• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cops: Letters to nyc mayor test positive for ricin

Celebrate? Yes, encourage wholesale murder, no. See, there is a difference between passing laws based upon necessity and public harm versus enforcing one's beliefs against the populace, personally I think Bloomberg is the lowest of human life and he can't leave the world quickly enough, HOWEVER, my personal feelings should an assasination attempt become successful are seperate from what is the morally correct choice, I can think in more than one dimension at a time.

So in other words you have a problem with representative democracy and the democratic process when it comes to against your beliefs. In other words you hate people that pass laws that go against your beliefs and would celebrate murder.
 
So in other words you have a problem with representative democracy and the democratic process when it comes to against your beliefs. In other words you hate people that pass laws that go against your beliefs and would celebrate murder.
Okay, to correct you. The U.S. is a constitutional federal republic, NOT a "representative democracy", the only thing democratic about the republic is the election process. Next, it's not about "against my beliefs" it's about tyrants breaking the law, Bloomberg has violated term limits with the aid of the NYC city council, he has violated Arizona law, federal law, jurisdictional law, and continues to assert that americans are too stupid and immoral to retain full rights. I don't care how you word it, I will be happy every time a tyrant is no longer victimizing the populace whether that is through retirement, loss of power through elections or conviction, or even death, that you don't get my point is irrelevant to me.
 
Reaching much? First off, MJ is a complete joke of a news source, secondly, you are not only accusing me of criminal activity but trying with everything you've got to confirm the bias instead of objectively looking at information. You realize simply celebrating when someone dies while crass is not illegal in the U.S. right? You realize sympathizing involves providing material and other support directly right?

At no point have I said I endorse or condone the violence, but hey, if you want to be offended because I may celebrate an outcome that removes a tyrant be my guest.


You got the attention you wanted, so deal with it.

Meanwhile,.....

big.jpg
 
, Bloomberg has violated term limits with the aid of the NYC city council, .

That is demonstrably FALSE.

The city council SETS term limits. Now how could they violate those limits THEY set by voting to extend term limits for the mayor?

If you don't understand that, I'll try to explain AGAIN.
 
That is demonstrably FALSE.

The city council SETS term limits. Now how could they violate those limits THEY set by voting to extend term limits for the mayor?

If you don't understand that, I'll try to explain AGAIN.
No, it isn't false at all. The term limits were set, Guilliani followed them and Bloomberg ran as a moderate Republican to follow up, when Bloomberg's second term ended he was not supposed to run again but magically he was on the ballot, he couldn't even follow simple rules and yet will put the hammer to anything that he disagrees with.

Q. and A. on Term Limits - NYTimes.com
 
No, it isn't false at all. The term limits were set, Guilliani followed them and Bloomberg ran as a moderate Republican to follow up, when Bloomberg's second term ended he was not supposed to run again but magically he was on the ballot, he couldn't even follow simple rules and yet will put the hammer to anything that he disagrees with.

Q. and A. on Term Limits - NYTimes.com

He was not 'magically on the ballot', nice try. Extension of term limits were put to a vote by the city council. The public had a chance to voice their opinions during the debate and the mayor's advocate had a chance. After the open,public debate the city council then put it to a vote. (You know, the way America works when you want to change a law) The extension of term limit vote passed. It was voted on by duly elected representatives of the 5 boroughs of NYC.

Do you follow so far. Once the city council (made up of duly elected representatives) changed the term limits (which was their right to do after VOTING on it and allowing the public discourse) then the term limit LAW WAS CHANGED. Ergo, NO LAW WAS VIOLATED.

You can continue to be obstinate, but any semblancce of critical thinking here will lead to to the conclusion that NO LAW WAS VIOLATED.

And maybe if Guiliani had the SUPPPORT of city council, he could have made a convincing argument to extend term limits, but he had burned too many bridges at that point and wouldn't have gotten the votes.


Speed limits are set - They change
taxes are SET - they change
retirement age is set - it changes
So I don't even know what you mean when you say 'term limits were set' . Laws are NOT written in stone and if you can garner the support to change them, well good on you!
 
Last edited:
He was not 'magically on the ballot', nice try. Extension of term limits were put to a vote by the city council. The public had a chance to voice their opinions during the debate and the mayor's advocate had a chance. After the open,public debate the city council then put it to a vote. (You know, the way America works when you want to change a law) The extension of term limit vote passed. It was voted on by duly elected representatives of the 5 boroughs of NYC.

Do you follow so far. Once the city council (made up of duly elected representatives) changed the term limits (which was their right to do after VOTING on it and allowing the public discourse) then the term limit LAW WAS CHANGED. Ergo, NO LAW WAS VIOLATED.

You can continue to be obstinate, but any semblancce of critical thinking here will lead to to the conclusion that NO LAW WAS VIOLATED.

And maybe if Guiliani had the SUPPPORT of city council, he could have made a convincing argument to extend term limits, but he had burned too many bridges at that point and wouldn't have gotten the votes.
Did you read the article, in the answer portion it was explained that a term limit change had to be done by public referendum vote, the council illegally voted not to hold referendum, then voted to extend the term limits while Bloomberg was approaching the end of his second term. The voters didn't even get to have their legal say, and the council made law where they had no legal authority.

Yeah, nothing shady, illegal, or dishonest there, all good. :roll:
 
Okay, to correct you. The U.S. is a constitutional federal republic, NOT a "representative democracy", the only thing democratic about the republic is the election process.
A representative democracy and a republic arent mutually exclusive...

Next, it's not about "against my beliefs" it's about tyrants breaking the law, Bloomberg has violated term limits with the aid of the NYC city council, he has violated Arizona law, federal law, jurisdictional law, and continues to assert that americans are too stupid and immoral to retain full rights. I don't care how you word it, I will be happy every time a tyrant is no longer victimizing the populace whether that is through retirement, loss of power through elections or conviction, or even death, that you don't get my point is irrelevant to me.

No he is not a "tyrant" he hasnt violated laws. You have a very very narrow definition of "tyrant".
 
A representative democracy and a republic arent mutually exclusive...
For the purposes of legal authority they are worlds apart.


No he is not a "tyrant" he hasnt violated laws. You have a very very narrow definition of "tyrant".
He is the TEXTBOOK definition of a tyrant and he has committed multiple legal violations just in Arizona and federal alone.
 
Wow, now folks are supporting terrorism.
 
"Support" is your word, not mine. I said I wouldn't cry over it. Liberals favor the criminal and hate the victim, so their being harmed is only poetic justice. Take George Tiller for example. I don't advocate people go around and shoot late-term abortion doctors, but when one get's shot, I say good riddance.

Reminds me of the movie "Shoah", where Poles didn't outright voice their support for the Holocaust, but they sure did make it clear that they were glad the Jews were gone. You are voicing the same kind of bigotry and passive support for murder.
 
For the purposes of legal authority they are worlds apart.
No they are not. You can be a republic and a representative democracy, like we are. Again they are not mutually exclusive.



He is the TEXTBOOK definition of a tyrant and he has committed multiple legal violations just in Arizona and federal alone.
He is oppressive? He is cruel? That is a tyrant, a cruel and oppressive leader.
 
1978 London, well, a ricin attack anyway. It was the famous "umbrella dart" to the leg. That's the last succussful ricin attack I can remember anyway.

I thought that was a M-1 Bioinoculator using magnetic propulsion to shoot a dart tipped with blowfish or some similar toxin
 
I thought that was a M-1 Bioinoculator using magnetic propulsion to shoot a dart tipped with blowfish or some similar toxin
Nope, walked right up to him with an umbrella that had a ricin laced ball and shot it into his leg.
 
No they are not. You can be a republic and a representative democracy, like we are. Again they are not mutually exclusive.
Care to actually study what the founders wrote about that? The Republic falls upon the division of state and federal powers with the federal having the least authority, the democratically elected representatives have only those powers which were granted within the constitution, public opinion is irrelevant until either a power is 1) enumerated or 2) granted by amendment.




He is oppressive? He is cruel? That is a tyrant, a cruel and oppressive leader.
I guess when you agree with someone that people are too stupid to have rights one could see him as less than a tyrant, otherwise please tell me WHERE Bloomberg is exercising legitimate authority sparingly and only for compelling interests.
 
Nope, walked right up to him with an umbrella that had a ricin laced ball and shot it into his leg.

most of the umbrella killings were using that CIA dart gun. Frank Church (gaping asshole) had a big expose of the CIA and the plans of that weapon were splashed all across the news. KGB before used to use cyanide guns often hidden in newspapers but victims often made lots of noise and would bring undue attention. A few weeks after the CIA bio-inoculator was splashed over the news=two bulgarian defectors were killed in western europe -it looked like heart attacks but more intense inquiry indicated shellfish toxin with small magnetic darts

want to hear something even more eerie. The zapruder film shows a guy with an umbrella shortly before JFK got shot-in his autopsy there was a small hole in his throat the size of the magnetic dart and the CIA admitted, eyars later-one of those devices was unaccounted for on Nov 22, 63. The same guy who wrote about this J David Truby, noted that JFK's head reacted to the shot consistent with someone who had been given a paralyzing neurotoxin right before being shot with a bullet
 
Care to actually study what the founders wrote about that? The Republic falls upon the division of state and federal powers with the federal having the least authority, the democratically elected representatives have only those powers which were granted within the constitution, public opinion is irrelevant until either a power is 1) enumerated or 2) granted by amendment.
So we are a representative democracy.. We are a republic.. Yes.. We also democratically elect representatives to represent us in DC, the federal government..





I guess when you agree with someone that people are too stupid to have rights one could see him as less than a tyrant, otherwise please tell me WHERE Bloomberg is exercising legitimate authority sparingly and only for compelling interests.
Please explain. How is he oppressing his people? How is his governing in cruel manners?
 
The person who is trying to kill Obama and Bloomberg is a terrorist and a traitor.
 
most of the umbrella killings were using that CIA dart gun. Frank Church (gaping asshole) had a big expose of the CIA and the plans of that weapon were splashed all across the news. KGB before used to use cyanide guns often hidden in newspapers but victims often made lots of noise and would bring undue attention. A few weeks after the CIA bio-inoculator was splashed over the news=two bulgarian defectors were killed in western europe -it looked like heart attacks but more intense inquiry indicated shellfish toxin with small magnetic darts

want to hear something even more eerie. The zapruder film shows a guy with an umbrella shortly before JFK got shot-in his autopsy there was a small hole in his throat the size of the magnetic dart and the CIA admitted, eyars later-one of those devices was unaccounted for on Nov 22, 63. The same guy who wrote about this J David Truby, noted that JFK's head reacted to the shot consistent with someone who had been given a paralyzing neurotoxin right before being shot with a bullet
Jesus Christ! That much trouble they weren't taking anything short of dead as an acceptable result.
 
Jesus Christ! That much trouble they weren't taking anything short of dead as an acceptable result.

the theory was-hit him with the toxin and he wouldn't be able to duck if the first shot missed it didn't
 
Reminds me of the movie "Shoah", where Poles didn't outright voice their support for the Holocaust, but they sure did make it clear that they were glad the Jews were gone. You are voicing the same kind of bigotry and passive support for murder.

Thank you for committing the Godwin falacy. Have a nice evening :)
 
Back
Top Bottom