If I was the idiot who invited these 'dignitaries', then I'd have the protesters do it outside. If you had your enemy at your house, would you go out of your way to make him miserable, or would you maintain a sense of decorum no matter how you felt inside? In this case it goes beyond personal character.
Ok I think we are talking about different things. Yes, if I invited them I would have to be respectful. Agreed. I was talking as someone who did not invite him.
what are you talking about? I never said I lived in Houston, I haven't for 16 years. I said I'd pay for your ticket if you had the guts to show up and say all this crap on camera to my face - you do that and i'll pay. I'm not going to give you a ticket to run errands! Either you do it or you don't. It seems to me that you won't do it. Gutless. You can hide behind your computer and spew your garbarge and have your babe tigermission back you up, but you can't say any of this stuff to my face. because you're gutless. you have no spine. so STFU
Why would you challened someone so far away to meet up with you? Sounds like it would be too hard to do.
Please. Email me the ticket information. I will come and say all of this verbatim to your face. I will say it several times, in fact, if that makes you happy. It is literally causing me to laugh out loud that you are claiming that I am too afraid to come and say all this to you when you are the one who is not following up. You can email me through the BBS. Here I am. Send the email and I will come and see you. You are the one who is taking up the role of spineless little b**** here, not me. I am ready and willing. Please. I am litterally begging you to follow up. Take some kind of action.
Ottomaton, please let us know when you've received verification of New Yorker's offer. This video should be excellent. I would hope it can be made in point-counterpoint fashion. Perhaps one of the mods could actually moderate it, Lehrer style.
It's classic NewYorker. I wouldn't expect any less. I think it should be done Alexander Hamilton style: a duel!
If you are going to invite him to talk, then yes. I don't care if its Hitler. If a person is so despicable that you can't stand listening to him without insulting and mocking him, then don't invite him in the first place. Duh. Columbia wanted it both ways. They get credit for allowing him his "free speech" (nevermind that inviting someone to talk is not free speech, it's invited speech), but they also get to use him as a punching bag.
i send you an email, why you need my email is beyond me - probably to give it to a spammer. so pick a few dates, i'll let you know which one works, fly up here and when you fulfill on your end, i'll cut you a check for your ticket up to $400. But you have to follow-through and say all the b.s. to my face. that's the condition. if you don't, and it will be on video tape - then you get nothing. and the video tape will be put up on youtube for everyone here to see. now i know what you will do, you will find some way to back out and then try to say it was my fault and that i am the one backing out. no...it's there, you have to fly up here, you have my email address as requested, so why don't you now put up some dates and all.
You have been completely and utterly defeated on this BBS -- you are the new MacBeth. One obvious lie after another...
Dude, it's up to him to come up here and follow-up. He'll never do it, he has no guts. It's so obvious he's a coward and I'm calling him out - he doesn't have the guts to say anything of that to my face, none of you do. I'd invite any of you up to New York City, and to say what you have to say to my face if you have the guts to. But when you back out like a little boy who's peed in their pants, don't spin it as me not following through. I'm here, not going anywhere. How can I not follow-through? It's up to the cowards to come here first.
You are such a moron, I was being sarcastic again in response to someone questioning whether or not I lived in NYC. I was mocking the whole thing from before. God man, I can't believe the s^$* for brains you have.
I've just finished reading through this thread and I can't believe this. New Yorker haven't you been a very vocal defender of keeping your anonymity so you could engage in an intellectual experiment and now you are blasting Otto as being a coward for hiding behind his computer and not willing to meet you face to face.. Anyway this whole thing is stupid and juvenile on both your parts. So what if Otto has offended your sensibilities by saying he was sick. If you don't believe that people online are the same as real life what does it matter then to challenge them to a real life face off. And for Otto, it seems to me that you're being suckered in by New Yorker into debasing yourself as being angy and petty. This isn't something that New Yorker hasn't done before and has deliberately said that is part of his experiment to prove that everyone is angry and petty. I apologize if I'm coming off as preachy and patronizing but I think most of us are better than this. I respect Otto's intellect and think he's one of the smartest posters on here. While I will say that I think New Yorker is often intellectually dishonest I also think he is very intelligent and knows what he is doing. New Yorker as I've said before I think its disrespectful of you to be baiting fellow posters like this and Otto I think its petty of you to allow yourself to be baited like this. That's my dos pesos for what its worth. As for meeting fellow posters in the real world I'm always interested in meeting fellow posters. I will probably be visiting NYC sometime in the next few months and time permitting I will be happy to meet with any NYC poster, SF, Basso, thegary, mc mark and even New Yorker. I will also pledge to be willing to say anything that I have said on the BBS in person but at the same time I'm not looking for some sort of face off confrontation and will gladly enjoy a few beers and laughs, except for Sam Fisher who I have vowed to defeat in the ultimate CF.net kumite for the title of most powerful warrior of the Clutch Realm.
Getting back to somewhat on topic. I noticed there was a big discussion about what rights non-citizens have and regarding the Declaration of Independence vs. the US Constitution. Its true the Declaration of Independence doesn't have the force of law, although it does have some legal precedence as without it the Constitution couldn't exist. You don't need though to go back to the Declaration of Independence but can go directly to the Constitution to understand that non-citizens of the US do have rights when they are under US jurisdiction. US Constitution Ammendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. In the language of this Ammendment no where does it mention citizenship as a requirement for this protection. Prior to the 14th Ammendment though it was understood that the Bill of Rights only applied to the Fed. and not the states but the 14th extended that to the states. Further the 14th ammendment also extends those protections to non-citizens in the jurisdication of the US government and states. Ammendment XIV Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The key term there in the bolded statement is "person" and not "citizen". If it had been citizen then yes non-citizens would have no rights but it says "person" meaning that even non-citizens are subject to basic rights. Even if you haven't read the Constitution it should be obvious that non-citizens are granted Constitutional rights and protections. If that wasn't the case then immgrants and visitors could be jailed without habeus corpus or trial. That clearly isn't the case and given all of the legal contortions regarding arguing that Gitmo isn't under US Jurisdiction shows that even the current Admin. recognizes that.
Hey, if you follow the thread, you'll see mr. otto tried to accuse me of hiding behind a computer so I'm inviting him to come up and say his trash about me to my face, and now let's see who hides. Yeah, I was a focal defender of my annoymity...the key words being "was". Years go by, and people change their minds as the idea of meeting people off the net doesn't seem as sketchy anymore. I've watched some games now with people off this board and it's been a positive experience. So if you're in nyc, want to grab a beer or watch a Rockets game, I'm cool with that.
So are you saying any foreign head of state or dignitary should be granted the same access as citizens? That's an interesting angle. I think he has been given the right to free speech and everything under the consitution. He can peacefully assembly - but he was denied a visit for security reasons and he did not protest that....so apparently he didn't feel it important enough to push the issue or that his rights were denied. So what's the point?
