When you put a sign on a freeway it says two things: 1) Whatever it says, and 2) that someone felt they had the right, or duty, to put it there.
Once all those flags went up on overpasses after September 11th, the freeways became fair game as forums for political expression. According to the first amendment, a sign that says "Impeach" has just as much right to be on a freeway as an American flag.
Besides, if the authorities didn't want signs on freeways, they'd have to take down all the billboards.
FB - 488
FB - 488
USA - 347
31 comments:
God bless you.
I always get a tear in my eye when I see one of these.
Let me know when you're doing it next and if you'd like company, I'll tag along.
right on !
Right on dude. Not sure which I like best, Halliburton or the blow job. Thank you.
Well done :) and Happy Easter
what do these numbers mean? number of signs?
FB - 488
USA - 347
Yes. Those are the number of signs I've put up since Jan. 1st vs. the number of pictures of signs sent in by readers. One of the things I'm trying to point out with this project is the power of individual action, something I think has been neglected by the left in its constant emphasis on "organizing" and acting soley in groups.
The other thing I'm trying to point out is that once all those flags went up after September 11th, the freeways became fair game for political expression. In over 4,000 signpostings I've been caught by police seven times, each time with no more consequence than having to take down the sign, if that.
I like the Halliburton one best --- makes the point clearest as to what this war was about, and something almost anyone had to "get" - particularly now that they are "moving to Dubai" -- what a sad joke...
greetings from ireland
what an inspirational effort
well done
The best estimate of the number of Iraqi dead in which the cause of death is directly related to the war is over 650,000. (Lancet study). This isn't common knowledge but it ought to be. Would the freewayblogger consider advertising this number?
Freewayblogger, I love you.....
1/ Congratulations on littering. I assume you will be paying for the people who have to come after you and clean up your mess? I didn't think so. Liberals never do.
2/ 650,000 have NOT died in Iraq. Want proof? Where are the mass graves? Your lancet poll is proven inaccurate by every single actual count out there.
3/ Where were you "supporters of the troops" when i was driving arround bosnia with a veitnam era flack vest on, in a canvas sided hummv, operating in a hostile enviroment, eating at a haliburton run DFAC, driving in vehicles run on haliburton supplied desiel?? Oh thats right, Clinton was in office.
4/ Will you take responsibility for the following if we withdraw from iraq?
a/ Genocide in iraq
b/ Regional war
c/ Terrorist attacks here in the usa
d/ The new terrorist nations created by the sucess of terrorist actions against USA.
Probably not. You will blame bush dispite the warnings.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Booooo! Get over yourself person commenting above me!
1/ Congratulations on littering. I assume you will be paying for the people who have to come after you and clean up your mess? I didn't think so. Liberals never do.
Does the same problem bother you, with all the signs that spawned in support of the Iraq War? I'm guessing no.
2/ 650,000 have NOT died in Iraq. Want proof? Where are the mass graves? Your lancet poll is proven inaccurate by every single actual count out there.
The Lancet report has been disputed by biased sources, who don't want to believe it. It has NOT been disproven in any substantive way by nonbiased scientific sources.
But let's say you're right, and it is wrong, even by a factor of 10. so "only" 65,000 Iraqi civilians have been caused to die because of your invasion.
Are you saying this is a good thing?
3/ Where were you "supporters of the troops" when i was driving arround bosnia with a veitnam era flack vest on, in a canvas sided hummv, operating in a hostile enviroment, eating at a haliburton run DFAC, driving in vehicles run on haliburton supplied desiel?? Oh thats right, Clinton was in office.
Exactly how many US troops died in that conflict?
I believe the number is "zero".
4/ Will you take responsibility for the following if we withdraw from iraq?
a/ Genocide in iraq
b/ Regional war
c/ Terrorist attacks here in the usa
d/ The new terrorist nations created by the sucess of terrorist actions against USA.
Probably not. You will blame bush dispite the warnings.
Will YOU take responsibility for all that's already gone wrong with Iraq, while Bush is still in office?
To wit:
a) losing Osama Bin Laden
b) how the invasion of Iraq has increased Al Qaeda's recruitment, training, and prestige in the Middle East
c) angered the rest of the Middle East, when right after 9/11 they were suddenly mostly on our side?
d) causing the civil war that most of us libs and progressives *predicted* would occur if we invade Iraq - but were told we were being alarmist?
Here's the situation as I see it, in metaphor:
Imagine a guy named Osama Bin Laden blew up your house and killed your family, and then ran into another town.
You go into that town, find out the house Osama's in and take it over - but then you invade and take over his NEIGHBOR's house because he said mean things about your dad once. And you kill this NEIGHBOR, but let Osama run away and later say "you're not that worried about him".
Is that a smart or effective way to deal with a man who's killed members of your family? Yes or no?
No answer i see. So again we see liberals getting away with breaking the law at will and not answering any questions. Typical.
1/ Congratulations on littering. I assume you will be paying for the people who have to come after you and clean up your mess? I didn't think so. Liberals never do.
Does the same problem bother you, with all the signs that spawned in support of the Iraq War? I'm guessing no.
-----------------------
I see you never answered the question. Typical liberal.
2/ 650,000 have NOT died in Iraq. Want proof? Where are the mass graves? Your lancet poll is proven inaccurate by every single actual count out there.
The Lancet report has been disputed by biased sources, who don't want to believe it. It has NOT been disproven in any substantive way by nonbiased scientific sources.
------------------------
It has by the UN the USA, the IRAQI government, and even iraqibodycount. In fact not one source supports that lie.
But let's say you're right, and it is wrong, even by a factor of 10. so "only" 65,000 Iraqi civilians have been caused to die because of your invasion.
-----------------------
I take it you aren't an american?
Are you saying this is a good thing?
----------------
Removing saddam was, I was proud to be part of it. Still are.
3/ Where were you "supporters of the troops" when i was driving arround bosnia with a veitnam era flack vest on, in a canvas sided hummv, operating in a hostile enviroment, eating at a haliburton run DFAC, driving in vehicles run on haliburton supplied desiel?? Oh thats right, Clinton was in office.
Exactly how many US troops died in that conflict?
--------------------
OH so its OKAY as long as clinton was in office. Fucking hypocrites.
I believe the number is "zero".
--------------------
I believe you are wrong. I was there, you weren't.
4/ Will you take responsibility for the following if we withdraw from iraq?
a/ Genocide in iraq
b/ Regional war
c/ Terrorist attacks here in the usa
d/ The new terrorist nations created by the sucess of terrorist actions against USA.
Probably not. You will blame bush dispite the warnings.
Will YOU take responsibility for all that's already gone wrong with Iraq, while Bush is still in office?
To wit:
a) losing Osama Bin Laden
-------------------
We lost bin laden in 2002 when he fled to pakistan dumbass.
b) how the invasion of Iraq has increased Al Qaeda's recruitment, training, and prestige in the Middle East
----------------------
Oh so making him a winner in iraq will make that better? dumbass.
c) angered the rest of the Middle East, when right after 9/11 they were suddenly mostly on our side?
-----------------------
You are kidding right?
d) causing the civil war that most of us libs and progressives *predicted* would occur if we invade Iraq - but were told we were being alarmist?
--------------------------
Dude read up on history, iraq has been in civil war since before saddam came into power. Ignorant libs again.
Here's the situation as I see it, in metaphor:
Imagine a guy named Osama Bin Laden blew up your house and killed your family, and then ran into another town.
You go into that town, find out the house Osama's in and take it over - but then you invade and take over his NEIGHBOR's house because he said mean things about your dad once. And you kill this NEIGHBOR, but let Osama run away and later say "you're not that worried about him".
Is that a smart or effective way to deal with a man who's killed members of your family? Yes or no?
---------------
Gee you just managed to prove you know nothing about middle eastern politics. ARE you suggesting we invade PAKISTAN??
Im not saying bush has done a great or even good job, i wouldn't have invaded iraq, but to leave would be the biggest mistake in american history. It would make things 100 times worse. You liberal hatemongers have not thought this through, What the fuck do you think will happen if we leave?
Anonymouse (sic) go away troll. You and your tired ... liberals breaking the law and getting away with it and not answering questions. Jeez. What circular logic and lies all neatly packaged together.
If you really believe those tired, lost slogans and lies you just posted. I feel really, really sorry for you.
Oh, and, LOVE the highway signs posted ... put some in Florida, will ya?
1) This is not littering. It is legal to post signs on public property as long as it is not permanent. FYI, I am not a liberal but I do believe in this form of peaceful protest, you sir are the one trying to make something bad of it.
2) I do agree that 650,000 have not died in Iraq, but the point is that nobody should have died in Iraq. Yes, entering Iraq was an easy way to lure the terrorists in so that we could kill them, but it doesnt necessarily make it 'right'.
3) I was there is Bosnia right along side of you. 2.12 Cav. Do some research though, Halliburton isn't the best company to stick up for.
4) a) Genocide in Iraq has been taking place there for a long time. That isn't anything to we should blame ourselves for. In the end, it is up to the Iraqis to stop it, not us. Even if we leave with Iraq in pristine shape does not mean that genocide will not occur there again in the future.
b) Same as above. Replace genocide with regional war.
c) These are going to occur for a very long time whther we like it or not. Someone will eventually nuke us wether we succeed in Iraq or not. There are way too many other problems in that region that could cause this. Our support for other foriegn nations for starters. George Washington said in his farewell speech to never form permanent ties with foriegn nations or it shall destroy America. My feelings are that he was right.
d) New terrorists nations will always rise and fall so long as the people of those nations do nothing about it. You complain about how much it will cost to clean up a few road signs, but how much will it cost to fight perpetual neverending war? Terrorists multiply like Gremlins in a swimming pool. New ones will 'Always' come along no matter the level of effort.
Oh, and please don't stick up for Bush. He is a loser and he is destroying the integrity of this great nation. Have you ever read the Constitution and looked at how many laws that Mr. Bush has broken? Oh wait, it's just a goddamn peice of paper... sorry I forgot....
So disagreeing makes me a troll, fine.
But we have confirmed that liberals need not follow the law.This confirms my view of liberals. Goodbye.
The reason liberals aren't fighting in Iraq is that don't believe the war is legal, moral or good for America.
The reason conservatives aren't fighting in Iraq is because they're pussies.
Anyone notice that the people left supporting Bush and his war are getting dumber and dumber?
Keep it up Mr. Freewayblogger, you are a fine example of American Patriotism! As a former servicemember who served in the U.S. Army, I salute you.
God bless you and if you need help let me know, I live in fascist Santa Clara
Wow Rush is the you? Come on you can tell us. If your not Rush Limbaugh, then your a loyal Dittohead. But I must say I like all the comments! even if I disagree with some.
Damn good work! I commend you.
Mark
Blowing the job...I need that on a t-shirt.
Freewayblogger said...
The reason liberals aren't fighting in Iraq is that don't believe the war is legal, moral or good for America.
The reason conservatives aren't fighting in Iraq is because they're pussies.
2:39 PM
I'm a liberal and just got back from 14 months in Iraq...as did my wife. And I have to agree with the pope, nothing good is going on there. It's groundhog's day over and over. We had cleaned Tall Afar up, and a few weeks ago they had the biggest bombing since the war started. Progress does not seem to be being made. And the only reason Ramadi is getting better is because we hire the sheiks to fight al qaeda and the insurgency for us.
Anonymous in Santa Clara, your help is needed. Let me know how to contact you and we'll get the South Bay up and running.
Hi from Down Under,
I say great work freeway blogger you are fantastic.
And to Anonymous regarding "litter" and all his verbal diaarrhoea, this person is not living in reality.
If Osama Bin Laden did organise Sept.11 Why dont you ask the question WHY DID HE DO IT? But somehow I dont think Anonymous can think past his inflated Superior Ego and his hummv.
Peace to everyone.
By the way I dont think we have been to the moon!
Anonymous said...
------
I see you never answered the question. Typical liberal.
I see you didn't answer my question, and am blaming me.
So here's my answer: no, it doesn't bother me. Even if the signs cost money to remove, which is doubtful - that's the cost of free speech.
So, now you answer: does the pro-Iraq war signs bother you, in terms of their possible litter cost? Yes or no?
You can answer, right?
------------------------
It has by the UN the USA, the IRAQI government, and even iraqibodycount. In fact not one source supports that lie.
Fine, whatever.
-----------------------
I take it you aren't an american?
I take it that YOU aren't an American, because you clearly don't believe in the American Way? You know, truth and justice, remember those?
Anyone can wave a flag - can you think for yourself?
Removing saddam was, I was proud to be part of it. Still are.
So killing 65,000 + innocent civilian Iraqis was worth removing a dictator who was no threat to us at all, while letting the scum who murdered 3,000 US civilians go free?
And in the process, increasing the funding, prestige and success of Al Qaeda was worth it, too?
Smart.
Exactly how many US troops died in that conflict?
--------------------
OH so its OKAY as long as clinton was in office. Fucking hypocrites...I believe you are wrong. I was there, you weren't.
Way to completely evade my point.
Face my point: Clinton doesn't bother us because he produced RESULTS.
NO SOLDIERS DIED IN COMBAT as a result of the Bosnian intervention.
You can beleive all you want to. But if you want to live, you depend on facts.
Here are the facts:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030402-iraq06.htm
ZERO military casaulties. Got that? ZERO.
Prove me wrong. Did a buddy of yours die in Bosnia from enemy fire? Then just produce that evidence. Or produce ANY evidence of ANY US soldier killed by enemy action in Bosnia.
Otherwise, face reality. Its' good for you.
To wit:
a) losing Osama Bin Laden
-------------------
We lost bin laden in 2002 when he fled to pakistan dumbass.
Exactly. Thank you for proving my point. We invaded the whole nation to get that guy. And how did he gey away? Who was President? Who outsourced the job to thrid-rate locals?
And WHICH president was it who then said, "Oh, I'm not really worried about him." Refresh me. What was his name again?
So, short answer: you apparently will not take responsibility.
b) how the invasion of Iraq has increased Al Qaeda's recruitment, training, and prestige in the Middle East
----------------------
Oh so making him a winner in iraq will make that better? dumbass.
Your answer: "no I won't take responsibility for that, either. But I will call you a dumbass to soothe my ego."
c) angered the rest of the Middle East, when right after 9/11 they were suddenly mostly on our side?
-----------------------
You are kidding right?
Sure, if by 'kidding' you mean 'acknowledging reality'.
Try it some time.
d) causing the civil war that most of us libs and progressives *predicted* would occur if we invade Iraq - but were told we were being alarmist?
--------------------------
Dude read up on history, iraq has been in civil war since before saddam came into power. Ignorant libs again.
OMFG - no. Jesus H. Christ.
Ok, wow.
Mr. History reader - tahnk you again for proving my point.
It was a known fact that these groups have been struggling against each other for hundreds of years. Which is how we libs and progressives knew - and TRIED to warn you - they would explode out into the open and cause a PUBLIC civil war where they'd fight for power.
But you wanted to believe the wishful thinking of this idiot you voted for twice.
And now we're all in the same mess. And we libs and progressives are going to have to clean up the mess that YOUR puppet masters have gotten this country into.
Think for yourself next time. Next time listen to other people. Since we've predicted every possible thing that could go wrong and have so far been right, and since most nonpartisan foreign policy experts have tended to agree with us, including retired military generals -just maybe we might know what we're talking about.
Gee you just managed to prove you know nothing about middle eastern politics. ARE you suggesting we invade PAKISTAN??
OMFG.
No.
Osama ran to Afghanistan, and we invaded IRAQ. See? That's the neighbors house. That's how bad your president blew it. And you voted for him twice. Thanks.
Im not saying bush has done a great or even good job, i wouldn't have invaded iraq, but to leave would be the biggest mistake in american history. It would make things 100 times worse.
When you're in a hole, you don't get out by digging faster. You stop digging.
You liberal hatemongers have not thought this through, What the fuck do you think will happen if we leave?
YOU are not htinking it through.
What we should do is call in the UN, and split the country into 3 sections. Give the Sunni one area, the Shiites another, and a third to the Kurds. That last one'll piss off Turkey, but there really isn't any other way around it.
Then we sit on the borders and keep them from crossing them to kill each other, and let them rebuild their country.
Any other solution has us in their civil war. which is bad. Because it's bad that soldiers die, bad that civilians die, bad that we're stuck in a two-front military occupation, bad that we're distracted from Afhganistan and the Taliban has resurged there.
That's all bad. You can see that, right?
The guy who calls us progressives "dumbass" suggests that Usama bin Baby escaped to Pakistan. Then he later asks, "ARE you suggesting we invade PAKISTAN??" Am I missing something here?
The Haliburton one is my fave. Thanks for your obsessive efforts.
Post a Comment