Man's life Over, Cops Decide He Watched Child Porn in First Class

While i acknowledge that Bill is an idiot, you are completely wrong. There was a radar unit operating on the north shore of Oahu on the morning of December 7, 1941, and they did detect the approach of hundreds of aircraft. They duly reported this to the dury officer to whom they were responsible, and he just dismissed it, saying they were expecting a flight of B17s from Los Angeles. Of course, there were only about a dozen B17s coming, not hundreds, and Los Angeles is east of Hawaii, not north of it. The failure to use the radar warning was of a piece with all of the failures of the command structure at Hawaii--hubris, silly paranoia, blindness to the obvious. I highly recommend At Dawn We Slept by Gordon Prange, et al, the most reliable account of which i know of the year leading up to the attack, and the attack itself, from both the Japanese and the American point of view.

They were devastated by WWII. America, by contrast made a killing, literally and literally from the war. Also, the UK got cut out of a lot of their opportunities to steal from the weaker, poorer countries of the world. The US, which had been stealing from a vast swath of the world's countries, did what any Mafia boss does when a rival gets "done in". The US's "territory", where it could rape and pillage as it pleased, grew larger, with fewer rivals.

LOL you never hear of the British empire that the sun never set on I assume!!!!!

UK did it very best to keep that empire alive after WW2 even if they was not able to do so.

Fools that know no history even recent world history can be amusing at times thanks for the laugh.

I love you to.............

Now to be fair that radar station was more of a testing platform then an operational part of an early warning system and was only up and running a few hours a day.

In fact if memory serve me correctly when they picked up the first attack waves they was operating the unit pass the time it should had been shut down for the day.

The technology was new and people in the train of command did not have a great deal of faith in it at that time.

Yeah, you're right, I recently saw a documentary on radar. The difference was trust, the British had learnt to trust radar during the Battle of Britain. The Americans had yet to start trusting it.

Essentially Bill is still pushing the narrative that America won the war single handed, and as a result we should all get down on our knees in gratitude. It's the attitude of someone who's only achievement is his nationality.

Well, I remember it but, truth be told, it is not to our credit that
relatively few Americans r acutely aware that he resumed office as Prime Minister in 1951.
I prefer not to join in personal acrimony, if not directly provoked.
The forum is more fun and more informative without it.



Its against the law here too, tho it is very risky in terms of its Constitutional foundation,
implying that government has jd to control what we look at; by that reasoning, if it DID,
government coud mandate that we can look at roses but NOT see petunias.
Such law fails to consider the adversarial relationship of government to its creators.
We need to be thinking about curtailing and strangling the jurisdiction of government, not expanding it.

I doubt that there exists any jurisdiction wherein it remains legal, tho I have not checked around.




Well, Izzy, I think that stringing them up
is probably too severe, but to avenge the malicious affronts to English personal dignity,
harsh sentences (maybe 25 years in prison or up) shud be applied.
Perhaps thay 'd be dissuasive.
(Minimally, thay 'd dissuade the nudistic rioters for the following 25 years, unless paroled.)

What were the actual sentences, Izzy ?





David

I've got a lot on today Dave. Here's a link to a google page with lots of articles about the sentencing for rioters. By your own personal standards you would probably find them lenient, but overall the sentences for a crime committed during the riots were harsher than a similar crime committed at another time.

Like you, I don't like the UK vs USA dialogue that Bill wants to impose upon the rest of us. When he is losing an argument he tries to wrap himself in the flag. He is one American I find disgusting, there are plenty of other Americans I respect and quite like.

Believe me, this is not a sentiment which is echoed by the rest of us.

I believe that a good amount of the UK v USA dialogue
is all in good fun. I remember my genetic heritage.

I 'm glad that u joined the forum; its more fun with u than it was without u.

Its your country; do what u want with it, whether I approve or not.





David

I don't think that for one minute mate. There are Englishmen who make me ashamed to be British. I once went on a booze cruise, a day trip to Boulogne to buy cheap alcohol and various French delicacies. Unfortunately it was on the same day a load of Sun readers cashed in tokens for a free day out. They behaved shamefully, a bunch of drunken rude yobs, making similar WW2 jibes as Bill.

Is that like a religious cult ?


What 's a yob ?



Thay used to accuse us of being: "oversexed, overpaid and over here" in WWII.





David

wow 75 pages of responses on this topic. I haven't read them all yet. I would just like to say, that this is a measure of how much of a police state we are becomming. Sure some people will justify it because it is child porn so "obviously" the man is guilty. But you no longer need to kill anyone, just frame them by putting child porn on their labtop and make it get triggered at some random time using a hidden program. Since you can't actually determine who used the computer the current user gets arrested for having child porn and their life ruined.

I am not trying to justify him if he is actually guilty, but the problem is it is too difficult to tell if he really is truely guilty. He might be, and chances are he is, but there is ALWAYS a chance that he is frame or his labtop infected with a popup porn virus. Since the later is a posiblity i think we need to be cautious about instanly thinking someone is guilty of child porn simply because they have it on their labtop. It is just too easy to write a program and infect someone's computer with it. A disgruntled student who wanted revenge for the D they were given for taking his class? Just saying...

Yes,
but there is a more fundamental issue of whether we ever gave jurisdiction
to government such that we need its permission qua what drugs we can take,
what food we can eat or what we can see.

These are all USURPATIONS of power, rapes of our liberty.
If we tolerate usurpation of power (as we are here doing)
then we are docile in flushing away our freedom; none of it is safe
because the precedent has been established that government
can freely aggrandize itself into unlimited despotism, at our expense

The dichotomy is simplicity itself:
EITHER government CAN get away with usurpation of power

or

it CANNOT get away with it.

America belongs to US, not to government.





David

Sure I knew that Churchill has another short time in power however not before the path for England after the war was set in concrete for beyond even his power to change at that point.

The time frame of right after the war was when it was all important to had have his leadeship.

People like Bill embarrass me, because this isn't like a boatload of punters daytripping to Boulonge. This is read by many, many people all over the world, and clowns like him serve to fuel negative images.

For the record: the mobile radar station didn't have a "best before date," the time when they were set to return to base was SOP, not some ultimate limit beyond which they could no longer function. Other clues were ignored as well. A destroyer (i believe it was USS Blue, but don't quote me) reported submarine contact the night before, and in fact attacked a sub contact in the entrance to the ship channel leading to Pearl. It was very likely the miniature sub which was later found sunk in the channel.

The November 27, 1941 war warning message was sent to all officers of general officer or flag rank in the Pacific. In Hawaii, there was an admiral commaing the 14th Naval District, but he was a cipher--Admiral Husband Kimmel was there as Commander in Chief, Pacific Fleet, and he took no action. The army commander there (and therefore commander of United States Army Air Forces on the islands) was Walter Short, and what he did was worse than taking no action. He had this obsessvie paranoia about fifth columnist and saboteurs, so his pursuit aircraft (what we now call fighters) were all clustered together in the middle of the airfields to keep them as far from the fences as possible. The lockers for the AAA ammunition were put under padlock, with the duty officer having the key, to prevent these chimerical saboteurs from using it to blow up his planes. On the morning of the attack, the AAA batteries, which had no ammo under Short's idiot rules, couldn't get any until someone found the duty officer to come unlock the ammo lockers--which was, of course, too late.

Worst of all was Douglas MacArthur. Not only had he taken no action upon receipt of the war warning message, he still did nothing after he knew Pearl Harbor had been attacked. The Japanese on Formosa were sweating bullets because they were locked down by a ground fog and they were certain the Americans would attack before they could get off the ground. Not only did MacArthur's air forces not attack, they were still lined up wingtip to wingtip when the Japanese finally arrived.

In this litanry of neglect and incompetence, however, there were some officers who did perform well. Admiral Halsey was in command of a task force based on USS Enterprise delivering air craft to Wake Island, which he did on December 2. He also received the war warning message, and put his ships on full wattime alert. He basically ordered his commanders to shoot first and ask questions later. It is said that his operations officer told him "Gaddamn it Admiral, you can't start your own private war!" Halsey said he'd take the responsibility and that if anyone got in their way, they were to be shot down or sunk.

The commander of USS Nevada, when he learned of the war warning message, put his crew on wartime alert--despite the grumbling. His was the only ship at Pearl to get underway on the morning of the attack. She was hit by a torpedo and several bombs, and he had to ground her--but she was salvaged and refitted. She participated in the bombardment of Normany during the D Day invasion, and later returned to the Pacific where she partisipated inthe Iwo Jima and the Okinawa operations.

The tragedy of the Pearl Harbor attack was a failure of command responsibility. Before all the conspriracy creeps crawl out of the woodwork, FDR sent a war warning message on November 27th--for those whose math is not that good, that's ten days before the attack. That Kimmel, Short and MacArthur failed to respond appropriately cannot be laid at FDR's door. That some officers did respond appropriately is evidence that the war warning message could have been effectively--if high ranking officers had not been asleep at the wheel. What really motivates the Pearl Harbor hysteria is racism, plain and simple. Americans had despised and belittled the Japanese for almost a century--and then they came along to pull off one of the most brilliant operations in the history of naval warfare. That sticks in the craw of a lot of American conservatives--they prefer to blame FDR than admit to the brilliance of the operation.

There been cases of people framing others by hacking into their computers systems and placing child porn on them however computer forensics was in the end able to show what had occur in the known cases at least.

Someone with great skill should be able to frame someone and get alway with it in theory at least.

That constitutional issue was settle in Hamilton and Jefferson times and by now is very very settle law to say the least.

The constitution necessary and proper clause along with the commerce clause give the US federal government all the power you do not care for.

The matter is now no more open for real debate then the idea that states have the right of secession from the union.

And who said otherwise however the very fact is was only operated for a few hours a day show that it was not as yet part of an working early warning system but a test bed for such devices being so in the future.

The chain of command was not as yet set up to smoothly take any warnings it might generate in a serious manner.

It would had been wonderful if this experimental device warning had been taken seriously enough to had place the island military on full alert but that anyone high enough in the chain of command would had done so seems very unlikely to say the least given human nature.

Your comment about what the chain of command was "set up" to respond to is silly to say the least. The failures of response can be laid squarely at the doors of Short and Kimmel. In March, 1941, the two staff officers from the respective staffs responsible for air operations prepared a report on the likely outcome of such an attack. It is called the Martin-Bellinger report, after the names of those officers. If it had been taken seriously, the report of the mobile radar station might have been taken seriously. As it was, the command structure failed due to hubris and complacency, not some stupid allegation about what it was "set up" to understand.