It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Souljah
I see that you dont have a problem with this same Flag Proudly Waving infront of Corporate HQ's of War Profiteers?
They are the Bunch of War Criminals, that Profit from this Madness called War on Terror, and are basicly degrading just about everything that Flag stands for.
But when people Burn it, then all hell breaks loose!
And its not a Problem of Riots - its the Problem of the Patriotism and what the Flag Represents.
Belive me, if burning the Flag was already Illegal, do you think it would stop the People from doing it?
And I dont think burning down somebodys House or blowing up a Car is in the same Leage as burning a piece of cloth with paint on it, which you buy in a store for few bucks. Now, how does that Compare?
Its a Piece of Cloth!
Will they pass a constitutional ban on pie throwing? Make it illegal to parody the president?
Welcome to the Police State.
Originally posted by kenshiro2012
Under the 1st Admendment, we as a people, can "voice" our opinion by burning the flag and nothing will come of it (as it stands now). BUT, if I were to burn the Qu'ran, urinate on it, Flush it (still want the toilet and plumbing that could do that), or even touch the Qu'ran, I would be demonized around the world. As recent events have shown, if I were to do any of the above acts against /to the Qu'ran other people would be killed.
What is the difference? It is more of a double standard here than anything else. If muslims, feel it is their right to desecrate the US flag as an expression of their freedom of speech, then why can they not accept the same offenses when performed on the Qu'ran?
Originally posted by CaptainJailew
Do you think all the executives and people actually putting the missiles and guns together created the war? Did Colt give Bush a lot of money so more M-4s and M-16s could be produced for the war? Did you know that the most recruited economic class is the lower 20%, the same people who work in those factories and make those guns?
Not that its right, but it is the reality of the situation. People get pissed when you light a flag on fire, people do not get pissed when a company flies it in front of their building. We do what the people want, its called a democracy, and I am quite fond of it.
People in America would be much more hesitant if it were illegal, the same reason people in America are much more hesitant to smoke weed in public as opposed to in Amsterdam.
Where do you draw the line? Just what is "free speech" what is a better test is called the "Free Expression" test, in which the government can not stop anything meant to express freely a concept or idea. If burning the flag was THE ONLY way to protest, then yes, it would be legal to do. The purpose of free speech was to maintain and aid in the free expression of ideas, not to protect specific instances of speech and action. If the idea of political dissent can still be conveyed, you have no foundation for your argument.
All jokes aside, I don't think this will be the trigger for a slippery slope and erosion of our rights. Stop focusing on the little things, legally, factually and practically your argument holds no water. This was an interesting debate, and I agree with you usually, but in this instance I think we must part ways.
Originally posted by SportyMB
I may be wrong but in America isnt it legal to burn bibles and religious papers if you chose to?
Souljah, do you think it's ok to burn chrisitan bibles in America? should it be illegal?
Originally posted by Souljah
I am talking about Corporations - I mean War Profiteers such as:
- Lockheed Martin
- Northrop Grumman
- General Dynamics
- United Technologies
- General Electric
- Science Applications International Corporation
- CSC/ DynCorp
Originally posted by shaunybaby
free speech is free speech, but it doesn't mean you can go around protesting how you like...burning a flag would be protest using violence...which isn't free speech. in england if deface money with the queens head on, lets say 'burn a £5 note' then thats supposed to be against the law...its nothing about free speech. you could say because of free speech you have the right to kick the s**t out of someone who's muslim, or black and so on if you're a white christian...whats the problem its free speech, i have the right to express myself how i want and freely. wrong.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
You see 'war profiteers'. I see massive employment, huge tax payments from the corporations and/or the millions employed by them, the space program with all it's benefits, airplanes, science and technology that make America great ....
The following companies are the top recipients of U.S. military dollars.
1. David J. Lesar, CEO, Kellogg, Brown & Root (subsidiary of Halliburton)
2003 military contracts revenue: $3.9 billion
Runs US military bases in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Djibouti, Georgia, Jordan, Kuwait, Turkey and Uzbekistan, built Guantanamo Bay, Cuba prisons, South Vietnam & Diego Garcia military bases
2. Vance D. Coffman, CEO, Lockheed Martin of Bethesda, Maryland.
2002 Salary: $25.3 million
Campaign Contributions in 2002: $9.7 million, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $69.1 billion,
Products: F-16, F/A-22 jet fighters, C-130J air transport, Hellfire, Javelin missiles
3. Philip M. Condit, CEO, Boeing of Chicago, Illinois
2002 Salary: $4.1 million
Campaign Contributions in 2002: $1.6 million, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $60 billion
Products: F-15 fighter, C-17 air transport, Apache Helicopter, JDAM "smart" bombs
4. William H. Swanson, CEO, Raytheon of Lexington, Massachusetts.
2002 Salary: $8.9 million, Military contracts 2000-2002: $27.5 billion
Products: Patriot & Tomahawk missiles, "Bunker Buster" bomb
5. Ronald Sugar, CEO, Northrop Grumman of Los Angeles, CA
2002 Salary: $1.5 million, military contracts 2000-2002: $34.6 billion (including TRW)
Products: B-2 stealth bomber, amphibious assault ships
6. Nicholas D Chabraja, CEO, General Dynamics of Fall Church, Virginia
2002 Salary: $15.2 million
Campaign Contributions in 2002: $1.64 million, Military Contracts 2000-2002: $25 billion
Products: Abrams M1 tanks, Trident submarines
7. George David, CEO, United Technologies of Hartford, Connecticut
2002 Salary: $9.7 million, Military contracts 2000-2002: $9.8 billion
Products: Black Hawk, Sea Hawk, Comanche helicopters
8. John F. Welch, Jr., CEO, General Electric of Fairfield. Connecticut
2002 Salary: $15.1 million
Campaign Contributions in 2002: $221,350, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $7.7 billion
Products: Aircraft engines, nuclear reactors, NBC news, msnbc.com
9. Paul V. Lombardi, CEO, DynCorp
Owned by Computer Sciences Corporation of El Segundo, California
Campaign Contributions in 2002: $221,350, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $5.5 billion
Products: Rent-a-cops in Afghanistan, Bosnia & Iraq, US-Mexico border, defoliation missions in Colombia.
Originally posted by shaunybaby
free speech is free speech, but it doesn't mean you can go around protesting how you like...
U.S. Constitution: First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.