OT Flag Burning.. should be of interest
EIsmith
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
Flag action draws salutes
Man pilloried in what vets say is defense of Old Glory, gets national
spotlight
By HUMBERTO MART�NEZ, Staff writer
First published in print: Sunday, September 27, 2009
VALLEY FALLS -- This is a red, white and blue village that is still
seeing red after a flag that flew over Iraq was burned by a 21-year-old.
The payback? He was publicly humiliated last Sunday by being duct-taped
to the flagpole of Veterans of Foreign War 1938 say he desecrated Sept.
18.
Nick Normile, post commander and Vietnam War veteran, said he's been
flooded with calls from media outlets since the events of last week
received attention from local TV stations and newspapers. He's been
asked to go live on a veteran's radio show program from Tennessee,
another radio show from Chicago and even received a call from NBC
studios in New York City.
But Normile said he's not planning to let the story get any more
attention and has declined appearances.
"I'm not trying to be some martyr or hero," Normile said. "I just did
what I thought was right."
The 21-year-old appeared intoxicated when he entered the VFW post on the
day of the alleged act, Normile said. When the man was refused service
for not having a proper ID, he ran out in a fit of anger. He cut the
rope of the flag, which had once flown over troops in Iraq, and ignited
it with a cigarette lighter.
Two days later, Normile said the man was forced to sit in the sun
pilloried for six hours as townspeople gathered across the street for a
youth soccer picnic. A sign was hung around his neck detailing what he
had done. It recalled the Middle Ages punishment, subjecting him to
public humiliation and scorn.
"He'll never disrespect the flag again, I can tell you that," Normile
said on Friday.
A week later villagers were hush-hush about the event, but patrons of
the post bar gave a nod of agreement to the punishment, pointing proudly
to a newspaper clipping of the event on a bulletin board.
Patriotism is on open display in this village of about 500, the walls of
a defunct railroad bridge near its entrance now brightly colored red,
white and blue. Most of the historical homes have American flags of
their own hanging from porches, some also adorned with the "Don't Tread
on Me" flag, popular with Tea Party activists.
Normile said once he found out what the man had done, he knew he had to
be taught a lesson. Normile said he went out hunting for him, but when
he couldn't find him at his apartment, he sought the help of the man's
uncle to bring him out.
"He manned up, he knew he had punishment coming," said Normile, who
described the young man he refused to identify as guilty and ashamed.
"I told him to think about those kids in the foxhole, and how they had
no one to set them free," Normile said. "It got to him, so I was
satisfied. He showed a lot of remorse, no attitude."
Normile said the flag, whose pieces will be retired in a formal
ceremony, had significant meaning. The village's auxiliary had been
sending toiletries and other goods to soldiers in Iraq, who then sent
back the flag that had flown over their bunker. It was received with
great attention and a ceremony.
State troopers and Rensselaer County sheriff's deputies said no charges
had been filed by either the VFW post or the man.
Reach staff writer Humberto Mart�nez at 454-5057 or by email at
hmar...@timesunion.com.
Read more:
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949#ixzz0SQxYjsN3
"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.
This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost
Karl Townsend
punishment, and he took it like a man. End of case.
Looks like all the liberal groups need to get their lawyers in here and fix
this disgrace to the American system. <VBG>
Karl
HH&C
wrote:
The groups and the lawyers need a swift kick in the nuts.
Dan
Bunch of bleeding cowards, just like Runner.
Why do those people hate this country so much?
Dan
Dan
Yawn. Which cowards would ever think of DOING such a thing? Certainly
not YOU, Hamster.
Why DO you hate this country so much?
Dan
Dan
> "He'll never disrespect the flag again, I can tell you that," Normile
> said on Friday.
Of course he can't possibly disrespect the flag AGAIN, since he never
disrespected the flag the first time. The cowards who taped him up
disrespected the flag and dishonored themselves, and our nation.
> "I told him to think about those kids in the foxhole, and how they had
> no one to set them free," Normile said. "It got to him, so I was
> satisfied. He showed a lot of remorse, no attitude."
Yet this young man did more to free those guys in the foxhole than the
whole cowardly mob who taped him up, and all the yahoos who blindly
cheer them on after the fact.
And the first thing out of these cowards' mouths is: "Rule of law."
They all belong in jail, where they can think [sic] about what they have
done.
> "First Law of Leftist Debate
> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
> that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
> more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
> losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
> homophobe approaches infinity.
>
> This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
> race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
> the subject." Grey Ghost
Grey Ghost ain't too smart...
Dan
HH&C
I have to repeatedly apologize for my country, don't I?
John R. Carroll
They hate themselves Dan.
Cowards and thieves that they are.
The rhetoric is their hidy hole.
--
John R. Carroll
mattathayde
http://rittercnc.com/metalworking/OT-Flag-Burning-should-be-of-interest-201157-.htm
:
-------------------------------------
EIsmith wrote:
> www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
the only issue i have with it is that it wasnt his flag. if it was his
flag
then he can do what ever the hell he wants with it. flag burning should
be
reserved for a last ditch message to show distain with the government or
the
society. any one that thinks it should be illegal is nothing more than a
fascist, same idea as not being able to destroy/deface a picture of a
dictator.
the kid was in the wrong since it wasnt his property and as such should
get
punished with vandalism charges but nothing more. it pisses me off when
the neo
conservatives who follow the blind patriotism who claim there is freedom
of
speech then try to hinder peoples freedom of speech yet them extend their
own
"Freedom" beyond the boundaries it allows.
-matt
##-----------------------------------------------##
Delivered via http://www.rittercnc.com/
Metalworking Forums
Web and RSS access to your favorite newsgroup -
rec.crafts.metalworking - 175141 messages and counting!
##-----------------------------------------------##
Michael A. Terrell
They are all nuts, and we aren't talking about Filberts.
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Cliff
>Flag action draws salutes
Find those "WMDs" yet?
Lying winger scum are a disgrace to all mankind.
--
Cliff
Don Foreman
(mattathayde) wrote:
>mattathayde had written this in response to
>http://rittercnc.com/metalworking/OT-Flag-Burning-should-be-of-interest-201157-.htm
> :
>
>
>-------------------------------------
>EIsmith wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
>
>
>the only issue i have with it is that it wasnt his flag. if it was his
>flag
>then he can do what ever the hell he wants with it. flag burning should
>be
>reserved for a last ditch message to show distain with the government or
>the
>society. any one that thinks it should be illegal is nothing more than a
>fascist, same idea as not being able to destroy/deface a picture of a
>dictator.
>
It is not illegal to burn a flag. In fact, that is the approved
method for respectful disposal of old flags.
However, the flag bears strong symbolism and meaning to some people.
The first amendment right to deliberately "make a statement" that some
will find inflammatory and highly offensive does not assure that they
won't respond vigorously when you succeed in offending them.
In that light, I'd say the veterans' response was quite temperate.
They did not harm the offender nor take or destroy his property. They
exercised their first amendment right to "make a statement" with a bit
of duct tape and a sign. Tit for tat, I'd say.
Ed Huntress
"Don Foreman" <dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote in message
news:29f4c5d39lmloe3dg...@4ax.com...
I hope you don't mean that. "Making a statement" by holding someone against
their will, and all the rest of it, constitutes kidnapping under the law.
It's a felony everywhere in the United States. It also constitutes battery
(and probably assault, depending upon the circumstances), but kidnapping is
the felony.
The question I have is whether the kid went willingly. I wouldn't object to
what was done to him if, in his more sober moment, he thought it was fair
and went along willingly. If he didn't, I'd arrest the participants, get a
change of venue, and prosecute them for felony kidnapping.
Finding a prosecutor who really did believe in the rule of law, and who
wasn't too much of a coward to bring the case, might be another matter.
BTW, the kid gets misdemeanor destruction of property, unless the flag was
worth enough to make it a felony. The case could be made for that,
considering what people had to go through to get that particular flag.
--
Ed Huntress
David R.Birch
>> In that light, I'd say the veterans' response was quite temperate.
>> They did not harm the offender nor take or destroy his property. They
>> exercised their first amendment right to "make a statement" with a bit
>> of duct tape and a sign. Tit for tat, I'd say.
>
> I hope you don't mean that. "Making a statement" by holding someone against
> their will, and all the rest of it, constitutes kidnapping under the law.
> It's a felony everywhere in the United States. It also constitutes battery
> (and probably assault, depending upon the circumstances), but kidnapping is
> the felony.
>
> The question I have is whether the kid went willingly. I wouldn't object to
> what was done to him if, in his more sober moment, he thought it was fair
> and went along willingly. If he didn't, I'd arrest the participants, get a
> change of venue, and prosecute them for felony kidnapping.
He was offered the option of having the cops called, a one on one with
a vet or sitting in the chair. He chose.
> Finding a prosecutor who really did believe in the rule of law, and who
> wasn't too much of a coward to bring the case, might be another matter.
Depends on what looks better for his career, usually.
> BTW, the kid gets misdemeanor destruction of property, unless the flag was
> worth enough to make it a felony. The case could be made for that,
> considering what people had to go through to get that particular flag.
The kid didn't want the cops brought in. He chose.
David
Dan
When Republicans are in charge, certainly.
Dan
Ed Huntress
"David R.Birch" <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:h9tpb...@news3.newsguy.com...
> Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>>> In that light, I'd say the veterans' response was quite temperate.
>>> They did not harm the offender nor take or destroy his property. They
>>> exercised their first amendment right to "make a statement" with a bit
>>> of duct tape and a sign. Tit for tat, I'd say.
>>
>> I hope you don't mean that. "Making a statement" by holding someone
>> against their will, and all the rest of it, constitutes kidnapping under
>> the law. It's a felony everywhere in the United States. It also
>> constitutes battery (and probably assault, depending upon the
>> circumstances), but kidnapping is the felony.
>>
>> The question I have is whether the kid went willingly. I wouldn't object
>> to what was done to him if, in his more sober moment, he thought it was
>> fair and went along willingly. If he didn't, I'd arrest the participants,
>> get a change of venue, and prosecute them for felony kidnapping.
>
> He was offered the option of having the cops called, a one on one with a
> vet or sitting in the chair. He chose.
Of course, that's heresay. Since kidnapping in New York has no statute of
limitations, the kid may decide at some future time that what happened was
something different. Apparently there are dozens of witnesses to the taping
and humiliation. It would be interesting to know if there were any witnesses
to the "offer."
>
>> Finding a prosecutor who really did believe in the rule of law, and who
>> wasn't too much of a coward to bring the case, might be another matter.
>
> Depends on what looks better for his career, usually.
>
>> BTW, the kid gets misdemeanor destruction of property, unless the flag
>> was worth enough to make it a felony. The case could be made for that,
>> considering what people had to go through to get that particular flag.
>
> The kid didn't want the cops brought in. He chose.
Who really knows?
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not siding with the kid. But I'm opposed to a
few things in this world, and one of them is taking the law into one's own
hands.
That may not be what happened here. But when I heard that the guy
perpetrating this "display" turned down media offers and wouldn't name the
kid, my suspicions were raised. I wouldn't be surprised if he's being quiet
about it on the advice of an attorney. Even if he has a strong case in
court, and even if no one would prosecute in a criminal case, the kid could
raise one hell of a stink in a civil case.
All it would take is a lawyer looking for some face-time with the media and
a contingency deal for the lawsuit.
--
Ed Huntress
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
> HH&C wrote:
>> On Sep 28, 6:14 pm, Dan <dnada...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Why DO you hate this country so much?
>>
>
> When Republicans are in charge, certainly.
>
country into the ground.
Bush bailed out the idiot bankers who wrote mortgages to people who
everybody knew weren't qualified; they were all betting on the bubble.
The bubble popped, and Bush did the worst possible thing he could do -
bailed out the ones who lost the bet.
So, then Obama gets elected, making all those speeches and selling his
own version of snake oil, and what does he do? He uses _YOUR_ money, and
your children's money, and etc... to "bail out" GM and Chrysler, who
should have gone broke decades ago. That "bailout" was just a payoff of
YOUR money to the UAW.
There has been virtually no change in Afghanistan policy, he's just
continued with Bush's "surge" mentality -
How are things better now than they were under Cheney/Bush?
Please note, I'm no lover of Bush, either, I hate them both exactly the
same.
But both wings of the statist bird hate me to death, because Freedom
is my worship word.
Thanks,
Rich
cavelamb
>
> Don't misunderstand me. I'm not siding with the kid. But I'm opposed to a
> few things in this world, and one of them is taking the law into one's own
> hands.
>
Someone please resolve for me the dichotomy of 'ignorance of the law
is no defense' with congress critters telling me they don't read the
bills because you need a team of lawyers to understand it.
Wes 2009
Ed Huntress
"cavelamb" <cave...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:09CdnVbNlae2C1_X...@earthlink.com...
The principle is not exactly what some people think it is. In fact, in
Blackstone, the Latin phrase which means what you said ("ignorance of the
law excuses no one") was modified to "ignorance of the law which everyone
is bound to know, excuses no man." That's closer to what the law is in most
countries today, including the US.
There have been successful defenses based upon ignorance of the law. See
Cheek v. United States, USSC 1991, and Lambert v. California, USSC 1957.
They're very rare, because the hypothetical situations people imagine when
they ponder this question are rare. Most crimes are committed with
knowledge, or approximate knowledge, that a crime is being committed. If
it's a case of administrative law, which can be illogical to a layman, and
arcane, most people who would be in a position to violate the law are also
in a position to question what the law actually is -- businessmen should
inquire with their legal counsel about matters relating to tax law, for
example.
A key issue in some cases is intent, and that is further hinged on the
question of responsibility versus negligence. You aren't likely to find
yourself in commission of a crime about which you had no reason at all to
believe was a crime. More likely, it would be a case of "you should have
known better," or "you had enough at stake that you should have asked a
lawyer."
--
Ed Huntress
rangerssuck
Where did you get that information (about the kid choosing this
punishment instead of calling the cops)? Or is this another case of a
winger making up his own set of facts to fit his agenda?
The kid ought to press charges, and see how his misdemeanor vandalism
stacks up against their felony kidnapping. What's next? "String 'em
up'?
These guys, with their great respect for the country and its rules and
laws, stepped WAY out of bounds.
cavelamb
I was going the other way with this one, Ed.
Quote me:
Ignorance is the ONLY excuse for many laws
azotic
I do believe a majority of congress is composed of lawyers that
are sufficiently incompentent to make a living at lawyering. That
is why they need a team of lawyers to tell them what they did.
Who has time to read a law when your busy playing golf and boozing with a
lobbyist ? <G>
Best Regards
Tom.
David R.Birch
> On Sep 29, 4:06 pm, "David R.Birch" <dbi...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>> He was offered the option of having the cops called, a one on one with
>> a vet or sitting in the chair. He chose.
>>
>>> Finding a prosecutor who really did believe in the rule of law, and who
>>> wasn't too much of a coward to bring the case, might be another matter.
>> Depends on what looks better for his career, usually.
>>
>>> BTW, the kid gets misdemeanor destruction of property, unless the flag was
>>> worth enough to make it a felony. The case could be made for that,
>>> considering what people had to go through to get that particular flag.
>> The kid didn't want the cops brought in. He chose.
>>
>> David
>
> Where did you get that information (about the kid choosing this
> punishment instead of calling the cops)? Or is this another case of a
> winger making up his own set of facts to fit his agenda?
It was in the original post and all the news reports that I saw.
>
> The kid ought to press charges, and see how his misdemeanor vandalism
> stacks up against their felony kidnapping. What's next? "String 'em
> up'?
He chose. They didn't force him to do anything or hold him against his
will. And they used duct tape, not string....
>
> These guys, with their great respect for the country and its rules and
> laws, stepped WAY out of bounds.
Maybe, but they did offer him a choice and he chose to sit in a chair
rather than pay a fine for a misdemeanor.
David
Don Foreman
Do you imagine that there are no members of that VFW post that would
attest that they witnessed the offer?
>
>Don't misunderstand me. I'm not siding with the kid. But I'm opposed to a
>few things in this world, and one of them is taking the law into one's own
>hands.
It's a small town, Ed. They didn't need a herd of lawyers and a gaggle
of government to sort out the matter of an ill-considered
disrespectful act by a town kid who'd overindulged and had a tantrum.
His elders made it clear to him that his vandalism was not acceptable
behavior. The "kidnapped" kid was right there in plain
sight,obviously not harmed and in no peril of being harmed. There's no
indication that he was gagged or rendered speechless, nor that he
publicly proclaimed any objection to his treatment.
"Law in own hands" perhaps, but closer to tough love than any form of
vigilantism. Kid screwed up, town elders jacked him up. Small town
bidness, none of ours.
>That may not be what happened here. But when I heard that the guy
>perpetrating this "display" turned down media offers and wouldn't name the
>kid, my suspicions were raised. I wouldn't be surprised if he's being quiet
>about it on the advice of an attorney.
This behavior is entirely in character for an NCO vet (sans attorney)
who provided a bit of character-building guidance and counsel behind
the barracks to a number of young wiseguys and screwups over the
years.
>Even if he has a strong case in court, and even if no one would prosecute in a criminal case, the kid could
>raise one hell of a stink in a civil case.
Perhaps he could try, but I strongly doubt that he will.
>All it would take is a lawyer looking for some face-time with the media and
>a contingency deal for the lawsuit.
The lawyer would certainly not be from Valley Falls, pop 476. The kid
would have to be complicit. He may want to continue living there.
Don Foreman
None of which addresses Wes's valid question. What do legislators have
to do that is more important than reading and understanding the
legislation they vote to pass or not?
cavelamb
Get re-elected
John Husvar
You judge it by what harm it will do if improperly administered.
-- Lyndon Johnson (?) (or maybe just me)
rangerssuck
The original post said absolutely nothing about choosing between the
police and this asinine punishment. It said "He manned up, he knew he
had punishment coming,"
So, as I said, you made shit up to support your viewpoint.
Larry Jaques
<dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> scrawled the following:
A Freakin' Men! Conyers should have been censured, for his little
statement if not for the way it was delivered. The man is one step
short of the grave and sounded like he was fighting for words, as if
he'd just suffered a massive stroke. The shadow of the incumbent is a
powerful and nasty thing, wot?
--
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw
SteveB
so I can read the story?
Steve
Ed Huntress
"Don Foreman" <dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote in message
Aha. I see, after some searching, that you're referring to Wes's reference
to Conyer's statement in another thread. I rarely follow links if there is
no comment or description of what they're about, and I hadn't heard Conyer's
comment myself.
The answer to the question, I think, is that any bill that runs over 1,000
pages is a pile of junk. Conyers is right. And in retrospect, it looks like
Obama, in trying to avoid the buzzsaw that Hillary Clinton ran into nearly
two decades ago, has found *another* way to create a piece of nightmare
legislation.
I've read something like 160 pages of the thing, selectively, and it looks
like a horse designed by a committee. Turning the whole thing over to
Congressional committees was not the answer, either. It's so full of hedges
and compromises that it *would* take a team a lawyers days to figure out
exactly what it says.
I've been despairing about health care reform for a couple of months now. I
doubt if much is going to happen, because too many powerful interests don't
want anything to happen, in the first place. In the second place, any bill
this unwieldy is an invitation to fear and fear-mongering by those
interests, no matter what it contains. Nobody knows what kinds of traps and
pitfalls lie buried inside of it.
As for Congress voting on legislation they haven't read, that happens every
year, with the budget. It raises the question of whether this country is
governable in this complex age -- at least, with the structure of government
we now have. The real work is done by lobbyists and the bureaucracy, while
the legislative arms, mainly Congress, look more detached from it all the
time. They seem to vote by their sense of smell and the readings of the
polls.
It's probably going to take at least another couple of tries, IMO, and
another decade. In the meantime, we'll go broke if we don't do something, so
some patchwork bits and pieces will be enacted between now and then. Health
care could get worse. The entrenched financial interests, especially the
private insurance companies, don't care about that. They only care that the
money keeps flowing their way. And they've aligned their pitch with the
conservatives to make sure nothing much happens.
If I had to put my finger on one thing that has created this mess, I'd say
it was Obama's faith in bipartisanship. The insurance industry, Big Pharma,
and other medical interests have played that failed effort for all they're
worth, and they've almost succeeded in doing exactly what they wanted to
do -- stop the whole thing cold.
It looks to me like Obama is wising up to the fact that he's going to have
to be more like LBJ to get anything done. I hope it's not too late. But a
50-page bill can be sold and defended; a 1,000-page bill cannot. If the Dems
get over their infatuation with making nice-nice with the Republicans,
there's just a slim chance they can get something worthwhile done. If they
can't, we're screwed.
--
Ed Huntress
Cliff
<freed...@example.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:37:48 -0700, Dan wrote:
>> HH&C wrote:
>>> On Sep 28, 6:14 pm, Dan <dnada...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Why DO you hate this country so much?
>>>
>>> I have to repeatedly apologize for my country, don't I?
>>
>> When Republicans are in charge, certainly.
>>
>Or when the Democrat takes the Republican ball and uses it to run the
>country into the ground.
>
>Bush bailed out the idiot bankers who wrote mortgages to people who
>everybody knew weren't qualified; they were all betting on the bubble.
What's wrong with capitalism rethug style?
They got the money, right?
That was the holy goal, right?
Why else did the rethugs deregulate & fail to enforce te remaining
regulations?
>The bubble popped, and Bush did the worst possible thing he could do -
>bailed out the ones who lost the bet.
Follow the money.
>So, then Obama gets elected, making all those speeches and selling his
>own version of snake oil, and what does he do?
Get the money back from the rethugs & capitalists?
>He uses _YOUR_ money, and
>your children's money, and etc... to "bail out" GM and Chrysler, who
>should have gone broke decades ago. That "bailout" was just a payoff of
>YOUR money to the UAW.
Winger BS. The UAW has a great deal at stake too. So do we all.
>
>There has been virtually no change in Afghanistan policy, he's just
>continued with Bush's "surge" mentality -
So why is it under such study?
>How are things better now than they were under Cheney/Bush?
Fewer lying neocons.
AND we don't have 40% + unemployment & failed banks with hyperinflation
too.
>Please note, I'm no lover of Bush, either, I hate them both exactly the
>same.
>
>But both wings of the statist bird hate me to death, because Freedom
>is my worship word.
So where were you before?
>Thanks,
>Rich
Find those "WMDs" yet?
--
Cliff
Don Foreman
wrote:
>I must have the OP killfiled. Can someone please post me the original site
>so I can read the story?
>
>Steve
Kirk Gordon
Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:49:30 -0400, "EIsmith" <ltt...@DELETEhughes.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
>
>
> Flag action draws salutes
> Man pilloried in what vets say is defense of Old Glory, gets national
> spotlight
>
> By HUMBERTO MART�NEZ, Staff writer
> First published in print: Sunday, September 27, 2009
>
> VALLEY FALLS -- This is a red, white and blue village that is still
> seeing red after a flag that flew over Iraq was burned by a 21-year-old.
>
>
> The payback? He was publicly humiliated last Sunday by being duct-taped
> to the flagpole of Veterans of Foreign War 1938 say he desecrated Sept.
> 18.
>
> Nick Normile, post commander and Vietnam War veteran, said he's been
> flooded with calls from media outlets since the events of last week
> received attention from local TV stations and newspapers. He's been
> asked to go live on a veteran's radio show program from Tennessee,
> another radio show from Chicago and even received a call from NBC
> studios in New York City.
>
> But Normile said he's not planning to let the story get any more
> attention and has declined appearances.
>
> "I'm not trying to be some martyr or hero," Normile said. "I just did
> what I thought was right."
>
> The 21-year-old appeared intoxicated when he entered the VFW post on the
> day of the alleged act, Normile said. When the man was refused service
> for not having a proper ID, he ran out in a fit of anger. He cut the
> rope of the flag, which had once flown over troops in Iraq, and ignited
> it with a cigarette lighter.
>
> Two days later, Normile said the man was forced to sit in the sun
> pilloried for six hours as townspeople gathered across the street for a
> youth soccer picnic. A sign was hung around his neck detailing what he
> had done. It recalled the Middle Ages punishment, subjecting him to
> public humiliation and scorn.
>
> "He'll never disrespect the flag again, I can tell you that," Normile
> said on Friday.
>
> A week later villagers were hush-hush about the event, but patrons of
> the post bar gave a nod of agreement to the punishment, pointing proudly
> to a newspaper clipping of the event on a bulletin board.
>
> Patriotism is on open display in this village of about 500, the walls of
> a defunct railroad bridge near its entrance now brightly colored red,
> white and blue. Most of the historical homes have American flags of
> their own hanging from porches, some also adorned with the "Don't Tread
> on Me" flag, popular with Tea Party activists.
>
> Normile said once he found out what the man had done, he knew he had to
> be taught a lesson. Normile said he went out hunting for him, but when
> he couldn't find him at his apartment, he sought the help of the man's
> uncle to bring him out.
>
> "He manned up, he knew he had punishment coming," said Normile, who
> described the young man he refused to identify as guilty and ashamed.
>
> "I told him to think about those kids in the foxhole, and how they had
> no one to set them free," Normile said. "It got to him, so I was
> satisfied. He showed a lot of remorse, no attitude."
>
> Normile said the flag, whose pieces will be retired in a formal
> ceremony, had significant meaning. The village's auxiliary had been
> sending toiletries and other goods to soldiers in Iraq, who then sent
> back the flag that had flown over their bunker. It was received with
> great attention and a ceremony.
>
> State troopers and Rensselaer County sheriff's deputies said no charges
> had been filed by either the VFW post or the man.
>
> Reach staff writer Humberto Mart�nez at 454-5057 or by email at
> hmar...@timesunion.com.
Lemme see if I've got this straight. We've sent brave men and women
to fight and die for the benefit of a country full of third world minds
that don't have a clue what freedom or rights are all about. We tell
ourselves, and our troops, that they're actually fighting to protect OUR
rights and freedoms, and things like the rule of law, due process, etc.
Then we think it's a good thing when someone attempts to "honor" our
troops by ignoring the rule of law, forgetting about due process, and
imposing a punishment that no US court would order.
And the reason for all this is that a VFW post commander and Viet
Nam war veteran is worried about kids in a foxhole who have "no one to
set them free". He's right about that. None of us will ever be free
until we realize that patriotism is a rational, reasoned commitment to
something that makes sense, and not a license to use slogans and flags
to justify destructive nonsense.
KG
David R.Birch
>> Maybe, but they did offer him a choice and he chose to sit in a chair
>> rather than pay a fine for a misdemeanor.
>>
>> David
>
> The original post said absolutely nothing about choosing between the
> police and this asinine punishment. It said "He manned up, he knew he
> had punishment coming,"
>
> So, as I said, you made shit up to support your viewpoint.
No, that would be sinking to your level.
<http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/09/vfw-hall-flag-burner-caught-duct-taped.html>
<http://www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=5221>
David
Ed Huntress
===================================================
"I found him on Sunday and I duct taped him to the flag pole," Normile said
bluntly. "He didn't deny it, said he was drunk. Let's just say he
volunteered to sit out here duct taped to the pole."
===================================================
"Let's just say"? Normile tells the story a little differently each time he
speaks about it. No wonder the whole town has clammed up. That statement
right there will appear in court, if it comes to that.
--
Ed Huntress
rangerssuck
> rangerssuck wrote:
> >> Maybe, but they did offer him a choice and he chose to sit in a chair
> >> rather than pay a fine for a misdemeanor.
>
> >> David
>
> > The original post said absolutely nothing about choosing between the
> > police and this asinine punishment. It said "He manned up, he knew he
> > had punishment coming,"
>
> > So, as I said, you made shit up to support your viewpoint.
>
> No, that would be sinking to your level.
>
>
> <http://www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=5221>
>
> David
OK, your first reference said, according to the "reporter," not
according to a quote, that he was given a choice. The second reference
said, in a direct quote of the alleged kidnapper, "Let's just say he
volunteered to sit out here duct taped to the pole." It says nothing
about having given him a choice.
So, now you're quoting a "reporter" who made shit up. Don't believe
everything you read on the internet.
rangerssuck
> > wrote:
>
> >>www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
>
> > Flag action draws salutes
> > Man pilloried in what vets say is defense of Old Glory, gets national
> > spotlight
>
> > hmarti...@timesunion.com.
>
> Lemme see if I've got this straight. We've sent brave men and women
> to fight and die for the benefit of a country full of third world minds
> that don't have a clue what freedom or rights are all about. We tell
> ourselves, and our troops, that they're actually fighting to protect OUR
> rights and freedoms, and things like the rule of law, due process, etc.
> Then we think it's a good thing when someone attempts to "honor" our
> troops by ignoring the rule of law, forgetting about due process, and
> imposing a punishment that no US court would order.
>
> And the reason for all this is that a VFW post commander and Viet
> Nam war veteran is worried about kids in a foxhole who have "no one to
> set them free". He's right about that. None of us will ever be free
> until we realize that patriotism is a rational, reasoned commitment to
> something that makes sense, and not a license to use slogans and flags
> to justify destructive nonsense.
>
> KG
well said.
SteveB
"Don Foreman" <dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote in message
ty, sir.
SteveB
"Don Foreman" <dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote in message
news:ht17c55rb8ahglnlq...@4ax.com...
Sounds like the VFW guys handled it admirably, and the offender manned up,
too.
Nuff said.
Steve
Larry Jaques
<old...@depends.com> scrawled the following:
Yeah, Ed went off the deep end yet again this month. <shrug>
Dan
> Kirk Gordon wrote:
>
>> None of us will ever be free
>> until we realize that patriotism is a rational, reasoned commitment to
>> something that makes sense, and not a license to use slogans and flags
>> to justify destructive nonsense.
>
> It will keep their heads company.
>
> Patriotic symbols have their place, but many use them like religion. As long
> as they have that to cling to, they can conveniently ignore logic, reason,
> and facts.
...and their OWN misbehavior.
Dan
HH&C
> HH&C wrote:
> > On Sep 28, 6:14 pm, Dan <dnada...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> HH&C wrote:
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Hmmm. A young man made a mistake. The local folks decided on proper
> >>>> punishment, and he took it like a man. End of case.
> >>>> Looks like all the liberal groups need to get their lawyers in here and fix
> >>>> this disgrace to the American system. <VBG>
> >>>> Karl
> >>> The groups and the lawyers need a swift kick in the nuts.
> >> Yawn. Which cowards would ever think of DOING such a thing? Certainly
> >> not YOU, Hamster.
>
> >> Why DO you hate this country so much?
>
>
> > I have to repeatedly apologize for my country, don't I?
>
> When Republicans are in charge, certainly.
>
Why?
HH&C
<freedom_...@example.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:37:48 -0700, Dan wrote:
> > HH&C wrote:
> >> On Sep 28, 6:14 pm, Dan <dnada...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Why DO you hate this country so much?
>
>
> > When Republicans are in charge, certainly.
>
> country into the ground.
>
> Bush bailed out the idiot bankers who wrote mortgages to people who
> everybody knew weren't qualified; they were all betting on the bubble.
>
> bailed out the ones who lost the bet.
To be fair, Barack Hussein Obama and John McCain abandoned the
campaign trail to come back to Washington and aid GW in bailing out
the guilty. It was in the news.
> So, then Obama gets elected, making all those speeches and selling his
> own version of snake oil, and what does he do? He uses _YOUR_ money, and
> your children's money, and etc... to "bail out" GM and Chrysler, who
> should have gone broke decades ago. That "bailout" was just a payoff of
> YOUR money to the UAW.
Gotta love those union bosses.
> There has been virtually no change in Afghanistan policy, he's just
> continued with Bush's "surge" mentality -
>
> How are things better now than they were under Cheney/Bush?
>
> Please note, I'm no lover of Bush, either, I hate them both exactly the
> same.
>
> But both wings of the statist bird hate me to death, because Freedom
> is my worship word.
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
Michael A. Terrell
I see that all the cowards and losers have spoken their small minds.
YAWN...
--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
David R.Birch
Do you repeat what you say, word for word, every time you tell a
different person about an event?
"The young man was given three choices: get turned over to the police,
go one-on-one in a fight with a seasoned war veteran, or be duct-taped
to a flagpole for six hours with a sign around his neck identifying
his alleged crime: flag burning."
He chose.
David
David R.Birch
>>> So, as I said, you made shit up to support your viewpoint.
>> No, that would be sinking to your level.
>>
>> <http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/09/vfw-hall-flag-burner-caught...>
>>
>> <http://www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=5221>
>>
>> David
>
> OK, your first reference said, according to the "reporter," not
> according to a quote, that he was given a choice. The second reference
> said, in a direct quote of the alleged kidnapper, "Let's just say he
> volunteered to sit out here duct taped to the pole." It says nothing
> about having given him a choice.
>
> So, now you're quoting a "reporter" who made shit up. Don't believe
> everything you read on the internet.
I'll remember that whenever I read one of your posts.
David
Ed Huntress
I tell the same story. Normile has told three different ones -- and he's
talking to the media.
SteveB
And I think that choice was the best thing he could have done having to
continue living in that small town. I respect that choice, but not his
other actions. Shows he does have some gumption.
Steve
SteveB
>> So, now you're quoting a "reporter" who made shit up. Don't believe
>> everything you read on the internet.
Better than that, don't believe everything you think.
vinny@work
"Dan" <dnad...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Rzawm.208668$sC1.1...@newsfe17.iad...
> Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>> "He'll never disrespect the flag again, I can tell you that," Normile
>> said on Friday.
>
> disrespected the flag the first time. The cowards who taped him up
> disrespected the flag and dishonored themselves, and our nation.
>
>> "I told him to think about those kids in the foxhole, and how they had
>> no one to set them free," Normile said. "It got to him, so I was
>> satisfied. He showed a lot of remorse, no attitude."
>
> whole cowardly mob who taped him up, and all the yahoos who blindly cheer
> them on after the fact.
>
> And the first thing out of these cowards' mouths is: "Rule of law." They
> all belong in jail, where they can think [sic] about what they have done.
>
>> "First Law of Leftist Debate
>> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence that is counter to
>> his preconceived world view and the more difficult it becomes for him to
>> refute it without losing face the chance of him calling you a racist,
>> bigot, homophobe approaches infinity.
>>
>> This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
>> race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to the subject."
>> Grey Ghost
>
> Grey Ghost ain't too smart...
>
> Dan
If I was there I might of kicked his ass for burning the flag, but taping
him up....federal offence.
When citizens both judge and sentence they are nothing but a mob.
What should of happened is they should of sat on him till the cops came,
citizens arrest.
If I found out someone did that to my kid, or hell even walked by and seen
it, I'd go bazerk on ALL of them.
Of course then I would kick my kids ass for burning a flag.
What if he died? Some guy just died from a tazer shot. people die
accidentally. Duct tape...shhesh, what if he was allergic to the glue?
If they punched him in a fit of anger..ok, but this crap seems like it was
premeditated, thought out. I say give everyone involved and ALL who watched
5 years in prison. YEA, even that 92 year old bitch that watched from her
picknik table.
vinny@work
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LPednSsyR9mvZ17X...@earthlink.com...
The fact that he did that has to be seperated from what was done to him.
Those people are not judges. Its no different than watching cops beat
people up.
Maybe they deserved it, but the cops have no power to judge and exact
sentence. If they did they would be in prison, where the people who taped
him up should be.
This has nothing to do with being patriotic or anything. Some dumbass did
something stupid and should of been arrested, maybe even sued.
But that's it.
SteveB
"vinny@work" <vi...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:ha17nm$8kp$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I think that if there were more incidents of this "instant justice" so long
as it is not excessive, that this country would be a better place in about
twenty minutes. Respect is long gone. Manners are long gone. Morals are
long gone. And as long as people say, "Oh my kid wouldn't do something like
that" and "I'll discipline my own children (yeah, like that's going to
happen)" and "Society does not have the right to punish my child", we're
going to be in the shithole we are in. There need to be more on the spot
instant tune ups for some of these smart little fuckers who think no one can
do anything, and Mom and Dad will rescue them. So, they remain perpetual
adolescents.
Why, I remember the nuns at Catholic school wearing kids asses out with
belts. And they'd smack you with those rulers and pointers as well as any
Muslim doing a caning. Or with whatever they had in their hands. Even
public school teachers and officials taking belts to kids. They didn't take
shit out of kids back then. I remember one kid took a swing at a wrestling
coach ...... what a mistake that was. The coach decked him and told the
parents if they wanted to press charges, go right ahead, he had a class of
witnesses who would state he was defending himself from assault by their
ducktailed punk kid. The kid ended up in prison for most of his adult life.
Of course that was back when MOST kids treated their elders and superiors
with respect, and the kid got it again once they got home.
So, we did what we did, and we got what we got.
The NEA.
Steve
Dan
Now they have.
Dan
Don Foreman
<karltown...@embarqmail.com> wrote:
>Hmmm. A young man made a mistake. The local folks decided on proper
>punishment, and he took it like a man. End of case.
>
I think that about sums it up.
Michael A. Terrell
We heard you the first time. No need for you to stutter.
Michael A. Terrell
"vinny@work" wrote:
>
> The fact that he did that has to be seperated from what was done to him.
> Those people are not judges. Its no different than watching cops beat
> people up.
> Maybe they deserved it, but the cops have no power to judge and exact
> sentence. If they did they would be in prison, where the people who taped
> him up should be.
>
> This has nothing to do with being patriotic or anything. Some dumbass did
> something stupid and should of been arrested, maybe even sued.
> But that's it.
That's your solution? Give money to lawyers instead of making people
responsible for their actions? What a loser. Its no wonder that there
are violent street gangs and high school dropouts.
Michael A. Terrell
Neither does Ed. He's trolling, as usual.
Ed Huntress
>
> SteveB wrote:
>>
>> >> So, now you're quoting a "reporter" who made shit up. Don't believe
>> >> everything you read on the internet.
>>
>> Better than that, don't believe everything you think.
>
>
> Neither does Ed. He's trolling, as usual.
I see you stoopped in to take a dump, Michael. Plumbing backed up again?
>
>
> --
> You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Do you wear that around your neck? You should. And then look in the mirror.
--
Ed Huntress
vinny
Funny how cowards all over usenet call people losers..."from a distance".
Look, i didn't say they shouldn't be responsible for their actions did I?
Vigilanties for the most part suck. THEY decide what the laws are and what
the punishment is. They usually exact punishment that doesn't fit the crime,
something THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES PROTECTS US ALL FROM!.
You got a problem with the constitution? WTF? thousands of Americans died
over that document and protecting your rights, but you feel it's a useless
document.
Go move away if you don't believe the US CONSTITUTION is valid! You friggen
unamerican pig.
Go to canada if you hate America and our system.
Friggen people died in how many damn wars protecting the American way of
life, and your sorry ass spits on the constitution!
Do you spit on the BIBLE when it doesn't go your way too?
Personally, I think you SPITTING on the constituion is far worse than
cutting down a flag.
I say we tape you up on an anthill for being antiAmerican and anti American
constitution.
vinny
Michael A. Terrell thinks the constitution doesn't matter. He spits on all
the soldiers graves who died making, and protecting that document and the
rights it outlines.
Maybe he has a better way than our constitution...
or maybe he is just a dumbass troll who hates America and American soldiers,
who thinks the constitution should be made into a pack of rolling papers.
Cliff
>
>
>Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:49:30 -0400, "EIsmith" <ltt...@DELETEhughes.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
>>
>>
>> Flag action draws salutes
>> Man pilloried in what vets say is defense of Old Glory, gets national
>> spotlight
>>
>> By HUMBERTO MART�NEZ, Staff writer
>> "He'll never disrespect the flag again, I can tell you that," Normile
>> said on Friday.
>>
>> A week later villagers were hush-hush about the event, but patrons of
>> the post bar gave a nod of agreement to the punishment, pointing proudly
>> to a newspaper clipping of the event on a bulletin board.
>>
>> Patriotism is on open display in this village of about 500, the walls of
>> a defunct railroad bridge near its entrance now brightly colored red,
>> white and blue. Most of the historical homes have American flags of
>> their own hanging from porches, some also adorned with the "Don't Tread
>> on Me" flag, popular with Tea Party activists.
>>
>> Normile said once he found out what the man had done, he knew he had to
>> be taught a lesson. Normile said he went out hunting for him, but when
>> he couldn't find him at his apartment, he sought the help of the man's
>> uncle to bring him out.
>>
>> "He manned up, he knew he had punishment coming," said Normile, who
>> described the young man he refused to identify as guilty and ashamed.
>>
>> "I told him to think about those kids in the foxhole, and how they had
>> no one to set them free," Normile said. "It got to him, so I was
>> satisfied. He showed a lot of remorse, no attitude."
>>
>> Normile said the flag, whose pieces will be retired in a formal
>> ceremony, had significant meaning. The village's auxiliary had been
>> sending toiletries and other goods to soldiers in Iraq, who then sent
>> back the flag that had flown over their bunker. It was received with
>> great attention and a ceremony.
>>
>> State troopers and Rensselaer County sheriff's deputies said no charges
>> had been filed by either the VFW post or the man.
>>
>> Reach staff writer Humberto Mart�nez at 454-5057 or by email at
>> hmar...@timesunion.com.
>
>
> Lemme see if I've got this straight. We've sent brave men and women
>to fight and die for the benefit of a country full of third world minds
>that don't have a clue what freedom or rights are all about. We tell
>ourselves, and our troops, that they're actually fighting to protect OUR
>rights and freedoms, and things like the rule of law, due process, etc.
> Then we think it's a good thing when someone attempts to "honor" our
>troops by ignoring the rule of law, forgetting about due process, and
>imposing a punishment that no US court would order.
>
> And the reason for all this is that a VFW post commander and Viet
>Nam war veteran is worried about kids in a foxhole who have "no one to
>set them free". He's right about that. None of us will ever be free
>until we realize that patriotism is a rational, reasoned commitment to
>something that makes sense, and not a license to use slogans and flags
>to justify destructive nonsense.
>
>KG
True.
And even then it can be counterproductive .... after all, it's one species
(minimum) & one planet.
About half of the species on the planet as of circa 1900 are expected
to be extinct circa 2050.
--
Cliff
Cliff
Another empty head issues forth nonsense.
--
Cliff
Cliff
>
>"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:LPednSsyR9mvZ17X...@earthlink.com...
>>
>> Dan wrote:
>>>
>>> sittingduck wrote:
>>> > Kirk Gordon wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> None of us will ever be free
>>> >> until we realize that patriotism is a rational, reasoned commitment to
>>> >> something that makes sense, and not a license to use slogans and flags
>>> >> to justify destructive nonsense.
>>> >
>>> > Your average flag waver can go ahead and stick that flag right up their
>>> > ass.
>>> > It will keep their heads company.
>>> >
>>> > Patriotic symbols have their place, but many use them like religion. As
>>> > long
>>> > as they have that to cling to, they can conveniently ignore logic,
>>> > reason,
>>> > and facts.
>>>
>>> ...and their OWN misbehavior.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>
>>
>> I see that all the cowards and losers have spoken their small minds.
>> YAWN...
>>
>
>The fact that he did that has to be seperated from what was done to him.
Flag burning is legal.
Cliff
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>"vinny@work" wrote:
>>
>> The fact that he did that has to be seperated from what was done to him.
>> Those people are not judges. Its no different than watching cops beat
>> people up.
>> Maybe they deserved it, but the cops have no power to judge and exact
>> sentence. If they did they would be in prison, where the people who taped
>> him up should be.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with being patriotic or anything. Some dumbass did
>> something stupid and should of been arrested, maybe even sued.
>> But that's it.
>
>
> That's your solution? Give money to lawyers instead of making people
>responsible for their actions?
So you suggest hanging wingers & neocons?
Bringing your own tree?
>What a loser. Its no wonder that there
>are violent street gangs and high school dropouts.
You sound like one ....
--
Cliff
Cliff
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>"vinny@work" wrote:
>>
>> The fact that he did that has to be seperated from what was done to him.
>> Those people are not judges. Its no different than watching cops beat
>> people up.
>> Maybe they deserved it, but the cops have no power to judge and exact
>> sentence. If they did they would be in prison, where the people who taped
>> him up should be.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with being patriotic or anything. Some dumbass did
>> something stupid and should of been arrested, maybe even sued.
>> But that's it.
>
>
> That's your solution? Give money to lawyers instead of making people
>responsible for their actions?
Such a you hold bushco & the lying winger scum for murdering about
a million, destroying two nations and trashing the US?
>What a loser. Its no wonder that there
>are violent street gangs and high school dropouts.
Another vote for crazed winger mob rule.
--
Cliff
Cliff
<hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Gotta love those union bosses.
The rights employees have now (and much safer workplaces)
as well as bennies are all thanks to the unions.
Clearly you know nothing of history but remain proudly
ignorant, as any winger prides themself on.
--
Cliff
David R.Birch
If it's your own flag, otherwise it's destruction of private property.
David
Larry Jaques
<old...@depends.com> scrawled the following:
I was going to question your answering a small mind who would say
"should of been arrested" but your answer was one which should be
heard by everyone; in the USA at minimum. Bravo! <clap, clap, clap>
You nailed it right on the button.
>So, we did what we did, and we got what we got.
>
>The NEA.
And the whole world suffers for it.
--
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw
rangerssuck
> "vinny@work" <vi...@rock.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ha17nm$8kp$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Right. And who do you suggest would do the decision making about what
is, and is not, "excessive?" Isn't that why we have due process? Or
are you one of those who think the world came to a screeching halt
after the writing of the second amendment? What's next, lynch mobs?
> Manners are long gone. Morals are
> long gone. And as long as people say, "Oh my kid wouldn't do something like
> that" and "I'll discipline my own children (yeah, like that's going to
> happen)" and "Society does not have the right to punish my child", we're
> going to be in the shithole we are in. There need to be more on the spot
> instant tune ups for some of these smart little fuckers who think no one can
> do anything, and Mom and Dad will rescue them. So, they remain perpetual
> adolescents.
Sure, and if a teacher, or, say, a store owner who caught YOUR kid
taking a five-finger discount (or, how about a store owner who THOUGHT
he caught your kid), kicked the crap out of YOUR kid, what would you
do?
Society most certainly DOES have the right to punish your child - we
call those things laws, due process, the justice system. Other
individuals most certainly do NOT have the right to take matters into
their own hands.
>
> Why, I remember the nuns at Catholic school wearing kids asses out with
> belts. And they'd smack you with those rulers and pointers as well as any
> Muslim doing a caning. Or with whatever they had in their hands. Even
> public school teachers and officials taking belts to kids. They didn't take
> shit out of kids back then. I remember one kid took a swing at a wrestling
> coach ...... what a mistake that was. The coach decked him and told the
> parents if they wanted to press charges, go right ahead, he had a class of
> witnesses who would state he was defending himself from assault by their
> ducktailed punk kid. The kid ended up in prison for most of his adult life.
> Of course that was back when MOST kids treated their elders and superiors
> with respect, and the kid got it again once they got home.
Oh yeah, the good old days. Yeah, I wish we lived in one of those
great countries where they cut of the hands of burglars and stone
prostitutes. Oh, wait, GWB decided to bomb them into being just like
us...
>
> So, we did what we did, and we got what we got.
>
> The NEA.
Right. Teachers are the root of all evil.
>
> Steve
rangerssuck
As well you should.
In this particular case, a professional reporter would have backed up
that "he was given a choice" statement with a properly attributed
quote. He did not, therefore we are left with a choice to either
believe that what the reporter wrote was true (without having a clue
who this reporter is), or believing that he made it up because it's
either what sounded good to him or it's what he thought he heard.
SteveB
"Don Foreman" <dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote in message
news:c6j8c5dic3tdies8s...@4ax.com...
One time, IIRC, Paul Harvey had on a piece on the radio about George
Washington, IIRC, or from about that era. (I say that a lot, so pardon me.
Mainly because I want to appear human about not remembering exactly, not
saying that everything I say is Gospel truth, and eliminating the need for
the anal to pick apart my post later.)
This was a very succinct (Characterized by clear, precise expression in few
words) description of how criminals should be handled, and how punishments
should be meted out. IIRC (that term again), the death penalty should be
carried out in less than seven days. It outlined crimes and the punishment
therefore. There was also some wording on the need for swift and consistent
justice in order to preserve the fabric and structure of society. It set
the punishment for rape, murder, etc.
Does anyone know of that document? I'd like to read it again. Will do a
little looking and see if I can find it.
Steve
Eregon.
> In this particular case, a professional reporter would have backed up
> that "he was given a choice" statement with a properly attributed
> quote. He did not, therefore we are left with a choice to either
> believe that what the reporter wrote was true (without having a clue
> who this reporter is), or believing that he made it up because it's
> either what sounded good to him or it's what he thought he heard.
>
"Officially" - though I've often had serious doubts - reporters are
considered to be "human" and, thus, tend to hear what thay *want* to hear
and write their stories with the "spin" demanded by their editors. <GRIN>
--
I used to be an anarchist but had to give it up: _far_ too many rules.
Eregon
> I think that if there were more incidents of this "instant justice" so
> long as it is not excessive, that this country would be a better place
> in about twenty minutes. Respect is long gone. Manners are long
> gone. Morals are long gone. And as long as people say, "Oh my kid
> wouldn't do something like that" and "I'll discipline my own children
> (yeah, like that's going to happen)" and "Society does not have the
> right to punish my child", we're going to be in the shithole we are
> in. There need to be more on the spot instant tune ups for some of
> these smart little fuckers who think no one can do anything, and Mom
> and Dad will rescue them. So, they remain perpetual adolescents.
>
> Why, I remember the nuns at Catholic school wearing kids asses out
> with belts. And they'd smack you with those rulers and pointers as
> well as any Muslim doing a caning. Or with whatever they had in their
> hands. Even public school teachers and officials taking belts to
> kids. They didn't take shit out of kids back then. I remember one
> kid took a swing at a wrestling coach ...... what a mistake that was.
> The coach decked him and told the parents if they wanted to press
> charges, go right ahead, he had a class of witnesses who would state
> he was defending himself from assault by their ducktailed punk kid.
> The kid ended up in prison for most of his adult life. Of course that
> was back when MOST kids treated their elders and superiors with
> respect, and the kid got it again once they got home.
>
> So, we did what we did, and we got what we got.
>
<Ear-splitting, 200db+ cheering>
Bravo, Steve!
Bravissimo Bravo!!!!!
Ed Huntress
"SteveB" <old...@depends.com> wrote in message
news:80vep6-...@news.infowest.com...
'Don't know what he was referring to, but I suspect Washington was referring
to justice under the law, not "justice" meted out by some yahoo who just
walked out of a VFW bar.
Hey, I did some checking on New York law and I see that there is plenty of
good reason for the good folks of Valley Falls to keep their mouths shut.
<g> If they claim that the flag is worth more than $250, it's a misprision
(failure to report a felony) not to report it to police. That's a felony
itself, which carries a prison term of up to three years for each individual
who knew about it.
But the real kicker is this: In six states, (New York being a little vague
on this point, but it appears that the principle applies), it IS a felony to
coerce someone to "perform work or other service, or to perform an act they
would not otherwise perform voluntarily" by threatening to turn them in to
the law. Who would have guessed? It applies only to non-law-officers.
The origin of the law was to prevent employers from coercing their
illegal-immigrant employees to work overtime, or whatever. But that isn't
what the laws say. They're pretty broad, and apply to ANY threat to "turn
someone in," as a coercion to get them to do something or not do something.
Veddy interesting. So if the flag was worth less than $250, all they had on
the kid was a misdemeanor. If they claim it was worth more, they could go to
prison themselves.
Now, all of the nonsense aside, one more objectionable thing here is that
tying the kid to the pole with a sign around his neck was intended to
humiliate him. That's a stupid thing to do, and it's why they've taken
humiliation out of almost all of our laws -- except for some sexual
offences, etc. And that's because criminologists learned long ago that all
you can accomplish that way is to create an enemy who will never forget it;
who is more likely to act in even more anti-social ways in the future; and
generally to be a bad example of behavior for everyone concerned --
including the soccer kids who were watching all of it.
Under the law, the kid most likely would have gotten some community service.
Say, cleaning up the grounds around the VFW, and painting the hall, and
other stuff. The punishment would have been constructive. The kid would have
felt the punishment, but the direction in which he was being pushed would be
toward recognizing that justice and "correct" behavior are about acting
responsibly and positively. All he learned from this exercise is that the
VFW is a bunch of pricks. Trying to break and humiliate him, they probably
just created more trouble for the community.
That's why vigilantism is illegal. It's why we don't allow justice to be
meted out by yahoos with no legal authority, or checks and balances, or
appeal to higher authority. One hopes that Normile learned *his* lesson,
which is that illegal behavior, no matter how "just" one may think it is, is
going to attract a lot of unwanted attention. And maybe a prison term.
--
Ed Huntress
Eregon
>
Try the second Book of the Bible: Exodus.
It's in the Covenant following the first 10 Commandments.
One of my favorites states that if a son strikes his father the son
shall be put to death. This one TRULY reinforces the earlier commandment
to "honor thy father and thy mother".
Wes
>www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
Two wrongs do not make a right. In the end, I hope the law calls it a draw.
Wes
Dan
Perhaps you could get your eyes checked.
Dan
Michael A. Terrell
Moron. I am a US Army Veteran. You are barking up the wrong tree.
You are a ranting loon, while trying to project your issues on others.
What I hate is idiots who rant and rave, without knowing what the hell
they are talking about.
Michael A. Terrell
vinny wrote:
>
> Michael A. Terrell thinks the constitution doesn't matter. He spits on all
> the soldiers graves who died making, and protecting that document and the
> rights it outlines.
> Maybe he has a better way than our constitution...
> or maybe he is just a dumbass troll who hates America and American soldiers,
> who thinks the constitution should be made into a pack of rolling papers.
Lying moron. I am a Veteran. I am now 100% disabled, and do volunteer
work to help other Veterans. Go away.
Michael A. Terrell
Dan wrote:
>
> Perhaps you could get your eyes checked.
They were, seven times last year after I had a Bells Palsy and lost
the use of one eye for over half a year. They will be checked again next
month, when the VA replaces my glasses. That is SOP for Veterans with
Diabetes.
Perhaps you could get your head examined.
Michael A. Terrell
Ed Huntress wrote:
>
> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:XYGdnVN2YK1EzVnX...@earthlink.com...
> >
> > SteveB wrote:
> >>
> >> >> So, now you're quoting a "reporter" who made shit up. Don't believe
> >> >> everything you read on the internet.
> >>
> >> Better than that, don't believe everything you think.
> >
> >
> > Neither does Ed. He's trolling, as usual.
>
> I see you stoopped in to take a dump, Michael. Plumbing backed up again?
You have a fetish for pluged up pipes? No surprise, after eating all
those red pencils.
> Do you wear that around your neck? You should. And then look in the mirror.
You make no sense, as usual.
Michael A. Terrell
Professional reporter? Reporters are the ones who couldn't remember
to ask, 'Doy'allwannalidondat?' All they give a damn about is seeing
their byline in print. Short, vague stories that will let the idiots
finish before they lose their train of thought is today's concept of
journalism.
rangerssuck
> rangerssuck <rangerss...@gmail.com> wrote in rec.crafts.metalworking:
None of which brings their version of the story, which David relied on
to prove his point, any closer to the truth.
Dan
> Dan wrote:
>
>> Perhaps you could get your eyes checked.
>
>
> They were, seven times last year after I had a Bells Palsy and lost
> the use of one eye for over half a year. They will be checked again next
> month, when the VA replaces my glasses. That is SOP for Veterans with
> Diabetes.
>
> Perhaps you could get your head examined.
>
>
They don't check very well...
BTW, the poor me routine doesn't sell very well. Try another tack.
Dan
Michael A. Terrell
Then quit using it. I'm still taking care of myself and keeping
busy. I've adjusted to the fact that i can no longer spend 16 hours a
day on my feet, or work 12 hours at one of my workbenches.
You just hang around usenet to pick juvenile fights.
Try another tack.
You're already tacky enough! :)
HH&C
wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:28:30 -0700 (PDT), "HH&C"
>
> >Gotta love those union bosses.
>
> The rights employees have now (and much safer workplaces)
> as well as bennies are all thanks to the unions.
>
> Clearly you know nothing of history but remain proudly
> ignorant, as any winger prides themself on.
> --
> Cliff
Actually, I've read a lot about the union movement. "The Progressive
Era" University of Maryland.
Thanks for showing your ignorance, or showing yourself to be a liar.
Or both.
Strabo
"THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES PROTECTS US ALL FROM",
...wait for it...government.
That's it.
In this case no law was violated. No charges were pressed.
It was their flag, their property. He pissed on their stuff, they
complained to him, he relented and acted the fool for a day in
repentance.
But you just can't stand not being a voyeur vigilante.
Ed Huntress
"Strabo" <str...@flashlight.net> wrote in message
news:ENfxm.25538$lR3....@newsfe25.iad...
Keep your day job, Strabo. The VFW doesn't have to press charges for the
police to make an arrest, and for the prosecutor to prosecute. But the VFW
*does* have to notify the police of the property destruction, if they claim
the property has value and if the destruction would constitute a felony. In
New York, the line for felony malicious property destruction appears to be
$250.
The business about pressing or dropping charges is often misunderstood. It's
a matter of evidence. The DA doesn't need you to press charges in order to
prosecute, but he *may* need you to provide evidence or witness.
--
Ed Huntress
Cliff
wrote:
>On Oct 1, 9:58�am, Cliff <Clhuprichguessw...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om>
You looked at the pictures, eh?
Any good ones?
--
Cliff
Cliff
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Dan wrote:
>
>>
>> Perhaps you could get your eyes checked.
>
>
> They were, seven times last year after I had a Bells Palsy and lost
>the use of one eye for over half a year. They will be checked again next
>month, when the VA replaces my glasses. That is SOP for Veterans with
>Diabetes.
>
> Perhaps you could get your head examined.
So badly managed socialized medicine is good enough for you.
I gather that Obama is trying to improve it after bushco & the
rats & cockroaches.
--
Cliff
Cliff
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>vinny wrote:
>>
>> Michael A. Terrell thinks the constitution doesn't matter. He spits on all
>> the soldiers graves who died making, and protecting that document and the
>> rights it outlines.
>> Maybe he has a better way than our constitution...
>> or maybe he is just a dumbass troll who hates America and American soldiers,
>> who thinks the constitution should be made into a pack of rolling papers.
>
>
> Lying moron. I am a Veteran. I am now 100% disabled, and do volunteer
>work to help other Veterans. Go away.
You & gummer live such interesting fantasy lives ....
--
Cliff
Cliff
Assault and battery, false imprisonment, kidnapping,
illegal restraint and probably a host of hate crimes.
>No charges were pressed.
>
>It was their flag, their property.
Then you have a crime against property.
Show us their reciept as proof of ownership.
Oops ... stolen government property?
>He pissed on their stuff, they
>complained to him, he relented and acted the fool for a day in
>repentance.
>
>But you just can't stand not being a voyeur vigilante.
--
Cliff
vinny
>
> vinny wrote:
>>
>> Michael A. Terrell thinks the constitution doesn't matter. He spits on
>> all
>> the soldiers graves who died making, and protecting that document and the
>> rights it outlines.
>> Maybe he has a better way than our constitution...
>> or maybe he is just a dumbass troll who hates America and American
>> soldiers,
>> who thinks the constitution should be made into a pack of rolling papers.
>
>
> Lying moron. I am a Veteran. I am now 100% disabled, and do volunteer
> work to help other Veterans. Go away.
>
Well...thus the problem with vigilantism.
"I think" Your a commy for spitting on the constitution, and you should be
wipped with a wet noodle for 17.654 hours.
It's all in how "I see it". Are you getting my point private!
What every American citizen gets by law is a fair trial and judgement by
their peers. No matter what, even if your charlie manson, hitler, or some
dumbass punk.
If one of them struck him i anger...ok, dumbass asked for it, but for a
group of people to do what they did is way off the hook. The fbi should be
arresting people for federal offences. That was no different than a gang
kicking your ass for being on their turf. To them that's way worse than
cutting a flag down.
Strabo
Evidence which will not be provided.
Occasionally the people win.
Michael A. Terrell
vinny wrote:
>
> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:1_Wdnb4aRMYUp1jX...@earthlink.com...
> >
> > vinny wrote:
> >>
> >> Michael A. Terrell thinks the constitution doesn't matter. He spits on
> >> all
> >> the soldiers graves who died making, and protecting that document and the
> >> rights it outlines.
> >> Maybe he has a better way than our constitution...
> >> or maybe he is just a dumbass troll who hates America and American
> >> soldiers,
> >> who thinks the constitution should be made into a pack of rolling papers.
> >
> >
> > Lying moron. I am a Veteran. I am now 100% disabled, and do volunteer
> > work to help other Veterans. Go away.
> >
>
> Well...thus the problem with vigilantism.
Not enough of it these days? That's why prisons are bulging at the
seams, because no one ever set limits for idiots before it was too late
and they continued to commit crime after crime, until we are forced to
pay the cost to warehouse them.
> "I think" Your a commy for spitting on the constitution, and you should be
> wipped with a wet noodle for 17.654 hours.
You may have spit on the constitution, I haven't.
> It's all in how "I see it". Are you getting my point private!
How YOU see it doesn't matter. Got it?
> What every American citizen gets by law is a fair trial and judgement by
> their peers. No matter what, even if your charlie manson, hitler, or some
> dumbass punk.
Hitler wasn't a US citizen, moron.
> If one of them struck him i anger...ok, dumbass asked for it, but for a
> group of people to do what they did is way off the hook. The fbi should be
> arresting people for federal offences. That was no different than a gang
> kicking your ass for being on their turf. To them that's way worse than
> cutting a flag down.
Yawn. then call the FBI and demand they investigate. Be prepared for
them to tell you it isn't worth their time, or to investigate you for
trying to stir up a situation they have no interest in. they have
enough real crimes to investigate, and idiot whiners who complain about
things outside their main focus are a waste of time.
Ed Huntress
Look, Strabo, you're guessing all over the place here, and you're mostly
just running on wishful thinking rather than knowledge.
It's clear that everyone involved wants to cool this situation and quiet it
down. The kid himself may feel the same way. If no one wants to prosecute,
then no one will.
What I'm pointing out is that the claims that "no law was broken" (and
you're one of the claimants) are dead wrong. I had a couple of spare hours
and I tracked it down, including related case law in New York. I also have
had some personal experience with the law of misprision, and how DA's deal
with it when they really want to bring a case and no one is cooperating.
They'll threaten to put the whole bunch in jail, and they could do it. They
also can charge for withholding evidence (another felony) and they can
compel testimony, which they'll usually do only in extreme, and serious,
cases. This case is neither, but that doesn't mean a DA couldn't do it.
I pointed out early in this discussion that it appeared no one was stepping
up to prosecute here so the criminal part probably is a dead-end. However,
and this is just a "what if" speculation itself, it looks like the kid, with
the urging of some lawyer looking for media face-time and working on
contingency, could bring a civil case at any time. There is no statute of
limitations in New York state on kidnapping and related crimes. Limitations
on the civil case are not clear -- I didn't look them up -- but they could
feint with a criminal charge and then follow-up with the civil case. That's
one way around time limitations on civil cases. I strongly suspect that some
sympathetic lawyers have passed the word around town to shut up and let the
thing blow over. There are good reasons to do so.
Since there was no physical injury, and since the kid apparently is keeping
quiet about the whole thing, prosecution is unlikely. But that doesn't mean
that the law was not abused by the entire event. There was criminal
vandalism, there was coercion, and there was unlawful restraint. There are
rights that one can't contract away, and kidnapping and unlawful
imprisonment or restraint fall deep within that territory. For an example,
look at the Polanski case. The victim has been pleading to have the case
dropped for years. The prosecutors don't care, and for good reason. This
case isn't just about her. It's about society's interest in prosecuting a
very serious crime.
And of course there was destruction of property in the Valley Falls case. It
was a very valuable flag, because of its meaning to the community. Burning
that particular flag was more than vandalism; it was a brutal attack on
decency and respect for many other people. A judge probably would allow for
a significant value to be attached to the flag; certainly enough to exceed
the $250 threshhold for a felony charge. So this was probably a felony. When
someone commits a felony, it's everyone's case -- not just that of the VFW,
or even the town. But, again, even though it's probably a felony, it is
unlikely it would wind up with a felony conviction. It's the type of case
that's typically bargained down. The case is not exactly trivial but the
facts do not support the idea that society was harmed by not prosecuting the
case.
But forget the fantasy that no law was broken. And don't count on the claims
by Normile that the kid "volunteered" to be tied to a pole and humiliated.
By definition, the kid was coerced into it. Whether he chooses to claim
unlawful coercion is up to him, and whether he's right is up to a judge and
jury, not to the barstool warmers at the local VFW.
>
> Occasionally the people win.
And sometimes they lose, as in this case, when a few individuals decided to
take the law into their own hands, and used threats to pull it off.
Your strange brew of quasi-anarchism is always a puzzlement, Strabo. You
claim to be a supporter of the Constitution, which guarantees all of us the
rule of law. But if a gang of self-anointed vigilantes dispatches some
pseudo justice that you happen to like, you think that "the people" won.
There aren't that many "people" who think like you, for which I believe we
can all be grateful. d8-)
--
Ed Huntress
Larry Jaques
<clu...@lycos.com> scrawled the following:
>"EIsmith" <ltt...@DELETEhughes.net> wrote:
>
>>www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846949
>
>
>Two wrongs do not make a right. In the end, I hope the law calls it a draw.
OK, the first wrong was the kid burning a flag. Please discuss the
second wrong. I don't see one. The parties involved could have
kicked the shit out of him but didn't. They talked to him he accepted
a social punishment. I don't see any wrong in that, and am happy that
the kid learned from his mistake without any legal repercussion.
Let's hope the Left leaves it alone. Voluntary humiliation is no civil
rights offense.
--
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw