André Jute, extreme, unsuitable for purpose, dangerous, dull, overpriced

On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:14:11 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

His votes are public record and I heard the clip
of him rationalizing one of them.

The votes are a public record but what they mean is not at all clear
from the right-wing sites you frequent. Please, find a mainstream
news site (even a conservative one like the Washington Post or the AP)
that characterizes that vote meaning what you think it means.

I don't think you can.

On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:14:11 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

http://www.google.com/search?&q=%22b...+alive+act%22&

Perhaps you'd like to comment on the first hit.

You really think Media Matters deserves comment?

Media Matters is surely left, but like the best left-wing sites, it's
very fact based and links to documentary evidence and mainstream news
reporting a lot.

That's not what humanevents.com and the other sites you cite tend to
do -- they just weave commentary into a big blog and claim it's news.

Big difference.

"Still Just Me..." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 18:15:03 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:


Bush and Cheney kept this nation safe following the attack on 9/11. We
shall
soon see if Obama can do the same.

Nonsense. The attack happened on their watch. While I question the
President's ability (either one) to impact the sort of attack we
encountered directly, if we're attacked that just makes is 1 to 1 for
the two Presidents.

The attack occurred after 8 years of Clinton no action. He was too busy
getting blow jobs - which he did not consider to be sex. And then that word
"is" had to be defined also. Yes, I agree with you, Clinton was much too
busy to see to this nation's security.

Let's note that Cheney and Conesco met with the Taliban in July in an
attempt to negotiate the $6b pipeline across Northern Afghanistan.
They didn't exactly have the pulse of the (potential) problem in hand,
now did they.

Cheney was trying to keep gas affordable for the masses. After all, most
Americans would rather drive their cars than do anything else - like fight
terrorists for example. Obama, a true European, will most likely want mighty
Israel to fight our wars for us in the future.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Still Just Me..." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 16:13:00 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

You just love to make up stuff. Furman didn't plant the glove*; he lied
about having ever used the 'n' word.

He clearly planted it. Simpson parked in front of his house and went
in the normal way. The alley was still crossed with cobwebs, based on
the testimony of his fellow detectives. It was a plant. So was the
drop of blood on the gate that magically appeared three days after the
original photos were taken with it not there. Perhaps you'd also like
to explain away why the detective took his blood out for a ride one
day.

Still has been watching too many "Law and Order: Criminal Intent" shows on
TV. Please Still, what ever you do, stay away from the detective business!

And he still works as a contributor to
Greta Von Sustren's (sp?) show and also on Geraldo Rivera's, not
Hannity's.

He was on Hannity's. So now he's a radical racist on another show.
Much better.

Still seems to want to call everyone a racist. This is the telltale
signature of a true racist. I believe we are entitled to know just what race
Still despises the most. I mean, there are many other races beside the Black
(Negroid) one after all.

(Not to say he never appeared on Hannity; it's possible he did; but he's
never been a regular AFAIK.) No idea where he lives, or why. I hear that
Sandpointers talk highly of you! LOL

Look into it. It's a racist haven. Perfect for Furman.

Still seems to want to call everyone a racist. This is the telltale
signature of a true racist. I believe we are entitled to know just what race
Still despises the most. I mean, there are many other races beside the Black
(Negroid) one after all.

*The glove was found exactly where Kato Whatzispuss heard a loud bang
behind
his guest room wall. How would Furman know where to plant it? He could
have just put it in the plants at the side of driveway. He didn't know
Simpson had been back there that night.

Maybe Furman bought Bruno Magli (sp?) shoes for OJ to wear on TV, too,
knowing that years later they'd leave prints in blood that would implicate
him! LOL

Bill "watched WAY more of that trial than I care to admit" S.


I'm not saying OJ didn't do it. I think it's pretty clear he did.
However, it's a fact that they falsified evidence and THAT is what
lost the trial for them. It didn't even matter that Furman was a
loudmouthed racist - it was the racism combined with the obvious
evidence planting that was the issue.

Still seems to want to call everyone a racist. This is the telltale
signature of a true racist. I believe we are entitled to know just what race
Still despises the most. I mean, there are many other races beside the Black
(Negroid) one after all.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Still Just Me... wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 16:13:00 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

You just love to make up stuff. Furman didn't plant the glove*; he
lied about having ever used the 'n' word.

He clearly planted it. Simpson parked in front of his house and went
in the normal way. The alley was still crossed with cobwebs, based on
the testimony of his fellow detectives. It was a plant. So was the
drop of blood on the gate that magically appeared three days after the
original photos were taken with it not there. Perhaps you'd also like
to explain away why the detective took his blood out for a ride one
day.

I see. So Furman went back there and then weaved cobwebs behind him to
cover his tracks. Brilliant.

As for the drop(s) of blood, not sure to WHICH gate you refer. I think I
and everyone else in the world would have heard about a "smoking gun photo"
proving a plant. But I'm sure that Furman found both gloves at the crime
scene and took one -- without being seen; and swiped some blood -- how, in
what and without being seen -- BEFORE HE EVEN KNEW THAT SIMPSON COULD
POSSIBLY BE INVOLVED -- and planted it all over at Rottingham (or whatever
it was called). Ridiculous. The defense and your media buddies set out to
destroy Mark Furman, and the prosecution and LAPD let them do it. Took the
heat off them for blowing the biggest (and easiest) case of the century.

As for the blood ride, Van Atter (?) did a dumb thing -- not because they
tampered with evidence, but because it allowed the defense to raise a stink
as if they did. (No evidence whatsoever that the blood was compromised. It
just didn't go fast and direct enough to avoid people like you yelling
foul.)

And he still works as a contributor to
Greta Von Sustren's (sp?) show and also on Geraldo Rivera's, not
Hannity's.

He was on Hannity's. So now he's a radical racist on another show.
Much better.

(Not to say he never appeared on Hannity; it's possible he did; but
he's never been a regular AFAIK.) No idea where he lives, or why.
I hear that Sandpointers talk highly of you! LOL

Look into it. It's a racist haven. Perfect for Furman.

*The glove was found exactly where Kato Whatzispuss heard a loud
bang behind his guest room wall. How would Furman know where to
plant it? He could have just put it in the plants at the side of
driveway. He didn't know Simpson had been back there that night.

Maybe Furman bought Bruno Magli (sp?) shoes for OJ to wear on TV,
too, knowing that years later they'd leave prints in blood that
would implicate him! LOL

Bill "watched WAY more of that trial than I care to admit" S.


I'm not saying OJ didn't do it. I think it's pretty clear he did.
However, it's a fact that they falsified evidence and THAT is what
lost the trial for them. It didn't even matter that Furman was a
loudmouthed racist - it was the racism combined with the obvious
evidence planting that was the issue.

I haven't made a point to listen to him -- crime stories on cable news don't
grab me much -- but the few times I have he's sounded very sharp (like an
excellent detective) and has gone out of his way to not express any racial
or ethnic bias. Other than the person or persons who testified that years
earlier (long before the trial) he had expressed prejudice and used a crude
and unaccpetable word, I'm not aware of any /proof/ that he did anything
wrong in the OJ case. It's a media-created myth and you've bought it
(shocking!). Here's your honorary L.A. Juror's Pin.

BS (done)

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...
On Jun 7, 6:36 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:

The OJ Simpson miscarriage of justice is a monument to Black Racism in
America. All Blacks should have been excluded from that particular jury.
Some morons do not think Black racism can exist in America, but I assure
you
that it is alive and well everywhere in the land

I made a point of watching some of that on television, and Alistair
Cooke, an acute observer of American mores, broadcast on the subject
more than once.

That case made a mockery of the entire justice system in the States.
The judge wasn't in control from day one: more to the point, he was
terrified of all the legal showboats sitting in front of him. He let
them run away with the trial. It looked like one sort of justice for
the rich and famous and another for the poor and friendless because it
was so blatantly a rich and famous man's bought justice.

You can't exclude blacks from a jury. But the Constitution guarantees
a man a jury of his peers. Had Simpson been tried by a jury of his
neighbours, in the same income bracket (which is what the Constitution-
framers intended), he'd still be in jail. It is a misuse of the
Constitutional guarantee to claim his skin colour is suddenly the most
significant thing about him (there are laws precisely to to forbid
that sort of racism!) and then to give him a poor black jury whose
vote was a foregone conclusion from day one.

However, the jury system is also everyone else's protection. If it
occasionally makes a mistake and lets a guilty party walk, we must
accept that to enjoy the protection it offers against an arbitrary
state. It's balance must very definitely be that not one innocent
shall be convicted.

I agree with Mr. Jute on most everything he says above. But the critical
thing that went wrong was the jury selection. Once that mistake was made,
everything else followed. I blame the prosecutors for not getting the jury
right.

I do not mind if a few innocents get convicted, even to the point of being
put to death, if it insures that most guilty get punished. Once justice
becomes outraged, as in the Simpson case, faith and trust in our
institutions is called into question and then we are all at risk. What is
good for society always greatly outweighs any consideration for the fate of
individuals.

The jury system is far from perfect as is democracy itself. Whether in fact
it is better than all those other systems out there is highly debatable. The
final answers are not yet in. Never forget that European fascism in the 30's
followed democracy, it did not precede it.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:14:11 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

His votes are public record and I heard the clip
of him rationalizing one of them.

The votes are a public record but what they mean is not at all clear
from the right-wing sites you frequent. Please, find a mainstream
news site (even a conservative one like the Washington Post or the AP)
that characterizes that vote meaning what you think it means.

I don't think you can.

The Washington Post and the AP are entirely left wing liberal propaganda
crap. The Washington Times is the paper to go to, not that execrable Post.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:14:11 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

http://www.google.com/search?&q=%22b...+alive+act%22&

Perhaps you'd like to comment on the first hit.

You really think Media Matters deserves comment?

Media Matters is surely left, but like the best left-wing sites, it's
very fact based and links to documentary evidence and mainstream news
reporting a lot.

That's not what humanevents.com and the other sites you cite tend to
do -- they just weave commentary into a big blog and claim it's news.

Conservative commentators present the facts just fine and then they comment
on those facts. If you don't like the comments, then just read the facts.
The Human Events article that I presented in full was just a statement of
the facts. There was hardly any commentary at all. What was there about it
that you did not agree with?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Edward Dolan wrote:
"Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT"
wrote in message ...
On Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:14:11 -0700, "Bill Sornson"
wrote:

His votes are public record and I heard the clip
of him rationalizing one of them.

The votes are a public record but what they mean is not at all clear
from the right-wing sites you frequent. Please, find a mainstream
news site (even a conservative one like the Washington Post or the
AP) that characterizes that vote meaning what you think it means.

I don't think you can.

The Washington Post and the AP are entirely left wing liberal
propaganda crap. The Washington Times is the paper to go to, not that
execrable Post.

Only Flogittodeathlinson (times 12 now I guess LOL ) could attribute a sound
and/or video clip of Obama saying he opposed the bill (one time of three)
because it "threatened the original intent of the woman" to destroy the
baby. This wasn't a /fetus/; it was a living /baby/ that had survived the
butchery of abortion and was viable outside the womb.

I refuse to do his Googling for him. (And Ed, please break it to him that I
plonked him and don't see what he addresses to me. It's really sort of
cute, in a sad and pathetic way, that he's still doing it. Just like
Prus-boy! LOL )

BS (done with this one, too)

Andrew Muzi wrote:
Edward Dolan wrote:
"AMuzi" wrote in message
...
Still wrote:
Charles Manson did not kill Sharon Tate.
"Michael Press" wrote
Charles Manson was convicted of the murder of Sharon Tate,
and rightly so. Had Vincent Bugliosi been counsel for
prosecution in State of California vs. Orenthal James
Simpson, then Simpson would have gone straight to jail,
not collecting $200.
"Edward Dolan" wrote:
At last, something that Mr. Press and I can agree upon. Manson was
the force behind all the killings and should now be rotting in his
grave if justice were the least bit swift in this country.
The OJ Simpson miscarriage of justice is a monument to Black Racism
in America. All Blacks should have been excluded from that
particular jury. Some morons do not think Black racism can exist in
America, but I assure you that it is alive and well everywhere in
the land despite our half Black president.
Michael Press wrote:
Prosecution was outright incompetent. They had a duty to the people,
and failed abominably.
Worse than mere incompetence.
The critical point was that evidence passed through the hands of a
perjurer. Jury had no choice really, despite his obvious guilt.

Trials are never perfect. Many witnesses lie. That should not prevent
one from coming to a right decision. The only thing that can explain
the result is Black Racism.

You're wrong. That may well be true (I wouldn't know or care) but it's
not the only explanation.

"Ed Dolan the Great" wrong? Say it ain't so!

Even if you believe all detectives are lying perjuring sneaks, a blatant
exposure like Furman's fatally taints the case. A responsible jury had
no other choice than to acquit the obviously guilty murderer.

The jurors could have forced a mis-trial.

Did you read the daily newspaper reports as it happened? This is not a
complex thing to understand.

I tried to close my eyes and plug my ears to avoid anything OJ at the
time. The trial marked the transition of so-called news into mostly
"infotainment".

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.