PDA

View Full Version : U.S. National anthem



Pages : [1] 2 3

Bneterasedmynam
12/17/2014 6:18pm,
So I have to wonder now if our anthem is also supposed to be ironic or if it is simply outdated now. Sony cancels 'The Interview' after major theaters pull outhttp://money.cnn.com/2014/12/17/media/the-interview-sony-theater-owners/index.html

Home of the brave?? We just dick tucked to a fat piece of **** with a bad haircut. This basically opens a huge can of worms when it comes to how we deal with terror threats. So take note freedom was assassinated by tyranny today.

BKR
12/17/2014 6:57pm,
Pretty much agree, although, the theaters are CYA on liability if any terrorist attack did happen at any of the showings.

Can you imagine the civil lawsuits ?

mike321
12/17/2014 10:27pm,
This is a "Declaration of Independence" moment for the United States. The 1st amendment is meant to forbid our government from infringing on free speech, but the point of government is to secure our rights. The full power of our government must fight this threat to free speech. Having said that I can't say the people involved are taking an inspired stance.

ermghoti
12/17/2014 10:40pm,
All of this applies to a Japanese company how, exactly?

mike321
12/17/2014 11:00pm,
All of this applies to a Japanese company how, exactly?
The film was going to show in United States theaters.

ermghoti
12/17/2014 11:57pm,
The film was going to show in United States theaters.

And everywhere else in the world. Fact remains, all of Sony's subsidiaries are owned by the Japanese parent company, so whining about teh Murkin spirit is off topic.

Are they a bunch of pansies that suck on purpose at web security? Hell yeah. Does it have anything to do with rockets glaring in various colors, the Constitution or the Declaration? LOLnope.

I'm not convinced it didn't test shitty, and they are seizing on the opportunity to stop bleeding money on distribution and advertising.

Bneterasedmynam
12/18/2014 12:05am,
And everywhere else in the world. Fact remains, all of Sony's subsidiaries are owned by the Japanese parent company, so whining about teh Murkin spirit is off topic.

Are they a bunch of pansies that suck on purpose at web security? Hell yeah. Does it have anything to do with rockets glaring in various colors, the Constitution or the Declaration? LOLnope.

I'm not convinced it didn't test shitty, and they are seizing on the opportunity to stop bleeding money on distribution and advertising.

I'm more irritated with the theaters than Sony. Sony only pulled out after the major theaters had already refused to show the movie. At that point I think Sony was just covering their own asses. The theaters piss me off by being pussies, and it's a trend that's increasing every time **** like this happens. It's like when Comedy Central wouldn't let South Park show the profit mohamid because the Arabs were threatening violence. **** those bastards. Why should we have to bend to the will of fucking asswipes?? That's why I posted this in reference to the anthem, specifically the part about the home of the brave. It just doesn't seem very brave to dick-tuck every time there is some dickweed making a threat. Our response to North Korea should be, if you attack our theaters we will destroy your **** hole country.

mike321
12/18/2014 8:50am,
And everywhere else in the world. Fact remains, all of Sony's subsidiaries are owned by the Japanese parent company, so whining about teh Murkin spirit is off topic.

Are they a bunch of pansies that suck on purpose at web security? Hell yeah. Does it have anything to do with rockets glaring in various colors, the Constitution or the Declaration? LOLnope.

I'm not convinced it didn't test shitty, and they are seizing on the opportunity to stop bleeding money on distribution and advertising.
Responding to a violent threat to free speech in US theaters is absolutely about the American spirit. Maybe you have been exposed to so many silly examples of American pride that when a real issue arrives you laugh it off with a "LOL". Even if the problem extends beyond US borders and the business owner is not a US citizen, the response in this country is still very relevant to what we stand for.

ermghoti
12/18/2014 10:08am,
Responding to a violent threat to free speech in US theaters is absolutely about the American spirit. Maybe you have been exposed to so many silly examples of American pride that when a real issue arrives you laugh it off with a "LOL". Even if the problem extends beyond US borders and the business owner is not a US citizen, the response in this country is still very relevant to what we stand for.

Theaters weren't going to show a terrible movie because people were probably not going to see it because a lunatic with a large army implied there could be trouble, and also it was terrible. Therefore, the studio pulled the plug. How is exposing yourself to the risk of decades of litigation from running a shoddy slapstick "comedy" displaying American pride?

DCS
12/18/2014 10:27am,
Even if the problem extends beyond US borders and the business owner is not a US citizen, the response in this country is still very relevant to what we stand for.

And what you stand for?

BKR
12/18/2014 11:18am,
http://a57.foxnews.com/www.foxnews.com/images/root_images/0/0/KIMMOGUL_20141218_110722.jpg

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/18/fbi-points-digital-finger-at-north-korea-for-sony-hacking-attack-formal/

mike321
12/18/2014 11:28am,
Theaters weren't going to show a terrible movie because people were probably not going to see it because a lunatic with a large army implied there could be trouble, and also it was terrible. Therefore, the studio pulled the plug. How is exposing yourself to the risk of decades of litigation from running a shoddy slapstick "comedy" displaying American pride?
Your question challenged me...after thinking about it your right, it comes down to the liability. However we will quickly circle back to "American spirit" issues. If a person shows a movie and their audience is attacked, liability should not fall on the person showing the movie it should fall on the attacker. As a nation we need to protect freedom of expression, even if the movie is no good.

ermghoti
12/18/2014 12:00pm,
Your question challenged me...after thinking about it your right, it comes down to the liability. However we will quickly circle back to "American spirit" issues. If a person shows a movie and their audience is attacked, liability should not fall on the person showing the movie it should fall on the attacker. As a nation we need to protect freedom of expression, even if the movie is no good.

Fair enough, but you know liability can fall on those with an ability to pay, and from whom a judgment can be collected. The only realistic retribution N Korea could face would be sanctions or military.

Keep in mind, the theaters had to fear the minimal chance of a physical attack, but the much greater risk of, say finding all their ticket presales being $0.01, or their payroll getting hosed for six months, or etc. In that case, military action is off the table, and sanctions are unlikely, especially if the culprit remain technically unidentified.

Ultimately, we as: is a trite slapstick is the proverbial hill we want to die on? I mean, I guess Chaplin set the benchmark for this kind of thing, but I'm sure Germany was deemed unlikely to project their power to the US in 1940.

Permalost
12/18/2014 12:43pm,
I'm thinking about responding to all Bnet news threads like this:
http://thetechnorat.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/south-park-i-thought-this-was-america-murica.jpg

ermghoti
12/18/2014 1:37pm,
Meanwhile, in Texas... (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/17/alamo-drafthouse-team-america_n_6345156.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000024)

Stickybomb
12/18/2014 1:59pm,
Hey, our national anthem includes much alcohol.