard pile if they didn't get enough votes.

In reply to this comment by EndAll:
Why'd you discard this?

From Webster's:

radical:
a: marked by a considerable departure from the usual or traditional : extreme
b: tending or disposed to make extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions
c: of, relating to, or constituting a political group associated with views, practices, and policies of extreme change
d: advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs

None of these apply, unless you're implying that there's a tradition that forbids the description of racial grievances in public. Or your view is that the proposition of a black man being President is "extreme change".

As for those who want to call this "crazy", or "hate speech", it's certainly inflammatory language, but I hear truth in what he's saying.

I agree that we're in a country run by "rich, white, men", and while I disagree that Hillary fit that mold (she's rich and white, but not a man), I also disagree that Barack isn't "rich", except by way of comparison to Hillary and McCain. Either Democratic candidate at that stage would've been a break of that mold, and I couldn't be happier about that.

I also have to go out on a limb and say that Hillary probably never was called a n***er, but you can be damn sure Obama's been called one. Hell, he probably gets a thousand e-mails a day filled with it.

Anyone interested in Rev Wright should watch his appearance on Bill Moyers, and his speech to the NAACP given that same weekend. Then watch his appearance at the National Press Club that Monday, and then hear the aftermath from Bill Moyers, and see if it might not seem a bit sad.

He definitely likes to poke people right in the eye with his message, but passionate people often do that. Give him a couple hours of time to explain who he is, where he comes from, and what he's trying to do before you try to call him a "nutball" or "hatemonger", because he's not either one of those things at all.

You seem to be confused about what I'm saying. I'm not against war photographers. Did I say photographers should go around helping everyone like some sort of roving superheroes? No. I said that if there's someone that needs immediate medical attention right in front of you and there's no immediate danger to yourself or others, you have the a responsibility as a human being to help them and not stand around snapping shots while they bleed to death.

Taken from the National Press Photographers Association Code of ethics, standard #4:

"Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy." NPPA

Standing around snapping photos while a civilian caught in a cross-fire is bleeding out directly in front of you doesn't strike me as very compassionate. Going back to the point I made earlier about Nachtwey, you lose none of the emotional power of the photo by snapping shots at the hospital as doctors work on the wounded.

Also, former NPPA president John Long had this to say about the ethics of photojournalists.

"For example, take the very famous photo of the young child dying in Sudan while a vulture stands behind her, waiting. It was taken by Kevin Carter who won a Pulitzer Prize for the photo (a photo that raised a lot of money for the relief agencies). He was criticized for not helping the child; he replied there were relief workers there to do that. After receiving his Pulitzer, Kevin Carter returned to Africa and committed suicide. He had a lot of problems in his life but, with the timing of the sequence of events, I cannot help thinking there is a correlation between his photographing the child and his suicide.

This is the kind of choice all journalists will face some time in his or her career; maybe not in the extreme situation that Carter faced, but in some way, we all will be faced with choices of helping or photographing. Some day we will be at a fire or a car accident and we will be called upon to put the camera down and help. It is a good idea to think about these issues in advance because when the hour comes, it will come suddenly and we will be asked to make a choice quickly.

Here is the principle that works for me. It is not a popular one and it is one that many journalists disagree with but it allows me to sleep at night. If you have placed yourself in the position where you can help, you are morally obligated to help. I do not ask you to agree with me. I just want you to think about this and be prepared; at what point do you put the camera down and help? At what point does your humanity become more important than your journalism?" Ethics in the Age of Digital Photography(emphasis added by me)

I hope you all watched his fine NAACP speech. but that's not making the news like his national press club speech. I have put it in a playlist in the hope of getting this sifted

Can't say I enjoy sifting this. I'm sure this will hurt someone.

http://politics.videosift.com/video/Reverend-Wright-Probably-Shouldnt-Be-On-TV

I dont care what washingtonpost says, but i expect others may:
from http://blog.washingtonpost.com/roughsketch/2008/04/obamas_pastor_reignites_race_c.html


The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, explaining this morning why he had waited so long before breaking his silence about his incendiary sermons, offered a paraphrase from Proverbs: "It is better to be quiet and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

Barack Obama's pastor would have been wise to continue to heed that wisdom.

Should it become necessary in the months from now to identify the moment that doomed Obama's presidential aspirations, attention is likely to focus on the hour between nine and ten this morning at the National Press Club. It was then that Wright, Obama's longtime pastor, reignited a controversy about race from which Obama had only recently recovered - and added lighter fuel.

here is a little more info on this guy (taken from wikipedia)

Hate Crimes legislation

On 17 April 2007, Hutcherson was scheduled to participate in a press conference hosted by Exodus International opposing passage of the federal Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007. The event, to be held at the National Press Club, was intended to put pressure on lawmakers to drop the legislation which proposed adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the currently protected classes of race, color, religion and national origin.[12] The press conference was cancelled in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings and never rescheduled.[13] The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 passed the House on 3 May 2007 by a vote of 237 to 180.

On 18 June 2007, Hutcherson and twenty nine other African-American pastors in the High Impact Leadership Coalition publicly opposed the Senate hate crimes bill renamed The Matthew Shepard Act on 1st Amendment grounds.[14]

________________________________________

Same-Sex marriage

On 1 May 2004, Hutcherson organized a "Mayday for Marriage" rally against marriage rights for lesbian and gay couples.[20] The highly-publicized effort drew an estimated 20,000 supporters from around the Puget Sound region to Safeco Field in Seattle, Washington - a city otherwise known for being welcoming of gay culture. Later, in October 2004, he organized another "Mayday for Marriage" rally in Washington, D.C. which attracted an estimated 140,000 participants.[15]

After switching focus from opposing anti-discrimination legislation to fighting recognition of domestic partnerships in early 2007, Hutcherson claims that the Christian group who were in charge of the effort failed to follow through on their plans. Despite opposition from Hutcherson and Christian groups the Domestic Partnership bill (HB5336) passed the state legislature and was signed into law on 21 April 2007. Angered by the situation, Hutcherson has said he intends to force a state-wide debate on legal recognition for same-sex relationships which he and other opponents see as an incremental step towards securing same-sex marriage rights. Speaking with The Olympian, Hutcherson said “I am going to do something that deals with the main issue,” adding that he intends to provide broader political leadership for Christians that he believes has been absent in recent years.[16]

________________________________________

Anti-Discrimination legislation

In 2005, the Seattle weekly newspaper The Stranger reported that Reverend Hutcherson persuaded Microsoft to withdraw support for the Washington Anti-discrimination bill (HB1515) that would have made it illegal to fire an employee due to their sexual orientation.[3] Hutcherson had reportedly told the Microsoft general counsel that 700 evangelical Microsoft employees attend his church, and all of them opposed the bill. He added that if Microsoft did not withdraw support of the bill, he would organize a national boycott of the software maker. Sometime after the meeting Microsoft changed its long held position on the issue from support to neutral stating that anti-discrimination was not a priority for that legislative session.[4]

is this not someones rights ?

from wikipedia

Hate Crimes legislation
On 17 April 2007, Hutcherson was scheduled to participate in a press conference hosted by Exodus International opposing passage of the federal Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007. The event, to be held at the National Press Club, was intended to put pressure on lawmakers to drop the legislation which proposed adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the currently protected classes of race, color, religion and national origin.[12] The press conference was cancelled in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings and never rescheduled.[13] The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 passed the House on 3 May 2007 by a vote of 237 to 180.

On 18 June 2007, Hutcherson and twenty nine other African-American pastors in the High Impact Leadership Coalition publicly opposed the Senate hate crimes bill renamed The Matthew Shepard Act on 1st Amendment grounds.[14]

or how about this ?

[edit] Same-Sex marriage
On 1 May 2004, Hutcherson organized a "Mayday for Marriage" rally against marriage rights for lesbian and gay couples.[20] The highly-publicized effort drew an estimated 20,000 supporters from around the Puget Sound region to Safeco Field in Seattle, Washington - a city otherwise known for being welcoming of gay culture. Later, in October 2004, he organized another "Mayday for Marriage" rally in Washington, D.C. which attracted an estimated 140,000 participants.[15]

After switching focus from opposing anti-discrimination legislation to fighting recognition of domestic partnerships in early 2007, Hutcherson claims that the Christian group who were in charge of the effort failed to follow through on their plans. Despite opposition from Hutcherson and Christian groups the Domestic Partnership bill (HB5336) passed the state legislature and was signed into law on 21 April 2007. Angered by the situation, Hutcherson has said he intends to force a state-wide debate on legal recognition for same-sex relationships which he and other opponents see as an incremental step towards securing same-sex marriage rights. Speaking with The Olympian, Hutcherson said “I am going to do something that deals with the main issue,” adding that he intends to provide broader political leadership for Christians that he believes has been absent in recent years.[16]

or one more

[edit] Anti-Discrimination legislation
In 2005, the Seattle weekly newspaper The Stranger reported that Reverend Hutcherson persuaded Microsoft to withdraw support for the Washington Anti-discrimination bill (HB1515) that would have made it illegal to fire an employee due to their sexual orientation.[3] Hutcherson had reportedly told the Microsoft general counsel that 700 evangelical Microsoft employees attend his church, and all of them opposed the bill. He added that if Microsoft did not withdraw support of the bill, he would organize a national boycott of the software maker. Sometime after the meeting Microsoft changed its long held position on the issue from support to neutral stating that anti-discrimination was not a priority for that legislative session.[4]

___________________

Fred Phelps = Maury Povich material

this guy ?