NO, I WILL NOT COMPLY! PERIOD watch!
youtube.com — Americans, you have the right to tell the government NO!
hdar3415- 1023 diggs
- digg it
- technoboy6666, on 10/18/2007, -5/+92No, I will not comply! Exclamation point.
- redfox2600, on 10/10/2007, -7/+9I will not comply.
-Seven of Nine, Tertiary Adjunct of Unimatrix Zero-One- redfox2600, on 10/15/2007, -11/+1Well I originally intended to have a sound clip, but it was a 404 so here a paradox.
If you listen to this guy and do comply with authority figures, then you now designate him as a new authority figure, in which case he would be saying to not listen to himself.- cdahlkvist, on 10/15/2007, -1/+12Wow. I hope the rest of digg doesn't read too far into this like you.
you obviously don't know the difference between someone asking "what would it take for you to stand up and fight" vs. someone telling you "fight because I tell you to do so."
- cdahlkvist, on 10/15/2007, -1/+12Wow. I hope the rest of digg doesn't read too far into this like you.
- moocow1452, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/women/voyager/notcomply.wav
Got your sound clip.
- redfox2600, on 10/15/2007, -11/+1Well I originally intended to have a sound clip, but it was a 404 so here a paradox.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 10/15/2007, -0/+4I watched EVERY SINGLE EPISODE! then i went back and studied the entire constitution and articles of confederation. and bill of rights. maaan. the power you feel when you can weild the law.
- redfox2600, on 10/10/2007, -7/+9I will not comply.
- 1337diggster, on 10/18/2007, -21/+30Also might I add there are very simple things you can do to protest. First off you can start by dumping your federal reserve notes and converting your cash reserves (such as your emergency savings) into gold/silver/other precious metals. Why? Because the federal reserve notes have inflation and your interest on those reserves (paid out through savings accounts) is noting more than a tax on your wealth!!!!!
- jmpeagle, on 10/16/2007, -17/+18that is a dumb idea. Try buying something with Gold at your local Best Buy.
- FreeStater, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2Purchasing at Best Buy is kind of the opposite of savings, but you have a point. Gold is not as liquid, which is both a positive and negative quality. However, one day we will wake up and the FRNs will be worthless. Then not only will Best Buy not take them, but they make for poor wall/toilet paper.
- fusama, on 10/16/2007, -3/+6While it is true that over the long term gold doesn't lose value due to inflation, another way of saying that is that its rate of return is the same as inflation. Nearly every other investment method, including high yield savings accounts and most bonds (TIPS & I-Bonds by design) have higher yields than inflation.
- FreeStater, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2I've heard it said that you need to get a yield of 10% to break even. That's pretty brutal.
- p0tent1al, on 10/15/2007, -4/+17Yeah I gather people have no idea what the parent poster is talking about, and that is why they are digging him down. People need to go watch the movie, Money as debt, and then come back and talk to us.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279&q=money+as+debt&total=1103&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0- Sharpezor, on 10/15/2007, -0/+2that is an awesome video man like wtf i didnt even know that
- tyywebb, on 10/15/2007, -1/+2Wow that was really interesting. I guess according to this video we can thank bankers for the Iraq war.
- rootneg2, on 10/16/2007, -3/+3good point; but now that the US dollar is no longer backed by gold/silver, if everyone *WERE* to try and to that, there wouldn't be enough gold to go around: instant depression.
On the other hand, there is definitely something to be said for *preempting* a depression before everyone else gets the same idea...- FreeStater, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2Why do so many people think this way? Your concerns are completely unwarranted. If there were only a single lbs of gold in existence, you could still back a currency with it. I don't know if people have the idea in their head that we'd need to print dollar bills out of gold, or make a one ounce gold coin as a basic unit of currency, but whatever your thought process is, you're mistaken.
Hypothetically, we could switch to a gold standard, and a single ounce gold coin would be approx $760.00 USD. 10 grams would be roughly $300.00 USD, etc. The benefit of it is that the value of the USD would stay that way. Also, it would mean that our government couldn't just print more of it (inflation tax) to spend in any way they wanted.
- FreeStater, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2Why do so many people think this way? Your concerns are completely unwarranted. If there were only a single lbs of gold in existence, you could still back a currency with it. I don't know if people have the idea in their head that we'd need to print dollar bills out of gold, or make a one ounce gold coin as a basic unit of currency, but whatever your thought process is, you're mistaken.
- mmazing, on 10/15/2007, -2/+2I heard there is some giant place that has all the gold. Let's go there and take it!
- Bklynadam, on 10/15/2007, -1/+1I thought it was Fort Knox
- chancesarent, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5No, it's the Federal Reserve under Wall Street, if I have my Die Hard 3 history correct
- Bklynadam, on 10/15/2007, -1/+1I thought it was Fort Knox
- tsalti, on 10/15/2007, -4/+1Whats wrong with investing in gold bonds? (no not the athletes foot powder) haha
- jmpeagle, on 10/16/2007, -17/+18that is a dumb idea. Try buying something with Gold at your local Best Buy.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/15/2007, -39/+6I will not comply with watching extremely old web videos.
- cdahlkvist, on 10/15/2007, -0/+10I will comply with burying you. Who cares if it's old. Many of us haven't seen it and since we cannot read your mind and we obviously can't keep up with your level of "in the know" old videos may be posted.
- KyjL, on 10/18/2007, -4/+29People wonder why I go to school for this sort of thing (at least as my Minor). I think this is a good reason.
- ICSU, on 10/15/2007, -1/+7Hitler in Germany
98% voted for him in Austria-Hungary? Which actually ended in 1918...
He's got some points right though. - Jibberwalk, on 10/15/2007, -0/+3I'm double majoring in Political Science and Criminology. That'll lead to graduate school with a focus on Constitutional law. I completley get why you go to school for this sort of thing. This sort of thing is the reason I live.
- ICSU, on 10/15/2007, -1/+7Hitler in Germany
- r0b0, on 10/15/2007, -38/+7Was he blaming the Jews for the Holocaust?
- jmpeagle, on 10/16/2007, -0/+40Did you even watch the video?
He's arguing that not resisting is probably not the best way to stop yourself from getting your rights trampled on. Many Jews hold this view, Holocaust survivors regret not resisting Hitler. Do you honestly think that anyone who had to live through the Holocaust and didn't resist thought to themselves afterwards (if they survived) "well I wouldn't have done anything differently".- r0b0, on 10/15/2007, -20/+2Yeah, I watched it, but it seems like a bad example to use, because it seems like he is blaming the jews for the holocaust because they didn't do anything.
- jmpeagle, on 10/18/2007, -0/+17wow...just wow. I don't know how you made that logical leap. Talk to a Holocaust survivor some time and ask them whether or not the Jews should have stood up against Hitler in the beginning.
- michaelinnotts, on 10/18/2007, -0/+10Your failure to grasp the fundamentals of logic impress me. We have got to a point in society where the fear of insulting other races is blinding us to the fundamentals of logic, rhetoric and argumentation. I was surprised to read in Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate that many students fear saying the Holocaust was wrong because they have been taught it is wrong to judge other cultures!
- RobotBuddha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Great-grandchild of jews who fled pre-ww2 germany. The main point, above any other, that they taught us was that fighting for your rights will get you killed. Not fighting for them will get you killed. The only way out is not playing the game at all, and removing yourself from the country trying to kill you. My great-grandparents lived because of that, none of their kin did because they fell into the other two sides of the spectrum.
- Schmidtopolis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I thank god (or at least, I thank my great grandparents) that they fled Hungary around the time Hitler was elected. Had they not, who knows what my family would have fallen into, being gypsy Magyar in a time of extreme authoritarian fascism... And the teach was not promoting the idea that the Jewish community was to blame for the Holocaust, he was drawing a parallel between not speaking up (or taking action) for you basic human rights, and the horrible things that can come of it. We all (and the teach as well) accept that Hitler and the Nazi party were to blame for the Holocaust... and there are lessons to be learned from that attempted genocide. Now listen next time, and don't just breed knee-jerk, PC reactions.
- michaelinnotts, on 10/16/2007, -0/+8And that is exactly why I left the US.
- cdahlkvist, on 10/15/2007, -7/+2Not sure leaving the country was what the founding fathers had in mind. Running scared is just as bad as not taking a stand against injustices. You must be French.
- BlackOp, on 10/15/2007, -0/+3Fighting for your rights will probably only get you killed after a certain stage. The point is to do it before that.
- FreeStater, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2Unfortunately, Anne Frank's family tried to come to the United States, but were denied. Too bad we didn't stick to the Constitution. We could have allowed people to save themselves from a lot of suffering.
- r0b0, on 10/15/2007, -20/+2Yeah, I watched it, but it seems like a bad example to use, because it seems like he is blaming the jews for the holocaust because they didn't do anything.
- p0tent1al, on 10/16/2007, -1/+9WTF are you Rudy Giuliani? You obviously didn't get the point he was trying to make. Go back and watch the video again. I'm not going to spell it out for you.
- Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3dumbass.
- jmpeagle, on 10/16/2007, -0/+40Did you even watch the video?
- Lax32, on 10/18/2007, -11/+54As time progresses, the probability of something being compared to Nazi Germany approaches 1.
- Koookie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21Godwin's law does not negate the accuracy of the statement in question.
- vfrex, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20I don't know why you are being dugg up for making an obvious statement. THE SKY IS BLUE. There, digg me up too.
- elnerdo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Because it's godwin's law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
- elnerdo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Because it's godwin's law.
- Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1As time progresses, the probability of something being compared to a yellow canary approaches 1 too. So?
- wootup, on 10/18/2007, -5/+92This was a very articulate, well-worded lesson. You can tell he actually cares about what he's talking about, and if there's something that America needs right now, it's people that truly care about freedom and believe in it. Free Americans need to take back their country before it's too late.
- michaelinnotts, on 10/18/2007, -1/+14I'm in an awkward position. I agree with him, but I felt the lesson was very poorly phrased, the example faulty, and his presentation inaccurate. Firstly, the Holocaust was a genocide of millions of people--Jews were the majority, but too often we forget about the Roma (aka Gypsies), homosexuals, foreigners, and handicapped. Secondly, he skipped a lot of steps of the Nazi attacks against the Jewry such as the ghettos and the food rationing, which were initially justified as ways to improve health/living conditions for all.
I agree with his point, and the hyperbole will make it more palatable to many, but it is still an unscholarly representation of history.- likeyehokwhatev, on 10/18/2007, -2/+2I felt the same way. He also passed the whole thing off as if not one single Jewish person cared about what was going on, which is completely ridiculous.
- michaelinnotts, on 10/18/2007, -1/+14I'm in an awkward position. I agree with him, but I felt the lesson was very poorly phrased, the example faulty, and his presentation inaccurate. Firstly, the Holocaust was a genocide of millions of people--Jews were the majority, but too often we forget about the Roma (aka Gypsies), homosexuals, foreigners, and handicapped. Secondly, he skipped a lot of steps of the Nazi attacks against the Jewry such as the ghettos and the food rationing, which were initially justified as ways to improve health/living conditions for all.
- BleedingHeadKen, on 10/18/2007, -3/+56That's Michael Badnarik, the 2004 Libertarian candidate for President. He cares about his subject, and he cares about *your* liberty as well as his. Unfortunately, we are all taught that saying "we will not comply" to government authorities will get us into trouble. Witness what happened to the Golden Gate High Schools students suspended for violation of dress code when they wore suits and ties to school. It's not about what they wore - it's about thwarting the authority of the people that are appointed to watch over us.
- Schmidtopolis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Evidently, schools are not the best place to exercise your freedom of speech/expression. For the most part, teachers and faculty don't teach, they are only concerned with keeping their jobs and the status quo. I realize that you can't blame them for wanting to keep their jobs, but the whole education structure needs to be re-examined so that teachers can have an opinion, and teach their students to form their own opinions as well.
- michaelinnotts, on 10/15/2007, -16/+4I am so sick of you libertarians. Yes, "I will not comply" is the better response in many situations, but we kinda need police to, yanno, stop murder, theft, and rape. If you look at European nations as recently as the 17th century, you will see the endemic misery and squalor of a society without a postal service, police force, free education for children, and civil rights. Libertarians tend to forget that civil liberties are the invention of bureaucratic nation-states, beginning with America and France in their respective revolutions. And the Americans invented big government, just as the French, it must be remembered, INVENTED bureaucracy.
Libertarianism sounds nice on the surface, but it's too naive and superficial a perspective to warrant experiementation.- 0zzy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3No.
- Gerbil_Juice, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5What is the point of having rights given to us by our Constitution if we're not allowed to use them? Are they just there so people can say we're lucky to have them, but never use them?
- asa400, on 10/15/2007, -0/+2@michaelinnotts: With all due respect, you are confusing anarchy with libertarianism. Please come back when you have informed yourself sufficiently to warrant an opinion.
- goffy59, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Blocked.
- BleedingHeadKen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2And yet, all of these things were getting better as people demanded more freedom and less tyranny. Industrialization was tough, but it led to a higher standard of living. Literacy was on the rise before government funded public education and literacy rates in many parts of the US and Britain were *higher* before we had compulsory schooling.
- Neiby, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I did a small amount of work on this guy's campaign. He's definitely not a perfect candidate for President, and he is a bit odd sometimes, but he'd still be far better than Bush or Kerry.
- nmcnface, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I had some chances to meet Badnarik and he's far from an ideal candidate. One of his main problems is he happens to be a pretty big dick.
- ch4os1337, on 10/10/2007, -15/+21Since when is Judaism a Race? its a god damn religion. like christianity.. but people don't go around saying "***** christian, stealing all our money for there god damn holy wars on iraq"
- ch4os1337, on 10/15/2007, -8/+3Joke ^
- shaelen, on 10/15/2007, -3/+11I get your joke, but there ARE those who are blaming Christians. By the way, to be a true Christian means to be Christ-like. How many Christians do you know who are trying to be exactly like Christ?
- ICSU, on 10/15/2007, -0/+13True Christian?
That's such a stupid fallacy. Nobody is a true Christian according to other Christians calling themselves true Christians.- SakisRakis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Not having any examples in the world does not mean a notion is a fallacy. You should amend your statement to something along the lines of "That is so stupid." It is your call to make that judgment, but it is most certainly not a fallacy.
Also, most people accusing Christians of not being true Christians are agnostic/atheists heckling from the sidelines, if you will pardon my analogy. - quisph, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Agreed. The only consistent definition of "true Christian" seems to be "the same type of Christian as the speaker."
- SakisRakis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Not having any examples in the world does not mean a notion is a fallacy. You should amend your statement to something along the lines of "That is so stupid." It is your call to make that judgment, but it is most certainly not a fallacy.
- quisph, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1oops, replied to wrong comment
- ICSU, on 10/15/2007, -0/+13True Christian?
- eximious, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I respect your point, but interestingly enough, there does seem to be a strong genetic link to Judaism. Of course, the idea of a "race" itself is difficult to pin down, but there are probably more important things to focus on in this video.
- ctrlv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Chaos actually you're wrong, being Jewish has nothing to do with religion or going to synagogue. There are different sects of Jews, some are extremely religious, some don't believe in god at all. When you're born a Jew you are born a Jew. Jews rounded up during the holocaust weren't rounded up because of their religious beliefs, but because they were considered an inferior race of people.
- arcooke, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17I wish I would have had a history or government teacher like that. Maybe then I would have paid attention... That guy was great.
- shaelen, on 10/15/2007, -11/+5I've done my part, I'm going back to playing World of Warcraft.
You eejits have no idea what freedom means.- Beatmiser, on 10/15/2007, -1/+7Apparently freedom for you means endless rep-grind and attunements....while paying for it.
- shaelen, on 10/15/2007, -4/+3And who are YOU to criticize grinding? Hahaha.. Ha. .. Ha.
We all have our own excuse for entertainment. Yours seems to be just as lame as mine.
- shaelen, on 10/15/2007, -4/+3And who are YOU to criticize grinding? Hahaha.. Ha. .. Ha.
- Beatmiser, on 10/15/2007, -1/+7Apparently freedom for you means endless rep-grind and attunements....while paying for it.
- slayernine, on 10/18/2007, -8/+5Why are all the comments about Jews and Hitler. This video is about American politics.
- omnithought, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Well, see, when trying to explain things to people, one must often use previously existing situations as examples so that there is a point of reference that people can understand, and thereby comprehend the explanation. When one situation is similar to another in several ways, then it is a valid example. For instance, your comment could be used as an example to support the idea that there really are such things as stupid questions.
- SakisRakis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1He is appealing to ethos is why.
- deathweaver108, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3because those that don't understand history are doomed to repeat it
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3nice. i saw this on tailrank and just posted this link in another digg article. glad to see someone submit it and it make it popular. we americans need to stand up more for what is right. all of us (save for a few retarded percent that still think bush is ordained by God) know what is going on is wrong. we all need to understand we can and should stand up for what is right.
- p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10He's absolutely right. And the way things are going, people are going to look back on this video, and wonder why nothing was done sooner.
- matrixbandit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No they won't, by then videos like this one will have been banned and eradicated.
- 4t0mik, on 10/15/2007, -12/+6Hitler was NOT elected to power. This is a lie and he knows it. He recited an election that took place AFTER he was named dictator. I am sad that a person who can't get basic facts right teaches are young ones. This is a good video to show how teachers these days....are not even up to standards the ability to teach.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0403a.asp- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1you totally missed the point. how long did you search his speech for a discrepancy? one could also argue bush stole elections as well. sure, hitler rose to power via the military and bush dodged his service every chance he got (http://xaa.xanga.com/7f6d672616c30136896160/w100462071.gif). but they both have used propaganda to promote their agenda and made us all think we are not patriots for questioning it.
maybe i should insinuate you are a sad person with low standards because you used the word "are" instead of "our"? it's basically what you're doing to try and discredit this guys' message.- 4t0mik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Not very long. It's a well known fact...that Hitler was not elected to power. Along with other mistakes he makes the fact is he is a teacher.....stating incorrect history. He is pushing an agenda....with made up history....
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1no, it's NOT a well known fact. i've talked to many people that learned otherwise and even i was taught he was elected to power in school. i had to learn otherwise in my own research that not every country operates on the same democratic principles as the US used to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_election%2C_1933 you don't even see the hypocrisy in your own statements. the most disturbing thing i see with bush supporters to date is their ability to take their own lies and fallacies and try and convince us that it is their detractors that are the liars with it. now i'm not saying you're a bush supporter but you seem to display the same type of spin-factor.
- 4t0mik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Not very long. It's a well known fact...that Hitler was not elected to power. Along with other mistakes he makes the fact is he is a teacher.....stating incorrect history. He is pushing an agenda....with made up history....
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1sorry link was broke. http://xaa.xanga.com/7f6d672616c30136896160/w100462071.gif
- 4t0mik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I am all for standing up to the government....but not telling the truth to get support to do it...is another thing. That's kinda what Hitler did.....now didn't he? He knows it is a lie....because I can post video of him stating Hitler was appointed...
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1or maybe you're nitpicking details. hitler never liked the idea of getting votes from the people and instead wanted to get voted on by the party. and yes, he was appointed by his party by an overwhelming number of votes.. both times. but does that discredit his entire speech or the core of his message? i think not.
if you had just corrected his error, i might be able to trust you when you say you're all about standing up to the government, but you resorted to petty insulting and insinuating you know what this guy is thinking. it's a tactic used regularly by buscho and we're all getting sick of it. it doesn't fool anyone.
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1or maybe you're nitpicking details. hitler never liked the idea of getting votes from the people and instead wanted to get voted on by the party. and yes, he was appointed by his party by an overwhelming number of votes.. both times. but does that discredit his entire speech or the core of his message? i think not.
- 4t0mik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I am all for standing up to the government....but not telling the truth to get support to do it...is another thing. That's kinda what Hitler did.....now didn't he? He knows it is a lie....because I can post video of him stating Hitler was appointed...
- ckedge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You're nit-picking. 30+ percent of Germans voted for Hitler in the first election. Your own link clearly notes that "The party won 230 seats in the Reichstag, making it Germany’s largest political party". In all modern democracies the party that wins the most seats (even if it is not more than 50% of the seats) is allowed to try and form a government. In most cases a coalition government with other parties. Canada has a "minority government" right now.
In the mid and late 30's after he and the Nazi's had gotten them out of the depression and put Germany into near 100 percent employment - a majority of Germans would have voted for him in a fair election.
Hitler was a popular leader whom the majority of Germans supported before the war.
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1you totally missed the point. how long did you search his speech for a discrepancy? one could also argue bush stole elections as well. sure, hitler rose to power via the military and bush dodged his service every chance he got (http://xaa.xanga.com/7f6d672616c30136896160/w100462071.gif). but they both have used propaganda to promote their agenda and made us all think we are not patriots for questioning it.
- Protonz, on 10/10/2007, -10/+8Doesn't seem like quoting Abraham Lincoln was a good idea. That president was responsible for the civil war. The southern states said they wanted out of the union, Lincoln's reply... kill them.
He did not stand for liberty, but history is written by the victors. JFK was also a dick, he was responsible for the Vietnam war, strange how people tend to ignore that little fact.- 4t0mik, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Lincoln himself stated.....if we had to keep the slaves to keep the Union....he would have.
"If I could save the Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also so that"
http://www.cyberlearning-world.com/nhhs/html/union.htm- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2once again, you're picking out ONLY the pieces that support your argument. and you had the gall to say this speaker was only trying to fulfill his own agenda. the rest of the quote goes "What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause." not to mention all his other quotes stating all men were equal and things like "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it." & "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy."
so.. are you just bad at the truth or do you actually get something out of keeping these criminals in power? - Frozo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I think you're misunderstanding Lincoln's point. He was stating that no matter what, the union of our country is above all other priorities. If the union was never preserved, we wouldn't be nearly as strong as we are today. Lincoln knew that the slaves situation would be fixed either way, eventually. The Union came first. And he was right.
- Protonz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Thus why Bush is so powerful. We would be more 'prosperous' if the states were more independent, and the federal government was much weaker.
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2..also, lincoln was clear in his reasoning and the specifics for the use of its suspension, as in the case of the first (of 3 i think) he suspended it, "You are engaged in repressing an insurrection against the laws of the United States. If at any point on or in the vicinity of the military line, which is now used between the City of Philadelphia and the City of Washington, via Perryville, Annapolis City, and Annapolis Junction, you find resistance which renders it necessary to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus for the public safety, you, personally or through the officer in command at the point where the resistance occurs, are authorized to suspend that writ."
bush just simply says that habeas corpus is gone for anyone he thinks is an enemy combatant. that's dangerous power to implement into the executive branch with an open-end.
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2once again, you're picking out ONLY the pieces that support your argument. and you had the gall to say this speaker was only trying to fulfill his own agenda. the rest of the quote goes "What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause." not to mention all his other quotes stating all men were equal and things like "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it." & "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy."
- 4t0mik, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Lincoln also suspended habeas corpus and jailed THOUSANDS of people without trial. Some even Senators. Lincoln by the facts was a more threatening President to our own people....than Bush.
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4bush is also not dealing with the same situation as lincoln. bush is invading a foreign country and holding US citizens to the same standards as the terrorists by giving himself permission to deem ANYONE an enemy combatant and stripping away their rights, strictly because he says so.
i don't like what lincoln did with respect to suspension of habeas corpus, the jailing of the ohio senator or the stifling of that newspaper but he was more in line with the constitution than bush. the constitution states "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the pubic safety may require it."
lincoln SUSPENDED it, but his intentions were made clear with statements like "Must I shoot a simple-minded soldier boy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of a wily agitator who induces him to desert? . . . I think that in such a case, to silence the agitator, and save the boy, is not only constitutional, but, withal, a great mercy."
bush effectively REMOVED habeas corpus and refuses to answer to the legalities of that action, more recently stating the executive branch need not answer to oversight.
personally, i think habeas corpus should NEVER be suspended nor removed.
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4bush is also not dealing with the same situation as lincoln. bush is invading a foreign country and holding US citizens to the same standards as the terrorists by giving himself permission to deem ANYONE an enemy combatant and stripping away their rights, strictly because he says so.
- onewingedangel9, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6The Civil War was happening with or without Lincoln, you can't put the blame for the start of the war solely on his shoulders.
- defektiv, on 10/22/2007, -4/+6riiight. lincoln was out to kill the southerners and not liberate the slaves. lets avoid accountability for the slave-owners wanting to enslave a race of folks and pretend that it was lincoln wanting to kill them instead of their refusal to give up their free meal tickets that started that war. pardon me, i just vomited a little in my mouth.
lincoln was a humanitarian. bush is trying to be a dictator. there is a huge definitive difference and it's disturbing that you'd try to discredit someone trying to show people their rights and encourage them to read our constitution as our leaders try to chip away at it.
want to know the real difference? brace yourself.. lincoln freed an enslaved race of people and we're enslaving an entire country and talking about invading another. all the while the ones pulling the strings are slowly taking away our rights and making US slaves. and furthermore, we've been screwing over the middle east by meddling in their affairs because of their beliefs for a long time now.. it's why we were attacked and why we're in this mess to begin with.- Protonz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Slavery was going away anyway. Look into it a little deeper. Slave owners were finding it was cheaper to pay 'slave-wages' to the workers instead of providing food/housing/clothing/etc.
And as time went on, those wages would have increased (as they do in all healthy free markets).- Frozo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yes, those wages did increase. It's called minimum wage. But public service and chain gains are always the "best" option.
- Protonz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Slavery was going away anyway. Look into it a little deeper. Slave owners were finding it was cheaper to pay 'slave-wages' to the workers instead of providing food/housing/clothing/etc.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No where in the Constitution does it say that a state may leave the union. Just an interesting fact.
- Neiby, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4But irrelevant. The Constitution delineates the responsibilities of the Federal government. Anything not mentioned in it is the responsibility (or right) of the individual States. It shouldn't be necessary to include the right of secession in the Constitution. Any State should be able to leave the Union if the State government follows its own internal procedures to do so. We are a union of individual, sovereign States, or at least we used to be. We'd be a lot better off right now if we still had that mindset.
- 4t0mik, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Lincoln himself stated.....if we had to keep the slaves to keep the Union....he would have.
- W00DR0W, on 10/10/2007, -13/+8An amateur speech by someone who admittedly doesn't know the facts on what he's saying.
Is there anything he said about the Jews and Germany that he bothered to look up? "Not that I can think of !"- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11enlighten us with your wisdom, oh wise one.
- 0zzy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Yes, I hate it when someone calls another out without facts or statements to back it up.
- xutopia, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Regardless of wether he was right or wrong in the details he was right that we give up rights one by one, not all of them at the same time.
- n8glenn, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2He didn't really go into much detail, he was just stating a few general facts that everyone already knows about. crystal nacht, stars of david, people being rounded up and put on trains and sent to camps, are you trying to say that those things never happened?
- goffy59, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1People like you are the reason this country is ***** up. Instead of speculating and arguing about who's most accurate, you could of taken a hint and listened to what he was getting at. But your too ***** stupid. Oh and block.
- digitalhippie, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6I need teachers like this.
- partyfavor, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2notice the texas flag in the background, , only in texas
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2ah texas.. the state that gave us rove, bush and gonzalez? nice try.
- scojerroc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3only in texas is the texan flag displayed... gosh, you're right, partyfavor! GENIUS!!
- MHall, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3blow hard
- myeyesarered, on 10/18/2007, -5/+1298% of Austria didn't really vote "for Hitler" but for the Anschluss. And only because SA men were standing at the voting polls
- Retrokid, on 10/18/2007, -2/+2And he goes from talking about Germany, saying the 98% while jumping to Austria-Hungary... which didn't exist at the time!!!! It broke up in 1918...
Credibility gone. You Lose.- cyberwarriorx, on 10/18/2007, -2/+1Exactly. Actual records suggested the largest vote the nazi party ever had in elections was 43.9%, not even a majority. The only reason they were able to come to power was through coalitions with other parties, political trickery and treachery.
- sinooka, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2It's been a month since this thread was relevant, but I had to point out the Bush didn't receive a majority vote in 2000, and it could be argued that there has been political trickery involved in his actions thereafter. Not to compare him with Hitler or anything, but your argument definitely holds no weight.
- JJDiggle, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2lol! The irony here is how you're inability to grasp the point, or you dishonest forsaking of reason in an attempt to invalidate someone like you have, has left you with little credibility. You've come across as childish fool who doesn't know his/her ass from a hole in the ground.
Was his grammar off at times, too? Technically speaking, did he pause too long before making certain points? Was his clothing, and or hair style a poor choice for delivering a speech? It thought the lighting was pretty bad, and it was a poor camera angle, personally, so I didn't pay any attention to him.
- cyberwarriorx, on 10/18/2007, -2/+1Exactly. Actual records suggested the largest vote the nazi party ever had in elections was 43.9%, not even a majority. The only reason they were able to come to power was through coalitions with other parties, political trickery and treachery.
- Retrokid, on 10/18/2007, -2/+2And he goes from talking about Germany, saying the 98% while jumping to Austria-Hungary... which didn't exist at the time!!!! It broke up in 1918...
- myeyesarered, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4woah this guy has almost no idea of the rise of hitler - he just talking random things
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2says you, eh? why don't you enlighten us or tell us where he's wrong? or are we just supposed to take your word for it? bush? cheney? rove? that you? i thought you guys didn't use the internets?
- ratnacage, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1God your dumb, I know he is wrong just based off of stuff i have seen on the history channel.
- deathweaver108, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"stuff you saw once"
sounds good to me... I'm sold
- deathweaver108, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"stuff you saw once"
- ratnacage, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1God your dumb, I know he is wrong just based off of stuff i have seen on the history channel.
- myeyesarered, on 10/10/2007, -1/+498% of Austria didn't vote "for Hitler" - first of all it was for the Anschluss, and 2nd of all this voting was done almost one month after he invaded Austria with 65'000 soldiers.
Generally he just talks random stuff. actually talking about Jews vs. Germans shows how stupid he is. all Jews in Germany were Germans and they fought for Germany in ww1 - he is talking about races (which would mean a biological difference) like the Nazis did - when it's actually about religion (Jews vs Christians). And there was resistance e.g. leaflet saying something like " X thousand Jewish soldiers died in WW1 fighting for Germany - we are one country"- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3my apologies. he did get a couple things wrong in his leadup to his message, which i took to be stand up to that which is unconstitutional, but first read the constitution to know when that happens. i'm sure he'll get a lot of crap for it, and probably will find another way to prepare his audience for his message in the future. i also confused your message with a couple others i was replying to. it's 3am, i'm tired and probably shouldn't be posting. ;)
- goffy59, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Block because your an incompetent moron.
- defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2says you, eh? why don't you enlighten us or tell us where he's wrong? or are we just supposed to take your word for it? bush? cheney? rove? that you? i thought you guys didn't use the internets?
- cruiser2007, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Sounds good to most ears, but it comes from a radical anti-government theocratic perspective--the ol' God and guns crowd.
- ahawks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You're getting buried, and I'll explain why.
You just used the Ad Hominem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem) argument, knocking down the presenter instead of what they say. I don't care if an Evangelical or Hitler himself presented this argument. The message is true.
Stand up for your rights or lose them, it is that simple.
- ahawks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You're getting buried, and I'll explain why.
- eximious, on 10/18/2007, -4/+23I respect the message, but even he admits that he's not too familiar with the rise of Hitler. He doesn't even know how many Jews were killed in the Holocaust (let alone mention all the non-Jews that were targeted)? Plus, he says that Hitler got 98% of the vote (... in Austria-Hungary). The last "legitimate" presidential election was in 1932 when Hitler got 30.1% of the German vote.
I'm disappointed that Diggers are eating this up.- myeyesarered, on 10/18/2007, -2/+4thank you - I thought I was the only person to notice this.
- iantobe, on 10/18/2007, -2/+6and Austria-Hungary didn't exist anymore, it was dissolved after WW I.
- chicagobiker, on 10/18/2007, -3/+7The speakers exact statistical knowledge of Hitler's rise isn't really the point. The point is it happened, and gradually in the name of patriotism, and no one resisted until they couldn't.
- Rich711, on 10/18/2007, -2/+3So the fact that he doesnt know what he's talking about and needs to make up ***** statistics doesnt mean we shouldnt still listen to him? And you guys make fun of FOX News... I have a homeless guy outside that talks about this ***** all day, I'll video tape a few hours worth for you diggers to jerk off to.
- Neiby, on 10/18/2007, -1/+3He is not an expert in pre- and post-war German politics and history. He is an expert on the US Constitution.
- myeyesarered, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2so that means that if you are an expert in something you can forget general knowledg?
- JJDiggle, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2No, the fact that you don't know what he is talking about means your comments are irrelevant, and foolish. If he had made up a hypothetical story as an example to use while discussing what he was actually talking about, no rational person would give a *****. You're an idiot.
- Rich711, on 10/18/2007, -2/+3So the fact that he doesnt know what he's talking about and needs to make up ***** statistics doesnt mean we shouldnt still listen to him? And you guys make fun of FOX News... I have a homeless guy outside that talks about this ***** all day, I'll video tape a few hours worth for you diggers to jerk off to.
- martin2968, on 10/18/2007, -1/+2he had a few other flaws with his historical data (the Hitler comparison) and mentioning "here are some words of our founding fathers... Thomas Jefferson and ABRAHAM LINCOLN..." He has a legitimate point but does not make the best measures to make it by skewing historical facts.
- Hananda, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Now, they way I heard it, he wasn't speaking about the way votes were cast when he was talking the 98%, but rather the election results, which would obviously been manipulated.
- JJruler, on 10/18/2007, -2/+1i agree with ex, the message is a good one, but the way he portrayed it was slightly aggravating. he acted like the jews bent over for the duration of the genocide, when in reality there was resistance to what was going on. i too am disappointed to see this dugg so many times
- goffy59, on 10/18/2007, -0/+3I really dont care you know why? He has a good point. And its funny how you all miss it. I guess I'll know who to blame when the country gets even worse.
- JJDiggle, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2You're disappointed? You bring up something that was completely besides the point, and diggers eat it up. Clueless.
- sensor, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Yeah I closed it after he said the Austria-Hungary thing... that was false information... so why should I trust anything else he was about to say.
- renjipanicker, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3It has been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience
- LordMeatloaf, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0KOTEX FITS PERIOD.
- jasdf, on 10/17/2007, -8/+1This is why I would never attend a public college, I refuse to listen to leftist professors' propaganda.
- martin2968, on 10/17/2007, -2/+3oh... so just listen to rightest professors propaganda. hypocrite. you fail.
- JJDiggle, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2This has got to be the saddest, most ignorant comment, I've ever seen here on Digg. Congrats.
- Meekus, on 10/22/2007, -3/+4Hindsight is always 20/20. While we like to think about the "what would I of done" scenario, it boils down to survival. That generation did what they needed to do in order for them and their families to live to see the next day. One day you are playing World of Warcraft, the next day you have four soldiers pointing their M16s at your mother, father, and sister. They are yelling at you on how worthless you are because of your religion and how you are bringing the country down. They shoot your sister. You see hate and rage in the soldiers eyes. You have no idea WHY they are doing this. Your parents are crying, you are frozen in terror. If you resist any further, you and your family will be shot right here and now.
Like I said - hindsight is always 20/20. If you resisted, your life was over, end of story. Could this of been avoided? I dont know. But, it is much less likely with us being active in politics and caring about the decisions these people we elect make.- ryobertbyeling, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0could this 'have' been avoided, not of. People are making this mistake every single time now, wtf?
- goffy59, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What about all the people who dont vote, which seems to be most.
- Julz, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3this guy is a idiot, is hes trying to imply that the holocaust is the jewish peoples fault?! the jewish people did try to stop the events that lead up to the holocaust but where jailed for it.
- thrallie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I don't think you even watched the ***** video.
- omnithought, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Even if he doesn't have every fact right, the intention of his message is clear: we should stand up for our rights and freedoms before they're all gone. It's truly sad that modern political discourse has degenerated to the point where people completely ignore the meaning of what people say and instead find whatever detail they can disprove and use it to throw out everything a person is saying. I see this tactic everywhere I look and it's *****. Time to start standing up against bullheaded obfuscation as well, because those who do that are hindering efforts to retain more important rights.
- likeyehokwhatev, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1This is exactly what the Bushies have been saying for years. "So what if we ***** up on WMD's, or if Iraq wasn't involved in 9/11, or if we botched the invasion, what matters is that we're making the world a safer place".
WRONG. What we need is accuracy and accountability. Just because this guy is ranting about freedom and self determination doesn't justify spewing untruth. This guy needs to do some homework before he starts making irresponsible statements, no matter how important the greater issue may be.
- likeyehokwhatev, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1This is exactly what the Bushies have been saying for years. "So what if we ***** up on WMD's, or if Iraq wasn't involved in 9/11, or if we botched the invasion, what matters is that we're making the world a safer place".
- 16777216, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Funny, I was saying this very thing just the other day and almost nobody there seemed to like it.
http://digg.com/offbeat_news/Security_Guard_Powertrip?t=8743571#c8743571
Perhaps I should have used a little more history as it seems too few people on digg understand the concept of cause and effect. - OneAndOnlySnob, on 10/18/2007, -1/+5I voted for this man for President. Too bad he didn't get elected. Too bad he didn't break like 2% of the vote.
- supermanred, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Probably because the opinion polls said that a different republican and democrat were in the lead, so all the American sheep voted for one of the two top candidates, both of which probably meet in secret (or in the open as the Clinton and Bush families do) to form policy.
What, did you think Bush and Clinton (the seniors I mean) were getting together just to golf? Did you think they were wife swapping? They're ***** you in the ass, America.
- supermanred, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Probably because the opinion polls said that a different republican and democrat were in the lead, so all the American sheep voted for one of the two top candidates, both of which probably meet in secret (or in the open as the Clinton and Bush families do) to form policy.
- yep23, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1i bet his jewish.
- ShaneApex, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I bet you're childish.
- Frosty122, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1it's a professor from UT Austin (woot) forgot who he is
- sdubois92, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Michael Badnarik
- Rich711, on 10/22/2007, -4/+1Blah blah blah, these guys say the same thing over and over. But I guess every years they'res a new batch of college grads moving back into their parents basement to listen to it. Go buy an overpriced Che' t-shirt you trustfundafarians and dimebag revolutionaries. "We're totally gonna change the world...right after this bong hit.
- ChrisAllen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Dugg for his white shoes.
- JJDiggle, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Nice work. That was one of the most relevant comments here.
- ShaneApex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Bravo.
- SlamShut, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Okay, raise your hand if you're sick to death of the alarmist "Take back your country," "now is our last chance" ***** rhetoric that's been popping up all over Digg lately (Ron Paul crew, I'm looking at you)?
America has survived ***** presidents for over two centuries. We'll survive Bush. Can't you people become politically motivated without believing that we're teetering on the edge of some sci-fi apocalypse?- Neiby, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Do you say the same thing to the Global Warming scaremongers? Talk about a sci-fi apocalypse... :-)
- supermanred, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They're right though. Your constitution is almost fit to wipe your ass with at this point, with all the unconstitutional laws that have been passed, including the "Patriot Act"
Americans would probably not protest an act that would force them to take 3 whippings a week, give 80% of their money to the government if it was called the Ultra Freedom GI Joe Lady Liberty USA USA Act...
- Deathtaxesnoles, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I voted for him in 2004 and donated to his house bid in 2006. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8321747074978323622&q=michael+badnarik&total=47&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
- Bklynadam, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Don't mess with Texas! (note flag in background)
- supermanred, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1One thing that makes me feel that USA will pull through in the end, is states like Texas and such where the average citizens hold more automatic weapons and anti-tank weapons than the army. If it ever gets really bad, I doubt it could get to Hitler dictatorship stage, because the average citizens and militias would take the country back, mind you the country would end up like a huge Afghanistan with warlords controlling various states, but at least the world would be spared another Facist Superpower.
- grotsasha, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Every Russian should watch this. Somebody make Russian subtitles...
- kayakto, on 10/18/2007, -1/+5this is a great speech, even though he messed up some historical facts, this video makes me say "thanks god for usa" :-) (im from europe btw)
- JJDiggle, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Look at what United States citizens are saying about this speech before you're too thankful. Most of them don't understand it, and the rest seem to resent being told that they ever have to be responsible for themselves.
- silverspyder, on 10/18/2007, -1/+3If he didn't get an explosion of applause about 80% of the way into that video where they cut it, I'd be amazed. On another note, that's kind of passionate for a high school lecture. (if in fact that's what it was) I haven't actually logged into digg and dugg anything for a while because firefox or digg won't auto-log me in each time. But this one made me login and digg. Good show! Brilliant.
- sdubois92, on 10/18/2007, -1/+3Badnarik rules
- BSSM, on 10/22/2007, -4/+0This guy is awesome because he is liberal in the sense the he wants liberty, not liberal in the sense that he is a pussy-whipped leftist hypocrite.
- FreeStater, on 10/22/2007, -1/+1That was Michael Badnarik, the man that would be president if the average IQ in the United States was in the triple digits.
Also, congrats to some of you commenting for totally missing the point. Eximious, who gives a *****?! Not that those facts aren't worth getting accurate, but this is a Constitution class, which should seem obvious given the discussion. Could you really not tell which was relevant for his discussion? You and michaelinnotts should win awards for how greatly you missed the point.- catbeller, on 10/22/2007, -0/+1It's the "The typeface didn't exist, therefore he didn't desert!" argument. Find one fact, however irrelevant (or even accurate!), home in on the "falsity", and therefore discredit the greater thesis. Fox News' gift to the toolbox of malevolent fools everywhere.
- CueBall909, on 10/22/2007, -1/+1Watch Michael's entire 7 hour class for free here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8321747074978323622
If you care at all about liberty, you owe it to yourself to take the time to watch. - supermanred, on 10/22/2007, -1/+2Vote this gay guy for President, he'll restore the constitution!
USA!! USA!!!- catbeller, on 10/22/2007, -0/+1The right always has the professional assassins and the political will to use them. He'd not last a term. Think about it: the rightist presidents took shots from idiots and the insane, while Democratic presidents were terminated by professionals. Military-grade killers will usually hook up with the righteous Right; that's why they have a seeming lock on blowing the heads off of their opposition.
- gabrielg01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That guy just proves the widespread stereotype that Americans don't know ***** about geography and history. Hitler was not elected in Austria-Hungary as he says. Hitler was elected in Germany. Hitler also was never elected with a 98% margin, or anything close to that.
The dude is trying to spread a positive message, but he is a total dilettante. He should do his homework, before preaching to others.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
.){kind=link}
