March 09, 2005
Leonard Resolution On JTTF Reportedly Expected 'Soon'
Meanwhile, Continued Silence From City Attorney On Training Issue
Earlier this week, Commissioner Randy Leonard met with Mayor Tom Potter for what Leonard called "an excellent discussion". Leonard has been working on a proposal to establish certain criteria which the Federal Bureau of Investigation would have to meet in order for the City to assign officers to the Joint Terrorism Task Force.
Leonard said that he and the Mayor agreed that more work needed to be done with both other members of the Council and and other groups before he and Potter would jointly introduce the resolution.
"Mayor Potter and I are focused on making sure we do as much advance work as possible," said Leonard, "so that when the backlash that will inevitably occur upon the resolution's introduction, we will have, hopefully, anticipated the various criticisms and made changes to the resolution to address those concerns."
Currently, we know what KGW reported last week, which is that it says the Mayor and Chief must supervise officers assigned to the JTTF, the cost of police participation in the JTTF would be covered by the Feds, and that the FBI must recognize that Portland's officers cannot investigation people for their political beliefs.
Or, rather, we know that's where the proposal stood at that time. Since then, Potter has made some additions, and as indicated above, discussions continue. What we also currently know is that while Leonard is unable to offer a specific date by which the proposal will be ready, he does say that he expects it to be "soon".
All of which brings us back to the question we've been asking over the past several weeks: Just what are the current oversight procedures for officers assigned to the JTTF?
As we've recently reported and argued, in essence nothing about those oversight procedures is known until and unless we know what training the City Attorney's office provides to JTTF-assigned officers regarding the provisions of ORS 181.575 and ORS 181.850. That training is required by the Mayor's PJTTF Oversight Protocol as established by former Mayor Vera Katz.
Unfortunately, as of this posting, the inquiries we've thus far sent to the City Attorney's office have elicited no response.
For the record: One of those inquiries, sent directly to the Deputy City Attorney responsible for providing that training, was sent only yesterday (we only just discovered we had his direct contact information). As such, we are not yet including that request in our frustration.
However, two prior inquires regarding this training, directed to the City Attorney's office administrator were initiated on February 28 and March 3. These remain unanswered and unacknowledged after seven and four business days, respectively.
Since oversight of JTTF-assigned officers appears to be almost entirely dependent upon those officers putting that training to use by self-certifying that they are in compliance with Oregon law, the continuing silence from the City Attorney's office means the public's understanding of current procedures remains noticeably -- and impermissibly -- incomplete.
Comments (28)
allehseya on 09 Mar 2005
I'm just glad that Commissioner Leonard and Mayor Potter are working on it together -- I think they complement each others concerns and am curious to see the resolution and how it addresses b!X' concern:
Clarity on the oversight procedures for officers assigned to the JTTF.
I fear the issue is too easily dismissed and clarity may not be provided with some lop-sided logic along the lines of "the public doesnt need to know as it would compromise security" or such argument.
The One True b!X on 09 Mar 2005
I fear the issue is too easily dismissed and clarity may not be provided with some lop-sided logic along the lines of "the public doesnt need to know as it would compromise security" or such argument.
That argument would be a non-starter. Since the only thing really left at issue is the training provided by the City Attorney's office, there is not security concern. No one in that office has security clearances regarding the JTTF, and simply would be supplying some sort of information regarding Oregon law to the JTTF-assigned officers.
Jack Peek on 09 Mar 2005
said Leonard, "so that when the backlash that will inevitably occur upon the resolution's introduction, we will have, hopefully, anticipated the various criticisms and made changes to the resolution to address those concerns."
Oh, leave it to me too spoil the "good feelings' about Randy's work.
The "DAMN BASICS" hello, we have a drought coming, what a good time for somebody in city hall with some brains to say..."Lets conserve water!" Lets do something for once before we have ...you know, like no water!
You "people" (boy, will I catch hell for that from Doretta) need to get out of the extremo/political thinking and ask our electeds to do the basics. We think too much in Portland, we think we are better then the rest of the country..the arrogance shows everyday.
I want a person like Leonard or Potter to stop, (OH PLEASE STOP THE SYMBOLISM FOR EVERY ISSUE OUTSIDE OF PDX) Spend the dollars like there the last, review line item budgets ,sell off things not in use, buy a basic car for staff use...not a damn SUV, STAY HOME, limit travel(junkets to sister cities)stop with the crap ,manage their jobs so we can point to a new paved street, and less sewage in the river(yes I KNOW ABOUT THE BIG DIG) How many yrs did that take too start?
Gee...can you see a pattern here? I want RANDY off the list of people to replace next election, he is tough, direct, and except for running from one issue...he could be a great mayor.
Leave the JTTF ALONE........we have issues directly related to the betterment of this city, that are left hanging because of the time wasted on this...Don't think I can't find enough votes for a candidate that will go to work on city business each day next time around.
People who want these things are working now for the repalcement of Diane linn, the list of people that can be replaced will grow if that JTTF relation ship is stopped or diluted.
So...go ahead, explode all over yourselfs attacking me....You don't get it and you never will. Doretta...lunch is at my place on me, we can eat in my backyard...perhaps I can introduce you to "The new neighbor" you will find them OK as long as they have their medication.
William on 10 Mar 2005
"I , (name), do solemnly (affirm or swear) I will support the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Oregon; Charter of the City of Portland and its laws; I will faithfully, honestly and ethically perform my duties as (Mayor/Commissioner/Auditor); I have no undisclosed financial interest in any business located in Portland or having contracts with the City; I hold no other office or position of profit; and I am not a member of any partisan political committee (; so help me God)."
Oops. Demanding proper oversight for the JTTF isn't their job... how?
Understand that all this "extremo/political" concern about the JTTF is driven by concern for people's rights. aka: Constitutional rights. aka: "the betterment of this city". Helping the terrorists win by willingly surrendering our rights is something our founding fathers would abhor.
The One True b!X on 10 Mar 2005
...something our founding fathers would abhor.
To be fair here, it's more accurate to say that to do so would be an abhorrance to the principles the founding fathers helpfully enshrined.
They themselves were not quite so pure, as evidenced by, say, the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Which is precisely why I keep hammering the point about being a nation of laws and not of men. The cult of personality is irrelevant to the protection of rights. What's relevant to the protection of rights is ensuring they are respected.
Jack Peek on 10 Mar 2005
Helping the terrorists win by willingly surrendering our rights is something our founding fathers would abhor.
'WHAT RIGHTS WILLIAM, HAVE YOU LOST IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERROR?
AS USUAL.....the rights deal, sure that is fine, but I will continue to repete the same "old song"...Right's good, not needed if someone that I cannot call by a name that is not PC in this town finds a way to"POISON THE WATER" "MARYTR HIM OR HERSELF WITH A BOMB IN A SCHOOL", "KILL ALOT OF PEOPLE IN PIONEER SQUARE ON FRIDAYS PEACE MARCHS",KNOCK OFF A TRI-MET BUS", "TAKE OVER A MAX TRAIN AN RUN A REDLIGHT" (oh crap, that has already been done)...the chances are many, the ability to do this if we dilute the ability to stop it are few.
The oversight question...give me a break, you people, I HAVE BEGGED...CAJOLED, SCREAMED...THREATENED...just about everybody for oversight of the people that manage the "difficult to place, "YES, JACK, they are dangerous!" criminally insane clients in neighborhoods next to a school....and not a thing has happen except now a lawsuit for the crappy care giving for a client that died in her own excrement. What the hell does it take? A 5th grader at Marysville school?
myrln on 10 Mar 2005
Life is hard, then you die, then they sell your clothes or give them to charity. So in the meantime, I prefer to live my life openly and freely without paranoids screeching to take away the freedoms and rights I have. It is my job to protect those freedoms and rights and to oppose any and all attempts to dilute or remove them.
Those who try and those who are willing to let them be diluted or removed fit exactly within my broader definition of what constitutes a terrorist. Guns and bombs are not a necessity for being a terrorist. Mindless obedience to authority is an effective weapon of destruction (and please note the modifier "mindless" to be clear).
William on 10 Mar 2005
b!X you're always quick to point out that our founding fathers weren't saints. You're quite correct. But what did it mean when they signed the Declaration of Independence? They knew damned well the Brits/East India Company would be coming for them, and that they could live more safely if they chose to allow their freedoms to be encroached. THAT is principle. Be they wealthy sexist classist white male landowners or not, they most certainly were unwilling to sacrifice their freedoms. Though Adams and some of the wrong-headed among them were ok with silencing political dissent, that does not diminish the point that all of them took risks to secure their freedoms (and, yeah, Jefferson and many others opposed Adams and now we hold Jefferson in much higher light). Well, ok. How about "something that many of our founding fathers would abhor"? :)
Jack, I'm outta' time until later. Let me just say, I do know people who have lost rights in the war on terror. Just because you don't have the desire to empathize with wronged innocents does not mean that "we" (and I include you in that "we") haven't lost rights. And as b!X points out, we should have good laws so that, when we're ruled by bad people, democracy won't die. Gotta' run. Will get back w/ you.
Jack Peek on 10 Mar 2005
Guns and bombs are not a necessity for being a terrorist. Mindless obedience to authority is an effective weapon of destruction (and please note the modifier "mindless" to be clear).
"MINDLESS" Those who quickly forgot that a swan dive off the 99th floor of the WTC....IS BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH!
Jack Peek on 10 Mar 2005
A side comment: I'll bet you both would support the new defense excuse for crime in the AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY...."POST TRAMATIC SLAVE SYNDROME
The One True b!X on 10 Mar 2005
Comment number 10 is utterly stupid, irrelevant, and ugly. Cheers, Jack! You've managed to start making an even worse impression as a person than you normally do.
William on 10 Mar 2005
Jack, I give up. There's a whole different reality out there, and you'll never see it the way you're going now. That's too bad for you. Maybe it'll take another 9/11 for you to see how lame Bush's method of fighting terrorism really is. Maybe if there's another 9/11 you'll think that Bush is doing everything right and it's those damned liberals that enabled the terrorists. If only America had eliminated a few more of "their" freedoms, we wouldn't have been hit again.
Just let me know when you want to have a reality-based debate instead of one where I've forgotten the tragedy of 9/11 and think that blacks are entitled to commit crimes.
The One True b!X on 10 Mar 2005
For the sake of context, what Jack is referring to in comment number ten is this trial in which one lawyer representing one client sought to defend that client using that theory.
The concept itself comes from a PSU professor, who, according to that article "found it disheartening and inappropriate that her theory was used in the defense" in the trial in question.
My point is this: If one attorney's use of a professor's psychological theory to defend one client in court is, in Jack Peek's mind "the new defense excuse for crime in the AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY", then Peek is utterly beyond the reach of rational minds.
If I were to take the same bastardization of thought which Jack Peek uses to turn one lawyer defending one client in one case into "the new defense excuse for crime in the AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY" and apply it to him...
...well, then I would think that all men in Portland are cognitively dissonant schizoids who belong in, well, yes, some group home somewhere.
But since I don't draw generalizations about entire classes of people based upon a single example, I would never do that.
tom on 10 Mar 2005
Peek has got to be the worst troll I have seen in ages. If you are going to draw folks into feeding your hate you need to draw them in. Peek's though is as subtle as the jack boot of facism smashing down on the faces of the oppressed over and over and over again.
As for the issue of the Joint Terrorism Task Facists I am honored to be in a city where the debate has been opened up and the citizens can get a voice to stop the Bush plan for the American Occupation Force of Jebus and its war on all things not White Bread and Christian.
Make no mistake, thats some of what we are dealing with under the plethora of attacks on our freedoms. We are a nation of many united for freedom, not for any one religious ideology. Go ahead and belive in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and your version of a Creator, but dont legislate it down the nations throats and dont expect every municiple area to pitch in and help with the Crusade.
Portland, I am proud to be a citizen here. I think it might beinift a Garvyesque program to move them Reds back to a more like minded venue where they can lynch Fags and Coloreds, put all non Christians to the steak and finance thier own jihads into the Holy Land.
But for this Portlander .. Non Serveram
Kick out the Terrorist Task Fascists, Kick out the Freedom Destroying Legislation, Kick out the Jams.
-tom
(there, that should get something maybe a little more creative out of peekerhead)
Jack Peek on 11 Mar 2005
Maybe it'll take another 9/11 for you to see how lame Bush's method of fighting terrorism really is.
The height of stupid...the real "deal" comes out, you "SOBS' are "praying" (I know you're not doing that) for another 911, so you "people" can say,"see, it is all Bush's fault.
You dilute a favorite drink, food, motor oil, what happens? It tastes like crap, your car's engine seizes up, you dilute a method to stop a possible 911 before it happens, you get people killed.
Laws can be diluted like civil rights, but these laws will never be needed again if you aren't there to enforce them, we will be because we stopped these animals in their tracks.
The item an the "slave syndrome" you know where I got that? The information was emailed too me by an African-American prominent in this city, HE WAS OFFENDED......NOT THEY WAY YOU TWO THINK HE WAS EITHER....He is sick of the lame excuses for excusing accountibility for African- American youth. So, next time a tv replay of the WTC is on, don't turn your head,look at it and decide if it were you, "would you rather burn to death, or do a swan dive from 99 floors.
myrln on 11 Mar 2005
Yeah, Jack, it's all a lot like people exploiting the 9/11 attack as their own private post-traumatic stress syndrome to work at stripping Constitutional rights. But for you and other similar exploiters, it's okay to shriek about the danger of people who inist upon protecting the Constitution or to blindly attack those who are a different color or persuasion from you...right? 9/11 makes you do it, right? It's not YOUR fault; the terrorists make you do it. Tell me, have you gotten your Ameriliban membership card yet from Osama ben Bush?
The One True b!X on 11 Mar 2005
He is sick of the lame excuses for excusing accountibility for African- American youth.
And if in the process he thinks, as you do, that the specifics of an isolated case somehow translate into a more generalized "new defense excuse for crime in the AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY", then he's not that bright, no matter what his color.
William on 11 Mar 2005
My new sport: answering Jack with the same logic Jack uses. Juvenile, I know, but how could I resist?
The height of stupid...the real "deal" comes out, you "SOBS' are "praying" (I know you're not doing that) for another 911, so you "people" can say,"see, it is all Bush's fault.
You dilute a favorite drink, food, motor oil, what happens? It tastes like crap, your car's engine seizes up, you dilute a method to stop a possible 911 before it happens, you get people killed.
WE DON'T NEED TO PRAY. Terrorists have to get lucky just once. We have to be right 100% of the time! Since there are so many terrorists, it is just a matter of time before they get us thanks to the terrorist welcome mat you liberals have rolled out.
I propose that the answer is to surrender ALL of our freedoms, and to live as slaves. You dilute a drink and it tastes like crap. You thin your motor oil and it doesn't work as well. So if it's not 100% motor oil, it's not worth JACK! We have 50% of our freedoms left and we need to give them up to be safe. It doesn't work if we do ANYTHING half-assed. If we don't give up every last freedom, we won't be around to appreciate them!
Jack Peek on 11 Mar 2005
You know, there will be a time in the near future, your rears will depend on people that work for your safety and mine/FBI. CIA. COPS, ETC.
The constitution will stand as it has for 200 plus years, you have lost nothing except an election and in 08 you will lose again.
You can "bray" like the icon of your party,an it will sound, not like "great debate" as you say you want....but it will sound like the "ass's you are.
The attacks all over the world by terror groups against us will cease, and most experts are saying the next attacks in size and number will be in the USA.
Your call then will be. why didn't Bush catch these cells? I know, let me tell you, ACLU. MOVEON.ORG, "CAIR"(*Sen. Charles Schumer: "we know [CAIR] has ties to terrorism"...hell,they do, they are welcome in Portland, Oregon anytime!
The groups like those that want us to give Mexico back all we took, those groups will be welcome here, any KOOK,ASSINE,OFF THE WALL GROUP THAT HIDES BEHIND THAT DOCUMENT YOU SAY WE ARE NOT PROTECTING, They sure haven't lost a thing. So, what is your bitch???
But the flag, the bible,the ten commandments are burned, their used to wipe your "dirty rears", but all in the name of free speech, so you haven't lost SH--.
It's racing season, my 500 hp Mustang, that passed DEQ, will for awhile burn up some of those fossil fuels at Woodburn drag strip.
That is another subject I will get nailed for..noise, air pollution, but what I see is away to get out of this city for a couple of hours and really breathe clean air at the strip...because it isn't clean here.
Challenge to "B!X"
Your writing is so slanted ////// LIKE THAT!
Post a request to the "Northeast Intelligence Network,ask them as a resident of this fair city, to send their evaluation of "little Beriut" as a possible sleeper cell city.
Then ask them if any city should leave or dilute the JTTF??? You aren't ready for not will you report the response...I got one!
FYI:
ABC's Dysfunctional Headline
How the Media is Facilitating al Qaeda
by Douglas J. Hagmann, Director
11 March 2005: The headline states "Secret FBI Report Questions Al Qaeda Capabilities," followed by "No 'True' Al Qaeda Sleeper Agents Have Been Found in U.S." The ABC News "exclusive" cites a "secret," 32-page FBI report that implies, based primarily on the sub-headline and not the report content, that al Qaeda sleepers are not in the US because none have been found. The headline does not accurately reflect the most important points of the story or the grim reality of the infiltration of the U.S. by Islamic terrorists.
Apparently, ABC is asking us to disregard the six Muslim men from Lackawanna, New York who were described by CIA Director George Tenant as "the most dangerous bunch inside the United States." We must also disregard the statement made by FBI Director Robert Mueller that they (the six Islamic terrorists from Lackawanna) "could be defined as a sleeper cell ... in terms of capabilities." The "Lackawanna Six" notwithstanding, let's take a look at the more salient content of the report beyond the headline. Excerpted from the report content:
Robert Mueller, stating that the lack of evidence "concerned him:" "I am concerned about what we are not seeing." "The report does cite several cases in which individuals have been seen as potential sleeper agents, including a member of the Saudi Arabian Air Force training at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas."
"A senior al-Qa'ida detainee instructed an operative who is currently in US custody, to settle in the United States with his family and maintain a low profile before eventually conducting an attack."
"Al-Qa'ida operatives have also married US women to obtain US visas and foreign documentation from other countries, according to sensitive reporting." In addition, women and married couples with children are being actively recruited.
Based on the content of the story, the headline is inaccurate and misleading but typical of the media's myopic view of Islamic terrorism. In terms of addressing Islamic based terrorism in the U.S., the media is like the orchestra playing on the deck of the Titanic as it began to sink. As the band played show tunes for the doomed passengers aboard the sinking ship in an attempt to portray some semblance of order and mask the dire situation amid the chaos, today's media is playing a similar tune to downplay the terrorists' presence and long-term objectives.
Rather than admitting that Islamic terrorists have published and promoted detailed instructions on how to infiltrate the infrastructure of the U.S., secure positions of responsibility and trust to later facilitate in its destruction, they urge Americans to accept and embrace such operatives under the color of cultural diversity and religious tolerance. Meanwhile, radical Muslims who publicly portray themselves as "moderates" continue to integrate themselves into the fabric of all levels of American society with nefarious intentions. For the past few decades, they have been adept at using the intrinsic freedoms we enjoy in the U.S. against us, securing positions within our nation's infrastructure. They have gradually and systematically insinuated themselves in our educational system, local and state government, and even in our own military to achieve dominance over our Judeo-Christian foundation and replace it with Sharia law and Islamic ideology.
What is described by the media and others as a patriotic convergence of "moderate Muslims for America" in the wake of 9/11 is, in many cases, a deliberate misrepresentation of their true agenda and is being facilitated by the politically correct who fail to comprehend the peril we face.
Headlines like those propagated by ABC as cited above serves to advance the agenda of our enemy who, contrary to the same headline, are already here.
'BIX, Call Doug Hagman who wrote the above, if you don't,your desire to report the truth fits in with Dan Rather, and like he you should retire.
The One True b!X on 11 Mar 2005
Jack, what in the world could the Northeast Whatever possibly have to say when a secret FBI report already says there are no sleeper cells in the U.S.
Be careful how you answer this one, Jack. You're the one who trusts the FBI. So if you trust them, you must believe they are right that there are no such cells.
If you think they are wrong, then you will be confessing that you think the FBI can't be trusted to be correct. In which case, you're with me and William when we say we need to keep on eye on what the FBI does.
So, as I said, think about how you want to answer this.
The One True b!X on 11 Mar 2005
Ah, I see. You think you already addressed the FBI report. But that's good, because here's my direct question:
If you think the FBI report is bogus, then you believe they are untrustworthy. So, why should we trust them here in Portland?
And there's no evidence in that Northeast Whatever source that proves ABC is somehow lying about the FBI report. All you have is them saying the ABC report is lying. That's not proof, it's assertion.
The One True b!X on 11 Mar 2005
Also, notice what the FBI director was doing. He was trying to turn the fact that they aren't finding any evidence of sleeper cells into proof that there must be sleeper cells, it's just that they are hiding really well.
That's moronic. As is anyone who falls for it. It's the same garbage the administration played out with WMDs, claiming that the fact they weren't there must simply mean he removed them or hid them really well -- until, as it turned out, there's simply weren't any.
It's the same thing. You simply cannot in any rational world argue that the absence of evidence proves there's a threat.
Jack Peek on 11 Mar 2005
Then ask for proof..do that reportor "shi-"
You are not listed as they are with NATO, as a resouce for anti-terror investigation.
You got nothing!
Click here: Northeast Intelligence Network YOU ARE NO REPORTER,
Email the director of the above site, ask him to evaluate the need for the JTTF.
Then really throw him a curve, tell Doug Hagmann, he is killing the Constitution by accessing information that may not be PC in Portland Oregon, but before you do, better read this:
Northeast Intelligence Network Now Listed on NATO Site
9 March 2005: The Northeast Intelligence Network is now listed on the Official NATO STARnet DTIN (NATO Defense Against Terrorism Information Node) webpage. The NATO node is designed to be a single point of access for information pertaining to defense against terrorism interests of NATO elements, NATO member countries, and partner countries. All agencies and organizations are listed in alphabetical order.
The Northeast Intelligence Network is honored to be listed with such intelligence organizations such as the CIA, NSA and a host of government and industry giants. It is a tremendous acknowledgment of which we are very proud.
Is your website///whatever listed as a resourse, what proof do you have Randy Leonard knows what day it is?
Jack Peek on 11 Mar 2005
PS BIXXER....You don't read enough Tom Clancey.
If you seek to bring the "rag"(oops,better not)out of their hole /caves, you put out information that we haven't a clue...both you an the media "swallowed" in deep! EMAIL DOUG HAGMANN, until then you got s---!
William on 11 Mar 2005
I've read some Tom Clancey, in particular a novel where hijackers flew an airplane into a building in which Congress was in session. The President was killed in that attack. In that same book, our leaders were portrayed as trustworthy conservatives, yet we're asked to believe that nobody could have conceived of hijackers using an airplane as a missile. By whom? By "trustworthy" conservative leaders. What do you see when you read Clancey? I get the message loud and clear--Tom Clancey doesn't offer a realistic portrayal of today's American leadership. So why trust the FBI?
As far as Leonard knowing what day it is, I note that he manages to show up where he's supposed to every Wednesday morning...
But of course this is all a non-response to your non-response. Like I said, I give up, and now I'm down to flippant answers with you. You want a debate? Bring some logic to the table. It's already overflowing with your rhetoric.
Jack Peek on 12 Mar 2005
Ask Doug Hagmann what the Joint Terror task force is worth...otherwise your call for debate is a lie.
Jack Peek on 12 Mar 2005
An too you both: A whole country (Great Britian) say's yes to an approach on terror that isn't traditional or PC....a whole country!
They were smart(not dumb like Leonard) to show terrorist(who are not here, as FBI report says,yeah right!)that the country is tough, and will be tough...period, on anyone in the country, who mainifests towards any terror act.
They put a clause in the passed law ,(yes there was debate)to review it. If there is a total resigning as it is now of the Joint terror deal here, with a review, that is then as it should be, then Randy Leonard ,B!X, and WILLIAM, can get back to their job of saving PDX from Jack Peek.
If it goes as I SUSPECT, and all the above mentioned parties "kill" the JTTF as it stands now, then you have a first ladies and gentlemen, an open door to potential terror cells who are not here...to land in Pioneer Square on Friday night's usual "peace march!" I think Toney Blair did a hell of a job!
William on 12 Mar 2005
Doug Hagmann thinks it's good, and he's an EXPERT! Therefore it must be good. One person who agrees with Jack must make it so. Clearly no room for improvement with the JTTF. Just leave it like it is.
Britain passed some "Anti-terror" legislation. Therefore a whole country approved of it. Just like the country approved of helping America invade and occupy Iraq (hey wait, the vast majority of Britain opposed that and millions marched against it...)(and don't forget that Britain didn't pass that legislation without quite a bit of opposition)(and also don't forget that a majority vote doesn't make something right--America used to think women and blacks shouldn't have a voice in politics but it wasn't right)(and also don't forget that you are choosing to arbitrarily define what makes a majority or an expert because I can list plenty of examples of majorities and experts both who disagree with you).
Please Jack, you still haven't even begun to bring the debate. Your comments are nonsensical. "Over 40 billion served. McDonalds must be great!" "I'm a doctor, and I say this fights cavities so it MUST!"
Still waiting for a real debate. Very tired of addressing fluff. Hey, if Doug Hagmann thinks the JTTF is so valuable and can prove it, why don't you invite him to this board? He'd probably actually be able to DEBATE and maybe he'd even win your side a few converts.
PS don't forget to have good will towards those who disagree with you. I'd still buy you a beer or whatever if I knew what you looked like and saw you at a bar.