AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Objective Thought and George Galloway
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I'm not ragging the British for not doing anything,BUT,if they had a thimble full of objectivity left in the UK this guy would have been arrested ,tried,convicted and executed by now.

Over here,we would not do anything either,that's why I am not ragging on them,we're both shot as far as functional organizations with any objectivity left within us.


http//news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article601356.ece
What about freedom of speech Palladin?
benjamin Wrote:What about freedom of speech Palladin?

Good point. I think that as long as Georgous George is not determined guilty of a crime, then he should be allowed to demonstrate to Everyone the comlete waste of intellectual development he happens to be.

Nothing serves to educate the majority of the public like a buffon loose in their midst. Naturally, there are those, who will fawn over his attempt at brilliance, but those would be misled anyway, so they are really not worth the consideration.
What about treason,Benjamin and John?

The man has basically sided with the enemy,in the nation I live in,this SHOULD be unacceptable.

So,a British legislator suggests Churchill ought to be murdered for the evil he did to Germany and you 2 would as well find this just "free speech"?
Patrick, we are not "officially" at war. Let's see, defacto, but not dejure. I am certain that even during WWII there were politicians of various and sundry degree just like Gorgeous George.

Do I despise his rherotic and wish someone would attempt to have him violate the laws of physics by having him and a brick wall occupy the same volume of space at the same time. Of course! But we live in 'so called' civilized times, in which "White Guilt" if run amock, and until this changes, we must suck it up and learn to live with it.

Besides, he is a great opportunity for our side to use as an example of what NOT to be. It is idiots, such as this, who help us define boundries that should not be crossed.
John,

I guess you 2 are right.

Would you see this otherwise if there was a formal declaration of war?

I wonder if we'll ever actually use that terminology again anyway,the senate authorized the POTUS to use any amount of force or anything else to crush this movement.

A guy like this literally would have been shot in 1943 and formality would have meant nothing. By the neighborhood before the government had the opportunity to.
Palladin Wrote:John,

I guess you 2 are right.

Would you see this otherwise if there was a formal declaration of war?

In a word,..............Yes.

Quote: I wonder if we'll ever actually use that terminology again anyway,the senate authorized the POTUS to use any amount of force or anything else to crush this movement.[/qoute]

Again, yes. And this authorization was a half assed attempt to please everyone, but actually doing the opposite. It's not practical.

[quote]A guy like this literally would have been shot in 1943 and formality would have meant nothing. By the neighborhood before the government had the opportunity to.

Probably not. First, he would not have done this under official war time conditions, although he would be secure in his own country, chastising us. However,If he was an American and did this, he would not have been shot. Rather, he would have been detained in a small cell or put in a Nut Ward for safe keeping.
John,

Do you think we will ever declare war again in America,to rid ourselves of such ambiguity? I predict no sadly.
Palladin Wrote:John,

Do you think we will ever declare war again in America,to rid ourselves of such ambiguity? I predict no sadly.

I answered your question above Patrick.

"In a word,..............Yes." Wink1
Quote:What about freedom of speech Palladin?

He was bribed by Saddam Hussein. Accepting money from an enemy of the country in order to influence policy in favor of that enemy. I thought bribery and treason were reason enough for punishment. :roll:
Dem,

The formality of a declaration of war is all that seems to protect George.

We have some as bad here,Cynthia McKinney for example.
Palladin Wrote:Dem,

The formality of a declaration of war is all that seems to protect George.

We have some as bad here,Cynthia McKinney for example.

I am certain that they are aware of this also. That is why the do it as they do.
It may be more invidious than just not having a formally declared war. I don't recall treason and sedition only being onerous during wartime. The Rosenbergs would not agree with this claim.

The real issue is just politics. Very few politicians rise to the level of statesman and do things that are right regardless of their own legacy. They more often bend and allow obvious acts of treason to be misperceived as good-hearted differences of opinion that need airing to be debated. When Leahy let our enemies know covert ops plans that he wanted stopped for political reasons, he passed over the line - but got away with it - because he framed the issue as righteous frustration rather than violation of Law. Since it is not for an individual politician to decide what is vital for National security - he performed an act of treason... but got away with it.

Same with Media elites who set themselves up as the equal to elected officials to decide what is right or wrong. Laws cannot be bent - only broken.

The media and the public have wiggled their way to a position where they feel national security must be proved before violating it is a crime. Shouldn't it be enough that the Law says, "No, you can't?" Why does a law only work if a popularity poll validates it?
All very good points wml.

Quote:We have some as bad here,Cynthia McKinney for example.

Oh she should be in jail for assaulting that police officer who was only doing his job. Remember the police officer who was killed in the 90s. I bet if a racist terrorist were to try and kill Cynthia she would be grateful of the police officers who put their lives on the line to protect them and the people. Just another example of what WML was speaking of. Politicians get away with crime so long as they wrap it around a political issue.