Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (15236)	1/1/2002 1:47:41 AM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

No interview with the keyboard M... and I did not opine at all on my thoughts about OJ's guilt/innocence. I simply said that I've met many racist Americans who had him convicted before she died.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (15236)	1/2/2002 7:07:04 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi Maurice Winn; What a post! Re the OJ case. Nice that you had time to watch it for days and days. I think that the prosecution's real problem was that they made the case a lot bigger than the open and shut murder case that the police handed them. They should have shown their best evidence over a period of about a week, and then sat down. Instead, they showed their best, their middle, and their worst evidence and the defense was able to create massive confusion. But that is not how "the USA legal system" works. The judge and both sides' lawyers (maybe the jury too) were playing it for all it was worth. California let it get out of control. And for that matter, the case was hardly a good example of "mayhem in the USA". I can find similar cases in any nation on the planet. Humans are amazingly non violent, but every now and then they do cut each other up, and the USA doesn't have a patent on the technique. Re Pakistan and India... I don't think they really have "daggers drawn". The civil war in East Pakistan / Bangladesh, which preceded the '71 war, was far more bloody than anything going on now. I think they're just putting on a bit of a show for the home crowds. It's the kind of back-seat squabbling that siblings pull on each other. They know that there's a level that they have to stay below, because if they let it get too loud, the US will step in and beat the crap out of whoever seems to be winning, so why get in a war? I predict that 4 years from now Pakistan / India relations will be far better than anyone now would be rational to predict. They'll be mostly arguing about who has the better soccer team. Re: "If New Mexico freedom-fighters based in Mexico had shot up the Capitol, the USA would go nuts!" Nope, not even close. You're ignoring the power realities. The fact is that the military power relationship between the US and Mexico is not at all similar to the military power relationship between Pakistan and India. Those two are more or less sort of equals. Mexico is so weak that the border isn't defended by either side. There is some history of cross border terrorism between Mexico and the US, and the US didn't "go nuts". Instead the US invaded the lawless sections of Mexico where the problem was happening. Eventually the problem went away, but it wasn't a big deal. Mexico does not have sponsoring terror in the US on their plate of foreign policy options. The military, diplomatic, and economic power discrepancy is way, way, way too large to be able to pull off that sort of stuff. The only nations which pursue cross border terrorism against a vastly more powerful neighbor are states which are already lawless. The others have too much breakable, or killable stuff to do that. This is why power is a good thing to have. -- Carl

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (15236)	1/2/2002 7:30:15 AM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

(OT)Now that I have checked into it, OJ was in fact tried three times. Re A jury found OJ didit. Another jury decided he hadn't been totally proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. That doesn't mean he didn't do it. (1)Well there is the original trial. Result innocent. law.umkc.edu (2)Then there was the civil case. Much easier to prove someone "guilty". Effective result...innocent. cnn.com Both victims' families sued him in civil court and won judgments of $33.5 million in damages in 1997 from a jury that held him liable under a different standard of proof. That verdict is still on appeal. Living well on a pension..Afterward, Simpson successfully challenged paying the award and lives well today on a hefty pension plan. He draws $25,000 a month on the $4 million pension set up when the former pro football star, actor and ad pitchman was making millions. (3) Custody of Children. Effective result innocent. usatoday.com Judge Nancy Wieben Stock found the Browns, who had battled Simpson for custody, failed to show Simpson "would be clearly detrimental to their well-being." Rather, the judge suggested, the children could flourish with Simpson. Then there are some "open questions" about some of the evidence submitted. news.bbc.co.uk Mind you the World reknown expert in the link is Chinese. The race of other experts mentioned isn't defined, but they could be biased too. Here are some of the additional "liers" usatoday.com Three people who will testify that the Bronco was broken into at the tow yard: tow truck driver John Meraz, Detective Kelly Muldorfer and William Blasini, a car parts buyer who said he didn't see any blood when he sat in the truck while it was in the tow yard; the defense contends that evidence from the Bronco can't be trusted. [Wot no red blood visible in a white truck jeez, can't have been looking properly -lol-] So has OJ been tried enough times yet, even for a blackman, on his wife's murder or is he still "guilty"?