Comments on: White House vs. Whistleblowers Debate: NWC Accepts Invitation, White House Declines

By: Sibel Edmonds

Sibel Edmonds — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 18:18:26 +0000

@Cinderman: “the Manchurian Candidate”- Perfectly sums up Obama. Chris Hedges had a very good description of it within the ‘ad campaign’ context…

By: cinderman

cinderman — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 04:04:05 +0000

At this point does anyone even begin to believe one iota of Mr. King of the Teleprompter, aka President Obama? He was total bs from the get go, and everyone (except the republican thugs) bought into this made from hollyweird candidate for president. The only thing he validated was “the manchurian candidate.” I suggest everyone here to at least read the book, or if you’re too lazy, watch both the movies. One doesn’t just come out of political obscurity and becomes president of the US without some heavy outside influence manipulating things. But the populace is so lazy they won’t even bother to google “obama + cia.” Enough said. Go do your homework. He’s a sleazebag whore for the NWO and the neocon agenda for global domination. Really, do you trust a “leader” of this country who’s also an admitted nicotine addict? He’s just another professional liar. You know every time he parts his lips and mutters the trash that he does!

By: JamesLaffrey

JamesLaffrey — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 05:51:55 +0000

remo, I agree with your sentiments for justice here.

I’d like to add a somewhat different point of view, though, in regard to what we are all a part of.

We The People are not to blame. We have been lied to by our government for our whole lives. And our parents were lied to by our government for their whole lives. Our major media have helped the government in the lies and cover-ups, in the misleading of us, for our entire lives. And now the government has added counter-blogging.

Since we are denied the information we need — and deserve — to make reasonably informed decisions in our “democracy,” we cannot be blamed for the misinformed decisions we make. And so we should not be blamed for the criminal actions of our fully corrupted government, who continue to commit the crimes no matter what we say or do.

Not all the people have the time to sort out what’s true, maybe true, and false. Some of us have the time and ability to do that, especially thanks to independent sources on the Internet. The Internet helps us do it more quickly than ever before.

Therefore, it’s going to be a minority of us who sort it out. And then it’s going to be a minority of us who help lead the busy majority to the goal we share: a true representative democracy.

Then, after we’ve established that democracy (and not before), will we get the trials you rightly call for and the justice you rightly call for.

And only then will our heroic whistle-blowers get the support and acclaim they richly deserve.

By: remo

remo — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 07:27:17 +0000

yes. we are all ‘part of it’, by that definition. willing or unwilling. By virtue of the fact we live here. But the war WAS on trial. Should BE on trial in every democracy on the planet. The trespass and vandalism of Afghanistan and Iraq is what should be on trial.

By: Kingfisher

Kingfisher — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 04:39:35 +0000

“Prosecution can’t appeal. That’s double jeopardy.”
Apparently not in New Zealand:
http://www.3news.co.nz/Waihopai-trio-may-yet-face-new-trial/tabid/423/articleID/147048/Default.aspx

“maybe the jury understands the essential wrongness of an illegal war, as I said. which is surely the point? The war is illegal. Based on lies. WMD are lies. 911 is a lie. Nobody ‘gets got’ for the biggies. a promotion more like, and the spybase is part of that.”
The war was not on trial; they were. They trespassed and committed serious vandalism.

“So its a peoples verdict of conscience, saying what they can, when they can, how they can: an act of respect for the lives already LOST, rather than in fear for those could be jeopardized because of it.”
The defendants pay taxes don’t they? So do the jurors, right? New Zealand is a democracy, correct? Then using some of the logic employed here, that would then make both the defendants and the jurors “part of that” wouldn’t it?

By: thewolfpacktravels

thewolfpacktravels — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:05:15 +0000

Prosecution can’t appeal. That’s double jeopardy. However, there has to be more to it than “greater good.” Any action can be pawned off on that defense. In fact, that’s how they brainwashed Nazis to be come psychopathic killers in concentration camps. I find that defense very vague, especially going against a government looking for blood. I’d like the exact precedent they used for this case.

Regarding Mr. Eisen, it’s not going to happen. He’s going to hide under a rock and let this blow over. I doubt you’ll even get in touch with him.

By: remo

remo — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 02:39:21 +0000

Well, there we are, Kingfisher. Time to disagree. The ‘greater good’ must be something greater in the good than can be referenced by present global terror politics. maybe the jury understands the essential wrongness of an illegal war, as I said. which is surely the point? The war is illegal. Based on lies. WMD are lies. 911 is a lie. Nobody ‘gets got’ for the biggies. a promotion more like, and the spybase is part of that. So its a peoples verdict of conscience, saying what they can, when they can, how they can: an act of respect for the lives already LOST, rather than in fear for those could be jeopardized because of it.

By: remo

remo — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 02:35:32 +0000

Well, there we are. Time to disagree. The ‘greater good’ must be something greater in the good than can be referenced by present global terror politics. maybe the jury understands the essential wrongness of an illegal war, as I said. which is surely the point? The war is illegal. Based on lies. WMD are lies. 911 too. Nobody gets got for the big lies – a promotion more like, and the spybase is part of all that, so maybe its a peoples verdict of conscience, saying what they can, when they can, how they can: an act of respect for the lives already LOST, rather than in fear for those could be jeopardized because of it. A recognition of injustice. Its a good sign.

By: Kingfisher

Kingfisher — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:57:46 +0000

Don’t know much about the Kiwi legal system, but I have a hard time believing that that defense is going to stand up to appeal. Also don’t see how their actions were for “the greater good”, it could just as easily have jeopardized lives.

By: remo

remo — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:42:47 +0000

Since probably we will be waiting some time before Mr Eisen gets back to you with the next excuse for not fronting, readers might be interested to hear in Wellington NZ, three men who 2 years ago broke into and exposed the Echelon spybase satellite dish by piercing its inflatable ‘security’ balloon with sickles, have been found not guilty of all charges by jury.
It was found the three men acted in the ‘greater good’. That proof of the part the spybase information relay played in the illegal Iraq war, and subsequent murder of tens of thousands of civilians, was enough to warrant the actions as right and proper.