Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 1824
-
"... there was a third possibility that we hadn't even counted upon"
[Read the article: Support for al-Qaida plots on large right-wing blog]
[Read more letters about this article: Here](points to Golden Wanker if he recogises the quote)
[Golden Wanker]: ... the same defiance and logic I love to see from people like Prunes, Arne, William T et al when they take apart the arguments of right-wingers turns to irrational personal attacks when the subject of Islam arises.
Have you considered the possibility (and most reasonable explanation) that it's the same "defiance and logic" as usual, and that it is a prolem with your perception, rather than everyone else's production, that accounts for this anomaly? I doubt it; this scotoma of yours is like many such: undetected by the observer and only obvious to others that can see what's being missed? The "hatred" here is all yours, buddy.
Cheers,
-
@ Golden Wanker
[Read the article: Support for al-Qaida plots on large right-wing blog]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Baldie replies to my comment "This rule by theology continues today in most (all?) Muslim dominated countries" by saying ,"No, it doesn't. What you have is archaic laws no one has followed for a thousand years. Just like you can't whistle while riding a horse backwards in New England."
Baldie, did you miss the list of conditions that I published on how non-Muslims live in Muslim countries? I'm happy to post it again, but I assure you that in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Malaysia etc those Islamic laws are most certainly enforced, even and especially against non-Muslims.
Just curious, Wanker, maybe I missed it: Which "Muslim countries" have you stayed in? Here's my list: Turkey, Egypt, Tchad (half'n'half), Indonesia. In none of these have I seen Islamic laws "enforced, even and especially against non-Muslims". In fact, Turkey and Indonesia are notably secular, certainly by my experience, and Egypt is certainly not particularly strict (something that bothers the Muslim Brotherhood no end, but they're hardly in the reins of gummint unless we manage to push the population into their arms). Tchad, being mixed, has a fair bit of accomodation (although its neighbour Nigeria has had some issues).
Cheers,
-
"Exigent circumstances"
[Read the article: The significance of the FBI's law-breaking]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've argued against "exigent circumsances" for quite some time (going back to pre-blog Usenet days; for instance, here: "http://groups.google.com/group/misc.survivalism/msg/2b6da49da7005df2").
Police (and other gummint agents) will use "exigent circumstances" when they don't have the goods, or when they just want a "free bite of the apple". The 72 hours they wanted for location traces without a warrant were supposed to be for emergency reasons when they thought lives might be in danger, but as we saw with Mark Fuhrman jumping the fence at Brentwood, that's just the ruse to get them in the door; they'll make stuff up, and the courts will generally defer to their 'judgement' (as they did with the lying sack'o'shite Fuhrman).
Not to say that sometimes "emergency" situations don't exist that require quick action (and FWIW, from my experience somewhere around half the "taps" on mobile phones are such "emergency" location requests; people gone missing, parents trying to track down kids, etc.). That's reasonable, but if there is no actual emergency, at the very least, any evidence that is found should be excluded at trial if no such "emergency" is found (and I'd say that not much is lost if all such "emergency" information is used only for the purposes that supposedly justify it and it is banned from court for prosecution regardless of whether the emergency exists; if the police think that it's really necessary, wake up a judge....).
Giving them the "free bite of the appple" just encourages them to lie, and to skirt the rules we have found appropriate.
Get a warrant.
Cheers,