17
   

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

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 07:01 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
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.

U shud be reminded of such hi-lar-i-ous world-wide embarrassment
every time u throw another Setantrum.
Setanta
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 07:14 am
@OmSigDAVID,
This is as much of a reply as you deserve . . . more, in fact . . .
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 07:20 am
@Setanta,
Its BETTER than most of yours!

more decent & civil





David
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 07:26 am
@Setanta,
That radar station was an experiment device that had not as yet proven it reliable and to think that anyone would risk their careers on placing the whole island on alert and getting the warships moving out of the harbor on a Sunday without most of their crews aboard and the planes into the air at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars in 1941 money and ten of millions in current funds on it warning is unlikely to say the least.

Looking back the radar warning with the sightings and the attacks on submarines outside the harbor together might had been enough together but then hindsight is wonderful indeed.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 07:32 am
@Setanta,
There's a world of difference between your well researched, and argued comments and Bill's atavistic assertions. Regarding Pearl Harbor, a lot seems to be made of the fact that the attack took place before the formal declaration of war. How significant do you think that really was?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 07:43 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Is that like a religious cult ?


The Sun is the flagship of the Murdoch press in the UK. It's supposed to be a newspaper, but most of the news is celebrity gossip, and there's a focus on topless women. It caters to the lowest common denominator. This is one of its more famous front pages.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b5/Freddiehamster.jpg/220px-Freddiehamster.jpg


Quote:
What 's a yob ?

From the online dictionary.

Quote:
yob (yb)
n. Chiefly British Slang
A rowdy, aggressive, or violent young man.[Alteration of boy (spelled backward).

yob [jɒb], yobbo [ˈjɒbəʊ]
n pl yobs, yobbos
(Sociology) Brit slang an aggressive and surly youth, esp a teenager


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


Over here the chant 'Two World Wars and one World Cup,' is shouted from the football terraces whenever England play Germany.
Krumple
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 08:33 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

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


I agree with you david... I just didn't focus on that aspect because I have repeated it so often. I am not surprised that today's americans so easily hand over their rights, because even in school we are taught that we don't have any rights in a public place (ie. school). I know the founding fathers of the US would be smacking their foreheads if they saw the current law books and just how much we have stripped away. But this also is the nature of governments, they jockey for power for the few and create serfs to hold up the few. It is difficult to say these things without being branded a lunatic because that is how successful the government has been at teaching people they don't deserve their rights.
Setanta
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 10:04 am
@izzythepush,
Ostensibly, and i think this has been well-enough researched, Admiral Nomura, the special envoy in Washington at the time, was unable to decode the message from Tokyo in time to present it in Washington before the attack took place. Ironically, the Americans had broken the Japanese diplomatic codes, and had already decoded that messages, and so knew that Nomura would be presenting a note to the President at about lunch time in Washington. Due to the ineptitude at the Japanese embassy, it was not presented on time--not until sometime after 1:00 p.m., i believe. There were a variety of reasons why Roosevelt, in consultation with General Marshall, Admiral King, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of State and the Secretaries of the Army and the Navy decided to send the war warning message on November 27th. "Purple," the name given to messages decoded from the Japanese diplomatic traffic was one of the major factors. Additionally, the Japanese naval code structure had been broken, so that within a few weeks of the changing of a code, most of it had been decipered. However, the code had been changed ahead of schedule at the beginning of November, 1941, and the special code names for ships and naval stations had not yet been deciphered. Several clues, however, were available. They did not have any information on the six largest carriers (and which were all a part of the First Air Fleet, which had begun steaming for Hawaii on the day the war warning message was written). Although Kimmel, Short and MacArthur were aware of Purple and the Imperial Navy codes, they did not receive transcripts of the intercepts directly. But that should not have mattered.

Nevertheless, all three of them failed to appropriately respond to the war warning message. Kimmel and Short ignored the Martin-Bellinger report, and instituted no regular patrolling to find an enemy fleet. The Martin-Bellinger reprort is chilling in its prediction of what actually happened, especially the conclusion that, due to the ability to avoid detection in shipping lanes, such an attack would very likely come from the north. Finally, Short's almost insane obsession with saboteurs not only made the U. S. Army Air Force on Hawaii unable to respond, it made them sitting ducks.

FDR and his advisors not unreasonably assumed that the commanders in the Pacific would appropriately respond to the war warning message. Another message about the Japanese declaration of war was being prepared when news of the attack reached Washington. One could allege that the boys in Washington should have known the significance of the Purple intercept about Nomura's note--but once again, they reasonably assumed that the men on the scene would already have taken appropriate measures.

So, according to the Japanese plan, the attack would arrive just after Nomura's note was handed in. From the American point of view, it really meant nothing, as FDR, Marshall and King were epecting Kimmel, Short and MacArthur to have already prepared for the eventuality.
BillRM
 
  0  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 12:21 pm
@Setanta,
The little detail that Hawaii did not received the last war warning on Dec 7 base on the decode of the Japanese breaking off peace talks until after the attack was under way seems to had been let out of your posting.

If memory service me correctly the naval communication radio link between the states and Hawaii was not working due to radio atmosphere conditions and they needed to fall back on Western Union commerce communication links and that delay the warning until after the attack had begone.

Yes hindsight is wonderful and people could had acted better in sitting up air patrols and so on after the first war warning however most of the thinking at the time was that the Japaneses would start the conflict far from the Hawaii islands shores.

On everyone was also under the assumption that you could not used torpedo planes in an attack on Pearl Harbor due to it being far too shallow for the torpedoes not to dig into the bottom of the harbor when drop from aircrafts.
Making an air attack on Pearl Harbor far less likely.

It is interesting how the Japaneses got around that limit on a torpedoes attack by mounting wooden fins on them to slow the speed of the drops.

History is complex and so is placing the blame after the fact for actions not taken.

izzythepush
 
  2  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 12:54 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

The little detail that Hawaii did not received the last war warning on Dec 7 base on the decode of the Japanese breaking off peace talks until after the attack was under way seems to had been let out of your posting.


Probably because it's nonsensical.
BillRM
 
  0  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 01:11 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
Probably because it's nonsensical


You never learn now do you?

From the NSA website.......

http://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic_heritage/center_crypt_history/pearl_harbor_review/pearl_harbor.shtml

With the 14-part message available, warnings were sent to American bases overseas. But, there were delays. Admiral Stark, Chief of Naval Operations, felt that previous warnings had been enough to keep Pearl Harbor alert, and declined to wake Admiral Kimmel in Hawaii at an early hour. General George Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, spent that Sunday morning in his usual recreational horseback ride and was unavailable until close to noon. He authorized dispatch of a war warning, but, as it happened, Army communications to Hawaii were down due to technical problems, and the warning was sent -- via Western Union telegram!
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 01:11 pm
@Krumple,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

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
Krumple wrote:
I agree with you david... I just didn't focus on that aspect because I have repeated it so often. I am not surprised that today's americans so easily hand over their rights, because even in school we are taught that we don't have any rights in a public place (ie. school). I know the founding fathers of the US would be smacking their foreheads if they saw the current law books and just how much we have stripped away. But this also is the nature of governments, they jockey for power for the few and create serfs to hold up the few. It is difficult to say these things without being branded a lunatic because that is how successful the government has been at teaching people they don't deserve their rights.
We agree. When I was 6, I was very, very acutely aware of a jurisdictional challenge
to government (more specifically, to that of its schools), to wit:
"Where in the hell do THAY get the right to make ME
go over THERE!?! My mother quelled my rebellion,
by convincing me (however grudgingly) of the practical value of education.

ANYWAY:
Each and every citizen needs to keenly focus upon the ADVERSARIAL nature
of the relationship between government and its creators (meaning US).

Personal freedom and jurisdiction of government are ADVERSELY PROPORTIONAL.





David
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 01:21 pm
@BillRM,
You should cut and paste more often.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 01:23 pm
@izzythepush,
Thank u, Izzy.





David
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 01:35 pm
@izzythepush,
I do enjoy your willingness to make a fool of yourself by never taking the time to check for yourself before issuing a challenge concerning commonly known facts or telling the world falsely that the US did not suffer any harm in backing England before Dec 7, 1941 and so on.

You never do learn now do you........................????????

izzythepush
 
  2  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 01:59 pm
@BillRM,
You clearly don't. What's the matter? Viagra not working? Is that why you feel the need to grunt out your bellicose gibberish? If you had half a brain you would realise that Set had already made the point about the attack happening prior to the declaration of war. In fact it was in my original question to him.

When you desperately try to put your own slobbering slackjawed interpretation on things you end up looking even more stupid, if that were possible. Like I said, you should cut and paste more often. It won't stop you missing the point, but it should cut down on the nonsensical gibberish.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 02:02 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
. . . FDR and his advisors not unreasonably assumed that the commanders in the Pacific would appropriately respond to the war warning message. Another message about the Japanese declaration of war was being prepared when news of the attack reached Washington. One could allege that the boys in Washington should have known the significance of the Purple intercept about Nomura's note--but once again, they reasonably assumed that the men on the scene would already have taken appropriate measures.
This is what happens when a CEO goes around ASSUMING things WITHOUT CHECKING.
Was he afraid to call them on the telefone????????

Even if we accept the proposition that Roosevelt was not using this
as a backdoor into the war in Europe, simple decency requires that
he call to check and to inquire into the readiness status, under the circumstances.
Just a casual word to an assistant woud have been enuf to check.
Roosevelt was guilty of the grossest negligence, resulting in unnecessary deaths,
assuming that he was not enticing a Japanese attack.

As Truman admitted: "The buck stops here."





David
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 08:05 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I have no idea of what NHS is.


Americans are known for their ignorance, Om, but you are truly a special case all to your own.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 10:52 pm
@JTT,
If I cared what u thawt about anything,
I 'd thank u for your observation, J.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Thu 26 Jan, 2012 10:57 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
I do enjoy your willingness to make a fool of yourself by never taking the time to check for yourself before issuing a challenge concerning commonly known facts or telling the world falsely that the US did not suffer any harm in backing England before Dec 7, 1941 and so on.

You never do learn now do you........................????????
I really LIKE IT when u don 't include the mistakes.
Beautiful, clear English!
Its nice; thank u. (Please don't stop!)





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/20/2025 at 05:18:38