http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/08/05/more-surveillance-abuse-exposed-special-dea-unit-is-spying-on-americans-and-covering-it-up/
QuoteAs Americans sort through their feelings regarding the disclosure of the massive collection of metadata by the National Security Administration, we are now learning of what may be a far more insidious violation of our constitutional rights at the hands of a government agency.
Reuters is reporting (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805) that a secret U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration branch has been collecting information from "intelligence intercepts, wiretaps, informants and a massive database of telephone records" and disseminating the data to authorities across the nation to "help them launch criminal investigations of Americans."
In this case, the Americans who are being subjected to these investigations are suspected drug dealers.
The unit of the DEA that is conducting the surveillance is known as the Special Operations Division ("SOD") and is made up of a partnership of numerous government agencies including the NSA, CIA, FBI, IRS and the Department of Homeland Security.
While there are suggestions that elements of the program may be legal, there is obvious concern on the part of those running the program—a concern that has not prevented them from going ahead with the collecting and using of covertly gathered data—that the surveillance effort may not be entirely kosher. We know this to be true because, according to documents reviewed by Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805), DEA agents are specifically instructed never to reveal nor discuss the existence and utilization of SOD provided data and to further "omit the SOD's involvement from investigative reports, affidavits, discussions with prosecutors and courtroom testimony. Agents are instructed to then use 'normal investigative techniques to recreate the information provided by SOD.'"
The last line of the directive is particularly disturbing.
By instructing agents to use "normal investigative techniques to recreate the information provided by SOD", law enforcement is being instructed to flat out lie when disclosing how they came across the tips or other information provided by SOD leading to an arrest. These agents are directed to give substance to the lie by fabricating a false source or method utilized to gain information leading to an arrest.
[More] (http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/08/05/more-surveillance-abuse-exposed-special-dea-unit-is-spying-on-americans-and-covering-it-up/)
See also:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805
http://gawker.com/the-dea-is-spying-on-us-and-showing-other-agencies-how-1028644034
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/08/did-the-dea-phony-up-criminal-investigations-of-americans--92311.html
http://reason.com/blog/2013/08/05/shocker-nsa-tools-for-spying-on-foreign
I liked this part:
QuoteSome defense lawyers and former prosecutors said that using "parallel construction" may be legal to establish probable cause for an arrest. But they said employing the practice as a means of disguising how an investigation began may violate pretrial discovery rules by burying evidence that could prove useful to criminal defendants.
Really? No shit? Are these first year law students or something?
Seriously though, parallel construction strongly suggests there are secret and illegal programs at work. It also suggests that anything said by the FBI, NSA etc about recent concerns in regards to the legality of their programs and the oversight which is used to control them, is quite possibly a pile of steaming bullshit.
Quote from: Cain on August 05, 2013, 08:53:15 PM
I liked this part:
QuoteSome defense lawyers and former prosecutors said that using "parallel construction" may be legal to establish probable cause for an arrest. But they said employing the practice as a means of disguising how an investigation began may violate pretrial discovery rules by burying evidence that could prove useful to criminal defendants.
Really? No shit? Are these first year law students or something?
Seriously though, parallel construction strongly suggests there are secret and illegal programs at work. It also suggests that anything said by the FBI, NSA etc about recent concerns in regards to the legality of their programs and the oversight which is used to control them, is quite possibly a pile of steaming bullshit.
Not if they can get away with it. I mean, from a pragmatic level.
Onward with the glorious 5 year plan.
Well, it's not like the law applied much (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/04/fbi-informant-crimes-report/2613305/) to the FBI anyway:
QuoteThe FBI gave its informants permission to break the law at least 5,658 times in a single year, according to newly disclosed documents that show just how often the nation's top law enforcement agency enlists criminals to help it battle crime.
OH, NO WAY, IT CAN'T BE. THE DEA ARE THE GOOD GUYS. I'M SURE A FEW OF THEM ARE CORRUPT BUT MOST OF THEM ARE TOTALLY IN IT FOR THE RIGHT REASONS.
:horrormirth:
Actually, yes.
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
In the face of evidence that disagrees with my beliefs, resort to anecdote!
:supertard:
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
:lulz:
Quote from: Net on August 06, 2013, 02:35:23 AM
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
In the face of evidence that disagrees with my beliefs, resort to anecdote!
:supertard:
:potd:
Dance everyone, dance!
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 11:02:19 AM
Dance everyone, dance!
As much as I hate the use of "retarded", no image so perfectly summarises the situation.
(http://anongallery.org/img/6957/hey-guys-look-how-retarded-i-am-jokes-on-them.jpg)
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
I find that very hard to pallet. Over the last Decade and especially these last few months we (The WORLD) have seen how the entirety of the administrative body of the United states has suffered an endemic, sustained and permissive culture of corruption. Of acting outside the boundaries of the law, ignoring international treaties and conventions, of placing little to no value on the lives of its citizens or anyone else, of routinely falsifying evidence, of using scare tactics, and of acquiring said "evidence" via illegal and illegitimate means.
I like you rwhn, but how can you, with a straight face say that these kind of actions are out of the ordinary?
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 11:02:19 AM
Dance everyone, dance!
SOCIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENT HURR HURR
Quote from: Faust on August 06, 2013, 02:58:10 PM
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
I find that very hard to pallet. Over the last Decade and especially these last few months we (The WORLD) have seen how the entirety of the administrative body of the United states has suffered an endemic, sustained and permissive culture of corruption. Of acting outside the boundaries of the law, ignoring international treaties and conventions, of placing little to no value on the lives of its citizens or anyone else, of routinely falsifying evidence, of using scare tactics, and of acquiring said "evidence" via illegal and illegitimate means.
I like you rwhn, but how can you, with a straight face say that these kind of actions are out of the ordinary?
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 11:02:19 AM
Dance everyone, dance!
Unless he doesn't plan to ever try to communicate with us again, I don't buy that, I'll be kind and hope that was sarcasm on his part.
Sadly, this isn't the first time he's said something like this.
I don't think he ever plans to communicate with us again. I think that was his way of making the thread about him.
He's made it plain that he doesn't give a shit about any of us and doesn't respect any of us; at this point he's just trolling and trying to derail threads.
Quote from: Faust on August 06, 2013, 02:58:10 PM
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
I find that very hard to pallet. Over the last Decade and especially these last few months we (The WORLD) have seen how the entirety of the administrative body of the United states has suffered an endemic, sustained and permissive culture of corruption. Of acting outside the boundaries of the law, ignoring international treaties and conventions, of placing little to no value on the lives of its citizens or anyone else, of routinely falsifying evidence, of using scare tactics, and of acquiring said "evidence" via illegal and illegitimate means.
I like you rwhn, but how can you, with a straight face say that these kind of actions are out of the ordinary?
Personal and professional experience working with the DEA. From the lower ranks right up to the top. I'm not arguing that the unacceptable is acceptable. All I know is every person I've dealt with from the DEA are good people trying to keep people safe. The media will always harp on the stupid bad shit that happens, like the kid who was forgotten. They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help protect our communities.
Quote from: Faust on August 06, 2013, 03:07:01 PM
Unless he doesn't plan to ever try to communicate with us again, I don't buy that, I'll be kind and hope that was sarcasm on his part.
It was sarcasm. It's as I've been saying for ages now, me simply posting, because of my views, gets everyone all worked up. This thread is a good example.
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 03:31:21 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 06, 2013, 02:58:10 PM
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
I find that very hard to pallet. Over the last Decade and especially these last few months we (The WORLD) have seen how the entirety of the administrative body of the United states has suffered an endemic, sustained and permissive culture of corruption. Of acting outside the boundaries of the law, ignoring international treaties and conventions, of placing little to no value on the lives of its citizens or anyone else, of routinely falsifying evidence, of using scare tactics, and of acquiring said "evidence" via illegal and illegitimate means.
I like you rwhn, but how can you, with a straight face say that these kind of actions are out of the ordinary?
Personal and professional experience working with the DEA. From the lower ranks right up to the top. I'm not arguing that the unacceptable is acceptable. All I know is every person I've dealt with from the DEA are good people trying to keep people safe. The media will always harp on the stupid bad shit that happens, like the kid who was forgotten. They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help protect our communities.
I don't believe the day to day operations are free from the policy and culture that seems to be actively pushed from the top. There are certainly good people in there, there are in any institution, hell even the Nazi regime had plenty of good people in the bottom ranks who thought they were just doing there job for their country.
Evil doesn't work without good people. Good people will do the most repugnant, nasty shit for what they think are "the right reasons"
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 03:31:21 PM
They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help protect our communities.
From everything I've read about the whole SOD/"parallel construction, but SHHH don't tell the judge or prosecutor" story...... this
is normal day-to-day operations........
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
:flush:
im going to use ignore function, tired of reading apologies of a stooge for the infinite time
Self-Censoring other points of view is an excellent way to protect paradigms.
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 11:39:49 PM
Self-Censoring other points of view is an excellent way to protect paradigms.
Yeah. :lulz:
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 11:39:49 PM
Self-Censoring other points of view is an excellent way to protect paradigms.
Acting like a retarded moron is an excellent way to get people to treat you like a retarded moron. I understand this is a difficult concept for you to grasp. I'll try again:
(http://moldychum.typepad.com/moldy_chum/images/seagull_fishing.jpg)
QuoteThe media will always harp on the stupid bad shit that happens, like the kid who was forgotten. They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help feed the prison pipeline.
And fixed.
Catch you all in 30 pages when he's trying to defend something equally reprehensible.
Quote from: Junkenstein on August 07, 2013, 08:11:40 AM
Catch you all in 30 pages when he's trying to defend something equally reprehensible.
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
I basically get paid to analyze opposing viewpoints, and have a personal interest in ideas/ideologies/representations but:
A) I'm not on the clock on this.
B) I can't even tell anymore where your butt-hurt trolling starts and your shill apologies begin, so from an analytical interest it's worthless.
C) I dislike attention-whores.
So this is the last time I grace you with my words, and I recommend others do the same, enough is enough.
Quote from: Telarus on August 06, 2013, 08:38:39 PM
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 03:31:21 PM
They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help protect our communities.
From everything I've read about the whole SOD/"parallel construction, but SHHH don't tell the judge or prosecutor" story...... this is normal day-to-day operations........
Yup. This has been going on since the 1990s, if not before. I believe this formed a pivotal part of the DEA's Kingpin Strategy in 1992, from which the Special Operations Division was created, in 1994.
Quote from: The Johnny on August 07, 2013, 08:26:37 AM
I basically get paid to analyze opposing viewpoints, and have a personal interest in ideas/ideologies/representations but:
A) I'm not on the clock on this.
B) I can't even tell anymore where your butt-hurt trolling starts and your shill apologies begin, so from an analytical interest it's worthless.
C) I dislike attention-whores.
You should leave PD then. It's attention-whores all the way down.
I'm not trolling. I work with the DEA on a regular basis. They do a lot of really good work that works to keep communities safer. Like the program that has removed over 50 tons of unwanted medicines from homes in my state. That's 50 tons of medicines that can't be diverted and abused and not flushed down the drain where it will fuck up our water. But no one likes to publish stories on that.
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: The Johnny on August 07, 2013, 08:26:37 AM
I basically get paid to analyze opposing viewpoints, and have a personal interest in ideas/ideologies/representations but:
A) I'm not on the clock on this.
B) I can't even tell anymore where your butt-hurt trolling starts and your shill apologies begin, so from an analytical interest it's worthless.
C) I dislike attention-whores.
You should leave PD then. It's attention-whores all the way down.
I'm not trolling. I work with the DEA on a regular basis. They do a lot of really good work that works to keep communities safer. Like the program that has removed over 50 tons of unwanted medicines from homes in my state. That's 50 tons of medicines that can't be diverted and abused and not flushed down the drain where it will fuck up our water. But no one likes to publish stories on that.
And the coast guard do amazing work for the navy, while its higher ups spend their time parked in hostile waters trying to create international incidents.
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: The Johnny on August 07, 2013, 08:26:37 AM
I basically get paid to analyze opposing viewpoints, and have a personal interest in ideas/ideologies/representations but:
A) I'm not on the clock on this.
B) I can't even tell anymore where your butt-hurt trolling starts and your shill apologies begin, so from an analytical interest it's worthless.
C) I dislike attention-whores.
You should leave PD then. It's attention-whores all the way down.
I'm not trolling. I work with the DEA on a regular basis. They do a lot of really good work that works to keep communities safer. Like the program that has removed over 50 tons of unwanted medicines from homes in my state. That's 50 tons of medicines that can't be diverted and abused and not flushed down the drain where it will fuck up our water. But no one likes to publish stories on that.
I think the problem is that people don't really care when a government dept. is doing its job. That's expected. Its when they are doing something bad/wrong/naughty that they become the topic of discussion. While I have no doubt that there are some really nice DEA agents who want nothing more than to make the world a safer place ( :lulz: ), that doesn't excuse the sort of BS described in the OP. The former doesn't defend the latter, therefore, its of no real value in the conversation.
Kinda like saying "Well, sure, GWB authorized extrajudicial rendition, extreme interrogation methods and went to war against a country that had nothing to do with the attacks on us, however, his administration also removed over 50 tons of dangerous weapons and terrorists from the world. That's 50 tons of dangerous weapons and terrorists that can't be used by our enemies or flushed down the drain where they will fuck up our water. But no one (except Fox) likes to publish stories on that.
Personally, I'm glad there won't be mujaheddin in my drinking water.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:05:25 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: The Johnny on August 07, 2013, 08:26:37 AM
I basically get paid to analyze opposing viewpoints, and have a personal interest in ideas/ideologies/representations but:
A) I'm not on the clock on this.
B) I can't even tell anymore where your butt-hurt trolling starts and your shill apologies begin, so from an analytical interest it's worthless.
C) I dislike attention-whores.
You should leave PD then. It's attention-whores all the way down.
I'm not trolling. I work with the DEA on a regular basis. They do a lot of really good work that works to keep communities safer. Like the program that has removed over 50 tons of unwanted medicines from homes in my state. That's 50 tons of medicines that can't be diverted and abused and not flushed down the drain where it will fuck up our water. But no one likes to publish stories on that.
I think the problem is that people don't really care when a government dept. is doing its job. That's expected. Its when they are doing something bad/wrong/naughty that they become the topic of discussion. While I have no doubt that there are some really nice DEA agents who want nothing more than to make the world a safer place ( :lulz: ), that doesn't excuse the sort of BS described in the OP. The former doesn't defend the latter, therefore, its of no real value in the conversation.
Kinda like saying "Well, sure, GWB authorized extrajudicial rendition, extreme interrogation methods and went to war against a country that had nothing to do with the attacks on us, however, his administration also removed over 50 tons of dangerous weapons and terrorists from the world. That's 50 tons of dangerous weapons and terrorists that can't be used by our enemies or flushed down the drain where they will fuck up our water. But no one (except Fox) likes to publish stories on that.
Personally, I'm glad there won't be mujaheddin in my drinking water.
It's the classic - "Hitler liked puppies so he must have been a nice guy..." - argument.
I expect no better from our resident koolaid-swilling tool of the oppressors :lulz:
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Uh... huh?
I think you've crossed wires on your comparison.
"DEA did a shitty thing"/"Uncle BadTouch did a shitty thing"
"But all DEA guys I know are cool so that doesn't count"/"But all Discordians I know are cool, so that doesn't count"
In neither case do 'ALL' of the DEA/Discordians need to be denounced... but in both cases, the excuse is not a valid response.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:26:32 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Uh... huh?
I think you've crossed wires on your comparison.
"DEA did a shitty thing"/"Uncle BadTouch did a shitty thing"
"But all DEA guys I know are cool so that doesn't count"/"But all Discordians I know are cool, so that doesn't count"
In neither case do 'ALL' of the DEA/Discordians need to be denounced... but in both cases, the excuse is not a valid response.
You do realise you're arguing with a fucking idiot, right? :kingmeh:
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:26:32 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Uh... huh?
I think you've crossed wires on your comparison.
"DEA did a shitty thing"/"Uncle BadTouch did a shitty thing"
"But all DEA guys I know are cool so that doesn't count"/"But all Discordians I know are cool, so that doesn't count"
In neither case do 'ALL' of the DEA/Discordians need to be denounced... but in both cases, the excuse is not a valid response.
Yes, but at no point have I excused the DEAs mistakes, in fact I've said before that shit is wrong and I stated that the judgement for the kid forgotten by DEA was a good thing. But it's too simplistic to just cast them all in the fire.
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:26:32 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Uh... huh?
I think you've crossed wires on your comparison.
"DEA did a shitty thing"/"Uncle BadTouch did a shitty thing"
"But all DEA guys I know are cool so that doesn't count"/"But all Discordians I know are cool, so that doesn't count"
In neither case do 'ALL' of the DEA/Discordians need to be denounced... but in both cases, the excuse is not a valid response.
I'm Not denouncing the DEA, I am saying fix the DEA, and all the other rotten to the core branches
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:29:24 PM
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:26:32 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Uh... huh?
I think you've crossed wires on your comparison.
"DEA did a shitty thing"/"Uncle BadTouch did a shitty thing"
"But all DEA guys I know are cool so that doesn't count"/"But all Discordians I know are cool, so that doesn't count"
In neither case do 'ALL' of the DEA/Discordians need to be denounced... but in both cases, the excuse is not a valid response.
Yes, but at no point have I excused the DEAs mistakes, in fact I've said before that shit is wrong and I stated that the judgement for the kid forgotten by DEA was a good thing. But it's too simplistic to just cast them all in the fire.
So you're while response was ignited by Nigel's obvious parody post? Really?
I think this may be one reason why things have become so strained with you. No one before Nigel's joke post was saying anything about throwing the whole DEA into the fire. Why take that one obvious, ALL CAPS, comment and run with it? Why not focus on the OP? Hell, I would have loved to see a comment from you saying "That is bullshit... blah blah blah... however, it isn't the only thing the DEA does and some of those guys are in it for the right reasons". I would have agreed 100% and thought you were trying to communicate.
Please, Please bring back the RWHN that communicated :(
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:35:34 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:29:24 PM
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:26:32 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Uh... huh?
I think you've crossed wires on your comparison.
"DEA did a shitty thing"/"Uncle BadTouch did a shitty thing"
"But all DEA guys I know are cool so that doesn't count"/"But all Discordians I know are cool, so that doesn't count"
In neither case do 'ALL' of the DEA/Discordians need to be denounced... but in both cases, the excuse is not a valid response.
Yes, but at no point have I excused the DEAs mistakes, in fact I've said before that shit is wrong and I stated that the judgement for the kid forgotten by DEA was a good thing. But it's too simplistic to just cast them all in the fire.
So you're while response was ignited by Nigel's obvious parody post? Really?
I think this may be one reason why things have become so strained with you. No one before Nigel's joke post was saying anything about throwing the whole DEA into the fire. Why take that one obvious, ALL CAPS, comment and run with it? Why not focus on the OP? Hell, I would have loved to see a comment from you saying "That is bullshit... blah blah blah... however, it isn't the only thing the DEA does and some of those guys are in it for the right reasons". I would have agreed 100% and thought you were trying to communicate.
Please, Please bring back the RWHN that communicated :(
Not in this thread but the sentiment has been more or less stated in other threads. But sure, okay, so I think what is being reported on on the OP is shitty, though I do think the DEA should have the ability to collect intelligence on drug dealers. But if they are gathering information on innocent Americans, that isn't right. My next question would be who forced this extra duty upon the DEA.
Quote from: Faust on August 07, 2013, 12:30:51 PM
Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on August 07, 2013, 12:26:32 PM
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Well I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
Uh... huh?
I think you've crossed wires on your comparison.
"DEA did a shitty thing"/"Uncle BadTouch did a shitty thing"
"But all DEA guys I know are cool so that doesn't count"/"But all Discordians I know are cool, so that doesn't count"
In neither case do 'ALL' of the DEA/Discordians need to be denounced... but in both cases, the excuse is not a valid response.
I'm Not denouncing the DEA, I am saying fix the DEA, and all the other rotten to the core branches
I am. They should be sacked.
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 01:31:15 PM
My next question would be who forced this extra duty upon the DEA.
:lulz:
You're adorable.
Arriving late to say
I'm sure there are a lot of fine, upstanding people in the DEA. Just like there are fine, upstanding people in the Catholic priesthood, and plenty of fine, upstanding people in the Ku Klux Klan.
I don't disagree with you that there are fine, upstanding people in these organizations.
I may, however, disagree with you on the definitions of "fine" and "upstanding."
Quote from: The End on August 07, 2013, 01:31:15 PM
I do think the DEA should have the ability to collect intelligence on drug dealers. But if they are gathering information on innocent Americans, that isn't right. My next question would be who forced this extra duty upon the DEA.
\
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7459/9443990200_ebeaf55cff_z.jpg)
QuoteBut how can we know which ones are drug dealers and which ones are innocent Americans unless we listen to them all? Really we are left with no other choice.
\
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7459/9443990200_ebeaf55cff_z.jpg)
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 02:45:22 AM
You're naive.
\
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7459/9443990200_ebeaf55cff_z.jpg)
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
Like you?
Quote from: /b/earman on August 08, 2013, 04:47:46 AM
Quote from: The End on August 06, 2013, 02:28:36 AM
All the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
Like you?
You already know what he's going to say. You already know he's going to believe what he says.
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
upstanding
Disagree on this point. More likely knuckle-dragging.
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Quote from: Pæs on August 08, 2013, 06:43:05 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
upstanding
Disagree on this point. More likely knuckle-dragging.
You are entitled to that stereotypical, discriminatory opinion.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Well I agree that clandestine operations like that probably wouldn't be common knowledge to most of the grunts and toilet cleaner and canteen staff.
Of course anyone who did gather evidence and falsify the investigative process should in my mind be immediately jailed, and all their convictions overturned as it would cast very large doubts over every single one of them.
Quote from: Faust on August 08, 2013, 11:52:34 AM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Well I agree that clandestine operations like that probably wouldn't be common knowledge to most of the grunts and toilet cleaner and canteen staff.
Of course anyone who did gather evidence and falsify the investigative process should in my mind be immediately jailed, and all their convictions overturned as it would cast very large doubts over every single one of them.
And the same treatment for every single one of their superiors.
Quote from: Faust on August 08, 2013, 11:52:34 AM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Well I agree that clandestine operations like that probably wouldn't be common knowledge to most of the grunts and toilet cleaner and canteen staff.
Of course anyone who did gather evidence and falsify the investigative process should in my mind be immediately jailed, and all their convictions overturned as it would cast very large doubts over every single one of them.
Sure, I agree with that, anyone who was doing anything illegal should be tried, and if convicted, punished.
What I'm saying is, based upon my interactions with people at all levels at that agency, is that I think you would find that those individuals would be in the minority, and that most there are just doing the job of protecting our communities from the scourge of illicit drugs.
Because make no mistake, drugs are having a HUGE impact on our country. Both in blood and treasure.
Not having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
Quote from: :regret: on August 08, 2013, 12:07:28 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 08, 2013, 11:52:34 AM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Well I agree that clandestine operations like that probably wouldn't be common knowledge to most of the grunts and toilet cleaner and canteen staff.
Of course anyone who did gather evidence and falsify the investigative process should in my mind be immediately jailed, and all their convictions overturned as it would cast very large doubts over every single one of them.
And the same treatment for every single one of their superiors.
This could backfire. If the superiors find themselves at risk, they might decide to help cover up the crimes of their employees (so they themselves won't go to jail).
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 01:41:59 PM
Not having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
What about having better policies instead of enforcing bad ones?
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 01:40:47 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 08, 2013, 11:52:34 AM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Well I agree that clandestine operations like that probably wouldn't be common knowledge to most of the grunts and toilet cleaner and canteen staff.
Of course anyone who did gather evidence and falsify the investigative process should in my mind be immediately jailed, and all their convictions overturned as it would cast very large doubts over every single one of them.
Sure, I agree with that, anyone who was doing anything illegal should be tried, and if convicted, punished.
What I'm saying is, based upon my interactions with people at all levels at that agency, is that I think you would find that those individuals would be in the minority, and that most there are just doing the job ...
This bit I can actually agree with. I don't think that 'most' employees of the DEA would be involved in gathering information and hunting down drug dealers. They do a lot of other things as well, so people not in the job where this sort of thing applies, probably don't know shit about it. However, if the DEA agents who have a job where this sort of thing would apply are involved, then its a really bad sign for the agency overall.
The guys who are out 'educating' kids about drugs or running "bring in your old prescriptions" drives may be completely innocent of any involvement (though I'd bet that some... perhaps many, of them would support the action if they knew about it). The issue though, is that if the OP is accurate and if this is sanctioned by the top brass at the DEA then we have a very serious issue which not only taints and tarnishes the 'nice guys' you know, but also indicates that the "drug war" is being used as yet another excuse to stomp on civil liberties... again.
That's the killer... just like the War on Terror. Yes the war got rid of some really bad dudes/really bad drugs, but there are so many badwrong things mixed in with it, that the gain on one side isn't worth the loss on the other.
There are lots of nice guys in the military. I bet a lot of them never raped/murdered innocent civilians. There are nice guys in Defense and Intelligence communities, many of whom probably never spy on US citizens. That, though, has little bearing on the problem presented by the institution itself.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable.
:lulz:
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 01:41:59 PM
Not having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
"necessary options"?
"necessary options""necessary options"NB the equitable application of the law should NEVER be an
OPTIONyou might try googling "contradiction in terms"
That you can even use language like that is why so many people around here are reacting badly to things you have been saying recently.
Quote from: Lord Cataplanga on August 08, 2013, 02:04:10 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 01:41:59 PM
Not having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
What about having better policies instead of enforcing bad ones?
In a general sense, yes. The devil is in the details.
Quote from: MMIX on August 08, 2013, 03:28:57 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 01:41:59 PM
Not having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
"necessary options"?
"necessary options"
"necessary options"
NB the equitable application of the law should NEVER be an
OPTION
you might try googling "contradiction in terms"
That you can even use language like that is why so many people around here are reacting badly to things you have been saying recently.
Right, shouldn't be an option, but the reality is that treating people equitably is always optional, speaking in strictly technical terms. People should be treatd equitably, things should be enforced and enacted equitably, but it's pretty safe to say that often doesn't happen.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 03:35:08 PM
Right, shouldn't be an option, but the reality is that treating people equitably is always optional, speaking in strictly technical terms. People should be treatd equitably, things should be enforced and enacted equitably, but it's pretty safe to say that often doesn't happen.
Ok, could you try unpacking that first sentence, please.
Read the news on any given day. People should be treated equitable. The news on a daily basis reminds you that for many people in this world, they view it as optional. Thus why I used the term "necessary option". Which yes, in the end means it is still optional for the actor. I was simply conveying that, in the specific topic being discussed, my view is that it is necessary for equitable enforcement.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Reread the sentence. Being an upstanding, law abiding citizen (not necessarily talking about you, or anyone in the DEA) doesn't mean that you're a good person who's actually helping people. Being upstanding and law abiding just means you're fitting a role. As far as we know, Mitt Romney is an upstanding and law abiding citizen. We also know he's a complete asshole with self-serving interests.
So, what we have is a situation in which the enforcement agency can do whatever the hell it likes with respect to this issue...And all we need to do is make sure that people act in a pure fashion.
Smells like Captain Utopia.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 03:56:42 PM
So, what we have is a situation in which the enforcement agency can do whatever the hell it likes with respect to this issue...And all we need to do is make sure that people act in a pure fashion.
Smells like Captain Utopia.
No. Try reading my posts again.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:00:40 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 03:56:42 PM
So, what we have is a situation in which the enforcement agency can do whatever the hell it likes with respect to this issue...And all we need to do is make sure that people act in a pure fashion.
Smells like Captain Utopia.
No. Try reading my posts again.
I have been. First, you implied that someone had to be "forcing" an already out of control police agency to listen in on people, which is fucking hilarious.
Then you said that the "necessary option" of proper enforcement was an "option" because people are going to abuse it, because it is a large organization, and therefore will have some bad apples.
So where am I losing the plot, here?
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 03:54:33 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Reread the sentence. Being an upstanding, law abiding citizen (not necessarily talking about you, or anyone in the DEA) doesn't mean that you're a good person who's actually helping people. Being upstanding and law abiding just means you're fitting a role. As far as we know, Mitt Romney is an upstanding and law abiding citizen. We also know he's a complete asshole with self-serving interests.
Your baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:03:13 PM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 03:54:33 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Reread the sentence. Being an upstanding, law abiding citizen (not necessarily talking about you, or anyone in the DEA) doesn't mean that you're a good person who's actually helping people. Being upstanding and law abiding just means you're fitting a role. As far as we know, Mitt Romney is an upstanding and law abiding citizen. We also know he's a complete asshole with self-serving interests.
Your baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
No, your statist view on
everything means you're not a good person helping people.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:03:09 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:00:40 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 03:56:42 PM
So, what we have is a situation in which the enforcement agency can do whatever the hell it likes with respect to this issue...And all we need to do is make sure that people act in a pure fashion.
Smells like Captain Utopia.
No. Try reading my posts again.
I have been. First, you implied that someone had to be "forcing" an already out of control police agency to listen in on people, which is fucking hilarious.
Then you said that the "necessary option" of proper enforcement was an "option" because people are going to abuse it, because it is a large organization, and therefore will have some bad apples.
So where am I losing the plot, here?
I also said people breaking the law should be held accountable and that the DEA should be doing what it does within the law, drug policy should be enforced and enacted equitably. And by and large I believe it is. But there are places where it clearly needs to be fixed or enforced better.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:03:57 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:03:13 PM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 03:54:33 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Reread the sentence. Being an upstanding, law abiding citizen (not necessarily talking about you, or anyone in the DEA) doesn't mean that you're a good person who's actually helping people. Being upstanding and law abiding just means you're fitting a role. As far as we know, Mitt Romney is an upstanding and law abiding citizen. We also know he's a complete asshole with self-serving interests.
Your baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
No, your statist view on everything means you're not a good person helping people.
I wasn't speaking to you.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:05:50 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:03:09 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:00:40 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 03:56:42 PM
So, what we have is a situation in which the enforcement agency can do whatever the hell it likes with respect to this issue...And all we need to do is make sure that people act in a pure fashion.
Smells like Captain Utopia.
No. Try reading my posts again.
I have been. First, you implied that someone had to be "forcing" an already out of control police agency to listen in on people, which is fucking hilarious.
Then you said that the "necessary option" of proper enforcement was an "option" because people are going to abuse it, because it is a large organization, and therefore will have some bad apples.
So where am I losing the plot, here?
I also said people breaking the law should be held accountable and that the DEA should be doing what it does within the law, drug policy should be enforced and enacted equitably. And by and large I believe it is. But there are places where it clearly needs to be fixed or enforced better.
1. They're violating the 4th amendment as a matter of policy. According to article VI, that is the law of the land. Ergo, the entire organization is in violation.
2. I know you support it. I know you believe in it. Because you don't think other humans can be trusted to operate without oversight in their daily lives.
3. Great. So what's your plan to fix violating the 4th amendment?
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:06:27 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:03:57 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:03:13 PM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 03:54:33 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Reread the sentence. Being an upstanding, law abiding citizen (not necessarily talking about you, or anyone in the DEA) doesn't mean that you're a good person who's actually helping people. Being upstanding and law abiding just means you're fitting a role. As far as we know, Mitt Romney is an upstanding and law abiding citizen. We also know he's a complete asshole with self-serving interests.
Your baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
No, your statist view on everything means you're not a good person helping people.
I wasn't speaking to you.
Imagine how horny that makes me.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:08:39 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:05:50 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:03:09 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:00:40 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 03:56:42 PM
So, what we have is a situation in which the enforcement agency can do whatever the hell it likes with respect to this issue...And all we need to do is make sure that people act in a pure fashion.
Smells like Captain Utopia.
No. Try reading my posts again.
I have been. First, you implied that someone had to be "forcing" an already out of control police agency to listen in on people, which is fucking hilarious.
Then you said that the "necessary option" of proper enforcement was an "option" because people are going to abuse it, because it is a large organization, and therefore will have some bad apples.
So where am I losing the plot, here?
I also said people breaking the law should be held accountable and that the DEA should be doing what it does within the law, drug policy should be enforced and enacted equitably. And by and large I believe it is. But there are places where it clearly needs to be fixed or enforced better.
1. They're violating the 4th amendment as a matter of policy. According to article VI, that is the law of the land. Ergo, the entire organization is in violation.
2. I know you support it. I know you believe in it. Because you don't think other humans can be trusted to operate without oversight in their daily lives.
3. Great. So what's your plan to fix violating the 4th amendment?
I don't share your opinion that they are violating the 4th.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:03:13 PM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 03:54:33 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:54:49 AM
And you know, he probably is an upstanding, law abiding citizen. But, that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Reread the sentence. Being an upstanding, law abiding citizen (not necessarily talking about you, or anyone in the DEA) doesn't mean that you're a good person who's actually helping people. Being upstanding and law abiding just means you're fitting a role. As far as we know, Mitt Romney is an upstanding and law abiding citizen. We also know he's a complete asshole with self-serving interests.
Your baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
What baseless assumption am I making?
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
Yes, yes, you keep saying that last part. Where in that sentence am I making any assumptions about you as a person?
The only thing I said was that I am sure that you are indeed a fine citizen, and that has no actual reflection on who you are as a person.
You then make a baseless assumption that I'm making baseless assumptions about you.
I am making the assumption that you have poor reading comprehension skills, though, that's not baseless so much as evident.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:17:32 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:08:39 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:05:50 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 04:03:09 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:00:40 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 03:56:42 PM
So, what we have is a situation in which the enforcement agency can do whatever the hell it likes with respect to this issue...And all we need to do is make sure that people act in a pure fashion.
Smells like Captain Utopia.
No. Try reading my posts again.
I have been. First, you implied that someone had to be "forcing" an already out of control police agency to listen in on people, which is fucking hilarious.
Then you said that the "necessary option" of proper enforcement was an "option" because people are going to abuse it, because it is a large organization, and therefore will have some bad apples.
So where am I losing the plot, here?
I also said people breaking the law should be held accountable and that the DEA should be doing what it does within the law, drug policy should be enforced and enacted equitably. And by and large I believe it is. But there are places where it clearly needs to be fixed or enforced better.
1. They're violating the 4th amendment as a matter of policy. According to article VI, that is the law of the land. Ergo, the entire organization is in violation.
2. I know you support it. I know you believe in it. Because you don't think other humans can be trusted to operate without oversight in their daily lives.
3. Great. So what's your plan to fix violating the 4th amendment?
I don't share your opinion that they are violating the 4th.
I know you don't.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
We can only operate on what we see. You may be a good person deep down inside. We haven't been exposed to that, so you have been treated, by damn near everyone, as the shitneck you appear to be based on the information available.
It is not our responsibility to somehow divine who you really are.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 05:05:43 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
We can only operate on what we see. You may be a good person deep down inside. We haven't been exposed to that, so you have been treated, by damn near everyone, as the shitneck you appear to be based on the information available.
It is not our responsibility to somehow divine who you really are.
I've been here for 8 years, of course you have. You are just exercising butthurt selective memory.
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:58:13 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
Yes, yes, you keep saying that last part. Where in that sentence am I making any assumptions about you as a person?
The implication is pretty clear, otherwise, it wouldn't be necessary to even make the statement you made.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 05:47:50 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 05:05:43 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
We can only operate on what we see. You may be a good person deep down inside. We haven't been exposed to that, so you have been treated, by damn near everyone, as the shitneck you appear to be based on the information available.
It is not our responsibility to somehow divine who you really are.
I've been here for 8 years, of course you have. You are just exercising butthurt selective memory.
Sorry, I can't remember 2009 because I can't SEE 2009, because it's buried in 2010-2013.
You from 2006-2009, I seem to remember as not being a fucking stooge.
You since then? Heh.
And this is the part where you claim you haven't changed. If that's the case, then you from 2006-2009 was a stooge that was just good at hiding it.
It's everyone's responsibility to know about RWHN because he's been here for 8 years. But you can't say you know anything about him. Because the internet is a horrible medium to get to know people. And despite being here for 8 years, RWHN doesn't know shit about you.
:lulz:
Quote from: Carlos Danger on August 08, 2013, 05:54:33 PM
It's everyone's responsibility to know about RWHN because he's been here for 8 years. But you can't say you know anything about him. Because the internet is a horrible medium to get to know people. And despite being here for 8 years, RWHN doesn't know shit about you.
:lulz:
I saw that, but I've grown filters with respect to RWHN, and I accept that sort of weaseling as a given.
Hmm, I didn't know Dok = everyone.
Interesting logic you are swinging there Cain.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 05:56:35 PM
Hmm, I didn't know Dok = everyone.
Interesting logic you are swinging there Cain.
Dok has mind powers that lesser mortals lack.
Anyway, this thread is about the DEA, not me.
Also, out of nowhere, thread is about RWHN.
:lulz:
And thread is about RWHN, because RWHN is the only one that thinks fishing expeditions on the part of law enforcement somehow "protect" the public.
Sorry, I forgot, RWHN only argues with Dok and utterly brand new people. Nigel, ECH, Vex, Ratatosk and Twid only signed up last week.
My bad.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 06:01:27 PM
And thread is about RWHN, because RWHN is the only one that thinks fishing expeditions on the part of law enforcement somehow "protect" the public.
Again, if you actually read my posts you will see I said something else entirely.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 01:41:59 PM
Not having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
\
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7459/9443990200_ebeaf55cff_z.jpg)
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2013, 06:00:30 PM
Also, out of nowhere, thread is about RWHN.
:lulz:
Page 2:
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on August 06, 2013, 03:18:59 PM
I don't think he ever plans to communicate with us again. I think that was his way of making the thread about him.
He's made it plain that he doesn't give a shit about any of us and doesn't respect any of us; at this point he's just trolling and trying to derail threads.
Deep-pocketed Pro-Legalization Lobby buys off Sanjay Gupta (http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/08/health/gupta-changed-mind-marijuana/)
Quote from: V3X on August 08, 2013, 06:37:55 PM
Deep-pocketed Pro-Legalization Lobby buys off Sanjay Gupta (http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/08/health/gupta-changed-mind-marijuana/)
Well, you know, he must be misinformed, or something.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 05:49:06 PM
Quote from: FRIDAY TIME on August 08, 2013, 04:58:13 PM
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
Yes, yes, you keep saying that last part. Where in that sentence am I making any assumptions about you as a person?
The implication is pretty clear, otherwise, it wouldn't be necessary to even make the statement you made.
Cant be that clear if i made an implication i was unaware of.
Quote from: The End on August 08, 2013, 04:54:42 PM
Assumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
I've never thought of knowing someone as a boolean expression.
Quote from: V3X on August 08, 2013, 06:37:55 PM
Deep-pocketed Pro-Legalization Lobby buys off Sanjay Gupta (http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/08/health/gupta-changed-mind-marijuana/)
Start another thread if you want to discuss this, as it has little to do with the topic of this thread.
Caccioppo (among others) has done several studies that indicate that the depth of connection people get out of interactions on the internet is entirely dependent on how individuals choose to use it. It can deepen the loneliness of people who use it to avoid depth of interaction, and can strengthen the sense of connectedness and the social support network of people who use it to build deep connections, much like with face-to-face social interactions. A person who goes to parties to avoid forging deep connections one-on-one can do so as easily as a person who goes to parties to meet people with whom they may forge long-lasting friendships. I am sure we have all known some of each type of person.
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 07:01:02 AM
Caccioppo (among others) has done several studies that indicate that the depth of connection people get out of interactions on the internet is entirely dependent on how individuals choose to use it. It can deepen the loneliness of people who use it to avoid depth of interaction, and can strengthen the sense of connectedness and the social support network of people who use it to build deep connections, much like with face-to-face social interactions. A person who goes to parties to avoid forging deep connections one-on-one can do so as easily as a person who goes to parties to meet people with whom they may forge long-lasting friendships. I am sure we have all known some of each type of person.
Even though I have not met a lot of you face to face, I've also met a good amount of you face to face.
And hell, that doesn't even matter. I consider a lot of you good friends (looking at you Nigel) and Roger called me tonight out of the blue. Dimo is my friend and the last time I saw him in person, which was a year ago, he mentioned that it doesn't matter and we can pick it up like we've known each other for ages. I've seen LMNO often enough that I don't even think of him as a PD'er anymore, but rather a guy I know who happens to go to the same forum I do. I don't think of him as "LMNO" anymore. Same thing with Suu, Richter, leln, and Luna. Sure, there's the IRL aspect, but, I only think of you as "Nigel" because the name suits you, much in the same way that I think of Eve as Eve. Or Dimo as Dimo (who, incidentally, refuses to call me Kevin, since that's not the name I was introduced to him with-to him, I'm Twid, and that's that, lol).
I consider a great many of the people here friends, and some, good friends. I am averse to talking on the phone (which means that, dammit, you fuckers I pick up the phone for better realize how much that means I appreciate our friendship!) but I also don't feel that long-distance friendships, phone or no phone, are any less "real" than local face-to-face friendships.
I am not a lonely, isolated person forced to "resort" to online friendship, either. I am blessed with an incredible network of amazing friends in Portland, Seattle, and San Francisco (as well as some who have moved farther abroad), many of whom I have known for 20+ years. Many of whom I would love for you spags to meet because you would like each other. I've become friends with you fuckers because I LIKE you, and I have made enough lifelong friends whom I initially met online (back in dialup days, judge me if you choose) to have no illusions or false divisions about "the real you" being somehow separate from "the online you". People can lie, sure, but they can do that in person, too.
Also, <3 <3 <3. Don't expect me to get this mushy ever again.
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 07:50:51 AM
I consider a great many of the people here friends, and some, good friends. I am averse to talking on the phone (which means that, dammit, you fuckers I pick up the phone for better realize how much that means I appreciate our friendship!) but I also don't feel that long-distance friendships, phone or no phone, are any less "real" than local face-to-face friendships.
I am not a lonely, isolated person forced to "resort" to online friendship, either. I am blessed with an incredible network of amazing friends in Portland, Seattle, and San Francisco (as well as some who have moved farther abroad), many of whom I have known for 20+ years. Many of whom I would love for you spags to meet because you would like each other. I've become friends with you fuckers because I LIKE you, and I have made enough lifelong friends whom I initially met online (back in dialup days, judge me if you choose) to have no illusions or false divisions about "the real you" being somehow separate from "the online you". People can lie, sure, but they can do that in person, too.
I mean yeah, I have plenty of friends in Boston that I know offline, independently from the internet. Don't mean I can't make friends here. I consider you guys friends because I like you guys. I don't need you as a replacement or even as a supplement. It just is.
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 07:52:07 AM
Also, <3 <3 <3. Don't expect me to get this mushy ever again.
D'aww.
<3
Also, I will note that I was looking forward to RWHN's new found freedom to come down to Boston and become IRL friends until very recently. Despite everything. Until he made it a point to twist my words and shit.
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 07:52:07 AM
Also, <3 <3 <3. Don't expect me to get this mushy ever again.
Awwwwwww, this should be in the newsfeed :D
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 09, 2013, 08:00:11 AM
Also, I will note that I was looking forward to RWHN's new found freedom to come down to Boston and become IRL friends until very recently. Despite everything. Until he made it a point to twist my words and shit.
S'alright, between my new relationship, being a dad, and everything else, I likely never would have found the time.
You have me.
Quote from: /b/earman on August 09, 2013, 04:37:18 PM
You have me.
BEARMAN: Not just an omnivorous mammal, but also cuddly.
By the time I'm 30, or I have a nest egg of 50% of a home in NH.
Quote from: /b/earman on August 09, 2013, 05:02:52 PM
By the time I'm 30, or I have a nest egg of 50% of a home in NH.
WHEN 30 WHIPPERSNAPPER?
Twid,
32
Bear,
27
Jewcat,
28 in November
Vacation soon.
Quote from: /b/earman on August 09, 2013, 05:02:52 PM
By the time I'm 30, or I have a nest egg of 50% of a home in NH TUCSON.
Fixed.
Sooner or later, everyone comes to Tucson.
hrmmm feeling old...
:lulz:
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:29:03 AM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 09, 2013, 08:00:11 AM
Also, I will note that I was looking forward to RWHN's new found freedom to come down to Boston and become IRL friends until very recently. Despite everything. Until he made it a point to twist my words and shit.
S'alright, between my new relationship being smug on the internet, being a dad dick, and everything else, I likely never would have found the time.
Fixed.
I'm currently torn between "Alcoholic" and "Autistic" to explain this continued idiocy.
My worst vice is coffee and my brain is in tip-top shape, thank you very much. Have you considered that perhaps the receiver is busted?
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 07:31:22 PM
My worst vice is coffee and my brain is in tip-top shape, thank you very much. Have you considered that perhaps the receiver is busted?
Odd. You have mentioned beer.
Heineken specifically if i recall.
Yeah, which I drink like once a month, if that.
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:17:05 PM
Yeah, which I drink like once a month, if that.
Still counts.
Yes, someone who drinks once a month can be considered an "alcoholic".
Great observation smarty pants!
:lulz:
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:21:46 PM
Yes, someone who drinks once a month can be considered an "alcoholic".
Great observation smarty pants!
:lulz:
I didn't say alcoholic. You said your worst vice was coffee. That was factually incorrect.
Now, what about a guy that smokes weed once a month?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 08:23:07 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:21:46 PM
Yes, someone who drinks once a month can be considered an "alcoholic".
Great observation smarty pants!
:lulz:
I didn't say alcoholic. You said your worst vice was coffee. That was factually incorrect.
Now, what about a guy that smokes weed once a month?
No dumbass, I drink alcohol once a month and have no dependency whatsoever.
If I were to try to quit caffeine there would be a withdrawal period because I drink coffee once or twice a day, my body has developed a level of dependency.
So I was factually correct, my worst vice is coffee.
vice != addiction.
It's good that you admit to your crippling drug addiction, but that doesn't mean that your drinking habit isn't still a vice.
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
Well apparently if one to two cups of coffee a day constitutes caffeine addiction.
Twid
Getting cup number 5
Rough day at work. Need a second mug to get my fix. Guys i am totally wired right now. Im jittery as fuck.
Two joe schmo itt
And then everyone was Requia ITT. :lulz:
Sorry what was that? You said it a little too quickly. Use both hands with that mug or the shaking will spill it everywhere.
Man i overdid it today. I had a mountain dew. Ill be up until 11 pm. Maybe i should check into a rehab and join caffeine addicts anonymous.
Will RWHN cry when his children are thrown in jail for pot?
Or will he personally escort them himself?
ITT, we all realize RWHN is actually a Mormon missionary.
No no this isnt about pot anymore. This is about rwhns crippling caffeine addiction. This first cup of coffee isnt metabolizing east enough! Get me a straw a razor and some ground folgers!
Rwhn understands addiction. One time at a diner the waitress have him decaf by mistake so he went apeshit stabbed her with his butterknife hopped the counter poured himself a cup of the real stuff slammed it back poured another slammed that back and then ran off.
Rwhn has been banned from dunkin donuts for his unique ordering style- grabbing the cashier by the shirt and screaming "give me the fucking coffee! No make that two fucking coffees! Skim milk! "
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
You dare to challenge our expertise in this field?
UNFORGIVABLE. We're all going to have tantrums now, if you don't mind, and spend the next year becoming increasingly insufferable while defending ourselves with THIS ISN'T THE REAL MEEEEE.
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
Quote from: Pæs on August 09, 2013, 10:03:04 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
You dare to challenge our expertise in this field?
UNFORGIVABLE. We're all going to have tantrums now, if you don't mind, and spend the next year becoming increasingly insufferable while defending ourselves with THIS ISN'T THE REAL MEEEEE.
:lulz:
He's just in DENIAL.
HARDER INTERVENTION.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Except the Daily Mail, of course.
Quote from: /b/earman on August 09, 2013, 09:32:14 PM
Will RWHN cry when his children are thrown in jail for pot?
Or will he personally escort them himself?
Well, given that it is decriminalized in Maine, and we don't throw kids in jail for using pot, it will never happen.
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
Big coffee has deep pockets too but only one maybe two of them.
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Maybe he's got it confused with that old Cheech and Chong album.
Big Bambu.Brain damage from the "monthly" beer. :lol:
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
\
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7459/9443990200_ebeaf55cff_z.jpg)
That Dr. Gupta... misguided, undereducated, and now bought off by Big Marijuana. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Well, there is, but...
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/big-marijuana-lobby-fights-legalization-efforts-94816.html
QuoteMedical marijuana is a billion-dollar industry — legal in 18 states, including California, Nevada, Oregon and Maine — and like any entrenched business, it's fighting to keep what it has and shut out competitors. Dispensary owners, trade associations and groups representing the industry are deeply concerned — and in some cases actively fighting — ballot initiatives and legislation that could wreck their business model.
That pits them against full legalization advocates, who have been hoping to play off wins at the ballot box last fall in Colorado and Washington state that established some of the most permissive pot laws in the world. Activists are hoping to pass full legalization measures in six more states by 2016.
From the point of view of dispensary owners, legalization laws — depending on how they're written — can have little immediate upside and offer plenty of reasons for concern. For one, their businesses — still illegal under federal law — benefit from exclusive monopolies on the right to sell legal pot, but state measures still don't end the risks of an FBI raid or Internal Revenue Service audit. Meanwhile, those same federal laws that prohibit growing, selling and using keep pot prices high.
Quote from: Carlos Danger on August 10, 2013, 12:37:40 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Well, there is, but...
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/big-marijuana-lobby-fights-legalization-efforts-94816.html
QuoteMedical marijuana is a billion-dollar industry — legal in 18 states, including California, Nevada, Oregon and Maine — and like any entrenched business, it's fighting to keep what it has and shut out competitors. Dispensary owners, trade associations and groups representing the industry are deeply concerned — and in some cases actively fighting — ballot initiatives and legislation that could wreck their business model.
That pits them against full legalization advocates, who have been hoping to play off wins at the ballot box last fall in Colorado and Washington state that established some of the most permissive pot laws in the world. Activists are hoping to pass full legalization measures in six more states by 2016.
From the point of view of dispensary owners, legalization laws — depending on how they're written — can have little immediate upside and offer plenty of reasons for concern. For one, their businesses — still illegal under federal law — benefit from exclusive monopolies on the right to sell legal pot, but state measures still don't end the risks of an FBI raid or Internal Revenue Service audit. Meanwhile, those same federal laws that prohibit growing, selling and using keep pot prices high.
That's the most hilarious aspect of people claiming that powerful marijuana lobbies are working to legalize pot... once it's legal, vendors will take a huge hit because it's so easy to grow and just a few plants provide more than anyone could use on their own.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Uh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 02:39:16 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Uh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
\
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101223143649/southpark/images/e/eb/Tweek_Tweak.png)
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 09, 2013, 09:59:59 PM
Rwhn has been banned from dunkin donuts for his unique ordering style- grabbing the cashier by the shirt and screaming "give me the fucking coffee! No make that two fucking coffees! Skim milk! "
<3
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 02:39:16 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Uh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
So there's many pot junkies consuming twice their body weight in pot?
Quote from: /b/earman on August 10, 2013, 04:49:32 AM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 09, 2013, 09:59:59 PM
Rwhn has been banned from dunkin donuts for his unique ordering style- grabbing the cashier by the shirt and screaming "give me the fucking coffee! No make that two fucking coffees! Skim milk! "
<3
Back atcha!
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 02:39:16 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Uh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
Because there's a huge profit on a plant that anyone can grow anywhere, with almost no effort at all.
:lulz:
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:47:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
And that's the awesome part. He's a fucking self-parody, and is now too dumb to think at all, much less for himself.
And I no longer believe there was a pre-automaton RWHN. There was just a guy who happened to hate Dick Cheney, madly looking for a uniform to wear.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:55:28 AM
And I no longer believe there was a pre-automaton RWHN. There was just a guy who happened to hate Dick Cheney, madly looking for a uniform to wear.
I dunno. It's very easy to go to the store to buy one thing and then be offered a package deal at a discount price, and then let the ensemble do all the work for you.
Plus, you know, caffeine can do weird shit.
Coffee
Not even once per day
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:59:46 AM
Plus, you know, caffeine can do weird shit.
Coffee
Not even once per day
Really? I have a coffee habit that enslaves me, yet the Daily Mail assures me that that's okay.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 07:04:06 AM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:59:46 AM
Plus, you know, caffeine can do weird shit.
Coffee
Not even once per day
Really? I have a coffee habit that enslaves me, yet the Daily Mail assures me that that's okay.
Are you a two cup a day addict? That's some heavy caffeine usage right there.
But, you know, before today I was unaware of how batshit the Daily Mail was, since, you know, I have a bit of a filter for obviously batshit headlines, no need to figure out what bat it's coming from.
That is some AMAZING shit right there over at the Daily Mail.
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 07:09:32 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 07:04:06 AM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:59:46 AM
Plus, you know, caffeine can do weird shit.
Coffee
Not even once per day
Really? I have a coffee habit that enslaves me, yet the Daily Mail assures me that that's okay.
Are you a two cup a day addict? That's some heavy caffeine usage right there.
But, you know, before today I was unaware of how batshit the Daily Mail was, since, you know, I have a bit of a filter for obviously batshit headlines, no need to figure out what bat it's coming from.
That is some AMAZING shit right there over at the Daily Mail.
A pot before the morning meeting, and another pot before the rest of the day.
I am the Keith Richards of coffee.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 07:21:13 AM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 07:09:32 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 07:04:06 AM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:59:46 AM
Plus, you know, caffeine can do weird shit.
Coffee
Not even once per day
Really? I have a coffee habit that enslaves me, yet the Daily Mail assures me that that's okay.
Are you a two cup a day addict? That's some heavy caffeine usage right there.
But, you know, before today I was unaware of how batshit the Daily Mail was, since, you know, I have a bit of a filter for obviously batshit headlines, no need to figure out what bat it's coming from.
That is some AMAZING shit right there over at the Daily Mail.
A pot before the morning meeting, and another pot before the rest of the day.
Continuous imbibing whilst at work. Cups empty? Go for more.
All of Saturday- no caffeine consumption. Maybe I still have it in my system well into Tuesday.
A cup before shower, a cup with breakfast, a cup before emails.
Probably another one at around 10am, maybe one with lunch depending on what it is, another in the early afternoon, another at the end of the work day and maybe one after dinner.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 07:04:06 AM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:59:46 AM
Plus, you know, caffeine can do weird shit.
Coffee
Not even once per day
Really? I have a coffee habit that enslaves me, yet the Daily Mail assures me that that's okay.
Much much later, I'm catching what you meant here.
I was mocking the RWHN and the meth not even once thing. I've consumed coffee heavily for almost 20 years. Strangely, as the weekends show, I seem to either have no dependency or so much damn caffeine in my system that withdrawal is impossible so long as work continues to have free coffee.
I have no strict coffee routine, but I'm usually downing a dozen large mugs per day.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:40:39 AM
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 02:39:16 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 11:20:04 PM
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 09, 2013, 10:27:04 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: The End on August 09, 2013, 08:36:25 PM
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
OH MY GOD, IT'S APPEAL TO AUTHORITY HOUR ALL OF A SUDDEN.
That's EVERY hour with RWHN... unless the authority cited disagrees with his dogma, in which case they're either corrupt or misguided.
:lulz:
Often both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
:lulz:
There is no "Big Marijuana", you idiot. You can damn near grow that shit on the moon.
Uh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
Because there's a huge profit on a plant that anyone can grow anywhere, with almost no effort at all.
:lulz:
Yes, there is, it is an industry projected to be in the Billions and one that will be bigger than the wine industry.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/big-data-download/investment-opportunities-grow-marijuana-business-152839542.html
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:47:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
Your statement was very clear, there was nothing to misinterpret. You either said it or you didn't. And y'all discount or don't read the contradictory information I've provided so you really aren't in a valid position to critique.
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:47:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
He's like a televangelist. :lulz:
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 03:41:55 PM
Your statement was very clear, there was nothing to misinterpret. You either said it or you didn't. And y'all discount or don't read the contradictory information I've provided so you really aren't in a valid position to critique. NUH-UH! You are!
\
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101223143649/southpark/images/e/eb/Tweek_Tweak.png)
I drink so much coffee that I can't even say how many cups a day. I blame my Mom, she was a coffee junkie and got me started at age 6 with coffee cut with milk. Such a terrible influence.
coffee what's coffee i don't drink that stuff i'd never touch it really i heard about one guy who hit that stuff almost every week and it turned him into a total internet asshole lol it was like he couldn't even hear what anyone was saying over the combined sound of all that slurping and the electric caffeine-induced buzz in his head yeah i'd never get into that stuff it sounds really dangerous and i heard it can dehydrate you and my dad said it would turn my knees black i'm not sure if that was a racist remark or not but he thought it was funny and i thought it was scary yeah coffee's bad definitely not for me not even once.
:lulz:
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 03:41:55 PM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:47:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
Your statement was very clear, there was nothing to misinterpret. You either said it or you didn't. And y'all discount or don't read the contradictory information I've provided so you really aren't in a valid position to critique.
HAW HAW HAW!
COFFEE IS FOR SISSIES REAL MEN DRINK THIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-3qncy5Qfk)
Quote from: Balls Wellington on August 10, 2013, 08:59:05 PM
COFFEE IS FOR SISSIES REAL MEN DRINK THIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-3qncy5Qfk)
That might be too intense for RWHN's addiction. He'd need, like, an ounce of it for his fix.
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 03:41:55 PM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:47:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
Your statement was very clear, there was nothing to misinterpret. You either said it or you didn't. And y'all discount or don't read the contradictory information I've provided so you really aren't in a valid position to critique.
Hang on a sec. Here is all of your posts in this thread in a row. You say you've provided contradictory information. Where is it? The only authority you appeal to is yourself.
It boils down to 'You should believe me because I know things, and I know people who know things'
Others have cited studies and various sources. Some have asked you to produce evidence of your own. "No, I'm right" does not constitute evidence.
These are taken out of context and so appear rather silly but they do show that nowhere in this thread (until one post at the very end, concerning a minor point) do you provide contradictory evidence.
QuoteAll the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
QuoteDance everyone, dance!
QuotePersonal and professional experience working with the DEA. From the lower ranks right up to the top. I'm not arguing that the unacceptable is acceptable. All I know is every person I've dealt with from the DEA are good people trying to keep people safe. The media will always harp on the stupid bad shit that happens, like the kid who was forgotten. They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help protect our communities.
QuoteIt was sarcasm. It's as I've been saying for ages now, me simply posting, because of my views, gets everyone all worked up. This thread is a good example.
QuoteSelf-Censoring other points of view is an excellent way to protect paradigms.
QuoteYou should leave PD then. It's attention-whores all the way down.
I'm not trolling. I work with the DEA on a regular basis. They do a lot of really good work that works to keep communities safer. Like the program that has removed over 50 tons of unwanted medicines from homes in my state. That's 50 tons of medicines that can't be diverted and abused and not flushed down the drain where it will fuck up our water. But no one likes to publish stories on that.
QuoteWell I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
QuoteYes, but at no point have I excused the DEAs mistakes, in fact I've said before that shit is wrong and I stated that the judgement for the kid forgotten by DEA was a good thing. But it's too simplistic to just cast them all in the fire.
QuoteNot in this thread but the sentiment has been more or less stated in other threads. But sure, okay, so I think what is being reported on on the OP is shitty, though I do think the DEA should have the ability to collect intelligence on drug dealers. But if they are gathering information on innocent Americans, that isn't right. My next question would be who forced this extra duty upon the DEA.
QuoteYou're naive.
Quote
Not as good as me, no, but good enough.
Quote
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Quote
You are entitled to that stereotypical, discriminatory opinion.
QuoteSure, I agree with that, anyone who was doing anything illegal should be tried, and if convicted, punished.
What I'm saying is, based upon my interactions with people at all levels at that agency, is that I think you would find that those individuals would be in the minority, and that most there are just doing the job of protecting our communities from the scourge of illicit drugs.
Because make no mistake, drugs are having a HUGE impact on our country. Both in blood and treasure.
QuoteNot having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
Quote
In a general sense, yes. The devil is in the details.
QuoteRight, shouldn't be an option, but the reality is that treating people equitably is always optional, speaking in strictly technical terms. People should be treatd equitably, things should be enforced and enacted equitably, but it's pretty safe to say that often doesn't happen.
QuoteRead the news on any given day. People should be treated equitable. The news on a daily basis reminds you that for many people in this world, they view it as optional. Thus why I used the term "necessary option". Which yes, in the end means it is still optional for the actor. I was simply conveying that, in the specific topic being discussed, my view is that it is necessary for equitable enforcement.
QuoteNo. Try reading my posts again.
QuoteYour baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
QuoteI also said people breaking the law should be held accountable and that the DEA should be doing what it does within the law, drug policy should be enforced and enacted equitably. And by and large I believe it is. But there are places where it clearly needs to be fixed or enforced better.
Quote
I wasn't speaking to you.
QuoteI don't share your opinion that they are violating the 4th.
QuoteAssumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
Quote
I've been here for 8 years, of course you have. You are just exercising butthurt selective memory.
QuoteThe implication is pretty clear, otherwise, it wouldn't be necessary to even make the statement you made.
QuoteHmm, I didn't know Dok = everyone.
Interesting logic you are swinging there Cain.
QuoteAnyway, this thread is about the DEA, not me.
QuoteAgain, if you actually read my posts you will see I said something else entirely.
QuoteStart another thread if you want to discuss this, as it has little to do with the topic of this thread.
QuoteS'alright, between my new relationship, being a dad, and everything else, I likely never would have found the time.
QuoteMy worst vice is coffee and my brain is in tip-top shape, thank you very much. Have you considered that perhaps the receiver is busted?
QuoteYeah, which I drink like once a month, if that
.
Quote
Yes, someone who drinks once a month can be considered an "alcoholic".
Great observation smarty pants!
QuoteNo dumbass, I drink alcohol once a month and have no dependency whatsoever.
If I were to try to quit caffeine there would be a withdrawal period because I drink coffee once or twice a day, my body has developed a level of dependency.
So I was factually correct, my worst vice is coffee.
Quote
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
Quote
And then everyone was Requia ITT.
QuoteWell, given that it is decriminalized in Maine, and we don't throw kids in jail for using pot, it will never happen.
QuoteOften both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
QuoteUh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
QuoteYes, there is, it is an industry projected to be in the Billions and one that will be bigger than the wine industry.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/big-data-download/investment-opportunities-grow-marijuana-business-152839542.html
This last post here is the only one in which you provide evidence, only it doesn't quite fit as the article states that there
will be an industry in the billions. The industry is growing and there are investment groups according to the article but there is nothing in it that links it to big tobacco currently. In fact the video states that a lot of 'old money' are reluctant to do so.
So other than that one link that didn't quite back up what you were saying, what contradictory information have you provided?
:treefucker:
ts;dr
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 07:21:32 AM
I am the Keith Richards of coffee.
I am caffeine-sensitive, I can't handle coffee.
-Nigel, a fragile flower
Quote from: McGrupp on August 10, 2013, 10:43:20 PM
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 03:41:55 PM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:47:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
Your statement was very clear, there was nothing to misinterpret. You either said it or you didn't. And y'all discount or don't read the contradictory information I've provided so you really aren't in a valid position to critique.
Hang on a sec. Here is all of your posts in this thread in a row. You say you've provided contradictory information. Where is it? The only authority you appeal to is yourself.
It boils down to 'You should believe me because I know things, and I know people who know things'
Others have cited studies and various sources. Some have asked you to produce evidence of your own. "No, I'm right" does not constitute evidence.
These are taken out of context and so appear rather silly but they do show that nowhere in this thread (until one post at the very end, concerning a minor point) do you provide contradictory evidence.
QuoteAll the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
QuoteDance everyone, dance!
QuotePersonal and professional experience working with the DEA. From the lower ranks right up to the top. I'm not arguing that the unacceptable is acceptable. All I know is every person I've dealt with from the DEA are good people trying to keep people safe. The media will always harp on the stupid bad shit that happens, like the kid who was forgotten. They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help protect our communities.
QuoteIt was sarcasm. It's as I've been saying for ages now, me simply posting, because of my views, gets everyone all worked up. This thread is a good example.
QuoteSelf-Censoring other points of view is an excellent way to protect paradigms.
QuoteYou should leave PD then. It's attention-whores all the way down.
I'm not trolling. I work with the DEA on a regular basis. They do a lot of really good work that works to keep communities safer. Like the program that has removed over 50 tons of unwanted medicines from homes in my state. That's 50 tons of medicines that can't be diverted and abused and not flushed down the drain where it will fuck up our water. But no one likes to publish stories on that.
QuoteWell I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
QuoteYes, but at no point have I excused the DEAs mistakes, in fact I've said before that shit is wrong and I stated that the judgement for the kid forgotten by DEA was a good thing. But it's too simplistic to just cast them all in the fire.
QuoteNot in this thread but the sentiment has been more or less stated in other threads. But sure, okay, so I think what is being reported on on the OP is shitty, though I do think the DEA should have the ability to collect intelligence on drug dealers. But if they are gathering information on innocent Americans, that isn't right. My next question would be who forced this extra duty upon the DEA.
QuoteYou're naive.
Quote
Not as good as me, no, but good enough.
Quote
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Quote
You are entitled to that stereotypical, discriminatory opinion.
QuoteSure, I agree with that, anyone who was doing anything illegal should be tried, and if convicted, punished.
What I'm saying is, based upon my interactions with people at all levels at that agency, is that I think you would find that those individuals would be in the minority, and that most there are just doing the job of protecting our communities from the scourge of illicit drugs.
Because make no mistake, drugs are having a HUGE impact on our country. Both in blood and treasure.
QuoteNot having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
Quote
In a general sense, yes. The devil is in the details.
QuoteRight, shouldn't be an option, but the reality is that treating people equitably is always optional, speaking in strictly technical terms. People should be treatd equitably, things should be enforced and enacted equitably, but it's pretty safe to say that often doesn't happen.
QuoteRead the news on any given day. People should be treated equitable. The news on a daily basis reminds you that for many people in this world, they view it as optional. Thus why I used the term "necessary option". Which yes, in the end means it is still optional for the actor. I was simply conveying that, in the specific topic being discussed, my view is that it is necessary for equitable enforcement.
QuoteNo. Try reading my posts again.
QuoteYour baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
QuoteI also said people breaking the law should be held accountable and that the DEA should be doing what it does within the law, drug policy should be enforced and enacted equitably. And by and large I believe it is. But there are places where it clearly needs to be fixed or enforced better.
Quote
I wasn't speaking to you.
QuoteI don't share your opinion that they are violating the 4th.
QuoteAssumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
Quote
I've been here for 8 years, of course you have. You are just exercising butthurt selective memory.
QuoteThe implication is pretty clear, otherwise, it wouldn't be necessary to even make the statement you made.
QuoteHmm, I didn't know Dok = everyone.
Interesting logic you are swinging there Cain.
QuoteAnyway, this thread is about the DEA, not me.
QuoteAgain, if you actually read my posts you will see I said something else entirely.
QuoteStart another thread if you want to discuss this, as it has little to do with the topic of this thread.
QuoteS'alright, between my new relationship, being a dad, and everything else, I likely never would have found the time.
QuoteMy worst vice is coffee and my brain is in tip-top shape, thank you very much. Have you considered that perhaps the receiver is busted?
QuoteYeah, which I drink like once a month, if that
.
Quote
Yes, someone who drinks once a month can be considered an "alcoholic".
Great observation smarty pants!
QuoteNo dumbass, I drink alcohol once a month and have no dependency whatsoever.
If I were to try to quit caffeine there would be a withdrawal period because I drink coffee once or twice a day, my body has developed a level of dependency.
So I was factually correct, my worst vice is coffee.
Quote
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
Quote
And then everyone was Requia ITT.
QuoteWell, given that it is decriminalized in Maine, and we don't throw kids in jail for using pot, it will never happen.
QuoteOften both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
QuoteUh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
QuoteYes, there is, it is an industry projected to be in the Billions and one that will be bigger than the wine industry.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/big-data-download/investment-opportunities-grow-marijuana-business-152839542.html
This last post here is the only one in which you provide evidence, only it doesn't quite fit as the article states that there will be an industry in the billions. The industry is growing and there are investment groups according to the article but there is nothing in it that links it to big tobacco currently. In fact the video states that a lot of 'old money' are reluctant to do so.
So other than that one link that didn't quite back up what you were saying, what contradictory information have you provided?
:lulz: This is amazing. It makes me want to do it with his whole post history.
Quote from: YOUR Social Science Thinkmonkey on August 11, 2013, 03:03:04 AM
Quote from: McGrupp on August 10, 2013, 10:43:20 PM
Quote from: The End on August 10, 2013, 03:41:55 PM
Quote from: Aloha Ackbar on August 10, 2013, 06:47:33 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 10, 2013, 06:42:07 AM
RWHN cracks me up. I have begun to think he believes the shit he's pushing.
He's an automaton. Which is ironic considering his pre-automation writings.
And since he goes out of his way to misinterpret everything, which is the root of my beef with him, I'm going to clarify by saying that I don't think he's an automaton because of his views, but rather that he won't even consider information that indicates that his programming may be in error. He came to a conclusion. He stopped thinking. Any contradictory information is from corrupt and biased shills, no matter how much contradictory evidence there is.
Your statement was very clear, there was nothing to misinterpret. You either said it or you didn't. And y'all discount or don't read the contradictory information I've provided so you really aren't in a valid position to critique.
Hang on a sec. Here is all of your posts in this thread in a row. You say you've provided contradictory information. Where is it? The only authority you appeal to is yourself.
It boils down to 'You should believe me because I know things, and I know people who know things'
Others have cited studies and various sources. Some have asked you to produce evidence of your own. "No, I'm right" does not constitute evidence.
These are taken out of context and so appear rather silly but they do show that nowhere in this thread (until one post at the very end, concerning a minor point) do you provide contradictory evidence.
QuoteAll the ones I've met are fine upstanding citizens.
QuoteDance everyone, dance!
QuotePersonal and professional experience working with the DEA. From the lower ranks right up to the top. I'm not arguing that the unacceptable is acceptable. All I know is every person I've dealt with from the DEA are good people trying to keep people safe. The media will always harp on the stupid bad shit that happens, like the kid who was forgotten. They won't report on the normal day-to-day operations that are straight forward and help protect our communities.
QuoteIt was sarcasm. It's as I've been saying for ages now, me simply posting, because of my views, gets everyone all worked up. This thread is a good example.
QuoteSelf-Censoring other points of view is an excellent way to protect paradigms.
QuoteYou should leave PD then. It's attention-whores all the way down.
I'm not trolling. I work with the DEA on a regular basis. They do a lot of really good work that works to keep communities safer. Like the program that has removed over 50 tons of unwanted medicines from homes in my state. That's 50 tons of medicines that can't be diverted and abused and not flushed down the drain where it will fuck up our water. But no one likes to publish stories on that.
QuoteWell I guess we should all denounce Discordianism because of Uncle BadTouch. All of the good Discordians don't excuse that piece of shit so we might as well all mail it in, right?
That's such a stupid,simplistic argument.
QuoteYes, but at no point have I excused the DEAs mistakes, in fact I've said before that shit is wrong and I stated that the judgement for the kid forgotten by DEA was a good thing. But it's too simplistic to just cast them all in the fire.
QuoteNot in this thread but the sentiment has been more or less stated in other threads. But sure, okay, so I think what is being reported on on the OP is shitty, though I do think the DEA should have the ability to collect intelligence on drug dealers. But if they are gathering information on innocent Americans, that isn't right. My next question would be who forced this extra duty upon the DEA.
QuoteYou're naive.
Quote
Not as good as me, no, but good enough.
Quote
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe. Not going out of our way to make innocent people miserable. The program outlined in the OP, if accurate, is definitely troubling and not something I support. It would also be a mistake to think the same for everyone employed by DEA. It's a big agency with a lot of staff.
Quote
You are entitled to that stereotypical, discriminatory opinion.
QuoteSure, I agree with that, anyone who was doing anything illegal should be tried, and if convicted, punished.
What I'm saying is, based upon my interactions with people at all levels at that agency, is that I think you would find that those individuals would be in the minority, and that most there are just doing the job of protecting our communities from the scourge of illicit drugs.
Because make no mistake, drugs are having a HUGE impact on our country. Both in blood and treasure.
QuoteNot having drug policies and not having those policies enforced is not an option. Having them enforced smarter, better, and in an equitable fashion, of course, are necessary options.
Quote
In a general sense, yes. The devil is in the details.
QuoteRight, shouldn't be an option, but the reality is that treating people equitably is always optional, speaking in strictly technical terms. People should be treatd equitably, things should be enforced and enacted equitably, but it's pretty safe to say that often doesn't happen.
QuoteRead the news on any given day. People should be treated equitable. The news on a daily basis reminds you that for many people in this world, they view it as optional. Thus why I used the term "necessary option". Which yes, in the end means it is still optional for the actor. I was simply conveying that, in the specific topic being discussed, my view is that it is necessary for equitable enforcement.
QuoteNo. Try reading my posts again.
QuoteYour baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people.
QuoteI also said people breaking the law should be held accountable and that the DEA should be doing what it does within the law, drug policy should be enforced and enacted equitably. And by and large I believe it is. But there are places where it clearly needs to be fixed or enforced better.
Quote
I wasn't speaking to you.
QuoteI don't share your opinion that they are violating the 4th.
QuoteAssumptions on who I am as a person. You don't know shit about me. Just as I don't know shit about any of you. The internet is a horrible way to get to know someone on any meaningful level.
Quote
I've been here for 8 years, of course you have. You are just exercising butthurt selective memory.
QuoteThe implication is pretty clear, otherwise, it wouldn't be necessary to even make the statement you made.
QuoteHmm, I didn't know Dok = everyone.
Interesting logic you are swinging there Cain.
QuoteAnyway, this thread is about the DEA, not me.
QuoteAgain, if you actually read my posts you will see I said something else entirely.
QuoteStart another thread if you want to discuss this, as it has little to do with the topic of this thread.
QuoteS'alright, between my new relationship, being a dad, and everything else, I likely never would have found the time.
QuoteMy worst vice is coffee and my brain is in tip-top shape, thank you very much. Have you considered that perhaps the receiver is busted?
QuoteYeah, which I drink like once a month, if that
.
Quote
Yes, someone who drinks once a month can be considered an "alcoholic".
Great observation smarty pants!
QuoteNo dumbass, I drink alcohol once a month and have no dependency whatsoever.
If I were to try to quit caffeine there would be a withdrawal period because I drink coffee once or twice a day, my body has developed a level of dependency.
So I was factually correct, my worst vice is coffee.
Quote
Oh my god, it's amateur hour all of a sudden.
Quote
And then everyone was Requia ITT.
QuoteWell, given that it is decriminalized in Maine, and we don't throw kids in jail for using pot, it will never happen.
QuoteOften both. Big Marijuana has some deep pockets.
QuoteUh huh, you are incredibly naive. There is huge money for the making if/when marijuana becomes legal. Tobacco companies, and others, are all poised to pounce on that shit. If you think otherwise you are beyond dense.
QuoteYes, there is, it is an industry projected to be in the Billions and one that will be bigger than the wine industry.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/big-data-download/investment-opportunities-grow-marijuana-business-152839542.html
This last post here is the only one in which you provide evidence, only it doesn't quite fit as the article states that there will be an industry in the billions. The industry is growing and there are investment groups according to the article but there is nothing in it that links it to big tobacco currently. In fact the video states that a lot of 'old money' are reluctant to do so.
So other than that one link that didn't quite back up what you were saying, what contradictory information have you provided?
:lulz: This is amazing. It makes me want to do it with his whole post history.
I think my favorite is "Your baseless assumptions don't mean that I'm not a good person helping people."
Fuzzy statist. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
More on the DEA surveillance:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/drug-agents-use-vast-phone-trove-eclipsing-nsas.html?_r=1&
Things to note:
- Instructions in the training material to NEVER mention the code-name "Hemisphere" on official documents.
- The majority of subpoenas issued to pull these records are "administrative subpoenas", meaning no judge or jury even saw them.
Quote from: Telarus on September 04, 2013, 05:37:29 PM
More on the DEA surveillance:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/drug-agents-use-vast-phone-trove-eclipsing-nsas.html?_r=1&
Things to note:
- Instructions in the training material to NEVER mention the code-name "Hemisphere" on official documents.
- The majority of subpoenas issued to pull these records are "administrative subpoenas", meaning no judge or jury even saw them.
Well, you know. Ticking time bomb, Jack Bauer to the rescue, etc, etc.
Quote from: Telarus on September 04, 2013, 05:37:29 PM
More on the DEA surveillance:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/02/us/drug-agents-use-vast-phone-trove-eclipsing-nsas.html?_r=1&
Things to note:
- Instructions in the training material to NEVER mention the code-name "Hemisphere" on official documents.
- The majority of subpoenas issued to pull these records are "administrative subpoenas", meaning no judge or jury even saw them.
Yeah, those are some good people doing the right thing, all right.
Quote from: AFK on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe.
Who dies THIS sound like? :lulz:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 12, 2020, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: AFK on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe.
Who dies THIS sound like? :lulz:
Ah, I forgot we had our very own bastard here once. Officer WHN.
I wonder how foamy his mouth is today.
Quote from: altered on June 12, 2020, 04:57:11 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 12, 2020, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: AFK on August 08, 2013, 11:36:50 AM
Sure it does, it means we are out there doing what we do to help our communities and keep them safe.
Who dies THIS sound like? :lulz:
Ah, I forgot we had our very own bastard here once. Officer WHN.
I wonder how foamy his mouth is today.
Not very. He doesn't have actual beliefs.