John Smith Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 As of today, the moderating group will be giving 24-hour suspensions to members whose behavior is seriously out of line. If said behavior continues after a suspension, stronger action will be taken. Civilty has been an issue recently, especially during the election season. Let's keep VC a friendly place. -The moderating team. We seem to do fairly well here - with our back and forth - until certain people start jabbing at people. Does self depreciation count? Link to post Share on other sites
Wendy Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 I'm almost 100% Jnick knows I'm just joshing him. but yeah, let's overlook people calling other people "stinky dildoes" and focus on that quote. Good bit, Serpico.Who overlooked what? Link to post Share on other sites
Doug C Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Serpico? Are narcotics and graft afoot? If so, thank God he's here! Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 It's a mod! Run! Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Serpico? Are narcotics and graft afoot? If so, thank God he's here!He lives near me. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Rosenberg transcripts raise possibility of perjury By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 7 minutes ago WASHINGTON - Newly released grand jury transcripts add strong evidence to the argument that the conviction and execution of Ethel Rosenberg in the Cold War's biggest espionage case were based on perjured testimony. In recent years, one of the two key witnesses against Rosenberg recanted his testimony. It now appears that the other witness made up her testimony. too. The witnesses were Ethel's brother and sister-in-law, David and Ruth Greenglass. Thanks to the work of a team of lawyers and historians, the government released the grand jury testimony that formed the basis for the charges against Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. At the Rosenbergs' trial, the Greenglasses testified that Ethel Rosenberg had typed stolen atomic secrets from notes provided by David Greenglass. The testimony provided the direct involvement the jury needed to convict Ethel Rosenberg and that the judge in the case needed to sentence her to death. On Thursday, after spending several hours poring over the transcripts, the lawyers and historians spotted a major omission in Ruth Greenglass' testimony to the grand jury. Nowhere does Ruth Greenglass tell the story about seeing Ethel Rosenberg type up the secrets. In fact, in her grand jury testimony, Ruth Greenglass says she herself wrote out the secrets in longhand. That testimony is consistent with subsequently decrypted Soviet cables from the time in which the Soviets describe material received from the Rosenbergs as being in longhand. Also Thursday, a man who was convicted with the Rosenbergs on espionage charges in 1951 admitted for the first time that he spied for the Soviet Union. Morton Sobell, 91, told The New York Times that he turned over military secrets to the Soviets during World War II, when the country was allied with Washington fighting the Nazis. Asked if he was spying, he said: "Yeah, yeah, yeah, call it that. I never thought of it as that in those terms." Sobell, who lives in New York, was released from prison in 1969 and had maintained his innocence. In the interview for the Times' Friday editions, Sobell, an electrical engineer, said the equipment he stole for the Russians were radar and artillery devices, not atomic secrets. Sobell said he believes Ethel Rosenberg was aware of espionage by her husband but didn't actively participate. "What was she guilty of? Of being Julius's wife," he said. The grand jury testimony from Ruth Greenglass confirms that the trial testimony about Ethel Rosenberg typing secrets is a fabrication, said Georgetown University law professor David Vladeck, part of the team that succeeded in gaining public release of the transcripts. "The Rosenberg case illustrates the excesses that can occur when we're afraid," said Meredith Fuchs, general counsel to the National Security Archive, one of the private groups that fought in court to get the testimony released. "In the 1950s, we were afraid of communism; today, we're afraid of terrorism. We don't want to make the same mistakes we made 50 years ago," Fuchs said. The material reveals that nearly four dozen witnesses testified to the grand jury. Only four of them testified at the Rosenbergs' trial. Among those who did not testify at the trial but did testify to the grand jury were a man and wife who the FBI believed were Soviet agents. But they never were charged and the transcripts show that prosecutors made no effort to question any of the grand jury witnesses about a series of stolen U.S. non-nuclear defense secrets that the government felt many of the witnesses knew about. The stolen secrets included proximity fuses used by the Soviets to shoot down the U-2 spy plane of Francis Gary Powers. The government also had evidence that the Rosenberg ring gave the Soviets secrets about airborne radar, land-based radar, analog computers used for guiding anti-aircraft weapons and information for the first designs of U.S. jet engines, said Steve Usdin, an author who helped win release of the grand jury material. Why didn't the grand jury delve into the theft of non-nuclear secrets? "I think that discussion of all of these other secrets that they gave the Soviets probably would have caused a great deal of alarm among the public and would have raised questions about the competence of American counterintelligence," said Usdin. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Who overlooked what? Analogman didn't post the rules of the board when she went on her little tirade. That's who. Link to post Share on other sites
gogo Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 That announcement did not even exist at the time. It's new. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Analogman didn't post the rules of the board when she went on her little tirade. That's who. I think that deal just got posted sometime this morning - 12:08 am Anyhow - can we not just have our back and forth here without the other stuff? Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 A 1 page diversion into good natured silliness should not require two Moderators and the hall monitor's attention, that's all I'm saying. Anyways: I'm sorry for attacking dumb people with my post. I'll take a 24 hour break now. Link to post Share on other sites
gogo Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 A 1 page diversion into good natured silliness should not require two Moderators and the hall monitor's attention, that's all I'm saying.The moderators (or, me, anyway) don't give a shit about the last page worth of silliness. If you were getting called on something here, I might understand what you're talking about. All I did was clarify a timeline. Link to post Share on other sites
the carlos Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 "climbing up on the cross" Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 The moderators (or, me, anyway) don't give a shit about the last page worth of silliness. If you were getting called on something here, I might understand what you're talking about. All I did was clarify a timeline. I was referring more specifically to Analogman. "climbing up on the cross" If you hate me so much, there's an ignore option. Link to post Share on other sites
the carlos Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 ha. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 I was referring more specifically to Analogman. If you hate me so much, there's an ignore option. I know one thing - it will be nice when you figure out who you are, and stop copying other people. I hope you don't act like that in real life - as someone is going to end up knocking you on your ass someday. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Anyways. I'm not surprised at all that Palin backtracked on the "mission from God" bit. Shit makes me nervous that she would even say it. Link to post Share on other sites
gogo Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 This: I know one thing - it will be nice when you figure out who you are, and stop copying other people. I hope you don't act like that in real life - as someone is going to end up knocking you on your ass someday. is not helping with keeping the tone civil around here. The two of you, ignore each other, please. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 This: is not helping with keeping the tone civil around here. The two of you, ignore each other, please. Yes, you are right. I should have refrained. Link to post Share on other sites
Edie Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 i'm usually just defending the missionary position against the rampant misrepresentation found on this board. PS. I hope this is construed to be humor Link to post Share on other sites
gogo Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Yes, you are right. I should have refrained.Thank you. I read this quote in Sarah Vowell's The Partly Cloudy Patriot yesterday: "While many of our citizens prosper, others doubt the promise, even the justice, of our own country. The ambitions of some Americans are limited by failing schools and hidden prejudice and the circumstances of their birth. And sometimes our differences run so deep, it seems we share a continent, but not a country." Good quote, right? That's George W., from his first Inaugural address. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 I'm almost 100% Jnick knows I'm just joshing him. but yeah, let's overlook people calling other people "stinky dildoes" and focus on that quote. Good bit, Serpico. You are 100% correct - though we go back and forth quite a bit, bobbob is one of my favorite posters on this board - I think he and I share many of the same beliefs, we just differ on how to present them. Link to post Share on other sites
quarter23cd Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 The moderators say they'll follow abusive behavior to the Gates of Hell, but they won't even follow it to the cave where Sarah Palin hides from the media. I dunno, that didn't even make sense, did it? Carry on. Link to post Share on other sites
the carlos Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 I just want to say that the whole "24 hour suspension" thing kind of tied in nicely with my breakfast club thread. just saying. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Context is a really important thing to consider sometimes. Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 It's a mod! Run! the post made me laugh and laugh. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts