Political Crossfire Forums

Green · Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:19 pm Post subject: Re: How do u justify censorship

The Comrade wrote: fresh08 wrote: i have been reading other threads and some people are saying that censorship is not a big deal. why care? btw did u no that u never see picutres of dead soldiers in the media. that is pretty big in the grand scheme of things. and who knows what the gov will censor next. don't you think that you have a right to know what is going on at all times. how else are we gonna keep the government at check?

oh noes dead bodies are censored.

no one wants to see that s**t. NO ONE. their names are mentioned and their LIVING pictures are shown.

only some sick necopheliac would want to see dead bodies.

Whoever likes horror movies.

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

Green wrote:

Whoever likes horror movies.

oh good one. you're a regular george carlin.

the reality is(yes, i know reality is a knew concept for you but try and keep up) no one wants to see dead bodies. there is no need for them on television, and they only serve to fuel polarization of the country.

if you're so into dead bodies i suggest you peruse rotten.com and get a full force blast of what death looks like.

fresh08 · Joined: 11 Oct 2006 Posts: 5

dead bodies are just an example but i guess censorship ties in with propaganda also because both alters in a bad and incomplete way that the general public sees things. everyone should be given the truth whether good or bad

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

fresh08 wrote: dead bodies are just an example but i guess censorship ties in with propaganda also because both alters in a bad and incomplete way that the general public sees things. everyone should be given the truth whether good or bad

do the "such and such a number of soldiers died today in iraq" not give you enough truth?

mathurin · Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:40 pm Post subject:

The Comrade wrote: fresh08 wrote: dead bodies are just an example but i guess censorship ties in with propaganda also because both alters in a bad and incomplete way that the general public sees things. everyone should be given the truth whether good or bad

do the "such and such a number of soldiers died today in iraq" not give you enough truth?

no it doesnt, thats just the downside
in past wars success was measured in territory gained or major units destroyed, perhaps in percentage losses, if you told somebody that 20 men died in an operation the person you told would prolly give you some unkind words and say "out of how many soldiers in the operation"
but our losses are minescule compared to previous wars, so they settle on gross numbers and nothing else

because they want you mad, or sad, or some combination, why?
because emotional people dont think, they dont question, they just attack, canceling the thought processes of its constituency should not be an objective for anybody

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

mathurin wrote:

no it doesnt, thats just the downside
in past wars success was measured in territory gained or major units destroyed, perhaps in percentage losses, if you told somebody that 20 men died in an operation the person you told would prolly give you some unkind words and say "out of how many soldiers in the operation"
but our losses are minescule compared to previous wars, so they settle on gross numbers and nothing else

because they want you mad, or sad, or some combination, why?
because emotional people dont think, they dont question, they just attack, canceling the thought processes of its constituency should not be an objective for anybody

and you don't think seeing a soldier with a kennedy-esque head wound isn't going to cause an intense emotional response?

stalin said it best. one dead is tragedy. one million dead is a statistic.

so going by what you say, pictures would merely help create this "emotional unthinking" crowd of people.

micfranklin · Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:35 pm Post subject:

I really don't know how censorship can be justified.

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

micfranklin wrote: I really don't know how censorship can be justified.

so things like this don't start polluting every form of media shown to the public.

micfranklin · Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:44 pm Post subject:

The Comrade wrote: micfranklin wrote: I really don't know how censorship can be justified.

so things like this don't start polluting every form of media shown to the public.

There's always the option of not turning on the television so you don't see things like that. Yeah I know, clicking buttons on a remote is a bit extreme for some of us :?

And since it was on there, somebody (not me) is going to be whipping up some crystal meth tonight....

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

micfranklin wrote:

There's always the option of not turning on the television so you don't see things like that. Yeah I know, clicking buttons on a remote is a bit extreme for some of us :?

And since it was on there, somebody (not me) is going to be whipping up some crystal meth tonight....

why should people have to suffer so sick weirdos can put anything they want on television or any other form of media?

micfranklin · Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:04 pm Post subject:

The Comrade wrote: micfranklin wrote:

There's always the option of not turning on the television so you don't see things like that. Yeah I know, clicking buttons on a remote is a bit extreme for some of us :?

And since it was on there, somebody (not me) is going to be whipping up some crystal meth tonight....

why should people have to suffer so sick weirdos can put anything they want on television or any other form of media?

Freedom of the press, anyone?

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

micfranklin wrote:
Freedom of the press, anyone?

yes the press has a right to show necrophelia, scat porn, beastiality, and suicides by shotgun on mainstream media all they want. there shouldn't be any regulations at all.

apparently you're okay with children finding s**t like this?

and don't go and blame the parents. considering i too was once a child i know that it's not hard at all to give your parents the slip on what you're doing.

micfranklin · Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:15 pm Post subject:

The Comrade wrote: micfranklin wrote:
Freedom of the press, anyone?

yes the press has a right to show necrophelia, scat porn, beastiality, and suicides by shotgun on mainstream media all they want. there shouldn't be any regulations at all.

apparently you're okay with children finding s**t like this?

and don't go and blame the parents. considering i too was once a child i know that it's not hard at all to give your parents the slip on what you're doing.

I'll start by saying that the parents, as many have said, should be monitoring what the children watch, unless they want their child seeing that.

But other than that, no I'm not okay with children seeing that.

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

micfranklin wrote:

I'll start by saying that the parents, as many have said, should be monitoring what the children watch, unless they want their child seeing that.

any seven year old knows how to bi-pass computer filters and television blockers. and a parent cannot watch their child 24/7

micfranklin wrote: But other than that, no I'm not okay with children seeing that.

yet you want to make it easier for them to access it?

micfranklin · Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:22 pm Post subject:

The Comrade wrote: micfranklin wrote:

I'll start by saying that the parents, as many have said, should be monitoring what the children watch, unless they want their child seeing that.

any seven year old knows how to bi-pass computer filters and television blockers. and a parent cannot watch their child 24/7

micfranklin wrote: But other than that, no I'm not okay with children seeing that.

yet you want to make it easier for them to access it?

Okay, let me put it like this. If you want your children seeing gore and nudity and stuff on public television, then go ahead and let them. But I don't think any seven-year old kid who still watches Pokemon can hack passwords and such in a computer.

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

micfranklin wrote:

Okay, let me put it like this. If you want your children seeing gore and nudity and stuff on public television, then go ahead and let them. But I don't think any seven-year old kid who still watches Pokemon can hack passwords and such in a computer.

who says the parents want their children to see it?

once again mic any seven year old can get past filters. and any seven year old can find loopholes in internet passwords. me and my friend used to do it all the time, most of the time not even having to guess the password.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7798

Korimyr the Rat wrote: The only censorship that I consider acceptable is the bare minimum needed to maintain operational security for legitimate military operations-- and then only for the duration of those operations.

Agreed.

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 8780

The Comrade wrote: micfranklin wrote:
Freedom of the press, anyone?

yes the press has a right to show necrophelia, scat porn, beastiality, and suicides by shotgun on mainstream media all they want. there shouldn't be any regulations at all.

apparently you're okay with children finding s**t like this?

and don't go and blame the parents. considering i too was once a child i know that it's not hard at all to give your parents the slip on what you're doing. They should have the right, and I will blame the parents. As a media owner, I should have the right to put on my station or in my newspaper whatever I want. If you don't want to see it, don't look at it. If you don't want your child to see it, get off your butt and be a parent. Don't let the computer or television be a babysitter.

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

Enoch wrote: They should have the right, and I will blame the parents. As a media owner, I should have the right to put on my station or in my newspaper whatever I want. If you don't want to see it, don't look at it. If you don't want your child to see it, get off your butt and be a parent. Don't let the computer or television be a babysitter.

parents cannot watch their children 24/7. and parents who try harm the child more then they help. it's called being a helicopter parent. and like i said, any 7 year old can get around any form of filter if they want to. it isn't hard.

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 8780

The Comrade wrote: Enoch wrote: They should have the right, and I will blame the parents. As a media owner, I should have the right to put on my station or in my newspaper whatever I want. If you don't want to see it, don't look at it. If you don't want your child to see it, get off your butt and be a parent. Don't let the computer or television be a babysitter.

parents cannot watch their children 24/7. and parents who try harm the child more then they help. it's called being a helicopter parent. and like i said, any 7 year old can get around any form of filter if they want to. it isn't hard.

So, because the parent isn't there to watch the child the media should?