Thank you, Timothy! You've said a lot of things far better than I could. Now you know where I stand politically on this. I wish they had charged him with treason. Would that be harder to prove?
Judith >1. That comment was targeted at the comment, what happened to innocent until >proven guilty. I was saying that since they were not US citizens, and since >they were caught during military operations (other than war) and they were >not in the UNIFORMED military service of their host nation (which would have >meant fighting for the Northern Alliance, which at the time was the legally >recognized government) that they do not have the same rights that are >accorded to US citizens. Listen people we did these guys a favor. Had we >sent them home they would have been tortured and killed. Period. I don't >know how you can scream and rant about human rights in the face of reality. >The Taliban that they supported was one of the worst human rights abusers in >existence. > >2. You as an American can disavow your citizenship when ever you feel like >it. You simply go into the consulate or embassy at your new host nation, >turn in your passport, and sign a paper. Many people have done just that. >Lee Harvey Oswald did just that. Had he done that he would be in Cuba with >the rest of the goobers. > >3. Well as a former 11b1p (Airborne, All the way!!) I would have to say >that should the national command authority decide to waste a single highly >trained live in such a way, well that would be a damned shame. Seriously >though, He would then just be an American Citizen in a foreign nation. The >people who were the recognized government (The Northern Alliance) were >Afghans. They were locals, and they were fighting a war. One that was very >much in our favor to win. > >I am sorry but I think we would be remiss in NOT playing favorites in >situations like that. Be a realist man, the Taliban was openly supporting >an organization that killed thousands of American civilians. They decimated >their own populace. > >I am not a big imperialist. I am kind of an isolationist truth be told. In >this case I think we were justified. Iraq, well I am not so sure there. We >will have to see how it unfolds. > >Tim Heald >I don't know >School Link Inc. >910.223.2116 x 122 > >http://www.schoollink.net >Providing technology solutions for educators > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Smith, Matthew P -CONT(DYN) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 3:04 PM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Lindh pleads guilty, won't receive life in prison > > > >>1. They are not citizens of the United States therefore they have no > >>rights under US law. > >Yay! You are not American! We can shoot you, steal from you, anything! >You have no rights. Or maybe you meant we can violate basic human rights >because they are not American? Or maybe legal rights, so the US can hold >any foreign national here for as long as they want without trial, counsel, >etc? I'm not trying to twist your words, I just can't interpret what you >meant. Otherwise, we should get off that whole human rights thing with >China, because the people being violated aren't Americans. > > > > >>Does the US have the right to charge an American citizen of crimes > >>committed in a different country? ><snip> > >>Personally I think he should have been tried for treason. > >But can he disavow citizenship without his countries permission? Can the US >"force" him to still be a citizen even though he has left, taken upon the >garb, lifestyle, language, etc of another country? If not, he should be >grouped with the rest and treated the same. Yes, even if it was against >other Americans(attacking 'his' country, btw). > >I know he choose to play the "I'm an American citizen" card when he was >caught, and I addressed that in an earlier post. I'm just addressing the: > >>Does the US have the right to charge an American citizen of crimes > >>committed in a different country? > >> > >>I would say yes. Within limits. Something like if it's against another > >>American(s). In this case he was fighting against us." > > > > >>4. The Taliban was only one government of Afghanistan, and was not > >>actually the recognized government at the time of hostilities. The > >>Northern Alliance was the recognized government and they invited us in and > >>allowed us to take the foreign fighters out of their country. They didn't > >>want them. > >Hmmm, 'recognized government'. So if we choose to recognize a particular >government, any other competing governments/groups become the bad guys? >What if the majority of that country's citizens recognize the one we choose >not to? > >I've got it! We drop an airborne 11B in any country, have him make camp. >Now, he declares him self an opposing government. The US recognizes his >plight, he invites us in, and we attack and free him from the fascist >regime. Bingo, our 51st state! >I think we just found the loophole that will let us take over the world. >Sweet. > >; ) > >Shouldn't countries work through competing governments amongst themselves? >Otherwise, the US would be dictating it's preference, and before you know >it, we would be installing puppet governments with US-friendly policies into >other countries. Oh, wait, never mind. > >It gets even better. Say the country with two opposing governments has a >resource we want. No other deciding factors, except the cost they will sell >that resource to us for. The US could become a "country hit-man", bartering >it's services to the one writing us the biggest check through lower prices, >trade, etc. Forget taking over the world, we'll just be country brokers and >take a percentage. That's where the real money's at. > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
