{"id":4279,"date":"2011-05-03T08:25:10","date_gmt":"2011-05-03T13:25:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stonescryout.org\/?p=4279"},"modified":"2011-05-03T08:25:10","modified_gmt":"2011-05-03T13:25:10","slug":"things-heard-e171v2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stonescryout.org\/?p=4279","title":{"rendered":"Things Heard: e171v2"},"content":{"rendered":"

Good morning. Midsized remarks?<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. A not unsurprising finding<\/a>, although that is not a reason not to be principled. There’s kind of a chicken\/egg thing going on here, as the decision to be principled, if based on principles not consequence won’t look to the consequence. I didn’t explain that well, does any one else see the chicken\/egg notion going on here?<\/li>\n
  2. Seeing as MassCare and the Federal act are quite similar, we can look to our future in Mass … and some things aren’t so good<\/a>. Supply and demand, contrary to the hopes and dreams of the designers (that is the left) actually do matter.<\/li>\n
  3. Brain damage and football<\/a>. So, the question then arises, can a grown man choose to ignore that and practice the profession of his choice freely?<\/li>\n
  4. Here are some reactions of bloggers (and tweeters) in Pakistan to the news of bin Laden’s death<\/a>. This was an assasination. Does that have legal ramifications<\/a>?<\/li>\n
  5. I’ve seen this sentiment on several left leaning blogs<\/a>, that they wish there was a trial. OK. We’ve all read Ms Arendt’s book (and if you didn’t shame shame on you). Some questions arise … the points made by Ms Arendt weren’t very obvious in the trial and it’s not clear that there is a Ms Arendt who would pen a similarly impactful tome as a result of this trial. So then, what would be gained by such a trial? Is the only reason the trial makes you uncomfortable is the legal point (and the political bias noted) in the prior post?<\/li>\n
  6. One other point to make about the prior link, Mr Greenwald is uncomfortable about the pro-USA demonstrations. However, media distortion of the reality set aside (which he apprently buys hook line and sinker) … this reaction<\/a> is I think far more typical. Why does that bother him? If you don’t think that is the “typical reaction” consider your reaction and that of those around you. Hmmm?<\/li>\n
  7. Some more legal roundup on drones and targeted killing<\/a>.<\/li>\n
  8. So will this reopen some of the discussions on torture<\/a>. Oddly enough, it  reinforces the POV I was espousing, that torture is effective but that we shouldn’t do it based on principles. There were those who argued that it doesn’t work (reasoning that the tortured will say anything to get the torture to stop), my counter was that didn’t hold up to analysis of torture used in by regimes in counter-insurgency operations (look at WWII and the Philippines and on on). <\/li>\n
  9. Pain of two sorts and … what sort of caught my attention is the title but for a strange reason. I have several webbed toes … which was kind in the title.<\/li>\n
  10. And to wrap it up … some food p0rn<\/a>. If you don’t want to call it p0rn … what would you call it? <\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Good morning. Midsized remarks? A not unsurprising finding, although that is not a reason not to be principled. There’s kind of a chicken\/egg thing going on here, as the decision to be principled, if based on principles not consequence won’t look to the consequence. I didn’t explain that well, does any one else see the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[60,58],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-links","category-marko"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t