Guest Tom Scully Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) Bill, "Nuts" is a rapidly shifting target. Our government, our president, many of our politicians, and our press, which is arguing to literally make illegal what IT is SUPPOSED to be doing; exposing the secrets of the powerful and of secret government to hold them accountable are arguably "nuts", along with huge swaths of our population. "Nuts" as in unreliable, confused, not fully cognizant of the consequences of decisions and actions. Remember, this guy, Assange, while acting exactly as a journalist should act, and charged with no crime in the U.S., is a target of "nuts" working themselves into a feverish pitch, who happen to include most of our government, our press establishment, and a majority of our fellow Amercians.: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/11/justice/index.htmlGlenn Greenwald Tuesday, Jan 11, 2011 11:12 ET What U.S. "justice" signifies around the world ..Paragraphs 92-99 of the outline detail Sweden's history of violating the Convention Against Torture by rendering War on Terror suspects to Egypt to be tortured, and concludes: "based on its record as condemned by the United Nations Committee against Torture and the Human Rights Committee, Sweden would bow to US pressure and/or rely naively on diplomatic assurances from the USA that Mr. Assange would not be mistreated, with the consequence that he would be deported/expelled to the USA, where he would suffer serious ill-treatment." This danger is legally relevant because the governing Extradition Act bars the expulsion of a prisoner where "extradition would be [in]compatible with the Convention rights within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1998." The outline also cited vigilante calls from leading right-wing figures for Assange's murder (yesterday, it was discovered that a prominent right-wing blogger, Melissa Clouthier, had registered the website JulianAssangeMustDie.com).... ....And now we have the spectacle of Julian Assange's lawyers citing the Obama administration's policies of rendition and indefinite detention at Guantanamo as a reason why human rights treaties bar his extradition to any country (such as Sweden) which might transfer him to American custody. Indeed, almost every person I've spoken who has or had anything to do with WikiLeaks expresses one fear above all others: the possibility that they will end up in American custody and subjected to its lawless War on Terror "justice system." Americans still like to think of themselves as "leaders of the free world," but in the eyes of many, it's exactly the "free world" to which American policies are so antithetical and threatening. It is not 1963 or 1968 anymore. The press is not to be expected to fill in the gaps you ably and reasonably outlined. CNN's lead reporter on these shootings this past weekend was Jean Meserve, CNN Department of Homeland (fatherland) Security correspondent. My rapidly growing concern is that reasonable people are not adjusting as quickly as is necessary to the changes taking place. They seem to be in denial that two 21st century U.S. presidents have endorsed such openly anti Constitutional and repressive policies and practices. The press is in the bag of the government, openly and brazenly, now. http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/01/04/burns/index.html...As usual, the Watchdog Press not only happily ingests and trumpets pro-government propaganda, but does so even more enthusiastically and uncritically than government spokespeople themselves. The reason there's so little government censorship of the press in America is because it's totally unnecessary; why would the government even want to censor a media this compliant and subservient? ... ....But in general, it's no more necessary for the U.S. Government to censor the American media than it would be for Barack Obama to try to silence Robert Gibbs.... http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2008/11/30/mccaffrey...As I documented at length at the time, using the thousands of documents Barstow had obtained, the propaganda that the networks broadcast as a result of this "military analyst" program -- about Iraq, Guantanamo and a host of other related issues -- was very coordinated and, by design, implanted falsehoods in virtually every aspect of their "reporting". Edited January 11, 2011 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 (edited) There are still a lot of outstanding questions about this case, despite the fact that there are hundreds of cops, local and federal and reporters on the case. Who are this guy's parent's? There has been mention of a synagog - are they Jewish, and if so, how come this has not been brought out by the hate mongers? Giffords is Jewish and was married in a synagogue by a Rabbi thought I think her husband is or was Christian (last name Kelly),made that what you saw. However acording to someone who claims to he a close friend of Loughner said his "mom is Jewish" and you must have missed the anti-Semites are all over it. Supposedly he admired American Renaissance, an anti-Semitic group but he listed both Das Kapital and Mein Kampf as among his favorite books. http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voicemail-phone-message?page=1 http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BR&q=jared+lee+Loughner+jewish&btnG=Pesquisar&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/09/dhs-memo-suggests-shooter-may-be-linked-racist-organization NOTE TO TOM - You're a moderator so why are did make a totally irrelevant off topic post on this thread in violation of the rules you are supposed to enforced? Edited January 11, 2011 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 There are still a lot of outstanding questions about this case, despite the fact that there are hundreds of cops, local and federal and reporters on the case. Who are this guy's parent's? There has been mention of a synagog - are they Jewish, and if so, how come this has not been brought out by the hate mongers? Giffords is Jewish and was married in a synagogue by a Rabbi thought I think her husband is or was Christian (last name Kelly),made that what you saw. However acording to someone who claims to he a close friend of Loughner said his "mom is Jewish" and you must have missed the anti-Semites are all over it. Supposedly he admired American Renaissance, an anti-Semitic group but he listed both Das Kapital and Mein Kampf as among his favorite books. http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voicemail-phone-message?page=1 http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BR&q=jared+lee+Loughner+jewish&btnG=Pesquisar&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/09/dhs-memo-suggests-shooter-may-be-linked-racist-organization NOTE TO TOM - You're a moderator so why are did make a totally irrelevant off topic post on this thread in violation of the rules you are supposed to enforced? interesting... just yesterday (01-10-2011), Mark POTOK of the Southern Poverty Law Center (whose spent years investigating right-wing fringe groups and familiar with American Renaissance) clearly stated: he could find no relationship between this guy and the American Renaissance, an anti-Semitic group..... link below http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 Bill, they haven't said for what reason. For the moment, people are simply speculating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 Craig, As a gun owner / pro-gun person, can you explain why you, as an individual, want the current gun laws to remain and why you own a gun? Is it protection? Is it simply what you believe to be a right, which you are exercising, and don't need a reason for? People can quote statistics all day long, but I'm interested in discussing why people hold their views. As I mentioned earlier, despite my anti-gun stance, I don't think anyone can say "I am right on this matter - you are wrong"; all we can say is we disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 There are still a lot of outstanding questions about this case, despite the fact that there are hundreds of cops, local and federal and reporters on the case. Who are this guy's parent's? ...How do they live a neighborhood for over 20 years and never get to know the names of their neighbors? What do the parents do for a living? ...and where JLL must have gone to try to enlist in the US military, though the Army turned him down - rejected him - but for what reason? Did they give him a test and determined he was nuts? BK An excerpt from my response to the questions Bill Kelly asked.: ...It is not 1963 or 1968 anymore. The press is not to be expected to fill in the gaps you ably and reasonably outlined. CNN's lead reporter on these shootings this past weekend was Jean Meserve, CNN Department of Homeland (fatherland) Security correspondent. My rapidly growing concern is that reasonable people are not adjusting as quickly as is necessary to the changes taking place... ...NOTE TO TOM - You're a moderator so why are did make a totally irrelevant off topic post on this thread in violation of the rules you are supposed to enforced? Sorry, Len, I'll be much more careful, next time. I promise, it won't happen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 There are still a lot of outstanding questions about this case, despite the fact that there are hundreds of cops, local and federal and reporters on the case. Who are this guy's parent's? ...How do they live a neighborhood for over 20 years and never get to know the names of their neighbors? What do the parents do for a living? ...and where JLL must have gone to try to enlist in the US military, though the Army turned him down - rejected him - but for what reason? Did they give him a test and determined he was nuts? BK An excerpt from my response to the questions Bill Kelly asked.: ...It is not 1963 or 1968 anymore. The press is not to be expected to fill in the gaps you ably and reasonably outlined. CNN's lead reporter on these shootings this past weekend was Jean Meserve, CNN Department of Homeland (fatherland) Security correspondent. My rapidly growing concern is that reasonable people are not adjusting as quickly as is necessary to the changes taking place... ...NOTE TO TOM - You're a moderator so why are did make a totally irrelevant off topic post on this thread in violation of the rules you are supposed to enforced? Sorry, Len, I'll be much more careful, next time. I promise, it won't happen again. Since you didn't quote or make reference to Bill's questions it was not clear you were responding to them. Despite your complaints about "the press" I imagine we know more about Loughner and his parents than the public did about LHO and Sirhan and their parents 3 days after the deaths of the Kennedys brothers. Bill’s questions have pretty much been answered: Who are this guy's parent's? - Randy and Amy Loughner ...How do they live a neighborhood for over 20 years and never get to know the names of their neighbors? Obviously not something with a simple answer, some people choose to isolate themselves, it seems to have been initiated by the dad. This seems to have started about 15 years ago. But I think it was the other way round, one neighbor said he didn't know their last name till the story broke. What do the parents do for a living? - “Randy married Amy Totman in 1986 and two years later they had their first and only son, Jared. He then became a stay at home dad, while Amy worked for Pima County, neighbors said.” “Amy Loughner is a Natural Resource specialist for the Pima County Parks and Recreation” http://abcnews.go.com/US/jared-lee-loughner-family-portrait-isolation/story?id=12587114 http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=22121&pst=1399244 ...and where JLL must have gone to try to enlist in the US military, though the Army turned him down - rejected him - but for what reason? Did they give him a test and determined he was nuts? “…an Army spokesman said Loughner “attempted to enlist in the Army, but was rejected for service.” The spokesman declined to say why Loughner was rejected, citing the Privacy Act Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47257.html#ixzz1Am8x34VE There is only one military induction center in AZ, it is in Phoenix http://www.mepcom.army.mil/meps/phoenix/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) Supposedly he admired American Renaissance, an anti-Semitic group but he listed both Das Kapital and Mein Kampf as among his favorite books.http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/jared-lee-loughner-friend-voicemail-phone-message?page=1 http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BR&q=jared+lee+Loughner+jewish&btnG=Pesquisar&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/09/dhs-memo-suggests-shooter-may-be-linked-racist-organization NOTE TO TOM - You're a moderator so why are did make a totally irrelevant off topic post on this thread in violation of the rules you are supposed to enforced? interesting... just yesterday (01-10-2011), Mark POTOK of the Southern Poverty Law Center (whose spent years investigating right-wing fringe groups and familiar with American Renaissance) clearly stated: he could find no relationship between this guy and the American Renaissance, an anti-Semitic group..... link below http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/ Note I said "supposedly" Fox News quoted a DHS memo which said "Suspect is possibly linked to this group. (through videos posted on his myspace and YouTube account.)" Read more: http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/latest-on-shooting-of-congresswoman-giffords-motivation-anti-semitic-and-she-was-the-target/#ixzz1AmDuoINh. I watched most of video on your link and didn't see Potok,however he wrote: Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates points out in a post earlier today that Loughner also makes a reference to a "second American constitution." As Chip notes, that is commonly understood to refer to the Reconstruction amendments that freed the slaves and gave them citizenship, among other things. Chip says that "raises the question of a possible racist and anti-immigrant tie" in the Arizona shooting. On top of that, Fox News is reporting on an internal Department of Homeland Security message suggesting some tie between Loughner and American Renaissance, a kind of white-collar racist group. I can't speak to those allegations. Outside of what Chip pointed out, I didn't see anything that suggested racial, anti-Semitic or anti-immigrant animus in Loughner's writings. Certainly, there's nothing I saw at all reminiscent of American Renaissance, which focuses heavily on the alleged intellectual and psychological inferiority of black people. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-potok/who-is-jared-lee-loughner_b_806500.html Edited January 12, 2011 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Sorry, Len, I'll be much more careful, next time. I promise, it won't happen again. Don't forget that some people at the DPF say that I'm really running the forum, so it BETTER NOT happen again or you'll be in BIG TROUBLE!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Additionally Craig's article cherry picks the data choosing best and worst cases (respectively) for uncontrolled and controlled jurisdictions. Washington DC is urban, poor and mostly African-American, for reasons beyond the scope of this thread Blacks are a disproportionately among the victims and perpetrators of homicides. http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_03.html http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_02.html Even so the it seems to fudge numbers: "According to Tucson Police Department records, by December 2010, the city – which is located 60 miles north of the Mexican border – experienced 51 murders by the use of guns. Washington police records, meanwhile, recorded 131 homicides in 2010, nearly three times the Tucson rate." Note that it compared total murders in DC to gun murders in Tucson and did not account for the population difference. Nationally 2/3 of murders involve guns so lets assume about 87 people were killed with guns in DC whose population is 10% larger. 87 - 10% = 79, thus while DC is still proportionally ahead of Tucson this probably due to the demographic differences noted above. I'll get to the rest of your claims as time permits later in the week but lets start with this little fantasy of yours. A quick check of the facts ( what you failed to do) shows that the author was correct, as of Dec 7th 2010 there were 51 homicides in TOTAL in Tucson. Why he wrote GUN murders is unknown. So your analysis is incorrect, The authors point stands. A city with a very similar size ( populations of both duly noted his article) shows a VAST diffference in murders. DC had a massive restriction on guns, Tucson did not. Based on this comparison it is NOT safer in a city with strict gun controls compared to one with limited gun controls. The OPPOSITE instead is true. And we have not even gotten to the city that went 25 years without a murder, and REQUIRES that each head of household have and maintain a gun.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myra Bronstein Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 How about a mini van driven through the crowd? Would you then want more restrictions on mini vans? It's not the object, its the person. How about a Pipe bomb? Or how about a few sticks of explosives strapped to his body? Both can be obtained. Where do your "restrictions" on objects that by themself cause no harm stop? I agree totally, And Craig, thanks for pointing out that the glock semi-auto pistol is used for sport in target shooting. I live within a mile of Range Road at Fort Dix and hear them target shooting all the time. The top ranger's son, Matt Emmons, won an olympic gold and silver medals and married the women's gold medal shooter at Bejing. I used to shoot a pretty good target myself. It isn't the target shooters anybody is worring about though, it's the politician shooters. And it is most certainly illogical to target the weapons when it is the assassins who should be controlled. After Dealey Plaza, instead of identifying the true killers, and figuring out how the covert action was conducted, identifying those who were really responsible and bringing them to justice, and making sure that such crime never happens again, they introduced gun control legislation instead. BK The car automobile analogy doesn’t hold for a few reasons: 1) Guns are designed to be lethal (and normally as lethal as possible with in size, price and legal constraints); with the very limited exception of people who buy them for sport shooting at inanimate targets they purchased for their lethal capacity. Safety is a principle design feature of cars and I know of no cases of someone buying specifically to kill (or be able to kill) themselves or others and obviously no cars are designed to be lethal. 2) In the US and most other countries one needs a license to own or (legally) drive a car and cars themselves are registered. One has to pass numerous tests to get a driver’s license. In most states, with the possible exception of handguns and semi-automatic/automatics, guns are not registered and gun ownership is unregulated. The only common type of license is for carrying concealed weapons. Even were regulation exists it is not very restrictive. In Illinois for example you need to be registered to carry a loaded weapon but this does not apply to residents of other states and unregistered residents can carry an unloaded gun and ammo in the same case. Perhaps Craig or Bill can point to a state where one needs a license to own most types of guns AND where the licensing processes is as controlled as for drivers. http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm 3) Due to their size, the use of automobiles can reasonably be controlled, cars (and their drivers/owners) are frequently stopped and/or fined due to erratic driving, speeding, broken lights etc. It is not uncommon for bad drivers to lose their licenses. Guns are much smaller and thus can easily be concealed; unless police have “reasonable cause” they can not even check to see if someone is carrying a gun. AFAIK the only way to lose a gun owner’s permit is to be convicted of a felony or have an order of protection issued against them. Thus the only reasonable way to control them is at (or before) the point of purchase. 4) Though about four times more people die due to cars than guns the overwhelming majority of these cases are due accidents and this is due to the degree to which cars are integrated into American life. Though the numbers of guns and cars are comparable the amount of time people use the latter is far greater than the former. About two-thirds of those killed in crashes are drivers thus they die due their own (normally) reckless behavior. The amount of people murdered with guns a year (about 10,000) and non-drivers killed a year (about 16,000) are comparable and are much higher if we count the amount of time people use the former compared to the latter. Get back to us when cars are used for murder with anywhere near the frequency of guns. The FBI does not even include automobiles in the 12 types of weapons in its statistics, they would fit into “Other weapons or weapons not stated” about 7% of the total, firearms account for about 2/3 of the total. http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/fatal-accident-statistics.html http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_08.html 5) In most cases people talking about banning private gun ownership but reasonable restrictions such as prohibiting clips with more than 10 bullets, automatics or semi-automatics and hollow-point or Teflon coated bullets. As for explosives AFAIK normally you need a license to purchase them which is why terrorists use things like fertilizer and drag racing fuel (which are now restricted as well) and 2005 - 9 only 17 or approximately 73,000 murder victims killed with explosives. (see FBI stats above). Good points Len. Neither the car nor the explosives examples hold, what with explosives being illegal and therefore harder to get than a legal gun. NRA boosters have to keep trotting out the old discredited adage that 'guns don't kill people people kill people'--even as crowds are mowed down by the supposedly benign guns in seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myra Bronstein Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Well I wasn't making it a Dem vs Rep issue so it seems like your quibble is with the media and maybe you should invite 'the media' onto the forum for a discussion. As for your first link, it is an interesting one thanks for sharing it. I do think that a bulleseye, which was used on the maps in your link, could be from a game of darts and is far different from a map, like Palin's, with gun sight cross hairs. Especially when she accompanies it with rhetoric like "Don't Retreat…Reload." Darts eh? Thats a funny one. Of course the symbol used by Palin is also used in the graphic arts business as a registration mark, as it is in other mechanincal drawing applications. See we can all play this silly game. Linking Palin to this event is simply more political "hate speach" to use the very term being tossed about today. The irony is that is it being used by those who claim to hate hate speach.... Oh, so asking people to take personal responsibility for their rhetoric is "hate speech"? LOL. Perhaps any speech you disagree with is "hate speech" in your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Good points Len. Neither the car nor the explosives examples hold, what with explosives being illegal and therefore harder to get than a legal gun. NRA boosters have to keep trotting out the old discredited adage that 'guns don't kill people people kill people'--even as crowds are mowed down by the supposedly benign guns in seconds. Pot is illegal for example and people EVERYWHERE buy it everyday. A LAW does not stop people who want something bad enough from obtaining it. Your logic stinks. Finally please show stats for handguns, or any guns 'mowing down crowds" without a human being pulling the trigger. Once again your tortured logic fails you. Guns don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people. A HUM MUST MAKE THE CHOICES. Pleease try again next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Well I wasn't making it a Dem vs Rep issue so it seems like your quibble is with the media and maybe you should invite 'the media' onto the forum for a discussion. As for your first link, it is an interesting one thanks for sharing it. I do think that a bulleseye, which was used on the maps in your link, could be from a game of darts and is far different from a map, like Palin's, with gun sight cross hairs. Especially when she accompanies it with rhetoric like "Don't Retreat…Reload." Darts eh? Thats a funny one. Of course the symbol used by Palin is also used in the graphic arts business as a registration mark, as it is in other mechanincal drawing applications. See we can all play this silly game. Linking Palin to this event is simply more political "hate speach" to use the very term being tossed about today. The irony is that is it being used by those who claim to hate hate speach.... Oh, so asking people to take personal responsibility for their rhetoric is "hate speech"? LOL. Perhaps any speech you disagree with is "hate speech" in your mind. Oh so what the left is doing is asking Palin to take responsibility for her speach? Clearly you have not been reading the comments of the "non hateful" left. Heck the shooters obsession with the congresswoman extends to well before Palin was even on the national radar. Palin has no responsibility for the action of the shooter. Her remarks were standard political fare. As Emanual said...Never let a good crisis go to waste....and the left is doing just that. The ONLY one resposible here is the shooter....not guns, not Palin, not any group....JUST THE SHOOTER. I don't however expect you to understand that concept. Hate Speach...what a silly construct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Okay, Another answer to one of my questions is the Army rejected JLL because he failed a drug test. So they did test him, probably in a number of ways. But what did his parents do for a living? Are they professionals? Who employs them? As we learned with Hinkley, this is an important question. And who are his doctors? BK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now