Internet censorship

Here is how people who go against the system are handled in America today.
http://youtu.be/OU-b5hDJpCo

This man has no integrity. He took the plea deal, even though he is against plea deals, and then instead of continuing his fight for the freedom of the shire, he ran away.

When you try to change things by going around looking for trouble, the only thing you will change is the amount of trouble you run into. When the police know you by name, it's time to admit that you f***ed up.
 
I picked that video because it showed how the system is designed to wear people down until they submit.
The stupid thing is that if the police would have simply just ignored the group as they danced on the green, sang songs, and passed out literature they probably would have eventually moved on to another town on their own.
The one cop in the video seemed to get it. He handed out the restraining order in front of the school with a smile and he didn't take it beyond that. He took it as a game. He saw the big picture.

Here is a larger scale http://youtu.be/e1YiUNvq5r4
 
Last edited:
Yes but breaking the law to try to prove a point is still breaking the law. I agree there were things on the video that I didn't agree with as far as his treatment by law enforcement, but how many times must you poke a dog with a stick before it bites you?
 
Exactly, I am showing how both sides feel that it is necessary to push each other until a confrontation is made.
Problems are not solved by confrontation. In both of the examples that I gave, both sides lost.
Censorship, or the attempt thereof, makes a problem greater than is really is.
 
Last edited:
I picked that video because it showed how the system is designed to wear people down until they submit.
The stupid thing is that if the police would have simply just ignored the group as they danced on the green, sang songs, and passed out literature they probably would have eventually moved on to another town on their own.
The one cop in the video seemed to get it. He handed out the restraining order in front of the school with a smile and he didn't take it beyond that. He took it as a game. He saw the big picture.

Here is a larger scale http://youtu.be/e1YiUNvq5r4

As I watched that video,I thought about the few times that I've been in a riot situation,both in a jail as a correction officer,and with the NYPD,on the street.These police had NO riot grear of any kind.There were no clear perameters or cordoned protest areas,set up ahead of time.It did look just like a goon squad.Granted,there are times,when police departments utilize specialized units,to deal with violent protesters.

But they aren't roving bands of cops,.They are trained,organized,and use proven tactics to defuse situations.But even this....dosen't work all the time.The term"mob mentality" is absolutley real.I've seen this happen 3 times,and it's a very scary thing.

In this case however,there seemed to be zero supervision,and no commands verbal or otherwise,used by the sherrifs depertment.

Conversley,the motivation of some of the protesters,as it is in many protests,is to provoke police into a violent confrontation.Protest organizers use certain loyalists,to accomplich these goals.Causes seem to garner more sympathy and support,when there's "innocent" victims and martyrs involved.

The video title of the sherrifs department being "federalized",is more than a bit of a streatch,since it compromizes the Posse Comitatas Act,which forbids the US military or their agents,to act as law enforcement ,against a civilian population,in a capacity,where Marshell Law,has not been declared due to a NATIONAL,Or state,emergency.

Any members doing so,can be federally prosecuted,and individually sued for civil right violations.

I agree that individual and collective freedoms are being erroded.The founding fathers knew of this possibility,which took place in Europe on occasion,and encouraged citizen revolt...which is why,if you research the founders and the constitution,we have the second ammendment.Some basic research will bear this out.

We aren't the only country to use open force againt it's citizenry.The British "Riot Act"(yes,it actually did exist),which was only repealed in 77,made it a felony,for failing to comply with a lawful oreder to,leave an area,and return to their homes,in a certain amount of time.

Having said tha,these cases are most ofted directed by a local police chief,not wanting to be pushed around in HIS town,and nore an ego thing than any conspiracy.believe,some of these police chiefs,have a hard time fitting their heads through a door way,the're so big.

Steve B
 
Last edited:
Exactly, I am showing how both sides feel that it is necessary to push each other until a confrontation is made.
Problems are not solved by confrontation. In both of the examples that I gave, both sides lost.
Censorship, or the attempt thereof, makes a problem greater than is really is.

I really do appreciate the people who protest, activists who try to make a point peacefully. I don't think that works in this country though. Major change here almost always comes after violence. Revolutionary war, Civil war, Civil rights movement are all prime examples. Seems to me that the only way to get the system to open their eyes and ears is by force. It is part of our history.

I see it like this: There is a room with 10 monkeys in it. In the room is a ladder with a banana at the top. 1 monkey climbs to the top and gets the banana, and all the other monkeys get hosed down with freezing cold water. The monkey that got the banana gets removed from the room and replaced by another monkey. Th new monkey gets the banana, and the other monkeys get hosed again. The banana monkey is removed, and a new one put in his place. The new monkey starts to climb the ladder, but the other monkeys pull him down and beat him until he no longer wants the banana. Once more a monkey is removed and a new one takes its place. When the new monkey starts to climb the ladder, he gets beaten. This cycle repeats itself until there are no original monkeys in the room, yet the monkeys all still beat the new guy who tries to climb the ladder. At this point, the monkeys don't know why they beat the one who climbs the ladder they just do. The moral of the story is that's just how things are around here, even if we don't know why anymore.
 
It seems that America recently has become more divided than ever before. In the 60's there were more people who held the middle view.
Now we have more extremist on either wing, and very few people left in the middle.
This is what causes more tension in our country.
 
It seems that America recently has become more divided than ever before. In the 60's there were more people who held the middle view.
Now we have more extremist on either wing, and very few people left in the middle.
This is what causes more tension in our country.

I chalk it up to the middle class slowly declining. It is becoming harder to make a living and advance economically, however the amount of poor are growing. I fear that eventually it will be rich and poor with no middle class.

I have my own ideas on how to fix the problem, as I am sure everyone does. This is a problem in itself. We wont fix anything if we can't agree on how to do it.
 
So social classes and political classes are directly related.
Black and White, without Grey is bad in both areas.

Steve, I liked your post. You shed more light on this thread.
 
Greetings-

In viewing some of the videos and posts---and considering a trip I made driving cross country

in the US--the problem is bigger than you can imagine.......i was almost killed, my teenager was...we and my other teenager are seriously injured still.....we did nothing...we are artists, musicians---unreal, do not think these cops are a few---they are many--and daily---innocent humans are beaten,tazed,pepper sprayed for no crime...some die.

Now, over 40,000 people have been or remain in a MA State jail---because a women--who worked for their system, faked evidence and is admitting it !!!! Will she go to jail ??

How bout the cops, prosecutors, judges she lied for to stick humans in cages ????

Do not stick your head in the sand --you won t see em coming to kick your arse....

My 16 year old angel daughter lost her drums--original blue sparkle ludwigs (1960's) She lost them because, we left our home to grab something to eat and someone else took them. She began playing on a full set--no pad, or only a snare....I love the memory--"Mama, I want to play what I hear" as we all should....she was trying to say simply, what she hears in her heart and soul--not what other people tell her to play, or play from a piece of paper---to see my tiny, sweet , quiet one whale makes me burst into joyous laughter--she is as much of a contradiction as I, her mama is, artistically and
in general. She will play again---all artists sometimes take a break even if they did not choose to. A personal friend, inducted into the jazz hall of fame not so long ago--is releasing a book soon--of course he is a drummer--and, a drummer can play drums on things other than traditional drums--me, I am partial to steering wheels while driving....

They force humans to submit by threatening those they love most-----listen to Dillon--

Hear the music--the passion in the lyrics...our hearts beat to the rhythm of our own drums
 
Last edited:
As I watched that video,I thought about the few time that I've been in a riot situation,both in a jailas a correction officer,and with the NYPD,on the street.These police had NO riot grear of any kind.There were no clear perameters or cordoned protest areas,set up ahead of time.It did look just like a goon squad.Granted,there are times,when police departments utilize specialized units,to deal with violent protesters.

But they aren't roving bands of cops,.They are trained,organized,and use proven tactics to defuse situations.But even this....dosen't work all the time.The term"mob mentality" is absolutley real.I've seen this happen 3 times,and it's a very scary thing.

In this case however,there seemed to be zero supervision,and no commands verbal or otherwise,used by the sherrifs depertment.

Conversley,the motivation of some of the protesters,as it is in many protests,is to provoke police into a violent confrontation.Protest organizers use certain loyalists,to accomplich these goals.Causes seem to garner more sympathy and support,when there's "innocent" victims and martyrs involved.

The video title of the sherrifs department being "federalized",is more than a bit of a streatch,since it compromizes the Posse Comitatas Act,which forbids the US military or their agents,to act as law enforcement ,against a civilian population,in a capacity,where Marshell Law,has not been declared due to a NATIONAL,Or state,emergency.

Any members doing so,can be federally prosecuted,and individually sued for civil right violations.

I agree that individual and collective freedoms are being erroded.The founding fathers knew of this possibility,which took place in Europe on occasion,and encouraged citizen revolt...which is why,if you research the founders and the constitution,we have the second ammendment.Some basic research will bear this out.

We aren't the only country to use open force againt it's citizenry.The British "Riot Act"(yes,it actually did exist),which was only repealed in 77,made it a felony,for failing to comply with a lawful oreder to,leave an area,and return to their homes,in a certain amount of time.

Having said tha,these cases are most ofted directed by a local police chief,not wanting to be pushed around in HIS town,and nore an ego thing than any conspiracy.believe,some of these police chiefs,have a hard time fitting their heads through a door way,the're so big.

Steve B
i want to elaborate on Steve's post for a bit.
The fear exist on both sides. We saw in the video that Alex Jones and his group was let into an area where they could protest. They did just that and they upset the police on purpose to bring on a reaction. The Police became anxious and they acted to move the protestors away. The situation almost became out of control when Alex started shouting, "1776 let the revolution begin" Both sides are in fear of each other and there is a very real threat for violence to occur.
As a "Grey Person" both sides look like idiots to me.
 
i have to agree Bob.I have no problem with someone calling it like they see it,but Alex is an extremeist,and his ratings seem to inspire his handling of certain situations,more so than common sense,which seems to be,not so common these days.

The Dallas sherriffs dept.need to re-examine their crowd control training,and embrace the fact,that in a dangerous,stressful situation,you'll default to the level of training,you're most familiar with.You need equipment,training with that equipment,and the will to use it.

Your I.Q.decreases,you form tunnel vision,you don't come up with a new plan.Plan B and C,should be a part of your training,which need to be constantly,reinforced,and ammended.

These crowd interactions,need to have numerous,trained supervisors at the scene,who can communicate their expectations and conduct code,to legal protesters.

This country was built on protest,civil unrest and revolution,but i would hate so see that latter ,become a reality.Then,both sides lose.

To A Human.Firstly,I'm sincerely sorry for your loss.You make some pretty substantial claims,as I know for a fact,a NY City DA,dosen't,incarcerate those kind of numers after a jury trial.There is also the 6th ammendment,concerning speedy trial.

I'm sorry some humanoid stole your daughters drums,but you really can't expect the police to the everywhere...all the time.That's just not practicle,as the sheer numbers of police would be prohibitive,financially.

Steve B
 
Last edited:
Other species as well. I know for a fact wolves and gorillas censor one another too. Ever see a wolf howl out of turn?


That's not censorship. That's hierarchical intimidation.

It operates on similar principles though - a conspicuous demonstration of power, backed by force.
 
Lets get back to internet censorship.
Everyone knows that alien lizards from planet X didn't shoot JFK.
Yet there are such theories posted on the net.
Should we censor them? Of course not! Leave them out there for all to see.

As many of you know I am connected to Newtown Ct. (Sandy Hook)
I have worked in the town close to the former school since 1981.
I have seen almost all the ridiculous conspiracy videos that have been put up on YouTube about the Sandy Hook Shootings. It has become my hobby to watch things like this. They don't offend me. I think that they reflect the grieving process that we all go through when confronting something as crazy as the Sandy Hook Shootings, or 9-11 for that matter. They actually help us heal in a strange sort of way. The imagination of thinking about conspiricies helps us cope on a phycological level. Our creativeness to invent these wild theories heals us. When we compose our view though videos, our minds process both the evidence, and fabricated evidence and we somehow come to terms with the unthinkable. It makes us feel good to have solved a mystery, or created more controversy. It depends on our inner feelings at the time. I know that this post will not make sense to many who do not understand the conspiracy theory philosophy. I didn't either, until recently. I had to be directly touched by it to come to terms with my true feelings.
 
Last edited:
That's not censorship. That's hierarchical intimidation.

It operates on similar principles though - a conspicuous demonstration of power, backed by force.

Well, my comment was actually was a bit of a joke. (reality is many wolves howl at the same time).

My point kind of was in any group of animals, its basic behaviour for somebody to keep the 'others in line' - even if they don't agree on a line.
 
Well, my comment was actually was a bit of a joke. (reality is many wolves howl at the same time).

My point kind of was in any group of animals, its basic behaviour for somebody to keep the 'others in line' - even if they don't agree on a line.


Ya - I figured that's what you were getting at. It's not just humans that have to deal with it.
But even in anarchistic human societies there are mechanisms to handle agreed upon transgressions.

But just to go way off topic - http://www.freewebs.com/alphawolfsabrina/socialorderandvisual.htm
 
Lets get back to internet censorship.
Everyone knows that alien lizards from planet X didn't shoot JFK.
Yet there are such theories posted on the net.
Should we censor them? Of course not! Leave them out there for all to see.

As many of you know I am connected to Newtown Ct. (Sandy Hook)
I have worked in the town close to the former school since 1981.
I have seen almost all the ridiculous conspiracy videos that have been put up on YouTube about the Sandy Hook Shootings. It has become my hobby to watch things like this. They don't offend me. I think that they reflect the grieving process that we all go through when confronting something as crazy as the Sandy Hook Shootings, or 9-11 for that matter. They actually help us heal in a strange sort of way. The imagination of thinking about conspiricies helps us cope on a phycological level. Our creativeness to invent these wild theories heals us. When we compose our view though videos, our minds process both the evidence, and fabricated evidence and we somehow come to terms with the unthinkable. It makes us feel good to have solved a mystery, or created more controversy. It depends on our inner feelings at the time. I know that this post will not make sense to many who do not understand the conspiracy theory philosophy. I didn't either, until recently. I had to be directly touched by it to come to terms with my true feelings.

Bob,I argee,as long as these things are taken at face value.They are mostly the work of dot connectors,utilizing the "post hoc,ergo propter hoc" applied logic.In other words,event Y ,followed event X,then event Y ,must have been caused by event X.

I have seen some crazy stuff in an over 20 year career with the NYPD.Some of it was actually true,most of it was just the product of over imagination,and sometimes,mental illness.

My career ,is based on collecting facts,which are verifiable,and demonsterable,which may or may not,verify a working theory.We just didn't line the pieces up on the board ,to make our theory fit the event.It all had to line up,through its own fruition,or we no matter what our gut said,we rejected it because of probable cause,couldn't be met.

If probable caus,couldn't be met,then the standard of" beyond a reasonable doubt",couldn't be met at trial.That standard MUST be met.or everything else is just conjecture,which amounts to circumstantial evidence.

The bigger the claim,the greater the factual evidence MUST be.Single ,unconnected "facts" are 99% of the time,circumstantial,and happenstance.

As much as these thing often help the healing process as i agree with,they can also create false hope,and keep the wound that was healing,from doing so.Boogie men around every tree,ghosts in the machine.

Sometime,people can't accept the explaination,though simple it may be,and Occams Razor,dosen't make sense to them.People want a larger,more complicated reason that a tragedy occured.A conspiracy theory,can be as comforting,as closure to some people.

I wish I had the answer for a victims next of kin,everytime,the'd ask me...why?Sometimes,you'll never know.

Steve B.
 
Bob,I argee,as long as these things are taken at face value.They are mostly the work of dot connectors,utilizing the "post hoc,ergo propter hoc" applied logic.In other words,event Y ,followed event X,then event Y ,must have been caused by event X.

I have seen some crazy stuff in an over 20 year career with the NYPD.Some of it was actually true,most of it was just the product of over imagination,and sometimes,mental illness.

My career ,is based on collecting facts,which are verifiable,and demonsterable,which may or may not,verify a working theory.We just didn't line the pieces up on the board ,to make our theory fit the event.It all had to line up,through its own fruition,or we no matter what our gut said,we rejected it because of probable cause,couldn't be met.

If probable caus,couldn't be met,then the standard of" beyond a reasonable doubt",couldn't be met at trial.That standard MUST be met.or everything else is just conjecture,which amounts to circumstantial evidence.

The bigger the claim,the greater the factual evidence MUST be.Single ,unconnected "facts" are 99% of the time,circumstantial,and happenstance.

As much as these thing often help the healing process as i agree with,they can also create false hope,and keep the wound that was healing,from doing so.Boogie men around every tree,ghosts in the machine.

Sometime,people can't accept the explaination,though simple it may be,and Occams Razor,dosen't make sense to them.People want a larger,more complicated reason that a tragedy occured.A conspiracy theory,can be as comforting,as closure to some people.

I wish I had the answer for a victims next of kin,everytime,the'd ask me...why?Sometimes,you'll never know.

Steve B.

I've often thought that maybe the whole conspiracy theory thing is the conspiracy itself. A specialized group that has been given the go to try and distract from what is actually going on. Seems that as conspiracies get bigger and more complex, people just stop caring, and the events themselves just get lost in the shuffle. People then stop caring to an extent (minus the conspiracy junkies), and eventually the whole thing is mostly forgotten. It is like giving cake to a kid with a boo-boo just to shut them up.
 
Back
Top