Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... Last
[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 13:21:59 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Hm.

How many black people frequent this board?

Personally, I'm not black, but I'm maybe just a hair closer to being black than anyone else here, having been subjected to 'black by association'.

I feel the real problem is somewhere between what most people are talking about.

There's still a racial problem in this country. That hasn't quite gone away, and frankly I'm not sure it ever can go away, but it is significantly better than times past (despite what Melvin might say, heh).

We also have a police problem, and I kind of feel you should wake up and pay attention to it. It's disturbing that the police exist now to enforce law, rather than to protect and serve, at least according to NYC (and likely most other places in the country).

The police officer felt his life was threatened. If you don't know a fucking thing about your community, you can feel your life is threatened by the stupidest things... like an unarmed young black guy acting stupid. Ridiculous lattitude, frankly, that targets a particular race if most of your police force isn't black (and therefore more prone to feeling threatened by someone you don't understand).

We need for our police to be better connected to the communities they supposedy 'enforce the law' within.

[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 14:35:56 EST from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The Law is the expressed will of the People.
We are, in spite of recent presidential activity, a nation built on Law; a People built on the Rule of Law.

And when we say the Police "Protect and Serve" the central action is, and must by definition always be, enforcement of the Law as the "Arm of the People."



Now, we know that 'protect and serve' in German is 'shuetzen und dienen'.
Would one of our native German speaking members please refresh my memory.
Which of the Third Reich agencies used that slogan?

[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 17:13:04 EST from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

amazon sugests that there is a book about the police in the city of Essen from 1920 to 1940 - so starting in the weimarer reprublik till the nazi time.

I'd rather say that this title was derived from the original 'to protect and to serve'

the only slogan famous I know of is

"Retten, Loeschen, Bergen, Schuetzen" aka " save, extinguish, salvage, protect"

which is the motto of the fire brigades.



[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 18:04:41 EST from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Actually, at least according to wikipedia, it was the slogan of the "Ordnungspolizei" which was under the SS.

[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 18:09:00 EST from vince-q @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

But I confess to having go look it up..

[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 18:47:37 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


It's also unusual that this jury did not indict the officer:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/11/26/3597322/justice-scalia-explains-wh at-was-wrong-with-the-ferguson-grand-jury/

[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 18:50:12 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


The problem with this shift of focus is how it causes an agent of law enforcement not to see his job more broadly, and to function as part of a community, but to function as a thug with peculiarly unbalanced rights in his favor.

[#] Thu Nov 27 2014 22:51:40 EST from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There is not, nor should there be any "shift of focus.'

Cops, no matter what your particular personal 'politically correct' view may be, have a rather simple (albeit exceptionally risky) job: prevent crime.


And when that, for any reason, does not happen, the detective division(s) of their respective police organization(s) have another (sometimes not so simple) job: find and catch the bad guy(s).

There are always complications. We live in a complex society in an increasingly complex age.

But one salient fact remains. In the United States if you are in iminent danger of injury or death, you are justified to use lethal force in your own defense.

And, in brief, THAT is why there was not, nor should there have been, any indictment in the Ferguson issue.

The "political/social" overtones attached to this case are solely the result of misplaced media attention engendered by their rapidly failing business model. Outlets such as CNN make money from their commercials/advertisements. In this era of the 'cable cutter' that income is rapidly shrinking. So such outlets will go to any method they can to increase public viewership. The public *likes* viewing mayhem on their TV screens - hence the popularity of the seemingly endless stream of "cop shows" such as Law and Order, CSI (pick your favorite city), NCIS (pick your favorite city of 3), Hawaii Five-O, NYPD Blue, etc. etc. etcl. So the "riots in Ferguson" were a tool to attract viewership, plain and simple.

Had the complicit news organizations *not* wanted "something thrilling" to broadcast on their networks, all they would have had to do is not elevate the "whooping up of a 'holy war'" by the likes of Al Sharpton and his "army" of mental diminutives to the level of "news-worthy" which it certainly was not.

The proof?
No 'riot' stuff on TV today.
Why not?
It's Thanksgiving. The people have more important things to watch.
Football. Real football. The NFL (and college games).

And so Ferguson goes away.
Or how they would put it in Ancient Rome:
Sic transit gloria mundi.

Or as Goethe would have put it:
Alles vergaengliche ist nur ein Gleichnis.

Or as any American would have put it earlier today:
Don't f*ck with my football!

[#] Fri Nov 28 2014 08:53:09 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I have more of a difficult time believing that the press is completely out of control concerning this issue. I really do think there's a problem with the police, although I won't go so far as to say that they're thoroughly out of control (except, perhaps, in a few places, like NYC apparently).

Yes, the police exists to enforce law among their other duties. If they can prevent crime, that's good, too. However, murder is also a crime for which punishment should be meted regardless of whether a policeman commits it or a civilian.

The line is murkier for the police because of the dangers presented to them by the nature of their work. However, shooting an unarmed person repeatedly, then supressing evidence of what happened (by erasing tape, or using legal procedures to silence witnesses, or some other questionable tactic), effectively allowing you to get away with murder, doesn't quite strike me as something this society should tolerate in its police force, regardless of whether a black or white man was the victim.

And in the Ferguson case, evidence was suppressed concerning the policeman's conduct towards the victim, suppressed in a fashion that even made a supreme court judge arch an eyebrow.

I don't live too far away from a county where the police lobbied successfully to make it illegal to videotape interactions with the police. Fortunately, this law was overturned by a judge, but the reason for this is clear... the police (at least in the county in question) are enough out of control that they don't want their interactions recorded, for fear of being caught doing something illegal to someone. And in Prince George County, Maryland, they are easily out of control, with politicians continuing to support them despite plenty of evidence that the police need to be reigned in.

And the first bit of evidence that something is wrong is when a group of people no longer feel comfort around the police, but fear.

[#] Fri Nov 28 2014 10:00:58 EST from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


And in the Ferguson case, evidence was suppressed concerning the
policeman's conduct towards the victim, suppressed in a fashion that
even made a supreme court judge arch an eyebrow.


As I would say in a court pleading:
Complainant is put to his proof.

[#] Fri Nov 28 2014 10:11:40 EST from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

A grand jury proceeding where the prosecutor's office is seeking an indictment is not an adversarial proceeding.

To say "evidence was suppressed" in a grand jury proceeding is really not even applicable.

While one might theoretize to one's heart's content, the grand jury proceeding is not the place to complain of evidence suppression simply because it is not relevant.

The job of the prosecutor's office in a grand jury proceeding is to seek
a True Bill (indictment) and to use the evidence they have on hand to maximize the likelihood of that outcome.

You might want to accuse a prosecutor's office of not mounting the best possible case, but suppressing evidence? The nature of the proceeding, and the role of the prosecutor in that proceeding make that accusation absurd.

And please remember that the burden here is "Probable Cause" and not "reasonable doubt" which is, in comparison, horrendously more difficult and which does, by its nature, demand an adversarial proceeding.

The probable cause burden could have been simply met by holding an arraignment instead of seeking a grand jury indictment. However that would have placed the burden of decision on one man - a judge to be sure, but one man in the final analysis. And I'm certain that in the Ferguson situation that was considered an onus too great for any one judge to bear.

Probable Cause is a ***very*** easy burden of proof to meet. Period.

The fact that 12 grand jurors saw no probable cause, even for the least of the five possible charges presented, simply states that there was no reason to indict. Period. End Of Story.

That's the way the Criminal Justice System is ***supposed*** to work.

A race problem? Yes. But it is not what you purport it to be.
It is this:
If it were a white kid and a black cop nobody would GIVE A SHIT.
THAT is the race problem.

[#] Fri Nov 28 2014 17:12:40 EST from the_mgt @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sadly, telling you that guns are your problem will be fruitless. While in the time between this post and the inevitable "2nd amendment" answer, another 12 year old with a fake gun will be shot by a cop jumping out of his car and another toddler will shoot his mother in the face with a gun he found under the couch. Now sports.



[#] Fri Nov 28 2014 19:23:43 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


vince-q:

I already provided evidence, 27 Nov. Justice Scalia explained rather eloquently what was wrong concerning the Ferguson indictment, and how the grand jury was manipulated.

[#] Sat Dec 06 2014 15:35:52 EST from @

Subject: Obama makes quick trip to Walter Reed hospital for sore throat

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

President Obama on Saturday got some medical tests at a military hospital in suburban Maryland after complaining of a sore throat.

http://feeds.foxnews.com/~r/foxnews/politics/~3/0w-2rAKWRh4/


[#] Sat Dec 06 2014 20:35:08 EST from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

Subject: Re: Obama makes quick trip to Walter Reed hospital for sore throat

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Dec 6 2014 12:35pm from @cascade in >
Subject: Obama makes quick trip to Walter Reed hospital for sore throat

President Obama on Saturday got some medical tests at a military
hospital in suburban Maryland after complaining of a sore throat.


...no doubt caused by excessive time spent with foot in mouth.

[#] Sun Dec 07 2014 00:11:07 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: Obama makes quick trip to Walter Reed hospital for sore throat

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I doubt that. He sincerely stands by everything he says, even the lies, even the failures. The man is a sociopath.

[#] Wed Dec 10 2014 00:43:04 EST from DemonStalker @ Dog Pound BBS II

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Considering all the nasty stuff earlier today it's awfully quiet in here.

[#] Wed Dec 10 2014 14:31:35 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I found the code:

if ( (year >= 2008) && (year <= 2015)) {
hide("~/real_birth_certificate.pdf");
publish("~/forged_birth_certificate.pdf");
system("rm -fr /usr/share/doc/united_states_constitution.txt");
}


[#] Thu Dec 11 2014 01:16:29 EST from vince-q @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2014-12-10 14:31 from IGnatius T Foobar @uncnsrd
I found the code:

if ( (year >= 2008) && (year <= 2015)) {
hide("~/real_birth_certificate.pdf");
publish("~/forged_birth_certificate.pdf");
system("rm -fr /usr/share/doc/united_states_constitution.txt");

}




Best I've seen in YEARS!
Too bad that those who need to learn the lesson you just taught are also those who are least likely to understand what you wrote, and even if they did, are absolutely the least likely to give a rat's ass.

[#] Thu Dec 11 2014 08:12:34 EST from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Too bad that those who need to learn the lesson you just taught are
also those who are least likely to understand what you wrote, and even

if they did, are absolutely the least likely to give a rat's ass.

For the record, we give a rat's ass.

We don't think you do.

We don't think you have any personal integrity or ethics.

We think all this birther crap is VERY thinly veiled racist douchebaggery.

Go to page: First ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... Last