Should Ward Churchill be jailed?

[cameron]

Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. I guess we'll never know cause we didn't live back then.

My comments about the FOunding Father's have nothing to do with W. Chrichhill. I could care less about the guy. He's an asshole.

The bottom line here is that you advocated the killing of people who said things you disagree with. Noam Chomsky is another asshole, yet I hardly think he did anything worthy of the death penalty. take note of how much people supported you in this thread.

You have attempted to use what the founding fathers have said, to excuse the acts of sedition committed by Ward Curchill. Ignoring the fact that they themselves would have as likely as not, have put him to the sword. Despite what you have tried to imply, that we can't know what they would have done. We know what they did with those they viewed as guilty of sedition: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority

You want to keep pushing this, OK Mateo I will oblige you. Do you understand the difference between lawful and unlawful killing? I am not advocating killing someone for simply disagreeing with me, that is a callow misstatement my position. I am advocating that those who are guilty of acts of sedition be held responsible for those acts.

Note: Mateo I don't need others to fight my battles for me. I follow the light cast by my own conscience, and not any consensus opinion of some group. Try standing on your own two feet. I suggest If you really want to travel down this road with me, lets keep it respectful shall we.

[mateo]

No he should be put up against a wall and shot for acts of sedition.

"Acts" or "Words"? Has be violently attacked the United States, or has he just said some really nasty shit? I'm going with the former on this one.

And why do you want to kill Noam Chomsky? Please state specific instances where he was attacked the United States thorugh more than just his words.

Sure, I'll keep it respectful. Keep in mind, you've been leveling most of the insults here.

[cameron]

mateo said:

No he should be put up against a wall and shot for acts of sedition.

"Acts" or "Words"? Has be violently attacked the United States, or has he just said some really nasty shit? I'm going with the former on this one.

And why do you want to kill Noam Chomsky? Please state specific instances where he was attacked the United States thorugh more than just his words.

Sure, I'll keep it respectful. Keep in mind, you've been leveling most of the insults here.

You need to learn to use a dictionary; sedition: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority


There is a difference between accurate description and insult Mateo. I meant respectful in the manner you approach me. You have been distinctly disrespectful in the fashion of an adolescent child.

I don't have anymore time right now, think before you respond to me.

[mateo]

cameron said:

mateo said:

No he should be put up against a wall and shot for acts of sedition.

"Acts" or "Words"? Has be violently attacked the United States, or has he just said some really nasty shit? I'm going with the former on this one.

And why do you want to kill Noam Chomsky? Please state specific instances where he was attacked the United States thorugh more than just his words.

Sure, I'll keep it respectful. Keep in mind, you've been leveling most of the insults here.

You need to learn to use a dictionary; sedition: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority


There is a difference between accurate description and insult Mateo. I meant respectful in the manner you approach me. You have been distinctly disrespectful in the fashion of an adolescent child.

I don't have anymore time right now, think before you respond to me.

So on top of advocating politil killings, you also htink I, and others, must address you as if you're someone important. I have not been disrespectful in any way. Please excuse me if I get a little defensive when I see someone advocating the killing of someone who, although a despicable human, is excersising his right to free speech.

Cameron, no one here supported you when you called for the execution of Churchill and Chomsky. Take that as a clue.

And since we're on the issue of the founding fathers, keep this in mind: Yeah, maybe they would have run Churchill out on a rail, but they also owned slaves. SHould we all own slaves cause that what some of the founding fathers did?

[cameron]

So on top of advocating politil killings,

I've never done any such thing, just because you are unable to recognize the difference between free speech and sedition, does not mean that one does not exist.

you also htink I, and others, must address you as if you're someone important.

Shakespeare, in Henry IV, Part One. Falstaff: 'The better part of valour is discretion; in the which better part I have saved my life.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
Alexander Pope

Let me try to be very clear, I could care less if you respect me or not. You want to act the fool, then you shouldn't be surprised when you are treated as such. That includes me, however if you treat me as a fool, how do you think I will treat you?

( I thought of something that explains what it is I am trying to convey to you. It's just a metaphor so don't get scared OK? If you put our debate in another context like this one: if we had a one night stand, I may or may not respect you in the morning, but if you do not respect me, I don't really care.)

I have not been disrespectful in any way.

You may not consider your callow mischaracterizations of my position as being insulting.
I do!

Please excuse me if I get a little defensive when I see someone advocating the killing of someone who, although a despicable human, is excersising his right to free speech

Again you fail to recognize, not all speech is protected speech.

Cameron, no one here supported you when you called for the execution of Churchill and Chomsky. Take that as a clue.

Again if they do or if they don't means what exactly? Like I've already tried to make clear to you. I follow the light cast by my own conscience, not on what you or anybody else may or may not think about it. If you wish to persuade me that I am wrong. You will need to do a whole lot better than "Everybody else thinks so" got it?

And since we're on the issue of the founding fathers, keep this in mind: Yeah, maybe they would have run Churchill out on a rail, but they also owned slaves. SHould we all own slaves cause that what some of the founding fathers did?


I didn't bring our founding fathers into this, you did. Right now I have bigger fish to fry. No insult meant, but this is getting tiresome. Write an essay why you think I am wrong and I will reply with one. Otherwise I think I am done with this.