>> ^BoneRemake:

This infuriated me !!!!!! FUCKIN ASS', man its pathetic of these people. Its funny how Stereotypically the people who you think would not do something are the only ones who did ( that is urban youth who wear their pants around their knees).


So you downvoted me because you think this whole situation is very upsetting. Well Fuck You sir...I'm in support of abducting more and more children. Studies have shown abductees are more driven (to escaping) and proactive (about escaping) and are more thoughtful and respectful (of the people training guns on them).

I'm only looking to make life better for the children, you bastard.

I thought that maybe the ice cream truck symbolized the gingerbread house. I'm sure if the Grimm story witch had wheels, she would have driven temptation to them as well.
Hansel and Gretel were also abducted in their own way, as they were kept and locked up. >> ^Opus_Moderandi:
I didn't catch the hansel & gretel reference either... maybe because they were abducted in this version? In the Brothers Grimm story, didn't they wander around til they came to the witches ginger bread house?

I didn't catch the hansel & gretel reference either... maybe because they were abducted in this version? In the Brothers Grimm story, didn't they wander around til they came to the witches ginger bread house?

>> ^rougy:

I'm a huge Maddow fan. Think she's got the best show on the air.
But sometimes.....
When she mentioned Obama's accomplishments, she sort of glosses over the fact that most of them were kind of half-assed compromises. "Health Care Reform" left the very people in charge of it--private insurance companies--that everybody wanted reform from in the first place. And I haven't looked at this financial reform thing too closely, but all of the authorities that I trust say that it is as much window dressing as it is substance. So I take issue with her on that.
Obama, as is true with most of the Democratic leadership, still caters too much to the rightwing and take the leftwing for granted.


True democratic leader. Unless you are about to be Rendered, a big banker or happen to be a resident near the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/04/11/bagram


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagram_torture_and_prisoner_abuse

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-1195.ZS.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/22/washington/22bagram.html?_r=2&scp=2&sq=bagram&st=cse

Currently the Executive Branch has the legal right to Abduct alleged criminals from other countries and fly them to Bagram where they have no chance for due process. Obama closed Guantanamo. Hooray! Then, the prisoners were moved to Bagram, thereby removing their right to petition the courts for Habeus Corpus.

Oh boy I can't wait for the replies here. Let the placating and Apologetics begin.

>> ^Porksandwich:

Well let's briefly into the plea bargaining and pleading down of charges so people can maintain a high conviction rate instead of letting people stand accused of their crimes in front of a jury of their peers. Which while speedier and less costly, creates an environment where when people do think they will get a better deal in front of a jury....most cases that ever make it to trial are for the really extreme cases. So people serving as jurors get a false impression that if you didn't take a plea deal you must be one nasty piece of work.
And I say this as someone who has never used drugs, but has witnessed the process they put people through when they catch them via a relative. Even changed court appearance times to a few hours earlier the day before he was to appear, because they decided to see him on a separate charge on the same day but many hours earlier. You would assume they book their times from the morning and work their way up, but they made a special case for him and made it earlier.... without notification during the weekend prior to his ordered appearance. I believe it's so they could put a warrant out for his arrest and arrest him when he appeared for his ordered and notified appearance time, because he was also being screwed around on getting a public defender. Had to appear multiple times in court without a public defender because their office never received paper work even though in the system he was showing up as having been assigned one.
And on top of all this, when they decided to let him have his vehicle back from impound (after being told they could keep any vehicle involved in a drug bust)...they wanted him and the owner of the vehicle to sign a paper admitting guilt to the crimes this vehicle was impounded over. Even after the judge ordered the release of the vehicle and gave written notice to release it, they still would not release it without the form. It was 2 extra weeks of impound fees simply because of refusal to admit guilt on one or more charges that were completely false dealing with "Dealer" plates. And when they refused to sign the papers the first time after the relative had plead not guilty...officers from the station who busted him showed up to the business where the plates originated from and stated that the dealership was a false/illegal business.
If these police officers receive THAT kind of fair and due process leading up to a trial. Then I think they will be handled as a normal citizen would be. However I doubt their police brothers will be so inclined to take it upon themselves to do this because other dirty laundry may possibly come up if they did so, because if a few officers can do it once to cover up a murder......little cover ups are more than likely. But it's highly unlikely the system will delve further into the police department for more cover-ups because it's like cutting off your arm to kill an infection that's throughout your body.
<div class="chunk" style="clear: none; overflow: auto;">
<div><div style="margin: 10px; overflow: auto; width: 80%; float: left; position: relative;" class="convoPiece"> NetRunner said:<img style="margin: 4px 10px 10px; float: left; width: 40px;" src="http://static1.videosift.com/avatars/n/NetRunner-s.jpg" onerror="ph(this)"><div style="position: absolute; margin-left: 52px; padding-top: 1px; font-size: 10px;" class="commentarrow">◄</div><div style="padding: 8px; margin-left: 60px; margin-top: 2px; min-height: 30px;" class="nestedComment box">, there are lots of moral and legal reasons why we have the presumption of innocence in our courts. We collect evidence and have a trial, and have judgment rendered by juries of our peers. We don't just say "he did it, let's burn him alive!" anymore, and I think that's a good thing.
Even the most hated people on Earth deserve a fair trial. I want rapists to face a trial. I want child molesters to face a trial. I want murderers to face a trial. I want terrorists to face a trial.
There's a definite possibility that the system will allow them to escape accountability in some unfair way, but it seems more reasonable to wait and see if such a thing occurs before preemptively deciding that it definitely will happen and getting mad about it in advance.
That's my main point -- calling out the preemptive assumption of guilt, both of the officers, and the legal system that has yet to even try these men.
(And yes, I did so preemptively...)
</div></div></div></div>
The police have the authority to shoot back when fired upon, which is why they initiated the cover up. The question lies in why they covered it up. Protect a fellow officer? Did that officer want someone in the group of people dead for some specific reason? Is that why he kicked and stomped him while he was dying on the ground?
My point of this is, if these had been normal citizens without the authority of the badge, the investigation might have been more complete at the time of the incident. In this case, the police are investigating themselves. It may not be the officers who did the crime who investigated it, but I really doubt they brought in an unbiased party to do the investigation at the time of the incident. So in essence, these police officers relied on the authority of their position to allow them to hinder and cover up details of the murder. Or in other words, the police used their authority to murder people except someone turned on them and now they have some semblance of testimony because they didn't look very hard for proof in the first place.
Police officers are required to do a lot of paper work anytime they discharge their weapons. So it's not really an option for them to keep their mouth shut in this case. They could outright lie or leave out details, but they don't have the option of not choosing to answer the question of "What happened?" I guess they could claim group memory loss.....or alien abduction.
If they all fired their weapons, they all participated in attempted murder and murder. If they aided other police officers in committing a crime, I look at it as driving the get away car or standing look out. If they are involving themselves as the vehicle for which these people can commit murder and hide it, they are just as guilty as the person who committed it. And now it's just a matter of whether it was a pre-meditated murder with one cop dragging the others into it, and how much those people knew of what happened when they agreed to help cover it up.
It's just like the average joe being pulled over for a traffic violation is told "Ignorance of the law does not make you exempt from it." Strip away the badges, no special favors, eliminate any and all possibilities of tampering or bias whether it be by jury, prosecutor or judge.....and then we'll have us a fair trial....and add in some of the stuff I spoke about above when replying to Netrunner. No special exemptions because they are government employees. Murder, tampering with evidence, impeding a police investigation, all the trimmings. And make sure they are punished as anyone else with similar backgrounds/priors to them, but who might have been working construction, truck driver, janitor, etc for the same crimes they are convicted of. Killing a cop is bad news when it comes to convictions, so perhaps treat "Killer Cops" as "Cop Killers" would be treated. Kill an innocent person in authority....innocent person killed by authority person. But yeah, they should face a greater punishment when it's all said and done because killing one of them is a greater crime than normal folk.
<div class="chunk" style="clear: both; overflow: auto;">
<div><div style="margin: 10px; overflow: auto; width: 80%; float: left; position: relative;" class="convoPiece"> Lawdeedaw said:<img style="margin: 4px 10px 10px; float: left; width: 40px;" src="http://static1.videosift.com/avatars/l/Lawdeedaw-s.jpg" onerror="ph(this)"><div style="position: absolute; margin-left: 52px; padding-top: 1px; font-size: 10px;" class="commentarrow">◄</div><div style="padding: 8px; margin-left: 60px; margin-top: 2px; min-height: 30px;" class="nestedComment box">Sigh... there is so much to correct. First, the police never had authority to randomly kill people. They did not abuse authority, but, rather their own sense of humanity. They became animals just like gang members and drug lords and fathers (who have similar authority to cops, if not more) who lose it and oh wait, just like a lot of normal people or insane people who flip.
Next, the cover up. I hope you feel the exact same way about regular people when they witness a crime... Only the detectives actively covered any thing up and I agree, aiding and abeding. However, just keeping your mouth shut is not close to murder.
If you advocate that it nearly identical, I would hope that if your brother or sister or mother witnessed a murder and kept quiet that you would want them to face nearly identical charges as the murderer as well.
A side fact is that most states have a law specifically for this crime. Failure to report a Felony. I know it seems lame, but rather than throw people in jail for life, or close to it, we should be reasonible. I say, charge the witness POS cops with the crime they did (Like every one else) and sue their asses in civie court. However, don't make them an exception.
Punish fairly in all circumstances or don't be mad when someone abuses the system.
Oh, and put the agressive pig who murdered under the needle and let him die. That's all I am saying.
I think you feel the same way based on the "punishment like every one else" bit, but it is possible you do not and would rather they face more time...
</div></div></div></div>
Had to edit this because it looked completely messed up when I finished typing although the preview looked fine.....hoping I can find the issue.


This is a long quote.

Well let's briefly into the plea bargaining and pleading down of charges so people can maintain a high conviction rate instead of letting people stand accused of their crimes in front of a jury of their peers. Which while speedier and less costly, creates an environment where when people do think they will get a better deal in front of a jury....most cases that ever make it to trial are for the really extreme cases. So people serving as jurors get a false impression that if you didn't take a plea deal you must be one nasty piece of work.

And I say this as someone who has never used drugs, but has witnessed the process they put people through when they catch them via a relative. Even changed court appearance times to a few hours earlier the day before he was to appear, because they decided to see him on a separate charge on the same day but many hours earlier. You would assume they book their times from the morning and work their way up, but they made a special case for him and made it earlier.... without notification during the weekend prior to his ordered appearance. I believe it's so they could put a warrant out for his arrest and arrest him when he appeared for his ordered and notified appearance time, because he was also being screwed around on getting a public defender. Had to appear multiple times in court without a public defender because their office never received paper work even though in the system he was showing up as having been assigned one.

And on top of all this, when they decided to let him have his vehicle back from impound (after being told they could keep any vehicle involved in a drug bust)...they wanted him and the owner of the vehicle to sign a paper admitting guilt to the crimes this vehicle was impounded over. Even after the judge ordered the release of the vehicle and gave written notice to release it, they still would not release it without the form. It was 2 extra weeks of impound fees simply because of refusal to admit guilt on one or more charges that were completely false dealing with "Dealer" plates. And when they refused to sign the papers the first time after the relative had plead not guilty...officers from the station who busted him showed up to the business where the plates originated from and stated that the dealership was a false/illegal business.

If these police officers receive THAT kind of fair and due process leading up to a trial. Then I think they will be handled as a normal citizen would be. However I doubt their police brothers will be so inclined to take it upon themselves to do this because other dirty laundry may possibly come up if they did so, because if a few officers can do it once to cover up a murder......little cover ups are more than likely. But it's highly unlikely the system will delve further into the police department for more cover-ups because it's like cutting off your arm to kill an infection that's throughout your body.

>> ^NetRunner:

, there are lots of moral and legal reasons why we have the presumption of innocence in our courts. We collect evidence and have a trial, and have judgment rendered by juries of our peers. We don't just say "he did it, let's burn him alive!" anymore, and I think that's a good thing.
Even the most hated people on Earth deserve a fair trial. I want rapists to face a trial. I want child molesters to face a trial. I want murderers to face a trial. I want terrorists to face a trial.
There's a definite possibility that the system will allow them to escape accountability in some unfair way, but it seems more reasonable to wait and see if such a thing occurs before preemptively deciding that it definitely will happen and getting mad about it in advance.
That's my main point -- calling out the preemptive assumption of guilt, both of the officers, and the legal system that has yet to even try these men.
(And yes, I did so preemptively...)


The police have the authority to shoot back when fired upon, which is why they initiated the cover up. The question lies in why they covered it up. Protect a fellow officer? Did that officer want someone in the group of people dead for some specific reason? Is that why he kicked and stomped him while he was dying on the ground?

My point of this is, if these had been normal citizens without the authority of the badge, the investigation might have been more complete at the time of the incident. In this case, the police are investigating themselves. It may not be the officers who did the crime who investigated it, but I really doubt they brought in an unbiased party to do the investigation at the time of the incident. So in essence, these police officers relied on the authority of their position to allow them to hinder and cover up details of the murder. Or in other words, the police used their authority to murder people except someone turned on them and now they have some semblance of testimony because they didn't look very hard for proof in the first place.

Police officers are required to do a lot of paper work anytime they discharge their weapons. So it's not really an option for them to keep their mouth shut in this case. They could outright lie or leave out details, but they don't have the option of not choosing to answer the question of "What happened?" I guess they could claim group memory loss.....or alien abduction.

If they all fired their weapons, they all participated in attempted murder and murder. If they aided other police officers in committing a crime, I look at it as driving the get away car or standing look out. If they are involving themselves as the vehicle for which these people can commit murder and hide it, they are just as guilty as the person who committed it. And now it's just a matter of whether it was a pre-meditated murder with one cop dragging the others into it, and how much those people knew of what happened when they agreed to help cover it up.

It's just like the average joe being pulled over for a traffic violation is told "Ignorance of the law does not make you exempt from it." Strip away the badges, no special favors, eliminate any and all possibilities of tampering or bias whether it be by jury, prosecutor or judge.....and then we'll have us a fair trial....and add in some of the stuff I spoke about above when replying to Netrunner. No special exemptions because they are government employees. Murder, tampering with evidence, impeding a police investigation, all the trimmings. And make sure they are punished as anyone else with similar backgrounds/priors to them, but who might have been working construction, truck driver, janitor, etc for the same crimes they are convicted of. Killing a cop is bad news when it comes to convictions, so perhaps treat "Killer Cops" as "Cop Killers" would be treated. Kill an innocent person in authority....innocent person killed by authority person. But yeah, they should face a greater punishment when it's all said and done because killing one of them is a greater crime than normal folk.

>> ^Lawdeedaw:
Sigh... there is so much to correct. First, the police never had authority to randomly kill people. They did not abuse authority, but, rather their own sense of humanity. They became animals just like gang members and drug lords and fathers (who have similar authority to cops, if not more) who lose it and oh wait, just like a lot of normal people or insane people who flip.
Next, the cover up. I hope you feel the exact same way about regular people when they witness a crime... Only the detectives actively covered any thing up and I agree, aiding and abeding. However, just keeping your mouth shut is not close to murder.
If you advocate that it nearly identical, I would hope that if your brother or sister or mother witnessed a murder and kept quiet that you would want them to face nearly identical charges as the murderer as well.
A side fact is that most states have a law specifically for this crime. Failure to report a Felony. I know it seems lame, but rather than throw people in jail for life, or close to it, we should be reasonible. I say, charge the witness POS cops with the crime they did (Like every one else) and sue their asses in civie court. However, don't make them an exception.
Punish fairly in all circumstances or don't be mad when someone abuses the system.
Oh, and put the agressive pig who murdered under the needle and let him die. That's all I am saying.
I think you feel the same way based on the "punishment like every one else" bit, but it is possible you do not and would rather they face more time...


Had to edit this because it looked completely messed up when I finished typing although the preview looked fine.....hoping I can find the issue.

What a fricken stupid ad. What exactly is the call to action supposed to be. What exactly is the message supposed to be other than lots of kids go missing or are abducted. It's stupid, doesn't give any guide as to what you can do, other than presenting with a website. Spending that amount of time on watching the ad they could have given at least a few positive things that could be done.

No sir, I don't like it.

Originally called "Uptight," which is how Jonny referred to it in its early staged, the song pays homage to Bob Dylan's "Subterranean Homesick Blues." It deals with alien abduction and stems from two incidents in Thom's life. The first occured at Abingdon School, when he was assigned an essay question that went something like this: "If you were an alien from another planet arriving on Earth, how would you describe what you saw?" The second incident occurred when Thom was driving down a country road and hit a bird (which he believes was a pheasant). He stepped out of the car and at that moment began thinking about alien abduction.


http://www.greenplastic.com/lyrics/subterranean.php

Featured Games:
00:15 8bit killer
00:18 10800 Zombies
00:20 A Game With A Kitty 2
00:23 a7x
00:25 Absolute Blue
00:28 Action Fist
00:30 Ainevoltas 2
00:33 Akuji The Demon
00:35 Alien Abduction
00:38 Alien Assault
00:40 Alien Breed Obliteration
00:43 Alien Deathmatch 2
00:45 An Untitled Story
00:48 Anamaton
00:50 Ancient Ants Adventure
00:53 Arc Aether Anomalies
00:55 Armed Generator Doom Machine
00:58 Attack of the Paper Zombies
01:00 Banana Nababa
01:03 Bernard & Hank 2
01:05 Big Building boom Blues
01:08 Blasterman vs Yellowskull
01:10 Blasting Agent
01:13 Block
01:15 Block Towers
01:18 Blockman Gets
01:20 Blocks n Bricks
01:23 Blocksum
01:25 Bombie Zombie
01:28 Bonesaw
01:30 Canabalt
01:33 Carnage street
01:35 Castle Of Elite
01:38 Castlevania The Bloodletting
01:40 Cave Story
01:43 Centipong
01:45 Chalk
01:48 Cho Ren Sha 68k
01:50 Clean Asia
01:53 Click Copter
01:55 Coal
01:58 Cobex
02:00 Cottage Of Doom
02:03 Cowboykilla
02:05 Crayon Physics
02:08 Crazy Over Goo
02:10 Crystal Cubes
02:13 Das Uberleben
02:15 Death Worm
02:18 Debrysis
02:20 Demolition Gunner
02:23 Destruction Carnival 2.0
02:25 Destructivator
02:28 Dino Run
02:30 drone
02:33 Dungeon Chaos
02:35 DUO
02:38 DUOtris
02:40 Echoes
02:43 Enough Plumbers
02:45 Enviro-Bear 2000
02:48 Eternal Daughter
02:50 Fig. 8
02:53 Fish Face
02:55 Flyout
02:58 Flywrench
03:00 Focus
03:03 Forward Always Forward
03:05 Fraxy
03:08 Frets on Fire
03:10 Frozzd
03:13 Gamma Bros
03:15 Gang Garrison 2
03:18 Garden Gnome Carnage
03:20 GearToyGear
03:23 GENERIC
03:25 Generic Arena Shmup
03:28 Genetos
03:30 Gianas Return
03:33 Globot Wars
03:35 Gloomy Nights And Living Dead
03:38 Gravitron
03:40 Gravity Bone
03:43 Gravortex
03:45 Grid Assault
03:48 Grid Defender 2
03:50 Gridwars
03:53 Guardian Of Paradise
03:55 Gunroar
03:58 Hakaiman
04:00 Hane 2 Paradise
04:03 Hellycopter
04:05 Hero Core
04:08 Horizontal Shooter Redux
04:10 Hurrican
04:13 Icy Tower
04:15 Igneous
04:18 Iji
04:20 Island Hoping
04:23 Jardinains
04:25 JNKPlat 2010
04:28 Jumper 3
04:30 Jumpman
04:33 Karnn Age
04:35 King
04:38 Knight of the Living Dead
04:40 Knytt
04:43 Knytt Stories
04:45 Kobo Deluxe
04:48 La Mulana
04:50 Lbreakout 2
04:53 Legend Of Princess
04:55 Legend Of Shadow
04:58 Lethal Application
05:00 lockon
05:03 Love+
05:05 Lunaria
05:08 Lyle in Cube Sector
05:10 Madness Reloaded
05:13 Meatboy
05:15 Mechatron: 2154
05:18 Mega Man 7-FC
05:20 Merry Gear Solid 2
05:23 Microbes
05:25 Millenipede
05:28 Mission Extreme
05:30 Mogura 2
05:33 Mono
05:35 Mr. Kittys Quest
05:38 Mubbly Tower
05:40 muon
05:43 Mystical Ninji DX
05:45 N
05:48 NAAC
05:50 Nanosmiles
05:53 Neonplat
05:55 Neva
05:58 Nezumiman
06:00 Nikujin
06:03 Ninja Rush
06:05 Ninjah
06:08 Noitu Love
06:10 Obake
06:13 Open LieroX
06:15 Pacman Ex 3
06:18 Pacz! - Pacmanworlds 2
06:20 Paroxysm
06:23 Path Of Time
06:25 Phun
06:28 Plasma Warrior
06:30 Poing
06:33 Polarity
06:35 Project F-60
06:38 Prototype 1
06:40 Prototype 2
06:43 Protozoa
06:45 Pteroglider
06:48 Purple
06:50 Push Push Penguin
06:53 Q-Lat 3
06:55 Railroad Rampage
06:58 Rainbow Wars
07:00 Rayhound
07:03 Remaddening
07:05 Rescue The Beagles
07:08 Retrobattle
07:10 Return to Sector 9
07:13 Robbie Swifthand
07:15 Runman Race Around The World
07:18 Saintrooper
07:20 Seiklus
07:23 Self Destruct
07:25 Shotgun Fun Fun
07:28 Shotgun Ninja
07:30 Sim War 5
07:33 Skullpogo
07:35 Soldat
07:38 Space Barnacle
07:40 Special Agent
07:43 Spelunky
07:45 Squid And Let Die
07:48 Squish
07:50 Star Guard
07:53 Strange Attractors
07:55 Streambolt
07:58 Streambolt Desero
08:00 Streets Of Rage Remake
08:03 SUAVE
08:05 Super Mario Bros Crossover
08:08 Super Mario Bros X
08:10 Super Mario War
08:13 Super Obliteration
08:15 Super Stun n Run
08:18 super vampire ninja zero
08:20 Survival Crisis Z
08:23 Swarm Racer
08:25 Synaesthete
08:28 Synchro
08:30 SYNSO 2
08:33 SYNSO championship edition
08:35 T2002
08:38 Tank Domination
08:40 Tasty Static
08:43 Teeworlds
08:45 Tekkyuuman
08:48 Tetrablocks
08:50 Tetraform
08:53 Tetripong
08:55 The Cleaner
08:58 The Hordes
09:00 The Power
09:03 Theseus
09:05 Thrust Extreme
09:08 Thrustburst
09:10 Toribash
09:13 Torque
09:15 Torus Trooper
09:18 Tower Bombarde
09:20 Treasure Tower
09:23 Trilby
09:25 troid
09:28 Tumiki Figthers
09:30 Turbopac
09:33 Typhoon 2001
09:35 Uchuusen
09:38 Umbrella Adventure
09:40 Varia
09:43 VECK
09:45 Voltorometer Recharged
09:48 Warning Forever
09:50 Western Shootout
09:53 Wire Robo
09:55 Within A Deep Forest
09:58 Wootman

You didn't read my post and you're setting me up as a straw man to argue against.

Obama's language in his executive orders that this is all about talk about respecting "international obligations, domestic laws, and humane treatment". So, I gather that means the only way rendition/abduction/arrest is going to be legit is if there's no reasonable government in place to do an extradition from like say a dude in Somalia plotting to blow up the French Club's trip to Paris. The language also specifies that it would be temporary confinement before due process and never to someplace where they could be tortured. The whole thing is ripe for nasty abuse but as I understand it they're trying to set up a legal framework that does not violate tenants of our society... it is a huge fucking legal mess but I don't see evidence that it's trying to do the stuff you're saying.
>> ^NordlichReiter:

>> ^alizarin:
Obama's renditions are different than Bush's in that :
Bush stuck people in Guantanamo for years with no end in sight or sent them to foreign countries to be tortured. Obama decried that.
Obama wants to maintain the ability to do renditions to places like Bagram only if it's
- for short periods of time (not endlessly imprisoning people without a trial)
- not putting them places where it's reasonable to expect they will be tortured
- not doing anything that's against domestic laws, international obligations, US policy, or humane treatment.
- plus he did effectively close Guantanamo imprisonment
- info
Still way too lacking in checks-and-balances protection from abuse for my tastes but you could make a good argument that he's not being hypocritical.

Utterly disgusting. Secret abductions? How does that not violate some tenant of our society? Due, fucking, process. How about some Equality Before the Law? Treat terrorists for what they are, criminals.

>> ^alizarin:

Obama's renditions are different than Bush's in that :
Bush stuck people in Guantanamo for years with no end in sight or sent them to foreign countries to be tortured. Obama decried that.
Obama wants to maintain the ability to do renditions to places like Bagram only if it's
- for short periods of time (not endlessly imprisoning people without a trial)
- not putting them places where it's reasonable to expect they will be tortured
- not doing anything that's against domestic laws, international obligations, US policy, or humane treatment.
- plus he did effectively close Guantanamo imprisonment
- info
Still way too lacking in checks-and-balances protection from abuse for my tastes but you could make a good argument that he's not being hypocritical.


Utterly disgusting. Secret abductions? How does that not violate some tenant of our society? Due, fucking, process. How about some Equality Before the Law? Treat terrorists for what they are, criminals.

How would you feel if when you brought up some controversy about representative democracy, I said, 'well, that's not a true democracy. In a true democracy, none of these problems would exist.'? That's how I feel arguing with you. You accept no responsibility for the many likely vulnerabilities your hypothetical doctrine has to corruption.

Assumptions can be right. - Yes, just because you've made an assumption doesn't mean that it's wrong, but if you have no evidence to back up your claim, or if your entire body of evidence consists of criticism of competing ideas, it makes your own assumption less persuasive.

Your assumption vs. my assumption - Your 'assumptions' are hypothetical, as a free market system has never existed or been attempted (unless you count Darfur or Rwanda). My 'assumptions' about representative government are based on evidence of a system that has been around for a long time. It's strengths and weaknesses are well known. There is a huge difference between hypothetical assumptions and assumptions based on observable evidence.

Argument from fallacy - That's actually pretty hilarious that calling out a fallacy is itself a fallacy. Ironic.... dontcha think? Guilty as charged, but you do this too hypocrite.

Red Herring - Half of your PQ is filled with Red Herrings. We both use these.

Negative proof - Yes, because something cannot be proven true doesn't mean it is false. How appropriate. Religious people use this one often and atheists usually rebut 'yes, but that's where evidence comes in'. Yes, blanky, that's where evidence comes in. I know you believe the free market would work as you want it to, but without any evidence to prove this, my brain will not allow me to believe in it, just as my brain will not allow me to believe in God. It doesn't mean you are wrong. You may be right. Bigfoot might be real. Aliens might abduct cows. Could be? Who knows?

Ridicule - You make political jokes too. Are you really suggesting we take humor out of the equation? Fuck that. No jokes and this becomes a droll exercise. It's getting a little stale as it is, but you've pumped some life into the discussion with this whole fallacy thing.

Example - I never said free markets are false, just impossible to achieve as you envision them. Considering that no political ideology has ever existed in its purest, corruption-free form, I feel like history backs me on this one. To clarify, my belief is that the 'free market' is too prone to corruption to make the world a better place, and would almost certainly make the world a worse place, not that it's false.

Repetition - I've never used the fact that you repeat the same arguments over and over as a way of trying to prove you wrong. I'm just noting personal frustration.

Repetition - I've never used the fact that you repeat the same arguments over and over as a way of trying to prove you wrong. I'm just noting personal frustration.

Consequences - I'm not saying deregulation MAY lead to problems, I'm saying it DOES. There are plenty of real life examples of the consequences of deregulation, one big one at the top of the page. We've lived them for decades. Is observable evidence really a fallacy?

Your example of me 'begging the question' - If you limit the role the public plays in affairs of state and country, the public will have less of a role in affairs of state and country. Lewd cat is lewd. Those with means would absolutely have more influence without having to compete with the will of the people. This doesn't seem like a controversial statement to me. What do you find untrue, unproven or unrealistic about this statement?

How does your system end a corporate dictatorship or achieve things? This is the simple question that has prompted much monkey dancing and tangents from you. I want to know specifically how we get from a to b, and doctrinal hypotheticals don't do it for me. Tell me a story, something that could make this seem real and possible.

Example: Dick and Jane open up a competing corporate dictatorship, make a shit ton of cash, then they buy a majority share of the other company and put it out of business. That's not a very believable story. If I could think of a good believable story, I would probably become a libertarian. That's where you come in. This is your bright shining moment to make some sense of this bullshit.

This is great, but it doesn't even scratch the surface of how crazy being a Spartan wife was.

First was the marriage, wherein the bride would have her head shaved, be dressed in men's clothes then made to lay alone in the dark on a pallet waiting for her husband (who she may have never met) to abduct her, have his way with her, then return her to her parent's house.

This was the start of a marriage which, for the first few years, consisted of the husband showing up at night once in a while for sex and otherwise having no real contact. After the husband reached the age of 30 he was allowed to live outside of the men's barracks so he would finally be able to live with his wife. Things didn't get much more "normal" from there though...

As the Spartan marriage was primarily for procreation, it was not unheard of for an older man to give permission for younger men to have sex with his wife in order for him to have strong, healthy children (the marriage's duty was to bear strong children for the state after all). There is no evidence that Spartan women were opposed to this though. They had greater rights than many other women throughout history with respect to property ownership (it is estimated that women owned 35% of all Spartan holdings), they probably received benefits from these arrangements. According to ancient historians like Plutarch these Spartan customs ensured that adultery, illegitimacy and prostitution were nonexistent in Sparta.

Further, unlike Athenian women who wore heavy, concealing clothes and were rarely seen outside the house, Spartan women wore short dresses and went where they pleased.

So being a Spartan wife was quite the interesting life. It could be difficult, but the benefits were a greater freedom, autonomy, wealth and power than any other women in the ancient world.

which video game is centered around clawing and scratching..?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

And he learned his fighting moves from video games.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
The moon landings were faked. The secret service was complicit in the Kennedy assassination. UFOs regularly abduct and anal probe people.
Pick any of the above. Believe what you want, if you won't hold rational beliefs there's no point in trying to discuss anything with you.



This is exaclty how I feel. Quotes and speeches like this (the vid) are just a mark of unoriginal thought and recycled rhetoric. This vid could have come straight out of the 60s.

People who buy into this crap have the Historial depth of a kiddie pool and a narrow-minded and mule-stubborn understanding of geo-politics.

People like this believe they are liberal and open-minded when in fact they're just as fanatic and close-minded as right-wing tea-baggers.


Peace and love!!!! War is bad, everyone put down their weapons, think of the mothers and crying babies and think of..."Wait....Whats that?"

Apparently Im only allowed to continue this comment in Chinese due to new regulations from the newly conquered and created Peoples Republic of America.

Somebody forgot to send them the memo about the Man and War being the real enemy.

Well I suppose Free Speech had a good run.