Topic: First Amendment Right
started by: MADDOG
Posted by MADDOG on Mar. 30 2012,3:09 pm
QUOTE
Polk County prosecutors are trying stronger tactics in an Occupy Des Moines trespassing trial scheduled to begin Monday, arguing that jurors should be barred from considering “free speech rights.”
Earlier this month, former state Rep. Ed Fallon was acquitted in the first of several trespassing trials when a jury decided that the First Amendment outranks a state Capitol curfew.
Court papers filed in preparation for Monday’s joint misdemeanor trespassing trial of Hugh Espey and David Goodner argue that the judge should not cede constitutional decisions to the jury.
Fallon was the first Occupy Des Moines protester to stand trial following 32 arrests at the Iowa Capitol. Monday’s trial is the first since that decision.
Jurors in the Fallon case reached their decision after following legal instructions from District Associate Judge Romonda Belcher that defined trespassing as remaining on property without justification. Jurors were told that, “ ‘Without justification’ allows and protects entry on public property for the purpose of reasonably exercising one’s right to free speech, assembly or to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
But the latest court paperwork — signed by Jeff Noble, the bureau chief who oversees misdemeanor prosecutors in the Polk County attorney’s office, and a prosecution intern — argues that the 1976 court decisions Fallon’s lawyer cited as basis for the jury instruction are no longer the controlling law. Other Iowa cases have “consistently held that free speech is no defense under Iowa’s trespass statute,” documents argue. And even if it is, “there are practical problems inherent in allowing a jury of laypeople to determine the legal reasonableness of constitutional justification.”
The documents cite a Des Moines Register story that quoted a juror in the Fallon trial explaining the verdict by saying that “the Constitution supersedes all state laws and regulations.”
Because jurors believe such things, “using instructions which characterize the defendant’s actions as an exercise of constitutional rights effectively wraps the defendant in the flag and dictates the outcome of the trial,” according to Noble’s motion. “Other jurors in future cases may not use the same problematic logic as the jurors quoted above. But the mere potential for the jury nullification discussed above is the exact reason why it is the court’s role — not the jury’s — to determine questions of constitutional law.”
The paperwork asks Belcher to bar any “evidence or argument regarding ‘free speech rights’ ” and whether those rights constitute justification.
Lawyers for the Occupy protesters counter that talk of public protest is essential, given the nature of the offense and that Iowa set up its trespassing law to allow a little leeway.
A 34-page defense motion, signed by Drake University law professor Sally Frank and two students, includes six pages that cite trespass cases from all 50 states and Guam. Iowa’s is the only law that includes the words “without justification,” the lawyers wrote.
“Since the Legislature purposely chose to include those words in the definition, they should be given full force and effect,” court papers contend. “The best way to do so would be to view ‘without justification’ as an element of the offense and allow evidence on justification to be admitted to the jury.”
< Occupy on trial >
Earlier this month, former state Rep. Ed Fallon was acquitted in the first of several trespassing trials when a jury decided that the First Amendment outranks a state Capitol curfew.
Court papers filed in preparation for Monday’s joint misdemeanor trespassing trial of Hugh Espey and David Goodner argue that the judge should not cede constitutional decisions to the jury.
Fallon was the first Occupy Des Moines protester to stand trial following 32 arrests at the Iowa Capitol. Monday’s trial is the first since that decision.
Jurors in the Fallon case reached their decision after following legal instructions from District Associate Judge Romonda Belcher that defined trespassing as remaining on property without justification. Jurors were told that, “ ‘Without justification’ allows and protects entry on public property for the purpose of reasonably exercising one’s right to free speech, assembly or to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
But the latest court paperwork — signed by Jeff Noble, the bureau chief who oversees misdemeanor prosecutors in the Polk County attorney’s office, and a prosecution intern — argues that the 1976 court decisions Fallon’s lawyer cited as basis for the jury instruction are no longer the controlling law. Other Iowa cases have “consistently held that free speech is no defense under Iowa’s trespass statute,” documents argue. And even if it is, “there are practical problems inherent in allowing a jury of laypeople to determine the legal reasonableness of constitutional justification.”
The documents cite a Des Moines Register story that quoted a juror in the Fallon trial explaining the verdict by saying that “the Constitution supersedes all state laws and regulations.”
Because jurors believe such things, “using instructions which characterize the defendant’s actions as an exercise of constitutional rights effectively wraps the defendant in the flag and dictates the outcome of the trial,” according to Noble’s motion. “Other jurors in future cases may not use the same problematic logic as the jurors quoted above. But the mere potential for the jury nullification discussed above is the exact reason why it is the court’s role — not the jury’s — to determine questions of constitutional law.”
The paperwork asks Belcher to bar any “evidence or argument regarding ‘free speech rights’ ” and whether those rights constitute justification.
Lawyers for the Occupy protesters counter that talk of public protest is essential, given the nature of the offense and that Iowa set up its trespassing law to allow a little leeway.
A 34-page defense motion, signed by Drake University law professor Sally Frank and two students, includes six pages that cite trespass cases from all 50 states and Guam. Iowa’s is the only law that includes the words “without justification,” the lawyers wrote.
“Since the Legislature purposely chose to include those words in the definition, they should be given full force and effect,” court papers contend. “The best way to do so would be to view ‘without justification’ as an element of the offense and allow evidence on justification to be admitted to the jury.”
< Occupy on trial >
Just where do our first amendment rights end? There are many lines drawn where the protection under the first amendment do not go. Is this one of them?
Clearly I have no love for the occupiers. They're a bunch of contentious unruly rabble with no respect for anything. Their disregard and respect for others and the law is obvious, but when the first amendment comes to play things change.
This country along with the founding and purpose of this forum is based on just those rights offered to us under it. As protesters, do they have the right to break other laws to attempt to make their point? Should trespassing be considered just what it is, an unlawful act committed on the person, property, or rights of another; usually as a wrongful entry on real property or should this be considered an entry on public property for the purpose of reasonably exercising one’s right to free speech, assembly or to petition the government for a redress of grievances?”
Clearly, the capitol grounds have hours during each day that are lawful to protest. Does capitol security and the legislature have the right to set times when the public may occupy the grounds? Are those times reasonable? Is it reasonable to have hours in the public areas?
The bureau chief for misdemeanors in Polk County says that the courts have consistently held that free speech is no defense against Iowa trespassing statutes.
The right to free speech is perhaps our most cherished right, but it's not absolute.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 30 2012,5:17 pm
MADDOG: Clearly I have no love for the occupiers. They're a bunch of contentious unruly rabble with no respect for anything. Their disregard and respect for others and the law is obvious-----
Me: Really? I've been far more respectful to everyone here than you have. I've never disrespected anyone's property. Contentious and unruly? I can't believe you are STILL judging a whole group by the stupid actions of a few. And yes, the loss of reasonably exercising one’s right to free speech, assembly or to petition the government for a redress of grievances is one of the problems facing us that we the occupiers have been trying to bring attention to.
Was it Bush that started "Free Speech Zones" ? People are allowed to redress government and protest miles away from the people we have problems with and miles away from the press? The press is now being told what stories they can cover and which they can not? Does that sound like America? The press is now being arrested and threatened for trying to cover stories the police and government don't want them covering? What country is this turning into?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 30 2012,5:51 pm
Hey MADDOG, did you see what happened to the contentious unruly UC Davis student Occupiers?Are these the disrespectful rabble you mean? Did you know Harvard also has students who occupy? So does Yale.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Mar. 30 2012,6:18 pm
(MADDOG @ Mar. 30 2012,3:09 pm)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Polk County prosecutors are trying stronger tactics in an Occupy Des Moines trespassing trial scheduled to begin Monday, arguing that jurors should be barred from considering “free speech rights.”
Earlier this month, former state Rep. Ed Fallon was acquitted in the first of several trespassing trials when a jury decided that the First Amendment outranks a state Capitol curfew.
Court papers filed in preparation for Monday’s joint misdemeanor trespassing trial of Hugh Espey and David Goodner argue that the judge should not cede constitutional decisions to the jury.
Fallon was the first Occupy Des Moines protester to stand trial following 32 arrests at the Iowa Capitol. Monday’s trial is the first since that decision.
Jurors in the Fallon case reached their decision after following legal instructions from District Associate Judge Romonda Belcher that defined trespassing as remaining on property without justification. Jurors were told that, “ ‘Without justification’ allows and protects entry on public property for the purpose of reasonably exercising one’s right to free speech, assembly or to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
But the latest court paperwork — signed by Jeff Noble, the bureau chief who oversees misdemeanor prosecutors in the Polk County attorney’s office, and a prosecution intern — argues that the 1976 court decisions Fallon’s lawyer cited as basis for the jury instruction are no longer the controlling law. Other Iowa cases have “consistently held that free speech is no defense under Iowa’s trespass statute,” documents argue. And even if it is, “there are practical problems inherent in allowing a jury of laypeople to determine the legal reasonableness of constitutional justification.”
The documents cite a Des Moines Register story that quoted a juror in the Fallon trial explaining the verdict by saying that “the Constitution supersedes all state laws and regulations.”
Because jurors believe such things, “using instructions which characterize the defendant’s actions as an exercise of constitutional rights effectively wraps the defendant in the flag and dictates the outcome of the trial,” according to Noble’s motion. “Other jurors in future cases may not use the same problematic logic as the jurors quoted above. But the mere potential for the jury nullification discussed above is the exact reason why it is the court’s role — not the jury’s — to determine questions of constitutional law.”
The paperwork asks Belcher to bar any “evidence or argument regarding ‘free speech rights’ ” and whether those rights constitute justification.
Lawyers for the Occupy protesters counter that talk of public protest is essential, given the nature of the offense and that Iowa set up its trespassing law to allow a little leeway.
A 34-page defense motion, signed by Drake University law professor Sally Frank and two students, includes six pages that cite trespass cases from all 50 states and Guam. Iowa’s is the only law that includes the words “without justification,” the lawyers wrote.
“Since the Legislature purposely chose to include those words in the definition, they should be given full force and effect,” court papers contend. “The best way to do so would be to view ‘without justification’ as an element of the offense and allow evidence on justification to be admitted to the jury.”
< Occupy on trial >
Earlier this month, former state Rep. Ed Fallon was acquitted in the first of several trespassing trials when a jury decided that the First Amendment outranks a state Capitol curfew.
Court papers filed in preparation for Monday’s joint misdemeanor trespassing trial of Hugh Espey and David Goodner argue that the judge should not cede constitutional decisions to the jury.
Fallon was the first Occupy Des Moines protester to stand trial following 32 arrests at the Iowa Capitol. Monday’s trial is the first since that decision.
Jurors in the Fallon case reached their decision after following legal instructions from District Associate Judge Romonda Belcher that defined trespassing as remaining on property without justification. Jurors were told that, “ ‘Without justification’ allows and protects entry on public property for the purpose of reasonably exercising one’s right to free speech, assembly or to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
But the latest court paperwork — signed by Jeff Noble, the bureau chief who oversees misdemeanor prosecutors in the Polk County attorney’s office, and a prosecution intern — argues that the 1976 court decisions Fallon’s lawyer cited as basis for the jury instruction are no longer the controlling law. Other Iowa cases have “consistently held that free speech is no defense under Iowa’s trespass statute,” documents argue. And even if it is, “there are practical problems inherent in allowing a jury of laypeople to determine the legal reasonableness of constitutional justification.”
The documents cite a Des Moines Register story that quoted a juror in the Fallon trial explaining the verdict by saying that “the Constitution supersedes all state laws and regulations.”
Because jurors believe such things, “using instructions which characterize the defendant’s actions as an exercise of constitutional rights effectively wraps the defendant in the flag and dictates the outcome of the trial,” according to Noble’s motion. “Other jurors in future cases may not use the same problematic logic as the jurors quoted above. But the mere potential for the jury nullification discussed above is the exact reason why it is the court’s role — not the jury’s — to determine questions of constitutional law.”
The paperwork asks Belcher to bar any “evidence or argument regarding ‘free speech rights’ ” and whether those rights constitute justification.
Lawyers for the Occupy protesters counter that talk of public protest is essential, given the nature of the offense and that Iowa set up its trespassing law to allow a little leeway.
A 34-page defense motion, signed by Drake University law professor Sally Frank and two students, includes six pages that cite trespass cases from all 50 states and Guam. Iowa’s is the only law that includes the words “without justification,” the lawyers wrote.
“Since the Legislature purposely chose to include those words in the definition, they should be given full force and effect,” court papers contend. “The best way to do so would be to view ‘without justification’ as an element of the offense and allow evidence on justification to be admitted to the jury.”
< Occupy on trial >
Just where do our first amendment rights end? There are many lines drawn where the protection under the first amendment do not go. Is this one of them?
Clearly I have no love for the occupiers. They're a bunch of contentious unruly rabble with no respect for anything. Their disregard and respect for others and the law is obvious, but when the first amendment comes to play things change.
This country along with the founding and purpose of this forum is based on just those rights offered to us under it. As protesters, do they have the right to break other laws to attempt to make their point? Should trespassing be considered just what it is, an unlawful act committed on the person, property, or rights of another; usually as a wrongful entry on real property or should this be considered an entry on public property for the purpose of reasonably exercising one’s right to free speech, assembly or to petition the government for a redress of grievances?”
Clearly, the capitol grounds have hours during each day that are lawful to protest. Does capitol security and the legislature have the right to set times when the public may occupy the grounds? Are those times reasonable? Is it reasonable to have hours in the public areas?
The bureau chief for misdemeanors in Polk County says that the courts have consistently held that free speech is no defense against Iowa trespassing statutes.
The right to free speech is perhaps our most cherished right, but it's not absolute.
Freedom of speech is paramount in a free society.
But when that public redress becomes violent or destructive in nature, those actions are not protected. The same with trespassing on private property is not protected. I also believe speech zones are also UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I also agree with the ruling. Free speech does not have a curfew, as this would be an infringement upon the 1st Amendment, and since the capitol is funded by taxpayers, they must have the ability to protest PEACEFULLY.
Free speech is absolute it is the actions that are not absolute.
Posted by Santorini on Mar. 30 2012,9:26 pm
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Mar. 30 2012,5:51 pm)
QUOTE
Hey MADDOG, did you see what happened to the contentious unruly UC Davis student Occupiers?
Are these the disrespectful rabble you mean? Did you know Harvard also has students who occupy? So does Yale.
Are these the disrespectful rabble you mean? Did you know Harvard also has students who occupy? So does Yale.
Were the sit-in kids blocking the entrance not asked to leave and they chose not to comply?! Disrespectful rabble?...absolutely.
The occupiers love to stage incidences such as this to get the media pity-party they are begging for...it brings the attention they want to their cause?!
So Yale and Harvard have wanna-bes...its college...most everyone there is trying to fit in somewhere. And many come from small town USA and the occupiers are their first real experience with testing the boundaries. Thats what ya do in college! Then ya grow up and live in the real world..and most outgrow the need for rebellion.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 30 2012,10:40 pm
They were not blocking any entrance. So, you believe they should have been blasted in their faces with pepper spray for linking arms and sitting on the ground? You watched the video and feel those young people deserved that? Here's another angle, maybe seeing the policeman walk between two of the students so he could get in front of them before he sprayed them will change your mind. I seriously hope you are not saying they deserved that for exercising their first amendment right. Wow, please tell me you are not saying that. Perhaps you did not watch the video at all. As for the rest of your comment. Wow. Check the meds.
Posted by Santorini on Mar. 30 2012,11:18 pm
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Mar. 30 2012,10:40 pm)
QUOTE
They were not blocking any entrance. So, you believe they should have been blasted in their faces with pepper spray for linking arms and sitting on the ground? You watched the video and feel those young people deserved that? Here's another angle, maybe seeing the policeman walk between two of the students so he could get in front of them before he sprayed them will change your mind. I seriously hope you are not saying they deserved that for exercising their first amendment right. Wow, please tell me you are not saying that. Perhaps you did not watch the video at all.
As for the rest of your comment. Wow. Check the meds.
As for the rest of your comment. Wow. Check the meds.
Check the meds?...hit a little too close to home for ya there Ros! Cause no one is taking this occupy seriously?
Ya never answered the question...were they not asked to leave?? Did they not just completely disrespect authority because they refused when asked? because they wanted the media attention? cause its the only way to keep this occupy thing alive?
Who does this Ros? College kids with too much time and too much of mommy and daddys money! Do ya ever see professionals camping out and about like these kids?
Posted by blahblahblah on Mar. 30 2012,11:27 pm
Since the OccupyMN folks have started protesting I think several interesting questions have come up (at least as far as I am concerned). I agree, having a curfew for protesting or designated "free speech zones" doesn't seem right. What happens though when 100 protestors, marching in the streets of congested downtown area snarl traffic for 1,000's of commuters trying to go about their lives? What happens when protestors enter a residential neighborhood and protest at all hours of the night, don't the residents of that neighborhood also have rights? The notion that all of us get 100% access to all taxpayer funded property is not true, and is a crazy concept. I can't simply walts into the White House whenever I want, nor the Pentagon, nor the restricted areas of the Albert Lea Police Department. Also, if it's true we should be allowed to camp on any and all taxpayer funded property free of charge, for as long as we want, then why are all those suckers paying for camp sites at national and state parks, didn't they get the memo that all taxpayer funded property doubles as free camp sites?
I don't know the right answers to these questions, but I think the recent protests have pushed us the point of having to answer some of these questions.
As for the article, aren't they saying the judge should make a ruling on constitutional versus unconstitutional, and in this case if the judge ruled unconstitutional that would be the end of the trial? I would prefer that model over letting juries decide what is constitutional versus unconstitutional.
Posted by Liberal on Mar. 31 2012,12:59 am
QUOTE
The occupiers love to stage incidences such as this to get the media pity-party they are begging for...it brings the attention they want to their cause?!
What other reason is there to protest?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 31 2012,1:09 am
Santorini: Check the meds?...hit a little too close to home for ya there Ros! Cause no one is taking this occupy seriously?---
Me: Um...no. Besides, Occupy is still going strong. No one is taking occupy seriously? Many people are. Hopefully soon everyone will be.
-------------
Santorini: Ya never answered the question...were they not asked to leave?? Did they not just completely disrespect authority because they refused when asked?
----
Me: So whenever the "powers that be" don't like what we the people have to say and tell us to leave and shut up, we should? Very interesting.
Another thing to take into account, the school chancellor had asked for police to remove tents, NOT STUDENTS. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) were horrified at what was done to the students. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) believes the students have the right to protest and air grievances.
---
Santorini: Do ya ever see professionals camping out and about like these kids?
---
Me: Yep. Even that day, there were some professors from the school that had joined in the protests with the students.
-------------------------------------
blahblahblah, not all of the protestors do those things you mentioned. Sadly some do. I will say one thing though, the day thousands were marching down the streets in NY (and yes, blocking traffic while marching. Kind of hard for thousands to march and not impede traffic) I was watching the livestream, and I must say, I was filled with hope, and my eyes with tears. Every single vehicle was honking, waving, giving thumbs up, and encouraging the marchers. Even cab drivers were holding their hands out the windows to shake hands with them and tell them thank you. And the cab drivers were having their work interrupted! But they were grateful, because they know things have gotten out of control, and our government is not even close to being "for the people, by the people" anymore.
And, no offense, but, it is kind of sad that your biggest response: "I think several interesting questions have come up (at least as far as I am concerned)."
was followed up by the behavior of some of the protestors, and ridiculing them and what they are doing.
Perhaps instead, you could try to realize what their message is, and how what has been happening in this country and still is happening in this country, with how corrupt our government is, is far more offensive than this group of people who want things fixed.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 31 2012,1:12 am
(Liberal @ Mar. 31 2012,12:59 am)
QUOTE
QUOTE
The occupiers love to stage incidences such as this to get the media pity-party they are begging for...it brings the attention they want to their cause?!
What other reason is there to protest?
LOL, thanks for that Liberal, I hadn't caught the irony in that remark lol.
Posted by Santorini on Mar. 31 2012,8:59 am
(Liberal @ Mar. 31 2012,12:59 am)
QUOTE
QUOTE
The occupiers love to stage incidences such as this to get the media pity-party they are begging for...it brings the attention they want to their cause?!
What other reason is there to protest?
Exactly!!
That is what makes these occupiers such a joke...most dont know what they are even there for...they each want their 15 minutes...
Posted by Santorini on Mar. 31 2012,10:02 am
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Mar. 31 2012,1:09 am)
QUOTE
Santorini: Check the meds?...hit a little too close to home for ya there Ros! Cause no one is taking this occupy seriously?
---
Me: Um...no. Besides, Occupy is still going strong. No one is taking occupy seriously? Many people are. Hopefully soon everyone will be.
-------------
Santorini: Ya never answered the question...were they not asked to leave?? Did they not just completely disrespect authority because they refused when asked?
----
Me: So whenever the "powers that be" don't like what we the people have to say and tell us to leave and shut up, we should? Very interesting.
Another thing to take into account, the school chancellor had asked for police to remove tents, NOT STUDENTS. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) were horrified at what was done to the students. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) believes the students have the right to protest and air grievances.
---
Santorini: Do ya ever see professionals camping out and about like these kids?
---
Me: Yep. Even that day, there were some professors from the school that had joined in the protests with the students.
-------------------------------------
blahblahblah, not all of the protestors do those things you mentioned. Sadly some do. I will say one thing though, the day thousands were marching down the streets in NY (and yes, blocking traffic while marching. Kind of hard for thousands to march and not impede traffic) I was watching the livestream, and I must say, I was filled with hope, and my eyes with tears. Every single vehicle was honking, waving, giving thumbs up, and encouraging the marchers. Even cab drivers were holding their hands out the windows to shake hands with them and tell them thank you. And the cab drivers were having their work interrupted! But they were grateful, because they know things have gotten out of control, and our government is not even close to being "for the people, by the people" anymore.
And, no offense, but, it is kind of sad that your biggest response: "I think several interesting questions have come up (at least as far as I am concerned)."
was followed up by the behavior of some of the protestors, and ridiculing them and what they are doing.
Perhaps instead, you could try to realize what their message is, and how what has been happening in this country and still is happening in this country, with how corrupt our government is, is far more offensive than this group of people who want things fixed.
---
Me: Um...no. Besides, Occupy is still going strong. No one is taking occupy seriously? Many people are. Hopefully soon everyone will be.
-------------
Santorini: Ya never answered the question...were they not asked to leave?? Did they not just completely disrespect authority because they refused when asked?
----
Me: So whenever the "powers that be" don't like what we the people have to say and tell us to leave and shut up, we should? Very interesting.
Another thing to take into account, the school chancellor had asked for police to remove tents, NOT STUDENTS. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) were horrified at what was done to the students. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) believes the students have the right to protest and air grievances.
---
Santorini: Do ya ever see professionals camping out and about like these kids?
---
Me: Yep. Even that day, there were some professors from the school that had joined in the protests with the students.
-------------------------------------
blahblahblah, not all of the protestors do those things you mentioned. Sadly some do. I will say one thing though, the day thousands were marching down the streets in NY (and yes, blocking traffic while marching. Kind of hard for thousands to march and not impede traffic) I was watching the livestream, and I must say, I was filled with hope, and my eyes with tears. Every single vehicle was honking, waving, giving thumbs up, and encouraging the marchers. Even cab drivers were holding their hands out the windows to shake hands with them and tell them thank you. And the cab drivers were having their work interrupted! But they were grateful, because they know things have gotten out of control, and our government is not even close to being "for the people, by the people" anymore.
And, no offense, but, it is kind of sad that your biggest response: "I think several interesting questions have come up (at least as far as I am concerned)."
was followed up by the behavior of some of the protestors, and ridiculing them and what they are doing.
Perhaps instead, you could try to realize what their message is, and how what has been happening in this country and still is happening in this country, with how corrupt our government is, is far more offensive than this group of people who want things fixed.
OWS is nothing more than a potpourit of juvenile demands and hypocrasy!
AdBusters, an anti-consumerist publication that sounded the initial call for the protest is funded in part by Tides, a major recipient of Soros funding, add to that Soros MoveOn.org. (unquote)
You Might Be an Occupier If:
--You claim to be for the environment, yet trash the area you are living and protesting.
--You claim to be fighting against greed, yet demand that all your debt be forgiven, that everything you want be given to you & paid by someone else
--You claim you want financial accountability, yet demand your own financial obligations be forgiven or repaid for you
--You claim to be a supporter of civil rights, but you dont respect the rights of those who dont agree with you
--You claim to be against wealth fat-cats, yet cheer when multimillionare Michael Moore shows up to speak
--You claim to be against the outsourcing of American jobs, yet live in a tent & use cell phones made by slave labor in China
--You claim that the public has the right to be in the parks, but you dont move your tent to let other people use them
--You claim the laws should apply to everyone, yet fight the police when they ask you to leave at curfew time
--You claim the TeaBaggers are violent because they own guns and dont use them, yet you throw rocks and bottles at duly appointed representatives of the people when they ask you to obey the law
--You claim to be fighting the good fight against corporate America, while drinking a beverage from Starbucks
Occupy is unpatriotic and the ows routinely view the US as the enemy. The American Flag has been trashed, desecrated. A Coast Guard female officer was harrassed and spit on in Boston...at a Portland rally the speaker said **CK AMERICA!!
(unquote)
Few reasons why its so hard to take the ows seriously...they dont take themselves seriously!
Posted by MADDOG on Mar. 31 2012,11:58 am
(Grinning_Dragon @ Mar. 30 2012,6:18 pm)
QUOTE
Freedom of speech is paramount in a free society.
But when that public redress becomes violent or destructive in nature, those actions are not protected. The same with trespassing on private property is not protected. I also believe speech zones are also UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I also agree with the ruling. Free speech does not have a curfew, as this would be an infringement upon the 1st Amendment, and since the capitol is funded by taxpayers, they must have the ability to protest PEACEFULLY.
Free speech is absolute it is the actions that are not absolute.
But when that public redress becomes violent or destructive in nature, those actions are not protected. The same with trespassing on private property is not protected. I also believe speech zones are also UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I also agree with the ruling. Free speech does not have a curfew, as this would be an infringement upon the 1st Amendment, and since the capitol is funded by taxpayers, they must have the ability to protest PEACEFULLY.
Free speech is absolute it is the actions that are not absolute.
GD, I agree free speech is paramount. When public redress or petitioning the government becomes violent and infringes on others in personal welfare or liberties, free speech is limited retrospectively. Free speech is not protected when it advocates violence or criminal activity. No is it protected when it is determined harmful to an individual due to slander or libel. Liberal and Jim, remember the MnALCU telling you about 'fighting words'?
SCOTUS also determined that "speech that enjoys
the most extensive First Amendment protection may be subject to “regulations of the time, place, and manner of expression." "Free Speech zones"
That's what I meant by not being absolute.
Rosalind posts read like a play script.
Me: I said lah lah lah
Him: you said what?
Me: good grief
girl 1: this is getting old
store clerk: that will be $3.50 please.
Cripes,
When I said the occupiers are a bunch of contentious unruly rabble with no respect for anything, that was a generalization. Does that mean that every single person in the group is that way?
No different is the pepper spray incident. That was likley excessive force by the police. Does that mean that every police officer uses excessive force?QUOTE
Was it Bush that started "Free Speech Zones" ? People are allowed to redress government and protest miles away from the people we have problems with and miles away from the press? The press is now being told what stories they can cover and which they can not? Does that sound like America? The press is now being arrested and threatened for trying to cover stories the police and government don't want them covering? What country is this turning into?
No, rosalind, free speech zones were in existence before Bush. I'm not sure if you didn't know or if you just wanted to 'pull a Bam-Bam and blame him. They came to being during the Johnson administration. The DNC used them in the '80s and again in Boston in 2004
They were expanded though when he was in office.GD, I tend to agree with you to a degree. Did the unions and protesters have the right to not leave the Wisconsin capitol at night?
Posted by blahblahblah on Mar. 31 2012,1:17 pm
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Mar. 31 2012,1:09 am)
QUOTE
And, no offense, but, it is kind of sad that your biggest response: "I think several interesting questions have come up (at least as far as I am concerned)."
was followed up by the behavior of some of the protestors, and ridiculing them and what they are doing.
Perhaps instead, you could try to realize what their message is, and how what has been happening in this country and still is happening in this country, with how corrupt our government is, is far more offensive than this group of people who want things fixed.
was followed up by the behavior of some of the protestors, and ridiculing them and what they are doing.
Perhaps instead, you could try to realize what their message is, and how what has been happening in this country and still is happening in this country, with how corrupt our government is, is far more offensive than this group of people who want things fixed.
Don't worry I am not offended, I'm not even really sure what you're sad about.
What is the message of Occupy?
Is it that things need to change in this country? I agree with that.
Is it that capatilism and mostly free markets don't work? I mostly disagree with this, the problem as I see it is crony capitalism (which is aided by government regulation)
Is it that students have been unfairly burdened with expensive degrees in low demand fields and now have loans to pay? I don't think I will ever agree with this.
Is it that people who can't afford homes they purchased should be allowed to keep the property regardless of the contract they agreed to and the failure to meet their contractual obligations? I think property rights are too important to ever agree with this.
Is it that there is too much money in politics, which is part of the reason we are always picking between the candidates that the money is willing to support? On this I can agree with Occupy, unfortunately Occupy is only about limiting corporate money and is totally for union money, and any other left-wing special interest money. I would be more interested in the elimination of money from all sides.
Is it that everyone should get free healthcare? I have been pondering this one a lot lately and am not sure. I however do believe that Minnesota does a good job of providing insurance to lower income individuals and families on the state level.
Is it that fractional reserve banking and the Fed enslave people with debt burdens they have no hope of ever repaying? I disagree with this, people enslave themselves with debt burdens they have no hope of repaying. I don't even see Occupy's issue with fractional reserve banking in general. It is possible that a country can devalue its way out of debt, but I am sure that has consequences of its own.
Is it that we as a society should strive for an existance promoted in the Zeitgeist series which manifests itself in the "The Venus Project" where somehow human behavior is magically changed and we all work our hardest for the benefit of all of us? At this point I am guessing it's obvious that I am going to think this is crazy.
So Rosalind, what have I missed here? What am I not taking into consideration? That two main topics discussed by OccupyMN are foreclosures and student loans, and constant debates about whether they should be more violent in their protests.
Posted by Santorini on Mar. 31 2012,5:11 pm
Good Post blahblahblah!!That about covers it
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Mar. 31 2012,8:38 pm
Yes blahblah, you are missing some things, and you are also misunderstanding other things.I don't know much about this part of what some in Occupy are working on, I just know some of these things have been being discussed since the first day of Occupy.
`End the Federal Reserve. Reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. Busting up the banks. Bank reform. End of crony capitalism. We don't want to have to bail out the "too big to fail" banks again. You and Santorini think it's ok that people lost their homes because they couldn't afford them (mostly I tend to agree to a certain point) but neither of you have said anything about the fact that banks are just as much to blame (even more so) but they got bailed out, people did not. I'm admitting I don't know much on the banking/economics part. But I trust what some of the occupiers are saying and doing about it. Here also is a good article from the WSJ:
< http://online.wsj.com/article...18.html >
Yes, we want Education Reform as well. Most of the groups I am with don't talk about forgiving student loans. We want college education costs to come down, the costs have skyrocketed in the last ten years or so, and we want things streamlined. Streamlining: For example, my oldest daughter is going to school to be a nurse. She became a CNA in her junior year of highschool and has been taking classes at Riverland for the last two years to become an RN. Half of her classes she is required to take have nothing to do with nursing. Why? It's a waste of money and time. Companies are saying that there isn't enough skilled labor for the jobs they need (some use that as a reason they outsource or go overseas) Ok, so get the costs of education down and get the whole education system to where it works.
Yes too much money in politics. I don't know where you got your info about Occupy only wanting to limit corporate money in influencing government, and not union money. I've never talked to another occupier that has ever said anything other than "get all money out of politics" . No more lobbyists, no more buying politicians in any way. We want Citizens United overturned: that was one of our first and is still one of our strongest ideas. We don't want money in politics, no matter what "side" they are on. The vast majority of us don't like republicans or democrats. They are both just as corrupt as the other.
As for your Zeitgeist comment, every once in awhile someone would come to one of the livestream rooms and spam Zeitgeist links. I don't know a single person who ever watched them, and I have never seen it discussed.
Free Healthcare? One thing I know for sure almost all of us occupiers agree on about healthcare is we don't want profits put over people. We happen to think it is wrong to let people die in the name of money.
Government agencies: We don't want them being bought or threatened by the people they are supposed to be keeping us safe from. Just one example of many: When doctors, scientists and all experts say that there is absolutely no safe level of mercury to have in our bodies-why does the EPA keep raising the acceptable levels of mercury for our bodies? Another example: When hundreds of people are calling the EPA, saying their drinking water is poisoned (to the point they can light their tap water on fire) why does nobody show up or even return their phone calls?
Environment: We don't want the air, land and water continuing to be poisoned. We want more R and D going on for safer cleaner alternatives, and faster implementation for using what we already have the technology for. Instead of building more nuclear power plants, like the two we can utilize wind, solar and hydro to create the same amount of energy.
Media: We want media we can trust. Not media that is paid to hide, lie, spin and fill us full of useless BS to keep us uninformed. We don't want media people who actually do try report important issues to be threatened. This is happening more and more in America and it should scare the hell out of every one of us. AP reporters and Democracy Now and 40 other reporters were handled quite roughly and jailed while covering the RNC in St. Paul in 2008. An ABC news reporter was arrested and charged with tresspassing covering the DNC in Denver in 2008. When CBS tried to do a report on the gulf, BP people and a couple coast guard men threatened them with arrest if they did not leave. One reporter was arrested during the WTO protests in 1999, a huge amount of reporters have been jailed all over the country for covering OWS. In LA the LAPD set up a freakin lottery to "allow" a few lucky reporters to cover a raid on occupiers. How is all this sounding to you? Think it's going to get better?
So many of the bills that have come out lately are so vague it leaves way too many important things up for interpretation. NDAA, Enemy Expatriation Act, SOPA, PIPA. The government is working hard at making any sort of protesting almost impossible. Free speech zones to crazy regulations set up to stymie free speech. BTW, no MADDOG, I did not ask if Bush started Free Speech Zones because he's republican. I dislike democrats as much as I dislike republicans. I asked because I didn't know. The first time I heard about them was with Bush.
We are sick of being lied to by our leaders. Why did we invade Iraq? Which story should we believe? Which story, if any, has even turned out to be true? We're sick of our government trying to/starting wars.
We want more transparency in local, state and federal government. We want more of a say in how money is spent and more of a say in what goes on. For the people by the people right?
We're sick and scared of the ever increasing power over us that the government has. We're sick of being called names and people saying we have no coherent message. Just look at the list I have given-there is more, but I'm tired, and to be honest I think my time and energy is being wasted in this forum. A funny thought popped into my head last night, I was remembering the first few weeks of occupy, and how HUGE it got so quickly, with NO media attention whatsoever. We were all frustrated and angry that it was being hidden like it was. Even the day 15 thousand people were marching down the streets of NY. It hit me last night: too bad the media DID start covering it. Occupy was growing much more quickly by word of mouth and people actually coming to the livestream room and to the park in NY to find out for themselves. That's how they found out the TRUTH about what was going on, and that's why it exploded so quickly.
Then the media finally showed up, lying, spinning and working their hardest to discredit the whole movement, making people want to shun the whole thing, and making some that had joined decide to opt out and not be labeled with the same names the media and their listeners were using. Almost worked, but not quite. This isn't done, not by a long shot. Another funny thing thanks to the media- everyone says we have alot of complaints but no fixes. Well, we do have some fixes, but the thing is, we just want more people to be aware of the important issues so there can be more people involved and more discussions, so we can find the best solutions to problems. Think the government is going to fix things? HA. They are the reason things have gotten the way they are, and it will continue to get worse if left up to them alone.
Or do you just want to go on debating and arguing republicans vs. democrats and who is better.
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 01 2012,11:34 am
curious Ros, your daughter going to Riverland Nursing, what classes specifically would you call unnecessary?Its wonderful that kids can do post-secondary while still in high school (free!) to get a jump start on their education and careers! Your daughter did a good job!
And a valuable lesson your daughter will learn practicing nursing is that with Medicare (govt run healthcare!) Cost is always considered over people!! And people do die in the name of money under medicare!
And water! Ive never trusted tap water...people flushing all kinds of crap down the toilets...eventually works is way into he drinking water...thats why I use
reverse osmosis! and supplement with flouride tabs.
And transparency from govt...
We utilize our voting rights to choose representatives that best represent our wishes/ needs. You are not always going to agree with their choices...but that is the name of the game! Dont like being lied to then gather your group and vote them out!
and people losing their homes? Yes it is sad, BUT...
why would someone making $30,000/yr even think they could afford a $300,000 home? Because the bank said they could? Common sense HAS to come into play here.
When my child and her spouse were buying their first home 2 years ago my advice to them was to never use both incomes when considering buying a house...use only one! If one of you should lose your job you could still afford to keep your home! As a result they have a beautiful home on the lake and are not constrained with excessive monthly payments. This is where personal responsibility of knowing what you can afford comes into play. Doesnt matter what the bank says you can afford...the bank is looking out for the bank...
the WSJ link...
Its a risk whenever a person invests in the stock market.
Anyone who invests knows the risk involved! Solution...
Dont invest!
Then you made a comment think the govt is going to fix things, HA...then why would you even want to push healthcare into the govts hands?!
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 01 2012,2:25 pm
This is my last comment to you. I used to think you were somewhat amusing with some of the things you would say, but after you called me a "terrorist sympathizer" and after I read Grinning Dragon's response, I started thinking how right he is that statements and thought patterns like yours are dangerous and troubling. Especially now with these new laws. I don't really want to be hauled away and locked up indefinitely without a lawyer, trial, and without even my family knowing what happened to me. Far fetched as it may seem, it is possible now for these things to happen. Right here in America, it is possible now. After your reaction towards the UC Davis students, and (you won't answer my question on if you think it was appropriate action from police) I have to assume by your other comments that you do approve and think the police had every right to blast those kids in the face with pepper spray. Peaceful kids doing nothing wrong. Exercising their first amendment right. Now I find absolutely nothing amusing about anything you say.
----------------
I can't believe I am even going to respond to your reverse osmosis comment as being the right option instead of considering STOPPING the poisoning of our water supplies:
Reverse Osmosis does not remove all of the chemicals that ends up in water from the process of fracking. There are still some chemicals that can't be removed, which in fact degrade the reverse osmosis filters quite rapidly, and cause cancer. There are people whose water has been poisoned by fracking, and are now dying of cancer. People whose land and water is damaged by fracking can't even sell their property and leave. Nobody in their right mind would buy it.
And I suppose in your way of thinking "They should have sold their property to the fracking companies. Personal Responsibility! They made the choice to not sell. Their neighbors on the other hand DID sell and became quite rich! Their neighbors can now move wherever they want to! But since they CHOSE to not sell or lease their property to frackers, it is THEIR FAULT their property has absolutely no value now, it is THEIR FAULT they aren't rich and are dying of cancer. They can always walk away with nothing and move somewhere else. It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND FREE CHOICE!!
That is how this country works and why it is so great! I think they should not be allowed to get welfare or any other type of government assistance though, after all, they did give up the chance to make money from their property, but they REFUSED! ----------------
I also can't believe you are still taking the side of the banks when they almost crashed the entire economy. Personal responsibility must only apply to we the people. Bankers work hard for their money! They deserved those million dollar bonuses right after they paid back their bail out money! You are jealous of other peoples' success and if you don't have what you want out of your life IT'S YOUR FAULT.
So now you will be put on ignore, but I will let you get in one last jab before I do, so make it good. Rant your heart out at my lazy-good-for-nothing-socialist-occupying-filthy-leftist-jealousofotherssuccess-gimmewhats
yours ass. Give it all ya got, because after this next comment from you I will not see any more.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 01 2012,3:41 pm
Roz, I know we've had our tiffs in the past but putting someone on ignore is pretty much sticking you fingers in your ears and singing la la la la, pretty childish IMHO
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 01 2012,7:03 pm
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 01 2012,3:41 pm)
QUOTE
putting someone on ignore is pretty much sticking you fingers in your ears and singing la la la la, pretty childish IMHO
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 01 2012,8:46 pm
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 01 2012,3:41 pm)
QUOTE
putting someone on ignore is pretty much sticking you fingers in your ears and singing la la la la, pretty childish IMHO
Yes I agree, but if I don't my head will likely explode.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 02 2012,6:41 am
I'll never ignore you Roz.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 02 2012,8:18 am
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 02 2012,6:41 am)
QUOTE
I'll never ignore you Roz.
Sometimes I wish you would!! Jk, I'm Jk. Agree to disagree sometimes.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 02 2012,9:23 am
^ That's what makes life fun.
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 02 2012,11:59 am
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Apr. 01 2012,2:25 pm)
QUOTE
This is my last comment to you. I used to think you were somewhat amusing with some of the things you would say, but after you called me a "terrorist sympathizer" and after I read Grinning Dragon's response, I started thinking how right he is that statements and thought patterns like yours are dangerous and troubling. Especially now with these new laws. I don't really want to be hauled away and locked up indefinitely without a lawyer, trial, and without even my family knowing what happened to me. Far fetched as it may seem, it is possible now for these things to happen. Right here in America, it is possible now.
After your reaction towards the UC Davis students, and (you won't answer my question on if you think it was appropriate action from police) I have to assume by your other comments that you do approve and think the police had every right to blast those kids in the face with pepper spray. Peaceful kids doing nothing wrong. Exercising their first amendment right. Now I find absolutely nothing amusing about anything you say.
----------------
I can't believe I am even going to respond to your reverse osmosis comment as being the right option instead of considering STOPPING the poisoning of our water supplies:
Reverse Osmosis does not remove all of the chemicals that ends up in water from the process of fracking. There are still some chemicals that can't be removed, which in fact degrade the reverse osmosis filters quite rapidly, and cause cancer. There are people whose water has been poisoned by fracking, and are now dying of cancer. People whose land and water is damaged by fracking can't even sell their property and leave. Nobody in their right mind would buy it.
And I suppose in your way of thinking "They should have sold their property to the fracking companies. Personal Responsibility! They made the choice to not sell. Their neighbors on the other hand DID sell and became quite rich! Their neighbors can now move wherever they want to! But since they CHOSE to not sell or lease their property to frackers, it is THEIR FAULT their property has absolutely no value now, it is THEIR FAULT they aren't rich and are dying of cancer. They can always walk away with nothing and move somewhere else. It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND FREE CHOICE!! That is how this country works and why it is so great! I think they should not be allowed to get welfare or any other type of government assistance though, after all, they did give up the chance to make money from their property, but they REFUSED!
----------------
I also can't believe you are still taking the side of the banks when they almost crashed the entire economy. Personal responsibility must only apply to we the people. Bankers work hard for their money! They deserved those million dollar bonuses right after they paid back their bail out money! You are jealous of other peoples' success and if you don't have what you want out of your life IT'S YOUR FAULT.
So now you will be put on ignore, but I will let you get in one last jab before I do, so make it good. Rant your heart out at my lazy-good-for-nothing-socialist-occupying-filthy-leftist-jealousofotherssuccess-gimmewhats
yours ass. Give it all ya got, because after this next comment from you I will not see any more.
After your reaction towards the UC Davis students, and (you won't answer my question on if you think it was appropriate action from police) I have to assume by your other comments that you do approve and think the police had every right to blast those kids in the face with pepper spray. Peaceful kids doing nothing wrong. Exercising their first amendment right. Now I find absolutely nothing amusing about anything you say.
----------------
I can't believe I am even going to respond to your reverse osmosis comment as being the right option instead of considering STOPPING the poisoning of our water supplies:
Reverse Osmosis does not remove all of the chemicals that ends up in water from the process of fracking. There are still some chemicals that can't be removed, which in fact degrade the reverse osmosis filters quite rapidly, and cause cancer. There are people whose water has been poisoned by fracking, and are now dying of cancer. People whose land and water is damaged by fracking can't even sell their property and leave. Nobody in their right mind would buy it.
And I suppose in your way of thinking "They should have sold their property to the fracking companies. Personal Responsibility! They made the choice to not sell. Their neighbors on the other hand DID sell and became quite rich! Their neighbors can now move wherever they want to! But since they CHOSE to not sell or lease their property to frackers, it is THEIR FAULT their property has absolutely no value now, it is THEIR FAULT they aren't rich and are dying of cancer. They can always walk away with nothing and move somewhere else. It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND FREE CHOICE!!
That is how this country works and why it is so great! I think they should not be allowed to get welfare or any other type of government assistance though, after all, they did give up the chance to make money from their property, but they REFUSED! ----------------
I also can't believe you are still taking the side of the banks when they almost crashed the entire economy. Personal responsibility must only apply to we the people. Bankers work hard for their money! They deserved those million dollar bonuses right after they paid back their bail out money! You are jealous of other peoples' success and if you don't have what you want out of your life IT'S YOUR FAULT.
So now you will be put on ignore, but I will let you get in one last jab before I do, so make it good. Rant your heart out at my lazy-good-for-nothing-socialist-occupying-filthy-leftist-jealousofotherssuccess-gimmewhats
yours ass. Give it all ya got, because after this next comment from you I will not see any more.
You never did respond...what should be done with American terrorists waging war on our own soil?! Perhaps being charged? then bail set? What would you call someone who sympathizes with the terrorists thrown into prisons for treasonist actions against the US
Your thought patterns are the ones that are dangerous and you seem to forget that along with Constitutional rights comes responsibility! You cannot have one without the other!Seriously...you ridicule reverse osmosis? Just how brainwashed are you? It is a known fact the RO systems put a serious dent in concentrations commonly found in drinking water INCLUDING a number of components currently identified as fracking components. Water treated with RO systems contain far fewer contaminants. (huffington post) But I am positive your environmental websites/blogs will love to dispute this...its doesnt help their cause!
But the big thing...
the peaceful US Davis protesters
(I still find you amusing!) Was it appropriate action by the police?Quote from multiple sources:
First, you have a 1st ammendment right to free speech, you do not have a 1st ammendment right to trespass or set up a hobo camp!
The occupiers scream at police, threaten them, flick lit cigarettes at cops, deliberately back into polices riot gear, block traffic, refuse orders to move and quit blocking the walkways, they do everything they can to bait the police. That brings us to US Davis where the occupy mob set up tents, refused to take them down when asked by police, at that point they sat down and locked arms to keep police from moving them.
ALL of the protesters KNEW they were going to be pepper sprayed and they could have gotten up and moved.
The problem wasnt the officers it was that the protesters thought they should be allowed to break the law with impunity!
Again, along with Constitutional rights comes responsibility! You bet the cops were right
Now remember...no more comments
Posted by Common Citizen on Apr. 02 2012,2:56 pm
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 01 2012,3:41 pm)
QUOTE
Roz, I know we've had our tiffs in the past but putting someone on ignore is pretty much sticking you fingers in your ears and singing la la la la, pretty childish IMHO
I don't see it as childish. When I put Hymen on ignore, I consider that an efficient use of time.
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 02 2012,4:22 pm
(Common Citizen @ Apr. 02 2012,2:56 pm)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 01 2012,3:41 pm)
QUOTE
Roz, I know we've had our tiffs in the past but putting someone on ignore is pretty much sticking you fingers in your ears and singing la la la la, pretty childish IMHO
I don't see it as childish. When I put Hymen on ignore, I consider that an efficient use of time.
I dont see it as childish either!
I see it as the equivalent of waving the white flag
Posted by hymiebravo on Apr. 03 2012,8:29 am
(Santorini @ Apr. 02 2012,4:22 pm)
QUOTE
(Common Citizen @ Apr. 02 2012,2:56 pm)
QUOTE
(Self-Banished @ Apr. 01 2012,3:41 pm)
QUOTE
Roz, I know we've had our tiffs in the past but putting someone on ignore is pretty much sticking you fingers in your ears and singing la la la la, pretty childish IMHO
I don't see it as childish. When I put Hymen on ignore, I consider that an efficient use of time.
I dont see it as childish either!
I see it as the equivalent of waving the white flag
Coomin - Is a case in point of somebody who needs more fiber in their diet.
Posted by Botto 82 on Apr. 03 2012,12:31 pm
(hymiebravo @ Apr. 03 2012,8:29 am)
QUOTE
Coomin - Is a case in point of somebody who needs more fiber in their diet.
This is the second thread today that you posted something about fiber in the diet.
Is everything okay..?
Posted by pantalonesverdes on Apr. 03 2012,7:36 pm
For those who like to educate themselves beyond the 10 second clip that CNN showed you about the UC Davis pepper spraying... turns out that the "innocent" protesters were not so innocent. They surrounded the officers and were demanding the release of the prisoners that the officers had with them:< LINK >
Or here is genius protester that admits that they prevented the officers from leaving and sat there after being told that they would have to go through them if they didn't move (around :55 in). If someone kept you from freely leaving somewhere it would probably be considered kidnapping or something similar:
< Link 2 >
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 03 2012,9:44 pm
(pantalonesverdes @ Apr. 03 2012,7:36 pm)
QUOTE
If someone kept you from freely leaving somewhere it would probably be considered kidnapping or something similar:
Hmm, both the videos I put up were quite a bit longer than ten seconds.
Kidnapping huh? That seems a bit of a stretch. Especially since the cop who sprayed them walked between two of the kids sitting on the ground to get in front of them. The rest of the police couldn't walk through them? Odd.
Guess we'll have to wait for the investigation to be released. It was supposed to be released already, but the police are fighting it. Should be out within the next month though.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 04 2012,11:14 am
Statement from the Episcopal Diocese of NYMarch 30, 2012
The Rt. Rev. Mark S. Sisk, Bishop of New York, Bishop Coadjutor the Rt. Rev. Andrew M.L. Dietsche and Assistant Bishop the Rt. Rev. Andrew D. Smith issued the following joint statement today:
At the six month anniversary of the Occupy Wall Street movement, we repeat our support for the principles of Occupy, and our conviction that the issues and challenges raised by this movement are in our opinion among the most important of our day. At our convention in January the Diocese of New York affirmed our commitment to these principles, and to the tradition of nonviolent civil disobedience as a means of putting the legitimate concerns of people of conscience before the public eye and before the powers of civil government.
< http://www.dioceseny.org/news_it...p-frisk >
-------------
pfffttt, what a bunch of socialist loving religious kooks
Posted by Common Citizen on Apr. 05 2012,10:48 am
What do you expect? He's an Episcopal.
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 05 2012,10:57 am
Rosalind doesn't like fracking-- QUOTE
I can't believe I am even going to respond to your reverse osmosis comment as being the right option instead of considering STOPPING the poisoning of our water supplies:
Reverse Osmosis does not remove all of the chemicals that ends up in water from the process of fracking. There are still some chemicals that can't be removed, which in fact degrade the reverse osmosis filters quite rapidly, and cause cancer. There are people whose water has been poisoned by fracking, and are now dying of cancer.
Reverse Osmosis does not remove all of the chemicals that ends up in water from the process of fracking. There are still some chemicals that can't be removed, which in fact degrade the reverse osmosis filters quite rapidly, and cause cancer. There are people whose water has been poisoned by fracking, and are now dying of cancer.
If this "science" is settled--where are the Obamunists on the issue? Wouldn't you THINK that the advocates of big government and government control would make this illegal?
MAYBE it's because there has been no proof of your contentions. Can you name any government studies that come to this conclusion (libbies ALWAYS trust government studies!)
Can you name any successful lawsuits that showed that someone "died because of fracking?"
QUOTE
People whose land and water is damaged by fracking can't even sell their property and leave. Nobody in their right mind would buy it.[/
People won't buy an OIL or GAS well? 
Back to the subject of this thread--
ISN'T IT INTERESTING that the "Occupiers" that oppose fracking and demand "clean air and water" cause such filth in the very public parks they "occupy"?
Santorini's list was right on. More liberal hypocrisy.
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 05 2012,10:25 pm
This thread on 1st amendment or breaking the law does not only apply to occupiers.How about the media?
Especially most recently with the Trayvon Martin case. Like it is not tragic enough, then the media outlets NBC, msnbc, CNN all LIED and manipulated the 911 recording of the call!! All this manipulation was to paint this case as racially motivated...to incite more anger with the public, and perpetuate continued separation. As baseless and unfounded as the information they reported was (NBC played the fudged tape 5 times!) they continued to go with the racism card! Inciting anger with the NAACP! Jackson & Sharpton, of course, adding their 2 cents, and the public in general angered over this racially motivated attack.
All this incited anger based on a LIE and manipulation.
OH, yea, they had to apologize...
ooops...it was an editing problem! Yea, like adding words and phrases and omitting others
THIS issue they were caught at...how many others have gone unnoticed and ignored??
Posted by alcitizens on Apr. 06 2012,8:43 am
"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 06 2012,9:51 am
(alcitizens @ Apr. 06 2012,8:43 am)
QUOTE
"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Your point
Mine is quite simple: most everyone screams for protection under the 1st Amendment...yet, most want nothing to do with personal responsibility...anything goes regarding interpretation of expression.
Posted by Self-Banished on Apr. 06 2012,11:33 am
^ oh c'mon! Responsibility is the the realm of the gov. Not it's citizens! 
Posted by MADDOG on Apr. 06 2012,1:00 pm
(alcitizens @ Apr. 06 2012,8:43 am)
QUOTE
"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
You forgot to add the part where it says that I swear to castigate any unelected group of people who might overturn a duly constituted and passed law that the president approved.
Posted by irisheyes on Apr. 07 2012,8:43 am
(Santorini @ Apr. 06 2012,9:51 am)
QUOTE
Mine is quite simple: most everyone screams for protection under the 1st Amendment...yet, most want nothing to do with personal responsibility...anything goes regarding interpretation of expression.
No, not everything goes. But I get nervous when you keep talking about taking away freedoms based on YOUR interpretation of what peoples' responsibilities are. I don't like the idea of limiting the 1st, 2nd, 4th, or 5th (or any other) Amendments because YOU don't think this or that person is responsible enough.
QUOTE
Especially most recently with the Trayvon Martin case. Like it is not tragic enough, then the media outlets NBC, msnbc, CNN all LIED and manipulated the 911 recording of the call!!
You don't like edited tapes, I thought you were a FOX viewer.
I never heard the edited tape until I searched for it after you mentioned this, and I agree they shouldn't omit words to make it sound even worse than it was. Because the unedited tape was bad enough considering what happened. It was obvious his mind was made up long before he shot the guy. But once again I bet you could care less that your friends on FOX have been caught editing tapes many times.
Hell, conservatives still love Breitbart and him and O'Keefe were great at editing stuff out. I bet you never even saw or heard a single unedited piece of film from those guys.
Posted by irisheyes on Apr. 07 2012,9:27 am
(jimhanson @ Apr. 05 2012,10:57 am)
QUOTE
If this "science" is settled--where are the Obamunists on the issue? Wouldn't you THINK that the advocates of big government and government control would make this illegal?
MAYBE it's because there has been no proof of your contentions.
MAYBE it's because there has been no proof of your contentions.
Considering how much resistance there's been to proving other things (birth certificates, evolution, and climate change), we might have our hands full. If they're using high pressure chemicals to frack near groundwater sources, would you be drinking from the tap after that?
It's usually a LONG time before regulatory agencies will say anything against companies causing illnesses. The examples are endless, those same companies make one phone call to their favorite politician and you can bet whatever agency steps out of line is going to get taken to the woodshed.
QUOTE
QUOTE
People whose land and water is damaged by fracking can't even sell their property and leave. Nobody in their right mind would buy it.[/
People won't buy an OIL or GAS well? Mineral rights can be worth a lot where they think there's oil and gas, but mineral rights and land rights can often be two separate things. At least they are in the North Dakota region where they're fracking. You can own land where your house is, but not own mineral rights underneath it, and vice versa. I haven't checked on the Pennsylvania and Kentucky areas though, just throwing it out there. But some areas they have more controversy over fracking depending on how close to groundwater the fracking is, which is why you don't hear near as much about this in the Dakotas.
QUOTE
ISN'T IT INTERESTING that the "Occupiers" that oppose fracking and demand "clean air and water" cause such filth in the very public parks they "occupy"?
I thought the Occupy crowd didn't know what they were protesting? Now you say they want clean air and water. Please, learn about the other things they're protesting and let FOX and Rush know, they seem to not know what's going on.
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 07 2012,12:08 pm
(irisheyes @ Apr. 07 2012,8:43 am)
QUOTE
(Santorini @ Apr. 06 2012,9:51 am)
QUOTE
Mine is quite simple: most everyone screams for protection under the 1st Amendment...yet, most want nothing to do with personal responsibility...anything goes regarding interpretation of expression.
No, not everything goes. But I get nervous when you keep talking about taking away freedoms based on YOUR interpretation of what peoples' responsibilities are. I don't like the idea of limiting the 1st, 2nd, 4th, or 5th (or any other) Amendments because YOU don't think this or that person is responsible enough.
QUOTE
Especially most recently with the Trayvon Martin case. Like it is not tragic enough, then the media outlets NBC, msnbc, CNN all LIED and manipulated the 911 recording of the call!!
You don't like edited tapes, I thought you were a FOX viewer.
I never heard the edited tape until I searched for it after you mentioned this, and I agree they shouldn't omit words to make it sound even worse than it was. Because the unedited tape was bad enough considering what happened. It was obvious his mind was made up long before he shot the guy. But once again I bet you could care less that your friends on FOX have been caught editing tapes many times.
Hell, conservatives still love Breitbart and him and O'Keefe were great at editing stuff out. I bet you never even saw or heard a single unedited piece of film from those guys.
Taking away freedoms??!! Like what?
You cannot have personal rights without personal responsibility. What limits are you talking about with 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th?? The bill of rights sets limits on the government. You keep bringing up Fox...you must be an avid viewer?! When has Fox purposely edited tapes?
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 07 2012,2:37 pm
Irish-- QUOTE
But I get nervous when you keep talking about taking away freedoms based on YOUR interpretation of what peoples' responsibilities are.
Isn't that what libbies have been doing for years? Every time you pass a law, you take away someone's freedom. EVEN WORSE--when you pass a law, implementation is left up to unelected bureaucrats, who impose THEIR interpretation of the law. These bureaucrats are the biggest threat to personal liberty today--they write and interpret regulations constantly--and it is a constant pushback to beat them back.Irish--
QUOTE
I never heard the edited tape until I searched for it after you mentioned this, and I agree they shouldn't omit words to make it sound even worse than it was. Because the unedited tape was bad enough considering what happened. It was obvious his mind was made up long before he shot the guy.
Perhaps if you HAD been watching Fox, you would have known that the tapes were edited to fit the liberal agenda--and it was these fake tapes that ignited the firestorm.What did you find wrong with the unedited tape? The guy was a neighborhood watch captain. Tyrone was trespassing on private property, in people's back yard. Zimmerman called the cops. According to Zimmerman, Tyrone attacked HIM when he went to the corner to get a street address. It was ZIMMERMAN'S voice calling for help, according to those who heard it. Then there are those pesky facts of how Zimmerman got scalp and facial wounds. How can you say that "his mind was made up before he shot the guy'?
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 07 2012,3:05 pm
I asked Irish why, if the science of fracking is settled, why the Obamunists in big government haven't intervened. He replied -- QUOTE
Considering how much resistance there's been to proving other things (birth certificates, evolution, and climate change), we might have our hands full. If they're using high pressure chemicals to frack near groundwater sources, would you be drinking from the tap after that?
"WE"? Should I put you down as a big-government Obamunist?
I'll agree--Obummer is really playing catch-up--trying to explain the birth certificate, trying to put a spin on the failed stimulus, trying to weasel-word his lack of energy policy (other than to make it much more EXPENSIVE!) and trying to defend his indefensible Obamacare from a public that doesn't want it and a Supreme Court that will likely find it unconstitutional--explain his threat to the Supreme Court (calling into question his claim that he was a "Constitutional Professor") that would have produced a failing grade in any high school civics class (now, if we only knew WHAT classes he took in high school!)
Nonetheless--I'm sure that the vast Federal Bureacracy is more than capable of legislating if fracking can be found to be detrimental--they don't need the "Commander in Chief" to make THAT decision. After all, they DID make the unpopular decision to stop Keystone Pipeline, didn't they?
Irish--
QUOTE
It's usually a LONG time before regulatory agencies will say anything against companies causing illnesses
That would beg the question, then--WHY DO WE HAVE THESE TOOTHLESS REGULATOR AGENCIES--AT COST OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS? It just MIGHT be that they have no evidence--other than the anecdotes of those who are perpetually outraged and afraid.
Still NO scientific evidence that fracking is dangerous--despite its widespread use, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO DRINK THAT GROUNDWATER with no bad effects. Has there been even ONE successful court case proving that fracking caused issues--despite its widespread use, millions of people exposed, and an army of lawyers that would just love to jump on the issue?
Irish--
QUOTE
I thought the Occupy crowd didn't know what they were protesting?
The "occupiers" are emblematic of those that are perpetually complaining. Just look at the widespread issues in the cartoon--these professional agitators are outraged about EVERYTHING--yet though they constantly demand "change"--they don't specify HOW that change should come about--or what those changes should be. Knowing what you want--how articulate it--and how to get it is the mark of an adult. These kids are like all OTHER kids--they think that simply saying "I WANT" and throwing a tantrum, the adults will give it to them. The probably learned it from Mr. "Hopey-Cangey" HIMSELF--just say the words, and your "Hopes" will "Change." That only worked for Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz! If you really believe in these fairy tales, click those ruby slippers together 3 times, and think "There's no place like home!
null< My Webpage >
Posted by alcitizens on Apr. 07 2012,4:46 pm
You right-wing republican kooks always talk big government and freedom and yet are passing laws to restrict women's reproductive rights, restrict voting rights, restrict workers rights and on and on.. Stay the frik out of my life you oppressive bunch of loons..Groups Promoting Oppression or Right-Wing Agendas
< http://www.publiceye.org/research/directories/dem_grp_undermine.html >
Imperialism, Oppression, Terrorism and the Far-Right Wing
< http://readersupportednews.org/pm-sect...ht-wing >
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 07 2012,5:40 pm
You can always tell who is losing an argument when they fly off the handle."Women's reproductive rights"? Who is proposing to limit them, and in what way?. Either you believe in abortion, or you don't--there is no middle ground. The pendulum has swung from pro-abortion to "pro-life"--yet contrary to left-wing dogma, the majority of the people believe that Roe V. Wade should not be repealed, or should be a state issue. What's wrong with that position--or having the discussion?
You aren't confusing Fluck the Flake with reproductive rights, are you? Nobody even TALKED about it until left-wing plant Snuffleoffugus brought it up in the debates, and was thoroughly laughed at. Contrary to the left-wing claims by Fluck the Flake, nobody proposed making contraception illegal, either--only not forcing people with religious beliefs to provide them--or making the TAXPAYERS pay for her fun.
"Restrict Voting Rights"? As in upholding the law, and NOT LETTING FELONS VOTE? As in "Don't let people vote multiple times?" As in "Not letting illegals vote"? As in "Prove you are a resident of the city or county you want to vote in"? As in "Don't let Black Panthers intimidate voters at the polls? I would say that these measures PROMOTE VOTING RIGHTS by assuring that those that are eligible are able to vote.
"Restrict Workers Rights"? As in "card check"--eliminating secret ballots? If that is so good, why don't we eliminate secret ballots for ALL elections, and do away with voting booths?
"Restricting Workers Rights"--as in NOT FORCING WORKERS TO JOIN A UNION in order to work? As in PUTTING THE WORKER'S INSURANCE UP FOR BID--INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE UNION SLUSH FUND? You want conservatives to "stay out of my life"--yet you support big governments FORCED intrusion into every facet of your life and every other citizen?
Posted by Liberal on Apr. 07 2012,11:06 pm
QUOTE
I'll agree--Obummer is really playing catch-up--trying to explain the birth certificate
Birth Certificate?
Posted by alcitizens on Apr. 08 2012,4:22 pm
Republican Gov. Scott Walker Quietly Repeals Wisconsin Equal Pay LawWomen earn 77 cents for every dollar that men make. In Wisconsin, it's 75 cents, according to the Wisconsin Alliance for Women’s Health (WAWH), which also estimates that families in the state "lose more than $4,000 per year due to unequal pay."
< http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012...0000009 >
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 09 2012,12:18 am
Naw, I don't need any MORE. I'd just like you to provide any case of a SUCCESSFUL LAWSUIT or EPA FINDING. What you have provided, as mentioned, is only anecdotal evidence.If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government? Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?
Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs?
QUOTE
Still NO scientific evidence that fracking is dangerous--despite its widespread use, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO DRINK THAT GROUNDWATER with no bad effects. Has there been even ONE successful court case proving that fracking caused issues--despite its widespread use, millions of people exposed, and an army of lawyers that would just love to jump on the issue?"
QUOTE
Seriously Jim? Because the companies doing the fracking have the BIGGEST army of lawyers. But, anyways, here's a short list of documented proof of problems for you. No court case yet, but I have a feeling there will be some very very soon:
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008< http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728 >
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008< http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728 >
2008? You mean that in 4 YEARS they can't prove their case?
----------
QUOTE
Pavillion Wyoming Health Survey:
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.
Well, what did the EPA have to say?
Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.QUOTE
Since the development of the oil and gas resources in the area, Pavillion residents have reported contamination and health impacts that they suspect are coming from Encana's Pavillion/Muddy Ridge gas-field. Residents' symptoms have ranged from rashes and headaches to neurological disorders and cancers. The survey found 94% of participants reported health impacts that are known effects of chemicals identified last year in drinking water wells.
If this is clear-cut--why hasn't the vaunted EPA shut it down?
QUOTE
A significant survey finding also includes 81% of participants reporting respiratory ailments. This indicates that a primary pathway of human exposure to chemicals in the area may be occurring through air pathways, such as industrial releases and from showering or washing dishes with contaminated water. Based on the survey, the landowners and groups are calling for regulators to identify the source of contamination, conduct residential and regional air-monitoring, and to implement medical monitoring in which residents with health impacts can receive blood and urine testing.
"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "
"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "
Let's see the results of those tests--and what EPA has to say about them.
QUOTE
While Encana and regulators claim that the source of the water contamination has not been identified, oil and gas production is the only industrial activity in the area. The EPA is planning to release additional drinking water tests to the public on August 31st. The State of Wyoming's Department of Environmental Quality is slated to place an air monitor in the Pavillion area in late September that will assess regional air quality.
------- The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
Let's see the report. You said you could provide more.------- The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
QUOTE
Poplar Montana:
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.
Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.
Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.
Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.
Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.
"Tracking for decades? How long has fracking been accomplished there?
QUOTE
Some wells outside town already have been rendered undrinkable by the plume of salty pollution
< http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html >
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.
According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm >
All of those violations, yet they couldn't find ONE for fracking! < http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html >
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.
According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm >
-----------
QUOTE
Franklin Township Pennsylvania March 2012:
The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.
"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
They have no evidence, but WPX is supposed to prove that they are NOT guilty? The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.
"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
QUOTE
The department began investigating elevated methane in the water wells in December when residents along Route 29 in the hamlet of Franklin Forks noticed discolored water and intermittent eruptions of gas and water from their well.
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU >
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112 >
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
REALLY? With all of these links, why isn't there a link to this supposed "gag" order? Why isn't the EPA allowing doctors to talk about this, if there really is an issue? < http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU >
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112 >
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
QUOTE
There is good reason to be curious about exactly what's in those fluids. A 2010 congressional investigation revealed that Halliburton and other fracking companies had used 32 million gallons of diesel products, which include toxic chemicals like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, in the fluids they inject into the ground. Low levels of exposure to those chemicals can trigger acute effects like headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness, while higher levels of exposure can cause cancer.
Yet NOT ONE MENTION OF METHANE.
QUOTE
The latest move in Pennsylvania has raised suspicions among the industry's critics once again. As Walter Tsou, president of the Philadelphia chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, put it, "What is the big secret here that they're unwilling to tell people, unless they know that if people found out what's really in these chemicals, they would be outraged?"
< http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0 >
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
Yet, "carbon sequestration"--pumping carbon back deep underground, is OK with these same eco-nuts? < http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0 >
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
QUOTE
All that underground space has made Ohio a leading importer of wastewater from other states. Last year, oil and gas companies injected 511 million gallons into Ohio’s wells, the most on record, according to the state’s Department of Natural Resources. More than half came from elsewhere. Of the 94.2 million gallons of drilling wastewater that Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale operators sent to disposal wells last year, 98 percent went to Ohio.
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.
The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.
The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm >
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.
The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.
The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm >
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies." Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.
Which is it--
A. Is the science NOT settled, or
B. has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 09 2012,12:41 pm
(alcitizens @ Apr. 07 2012,4:46 pm)
QUOTE
You right-wing republican kooks always talk big government and freedom and yet are passing laws to restrict women's reproductive rights, restrict voting rights, restrict workers rights and on and on.. Stay the frik out of my life you oppressive bunch of loons..
Groups Promoting Oppression or Right-Wing Agendas
< http://www.publiceye.org/research/directories/dem_grp_undermine.html >
Imperialism, Oppression, Terrorism and the Far-Right Wing
< http://readersupportednews.org/pm-sect...ht-wing >
Groups Promoting Oppression or Right-Wing Agendas
< http://www.publiceye.org/research/directories/dem_grp_undermine.html >
Imperialism, Oppression, Terrorism and the Far-Right Wing
< http://readersupportednews.org/pm-sect...ht-wing >
Not so!
Some of us believe the government has no business in a womans womb! Bedrooms and wombs should be off limits to the government!
Nobody is restricting anyones privilege to vote. Simply...it is a privilege that involves personal choice and responsibility for those qualified! Part of that qualification should be to prove who you are!
What workers rights are you talking about? Mine or yours?
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 09 2012,2:13 pm
Rosalind-- QUOTE
And then there's your comment: The "occupiers" are emblematic of those that are perpetually complaining. Just look at the widespread issues in the cartoon--these professional agitators are outraged about EVERYTHING--yet though they constantly demand "change"--they don't specify HOW that change should come about--or what those changes should be.
------
Awww Jim, are people only allowed one or two problems to complain about? I didn't get that memo. hmmm, and looking at the list of issues, or things some of us in this forum have been discussing for the last few months, or hell, some things most people in this forum have been complaining about since this forum began!- All of these issues are minor? We have no legit complaints? Do you honestly think that? You think the country is just fine and dandy?
--------------
Awww Jim, are people only allowed one or two problems to complain about? I didn't get that memo. hmmm, and looking at the list of issues, or things some of us in this forum have been discussing for the last few months, or hell, some things most people in this forum have been complaining about since this forum began!- All of these issues are minor? We have no legit complaints? Do you honestly think that? You think the country is just fine and dandy?
Nope--you can protest about most anything you want--but it reminds me of that Marlon Brando line in The Wild Ones--"What are you protesting?" To which he sneers "What have you got?"
Some people are BORN PROTESTERS!
Then there are the rest of us--we're outraged, too--mainly by what the "Protesting class" of "political activists" have foisted upon us. For the most part, we simply endure their tantrums--until it goes too far--then we throw them out as happened in 2010. (laugh)
JIM
QUOTE
These kids are like all OTHER kids--they think that simply saying "I WANT" and throwing a tantrum, the adults will give it to them.
----Rosalind--
QUOTE
Oh, should we be people like you who continually stick their heads in the sand and ignore big problems so the problems just keep growing and growing?
--------Naw--I don't stick my head in the sand--I take every opportunity to expose the ridiculous positions of liberals!
QUOTE
"It's only been 6 months--look at what they've accomplished"
Yep--they've managed to alienate the majority of the populace, despite STARTING OUT with support!
QUOTE
Anyways, here is some of what has been accomplished:
Income Inequality: The 99 Percent movement refocused America’s political debate, forcing news outlets and eventually politicians to focus on rising income inequality. While debt and deficits were the primary focus of the media before the movement started, their attention after the movement began shifted to jobs, Wall Street, and unemployment. By the end of October, even Republicans were talking about income inequality, and a week later, Time Magazine devoted its cover to the topic, asking, “Can you still move up in America?”
Income Inequality: The 99 Percent movement refocused America’s political debate, forcing news outlets and eventually politicians to focus on rising income inequality. While debt and deficits were the primary focus of the media before the movement started, their attention after the movement began shifted to jobs, Wall Street, and unemployment. By the end of October, even Republicans were talking about income inequality, and a week later, Time Magazine devoted its cover to the topic, asking, “Can you still move up in America?”
End of October? Who even TALKS about the "occupiers" today?
All they've done is "demand" and "talk" about the issue--no legislation--obviously, the issue takes a back seat to Obummer's dismal record on economics and foreign policy. (laugh)QUOTE
Occupy Our Homes: The movement has drawn attention to many of the predatory, discriminatory, and fraudulent practices perpetrated by banks during the foreclosure crisis, and across the country, Occupy groups, religious leaders, and community organizations have helped homeowners prevent wrongful foreclosures on their homes. Activists in Detroit are working to save their fifth home, and similar actions have taken place in cities like Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Cleveland, and Atlanta. The movement has drawn so much attention that local political leaders and even members of Congress have stepped in to help homeowners facing foreclosure.
Yep--"demanding" that banks foregive money that they loaned as required by slobbering Barney Frank and Chris Dodd (you know, the friend of Countrywide?) Those banks MADE those people buy houses they couldn't afford, according to liberal rhetoric.
You hold up DETROIT as a winning strategy? THAT'S CRAZY!
QUOTE
Move Your Money: On Bank Transfer Day, activists helped more than 40,000 Americans move their money from large banks to credit unions, and more than 650,000 switched to credit unions last October. Religious groups have taken up the cause as well, moving $55 million before Thanksgiving. This year, a San Francisco interfaith group moved $10 million from Wells Fargo and other groups marked Lent by moving more money from Wall Street. As a result, analysts say the nation’s 10 biggest banks could lose $185 billion in customer deposits this year “due to customer defections.”
Have any of these banks gone under? (If they did, Obambi would likely bail them out!)
I havent' seen bank stocks go down--or interest rates, for that matter. I haven't read of any issues in the Financial Times--this looks like a completely ineffective protest--but what do you expect from people camped out in a park and beating on drums? It reminds me of the Aztecs, who pretty much did the same thing--standing outside at night and beating drums to cause the sun to rise in the morning. Same cause/effect--or lack thereof! (sarcasm)QUOTE
Also, there are a few cities finally coming up with new banking ordinances and legislature, and changing how the cities themselves deal with their money:
Los Angeles drafted a responsible banking ordinance in March that assesses banks that do business with the city based on foreclosure data; in February, Kansas City, Missouri, passed a resolution ordering the city manager to only do business with banks that don't engage in predatory lending; and in November, New York City introduced legislation that would force banks that want to hold city deposits to submit community reinvestment plans.
And just days ago, in Massachusetts, the city of Brockton was persuaded to move its money out of Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase altogether after they refused to negotiations on loan modifications for homeowners facing foreclosure.
Los Angeles drafted a responsible banking ordinance in March that assesses banks that do business with the city based on foreclosure data; in February, Kansas City, Missouri, passed a resolution ordering the city manager to only do business with banks that don't engage in predatory lending; and in November, New York City introduced legislation that would force banks that want to hold city deposits to submit community reinvestment plans.
And just days ago, in Massachusetts, the city of Brockton was persuaded to move its money out of Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase altogether after they refused to negotiations on loan modifications for homeowners facing foreclosure.
LOS ANGELES--now THERE is an example of fiscal responsibility to emulate!
QUOTE
----We are also trying to help out the Securities and Exchange Commission, since they seem to be having such a difficult time!:
< http://www.occupythesec.org/ >
Here's another link where the letter OccupytheSEC wrote might be easier to read:
< http://www.scribd.com/doc...er-Rule >
---------< http://www.occupythesec.org/ >
Here's another link where the letter OccupytheSEC wrote might be easier to read:
< http://www.scribd.com/doc...er-Rule >
If you really wanted to help--where were you when Barney Frank and Chris Dodd blocked investigation into Fannie and Freddie?
QUOTE
Thousands of Occupy and anti-tarsands protestors held hands and circled the White House asking Obama to stop the XL pipeline. It was postponed at least.
"Circled the white house and held hands?" No Kum-bay-yah?
QUOTE
What I think is most important about Occupy is that it has finally gotten people to realize we have some very big problems that need to be addressed ASAP. People are realizing the same-old-same-old just isn't working. People are waking up and trying to figure out what can be done to fix a whole shipload of problems that have cropped up while most of us have been sleeping.
And now, we also have the scary things happening that I thought would NEVER happen in America.
And now, we also have the scary things happening that I thought would NEVER happen in America.
When the TEA PARTY thought the same thing, libbies hated it. I guess COPYING IS THE MOST SINCERE FORM OF FLATTERY!
The difference between the Tea Party and the "occupiers" is that the Tea Party has been lawful--while the "occupiers" have not. The Tea Party has been clean and picked up any trash left after one of their protests--the "occupiers" live in filth. The Tea Party has been effective--the "occupiers"--not so much!
QUOTE
The NDAA, The Enemy Expatriation Act (not passed yet) the latest Executive Order, and an crazy amount of reporters being arrested for covering Occupy Protests. So many have been arrested and some even beaten that we are now ranked 47 in the world for freedom of the press:
< http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news...wn.html >
I don't understand why that doesn't concern every one of us. Has the president or any governor spoken out against reporters being arrested the last few years? No. Even the main stream media doesn't discuss it.
< http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news...wn.html >
I don't understand why that doesn't concern every one of us. Has the president or any governor spoken out against reporters being arrested the last few years? No. Even the main stream media doesn't discuss it.
MAYBE is isn't the big problem you think it is. Wouldn't you think that the PRESS, with its "BULLY PULPIT" would be able to do something about this? I guess not!
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 09 2012,9:39 pm
Liberal, can we get an eyeroll emoticon as one of the choices?
Posted by blahblahblah on Apr. 09 2012,10:10 pm
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Apr. 09 2012,12:18 am)
QUOTE
Naw, I don't need any MORE. I'd just like you to provide any case of a SUCCESSFUL LAWSUIT or EPA FINDING. What you have provided, as mentioned, is only anecdotal evidence.
If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government? Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?
Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs?
2008? You mean that in 4 YEARS they can't prove their case?
----------
Well, what did the EPA have to say? Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.
If this is clear-cut--why hasn't the vaunted EPA shut it down?
Let's see the results of those tests--and what EPA has to say about them.
"Tracking for decades? How long has fracking been accomplished there?
-----------
Yet NOT ONE MENTION OF METHANE.
You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies." Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.
Which is it--
A. Is the science NOT settled, or
B. has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government? Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?
Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs?
QUOTE
Still NO scientific evidence that fracking is dangerous--despite its widespread use, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO DRINK THAT GROUNDWATER with no bad effects. Has there been even ONE successful court case proving that fracking caused issues--despite its widespread use, millions of people exposed, and an army of lawyers that would just love to jump on the issue?"
QUOTE
Seriously Jim? Because the companies doing the fracking have the BIGGEST army of lawyers. But, anyways, here's a short list of documented proof of problems for you. No court case yet, but I have a feeling there will be some very very soon:
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008< http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728 >
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008< http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728 >
2008? You mean that in 4 YEARS they can't prove their case?
----------
QUOTE
Pavillion Wyoming Health Survey:
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.
Well, what did the EPA have to say?
Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.QUOTE
Since the development of the oil and gas resources in the area, Pavillion residents have reported contamination and health impacts that they suspect are coming from Encana's Pavillion/Muddy Ridge gas-field. Residents' symptoms have ranged from rashes and headaches to neurological disorders and cancers. The survey found 94% of participants reported health impacts that are known effects of chemicals identified last year in drinking water wells.
If this is clear-cut--why hasn't the vaunted EPA shut it down?
QUOTE
A significant survey finding also includes 81% of participants reporting respiratory ailments. This indicates that a primary pathway of human exposure to chemicals in the area may be occurring through air pathways, such as industrial releases and from showering or washing dishes with contaminated water. Based on the survey, the landowners and groups are calling for regulators to identify the source of contamination, conduct residential and regional air-monitoring, and to implement medical monitoring in which residents with health impacts can receive blood and urine testing.
"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "
"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "
Let's see the results of those tests--and what EPA has to say about them.
QUOTE
While Encana and regulators claim that the source of the water contamination has not been identified, oil and gas production is the only industrial activity in the area. The EPA is planning to release additional drinking water tests to the public on August 31st. The State of Wyoming's Department of Environmental Quality is slated to place an air monitor in the Pavillion area in late September that will assess regional air quality.
------- The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
Let's see the report. You said you could provide more.------- The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
QUOTE
Poplar Montana:
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.
Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.
Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.
Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.
Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.
"Tracking for decades? How long has fracking been accomplished there?
QUOTE
Some wells outside town already have been rendered undrinkable by the plume of salty pollution
< http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html >
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.
According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm >
All of those violations, yet they couldn't find ONE for fracking! < http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html >
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.
According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm >
-----------
QUOTE
Franklin Township Pennsylvania March 2012:
The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.
"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
They have no evidence, but WPX is supposed to prove that they are NOT guilty? The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.
"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
QUOTE
The department began investigating elevated methane in the water wells in December when residents along Route 29 in the hamlet of Franklin Forks noticed discolored water and intermittent eruptions of gas and water from their well.
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU >
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112 >
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
REALLY? With all of these links, why isn't there a link to this supposed "gag" order? Why isn't the EPA allowing doctors to talk about this, if there really is an issue? < http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU >
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112 >
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
QUOTE
There is good reason to be curious about exactly what's in those fluids. A 2010 congressional investigation revealed that Halliburton and other fracking companies had used 32 million gallons of diesel products, which include toxic chemicals like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, in the fluids they inject into the ground. Low levels of exposure to those chemicals can trigger acute effects like headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness, while higher levels of exposure can cause cancer.
Yet NOT ONE MENTION OF METHANE.
QUOTE
The latest move in Pennsylvania has raised suspicions among the industry's critics once again. As Walter Tsou, president of the Philadelphia chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, put it, "What is the big secret here that they're unwilling to tell people, unless they know that if people found out what's really in these chemicals, they would be outraged?"
< http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0 >
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
Yet, "carbon sequestration"--pumping carbon back deep underground, is OK with these same eco-nuts? < http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0 >
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
QUOTE
All that underground space has made Ohio a leading importer of wastewater from other states. Last year, oil and gas companies injected 511 million gallons into Ohio’s wells, the most on record, according to the state’s Department of Natural Resources. More than half came from elsewhere. Of the 94.2 million gallons of drilling wastewater that Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale operators sent to disposal wells last year, 98 percent went to Ohio.
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.
The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.
The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm >
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.
The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.
The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm >
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies." Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.
Which is it--
A. Is the science NOT settled, or
B. has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
Am I the only one that is confused by this? Doesn't this seem like Jim's response, but posted by Rosalind?
Posted by blahblahblah on Apr. 09 2012,10:49 pm
Rosalind,Back a few pages you listed off several of Occupy's causes (post #17). I have to say, I think you have a very romanticized view of this movement. To be fair though, in the list there are several items that I agree are problems. Identifying the problems seems to the easy part. We (me and Occupy) however tend to differ in how we would solve these problems. I think the Occupy movement helped increase awareness of many of these issues, but not so much in a way that fosters public debate about the issues. It's more along the lines of occupiers wanting to stand in the middle of the road and periodically rant about a laundry list of issues.
Most of my information about Occupy comes directly from Occupy, although I have followed the Minnesota faction of the movement considerably more than other factions. It's true though across the country Occupy Homes seems to have been the most active. I can't speak for the homes that were selected outside of Minnesota, but I have not heard any evidence of any fraud in any of the Minnesota foreclosures that have been occupied, sad stories certainly, bad customer service on behalf of the bank for sure, but no fraud. Do you happen to know what the fraud was?
I have been hoping that Occupy would begin to form something along the lines of a political party (albeit one that I would probably spend a lot of time disagreeing with, but I think we would benefit from more political parties), but sadly it does not seem to be in the cards. I tuned in for large parts of the re-occupation last Saturday, all I can say is, what a joke. This is an organization that is mostly interested in camping and marching, and endless debates and confrontations with the cops about whether camping and marching are constitutionally protected. The whole camping thing is a total distraction from actually doing anything. OccupyMN had the whole winter to get their act together, and on Saturday they picked up literally where they left off last fall, trying to camp and trying to march, and once again debating the rights they do or don't have to do either of these activities. The difference however is that Minneapolis cops were not in the mood for a debate (or a game of capture the flag) and took off the “kid gloves”. I doubt many moderate people who are basically supportive of Occupy are going to get involved in the BS that occurred last weekend. I would say the evidence suggest that mere lip service is paid to that long list of items in your pervious post, while the primary focus is on camping and marching.
Occupy has two choices, advocate for change inside our current system, which means getting politically active, or advocate for a new system. If they want to work in our current system they better get their crap together because they are less than seven months away from an important election. If they want a new system they will probably need more weapons. I suppose the third option is that they are severely misguided whiners currently throwing a huge temper tantrum.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 09 2012,11:11 pm
(blahblahblah @ Apr. 09 2012,10:10 pm)
QUOTE
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Apr. 09 2012,12:18 am)
QUOTE
Naw, I don't need any MORE. I'd just like you to provide any case of a SUCCESSFUL LAWSUIT or EPA FINDING. What you have provided, as mentioned, is only anecdotal evidence.
If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government? Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?
Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs?
2008? You mean that in 4 YEARS they can't prove their case?
----------
Well, what did the EPA have to say? Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.
If this is clear-cut--why hasn't the vaunted EPA shut it down?
Let's see the results of those tests--and what EPA has to say about them.
"Tracking for decades? How long has fracking been accomplished there?
-----------
Yet NOT ONE MENTION OF METHANE.
You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies." Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.
Which is it--
A. Is the science NOT settled, or
B. has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government? Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?
Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs?
QUOTE
Still NO scientific evidence that fracking is dangerous--despite its widespread use, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO DRINK THAT GROUNDWATER with no bad effects. Has there been even ONE successful court case proving that fracking caused issues--despite its widespread use, millions of people exposed, and an army of lawyers that would just love to jump on the issue?"
QUOTE
Seriously Jim? Because the companies doing the fracking have the BIGGEST army of lawyers. But, anyways, here's a short list of documented proof of problems for you. No court case yet, but I have a feeling there will be some very very soon:
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008< http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728 >
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008< http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728 >
2008? You mean that in 4 YEARS they can't prove their case?
----------
QUOTE
Pavillion Wyoming Health Survey:
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.
Well, what did the EPA have to say?
Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.QUOTE
Since the development of the oil and gas resources in the area, Pavillion residents have reported contamination and health impacts that they suspect are coming from Encana's Pavillion/Muddy Ridge gas-field. Residents' symptoms have ranged from rashes and headaches to neurological disorders and cancers. The survey found 94% of participants reported health impacts that are known effects of chemicals identified last year in drinking water wells.
If this is clear-cut--why hasn't the vaunted EPA shut it down?
QUOTE
A significant survey finding also includes 81% of participants reporting respiratory ailments. This indicates that a primary pathway of human exposure to chemicals in the area may be occurring through air pathways, such as industrial releases and from showering or washing dishes with contaminated water. Based on the survey, the landowners and groups are calling for regulators to identify the source of contamination, conduct residential and regional air-monitoring, and to implement medical monitoring in which residents with health impacts can receive blood and urine testing.
"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "
"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "
Let's see the results of those tests--and what EPA has to say about them.
QUOTE
While Encana and regulators claim that the source of the water contamination has not been identified, oil and gas production is the only industrial activity in the area. The EPA is planning to release additional drinking water tests to the public on August 31st. The State of Wyoming's Department of Environmental Quality is slated to place an air monitor in the Pavillion area in late September that will assess regional air quality.
------- The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
Let's see the report. You said you could provide more.------- The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
QUOTE
Poplar Montana:
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.
Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.
Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.
Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.
Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.
"Tracking for decades? How long has fracking been accomplished there?
QUOTE
Some wells outside town already have been rendered undrinkable by the plume of salty pollution
< http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html >
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.
According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm >
All of those violations, yet they couldn't find ONE for fracking! < http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html >
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.
According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm >
-----------
QUOTE
Franklin Township Pennsylvania March 2012:
The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.
"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
They have no evidence, but WPX is supposed to prove that they are NOT guilty? The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.
"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
QUOTE
The department began investigating elevated methane in the water wells in December when residents along Route 29 in the hamlet of Franklin Forks noticed discolored water and intermittent eruptions of gas and water from their well.
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU >
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112 >
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
REALLY? With all of these links, why isn't there a link to this supposed "gag" order? Why isn't the EPA allowing doctors to talk about this, if there really is an issue? < http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU >
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112 >
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
QUOTE
There is good reason to be curious about exactly what's in those fluids. A 2010 congressional investigation revealed that Halliburton and other fracking companies had used 32 million gallons of diesel products, which include toxic chemicals like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, in the fluids they inject into the ground. Low levels of exposure to those chemicals can trigger acute effects like headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness, while higher levels of exposure can cause cancer.
Yet NOT ONE MENTION OF METHANE.
QUOTE
The latest move in Pennsylvania has raised suspicions among the industry's critics once again. As Walter Tsou, president of the Philadelphia chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, put it, "What is the big secret here that they're unwilling to tell people, unless they know that if people found out what's really in these chemicals, they would be outraged?"
< http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0 >
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
Yet, "carbon sequestration"--pumping carbon back deep underground, is OK with these same eco-nuts? < http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0 >
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
QUOTE
All that underground space has made Ohio a leading importer of wastewater from other states. Last year, oil and gas companies injected 511 million gallons into Ohio’s wells, the most on record, according to the state’s Department of Natural Resources. More than half came from elsewhere. Of the 94.2 million gallons of drilling wastewater that Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale operators sent to disposal wells last year, 98 percent went to Ohio.
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.
The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.
The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm >
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.
The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.
The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm >
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies." Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.
Which is it--
A. Is the science NOT settled, or
B. has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
Am I the only one that is confused by this? Doesn't this seem like Jim's response, but posted by Rosalind?
Didn't you read the article? There are four companies drilling in that area and none of them will accept blame. Nobody is trying to find out who is responsible. That is what I'm talking about. The same with all of these other places. These people in all of these places contacted local officials, agencies like the EPA that is supposed to be watching out for these sorts of problems, but they can't get any help. Only local papers carry most of these stories, that's why it's so hard to find out about them.
Here's a draft of the EPA report on Pavillion Wyoming, I don't think the final draft has been released yet.
< http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/ >
Vaunted EPA? They are as crooked and full of BS as pretty much every other government agency. Too many people were making too much noise, so the EPA had no choice but to finally acknowledge that town's drinking water. That's also why I think there will finally start to be some litigation going on against some of these drilling companies.
Why isn't the EPA allowing doctors to talk about this? There are tons of doctors talking about all the problems with fracking. There are also doctors fighting the "gag order". It's a new law in Pennsylvania, under the guise of "protecting trade secret information". The companies don't want their toxic recipe getting into the wrong hands supposedly. That's part of what has been BS about this whole thing. These drilling companies don't have to tell ANYONE what they are pumping into the ground. They have been protected. They have been exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act. NOBODY but them know what they are putting into the ground. So, also, when drinking water gets contaminated they say "Wasn't us, we don't use that sort of chemical"
< http://www.propublica.org/article...too-far >
Did I ever say carbon sequestration was ok? To be honest, this is the first I"ve ever heard of it. Thank you for giving me something else to look into.
You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies." Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.
Have you not read anything I've ever posted? Me put my faith in the Federal government??!! Not a chance.
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
Again, you must not read most of what I post, or you would already know what I have to say on that subject.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 09 2012,11:29 pm
They don't put methane into the ground while fracking. They release methane that is deep in the ground which then seeps into the water through all the cracks and fissures created by fracking.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Apr. 09 2012,11:52 pm
(blahblahblah @ Apr. 09 2012,10:49 pm)
QUOTE
Rosalind,
Back a few pages you listed off several of Occupy's causes (post #17). I have to say, I think you have a very romanticized view of this movement. To be fair though, in the list there are several items that I agree are problems. Identifying the problems seems to the easy part. We (me and Occupy) however tend to differ in how we would solve these problems. I think the Occupy movement helped increase awareness of many of these issues, but not so much in a way that fosters public debate about the issues. It's more along the lines of occupiers wanting to stand in the middle of the road and periodically rant about a laundry list of issues.
Most of my information about Occupy comes directly from Occupy, although I have followed the Minnesota faction of the movement considerably more than other factions. It's true though across the country Occupy Homes seems to have been the most active. I can't speak for the homes that were selected outside of Minnesota, but I have not heard any evidence of any fraud in any of the Minnesota foreclosures that have been occupied, sad stories certainly, bad customer service on behalf of the bank for sure, but no fraud. Do you happen to know what the fraud was?
I have been hoping that Occupy would begin to form something along the lines of a political party (albeit one that I would probably spend a lot of time disagreeing with, but I think we would benefit from more political parties), but sadly it does not seem to be in the cards. I tuned in for large parts of the re-occupation last Saturday, all I can say is, what a joke. This is an organization that is mostly interested in camping and marching, and endless debates and confrontations with the cops about whether camping and marching are constitutionally protected. The whole camping thing is a total distraction from actually doing anything. OccupyMN had the whole winter to get their act together, and on Saturday they picked up literally where they left off last fall, trying to camp and trying to march, and once again debating the rights they do or don't have to do either of these activities. The difference however is that Minneapolis cops were not in the mood for a debate (or a game of capture the flag) and took off the “kid gloves”. I doubt many moderate people who are basically supportive of Occupy are going to get involved in the BS that occurred last weekend. I would say the evidence suggest that mere lip service is paid to that long list of items in your pervious post, while the primary focus is on camping and marching.
Occupy has two choices, advocate for change inside our current system, which means getting politically active, or advocate for a new system. If they want to work in our current system they better get their crap together because they are less than seven months away from an important election. If they want a new system they will probably need more weapons. I suppose the third option is that they are severely misguided whiners currently throwing a huge temper tantrum.
Back a few pages you listed off several of Occupy's causes (post #17). I have to say, I think you have a very romanticized view of this movement. To be fair though, in the list there are several items that I agree are problems. Identifying the problems seems to the easy part. We (me and Occupy) however tend to differ in how we would solve these problems. I think the Occupy movement helped increase awareness of many of these issues, but not so much in a way that fosters public debate about the issues. It's more along the lines of occupiers wanting to stand in the middle of the road and periodically rant about a laundry list of issues.
Most of my information about Occupy comes directly from Occupy, although I have followed the Minnesota faction of the movement considerably more than other factions. It's true though across the country Occupy Homes seems to have been the most active. I can't speak for the homes that were selected outside of Minnesota, but I have not heard any evidence of any fraud in any of the Minnesota foreclosures that have been occupied, sad stories certainly, bad customer service on behalf of the bank for sure, but no fraud. Do you happen to know what the fraud was?
I have been hoping that Occupy would begin to form something along the lines of a political party (albeit one that I would probably spend a lot of time disagreeing with, but I think we would benefit from more political parties), but sadly it does not seem to be in the cards. I tuned in for large parts of the re-occupation last Saturday, all I can say is, what a joke. This is an organization that is mostly interested in camping and marching, and endless debates and confrontations with the cops about whether camping and marching are constitutionally protected. The whole camping thing is a total distraction from actually doing anything. OccupyMN had the whole winter to get their act together, and on Saturday they picked up literally where they left off last fall, trying to camp and trying to march, and once again debating the rights they do or don't have to do either of these activities. The difference however is that Minneapolis cops were not in the mood for a debate (or a game of capture the flag) and took off the “kid gloves”. I doubt many moderate people who are basically supportive of Occupy are going to get involved in the BS that occurred last weekend. I would say the evidence suggest that mere lip service is paid to that long list of items in your pervious post, while the primary focus is on camping and marching.
Occupy has two choices, advocate for change inside our current system, which means getting politically active, or advocate for a new system. If they want to work in our current system they better get their crap together because they are less than seven months away from an important election. If they want a new system they will probably need more weapons. I suppose the third option is that they are severely misguided whiners currently throwing a huge temper tantrum.
QUOTE
I think the Occupy movement helped increase awareness of many of these issues, but not so much in a way that fosters public debate about the issues.
It's really too bad the mainstream lying media had to show up and gut this movement. I'd like to know how things would be right now if that hadn't happened.
QUOTE
Identifying the problems seems to the easy part. We (me and Occupy) however tend to differ in how we would solve these problems.
That's why we need more people working on the problems. The only certain thing is: we can't just leave it all up to government, we have to start participating and work hard to fix the problems.
QUOTE
It's more along the lines of occupiers wanting to stand in the middle of the road and periodically rant about a laundry list of issues.
There are ALOT of occupiers working their butts off trying to come up with solutions.
QUOTE
Most of my information about Occupy comes directly from Occupy, although I have followed the Minnesota faction of the movement considerably more than other factions
Minnesota Occupy is the one I have dealt with the least. Way too many huge egos, instigators and hard headed a-holes. Way too many problems in the two main Occupy Minnesota groups. It's kind of hard to fix external problems when there are so many internal ones.
QUOTE
I can't speak for the homes that were selected outside of Minnesota, but I have not heard any evidence of any fraud in any of the Minnesota foreclosures that have been occupied, sad stories certainly, bad customer service on behalf of the bank for sure, but no fraud. Do you happen to know what the fraud was?
Sadly, I don't understand parts of the movement. Usually the parts I don't understand have to do with money. Banking and homes. However, I do think if banks were allowed to be bailed out, then the people losing their homes should also be given a chance to keep their homes. Make a payment plan that works for both the bank and home buyer maybe. I don't know. I will try to check into the "fraud" allegations, but just to let you know, I probably won't understand what I am reading.
QUOTE
I have been hoping that Occupy would begin to form something along the lines of a political party (albeit one that I would probably spend a lot of time disagreeing with, but I think we would benefit from more political parties), but sadly it does not seem to be in the cards.
Occupy got involved with these two things:
beyourgovernment.org
occupygovernment.org
I like both of these ideas. Unfortunately, this started right before occupy was almost crushed. Another thing is that, I guess alot of us are so fed up with all the corruption and crap happening in every branch of government, we feel that "infiltrating" the political spectrum would just take too damn long. How many years has the corruption been allowed to take hold? Too freakin many.
QUOTE
I doubt many moderate people who are basically supportive of Occupy are going to get involved in the BS that occurred last weekend.
I was spending time with Chicago's occupy on Saturday, but like I said, I've not had much to do with Minnesota's.
QUOTE
I suppose the third option is that they are severely misguided whiners currently throwing a huge temper tantrum.
No, I would say the majority of us are not.
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 10 2012,10:31 am
What is with these super long posts??!! Cant people make their point by summarizing the content??
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 10 2012,1:01 pm
I agree.When someone makes a number of outrageous comments, you either have to respond to them collectively or individually. If Rosalind will confine herself to one outrageous comment at a time, I'll take each one as she posts it.
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 10 2012,1:02 pm
Rosalind-- QUOTE
Liberal, can we get an eyeroll emoticon as one of the choices?
I'll go you one better--"Liberal--can we get an EYES SHUT as one of the choices?"
Posted by Santorini on Apr. 10 2012,1:20 pm
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Apr. 09 2012,11:29 pm)
QUOTE
They don't put methane into the ground while fracking. They release methane that is deep in the ground which then seeps into the water through all the cracks and fissures created by fracking.
No...but it is released through a natural decomposition process.
Pa. found the methane in water unrelated to fracturing but related to topography. As in Co. and Pa. menthane in the drinking water was isolated to biogenic methane. None of this was reported in Josh Foxes docudrama.
You so eloquently accuse the media, the oil companies etc. of lying...
as if your information sources (as biased as they , are)
(not to mention pure agenda driven! the very thing you accuse the govt and corps of!!)
are the only place for truth and justice
Posted by busybee on Apr. 16 2012,10:35 pm
QUOTE
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What is "Freedom of Speech" in this country when it's own citizens are people most absorbed in political party separation conflicts, media driven conflicts and personal agenda conflicts that ultimately creates the on-going separateness of the "unity" this County is supposed to possess in high quality above any other country in the world?
Say anything and about any subject that you believe you have a the Freedom speak of in the U.S and you will be ripped apart by your OWN PEOPLE, not any other county's citizens.
Posted by Liberal on Apr. 17 2012,11:51 am
Freedom of speech isn't meant to protect you from criticism.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 10 2012,8:18 am
I didn't notice comment #50 before, and when blahblahblah mentioned it I thought he was just poking fun of me having troubles trying to work the "Quote, Unquote" function of the forum. I had to come back to this topic looking for a link I can no longer find in my computer folders, and that's when I realized it. So, why does comment #50 look like Jim's comment, but posted with my account? Is it a glitch that happens often? - Because normally I don't reread after I post a comment.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 10 2015,8:39 am
QUOTE
Nobody changed anything on your posts or your profile. Nobody has access to your profile and why would anyone care enough about what you post to change it. Also there's a log file of changes made by moderators and nobody has touched a single letter of any post you've made.
Really? Post #50 was most definitely changed by jimhanson.
Posted by irisheyes on Jun. 10 2015,7:48 pm
^I logged in to the Admin control panel to check the moderator logs. Post #50 was made on April 9, 2012, it does not show Jimhanson editing or deleting anything in that thread (or any other thread in the Opinion section that month or year). In 2012, only two edits were made, but neither were in that section of the forum, so I know that wasn't it.It's safe to say that most edits are done by me, and that's if someone tries to drop the F-bomb or the C word, or if it's something sexually explicit enough I'll remove the word or phrase.
Roz:
QUOTE
So, why does comment #50 look like Jim's comment, but posted with my account? Is it a glitch that happens often? - Because normally I don't reread after I post a comment.
My guess is that when you entered the HTML code for the quote and unquote it got entered backwords. If I post a longer response with lots of quotes, I have to double check otherwise I enter the quote/unquote in the wrong spot.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 10 2015,8:03 pm
(irisheyes @ Jun. 10 2015,7:48 pm)
QUOTE
^I logged in to the Admin control panel to check the moderator logs. Post #50 was made on April 9, 2012, it does not show Jimhanson editing or deleting anything in that thread (or any other thread in the Opinion section that month or year). In 2012, only two edits were made, but neither were in that section of the forum, so I know that wasn't it.
It's safe to say that most edits are done by me, and that's if someone tries to drop the F-bomb or the C word, or if it's something sexually explicit enough I'll remove the word or phrase.
Roz:
My guess is that when you entered the HTML code for the quote and unquote it got entered backwords. If I post a longer response with lots of quotes, I have to double check otherwise I enter the quote/unquote in the wrong spot.
It's safe to say that most edits are done by me, and that's if someone tries to drop the F-bomb or the C word, or if it's something sexually explicit enough I'll remove the word or phrase.
Roz:
QUOTE
So, why does comment #50 look like Jim's comment, but posted with my account? Is it a glitch that happens often? - Because normally I don't reread after I post a comment.
My guess is that when you entered the HTML code for the quote and unquote it got entered backwords. If I post a longer response with lots of quotes, I have to double check otherwise I enter the quote/unquote in the wrong spot.
Thank you Irish Eyes, but I am not saying Jim changed my comment as a moderator.
Comment #50 was very clearly changed by Jim, but not in any moderator type way.
Just go to comment #50 and read it. See for yourself.
QUOTE
My guess is that when you entered the HTML code for the quote and unquote it got entered backwords. If I post a longer response with lots of quotes, I have to double check otherwise I enter the quote/unquote in the wrong spot.
No, that's not what has happened with comment 50.
Go read it for yourself.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 10 2015,9:19 pm
He's a moderator anything he edits is logged. The only way someone can edit another person's post is as a moderator. He also can't change his moderator status so anything he does is as a moderator. So saying he didn't change it as a moderator is nonsense.Ive told you there's no record of him editing the post, irisheyes looked through the log files and also told you he didn't edit it. What would it take to convince you that you most likely screwed up the quote function?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 10 2015,9:36 pm
I am saying that Jim was somehow logged into my account. Not as any moderator, but actually LOGGED INTO MY ACCOUNT. When I first asked about it I asked if it was a glitch. - I was actually just being polite.Good grief, anyone who reads comment #50 can see for themselves that it's not a quote/unquote problem. If it was...what post of Jim's did I get his words from?
No, in post #50, most of the things I had personally posted in that comment are gone, the parts that are left are in quotes, and Jim is responding to the parts in quotes. I'm not responding to him.
If I would have had a problem with the quote/unquote, post #50 would not look and read the way it does. He did leave one of his comments in quote from his post in #45, all of the other things in quotes are some of the things I had personally posted in #50.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 10 2015,11:01 pm
Moderators can not log in as another user. That would take a super administrator and even then they'd have to change your password to do that.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 10 2015,11:39 pm
(Liberal @ Jun. 10 2015,11:01 pm)
QUOTE
Moderators can not log in as another user. That would take a super administrator and even then they'd have to change your password to do that.
Either he somehow knew my password and he logged into my account or there was some sort of glitch, that apparently has never happened before or since on this forum.
Is there any other possible explanation for post #50?
You can see everyone's IP addresses? Is there any way to check what two IP addresses were involved for post #50?
How would jim get my password? No idea.
Why would jim want to get into my profile? No idea.
How could he not realize he was still in my account when he started responding to my post? No idea.
Quote/unquote error? Definitely not.
Glitch? I highly doubt it.
Did I momentarily choose jim as a split personality? Definitely not.
Any other possible explanation?
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,12:05 am
My money is on mental illness for an explanation.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,5:34 am
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,12:05 am)
QUOTE
My money is on mental illness for an explanation.
Well of course it is.
But I doubt the other forum members believe that.
Posted by grassman on Jun. 11 2015,5:40 am
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,12:05 am)
QUOTE
My money is on mental illness for an explanation.
You are pretty flip about mental illness aren't you. Would you throw remarks about cancer around like that? I mean you refer to it quite a lot.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,6:02 am
(grassman @ Jun. 11 2015,5:40 am)
QUOTE
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,12:05 am)
QUOTE
My money is on mental illness for an explanation.
You are pretty flip about mental illness aren't you. Would you throw remarks about cancer around like that? I mean you refer to it quite a lot.
That's just his way of attempting to marginalize or get under the skin of anyone he disagrees with.
In this case, he'd rather try to dismiss any discussion about post #50 because he either can't explain what happened or he doesn't want to.
The forum is already dying, think he wants forum members to be wondering that maybe their personal information isn't very safe or that their private communications in the forum might not actually be completely private?
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,6:20 am
What do you think I should call someone who continues to claim that the most computer illiterate moderator hacked into her account and changed her profile and posts even when multiple people explain that it's not possible.At some point you just have to call a spade a spade, I'm not going to ignore her accusations because any lie repeated enough times will convince some people it's true and I'm not going to humor someone that is accusing a moderator of doing something wrong when they clearly didnt. I enjoy making fun of Jim but I also know Jim well enough that I can say he would never hack into someone else's account.
Same thing goes for conspiracy theorists, they're mentally ill and I'm not going to let the nuts turn this forum into another prison planet, or natural news. I'll shut it down before I let that happen.
Posted by grassman on Jun. 11 2015,6:26 am
So what was the cause of his post being under her name?
Posted by Self-Banished on Jun. 11 2015,6:44 am
Hmm...
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,6:49 am
QUOTE
The forum is already dying, think he wants forum members to be wondering that maybe their personal information isn't very safe or that their private communications in the forum might not actually be completely private?
Ok, I give up. I'll just agree that jimhanson all of the sudden developed some serious computer skills and with his new found skills he hacks into people's accounts, guesses their password, changes their password, logs in with the new password, then screws with their profiles, reads their private messages, and changes their posts. Then he hacks back into the adminstrators control panel and changes the encrypted password back to what it was originally. Oh yeah, he also knows enough to hack into the sql database to delete any record of his activity.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,6:56 am
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,6:49 am)
QUOTE
QUOTE
The forum is already dying, think he wants forum members to be wondering that maybe their personal information isn't very safe or that their private communications in the forum might not actually be completely private?
Ok, I give up. I'll just agree that jimhanson all of the sudden developed some serious computer skills and with his new found skills he hacks into people's accounts, guesses their password, changes their password, logs in with the new password, then screws with their profiles, reads their private messages, and changes their posts. Then he hacks back into the adminstrators control panel and changes the encrypted password back to what it was originally. Oh yeah, he also knows enough to hack into the sql database to delete any record of his activity.
OR, jim somehow found out my password and just simply used my username and password to sign into my account.
Occam's Razor.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,7:42 am
Here is a great explanation of the problem.< https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...heories >
Posted by Botto 82 on Jun. 11 2015,8:08 am
Ha!
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,8:34 am
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,7:42 am)
QUOTE
Here is a great explanation of the problem.
< https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...heories >
< https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...heories >
QUOTE
In this case, he'd rather try to dismiss any discussion about post #50 because he either can't explain what happened or he doesn't want to.
The forum is already dying, think he wants forum members to be wondering that maybe their personal information isn't very safe or that their private communications in the forum might not actually be completely private?
The forum is already dying, think he wants forum members to be wondering that maybe their personal information isn't very safe or that their private communications in the forum might not actually be completely private?
I'm either psychic or you are very predictable.
So figure out how it happened then. Or at least offer up another plausible explanation.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,8:37 am
(jimhanson @ Jun. 04 2009,5:48 pm)
QUOTE
I've NEVER edited a post--and never been told how to move items in a thread.
Here's a 2009 post from jimhanson explaining how many times he's edited something. Like I said he couldn't edit a post if he tried, he didnt even know how to move a topic even though all you have to do is click the " move topic" button at the bottom of the moderators page. So he went from being completely computer illiterate to a top notch hacker in 4 years time?
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,8:40 am
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Jun. 11 2015,8:34 am)
QUOTE
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,7:42 am)
QUOTE
Here is a great explanation of the problem.
< https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...heories >
< https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...heories >
QUOTE
In this case, he'd rather try to dismiss any discussion about post #50 because he either can't explain what happened or he doesn't want to.
The forum is already dying, think he wants forum members to be wondering that maybe their personal information isn't very safe or that their private communications in the forum might not actually be completely private?
The forum is already dying, think he wants forum members to be wondering that maybe their personal information isn't very safe or that their private communications in the forum might not actually be completely private?
I'm either psychic or you are very predictable.
So figure out how it happened then. Or at least offer up another plausible explanation.
Wtf are you talking about? What part of that quote makes me predictable or you a psychic?
Or was that a typo and you meant to say psycho?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,8:47 am
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,8:37 am)
QUOTE
(jimhanson @ Jun. 04 2009,5:48 pm)
QUOTE
I've NEVER edited a post--and never been told how to move items in a thread.
Here's a 2009 post from jimhanson explaining how many times he's edited something. Like I said he couldn't edit a post if he tried, he didnt even know how to move a topic even though all you have to do is click the " move topic" button at the bottom of the moderators page. So he went from being completely computer illiterate to a top notch hacker in 4 years time?
Is your reading comprehension truly that bad?? How many times do I have to say that I don't think jim did anything to my post as a moderator? It appears that jim signed into my account, using my user-name and password. I'm saying he messed up post #50 unintentionally.
A person doesn't have to be a "top notch hacker" if they know someone's password.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,9:02 am
(Rosalind_Swenson @ Mar. 31 2012,1:09 am)
QUOTE
Santorini: Check the meds?...hit a little too close to home for ya there Ros! Cause no one is taking this occupy seriously?
---
Me: Um...no. Besides, Occupy is still going strong. No one is taking occupy seriously? Many people are. Hopefully soon everyone will be.
-------------
Santorini: Ya never answered the question...were they not asked to leave?? Did they not just completely disrespect authority because they refused when asked?
----
Me: So whenever the "powers that be" don't like what we the people have to say and tell us to leave and shut up, we should? Very interesting.
Another thing to take into account, the school chancellor had asked for police to remove tents, NOT STUDENTS. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) were horrified at what was done to the students. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) believes the students have the right to protest and air grievances.
---
Santorini: Do ya ever see professionals camping out and about like these kids?
---
Me: Yep. Even that day, there were some professors from the school that had joined in the protests with the students.
-------------------------------------
blahblahblah, not all of the protestors do those things you mentioned. Sadly some do. I will say one thing though, the day thousands were marching down the streets in NY (and yes, blocking traffic while marching. Kind of hard for thousands to march and not impede traffic) I was watching the livestream, and I must say, I was filled with hope, and my eyes with tears. Every single vehicle was honking, waving, giving thumbs up, and encouraging the marchers. Even cab drivers were holding their hands out the windows to shake hands with them and tell them thank you. And the cab drivers were having their work interrupted! But they were grateful, because they know things have gotten out of control, and our government is not even close to being "for the people, by the people" anymore.
And, no offense, but, it is kind of sad that your biggest response: "I think several interesting questions have come up (at least as far as I am concerned)."
was followed up by the behavior of some of the protestors, and ridiculing them and what they are doing.
Perhaps instead, you could try to realize what their message is, and how what has been happening in this country and still is happening in this country, with how corrupt our government is, is far more offensive than this group of people who want things fixed.
---
Me: Um...no. Besides, Occupy is still going strong. No one is taking occupy seriously? Many people are. Hopefully soon everyone will be.
-------------
Santorini: Ya never answered the question...were they not asked to leave?? Did they not just completely disrespect authority because they refused when asked?
----
Me: So whenever the "powers that be" don't like what we the people have to say and tell us to leave and shut up, we should? Very interesting.
Another thing to take into account, the school chancellor had asked for police to remove tents, NOT STUDENTS. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) were horrified at what was done to the students. The chancellor, and pretty much everyone (except you) believes the students have the right to protest and air grievances.
---
Santorini: Do ya ever see professionals camping out and about like these kids?
---
Me: Yep. Even that day, there were some professors from the school that had joined in the protests with the students.
-------------------------------------
blahblahblah, not all of the protestors do those things you mentioned. Sadly some do. I will say one thing though, the day thousands were marching down the streets in NY (and yes, blocking traffic while marching. Kind of hard for thousands to march and not impede traffic) I was watching the livestream, and I must say, I was filled with hope, and my eyes with tears. Every single vehicle was honking, waving, giving thumbs up, and encouraging the marchers. Even cab drivers were holding their hands out the windows to shake hands with them and tell them thank you. And the cab drivers were having their work interrupted! But they were grateful, because they know things have gotten out of control, and our government is not even close to being "for the people, by the people" anymore.
And, no offense, but, it is kind of sad that your biggest response: "I think several interesting questions have come up (at least as far as I am concerned)."
was followed up by the behavior of some of the protestors, and ridiculing them and what they are doing.
Perhaps instead, you could try to realize what their message is, and how what has been happening in this country and still is happening in this country, with how corrupt our government is, is far more offensive than this group of people who want things fixed.
From the first page of this topic where you couldn't use quote but by the end of the topic it's impossile that you made a mistake using the quote function.
Did you read the psychology today article. Did you pay attention to the part that says conspiracy theorists usually have a victim mentality? That pretty much was dead on description of you.
How would jimhanson get your password when the only place you can access the password field is by logging in as an administrator and even then its displayed as asterisks? Im done trying to explain it to you, but you should consider getting some counseling for your victim mentality. It must suck going through life thinking you're a victim all the time.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,9:10 am
I already asked you and Irish where I got Jim's words from if it was a quote error. I have already stated that the post would not look or read like it does if it was a quote problem. Other forum members are not as stupid as you think they are.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,9:18 am
Seek help.
Posted by Self-Banished on Jun. 11 2015,9:18 am
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,7:42 am)
QUOTE
Here is a great explanation of the problem.
< https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...heories >
< https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...heories >
Not taking sides but excellent article
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,9:30 am
One more point. The IP address at the bottom of the post is not Jims, it's the crazy ladies IP. So I guess Jim must have broken into her house, found her computer logged in, sat down and wrote a couple hundred word post, screwed with her profile and then high tailed it out of there in case the crazy lady came back from her bunker.I guess the other option would be that the crazy lady didnt know how to use the quote properly.
Occam's razor indeed.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,9:54 am
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,9:30 am)
QUOTE
One more point. The IP address at the bottom of the post is not Jims, it's the crazy ladies IP. So I guess Jim must have broken into her house, found her computer logged in, sat down and wrote a couple hundred word post, screwed with her profile and then high tailed it out of there in case the crazy lady came back from her bunker.
I guess the other option would be that the crazy lady didnt know how to use the quote properly.
Occam's razor indeed.
I guess the other option would be that the crazy lady didnt know how to use the quote properly.
Occam's razor indeed.
Sorry, but you're the one who's crazy if you think anyone on the forum who reads post #50 is going to believe that it was me just having a problem with the quote function.
What post of his did I get his words from?
How on earth does post 50 read the way it does if it was a quote problem.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,10:58 am
So if I was having problems with the quote function, this is what post #50 should look like. Even with your comprehension problems I doubt this makes sense.QUOTE
Naw, I don't need any MORE. I'd just like you to provide any case of a SUCCESSFUL LAWSUIT or EPA FINDING. What you have provided, as mentioned, is only anecdotal evidence.
If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government? Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?
Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs?
If this is the problem you make it out to be, where is the vaunted Federal Government? Like most libbies, you seem to trust them--why aren't you angry at THEM for their FAILURE to do what they are charged with doing?
Is it because FAILURE IS AN OPTION--just like most Federal programs?
Not sure what to do with this line since it's the part I quoted in my original #50 post, from jim in post 45 and it's still in quotes in the messed up post #50:
QUOTE
Still NO scientific evidence that fracking is dangerous--despite its widespread use, MILLIONS OF PEOPLE DO DRINK THAT GROUNDWATER with no bad effects. Has there been even ONE successful court case proving that fracking caused issues--despite its widespread use, millions of people exposed, and an army of lawyers that would just love to jump on the issue?"
Seriously Jim? Because the companies doing the fracking have the BIGGEST army of lawyers. But, anyways, here's a short list of documented proof of problems for you. No court case yet, but I have a feeling there will be some very very soon:
Logan Mountain Colorado, 2008http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13535728
QUOTE
2008? You mean that in 4 YEARS they can't prove their case?
Pavillion Wyoming Health Survey:
People here are sick. Our water, air, soil, and our health are all connected, says John Fenton, Pavillion resident with a contaminated drinking water well. Thanks to the EPA we will know what chemicals are in our water. Now we need to know the chemicals in our air, our homes and our bodies.
QUOTE
Well, what did the EPA have to say? Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.
Guess all we have to go on is ONE PERSONS OPINION.Since the development of the oil and gas resources in the area, Pavillion residents have reported contamination and health impacts that they suspect are coming from Encana's Pavillion/Muddy Ridge gas-field. Residents' symptoms have ranged from rashes and headaches to neurological disorders and cancers. The survey found 94% of participants reported health impacts that are known effects of chemicals identified last year in drinking water wells.
QUOTE
If this is clear-cut--why hasn't the vaunted EPA shut it down?
A significant survey finding also includes 81% of participants reporting respiratory ailments. This indicates that a primary pathway of human exposure to chemicals in the area may be occurring through air pathways, such as industrial releases and from showering or washing dishes with contaminated water. Based on the survey, the landowners and groups are calling for regulators to identify the source of contamination, conduct residential and regional air-monitoring, and to implement medical monitoring in which residents with health impacts can receive blood and urine testing.
"We have spent thousands on doctors and tests", says Jeff Locker, a Pavillion landowner with contaminated water. Locker and his wife have struggled with respiratory and neurological symptoms, constant nausea and headaches, and aggressive pre-cancerous growths. "It's big profit over people's health. Our health officials need to step forward. "
QUOTE
Let's see the results of those tests--and what EPA has to say about them.
While Encana and regulators claim that the source of the water contamination has not been identified, oil and gas production is the only industrial activity in the area. The EPA is planning to release additional drinking water tests to the public on August 31st. The State of Wyoming's Department of Environmental Quality is slated to place an air monitor in the Pavillion area in late September that will assess regional air quality.
------- The EPA has just recently verified that fracking has poisoned this town's water, air and land.-----------------
QUOTE
Let's see the report. You said you could provide more.
Poplar Montana:
Oil companies have agreed to pay $320,000 to the northeastern Montana city of Poplar to relocate water wells and take other steps to deal with a 40 million gallon plume of pollution seeping into drinking supplies.
Environmental Protection Agency scientist Sarah Roberts said Tuesday that Poplar's water so far remains safe to drink but faces imminent danger.
Federal officials have been tracking the underground plume's spread from the East Poplar oil field for decades. It is moving toward Poplar and reached city water supplies in 2010.
QUOTE
"Tracking for decades? How long has fracking been accomplished there?
Some wells outside town already have been rendered undrinkable by the plume of salty pollution
< http://billingsgazette.com/news...44.html >
--------------
August 2010:
A new report by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association said the state has identified 1,435 violations by 43 Marcellus Shale drilling companies since January 2008, prompting environmental groups to call for quick legislative action to protect water and land resources.
According to Monday's report, 952 of the violations were identified as having or likely to have an impact on the environment. Those included 100 violations of the state Clean Stream Law, 268 for improper construction of waste water impoundments; 277 for poor erosion and sedimentation plans during well pad, road and piping construction; 16 for improper blowout prevention; and 154 for discharging industrial waste, including drilling waste water containing toxic chemicals, onto the ground or into streams.http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/10215/1077192-454.stm
QUOTE
All of those violations, yet they couldn't find ONE for fracking!
Franklin Township Pennsylvania March 2012:
The Department of Environmental Protection has asked a natural gas drilling company to step in and help three Franklin Twp. families whose well water contains high levels of methane.
State environmental regulators have not determined the source of the gas and are not saying WPX Energy is responsible for the methane, DEP spokeswoman Colleen Connolly said. But in a letter to the driller Friday, regulators asked that WPX help address the problem.
"They can offer to put in (methane) mitigation systems. They can offer to buy bottled water. We did ask them to vent at least one well," Ms. Connolly said.
"We're looking at a situation where some temporary fixes need to be put in, and we're putting the ball in WPXs court"
QUOTE
They have no evidence, but WPX is supposed to prove that they are NOT guilty?
The department began investigating elevated methane in the water wells in December when residents along Route 29 in the hamlet of Franklin Forks noticed discolored water and intermittent eruptions of gas and water from their well.
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...f1SCBiU >
---------We're not saying you are responsible, but pretty please help them out?
Two days later they put in vents and offer free supplies of clean water. Just to be nice?
< http://thetimes-tribune.com/news...1289112 >
Ms. Hadlick's water also contained high levels of salts. Her methane level, 58.3 milligrams per liter, is more than twice the concentration state regulators have called the "true level of concern": when the water is so full of gas it begins to release it to the air.
"It makes your hair really dried out and yucky feeling," Ms. Hadlick said. "My son has had sores in his mouth from using the water to brush his teeth."
--------------------
Pennsylvania doctors now have a gag order on them so they can't tell patients what chemicals they might be exposed to.
Under a new law, doctors in Pennsylvania can access information about chemicals used in natural gas extraction -- but they won't be able to share it with their patients. A provision buried in a law passed last month is drawing scrutiny from the public health and environmental community, who argue that it will "gag" doctors who want to raise concerns related to oil and gas extraction with the people they treat and the general public.
QUOTE
REALLY? With all of these links, why isn't there a link to this supposed "gag" order? Why isn't the EPA allowing doctors to talk about this, if there really is an issue?
There is good reason to be curious about exactly what's in those fluids. A 2010 congressional investigation revealed that Halliburton and other fracking companies had used 32 million gallons of diesel products, which include toxic chemicals like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, in the fluids they inject into the ground. Low levels of exposure to those chemicals can trigger acute effects like headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness, while higher levels of exposure can cause cancer.
QUOTE
Yet NOT ONE MENTION OF METHANE.
The latest move in Pennsylvania has raised suspicions among the industry's critics once again. As Walter Tsou, president of the Philadelphia chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, put it, "What is the big secret here that they're unwilling to tell people, unless they know that if people found out what's really in these chemicals, they would be outraged?"
< http://www.theatlantic.com/health...0 >
-----------------
All that leftover fracking water has to be stored some place. Alot of it is being pumped deep underground in Ohio:
QUOTE
Yet, "carbon sequestration"--pumping carbon back deep underground, is OK with these same eco-nuts?
All that underground space has made Ohio a leading importer of wastewater from other states. Last year, oil and gas companies injected 511 million gallons into Ohio’s wells, the most on record, according to the state’s Department of Natural Resources. More than half came from elsewhere. Of the 94.2 million gallons of drilling wastewater that Pennsylvania’s Marcellus shale operators sent to disposal wells last year, 98 percent went to Ohio.
Oil and gas companies haven’t put up as much of a fight over the proposed regulations, perhaps because they were introduced in the aftermath of a series of bizarre earthquakes near Youngstown that have been linked to the underground wastewater. There had been no record of quakes in the area before D&L Energy, based in Youngstown, began injecting wastewater into a well about 9,200 feet underground in December 2010. Starting in March, there were 12 quakes within a mile of the well ranging from magnitude 2.1 to a 4.0 quake that hit on New Year’s Eve.
----Ohio's earthquakes:
The ODNR's 20-page preliminary investigation report released Friday based its findings on evidence from seismic monitors, the locations of the epicenters of 12 minor earthquakes within one mile of the disposal well, and the discovery of a heretofore unknown fault in the underlying bedrock.
"We made the determination that, while it's difficult to induce seismic activity, the depth of this well reached a previously unmapped fault and there is a likelihood it lubricated the fault, resulting in seismic activity," ODNR spokesman Carlo LoParo said.
The earthquakes registered magnitudes of 2.7 to 4.0, rattling dishes in homes but causing no structural damage. A 4.0-magnitude earthquake has a seismic energy yield equivalent to detonating a small atomic bomb.
The first earthquakes occurred three months after the high-pressure injection of wastewater began. Several quakes occurred in December 2011, with the last and most powerful on New Year's Eve, less than 24 hours after state regulators asked the company to shut down the well.
< http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12070/1215767-503-0.stm >
---------
Fracking is also responsible for many earthquakes in Oklahoma and the UK. Just google it.
-----------
Unfortunately there are plenty more instances of fracking poisoning water, land and air, so just ask if you want more. Also, it is getting harder for the media, EPA and drillers to hide it. Too many people are sick, it is happening too often, too many people are finally finding out about it, and too many people are mad.
--------------------------------------------
QUOTE
You seem to believe that all of societies ills--from bad-tasting water to earthquakes, are the result of "big oil companies." Inexplicably, you put your faith in the Federal Government--which doesn't seem to share your views as they've done nothing to support your views or to stop the practice.
Which is it--
A. Is the science NOT settled, or
B. has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
Which is it--
A. Is the science NOT settled, or
B. has the Federal Government colluded with "big oil" to not allow the practice?
Since you are a good liberal and don't like the practice, I'd expect that you would not use natural gas for heating--would boycott electrical companies that use it for producing electricity when the windmills don't work--and wouldn't use petroleum products from companies that engage in the practice.
They used to have bumper stickers in Texas that said "For those that don't like oil, let 'em freeze to death in the dark!"
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,11:37 am
How about you explain how the post has your IP address at the bottom and your name at the top?
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,1:30 pm
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,11:37 am)
QUOTE
How about you explain how the post has your IP address at the bottom and your name at the top?
I have no idea about pretty much anything when it comes to computers. But since I originally posted #50, I would assume of course it would show my IP address? I'm surprised that would even have to be explained to you.
I don't know if another IP address would also show up if the post was edited from a different source? That's why I asked about the IP address thing in the first place.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 11 2015,2:29 pm
So you admit you dont know anything about computers and yet nobody can tell you that you're wrong about this. Do you realize there is not one person that backs you up on this? How much do you think maddog would like to prove me wrong, yet he's not backing you up. Why do you think that is? I can tell you why, it's because you'd have to be crazy to think that jimhanson would or could do what you're accusing him of. Why would he edit your posts when he eviscerated you every time you posted. There isn't one exchange between you two where he didnt make you look like a fool.Okay try to concentrate and come up with an explanation of how he could get your password, or how he could make the edits and not leave any trace of making those changes.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 11 2015,4:11 pm
(Liberal @ Jun. 11 2015,2:29 pm)
QUOTE
So you admit you dont know anything about computers and yet nobody can tell you that you're wrong about this. Do you realize there is not one person that backs you up on this? How much do you think maddog would like to prove me wrong, yet he's not backing you up. Why do you think that is? I can tell you why, it's because you'd have to be crazy to think that jimhanson would or could do what you're accusing him of. Why would he edit your posts when he eviscerated you every time you posted. There isn't one exchange between you two where he didnt make you look like a fool.
Okay try to concentrate and come up with an explanation of how he could get your password, or how he could make the edits and not leave any trace of making those changes.
Okay try to concentrate and come up with an explanation of how he could get your password, or how he could make the edits and not leave any trace of making those changes.
QUOTE
So you admit you dont know anything about computers and yet nobody can tell you that you're wrong about this.
So why don't you explain what happened with post 50.
QUOTE
Why would he edit your posts when he eviscerated you every time you posted. There isn't one exchange between you two where he didnt make you look like a fool.
That's freakin hilarious. jim always made as big a fool of himself as you do. When he can't rebut something he just ignores it like nothing was said. Just like you do. Or calls a person names and acts like dealing with the other person's stupidity is just not worth the time, just like you do. Unlike you however, I don't think jim ever twisted and lied like you constantly do.
I didn't know that post 50 had gotten screwed up until much later after the fact when I came back looking for a link, which I had unfortunately HAD in comment 50, but it's gone now. When blahblahblah commented with post 54, I thought he was the one responding to some of the things I had written in 50. I wondered why he sounded as obnoxious as jim. Blahblah was always respectful and actually discussed things.
So I responded to jim in post 56. Jim, as usual, acted like he didn't even see any response. Typical. Kinda like how that time he posted a wikipedia page supposedly explaining the climategate emails, but the link he posted was actually a wikipedia page that overwhelming showed the opposite of what jim thought it was. And he just went on acting like he hadn't made a total fool of himself again... just like you do.
QUOTE
Okay try to concentrate and come up with an explanation of how he could get your password, or how he could make the edits and not leave any trace of making those changes.
How about you come up with an explanation of what happened to post 50.
How many traces will a person leave if they sign into someone's account using the other person's username and password?
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 12 2015,7:46 am
I gave you the explanation but because you're always a victim you can't accept that you did something wrong. Just like you can't admit that you gave the county your kids, you lied about that for years and even wrore letters to the editor blaming DHS. Then you finally admit you gave them your two oldest kids, but you claim it was temporary, so in your mind you did nothing wrong and were just a victim of a DHS kidnapping. The really messed up thing is you spent years trashing the name of everyone at DHS for doing nothing but helping you out. And you knew they couldn't defend themselves because of privacy laws. That makes you a complete and total a-hole.
And don't even try playing the victim and claim I'm talking about your kids. I'm talking about your inability to accept blame for your actions. I've said before I think you kids were victims in the whole thing, but I think they're victims of your behavior, not DHS.
< http://www.workopolis.com/content...-is-you >
< http://www.cbsnews.com/news/5-signs-that-youre-the-problem/ >
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 13 2015,6:23 am
QUOTE
I gave you the explanation but because you're always a victim you can't accept that you did something wrong.
What explanation? I messed up the quote function?
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when it comes to my family and what happened with us.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 14 2015,5:41 am
You think everyone in this forum is stupid.I don't know why anyone rarely calls you out on your obvious lies, but let's see if anyone wants to come to your defense and back up your obvious lie that post 50 was the result of me not using the quote function correctly.
Probably as many members that came to your defense every time I said
QUOTE
I'm not the one who looks like a lying, spinning, delusional crazy person. You are. And I'm not the one making you look that way. You are.
Zero.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 14 2015,3:24 pm
Yeah, you're probably right. Im sure you convinced everyone that a computer illiterate moderator hacked into your acoount and messed with one post and a couple things in your profile, then covered up any trace of doing it. As far as lying, I have no reason to lie nobody is going to buy into this conspiracy theory anymore than they believed the Aurora shooter had help, Sandy Hook never happened, and GM is going to corner the market on daytime running lights.
The one thing that does bug me is I wonder what you think Jimhanson's motivation would have been. You really believe that if he were going to change posts and profiles he'd pick one of your rambling posts that nobody reads?
Posted by Botto 82 on Jun. 14 2015,10:24 pm
I'd admit to doing it, if it would shut down this discussion. I really would.Sections of the post in question DO have a jimhanson style to them, but I'm with Liberal on his doubts of Jim having anything to do with it. It would be an incredible departure from his character, not to mention his computer skills.
The explanation lies elsewhere...
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 14 2015,10:47 pm
My second guess would be a database problem but what are the chances that it would only happen to arguably the most paranoid conspiracy theorist on the forum.I'd even considered giving her access to the administrator panel and moderator panel so that she could see what moderators see and what adminstrators see. There's no password info on mod control panel so jimhanson would literally have to hack in to admin control panel and then access the database manually. He literally as a moderator would have to go through just as much work as any regular user, also if you guess a password wrong three times on the admin panel it locks that admin acount. It's one of the reason we have several administrators to make sure were never locked out of forum.
Posted by grassman on Jun. 14 2015,10:54 pm
Well. why didn't you say so. Hey can I be an admin.? I see across this country a lot of people take a title and don't do anything. They sure like that title tho! Just kidding... 
(about being admin. that is.)
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 15 2015,5:37 am
How many times you going to lie about me saying Sandy Hook was a hoax? Again, how many traces would a person leave if they signed in with another person's username and password?
I have no idea how jim would know my password, but post 50 was definitely changed from what I had written. The things jim wrote in post 50 are his responses to what I wrote in post 50. So how did that happen? Maybe you told him the password.
I don't know WHY jim would want to get into anyone's account. Maybe he likes reading other people's private communications?
QUOTE
My second guess would be a database problem but what are the chances that it would only happen to arguably the most paranoid conspiracy theorist on the forum.
It's your system, your forum, and post 50 was definitely changed from what it originally had been, into something written by jim, so why don't you figure it out. A database problem wouldn't leave any trace?
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 15 2015,8:52 am
Maybe I gave him the password? WTF, would I do that, for? Just so he could post using your name to mess with you?Seriously, you need some mental health assistance. That's not meant as an insult, I really believe you should see someone.
Posted by Rosalind_Swenson on Jun. 15 2015,9:27 am
QUOTE
Just so he could post using your name to mess with you?
I think he posted in my name completely by accident, forgetting he was logged into my account when he started replying to my post.
QUOTE
Maybe I gave him the password? WTF, would I do that, for?
No idea, but it's not like you haven't already proven over and over again that you're untrustworthy and you're a liar.
It's your system, your forum, and post 50 was definitely changed from what it originally had been, into something written by jim, so why don't you figure it out.
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 15 2015,9:35 am
Seek help.< http://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/202/Mental-Health-Center >
Posted by Liberal on Jun. 15 2015,10:39 am
Your post from militarized policeQUOTE
Or when one of my comments had been changed and for some reason looked like Jim had written a comment with my account, as if Jim had somehow been in my profile, my account, and mistakenly wrote a comment using MY account. - If I considered myself a victim I might have whined and demanded some sort of answer as to why and how that happened. I just asked if it was some sort of glitch. By the way, I never did get an answer to that question.
Using your own words you clearly see yourself as a victim.
Posted by stardust14 on Jun. 23 2015,1:45 am
Rosalind, we must remember when locals trash Occupy they are really trashing any public protest. McCarthyism lives in AL. As one comment so plainly explained it is okay to bitch and moan privately in the safety of ones curtained home or sleazy bar, but not in open public or when sober as to raise any attention of neighbors, boss, minister, banker--- local black-listers. Public discourse on contentious issues is relegated to highschool clique behavior, as many of these threads show. The fear of exposing true beliefs in group publicly is found in Cons as well as Libs. There is no facist Chamber ordinance outlawing protests. Just fear. The pious pompous defenders of free speech in this thread are blowing hot cyber safe smoke. The cruel comments is one puff of the smoke. Their schizo neurotic lives is another.As far as the integrity of this site my privacy was breeched several years back.
Posted by MADDOG on Jul. 02 2015,8:51 am
QUOTE
< East Tennessee hardware store puts up 'No Gays Allowed' sign >
UPDATE: WEDNESDAY, JULY 1, 2015: A new sign has been posted at Amyx Hardware & Roofing Supplies in Grainger County.
The sign reads, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone who would violate our rights of freedom of speech & freedom of religion."
The sign bears the signature of the store's owner Jeff Amyx.
We'll have more on this story later today on 10News and WBIR.com.
ORIGINAL STORY: (WBIR) An East Tennessee store owner is using what some call a controversial sign to express his beliefs following the Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage.
Several WBIR 10News viewers brought this story to our attention on Facebook.
Jeff Amyx, who owns Amyx Hardware & Roofing Supplies in Grainger County, added the 'No Gays Allowed' sign because gay and lesbian couples are against his religion.
Amyx, who is also a baptist minister, said he realized Monday morning that homosexual people are not afraid to stand for what they believe in. He said it showed him that Christian people should be brave enough to stand for what they believe in.
"They gladly stand for what they believe in, why can't I? They believe their way is right, I believe it's wrong. But yet I'm going to take more persecution than them because I'm standing for what I believe in," Amyx said.
He said he has no plans to take the sign down.
UPDATE: WEDNESDAY, JULY 1, 2015: A new sign has been posted at Amyx Hardware & Roofing Supplies in Grainger County.
The sign reads, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone who would violate our rights of freedom of speech & freedom of religion."
The sign bears the signature of the store's owner Jeff Amyx.
We'll have more on this story later today on 10News and WBIR.com.
ORIGINAL STORY: (WBIR) An East Tennessee store owner is using what some call a controversial sign to express his beliefs following the Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage.
Several WBIR 10News viewers brought this story to our attention on Facebook.
Jeff Amyx, who owns Amyx Hardware & Roofing Supplies in Grainger County, added the 'No Gays Allowed' sign because gay and lesbian couples are against his religion.
Amyx, who is also a baptist minister, said he realized Monday morning that homosexual people are not afraid to stand for what they believe in. He said it showed him that Christian people should be brave enough to stand for what they believe in.
"They gladly stand for what they believe in, why can't I? They believe their way is right, I believe it's wrong. But yet I'm going to take more persecution than them because I'm standing for what I believe in," Amyx said.
He said he has no plans to take the sign down.
< View on YouTube >
Posted by Liberal on Jul. 02 2015,12:11 pm
First gay person he kicks out will contact the ACLU and he'll lose his store, Just like the cake bigot.Funny thing about MD's dislike of gays. It's making wonder if there's a reason I've never seen him with a woman before...
Posted by MADDOG on Jul. 02 2015,1:02 pm
BFD. If the guy wants to protect his right to the first Amendment, more power to him. I think enough people are getting fed up with all this hurt feelings un-natural sex ship. Anymore you don't have to even be a girl to be in the frickin' Girl Scouts. Good grief, get over it. It's about time people start standing up for their beliefs. Caitlin Jenner. Looks like he/she lost the hero status. There's a reason they call them q...
Posted by irisheyes on Jul. 02 2015,1:45 pm
(MADDOG @ Jul. 02 2015,1:02 pm)
QUOTE
BFD. If the guy wants to protect his right to the first Amendment, more power to him. I think enough people are getting fed up with all this hurt feelings un-natural sex ship.
Politicians didn't say they were hateful when they were being prejudiced against blacks either, they said it was states rights. So IMO, he's using the "freedom" thing is as spin instead of admitting to bigotry. I'm just wondering what part of the scripture he's reading though. WWJD? Does he really think Jesus wouldn't sell to someone or even let them in their store because of their orientation?
The message of not throwing the first stone unless you're free of sin seemed to be a pretty clear message, and so is love thy neighbor.
Posted by MADDOG on Jul. 02 2015,3:01 pm
Trying to pen the animal on both sides of the fence doesn't work well. I see what you are trying to say and know where you're leading this. WWJD? Likely treat them kindly as He did at the well when He told the woman to "Go, and sin no more."As for what part of the scripture he's reading, I can't be sure. Nor can you. I can't determine the limits of his faith either.
I Corinthians 5 is rather precise on religious teachings. There are many examples we are given to associate with others of this same faith.
Posted by Common Citizen on Jul. 03 2015,8:58 am
The left has a habit of telling those that disagree with them that they are intolerant, hateful, and judgmental subjecting themselves to hipocracy in the process. If Jesus didn't ask my guess is it's because he didn't have to.
I was talking with a friend the other day on the differences between judging someone or something in a descerning way versus in a condemning way. Two very different things. It's not our place or responsibility to condem someone for their beliefs but it is natural to discern right from wrong based on ones own personal beliefs. Imo.
Posted by Liberal on Jul. 03 2015,5:27 pm
But what do your beliefs have to do with someone else's right to equal protection under the law?
Posted by Expatriate on Jul. 03 2015,6:44 pm