Amerika, zemlja velika

[harper lee]

12 minutes ago, Ivo Petović said:

Glupo je i biti condescending i potcenjivati svoje sagovornike...

 

 

?

[Frank Pembleton]

Zlobna si zbog sour grapes pominjanja Mayday i njenog startapa. 

@MayDay ima startup?
Whooooaaaaoooo!
Kad i gde i kako se zove?

.... Shiit has hit the fan!

[mustang]

da je htela da podeli sa tobom, podelila bi 

[Gojko & Stojko]

5 hours ago, Ivo Petović said:

Glupo je i biti condescending i potcenjivati svoje sagovornike...

 

5 hours ago, harper said:

?

U prvi trenutak mi je ovaj upitnik izgledao čudan od nekoga ko je (s pravom, naravno) malopre izneo tolike pohvale za Bomovu knjigu, ali znajući tvoj forumski opus sasvim se slaže. Šteta čitanja Boma.

 

Za Iva Petovića, jedan ovdašnji susret sa Pitersonom od prošle godine, nadam se da će da bude interesantan. Ja sam uživao gledajući kako ga je Ketrin MekGregor postavila na mesto. Ako video nije dostupan van Australije, ima transkript.

 

SaE

[ObiW]

Da se vratimo na omiljenu temu nasih eksperata za slobodu govora u Americi:

 

“Defendant Shall Not Attend Protests”: In Portland, Getting Out of Jail Requires Relinquishing Constitutional Rights

 

A dozen protesters facing federal charges are barred from going to “public gatherings” as a condition of release from jail — a tactic one expert described as “sort of hilariously unconstitutional.”

 

[...]

 

Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School said that imposing a protest ban as a release condition undermines the distinction between protected protest and criminal activity. “Even if they’re right that these people did, in fact, step beyond the bounds of the First Amendment and do something illegal, that doesn’t mean you can then restrict their First Amendment right.”

 

The ACLU’s Somil Trivedi said, “Release conditions should be related to public safety or flight” — in other words, the risk that the defendant will abscond. “This is neither.” He described the handwritten addition of a protest ban to a release document as “sort of hilariously unconstitutional.”

 

“I suppose the government could argue, ‘You disobeyed a law enforcement officer at a protest, and we don’t trust you to not do it again,’” Trivedi said.

 

But the release documents already instruct defendants that they are not allowed to break any laws while awaiting trial. “If they want to say ‘don’t break a law again,’ they’ve already said that,” Trivedi told ProPublica. “Beyond that, the only part that’s left would be not letting you exercise your First Amendment right.”

[...]

ovo je jos bolje:

[...]

 

 

Dreibelbis, like other protesters to whom ProPublica has spoken, said he was arrested for being on the sidewalk outside the federal courthouse. Because the federal government owns the land under the sidewalk, another protester (who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid influencing his upcoming trial) told ProPublica it’s “common knowledge” among protesters that the sidewalk is a no-go zone, and setting foot on it risks federal prosecution.

Dreibelbis told ProPublica he roller-skated into the protest, expecting to attend only briefly. He said he knelt on the sidewalk and was arrested by officers. (The charging document filed against Dreibelbis offers no arrest details.)

 

za vas koji se pitate (u tebe gledam Budjo) "a sta je Obama radio?", evo odgovora:

 

Both President Donald Trump and his predecessor, Barack Obama, have invoked that part of the law in the past. But the use of that same law to file criminal charges appears to be novel. The Obama administration sent a “surge force” of 400 FPS agents, and a dozen CBP agents, to Baltimore in 2015, when the police killing of Freddie Gray sparked broad unrest, but no charges were filed under Section 1315 itself in that response.

 

https://www.propublica.org/article/defendant-shall-not-attend-protests-in-portland-getting-out-of-jail-requires-relinquishing-constitutional-rights

[Gojko & Stojko]

54 minutes ago, ObiW said:

...

Ili, što bi rekao zec vuku (uz zaštitu medveda): "A gde ti je kapa?"

 

SaE

[Budja]

1 hour ago, ObiW said:

Da se vratimo na omiljenu temu nasih eksperata za slobodu govora u Americi:

 

“Defendant Shall Not Attend Protests”: In Portland, Getting Out of Jail Requires Relinquishing Constitutional Rights

 

A dozen protesters facing federal charges are barred from going to “public gatherings” as a condition of release from jail — a tactic one expert described as “sort of hilariously unconstitutional.”

 

[...]

 

Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School said that imposing a protest ban as a release condition undermines the distinction between protected protest and criminal activity. “Even if they’re right that these people did, in fact, step beyond the bounds of the First Amendment and do something illegal, that doesn’t mean you can then restrict their First Amendment right.”

 

The ACLU’s Somil Trivedi said, “Release conditions should be related to public safety or flight” — in other words, the risk that the defendant will abscond. “This is neither.” He described the handwritten addition of a protest ban to a release document as “sort of hilariously unconstitutional.”

 

“I suppose the government could argue, ‘You disobeyed a law enforcement officer at a protest, and we don’t trust you to not do it again,’” Trivedi said.

 

But the release documents already instruct defendants that they are not allowed to break any laws while awaiting trial. “If they want to say ‘don’t break a law again,’ they’ve already said that,” Trivedi told ProPublica. “Beyond that, the only part that’s left would be not letting you exercise your First Amendment right.”

[...]

ovo je jos bolje:

[...]

 

 

Dreibelbis, like other protesters to whom ProPublica has spoken, said he was arrested for being on the sidewalk outside the federal courthouse. Because the federal government owns the land under the sidewalk, another protester (who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid influencing his upcoming trial) told ProPublica it’s “common knowledge” among protesters that the sidewalk is a no-go zone, and setting foot on it risks federal prosecution.

Dreibelbis told ProPublica he roller-skated into the protest, expecting to attend only briefly. He said he knelt on the sidewalk and was arrested by officers. (The charging document filed against Dreibelbis offers no arrest details.)

 

za vas koji se pitate (u tebe gledam Budjo) "a sta je Obama radio?", evo odgovora:

 

Both President Donald Trump and his predecessor, Barack Obama, have invoked that part of the law in the past. But the use of that same law to file criminal charges appears to be novel. The Obama administration sent a “surge force” of 400 FPS agents, and a dozen CBP agents, to Baltimore in 2015, when the police killing of Freddie Gray sparked broad unrest, but no charges were filed under Section 1315 itself in that response.

 

https://www.propublica.org/article/defendant-shall-not-attend-protests-in-portland-getting-out-of-jail-requires-relinquishing-constitutional-rights

 

Hm... da se igram djvoljeg advokata.

Dakle, ako pijancu u kolima zabranis da vozida li je li to protiustavno, jer, eto, vec su mu rekli da ne krsi zakon?

Ovde je, kao i u mnogim drugim slucajevima, rec o tome da se smanji verovatnoca pocinjenog prestupa.

[ObiW]

Dobro je što si upisao ekonomiju a ne pravo.

[ObiW]

Minneapolis Police Reportedly Identify Viral 'Umbrella Man' As White Supremacist

 

Police say the masked, umbrella-wielding man who smashed windows at a Minneapolis auto parts store two days after George Floyd's death has ties to a white supremacist group and specifically sought to inflame racial tensions.

 

The Star Tribune reported that the man had also spray painted "free (expletive) for everyone zone" on the doors of the store, which was later burned to the ground.

 

"This was the first fire that set off a string of fires and looting throughout the precinct and the rest of the city," Christensen wrote in the affidavit, according to reports. "Until the actions of the person your affiant has been calling 'Umbrella Man,' the protests had been relatively peaceful."

 

The tipster identified the man as a Hell's Angels member, and said he "wanted to sow discord and racial unrest by breaking out the windows and writing what he did on the double red doors," reported the Star Tribune.

 

According to Minnesota Public Radio, community members have long suspected that outside extremists were trying to inflame tensions at demonstrations against racism and police brutality in the wake of Floyd's death, with some Twin Cities residents reporting seeing "white supremacist and other far-right imagery on vehicles that came into their neighborhoods during the protests."

[vememah]

13 hours ago, mustang said:

proverila sam i doktorku jer nija prva da isto prica, sve legit. 

 

Legit reptilijanci, demoni i veštice. Cool.

 

Quote

 

A Houston doctor who praises hydroxychloroquine and says that face masks aren’t necessary to stop transmission of the highly contagious coronavirus has become a star on the right-wing internet, garnering tens of millions of views on Facebook on Monday alone. Donald Trump Jr. declared the video of Stella Immanuel a “must watch,” while Donald Trump himself retweeted the video.

Before Trump and his supporters embrace Immanuel’s medical expertise, though, they should consider other medical claims Immanuel has made—including those about alien DNA and the physical effects of having sex with witches and demons in your dreams. 

Immanuel, a pediatrician and a religious minister, has a history of making bizarre claims about medical topics and other issues. She has often claimed that gynecological problems like cysts and endometriosis are in fact caused by people having sex in their dreams with demons and witches. 

She alleges alien DNA is currently used in medical treatments, and that scientists are cooking up a vaccine to prevent people from being religious. And, despite appearing in Washington, D.C. to lobby Congress on Monday, she has said that the government is run in part not by humans but by “reptilians” and other aliens.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/stella-immanuel-trumps-new-covid-doctor-believes-in-alien-dna-demon-sperm-and-hydroxychloroquine

[Anduril]

18 hours ago, Budja said:

 

Uopste nije relativizacija.

HCQ je kontroverzna tema bas zato sto su rezultati razlicitih OBJAVLJENIH studija pokrili sve: od stetnosti, preko nije bitno, do korisnosti. I bilo je ocajnih metodoloskih, do fake studija, na obe strane argumenta. Dakle, nije rec o ravnoj zemlji.

 

I zbog toga zatvaras tviter account?

 

Ideaan fuel za sve teoreticare zavere.

Vec rekoh, ne lupetaj. Imao si vremena da se informises o cemu se radi, nije vise mart ili april. Ali, vaznije ti podrzavanje prava na propagandu neofasista. Nije ti prvi put.

 

18 hours ago, Gandalf said:

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Cak i Borat zna fundamentalnu razliku izmedju freedom of speech i freedom of reach. To je razlika izmedju slobode govora i slobode (neofasisticke) propagande.

 

[mandingo]

Kad se vec prica o Jordanu Petersonu.... Doktor Michael Malice je bio gost na kcerkinom podcastu: 

 

 

@ 49:30 i

@ 54:20 

 

Otprilike... Sa telefona postujem pa nisam siguran. 

 

 

[Budja]

13 hours ago, ObiW said:

Dobro je što si upisao ekonomiju a ne pravo.

 

E, kad to kaze 1 banderash™, onda moram da se zamislim.

[Budja]

6 hours ago, Anduril said:

Vec rekoh, ne lupetaj. Imao si vremena da se informises o cemu se radi, nije vise mart ili april. Ali, vaznije ti podrzavanje prava na propagandu neofasista. Nije ti prvi put.

 

 

 

 

Zalepis etiketu "propagana neofasista" i vozi, nema da brines.

 

Btw, ovo "neofasizam" zvuci jednako rogobatno kao "neoliberalizam".

Edited July 29, 2020 by Budja

[harper lee]

25 minutes ago, Budja said:

 

Zalepis etiketu "propagana neofasista" i vozi, nema da brines.

 

Btw, ovo "neofasizam" zvuci jednako rogobatno kao "neoliberalizam".

 

Tako funkcionisu svi SJW. Svako misljenje koje im se ne svidja traze da se ukine jer je fasisticko a fasisticko je zato sto oni kazu da jeste. Lekari, ekonomisti, inzenjeri, programeri, influenseri, razni analiticari nicega i eksperti ni za sta, svi se bez obzira na struku smatraju strucnjacima za psihologiju, socijalnu psihologiju, sociologiju i filozofiju politike jer su te oblasti odredili sebi za hobi i procitali su nekoliko aktuelnih tekstova o tome. Uglavnom pisanih od istih diletanata kao sto su i oni sami. Smesna stvar.