Laid Off Engineer Shoots And Kills Siport CEO And VP — This could become a trend.
Things took a terrible turn yesterday when an Engineer laid off from a local semi-conductor company, Siport, shot and killed the company CEO, Sid Agrawal, VP of Operations, Brian Pugh, and an unidentified woman.According to the (cached) company Web site, SiPort is a fabless semiconductor company incorporated in 2004 that received its first round of funding in 2005. Sid’s bio states that he held executive management positions at Alliance Semiconductor (IPO), Layer Five Networks (acquired by Juniper) and Synaptics (IPO) and leadership marketing, sales and engineering positions at Adobe, Intel and Bell Labs. The company is backed by Lightspeed Venture Partners, Morganthaler, New Venture Partners, and Intel Capital.
#31 Confusion: “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. ”
So, what does all that have to do with a “National SECURITY force”?
Cow Paddy, Ignorant shit Talking Sociopath and Digby, his gay, yet devoted, side kick, (He never leaves his buddy’s behind)
A reprint of a Chicago Tribune story. Complete with commentary and background. The Chicago Trib is NOT known for being a liberal paper.
#33, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath,
Quit farting. Either shit or get off the pot !!!
Give us a quote where he proposed an ARMED CIVILIAN FORCE or admit you again just made it up.
Agriwal? that sounds like an Indian to me. Indians are bad news where ever they go. Cheap labor doesnt means high satisfaction , job security for the workers. Kick the indians out and dont let them take your job. It will bet better for America.
#35 Mr. CONfusion,
So, what does all that stuff about AmeriCorps have to do with a “Civilian National SECURITY force”?
Simple question.
Round ’em up boys, we’re thinin’ out the herd. Gidiyup! Yeehaw!
Perish the thought any of this lot should ever do any research on their own. The shooter was not layed-off. No one was layed-off at Siport.
He had been fired.
http://tinyurl.com/5sjrhb
Not to go too X-Files, but this is how it starts.
Will the price of oil go down quickly enough, causing the economy to rebound faster, to prevent the revolution against the rich?
I think Mr Fusion’s disagreement is that “security” doesn’t imply “armed”
Though, having been unarmed security myself in the past, I believe most people would argue that unarmed security lack any signfigant efficacy.
And no “armed” does not specify guns – even if you only have a taser or a club you are still armed
#41, Sour,
Cow Paddy explicitly wrote, #12
No, I think it was in response to Obama saying he was going to put together an SA like civilian armed force…
So phuk the twisting of words and their meanings. I’m asking him to tell us where Obama said he was creating an Armed Civilian Force.
# 41 Sourtone said, “I think Mr Fusion’s disagreement is that “security” doesn’t imply “armed”
Though, having been unarmed security myself in the past, I believe most people would argue that unarmed security lack any signfigant efficacy.”
Yes, a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded as the military points to one thing. And, it isn’t expensive designer uniforms…
Of course the cool aide drinkers can’t explain what this new force is for…
I’m sure he would have used poison, a bomb, or a knife if he didn’t have access to a gun. Either way it’s sad that these people died.
—
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. “- Obama
We’ll that’s a very interesting implication. Since when have we relied just on our military for national security Obama? Does he want to create another Homeland Security part duex. Maybe he likes the idea of a Gestapo where friends inform on their friends. Sounds like some major new taxes to me. It’s a far cry from dismantling Bush’s security apparatus, sounds more like he wants to make it even larger.
Maybe his next implication will be that we need to fix those with “abnormal” sexual disorders through an aggressive health plan in order for a more secure society that is safe for our children. We can’t have them sending people anthrax after all.
“Thank GOD for guns Eh, Sid? ”
Get a gun and a ‘carry permit’ and take it to work to defend yourself.
Or, you sit there like a fool thinking “I wish I had a gun to defend myself” as your co-worker pulls the trigger and blows you head off…
If Sid had been ‘carrying’, the headline would have been entirely different
I used to work in the California Superior Court and I speak from experience.
Thank GOD also for our Sheriff’s armed bailiffs.
See:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106856/
Perhaps too much target practice with a soldering gun?
It may also be that long term exposure to Vista causes brain damage and these fits are merely a symptom.
Good investment… http://tinyurl.com/5d9c8s
Oops! Already out of stock!!
How many employees does Dvorak have?!?
[If Dvorak fires us, we’ll be forever grateful.
– ed.]
#43, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath and former Mall Rent-A-Cop,
Read it and weep.
security
se·cu·ri·ty (s-kyr-t)
n. pl. se·cu·ri·ties
1. Freedom from risk or danger; safety.
2. Freedom from doubt, anxiety, or fear; confidence.
3. Something that gives or assures safety, as:
a. A group or department of private guards: Call building security if a visitor acts suspicious.
b. Measures adopted by a government to prevent espionage, sabotage, or attack.
c. Measures adopted, as by a business or homeowner, to prevent a crime such as burglary or assault: Security was lax at the firm’s smaller plant.
d. Measures adopted to prevent escape: Security in the prison is very tight.
4. Something deposited or given as assurance of the fulfillment of an obligation; a pledge.
5. One who undertakes to fulfill the obligation of another; a surety.
6. A document indicating ownership or creditorship; a stock certificate or bond.
Now can you explain why you wrote about the “SA like Civilian Armed Force?” You have been dodging it all along, now come clean and tell us about this Civilian Armed Force that Obama has in mind.
# 49 Mr. Fusion said, “Now can you explain why you wrote about the “SA like Civilian Armed Force?””
Sure, it’s obvious. If you are going to form a civilian security force and fund it as heavily as the military you are going to spend BILLIONS on H/W. It’s not going to be salary & fancy uniforms.
What’s your explanation.
Mr. Fusion.
Sorry I replied to you. I had no idea you are insane.
Oh. By the way. If you listen to the words of Moses, you will hear the phrase “just as powerful” (as the United States Military). Golly. How do you become “just as powerful” as one of the most powerful Military Forces on Earth without being “armed”???
Just wondering….about the rants on this blog and about what is in store for this country. I am guessing the stores are not only sold out of AR 15’s, but Kool Aid as well.
#50 & 51, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath and former Mall Rent-A-Cop and his gay sidekick Digby.
Sure, it’s obvious. If you are going to form a civilian security force …
So where did Obama say he was forming an CIVILIAN ARMED FORCE. Just like the “SA”. C’mon, you claimed it, now show us where he said it. I even copied a transcript of his speech in #31 where you claim he made the plan.
Time to put up or shut up.
*
Paddy, it is not the biggest problem to make an error. It happens. When it is pointed out that you made a mistake though, the thing to do is own up and admit it. To continue with the error is to continue with a lie. Knowingly making and continuing a lie will only earn contempt.
Digby, go back to your good book. I’m sure you’ll find some solace in it to ease your effen ignorant mind.
I believe Obama is talking about a federal group to take the place as primary responder instead of semi-government groups like the Red Cross and Salvation Army, that is not beholden to the military like the guard. They would need real funding and support, as well as everything a disaster-relief group would need and a military unit would have, except guns.
# 54 smartalix said, “groups like the Red Cross and Salvation Army,”
Sorry, neither deals with national security concerns and isn’t a “national security force” to be as well funded as the military ($480 billion FY ’08).
Still waiting for a plausible explanation, other than a civilian SA like force under control of the Obama.
Press have queried him but Obama refuses to clarify.
“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”
This is what he said. I am not sure how you can have a security force that is as powerful, as strong, and as well-funded as the military without giving them weapons.
What is he going to do? Teach them to sing like Nero and conquer with love?
Get a grip. This guy is talking about his own SS.
The Vatican is just as powerful as many countries, but it doesn’t really have an armed force, unless you count those Swiss Guards. Or you could compare Hollywood with the US Military and talk about the power of their messages.
Is it possible that some of the posters here choose not to use their imaginations when it doesn’t suit their world-view?
Liberals really are off in another dimension. 99.4% of people hearing that speech would just “know” he’s talking about an armed force. It can’t be intrepreted any other way.
#56, Liberty,
If you read Post #31 again, you will exactly what he is laying out. There is no talk of any portion of the AmeriCorp or Peace Corp being armed, like the “SA” or otherwise.
As Alix, in #54 eludes, a group of Americans prepared to respond to disasters, ready to help those in need, with the equipment, training, and will to do the job. To help domestic situations, such as “Meals on Wheels” or filling in Social Security forms.
I see AmeriCorps, Peace Corps, Freedom Corps, Energy Corps and a civilian security force that would have to be armed to be as powerful as the military. They’re obviously separate entities.
The more disturbing part of his message is how we’re supposed to throw away our individuality and become drones slaving away in public service. He’s proposing to “save” America by discarding the American Dream which is based on the idea of a nation of individuals, not a collective.
#59, I know — I copied it from that post. I know he didn’t specifically state he was going to arm them.
However, when you say you are going to invade a country, you don’t have to say you are taking your guns with you either.
As I said, unless he is trying to pull a Nero, you don’t create that kind of organization (security force) unless it is (para)military in nature.
Unless he plans to redefine what “security force” means, we are looking at a national para-military police force.
If he really didn’t mean to arm these guys, then I worry for our real military as he doesn’t know the difference between a “security force” and a community service organization.
# 61 LibertyLover said, “If he really didn’t mean to arm these guys, then I worry for our real military as he doesn’t know the difference between a “security force” and a community service organization.”
What’s really interesting is that the current military budget is ~51% of the total Fed budget. So, add another 51% for the Civilian SA & 49% for the remainder and you are at 151% WITHOUT all of Omama’s additional spending on Health care.
This guy is NUTS.