Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why don't you read the article first? According to the article posted by Moose, the "reporter" shoved a person there. He was also detained for trespassing (according to the article).
Also, according to the article, The Attorney General will decide if the person was trespassing or not, not me nor anybody else in this forum. So, those of you who are defending the "possible" trespasser are just as wrong as I am by defending the security guard who detained the reporter. Why? Because it's not you nor I who decides if the reporter was trespassing or not.
It will not be up to "The Attorney General" to decide. it is up to the local District Attorney's office. Also note that the police officer wasn't going to touch that one with a ten foot pole! And if you think there's a chance any DA in Alaska would take such a charge to court... I've got some beach property and a bridge to sell you!
Quote:
And if any of you don't believe that "trespassing" is not possible in public places, go ahead and spend some time hanging around the school playground during recess.
And just as with that case, there necessarily has to be more to it than you are stating. Just "hanging around" is never sufficent cause for trespassing in a public place (which a school playground during recess is not).
Trespass in a public place follows from refusing to leave when lawfully ordered to do so, not from "hanging around".
Quote:
By the way-and I am assuming again-it's very possible that the "reporter" accused of trespassing will also be charged with assault, and also, it's very possible that the same reporter is one who has been following Miller around Alaska with his little camcorder.
Ha! That isn't going to happen.
What could happen, according to details in the ADN article, is that two or more of Miller's security people will be charged with assault (or kidnapping for that matter). Here is what was reported, "After Miller walked away, Hopfinger said, he was surrounded by Miller supporters and security guards and felt threatened, so he pushed one of them away." The "felt threatened" is the key phrase in regard to an assault. There clearly is evidence that the guards assaulted the reporter, but there is no evidence that the reporter assaulted anyone. Physical contract in a crowd does not rise to the level of an assault; but surrounding someone and not allowing them to move is an assault if it frightens the person. And note that if even one of those involved suggests that Miller was aware of what they were going to do, then Miller could be charged with both assault and kidnapping, but also conspiracy to commit those crimes. Any lawyer who thinks giving the order to go ahead and then walking off is protection from criminal charges is headed for a lot of trouble with ethics... where Joe Miller already has a long history!
Quote:
We will have to wait and see. If I am wrong, then I will admit of being so.
You may as well fess up right now, because you didn't get the facts correct and clearly have no perception (recall: the facts) of what the significance of any of this is. Do you even know what a District Attorney is, as compared to an Attorney General?
I just got back from my week in Eastern Pennsylvania and I heard a lot of different opinions around many discussion tables. There were over 20,000 people at the meet so it was a minuscule population to use as a base for any statistics but it does show what people who have done well enough in life to take a week off and travel long distances to gather with friends and people with a similar interest.
Good points, but I will suggest to you that people who don’t do so well in life do the same things. Also, such things are done mostly for self-gratification. And no, I don’t find anything wrong with something that brings one a little happiness.
Quote:
The first observation I have to make is I found few people with Ray's spiel. For the most part I'd classify the group as above average in income and many are better educated then in usual populations. In one group I felt like the loser being everyone had more and higher degrees than I did. However one person in that group was parroting a spiel that sounded exactly like Ray. I almost asked to see his cheat sheet to make a copy so I could post it here with the exact words Ray uses.
In other words, you saw people, some rich, and some not as rich, much like a cross-sectional view of your neighborhood, for example. But here is where things can get tricky, for your perceptions led you to believe that that was the case. The problem with such a view of others is that, in general, one’s perceptions are a projection of oneself. What you see in others is nothing more than a projection of your own feelings. You just don’t realize it at the moment.
Quote:
But over all it seemed almost everyone was of an opinion that the economy was down because a rotten administration followed a good one leaving the present one to clean up the mess. And the general consensus was it's going to take longer than we'll like to fix this mess. The best one I heard was from some of the retired military who thought it was only right to bring the entire population up to their medical care level which several noted was still below the Congressional or Federal employee level. One postulated that if the TPeeres had their way the military might lose their health benefits.
My view on the state of our economy is as follows: It takes two to tango. In this case, both the Republicans and Democrats who have been in charge in previous administrations, and now. It’s they the ones who create the laws relating to every aspect of the national economy. While the previous administration created the largest government and budgets ever, the present administration tripled it instead of reducing it.
By the way, I served in the military for over 20 years, and retired back in 1994 at the age of 46. I had accrued 90 days of leave, so instead of "signing out" I took terminal leave and got another job in town. I worked at that job for a period of one year, and then moved up to a better job. I have worked for over 15 years at this job, and plan to retire soon. However I work over 16 hours per day, at this job plus another part-time job.
Quote:
That was when I though to my self that's never been part of Ray's arguments. He's like Miller; If it's good for me then it's we need to keep it.
There is no way possible to know how another person is. Even knowing oneself is not possible for most of us since we always change. How can you tell what Miller is? How can you tell what I am unless you are God? You can be married to the same person for 50 years and still not know the person fully. What you know is what you choose to know, good or bad. But it does not mean that what you know is true; all you know is your perceptions of the other person. In a counseling interview of a couple that is arguing with each other, each one tells a different view of the other. In fact couples are highly surprised when hearing what the other person believes one the other is like.
Quote:
But the surprise was since some of them knew I had moved to Alaska I was asked what was wrong with those people up there? I replied that I didn't think all of them were that way and I'll leave it to the individuals to determine what that means to each of you.
How about turning the question around? Can you ask of them “what is wrong with those people down there?”
See, not too people are the same. Who’s is right or who’s wrong depends on with side one stands on.
Ray I really wish you wouldn't come on so strong with your answers. In this case even surrounding the reporter and interfering with his freedom of movement could be construed as false imprisonment or kidnapping. In some jurisdictions hindering someones freedom of movement, or what we might construe as escaping the crowd, is called holding a hostage which is kidnapping. Also there are several people who had come forward when I wrote my comment and they definitely were saying as witnesses to the event, and their descriptions of what they had seen, wouldn't have convicted the reporter but would have convicted the gang (And I use the word gang in it's worst context) of the appropriate felony. Actually the act of creating a threat which the oppressed party believes to be true, and is afraid for their safety, constitutes assault. Actually touching and hindering freedom of movement is battery which is an even higher felony and committing an act which creates the fear and then committing the overt act, of making physical contact, is assault and battery which could be charged as assault and battery which is both crimes. That the person was handcuffed is an act that might just be something Joe might wish would go away. From what I read a few minutes ago the witnesses are making that claim about the facts in the case.
Now if Joe is found to have any prior knowledge of what was going to happen he could be guilty of being an accessory before the fact which lead up to the crime, or even worse having conspired in the planning of a crime and also as a vicarious participant, even though he walked away when the gang started committing the crime. So based on what testimony is available right now Joe, even if he wins the election, could be denied his seat in the next Congress because of his active participation in a crime.
My concern now is what kind of individual would make such a grandiose play which seems to involve moral turpitude leading up to such a Constitutional affront to the reporter? Is a person who is incapable of controlling his behavior worthy of receiving any of our votes for high elective office? Is this an indication of his innate character? Is his aggression possibly capable of following a long ago precedent which lead to one Senator caning another Senator, who disagreed with the malefactor, almost to death on the Senate Floor? Is this kind of person who we desire as our elected Representative, from Alaska, showing how people who come to Alaska from elsewhere are allowed to act when they flee to this State?
What I'm trying to point out to you Ray is be careful what you wish for you might not like it if it were to come to pass. Here is a Constitutional issue this Constitutional scholar should know enough about to avoid even the implication. Remember Cesar's wife should never do anything which might be thought of as unbecoming Cesar's wife's position in life.
I'll remember to ask for the apology should that possibility come to fruition. And if the event should come to pass I'll be sure to remember every anniversary maybe even down to the year, month, week, day, hour, and maybe minutes and seconds. Even you wouldn't wish for that.
What these people want bears no resemblance to truth or integrity. They do not even want to be right. They worship control. Control of the facts, control of the time place and even what questions are asked. They are devout followers of trickery which elevates them over others. Control for control's sake. The only way to deal with them is to embarrass and expose them for what they are. Like alcoholics control is the drug that fuels their desires. They look for it strive for it and take it. This reporter is going to sue them and he is going to win. The DA will press false imprisonment charges against the two brown shirted thugs. Take a really good look people. This is what fascism looks like when it comes softly over the horizon.
Ray I really wish you wouldn't come on so strong with your answers. In this case even surrounding the reporter and interfering with his freedom of movement could be construed as false imprisonment or kidnapping. In some jurisdictions hindering someones freedom of movement, or what we might construe as escaping the crowd, is called holding a hostage which is kidnapping. Also there are several people who had come forward when I wrote my comment and they definitely were saying as witnesses to the event, and their descriptions of what they had seen, wouldn't have convicted the reporter but would have convicted the gang (And I use the word gang in it's worst context) of the appropriate felony. Actually the act of creating a threat which the oppressed party believes to be true, and is afraid for their safety, constitutes assault. Actually touching and hindering freedom of movement is battery which is an even higher felony and committing an act which creates the fear and then committing the overt act, of making physical contact, is assault and battery which could be charged as assault and battery which is both crimes. That the person was handcuffed is an act that might just be something Joe might wish would go away. From what I read a few minutes ago the witnesses are making that claim about the facts in the case.
Now if Joe is found to have any prior knowledge of what was going to happen he could be guilty of being an accessory before the fact which lead up to the crime, or even worse having conspired in the planning of a crime and also as a vicarious participant, even though he walked away when the gang started committing the crime. So based on what testimony is available right now Joe, even if he wins the election, could be denied his seat in the next Congress because of his active participation in a crime.
My concern now is what kind of individual would make such a grandiose play which seems to involve moral turpitude leading up to such a Constitutional affront to the reporter? Is a person who is incapable of controlling his behavior worthy of receiving any of our votes for high elective office? Is this an indication of his innate character? Is his aggression possibly capable of following a long ago precedent which lead to one Senator caning another Senator, who disagreed with the malefactor, almost to death on the Senate Floor? Is this kind of person who we desire as our elected Representative, from Alaska, showing how people who come to Alaska from elsewhere are allowed to act when they flee to this State?
What I'm trying to point out to you Ray is be careful what you wish for you might not like it if it were to come to pass. Here is a Constitutional issue this Constitutional scholar should know enough about to avoid even the implication. Remember Cesar's wife should never do anything which might be thought of as unbecoming Cesar's wife's position in life.
I'll remember to ask for the apology should that possibility come to fruition. And if the event should come to pass I'll be sure to remember every anniversary maybe even down to the year, month, week, day, hour, and maybe minutes and seconds. Even you wouldn't wish for that.
According to the article, the original one posted by Moose. The reporter was detained because of trespassing. Also, according to the same article, the police said that it was to the DA to determine if is was case of trespassing or not. It's as simple as that.
Yes I came up strong about it, and perhaps I should have said, "if it's true that the reporter was trespassing, it serves him well, and hope he gets a couple of days in jail." However, I don't think it would have made a difference one way or another at this forum where most posters oppose Miller.
In relation to with way this case will go, we will still have to wait and see for we can't tell the future. According to this article, Miller had rented the school room for the event, so he could very well decided to press trespassing charges against the photographer, since he (the picture taker) wasn't invited to the event: http://newsminer.com/view/full_story...w_left_bullets
What these people want bears no resemblance to truth or integrity. They do not even want to be right. They worship control. Control of the facts, control of the time place and even what questions are asked. They are devout followers of trickery which elevates them over others. Control for control's sake. The only way to deal with them is to embarrass and expose them for what they are. Like alcoholics control is the drug that fuels their desires. They look for it strive for it and take it. This reporter is going to sue them and he is going to win. The DA will press false imprisonment charges against the two brown shirted thugs. Take a really good look people. This is what fascism looks like when it comes softly over the horizon.
All of those who have control don't want to release it (Lisa plus all others who have it), and all of those who don't have the same control wish to have it (Miller, and and others who want it). There is no difference between the two (Lisa and Miller), except that one has been in power for awhile (Lisa) and has become part of the same corrupt group of incumbents who are now fighting to maintain their control. Miller? I give him the benefit of the doubt. Lisa? I already know her record in Congress.
What these people want bears no resemblance to truth or integrity. They do not even want to be right. They worship control. Control of the facts, control of the time place and even what questions are asked. They are devout followers of trickery which elevates them over others. Control for control's sake. The only way to deal with them is to embarrass and expose them for what they are. Like alcoholics control is the drug that fuels their desires. They look for it strive for it and take it. This reporter is going to sue them and he is going to win. The DA will press false imprisonment charges against the two brown shirted thugs. Take a really good look people. This is what fascism looks like when it comes softly over the horizon.
This is what fascism looks like when it comes softly over the horizon.Those who do not remember their history are bound to repeat it.
[quote=AADAD;16312101]What these people want bears no resemblance to truth or integrity. They do not even want to be right. They worship control. Control of the facts, control of the time place and even what questions are asked. They are devout followers of trickery which elevates them over others. Control for control's sake. The only way to deal with them is to embarrass and expose them for what they are. Like alcoholics control is the drug that fuels their desires. They look for it strive for it and take it. This reporter is going to sue them and he is going to win. The DA will press false imprisonment charges against the two brown shirted thugs. Take a really good look people. This is what fascism looks like when it comes softly over the horizon.
This is what fascism looks like when it comes softly over the horizon Today reading reports about former Attorney General John ******** (of the Bush administration) and the unlawful detainment case being decided, I thought this case is another example of how the greatest democracy in the world has stepped one step closer to fascism.
This is not a conservative vs. liberal vs. teabagger vs. independent issue at all. We as Americansare so busy fighting each other that the powers that be are getting away with undermining, selling off and destroying any resemblence to what this country has stood for. I suspect Germany and many other countries have stood at the same crossroads we stand at now. As American citizens we better think long and hard about the slippery slope we are standing on.
First off the article does not say that the reporter was not invited to the event; but does say that the "press" was invited (and that would include the reporter). Anchorage Police Lt Dave Parker is quoted in the article as saying, "If the press is invited, they have every right to be there," and there is no indication that anyone notified the reporter that he was not included.
Second problem though... The "arrest" was made in an area that was not rented to Miller for the event. Miller's people had no right to refuse access to that area, in fact Miller's people had no right to be in that area!
Third, Miller's goon squad had no obvious identification, and they repeatedly refused to identify themselves or who they worked for. That means they had no status that allowed them to tell anyone to leave.
Fourth problem is that the goon squad clearly lied. They claimed the reporter shoved someone against a locker; but the police said that they found no indications that had happened. Nobody claimed the had been shoved against the lockers, and nobody said they saw anyone else shoved like that.
The fifth, and the most serious problem, is the claim by Miller that he was required by the contract to rent the facility to have the security squad he hired. This is an attorney making up pure bull crap. This is a guy who claims to understand our Constitution! The school district spokesperson says the contract requires a security plan, not a goon squad. They need a parking lot monitor! And someone at the door to enforce school policy! And they are supposed to start off with a short statement to everyone outlining a set of simple rules, but did not do that.
An attorney who can't see the difference between a security plan involving a parking lot monitor and a goon squad that puts handcuffs on people for disagreeing with Miller, especially after Miller cites border guards in East Germany shooting citizens as an example for the US to follow is not what we should be sending to the US Senate.
All of those who have control don't want to release it (Lisa plus all others who have it), and all of those who don't have the same control wish to have it (Miller, and and others who want it). There is no difference between the two (Lisa and Miller), except that one has been in power for awhile (Lisa) and has become part of the same corrupt group of incumbents who are now fighting to maintain their control. Miller? I give him the benefit of the doubt. Lisa? I already know her record in Congress.
Again, the point of the article and my post are elusive to you. That's ok. Just don't assume that you are correct....K??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Today reading reports about former Attorney General John ******** (of the Bush administration) and the unlawful detainment case being decided, I thought this case is another example of how the greatest democracy in the world has stepped one step closer to fascism. 
