Ok. So porn is free speech. Art is free speech.

Just as mental exercise, bear with me:

A couple places a sign just outside, but in plain sight of the children at a kindergarten. The sign says Art in progress. There's also a photographer taking pictures and shooting a film. They start fornicating.

Free speech? Should the children just 'walk away'? Is breaking this up 'restricting free speech?'

Speech is already restricted in advertising. Else show me the advertisements with full frontal nudity or the ones that show the sexy woman actually sucking your dick after applying the correct brand of deodorant.

This is Europe and in Europe a liberal is someone who believes in Liberalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

Sure there are guarantees against being offended, maybe not in the constitution but in your laws none the less.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States#Content-based_restrictions

I won't deny you your fairytale of Unlimited Free Speech but it is a rather childish belief.

Hyperbole much?

We know lots of you guys and gals in America are all into radical free speech and everything, which is nice and we love you for it.

And yes, most European governments AND their citizens believe it's perfectly fine in imposing some limits on free speech.

So does your own government I might add. And I'm pretty sure most Americans, conscious or not, are also in favor of limiting Free Speech.

Like, for example, limiting free speech for that guy which is making indecent proposols to your 6 year old daughter or son. Or not allowing someone to publicly threaten you with death. Not allowing random slandering. Heck, you should try to shout 'I'm going to kill the president' in front of the white house once and tell me how you like it.

Please educate yourself on your own country, thank you. Following link might be a nice starting point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States

Excuse my french and thanks for holding me to high standards.

Now let's hear your comment in Dutch or any other non-english language for that matter, thank you.

No, but it would deescalate the situation. And return the conflict to it's smaller proportions, namely a civil war between North and South Korea.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but AFAIK China has long ago withdrawn it's troops at the DMZ, hasn't it? Why doesn't the US follow suit? South Korea has an ample army, they should be more that able to fend off a defense themselves.

Moreover, retreating US troops from South Korea will in fact destablize North Korean leadership by undermining their argument that the US is public enemy number one.

"North Korea is a good example of what the world would look like when the USA does not "bomb everyone"."

Eh, I'm from a country that the US hasn't bombed recently and we look nothing like North Korea, luckily.

And while I agree with you that North Korean leadership is just using this 'war' with the US as an excuse, the US is giving them a pretty good excuse to use. If only by maintaining the sheer number of military force you have been in the last few decennia. It's quite rediculous, compared to the military force of any other nation in existance today.

Moreover, the US has shown a history of bullying nations. For example, I am from the country that is officially sanctioned to be invaded if an American soldier is ever incarcerated by the ICC for warcrimes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act

And we're officially allies!

No, that is not the only other option. And no, this is not to be compared to a crazy guy waving guns.

Is that you, GW Bush?

According to which translation exactly?

I'm not even sure this kind of stuff can be said unambigiously in the Korean language, or even in English.

There's is a reason French was and still is used a lot for diplomatic traffic: it has lot's of checkbits countering exactly these kind of ambiguities.

I like the solution in Hitchikers guide to the Galaxy better: send the moochers and inproductives off on a mission to colonize new planets and then don't follow them.

Eh no. Hate to burst your bubble, but those salaries are paid by customers, not shareholders. Shareholders invest in a company to allow for growth.

I don't know about your salary, but a large part of mine went into taxes, of which a substantial amount was used to avert the downfall of banks and other institutions. I paid for the failures some of these executives didn't even pay for themselves. None bar a few offered to return their bonuses, none bar a few considered lowering their salaries whilst demanding pay cuts and terminations all around.

Yes, because being worth a couple of billion magically makes everything you ever did ok! No luck involved, it must be of his own merit. Committed crimes along the way? Who cares! Ripped off a few hunderd, thousand, million people? Shame on them for being stupid.

Fuck ethics, fuck morality, the only measure of worth is good 'ol greenbacks.

Not saying this Valve guy did anything wrong, just commenting on the mindboggling stupidy of your sweeping generalization.

"Heck let's compare them to other companies. How much does an Android user with a Gingerbread phone have to pay to get Jellybean? Can't be done. Has to buy a new phone because the hardware manufacturer swears there's no way to get Jellybean running on the hardware he sold you last Tuesday. And technically the manufacturer's right. If you don't want to pay an engineer to work on last year's product because last year's product is no longer a profit center, then it is indeed impossible to get new software running on last year's product."

Eh no. I've a Samsung Galaxy II which is now running 4.1.2 Jelly Bean. And no, this is not a self installed mod, it's a manufactorer provided update which installed itself automatically. No computer required, no horrid shit-piece of software called iTunes required.

Some nice features of the Galaxy III were even backported. This phone feels brand new again.