NSR - I HATE activists!!!

You may not like Glademaster's politics, but it seems like members of the Judges Advocate from all of the branches of the military thought the Yoo memo was for shit also.

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2005/07/h...rrogation.html

Top of the page biznitches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stu Gotz

You may not like Glademaster's politics, but it seems like members of the Judges Advocate from all of the branches of the military thought the Yoo memo was for shit also.

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2005/07/h...rrogation.html

Top of the page biznitches.

---

Just want to clarify

your talking about the "Yoo memo." I do not support the memo; i support the man's (no affiliation to "The Man") ability to participate in the political process. He should have never been asked by those students to resign. They tried to silence his political opinions by punishing him for his support of administration policy. That is no reason to lose your job

I dont "hate" activists...

I am just a lot more comfortable when they are not around [/barfly]

Looking forward to the next installment!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Borat

Just want to clarify

your talking about the "Yoo memo." I do not support the memo; i support the man's (no affiliation to "The Man") ability to participate in the political process. He should have never been asked by those students to resign. They tried to silence his political opinions by punishing him for his support of administration policy. That is no reason to lose your job

---

BS. He was asked to quit because the memo proves he is an incompetent attorney who chose a political agenda over a true analysis of the law. IMHO he's an embarrassment to his country and his profession.

Sorry guys I actually had to work today... I even attempted to ski with Telekoptero.... one run and got called back slammed.... installment coming, prolly tonight!
EDIT UPDATE Moron Right Wing Activist post is on page 5, #110

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty Nails

BS. He was asked to quit because the memo proves he is an incompetent attorney who chose a political agenda over a true analysis of the law. IMHO he's an embarrassment to his country and his profession.

---

Who are you to judge Yoo’s competency?

The Yoo Memo "argues that there are effectively "no limits" on the president's authority to wage war." (http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/a...4/1218memo.htm)

That is his non-binding legal opinion, which he is entitled to give: It is up to the courts, not the students or yourself, to determine the validity of his assertions as cases permit.

The supreme court, on many occasions, has confined the presidential powers. On many other occasions, it has affirmed Yoo's beliefs. "He" never violated the law; he only provided his non-binding legal opinion. Why should he resign for doing his job?

The right to state our opinions is guaranteed in the constitution. A public university has no right to censor people

I want to make a point here: Yoo's dissent does not make him incompetent. People are entitled to their own opinions in this country; Get used to it.

You are falling into the same trap that those Berkeley sheep fell into. They, in their blind rage toward the incumbent administration, fought against the civil liberties that make this country great, chief among them the first amendment.

Remember that censorship is a double edged sword. How would you feel if the government revoked your job because your opinion was “incompetent.”

Dissent, regardless of political affiliation, should never be silenced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Reverend Floater

This is the worst thread I've seen in a while.

---

you guys are truely fucked, or more aptly we are fucked, if you dont see the value of activism and more importantly the acceptancene of activism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mookie blaylock

you guys are truely fucked, or more aptly we are fucked, if you dont see the value of activism and more importantly the acceptancene of activism.

---

I tend to come down on the Rev's side - I am happy that there are people in the world who care enough to put themselves on the line in support of their beliefs.

On the other hand, I see plenty of activist types who are effectively brainwashed as Summit kinda said. I don't talk to my dishwsher or my fridge, can't see why I'd talk to those folks either.

As far as them coming to the door, Summit, get a couple of big dogs, it works wonders.

oh, and core shot, it appears that you have no problem with right-wing activists? correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Borat

Who are you to judge Yoo’s competency?

The Yoo Memo "argues that there are effectively "no limits" on the president's authority to wage war." (http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/a...4/1218memo.htm)

That is his non-binding legal opinion, which he is entitled to give: It is up to the courts, not the students or yourself, to determine the validity of his assertions as cases permit.

The supreme court, on many occasions, has confined the presidential powers. On many other occasions, it has affirmed Yoo's beliefs. "He" never violated the law; he only provided his non-binding legal opinion. Why should he resign for doing his job?

The right to state our opinions is guaranteed in the constitution. A public university has no right to censor people

I want to make a point here: Yoo's dissent does not make him incompetent. People are entitled to their own opinions in this country; Get used to it.

You are falling into the same trap that those Berkeley sheep fell into. They, in their blind rage toward the incumbent administration, fought against the civil liberties that make this country great, chief among them the first amendment.

Remember that censorship is a double edged sword. How would you feel if the government revoked your job because your opinion was “incompetent.”

Dissent, regardless of political affiliation, should never be silenced.

---

You obviously have no clue what lawyers do. You also have obviously not read the reams of international law journals addressing Yoo, Bybee, or the other hacks working the I-law desks at DOJ back in the day. If you give faulty advice, it is MALPRACTICE, not an opinion. He provided contrived legal analysis that fit a political agenda instead of a honestly researched analysis of the law. It wasn't just DoD uniformed attorneys (who know and work with I-law far more and longer than Yoo) who bashed the work coming out of DOJ's ivory tower. Even Colin Powell, along with OSD staff attorneys, wrote memos to the White House about these guys and their "opinions" that defied argumentative logic.

My opinions are what they are, but the legal advice I provide to a client is never result oriented or incompetent.

summit - I agree. Whenever someone makes a point of telling you that they are open-minded, they are usually a total idiot spouting someone else's rant to get attention.

it really does make me pretty angry.

What the fuck are you people arguing about. Yoo didn't lose his job.

Interesting thread. The resulting discussion reveals a lot about how people are unaware how much they are simply repeating thoughts, beliefs and opinions and not researched facts:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by watersnowdirt

The Boston Tea Party - a bunch of activists.

---

Example No. 1: Sorry, no. The people who brought you the Boston Tea Party were a bunch of miscreants. They dressed up and trashed someone else's property. It was all in the name protesting taxes...taxes that they didn't have to pay. The "tea tax" was absorbed by the exporting companies, not the colonists themselves. Basically, a bunch of people were angry and broke stuff. They were rioters, no less. Frankly, the whole thing was an act of criminal vandalism that, over time, has been romanticized as patriotism by people who don't know better because they're just repeating what they heard and want to think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

I for one am a fan of activism, no matter how extreme or "annoying" as long as it is coming from people who are knowledgeable in the field they are being vocal about.

For example, Cal Berkeley activism(whether it is left or right) is far more tolerable than say, uneducated Texan or delusional hippy activism. Hopefully, if I manage to keep my grades up and string together a few coherent paragraphs next fall, I can engage is some Berekely style activism of my own, just to spite Summit.

---

Example No 2: A prime example. Glademaster assumes that Texans are uneducated (some are, some aren't, just like everywhere else) and that hippies are delusional (ok, I'll give him that. I really don't think the hippy ideals have been thought through very well.), and assumes that Berkeley activists think more. Glademaster has no business making this statement; he has not attended Berkeley, but is merely stating his romanticized viewpoint of a school based on reputation and hearsay. This is effectively the same as the guy holding signs saying "Get a Brain Morans! - GO USA"--both are saying things based solely on perceptions and opinions and not facts.

I go to a school like Cal-Berkeley where it is "cool" to be liberal (CU-Boulder). Unfortunately the same thoughtless, trendy mindset that supports the fashion industry is responsible for much of the political climate here. I can say with personal experience that America's educational system does not favor logical, reasoned thought, and that you can get good grades and get into a good school with having to go through a logical thought process. Furthermore, reports and studies are often manipulated as they go through various filtering processes, and the original data is often difficult to come by, especially when citations are not present (often the case). Bias is inevitable, and people often hear only what they want to believe.

Now before people (rather ironically) call me a right-wing asshole, read carefully and notice that I made no political endorsements of either direction. I'm sure that's what people will think, though, because that is what they will want to believe, because if they disagree with me it is a way for them (in their minds) to denounce the legitimacy of my arguments. Frankly, it is very difficult to get past what you think and only look at what you know. It is much easier simply to bury your head in the sand and not have to change and re-evaluate your position.

Edited for clarity after re-reading

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

You missed the point just like WaterSnowDirt.

MLK had common sense, education, and was capable of honest debate. He knew what he was talking about.

---

Not too sure about that, especially the "education" and "honest debate" part. He did, after all, plagiarise his doctoral dissertation to get his theology degree from Boston University.

Squatch, while you make no endorsement of either political ideology. You do accuse all liberals at your school of a "thoughtless and trendy mindset similar to that which supports the fashion industry." when everyone knows that crunchy liberals don't care about dressing nicely.

I mean when's the last time you saw a hippie in an Armani suit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

I mean when's the last time you saw a hippie in an Armani suit?

---

Boulder. Last month.

I know it's a prerequisite to be smelly to be a hippy, but some of the more "funded" hippies break the mold sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squatch

Now before people (rather ironically) call me a right-wing asshole, read carefully and notice that I made no political endorsements of either direction. I'm sure that's what people will think, though, because that is what they will want to believe, because if they disagree with me it is a way for them (in their minds) to denounce the legitimacy of my arguments.

---

Nah, you are just another person basing your opinions primarily on feelings not facts who thinks of himself as a calmly rational individual. Few people have the time, resources or understanding to come up with individual opinions, 99.999% of the world parrot someone elses line. Live with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Witherspoon

What he said.

---

OK, that's funny. Made me laugh at least.

CJ: Merry Widows rawk:

Classic:
http://www.staylace.com/unsortedjpgs/mw_laces.jpg

Modern:
http://www.lingerie-uk.tv/acatalog/l...ry%20widow.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cono Este

Lately is has become trendy to be uneducated and outspoken on almost any issue.

---

Hmmm, actually this was quite trendy back in the 60's also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cono Este

This is not Peoples Park. You need to give examples when you make such an accusation. Surely they taught you that at Berekley?

You said we continue to commit "war crimes". Which ones do you refer to? And tell me about AFghanistan.

Maybe statements like that can get you laid at Berkeley, but some of us have relatives in service over there, and some of us have served over there, so tell me about these "war crimes".


I want to know.

---

read: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/conten.../060227fa_fact

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

Squatch, while you make no endorsement of either political ideology. You do accuse all liberals at your school of a "thoughtless and trendy mindset similar to that which supports the fashion industry." when everyone knows that crunchy liberals don't care about dressing nicely.

I mean when's the last time you saw a hippie in an Armani suit?

---

Not true. Thanks for completely missing the point, though. I actually accuse people who have no real political or social opinions of their own of aligning themselves with the liberal stance merely because it is the most popular viewpoint around here. That's very different from actually being a liberal/believing in the liberal platform.

And the point isn't fashion...it's the bandwagon mindset. The fashion thing was merely an analogy.

Or maybe my sarcasm detector is broken.:redface:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squatch

Not true. Thanks for completely missing the point, though. I actually accuse people who have no real political or social opinions of their own of aligning themselves with the liberal stance merely because it is the most popular viewpoint around here. That's very different from actually being a liberal/believing in the liberal platform.

---

And you think this only happens on the left? Talk to a texan :rolleyes:

Humans are herd creatures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Witherspoon

Here's a better one - and its review of the corporate site above. :wink:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...h.Com_Web_Site

---

Surprise! Everyone has bias.

One big thing that I noticed how slanted the website (activistcash) was. Clearly had an agenda, although it's hard to imagine any organization or group without one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cj001f

And you think this only happens on the left? Talk to a texan :rolleyes:

Humans are herd creatures.

---

Didn't say that. Merely reporting observations in Boulder, CO, among the student population.

The general point of my argument in those passages arose from a previous claim that "Berkeley activism" (and perhaps college-activism in general) was somehow superior to regular activism. There are many similarities between the school I attend and observe and Berkeley, so I was mentioning my observations as how it related to the supposed legitimacy/superiority of college activism. Nowhere do I say that the right is immune from this. However, I do not attend a school with a predominantly rightward political stance, so I can't speculate on that subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freshies

read: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/conten.../060227fa_fact

---

An interesting article that makes Mora look like a lone crusader. There was much buzz about it the day it came out. He actually had serious allies and support, but the White House surrounded itself with hacks. The best thing the article does is point out in layman's terms that law was being ignored and cast aside after decades of precedent, custom and practice.

Yoo, Bybee, Gonzales, Beaver, Haynes -- absolute failures in legal reasoning. They are the reason behind McCain's torture legislation. Still cannot believe we are not applying Common Article 3 as a standard. It will be interesting to see how many people are indicted in foreign courts for criminal violations of international law (specifically CA3).

Still, I think Glademaster referred to continuing war crimes (systematic) in Afghanistan and that is what he was called out on. Still waiting to hear more on that.

FYI: Here is the American Bar Association's report on domestic surveillance -- in which they state in no uncertain terms that the President has acted illegally.

http://www.abanet.org/op/domsurv/

You can read the whole report from the above link: here are the first two paragraphs.

"RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association calls upon the President to abide by the limitations which the Constitution imposes on a president under our system of checks and balances and respect the essential roles of the Congress and the judicial branch in ensuring that our national security is protected in a manner consistent with constitutional guarantees;

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association opposes any future electronic surveillance inside the United States by any U.S. government agency for foreign intelligence purposes that does not comply with the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801 et seq. (FISA), and urges the President, if he believes that FISA is inadequate to safeguard national security, to seek appropriate amendments or new legislation rather than acting without explicit statutory authorization;"
[...]