Yada Yada / The Off Topic Arena

you are the only one to use this term rye. i did not see anything threatening in the post. i feel people should be able to exercise free speech here. exceptions would be for unlawful behavior of course. i had to look the term "soverign citizens" up to see what you are talking about. of course if that was being promoted here then it would not be acceptable. my point in my comments would be that the US is a huge experiment in the idea of diversity that right at the moment would not appear to be going very well. another point i would like to make is that there are a number of countries who have tried to limit immigration and maintain what some of them call "their purity" in fact, japan being a notable example and north korea perhaps most of all. perhaps you are over reacting and might want to let this get discussed a bit. it has been educational for me so far.

 

Very interesting discussion, but we all know that these days what we say or write, almost anywhere, is being recorded, stored and analysed. Key words are searched for and actions follow which might be to the detriment of private individuals and organisations - some of this is justified (unless our governments take action against terrorists on our behalf then we end up with a World none of us would want) and some is a misuse (some laws are introduced by taking 'opportunities' against real or perceived threats and all laws are twisted and turned to do more than ever intended).

But, whatever is happening in terms of the control of populations, every individual and organisation has the right to decide what is right for them, as long as it is legal and has no negative impact on others - so, if a site such as DI decides it impacts on their business, or goes against their role, we need to accept it and have our discussions elsewhere. No one is forced to come here (although some are 'forced' not to!).

My personal viewpoint, shared by most I assume, is that I don't want one 'drop of ink' to be used to support those barbaric b*astards who think they have a cause and can use human life to achieve it, even when evidence is overwhelming that the majority don't support them. I accept that sometimes 'today's terrorist' is tomorrow's legitimate government but that has to be worked out politically.

I want free speech but there are times I accept it is not appropriate. That is the World we live in.

 

And Japan has the problem already of not enough young people to support the elderly population (and seems to be rapidly becoming a society where the young are preferring solitude ('solo bars', for example) and not stable partnerships and children) - this is 'solved' by most countries through enabling citizenship to young people, something Japan seems not interested in.

 

so i am pretty sure there are many people in the US right now that wish we had followed the japan example of growing old together! enabling citizenship, or more accurately just access, to young people doesn't seem to be working out very well

 

ok, so i click agree with you because i think i do based on the last sentence. the rest was a bit confusing. but that also means i probably agree at least generally with what rye said, at least in principle. however, i am still not of the opinion that that is where "obliged friend" was headed with his post, not being able to read minds and all.

so i certainly agree that a site like DI has the right to decide what impacts there business. so is there an appeal mechanism to the decisions made by our mediator or is he DI? is he the owner then? does anyone know?

 

hahaha, point well taken mr poppy