What is Digg?367 Comments
- wreckosaurus, on 11/15/2007, -21/+170“While I believe in the right to free speech, to me that doesn’t give anyone the right to criticize one’s leader at a foreign venue in a totally nonpolitical event,”
“It’s not that I don’t forgive them, but I still think they should be punished.”
wow, some people are ***** retarded - ronito, on 11/15/2007, -11/+145The USBF president's email: usbf.president@acbl.org
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -25/+116Welcome to Bush world!
Dissenters will be silenced.
Yay, free speech? - RicDesan, on 11/15/2007, -26/+113This is a Henious! And heinous in a way that supports the current trampling of free speech for citizens of this country! The federation is trying to over step its bounds and should somehow be sanctioned for doing so. I will gladly boycott any revenue producing sponsors that the federation benefits from! Its time to start taking rights back and the best way to do that is to hit organizations in a way that hurts most.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -5/+76O *****! Not the bridge world!
- spaceman0, on 11/15/2007, -10/+66"Ms. Martel said the action by the team, which had won the Venice Cup, the women’s title, at the Shanghai event, could cost the federation corporate sponsors."
So corporate sponsors = support bush != free speech. - jayfarer, on 11/15/2007, -7/+56"We did not vote for Bush"? that's it?
I was expecting something vulgar, with images and printed on T-shirts and 6 foot banners. Banning them or taking any action against them is monumentally dumb. - RAEP, on 11/15/2007, -7/+56It's not even a very negative sign. It's not like it says "***** Bush" or any of that, it's just to show the world that not all Americans are idiots. If you won something as an American, wouldn't the last thing you would want people from other countries to think be "Oh how this event has gone downhill."
It's hardly an Anti-Bush sign. Everyone knows that this administration has ***** ***** up, they are just trying to distance themselves from that image of America. - TexTurboesq, on 11/15/2007, -3/+35The Bridge world is in an uproar? What's next terror at the tiddledewink showdown?
- kg4gyt, on 11/15/2007, -21/+53Freedom of speech is only at a federal government level, it doesn't go down to inside private groups that can set whatever rules they want.
- monkeyrun, on 11/15/2007, -7/+38How's that treason?
I did not vote for Bush either.
Oh please hunt me down and hang me. - tucsonsun13, on 11/15/2007, -15/+43Seriously....no one on this site voted for Bush.....and no one supports him any longer anywhere
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -3/+23I am not a US citizen and I like to criticize the US. What the ***** are you gona do about it? Bitch much?
- LuciferChaos, on 11/15/2007, -4/+23Man, I thought the lady on the far right in that picture was wearing a Nixon mask at first...
- merlinds, on 11/15/2007, -4/+22this is ***** - community service?
for a sign! - SiNN4R, on 11/15/2007, -1/+18You people still don't get it do you? Free speech is an American value not a republican value and not a democrat value. Its not a Christian value and its not an atheist value. Its not black or white. Its a human value.
- jordanisj, on 11/15/2007, -1/+17That's very true. They have every legal right to censure the players for this, but that doesn't make it morally right, or right in the spirit of american freedoms. From the tone of the people calling for the heads of those women, it seems fairly clear to me that they are speaking from a personal offense, which is a low and petty thing to try and cut someone out of a year's pay over.
This isn't a case of, say, an organization punishing members because their actions caused harm to the organization (unless the article managed to leave something big out), this is a case of highly-placed people in the organization using their power to throw a hissy fit at people who disagree with them. And that is 100% unamerican and completely reprehensible. - pintomp3, on 11/15/2007, -0/+15still kind of a dick move to punish them for it. i wonder if there are rules in the club against making political statements or did they arbitrarily decide to punish them? it would be kinda like the dixie chicks losing their record deal for saying they were ashamed bush was from texas.
- pseudononymist, on 11/15/2007, -1/+15It's all about the corporate sponsorship--"best interests" means whether those sponsors will pull out as a result, which essentially puts those corporations in control of determining what sort of speech is allowed. This kind of system is messed up.
- jaxcs, on 11/15/2007, -0/+14Does the bridge federation have a rule against political speech as part of its by laws? If it doesn't then what you say makes no sense. And if this is true, then as the article makes clear, why is the political speech of those who wore 1.20.08 buttons or buttons supporting bush not similarly treated?
- blueboxed, on 11/15/2007, -24/+38Look at those faces...JESUS... its like the bar scene from star wars....
- pseudononymist, on 11/15/2007, -0/+12Anytime, anywhere. This principle might not be perfect, but it's way better than letting those in power decide for us.
- jambox, on 11/15/2007, -5/+17My God, US politicians get such an easy ride! In fact, it's no surprise that Bush has lost touch with reality (he isn't the first US president to do so) when he's shielded from any sort of criticism.
I remember in the last general election here in the UK, Tony Blair (a curse of a thousand lice upon him) had to stand up in the town hall in Sedgefield (his constituency) for the votes to be read out, surrounded by his opponents, including three or four 'protest candidates' who had formed parties called "Tony Blair is a lying scumbag", "Hold Blair responsible for war in the Middle East" and so on, the names of which were then read out over a loudspeaker when the results were announced.
He was in the middle of this ruck of people all wearing hats and t-shirts saying "BLIAR! BLIAR!" and such.
No chance of him getting confused and thinking he's dead popular any more... - vpshockwave, on 11/15/2007, -4/+16I agree with the French that were quoted.
- thewidowmaker, on 11/15/2007, -3/+14I love the punitive nature of some people...there is a problem, so...who can we punish or financially cripple to set an example?
Also, for those critical of them for talking unfavorable about the president in front of non-US citizens:
1) Any American that travels knows that people around the world are generally unsympathetic towards him and tend to brand Americans as hicks in general for electing him. There is an inate need to disassociate yourself from that in some cases just for your own sense of credibility. Trust me, I know, everytime I say I am Canadian, people tend to begin to rip into Americans and their administration...
2) Like hell the US and its citizens (including those of every country) don't stick there nose in every other country's affairs and have comments, unfavorable or otherwise about people from Putin to Karzai...Sarskosy to Morales..to recently, Musharraf. Give your head a shake...it is a global community where people can and do discuss administrations objectively with nationals of any country. Typically, I wouldn't say anything unfavorable about the Prime Minister of Canada because most people would be like "who? what? how esoteric..."
3) This ain't 24. The bridge players of foreign countries aren't going to try to something crazy because they know that some US bridge players are unfavorable of their current administration. There isn't some clandestine operative, stroking a white cat, saying... "We will get to them through Bridge muwahahaha"
Finally,
1) Like hell they all haven't had a glass of wine or two at their victory celebration. Whose, wife or Mom doesn't get a bit gabby when they are drinking. And sure as hell they want to fit in with their peers there and if the conversation was political in general among players...well, there may have been situational context unaware to the lay newsreader.
Meh...this just confirms how assinine people can be. - nickbetzold, on 11/15/2007, -0/+11WHAT RULE?
- cogitocogito, on 11/15/2007, -1/+12I think you mean that the right to free speech is not respected in countries that don't recognize the right to free speech. Big difference.
- hitmonval, on 11/15/2007, -8/+19Nothing but respect for these women. It takes guts to do something like that. All you neanderthal hicks howling about lack of patriotism need to re-examine who loves their country more, a person who puts a ribbon magnet on their car, or someone who protests because they fear their country is going to hell in a handbasket.
- hakz, on 11/15/2007, -3/+14treason?? someone is really bitter
- mattewood, on 11/15/2007, -11/+22Those ladies got ballllllls! Kudos to them.
- fires, on 11/15/2007, -1/+11I'll see your quote and raise you this one!
“If the U.S.B.F. wants to impose conditions of membership that involve curtailment of free speech, then it cannot claim to represent our country in international competition,” - parax, on 11/15/2007, -11/+21"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" -The US Constitution
Because Congress was not involved and no law was being created or enforced, freedom of speech is not the issue.
If it weren't an ant-bush sign and instead the person stood up and shouted "I'm a child molestor!" would you defend their right to participate in the future of the event? Because you're legally allowed to express yourself does not mean there are no social consequences of doing so. And those consequences may include not being welcome at a privately-funded event. - jhbarr, on 11/15/2007, -1/+11Uhh. That is exactly what free speech is about. It's not a matter of who, when or where. It is free speech because it can be done by anyone, anytime and anywhere.
- arjie, on 11/15/2007, -1/+11Out of curiosity, why do you support Bush?
- WaterDragon, on 11/15/2007, -4/+13Please stop trying to associate America and Americans with the Bush crime family and their on-going atrocities against all of humanity.
Clinton, obama, Bush, Cheney...are all part of the scam known as the Council on Foreign Relations, that orchestrates and determines what wars will happen...for profit.
It is too bad you are so sadly uninformed and living in ignorance of any truth and decency.
F**k TRAITORS! - EJTower, on 11/15/2007, -3/+12I suppose you think we loose all our other fundamental human rights when you leave the country too?
- brinewr, on 11/15/2007, -7/+16"Ms. Martel said the action by the team, which had won the Venice Cup, the women’s title, at the Shanghai event, could cost the federation corporate sponsors." THERE IT IS!! This isn't about free speech! This is about whether or not THEY MAKE MONEY! I am SICK of my beloved country being about business and not about PEOPLE! This used to be a place where I was guaranteed "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", but now I seem to be promised only "life (if you can afford health care), liberty ( if you don't mind the government monitoring your phone calls and emails), and the pursuit of the no-longer-almighty Dollar". Mr. Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, & Franklin.... forgive us, for we are too self-involved to know what we are doing to your wonderful country. Roll over again in your graves!!!
- goffy59, on 11/15/2007, -1/+9Doesn't make it right.
- colonelbuckshot, on 11/15/2007, -4/+12Why assume their views represent those of the USBF? What a boring, inhibited world political correctness makes for.
- cogitocogito, on 11/15/2007, -7/+15Let's hope that they don't renege but redouble their efforts, and that others follow suit and slam Bush while he's vulnerable.
- theeEqualizer, on 11/15/2007, -0/+8Well if freedom of speech is only meant for the Federal government, then stfu, fascist. It's so great when a conservative tries to call liberals "elite". As if intellect and education was a bad thing. As if YOU were in league with the "common man" - a realist, with hard working, unquestionable moral values. When in fact, you are only a deluded, freedom-hating, double-speaking, talk-radio-loving, stick-up-your-ass neo-con whose fifteen moments idealogical glory is over.
- Deanblackoak, on 11/15/2007, -2/+9Another stupid statement. When your country is teetering on the edge of fascism you should use any means at your disposal to save it. People we are in a world of hurt. The kid gloves and good manners have got to come the hell off.
- Waiting2awake, on 11/15/2007, -1/+8Smacksaw - Free speech has exclusions for just that case - but short of libel or slander(both of which you are given your time in court to defend your actions - want to bet that won't happen here?).
The problem here is it smacks of economic force to silence a political opinion...Worse, the usual suspects still refuse to see that this is one of the more core problems of the US right now. Corporate control in every facet of their lives, mostly in ways that are not apparent -like this case demonstrates. - jaxcs, on 11/15/2007, -1/+8The question is answered in the article. But in a larger sense, when do you think would be an appropriate time to protest? Other than the voting booth, or (maybe) during a rally, when would you say is it appropriate to protest?
- r0b1, on 11/15/2007, -1/+7We'll invade your country and plunder your villages.
- floorman56, on 11/15/2007, -2/+8I wonder if it had said "Islam enslaves women" or Jesus loves you" would everyone be supporting there freedom of speech
- lnf69, on 11/15/2007, -0/+6smacksaw, I want you to keep your ***** to yourself. Your comments are offending me and representing Digg users in a negative light. Stop commenting on digg. I don't like what you have to say.
/demonstration of ignorance to the ideas of what freedom is. - pseudononymist, on 11/15/2007, -0/+6China's constitution actually does recognize this right. Of course, they suck at protecting it.
- Winded, on 11/15/2007, -9/+15I swear I thought they were talking about building actualy bridges through the first part of that article.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 359 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is