Simply Unbelievable but true...WOW

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Nolan-Vinny-Sam, Apr 30, 2004.

  1. JUSTICE SCALIA BANS MEDIA FROM FREE SPEECH CEREMONY
    March 19, 2003

    "The City Club usually tapes speakers for later broadcast on public television, but Scalia insisted on banning television and radio coverage," Foster told the Associated Press.

    "I might wish it were otherwise, but that was one of the criteria that he had for acceptance,"
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june03/scalia_3-19.html

    It's the &^%$%ing freedom of speech ceremony, Scalia BANS MEDIA????? :confused: :confused:

    What the F%$k??? There is something definately wrong....
     
  2. BSAM

    BSAM

    It pains me to say this, but you are dead RIGHT on this one, Nolan.
     
  3. Pabst

    Pabst

    I think one has a right to ban their own speech! Like many Justice's, Scalia prefers the dignity of not having his mug broadcast. WTF, prior to television did man not exist?
     
  4. litsen to this.....2 jockeys from a local miami radio show ( dont know which one ) are getting fined for crank calling Fidel Castro....hahahahahahahahahhaha....hahahahahahahah...they are getting fined because they aired the call without Fidel being told or approving of it being aired...hahahahahahahah...
     
  5. You can't be serious..But I guess you are.:eek:
    In that case he should give up his capacity as Justice, don't ever talk in public and move himself to an undisclosed location.
    The message of his decision and use of his power is more than a slap in the face to all of America.:eek: :eek:

    Sooooo to use your reasoning above...If a person's picture or as you call it "mug" in this case (interesting label for Scalia's face), is viewed on television, then that person is losing his dignity??

    :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
     
  6. Pabst

    Pabst

    You don't even use your real alias let alone your real name and you're critisizing someone who dosen't want the press attending an awards ceramony where he's the HONOREE.

    A slap in the face to all of America? ROFL. No, what's offensive is officials who squeeze out every drop of publicity that they can during their tenure.
     
  7. How ironic.

    :(
     
  8. constitutional arguments aside, the absurdity of banning the press from attending a "free speech" award should be obvious.... but this is a guy that goes camping with a party in a lawsuit he's deciding, so his ability to perceive absurdity seems suspect.
     
  9. LOL...Cmon man, I'd think you could do better than this. ET is not the CityClub nor there are Justices here posting, paid by our tax dollars. Trying to slam a poster for using an alias on ET should be beneath you... But I digress on this issue....

    Please explain your reasoning:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quote from Pabst:

    I think one has a right to ban their own speech! Like many Justice's, Scalia prefers the dignity of not having his mug broadcast. WTF, prior to television did man not exist?

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I'll ask again,
    If a person's picture or as you call it "mug" in this case (interesting label for Scalia's face), is viewed on television, then that person is losing his dignity?? :confused:

    Note: I don't care for a food fight, only trying to understand your reasoning on this....
     
    #10     Apr 30, 2004