Empire of the Iguanadons

So it is done. The ticket for the Republican party has been decided at last: Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will be the team to lead us to victory in November.

There were a number of people up for contention for the spot, all of whom would have made a good choice: Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Tim Pawlenty, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Rob Portman, and even General David Petraeus. In the end, Romney has made a wise choice by picking someone with solid experience, the qualifications to fill the office should the need arise, and someone who has proven fiscal discipline and the ONLY worthwhile budget plan to have been floated in the Senate in decades. Combining this with Romney's executive experience as both a governor and a CEO, the ticket is as solid as it could get at this point. Now it's on to dealing with the menace that is Obama-Biden.

Ryan wasted no time in coming out fighting and slamming Obama for the mess he's made over the last 4 years. It would be damn near impossible for anyone to dispute that things have been bad, and that Obama has done nothing whatsoever to improve the situation. Instead, he's simply made it WORSE that it could have been. Unemployment figures published by the government are woefully understated, even at 8.3% currently. Look around you, I'm sure you know at least 3 people who are out of work right now and can't find any. One of those people has probably resorted to collecting welfare just to survive. One probably found a way to get on disability, and the 3rd one - if they were lucky - managed to collect unemployment. Guess who the only one actually being counted is? Double your statistic and you'll have a much clearer picture of the problem. It's far more likely the real numbers are around 15%. Not 8%.

Of course, the Obama campaign retaliated almost immediately against Ryan's accusations, but had nothing of substance to offer up for it other than calling Ryan's budget plan a sham and a return to the "Failures of Bush." Seriously guys. It's time to get a new line of rhetoric. Bush has been gone for 4 years now. Take some damn responsibility for the catastrophe you've helped cause. Plus, the notion that Ryan is attempting to end Medicare seems a bit disingenuous when it was Obamacare that signed Medicare's death warrant and Ryan has been against that all along.

Whatever you may think, it's time to get ready for full on campaign season to begin. Both sides are going to be at each other's throats between now and November. I for one am looking forward to seeing who shows up to speak at the Republican convention, and then to watch as Romney and Ryan wipe the floor with Obama and Biden during the upcoming debates. Though, as I'm sure everyone has noticed, the TV ads are going to get brutal. Very brutal.

Oh, and for those wondering, no, this isn't the 500th post yet. A number of posts were sacrificed as software tests in early days. This is actually only #477.
.........................
RIP United States of America

July 1776 - November 2012.

So did i thing that extradition you needed to be charged with a crime, but it looks like they can do that just to question you, but he has not been charged with anything by the Swedes, look it up, you will see the truth of that. And that is my only objections here, if they charged him, then i would support the extradition.

I do not like it one bit, can you imagine, i walk into my local police and say Samson from TooFarAway California committed X crime and the next thing you know, you are being sent here for questioning. DO you think that the US government would allow it? Not a chance, but our government is weak as piss when it comes to protecting the rights of their own citizens, and just opens its mouth and takes whatever cock is offered.

http://www.talkradionews.com/opinion/2012/08/17/assange-has-still-not-been-charged-with-a-crime.html

I did look it up, and not only did Sweden CHARGE him with the crime of sexual assault, they got an EU arrest warrant issued for Assange, who prompty went and hid in England and tried to fight the order. To which he was given a fair proceeding all the way up to the UK's version of the Supreme Court, who upheld the extradition order.

Once this took place, his lawyer apparently advised him to go hide in the Ecuadorian embassy to apply for political asylum. Which as we know is what he did.

So yeah. Stop watching liberal news reports. For fuck sake, even Wikipedia has all this documented. And you know how much stock I put into Wikipedia pages.

And thus, here we are. A wanted fugitive from justice is hiding out in the embassy of a criminal government who's only interest in the whole affair is to punch the West in the face for no valid reason. A country, mind you, that doesn't believe in fair trials the way the West does and would have executed this man ages ago had he spied against them.

Perhaps this is also why your own government won't step up. My guess is they've seen the evidence and don't want to get involved.

You issue an arrest warrant to detain someone lawfully, you do not have to charge someone with a crime to do that. The fact remains, he has not been charged with a crime and is only wanted for questioning.

At least the Swedes issued a warrant for questioning which is more than the US will offer him, there will be no warrants no charges laid, he will be holed up and tortured in some CIA facility with no rights at all and held for all eternity.

Except that even Wikipedia says you're wrong, that the Swedes DID charge him. I'm not going to debate this further since all reports I've seen agree with what Wikipedia says about it. You cite one horribly biased liberal blog service and have the audacity to ever tell me I'm bad about doing the same?

With what? Link them.



Google "what crime has julian assange been charge with" and you will get 1000's of pages saying he has not been charged with anything by the Swedes. Only that he is wanted for questioning.

DO you want anymore credible sources?

Credible, yes, not the rags you're citing so far. Time? You can't be serious, especially when you yourself have told me in the past that Wikipedia validates all sources. *lol*


Note the word: CHARGES. How much clearer does this need to get?

Source cited by Wikipedia: http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/7570-the-charges-against-julian-assange

Comment #1 there is particularly amusing:

Right wing? That idiot is on crack, and not the good stuff either. Setup by the CIA? Nope. If they wanted him they'd have had him by now. In a body bag.

Now, I have no idea how credible the source cited is, but people keep insisting on telling me it wouldn't survive two years on Wikipedia if it wasn't considered reliable. Sorta sucks when I get to use your own logic against you, doesn't it?

They are the charges they want to question him about, but, he has not been formally charged with committing those crimes, i hope you see the distinction, in what you linked charge is used instead of crime. Stupid English and one word can be used in a billion different ways and meanings.

What is important is the legal distinction of being charged with a crime. It is a formal process, you know, in your own nation they read you Miranda rights and such when it happens you have been formally arrested in relation to a crime, But you can also be detained for questioning without charge and an arrest warrant can be issued then if you do not agree to such an action, even though you are not formally charged with committing an offence.

You are a smart enough guy to know the difference between these two things and not read into the hype and believe all the misinformation out there in regards to this issue.

Actually no, you can't be arrested just for being wanted for questioning. While the cops have the right to question you about things, they can't just pluck you off the street for that without something formal. They're sure as hell not going to get a Federal arrest warrant for it. Which would be the equivalent of what that EU arrest warrant is.

Every lawyer worth his salt in the USA will tell you flat out that if the cops want to take you down to the station, you're BEING ARRESTED.

But this is not the US, it is the UK and Swiss systems here, where, you can be detained (arrested) for questioning, without charge for a maximum of 48 hours i believe it is in the UK. Then you have to be charged or released.

And that is what is at contention here, the Swiss use bogus allegations to get Assange onto their soil and then send him off to the US to face the farce of military justice in Gitmo, where he has no rights at all under any laws in the known universe.

But the Swiss would give no undertakings as to Assanges rights, and we all know that he will have no rights if the US get their hands on him.

No, actually we do know he'd have rights here. You forget. Bleeding hearts are in charge of the government right now. They might even hail him as a hero.

You can also be held for 48hrs without being charged here too, but that changes nothing as far as what the lawyers will tell you. And they'd be right. If you get locked up for 2 days, you've been arrested. If they got warrants issued to cause that to happen, you're already in deep shit.

Fact remains, Assanage *DID* get charged with something and only the media spin and cult following the guy has has convinced anyone otherwise. The Swedes have never backed down from the position that he's been charged with sexual assault.

You'll believe what you want though, you've been shown the proof, you refuse to accept it, so maybe we should just drop this, yes?

BTW, Gimo? Torture? We've been over this before. No such thing happened there. It'd be a vacation spot to him just like staying at the embassy is now.

They have dropped the allegations 2 times and downgraded them. The only thing they can downgrade to now is that he is no longer a person of interest.


Apart from agreeing to disagree, he will have no rights to appoint legal representation, he will have no rights to visitation, he will be held indefinitely without charge, he will not face a jury of his peers and he will not face a fair trial and he will have no right to appeal. Those are facts that cannot be disputed, they are exactly what happened to David Hicks and others who went there and faced the shambolic military tribunal.

Even the Aust Government has conceded this in relation to Hicks, when pressed about proceeds of crime from Hicks's book, they said more or less, they cannot take the money because he did not commit any crime, or was not convicted of any crime in a court that has any standing. In other words IT IS A JOKE.

Except possibly for how they're not facts, but why let little things like facts get in the way of things, yes?

1. he will have no rights to appoint legal representation,
2. he will have no rights to visitation,
3. he will be held indefinitely without charge,
4. he will not face a jury of his peers,
5. he will not face a fair trial,
6. he will have no right to appeal.

They are the facts, that is exactly what everyone else at Gitmo has received. Most of them never get past 3. because those that remain there currently are all held indefinably without charge.

David Hicks was forced to have a US military lawyer, his own legal council was not allowed any say in anything that happened to him. He did not face a jury of his peers who could look at the evidence and decide on guilt, he had no rights to visitation other than his forced upon him lawyer, his trial was hardly fair, and he had no right to appeal or recourse for the injustice dealt to him my your government.

1. That's bullshit and you know it.
2. No military prisoners do, but you're assuming he'd be tried in a military court.
3. Held without bail. He's a flight risk. I would think his stunt with Ecuador would prove that much. They're called bail hearings. He'd have the chance to be heard on bail.
4. Does this man even have any "peers"?
5. Bullshit.
6. Bullshit.

You clearly know absolutely nothing about the US legal system.

Also, you're making a blanket assumption that he'd be taken to Gitmo. At no point has any legitimate news source ever claimed this would happen and since he'd be getting tried for what amount to computer crimes, there's little if any chance he'd end up in a military tribunal.

As for whether he'd get a fair trial or not, he's brought that problem down on his own head by insisting on making an ass of himself in the international press at every opportunity. Plus, he has lawyers. So don't even try to claim he'd not have representation. He already does.

Hicks was caught on a battlefield in Afghanistan. These cases couldn't be any further apart if you tried.

That story really moved you, huh?


Now, if we can just establish which Australian government employees in particular and which American cock we're actually talking about, this might actually start to sound like a good offer.


You appear to be implying that we shouldn't mean that, and normally we wouldn't mean that, but if you feel the need to question it, maybe we should mean that. After all, you're also implying that all of us fundamentalist Jews are bad...


You say this, but I'm not so sure history supports your position. You really seem angry tonight, have you been drinking? I only ask because, you know, friends don't let friends post drunk and all that.


You really feel seriously vindicated by that whole British phone tapping drama, don't you?


You've got my vote for that one too.


Do you have this on solid authority? Is it the entire government that offers free blow jobs? Do they do this for any American cock that's offered?


Wasn't it the various South American governments that gave most of the Nazis asylum after the holocaust too? Why does everyone always run to South America? Why would the South Americans want these people??

As far as the rest of the Assanage stuff, I thought we had at least two other threads specifically about Gitmo & Assanage.. what do either have to do with Romney vs. Obama?

Yes, the South Americans have a pretty colorful history of offering protection to war criminals from Europe. Assange's case isn't really anything new and different here.

And it doesn't have anything to do with Obama except perhaps that it's probably his cock Fury is referring to being sucked.

I just don't get why South America would want these monsters? Granted, compared to the war criminals they usually prefer to take in, Assange really isn't much, but he's still not exactly coming in with a clean slate. Maybe it's for the economic influx these people tend to bring?

Eww!

Yeah, i looked back over some of what i posted earlier and it does sound angry dont it, it was not intended, but i think when you are passionate about a subject, you put everything into presenting or defending the position.



LMAO, It was like 9am in the morning here when we started on this, so i hope i was not drunk or i might have more serious problems, Oh and you know i am tea total don't you



I think it is a bit of a stretch to call Assange a monster, or put him in the same group as Nazi's as Samson did, considering he has not been convicted of any crime, but i can agree with the sentiment, why would South American countries want to give sanctuary to criminals?

Also, how could Assange ever get a fair trial in the US court system (lets forget the military tribunal for now), if the majority of people think about things as you both do, there is no jury in the country that would be impartial. Cause yall have judged him guilty before he has been charged or convicted.

Remember that whole thing about population and how much bigger we are? That. There's 350 million people living here, many of whom are drooling zombies who couldn't tell you a thing about Assange. Sadly they're the same zombies who voted for Obama and who think liberalism isn't a mental disease.

I would wager that most informed Americans know Assange is an ass and that the evidence is overwhelming that he's done what's been claimed. He's admitted he leaks documents to the world, without regard for anyone's safety when doing so, what more do you really want?

Who cares whether some foreign internet nerd in some foreign country gets extradited to some other foreign country? What does all this have to do with the Romey-Ryan ticket? Am I the only one who thinks this is a very exciting ticket?

The economy is in the worst state it has been in a human life time, American political power has declined globally over the past 4 years, and while it will remain no. 1 militarily for the forseeable future, others are fast catching up. Under normal circumstances, the incumbent would obviously have no chance in heck of being reelected. But then there is the opponent: Romney-Ryan. The first is more of a wimp, and less in touch with society than his elitist liberal opponent, and the other a tea party extremist, sure to alienate the half of the electorate with more moderate or changeable views. A major reason why the current president was elected in the first place, was the unusually weak opposing ticket. Now they're doing it again! Does the GOP not have serious candidates any more, or are they all sparing themselves for 2016, and is Romney taking one for the team, to provide the tea party candidate with a national stage to be set up for a try 4 years from now? Any way, what should have been a slam dunk, will now be an actual contest.

That depends on how you're defining excited I guess. I for one think it's a pretty good ticket. You'd have to do a lot though to get me really excited. On the level of Regan/Bush or something, which we don't have this time around. It's a whole lot stronger than McCain/Palin though (because it's not McCain btw, Palin was the strong force on that ticket).

Switching back over to the Israel thing: http://news.yahoo.com/tumour-israel-soon-destroyed-ahmadinejad-091548418.html

Yeah, because Fox News totally manipulated Yahoo News, right? I think it's fair to say Ahmadinejad said what he meant and that in his mind there's no difference between "Zionist" and "Jew". He really is the Adolf Hitler of our time and we should be heeding the signs from history before it's too late.

Oh shit, no, I didn't, sorry about that.


Okay, now hang on, I really thought that I was clear enough in explaining that I wasn't lumping him in with the Nazis beyond being essentially yet another international criminal that some South American country is offering to welcome in amnesty. My question though stands, I don't understand why these South American countries would want these people, especially the real monsters that they've taken in the past, but any of them in general. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Well, yes, Samson and I have essentially already decided that he's guilty of treason against the U.S. because of his self-admitted and published acts of espionage against our country, which is one of his country's allies, during a time of active war which may very well have jeopardized the lives of thousands of our soldiers, which, as a veteran myself, I feel pretty strongly about. As for his sexual assault charges in Sweden, I have no idea. If he's guilty, it's another crime he should be punished for as well, if he's not guilty then he should just be punished for his crimes against the United States. But as Samson pointed out, while he's been big news here we have plenty of people here who honestly don't pay attention to news that doesn't actually involve them, which I think is really sad, but it does provide people who could serve as impartial jury members, as our Anonymous poster stands testament to, as a case in point.


Actually, if you'd read the whole thread, you'd already know that Id previously pointed out that we're way off-topic with the stuff about Assange too and that Samson, Dwip, The_Fury & prettyfly (who aren't even citizens of the U.S.), and myself are quite interested in the present election race too, but there's only so much to discuss about it between campaign events.


Actually, I would think that it could very easily be argued that the economy was far worse than it presently is more than a few times in the past. Most recently, we could look at The Great Depression, but moving further back, the revolts in France were primarily caused by the extreme and widespread poverty and the horrific conditions that came with it, even further back much of The Dark Ages were pretty bad for the common folk. I'm sure that Dwip could easily provide us some other examples, but I assume these are sufficient to refute your statement as written.


I think I'll leave the rest of this to Samson to "defend" because he generally does it far better than I do, but I think it should already be obvious from previous posts in the start of this very thread that clearly he and I don't agree with your perspective.


As far as I know, yahoo news is strictly straight off AP's newfeed, that's why it's my primary news source. I really wish our leaders would feel less restricted by Geneva Convention rules and such and would just let the special forces teams, and the CIA black-ops teams, serve as political assassins every now and then when it's really needed. I really do think this may be a case of cutting off the snake's head and the rest of the beast will collapse, though I still do believe that a beautiful glass skating rink in the middle east would not be a bad thing either, but one's a short term solution to an immediate problem and the other is a long-term genocidal solution to a recurring problem which, I readily admit, is colored drastically by my own bias which could easily be consider racism, but does have a very real foundation, as I've explained before. (Obviously, I wouldn't really want any government using enough nukes to accomplish this, but I don't think that even if they did it would be nearly as bad as some folks here are convinced that it would be.)

Slight point of order. I'm not looking to hang Assange for treason. That's not even legally possible as he's not a US citizen, unless there's something we don't know. Espionage, sure, that's likely the best case scenario we could get him on.

Fair enough, he probably can't be tried for treason as a non-citizen, but espionage would suffice if they take into account that we were officially at war at the time and he is a citizen of our allies and his acts of espionage directly endangered our soldiers.