Freedom Ride

Hi, So where can i find the movie ‘Freedom Writers’ Online for free?
Yes, i know about youtube, and watch-movies.net. but i cant seem to find it. Also, dont suggest going out, because its 1.13 am and i want to watch it online xD So, if you could give a link to site, i’d appreciate it greatly.

surfthechannel.com
megavideo.com
watch-movies-links.net
56.com
tudou.com
youku.com
tv-links.cc
themoviesempire.com
supernovatube.com
veoh.com
theonlydevice.com

etc. etc.
good luck(:

the first amendment of the constitution protects freedom of the press which has allowed the press be what it si today. so should this great freedom continue?

The majority of the press is controlled by a handful of people with ulterior motives using fear mongering and brainwashing on the general public. If a reporter doesn’t tow the company line, they are fired. So it’s not really free at all.

Is it justified to do these things during war?

It showed a contradiction. Black soldiers went of to "save the world for democracy," but were denied their civil rights. It was a lesson their children and grandchildren didn’t forget.

Why should a copyright holder have such power over when his or her words are used by another?
What is the big deal over copyright?
Is it really fair in light of our Freedom of Speech?

freedom of speech was intended to be on the personal front. the idea was that a person could not be put in jail for merely expressing an opinion. it was also ment so that ideas could be freeflowing. when you are talking about copyrighted material you still have the right in most cases to use it yourself, just not profit from it. copyright laws protect ideas, or a product. when you write a book copyright laws protect you from having someone grabbing a copy, taking it to the publisher and producing it and selling it as his own.

it is amazing that the whole freedom of speech idea is so hard for people to get. freedom of speech does not mean you can say whatever you want, whenever you want, to anyone you want. everything has practical limitations. try telling the president of the united states that you are going to kill him, you’re just using your freedom of speech right? wrong, you are threatening, which you can’t do. try lieing in a court of law under oath, freedom of speech? no, you do not have that freedom . try talking out of order in a court of law, you’ll be in jail before long. the thing is, this is not restricting your right to voice an opinion, this is maintaining order, it is taking threats seriously, it is protecting people from having their ideas stolen. slander, libel, purgury, terrorist threats, these are all limits on freedom of speech.

and why?

It would start in the state courts since it is a state law, then can be appealed to the federal courts since it deals with the U.S. Constitution.

I think of all those poor guys, 18-year olds charging up hillsides defending American freedom, only for Obama to go ahead and pass complete national control over all our health decisions, crushing our currency, bowing to the church of environmentalism and wealth redistribution, and destroying everything they died for.

What a tragedy. What a waste of human life.

Nobody has been fighting for American Freedom in either Iraq or Afghanistan. (You don’t mention where it is that the President has been ‘pissing away’ American freedom, so I assume you mean one of those very different countries).

Certainly none of your allies believe they were fighting or are fighting for their own freedom or for American freedom.

The brief wars in Iraq were fought to remove the military threat posed by the Saddam Hussein regime to its neighbors and to minority groups within Iraq.

The war in Afghanistan was launched to hunt down those hiding there who conspired to murder people in other countries. Unlike the Iraqi regime, they were never in a position where they could threaten the existence of another state. The war is now being continued in support of the government of Afghanistan.

else\\?
i read it somewhere. this is a question. thanks for showing interest.

Over time the meaning of Liberal has changed. The definition you have is for classic liberals which is close to what we call Libertarianism today. People who now call themselves Liberal are on the left on economic issues and strong supporters of civil liberties. The media often uses cultural issues to define liberal.

and how it helped the civil rights movement?

thanks soo much!! i have a headache and it’s like 3 am over here
oh! and do you have any info on the education of african americans and their right to vote maybe a little before the movement

In general, the freedom of assembly has fostered social changes in the USA, including social change towards the 13th Amendment of the Constitution, wherein Congress abolished slavery. Any American was able to meet others publicly and in their homes to discuss whether they thought slavery could be continued without any fear of retribution from any state actor, whether a police officer or otherwise.

Years later during the Civil Rights movement, the same freedom of assembly enabled African American to march from Selma to Montgomery and for young students at Berkeley to speak out against bias and prejudice. Though several students were arrested for trespassing, none were arrested for voicing their views against the establishment. These rights to assemble were integral in ushering in civil rights.

more details the better and the more persuassive language is good too, thanks

During World War II, the Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army was allied with the British, but during the Malayan Emergency, members of its successor (the Malayan Races Liberation Army), were branded "terrorists" by the British.More recently, Ronald Reagan and others in the American administration frequently called the Afghan Mujahideen "freedom fighters" during their war against the Soviet Union, yet twenty years later, when a new generation of Afghan men are fighting against what they perceive to be a regime installed by foreign powers, their attacks are labelled "terrorism" by George W. Bush. Groups accused of terrorism understandably prefer terms reflecting legitimate military or ideological action.Leading terrorism researcher Professor Martin Rudner, director of the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies at Ottawa’s Carleton University, defines "terrorist acts" as attacks against civilians for political or other ideological goals, and goes on to say "There is the famous statement: ‘One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.’ But that is grossly misleading. It assesses the validity of the cause when terrorism is an act. One can have a perfectly beautiful cause and yet if one commits terrorist acts, it is terrorism regardless.

Every single Newspaper, Comment site , Social networks, any place that originally allowed you to freedom of speech suddenly deleted your comments ,accounts, and whatever utilizes your freedom to speech are suddenly taken away from you ?

I’d keep looking for new ways to express myself.

China opened up because of the Olympics and many citizens that had never been able to talk to people from other countries found a whole new world on their computers. After the Olympics their global connections were cut away again and they were back to a very limited and censored internet. Did they accept that? No. They keep finding creative ways to get out on the global uncensored internet to make their voices heard. I’d be just like them.