42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Sat 17 Aug, 2013 08:19 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Not sure why you think he would not get one, but I suspect it has to do with the fact that a "fair trial" will almost certainly end with him being convicted of high crimes.


I am beginning to think as more and more information are slowly coming out that the President I voted for two times might be more guilty of high crimes then Snowden.

At the very least, not honoring his oath to protected the constitution including the first and the fourth amendment.
JTT
 
  2  
Sat 17 Aug, 2013 08:50 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
So I ask: Why do you think he would not get a “fair trial?”


Because the criminals are the ones conducting the trial, Frank. That's like saying he would get a fair trial from Stalin or Hitler. The criminals have a strong vested interest in not being found out.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 02:38 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Not sure why you think he would not get one, but I suspect it has to do with the fact that a "fair trial" will almost certainly end with him being convicted of high crimes.


I am beginning to think as more and more information are slowly coming out that the President I voted for two times might be more guilty of high crimes then Snowden.

At the very least, not honoring his oath to protected the constitution including the first and the fourth amendment.



You are welcome to think whatever you choose.
revelette
 
  2  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 06:19 am
@ehBeth,
Because one thing exist does not mean the other does not exist. In other words, yes it is true, we do have a high murder rate, although according to statics it has leveled out. We also have terrorist threats and actual plots. Both exist and to ignore the later would just be irresponsible.

Having said that, I do think more oversight needs to be put in place by independent people not connected to the three branches of government.
BillRM
 
  2  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 06:25 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
You are welcome to think whatever you choose


Only for the moment the ways things are going, will you be free to express those thoughts.

Having such opinions will mean that you will be watch very carefully for the rest of your life as a maybe terrorist.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  3  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 07:43 am
@revelette,
How do you propose to pay for all of this? The only tax increases that the Rs will allow fall on the backs of the working class. Do you really think we should borrow money to spy/snoop on our own people? Should we raise their taxes to do so? How high are you willing to let your taxes go? I have no idea how old you are or your tax burden, but I'll be dipped if I'm going to support deficit spending or increased taxes to pay someone to plow through the emails/posts of myself/friends/family.

I truly don't understand the "at any cost" mentality of people who are willing to throw the constitution in the toilet for a feel-better sense of safety that doesn't hold up to a cost-benefit analysis.
RABEL222
 
  2  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 08:55 am
@revelette,
You mean the kind of oversight they they exercise over the CIA and the military?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 09:00 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Whenever the US government wants to create a boogeyman, the sheeple just baaa and follow right along.


every government takes this Wizard of Oz approach to some extent.

It's just particularly obvious in the U.S . right now.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  0  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 09:07 am
@revelette,
Come on people! Murder in the U S of A usually involves 1 or 2 people. Terrorists want to kill any number from thousands to hundreds. Unregulated how long do you think it would take them to surpass the murder rate?
BillRM
 
  1  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 09:20 am
@RABEL222,
Quote:
Murder in the U S of A usually involves 1 or 2 people


Or hundreds in some cases or dozens in other cases or................

Take a drunk who had been thrown out of an after hour club int NYC that got mad and the picked up a few gallons of gasoline and a match for example.

Or a man with a brain tumor who climb a tower with a rife in hand in Texas.

Or two kids who got a hold of an uncle rifle and then pull the fire alarm at school and gun down kids at they ran out the doors.

Or the guy who took a car on a boardwalk and run over and killed people or.......
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 10:13 am
@JPB,
There's an article in today's San Jose Merc on the editorial pages written by Charles Krauthammer that describes how the Obama administration is usurping laws established by congress.

It's really strange that the US President breaks laws at will, but he approves spending billions on spying on US citizens.

This country was once known as the country of laws.

When the president breaks the laws of this country, what makes him think everybody else should follow the laws?

0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 10:13 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:
Unregulated how long do you think it would take them to surpass the murder rate?


at the rate Americans manage to kill each other (not just straight-on murder), it will likely take decades - unless terrorists figure out ways to kill tens and hundreds of thousands of Americans at a time
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 10:25 am
@ehBeth,
Our home-grown terrorists and gun-lovers are the bain of our country that kills more children than any al quaida member.

We're blind to our own destructive behavior.

Newtown was only a blip on the radar screen, and it will repeat itself over and over and over....
ehBeth
 
  1  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 10:31 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:


Newtown was only a blip on the radar screen, and it will repeat itself over and over and over....



you reminded me of this effort to track gun deaths in the U.S.

today's update

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_tally_every_american_gun_death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

Quote:
Update, June 19, 2013: As time goes on, our count gets further and further away from the likely actual number of gun deaths in America—because roughly 60 percent of deaths by gun are due to suicides, which are very rarely reported. When discussing this issue, please note that our number is by design not accurate and represents only the number of gun deaths that the media can find out about contemporaneously. Part of the purpose of this interactive is to point out how difficult it is to get accurate real-time numbers on this issue.


Using the most recent CDC estimates for yearly deaths by guns in the United States, it is likely that as of today, 8/18/2013, roughly 21,582 people have died from guns in the United States since the Newtown shootings. Compare that number to the number of deaths reported in the news in our interactive below, and you can see how undertold the story of gun violence in America actually is.



over 21,000 Americans killed by guns since December 14, 2012

that is just guns

___


Again, forget about terrorists. Worry about your friends and family - they're more likely to kill you.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  4  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 10:33 am
Snowden's tried to point out what our western governments are doing to us - and oh look a squirrel (terrorist threat, faux or real) and everyone's looking off in another direction
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 12:42 pm
Quote:
The partner of the Guardian journalist who has written a series of stories revealing mass surveillance programmes by the US National Security Agency was held for almost nine hours on Sunday by UK authorities as he passed through London's Heathrow airport on his way home to Rio de Janeiro.

David Miranda, who lives with Glenn Greenwald, was returning from a trip to Berlin when he was stopped by officers at 8.30am and informed that he was to be questioned under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The controversial law, which applies only at airports, ports and border areas, allows officers to stop, search, question and detain individuals.

The 28-year-old was held for nine hours, the maximum the law allows before officers must release or formally arrest the individual. According to official figures, most examinations under schedule 7 – over 97% – last under an hour, and only one in 2,000 people detained are kept for more than six hours.

Miranda was then released without charge, but officials confiscated electronics equipment including his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, DVDs and games consoles.
Source and full report
BillRM
 
  1  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 12:57 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
David Miranda, who lives with Glenn Greenwald, was returning from a trip to Berlin when he was stopped by officers at 8.30am and informed that he was to be questioned under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The controversial law, which applies only at airports, ports and border areas, allows officers to stop, search, question and detain individuals.




It would seems that the UK will follow the US anywhere no matter where we lead.

I wonder if he talked to them or not but given all those hours either mean he did talk to them at length or they pounded their heads on the wall trying to get him to talk.

Note with special attentions to being question under US law never never never talk to the cops under such a situation even if you are as innocent as can be.
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 01:06 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Note with special attentions to being question under US law never never never talk to the cops under such a situation even if you are as innocent as can be.
This has been in the UK and the related law is mentioned in the linked report.
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 01:09 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Glenn Greenwald's view as published by the Guardian:
Quote:
[...]
Despite all that, five more hours went by and neither the Guardian's lawyers nor Brazilian officials, including the Ambassador to the UK in London, were able to obtain any information about David. We spent most of that time contemplating the charges he would likely face once the 9-hour period elapsed.

According to a document published by the UK government about Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act, "fewer than 3 people in every 10,000 are examined as they pass through UK borders" (David was not entering the UK but only transiting through to Rio). Moreover, "most examinations, over 97%, last under an hour." An appendix to that document states that only .06% of all people detained are kept for more than 6 hours.
[...]
This is obviously a rather profound escalation of their attacks on the news-gathering process and journalism. It's bad enough to prosecute and imprison sources. It's worse still to imprison journalists who report the truth. But to start detaining the family members and loved ones of journalists is simply despotic. Even the Mafia had ethical rules against targeting the family members of people they feel threatened by. But the UK puppets and their owners in the US national security state obviously are unconstrained by even those minimal scruples.

If the UK and US governments believe that tactics like this are going to deter or intimidate us in any way from continuing to report aggressively on what these documents reveal, they are beyond deluded. If anything, it will have only the opposite effect: to embolden us even further. Beyond that, every time the US and UK governments show their true character to the world - when they prevent the Bolivian President's plane from flying safely home, when they threaten journalists with prosecution, when they engage in behavior like what they did today - all they do is helpfully underscore why it's so dangerous to allow them to exercise vast, unchecked spying power in the dark.

David was unable to call me because his phone and laptop are now with UK authorities. So I don't yet know what they told him. But the Guardian's lawyer was able to speak with him immediately upon his release, and told me that, while a bit distressed from the ordeal, he was in very good spirits and quite defiant, and he asked the lawyer to convey that defiance to me. I already share it, as I'm certain US and UK authorities will soon see.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Sun 18 Aug, 2013 01:16 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
This has been in the UK and the related law is mentioned in the linked report.


I am aware of that and I limited my comment to US law as I do not know UK legal system however I would off hand apply that to all such situations where they are unlikely to get the rubber hoses out.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 89
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.56 seconds on 11/29/2024 at 02:40:21