Hi Shaun,Clinton said, "I did not have sex with that woman". And he was right, he was telling the truth. He took advice from one of the US.s top specialist lawyers and a judge on the subject and he was advised that what he did "with that woman" could not be constituted as having sex, no matter what the public thought...en masse.
Rape is defined as the entry of 1 inch of penis into the vagina without continuing consent of the woman. His penis was nowhere near "that woman's" vagina, probably because it was so bent and pointing upwards whilst she was kneeling down, also, in the alternative, it is not known whether "that woman" uttered any form of coherent consent, from the beginning to the end of oral consumation and ejaculation.
Those latter remarks are pure hearsay of course, so don't quote me. I never actually saw the photo he had to have taken of his penis...:-) . Mind you, it might be on the Congress court record somewhere. I wonder if John would be able to get a copy...and put it on Cryptome...in the pursuit of free speech of course...:-) . Or perhaps it is classified as a compartmentalised top secret document...locked up for 50 years :-) .
Joking aside, it must have been a terrible for his family to handle... ATB Dougie. On 27/02/15 23:22, Shaun O'Connor wrote:
Hi Doug.Do I know any honest people? hmmm. I know many who say they are honest but there is a world of difference between declaring oneself as being honest and actually being 100% honest, I think all of of us fib from time to time if truth be told.nowt wrong with that if it does no harm imho. reminds me of the Clinton fiasco when wots his name declared rather lamely"I'm trying to be honest here", i think he got caught having an extra marital affair if memory serves.I could never decide whether to feel sorry for the guy or gloat over his misfortune at getting caught.ATB Shaun On 27/02/2015 22:41, doug wrote:Hi Shaun,He is 89 years old...I shouldn't think he is doing it for the money. He is spending money on the court case, hoping to prevent the showing and distribution of the film...and protect the secrets of the US government. A bit late, but never mind. It depends on how long he is going to pursue his case regarding the publication of classified documents, remember, even when classified documents are in the public domain, it doesn't remove their secret classification...and what support he is getting or hoping to get. It might finish up as damp squib, or a big bang as it comes up to the US electiion. Who knows what motives and intentions he is pursuing, apart from what it says on the face of his court case.As for truth...in my view, there are many of them... it is just a question of picking the ones that serve one best...and learning to discard them and adopt new ones when they become inconvenient.:-)ATB Dougie. P.S. Do you know any honest people...:-) On 27/02/15 22:20, Shaun O'Connor wrote:Hi DougI got my movie for free, and yes it was quite interesting. microwaves are great Faraday cages.( just remember to take the mobile out before turning the thing on). fridges are great for prolonging trace memory on a ram chip ( but you have to be bloody nippy and get the chip in the freezer within 30 seconds of power down),Regarding the blanket scene I had myself asking the question is this guy for real? I got the impression that while he is plainly quite articulate , he was scared stiff but didn't want to make too much play of it.And as for Edwards making a big hoo ha over the film, i think he is just trying to get money off the producers of the film under the pretext of damage. looking at the case material( such as i have read thus far), he seems to be changing his tactics each time he gets rebuffed.As to the matter of "truth"now let me cogitate upon that one. ....yes "truth" is that which we as a society accept as such by a combination of mutual agreement and subtle coercion.ATB Shaun aka Paddington bear. On 27/02/2015 21:39, doug wrote:Hi Shaun,I watched the film on Channel 4. Things come free to those who wait:-) .I am thinking about suing Edwards, of Edwards v Snowden, for misrepresentation. I didn't suffer from aches and pains, mental and physical anguish. I wasn't psychologically destroyed by the failure in US and UK national security. I have no immediate or long term fear of Al Quaeda creating another 9/11 (at least no more immediate than I have a fear of the world being destroyed by nuclear weapons). I don't see the terrorists rising up and using other methods of communication to overcome NSA or GCHQ surveillance. They may have gone all quiet and returned to the language of the W.O.M.B...who knows. Jihadi John continues his work, and I day say that his asshole is squeaking now that his true identity has been discovered. Osama Ben Laden comes to mind...Of course, the terrorists might have been responsible for engineering the downfall of Sir Malcolm Rifkind, Chairman of the UK Intelligence and Security Committee, by paying Channel 4 to set him up in a sting operation, with a new job with a new Chinese company asking how much it would cost for him and the Straw man to approach Ambassadors and others of influence in the government, but I tend to think that it was more to do with their big ego. They should learn to work harder at their age, instead of lounging about earning a fortune at the taxpayers expense and travelling the world on public expense accounts.In fact, quite the opposite from Mr. Edwards, I quite enjoyed the film, it put everything together for me. I have seen better, but at least it didn't cost too much to make. I particularly liked the keeping of mobile phones in the fridge...or was it the microwave? The wearing of the blanket by Snowden to prevent surreptitious intrusion on his air-gapped computer by the powers that be was either a master stroke or streak of paranoi, (didn't I read an article somewhere, by some well respected security consultant whose air-gapped computer somehow, even after being swiped and forensically cleaned and a new, clean operating system installed, still finished up with a compromised operating system?) and lying of the NSA and CIA Directors at the house committees after swearing the oaths of telling the truth. I dare say that their lying was completely unwitting of course...they never ever lie on purpose. No means no...doesn't it...:-) . The NSA and the other intelligence and security services do NOT collect US citizens data, content and metadata on purpose.ATB Dougie. On 25/02/15 22:16, Shaun O'Connor wrote:already have the3 movie.;-) On 25/02/2015 20:51, doug wrote:Citizen 4 on UK TV Channel 4 at 11 p.m. For your information... Enjoy...:-). ATB Dougie.--*_PRIVACY IS A BASIC RIGHT - NOT A CONCESSION _* https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda--*_PRIVACY IS A BASIC RIGHT - NOT A CONCESSION _* https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda--*_PRIVACY IS A BASIC RIGHT - NOT A CONCESSION _* https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/when-time-comes-we-need-be-ready-fight-tpps-secret-anti-user-agenda