No, hits=-5.4 required=5.0
	tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,PENIS_ENLARGE,
	      REFERENCES,T_QUOTE_TWICE_2,T_URI_COUNT_0_1,USER_AGENT,
	      USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA,X_ACCEPT_LANG
	version=2.50-cvs

bitbitch@magnesium.net wrote:
>>>Wishful thinking. People are just bigger dickheads now. Culture is changing
>>>and it is becoming acceptable to get in peoples face and shout them down
>>>when you disagree with them.  The people that do this are NOT
>>>disenfranchised. They
>>>get their rocks off on being disagreeable assholes. The act of protesting is
>>>more important than the actual issue being protested for most of these
>>>people.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>OB> In my experience, this is classic "American" behaviour, and I don't
>OB> think its on the increase outside of the US of A.
>OB> I am willing to accept the premise that Americans are bigger dickheads
>OB> then they used to be.
>
>*sighs*
>
>Right.  Because Americans are the only people capable of being
>assholes.  Shit.  History keeps fucking up when they keep mentioning
>all the historical examples of dickhead-ness that have proceeded the
>US.
>
>After all, we're the only country who gets unruly when it comes to
>issues.   Thats why its always just the Americans at those crazy WTO
>meetings...  Right, Owen?
>
>
>
>
>
A flippant remark that I will probably regret  - sure there's assholes
everywhere. I just remember a lunch in Spain with
a semi-famous American - I think we had about 10 nationalities at the
table, and he managed to insult each of them within
15 minutes. A historical perspective makes me think that empires -
Roman, British, Russian, American, whatever - produce
a larger proportion of assholes than subject nations (and are more
likely to have them in positions of authority).
Owen

No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0
	tests=AWL,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,
	      T_OUTLOOK_REPLY,T_URI_COUNT_0_1
	version=2.50-cvs

----- Original Message -----
From: <bitbitch@magnesium.net>
> People are screaming and shouting over the political figures because
> they cannot be heard in any other way.
What, are they illiterate? Mute? What's their problem? If somebody stops
them from posting web pages, or printing newsletters, or talking on the
phone, or organizing their /own/ conference then that would be wrong.
I don't think free speech is a license to speak directly at and be in the
physical presence of any particular individual of your choosing - especially
when that individual is busy doing something else and isn't interested.