Despite an international outcry over its medieval legal system, Iran has announced a real crowd pleaser: eight women and one man will be stoned to death for adultery. Iran applies Sharia law and will execute them in the name of Islamic justice.
There remain a few unstoned women who are fighting against such outrages. One is Shadi Sadr. Her colleague, Mohammad Mostafai represents one woman, Malak Qorbani, whom he insisted plead guilty to adultery even though she did not know the meaning of the charge. That would seem likely since the penalty is stoning.
Stoning remains the rage among Islamic countries who continue to mete out religious codes through their court systems, click here and here .
Next time, when you don’t know what someone means by a term, even such difficult and elusive ones like “CITIZENS OVERSIGHT”, try “asking them.
Instead of CHANGING their words because your fat pompous ass thinks it knows what they meant better than they did themselves.
Then I could have explained to you, that CITIZENS OVERSIGHT would be the oversight of the COMMUNITY over the law enforcement agencies who police them.
😐
Since you couldn’t put that rubik’s cube together on your own.
Porky says, ‘That’s All Folks!’
See, I however, you pompous pinheaded prick, wasn’t talking about “NACOLE”.
Because unlike you, I already knew about NACOLE, and maybe even am a member.
I said, jackass, “CITIZENS OVERSIGHT”, because I MEANT “CITIZENS OVERSIGHT”.
If I had MEANT “Civilian Oversight”, I would have said it.
Dumbass.
The Messpot said…
no one disagrees with civilian oversight.
That’s why we have local and state governments composed of elected officials
😐
Wrong pinhead.
Thats why we’ve got organizations like “NACOLE”.
😀
Or have you never heard of the National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement?
Formed by PRIVATE CITIZENS, and they don’t constitute a STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, dipsh$t.
Oh messpo, reduced to calling me a “pig” now?
I’m not the one who told you to show us all your own stupidity, in proclaiming either “CITIZEN OVERSIGHT” or “CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT” = “GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT.
😐
That was your call, skippy.
Bartlebee recommenends “CITIZEN OVERSIGHT”.
Messpo, CHANGES Bartlebee’s words from “CITIZEN OVERSIGHT”, to “CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT”.
Why you ask?
Why because mespo proclaims he knows better than Bartlebee what Bartlebee is thinking.
😀
Now whats really funny, is that even being busted in creating a straw argument, he still proclaims that a CITIZENS OVERSIGHT means “GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT”.
And THATS funny stuff.
Patty C:
You are right again. I cannot teach this pig to sing, and worse yet it’s annoying even me.
Here, let me help since you’ve successfully buried his folly.
😀
I’ll repost it.
Bartlebee first said;
BARTLEBEE
1, July 22, 2008 at 10:57 pm
And until we get CITIZEN OVERSIGHT of the enforcement agencies that rule our communities, nothing is going to change.
Then, several minutes later, messpo responded saying;
mespo727272
1, July 22, 2008 at 11:17 pm
no one disagrees with civilian oversight.
That’s why we have local and state governments composed of elected officials
There now. Isn’t that a little clearer?
And whats really funny, is she shoots down your crumbling, untenable spin with her defintion, of civilian.
By ‘citizen’, I suspect what is really meant is ‘lay person’
ie nonprofessional, nongovernmental, and/or generally unqualified
in law enforcement – possibly even self-appointed…
Uhhh….no Patty. By “citizen”, messpo means State and Local Government.
Try reading what he actually wrote, before you come in to wave your pom poms over it.
Ahh, and there it is.
Patty C comes to run interference.
The lawyers case founders, and here comes Patty.
Not one refutation or point made, just “mespo wins! Bartlebee loses!” declarations.
😐
You two should consider getting a room.
Excellent presentation, Counselor!
Alas, I suspect the remedy sought is even more pathetic.
By ‘citizen’, I suspect what is really meant is ‘lay person’
ie nonprofessional, nongovernmental, and/or generally unqualified
in law enforcement – possibly even self-appointed…
mespo727272
1, July 24, 2008 at 12:16 am
Like russ, I think that I shall never see one as dumb as Bartlebee.
That you are “like russ”, is not in doubt here. That fact I believe I have well established.
As for being dumb, if you mean thinking that the term “CITIZEN”, or “CIVILIAN” for that matter, when speaking in regards to the State and Local government, must by definition indicate someone “other than” the State and Local Government…. then… er….yea. I’m really dumb.
😐
And you’re really smart.
So “Citizen Oversight” = “Civilian Oversight” = “Government Oversight”.
😮
In your “legal dictionary”, you’re telling me, that the legal definition of the term “Citizen” or even “Civilian”, when used in context of the criminal justice system is defined as the “State and Local Government”?
THATS your answer?
wow.
😐
You Lawyers must go to school a long time to learn stuff like that, huh?
Like russ, I think that I shall never see one as dumb as Bartlebee.
uhh…mr Lawyer sir…?
… do I have to pay you for this …er… “advice”?
😐
If so, I hope you bill on the quarter hour.
And even if I did mean “Citizens Oversight”, it would still refer to the the State and Local Government?
😐
But I didn’t mean that…. so “Civilian Oversight” is what I “really meant”, and that STILL means, “State and Local Government Oversight”?
:\
My heads starting to hurt..
So I didn’t mean Citizens Oversight?
😐
Even though I said….. “Citizens Oversight”?
Heck I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt and accept you may have “accidently” changed my term, instead of trying to just change them and act as if it was I said.
But since you admit you took my words, twisted them, simply so you could launch a grammatical straw argument, I guess that birds pretty much flown the coop.
So you admit changing my words, because by in your own mind, you think you know what I really think, better than me.
—
mespo727272
1, July 23, 2008 at 11:50 pm
My point was that you actually meant “civilian oversight” when you said “citizen oversight
—-
Sorry, I’m just musing on the level of pompous assness required to make such a declaration.
😐
You knew, what I “meant”, better than I did?
And that was that I meant to use the word “civilian”, when I said “citizen”.
😐
And the word “civilian”, ….actually means State and Local Government.
😐
Wow.
mespo727272
1, July 23, 2008 at 11:50 pm
I know this is tough stuff for you so I will go very slowly.
My point was that you actually meant “civilian oversight” when you said “citizen oversight
😀
So now, your position is, that you admit what I accused you of earlier, that is, trying to mold MY position so you could more easily argue against it by creating a straw argument?
You are now telling us, that you PURPOSELY took my word “CITIZENS OVERSIGHT”, turned it into “CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT”?
Thats where you want to go?
😀
Man, you’ve tossed the shovel and moved on to the jack hammer, ay slick?
bartles:
“That means the “Citizen Patrols” in your neighborhood, are actually performed by the Police?”
******************
Of course those two categories are not congruent. One is a subcategory of the other. That all policeman are citizens does not imply that all citizens are policemen. I know this is tough stuff for you so I will go very slowly.
My point was that you actually meant “civilian oversight” when you said “citizen oversight” Not wanting to further embarrass you I let it go and just corrected it since everyone knows that if you really want “citizen oversight” you already have it because the cops who oversee other cops are already “citizens.” What I suspect you meant to say was that you wanted “civilian” as in non-cop oversight as per the definition of “civilian” above. If so, I pointed out that our elected officials meet the definition of civilians because the vast majority are neither police nor members of the active armed forces.