“You don't understand that your ignorance…” – tink I do understand fairly just how ignorant I am.
“… of the knowledge I present is enforced by 'the fear of the unknown'.” – tink Here is where the projection begins. No more reflection, no more analysis..’tis the end of interaction. On Jun 18, 5:47 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > Please explain the power I have that has gone to my head. > The idea I present has the power to incite 'the fear of the unknown' > in you, for one. It's a fact, not something I would impose. And I > don't even like the fact. > > You don't understand that your ignorance of the knowledge I present is > enforced by 'the fear of the unknown'. > > peace & Love > > On Jun 18, 9:41 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > “Your ad hominem is so smooth Mr. Moderator :-)” > > “I guess I need to work on my self- > > righteousness :-)” – tink > > > “…it smacks of textbook low level megalomania.” – CJ > > > ..the term I was going to use but found it, while accurate, to be more > > easily perceived as ad hominem rather than a ‘smooth’ suggestion for > > self observation. Tink, if you wish, it is possible to find post after > > post where you project upon the perceived ‘other’ person exactly what > > you are doing. You apparently don’t understand what is being said to > > you and then say it is the other one who doesn’t and you know. It is > > obvious to many of us that this is not the case. > > > On Jun 18, 6:45 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hoi Lee! > > > According to the Articles of the Geneva Convention, any combatant who is > > > not > > > identified by uniform, rank and serial number is an unlawful combatant, > > > and > > > not subject to the rules of protections of the convention. The French > > > Resistance, when captured by the Nazis, were typically tortured and > > > summarily executed. > > > As unlawful combatants, the Convention returns the specificities of > > > detention to the detaining state. Regarding the US, the laws that apply to > > > unlawful combatants would be the Presidential Military Order "Detention, > > > Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against > > > Terrorism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detention,_Treatment,_and_Trial_of_Certa...>" > > > of 2001, invoked under the War Powers Resolution, which spelled out long > > > term detention for those suspected of terrorist activity, and authorized > > > Gitmo to be the holding ground for said combatants. > > > > It's not pretty, but it's legal, according to both US and International > > > Law. > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_combatant > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:27 AM, [email protected] < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Come in late on this one, but I just had to say this. > > > > > Hey Don, you said: > > > > > ' Prisoners of war are soldiers. They have a rank and a serial > > > > number. They wear uniforms. Because of this affiliation with the > > > > military they are awarded rights under the Geneva Conventions. People > > > > fighting our military that are not military themselves DO NOT have the > > > > rights that are reserved for soldiers. That is a the truth and not > > > > just my opinion.' > > > > > So civilians fighting soldiers using gurila tactics are not to be > > > > considered soilders engaged in war? What of the French underground > > > > during WWII? > > > > > On 14 June, 23:17, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I'm aware the U.S. has suffered in world opinion. It really can't be > > > > > helped if you choose to see things in treaties or laws that simply > > > > > aren't there. Much the same thing is happening in our court system > > > > > now. We are moving away from following the law as it is written to a > > > > > more case by case study based on a perpetrators past experiences > > > > > rather then a judgment on what he did. We may even end up with a new > > > > > amendment soon. > > > > > > Prisoners of war are soldiers. They have a rank and a serial number. > > > > > They wear uniforms. Because of this affiliation with the military > > > > > they are awarded rights under the Geneva Conventions. People fighting > > > > > our military that are not military themselves DO NOT have the rights > > > > > that are reserved for soldiers. That is a the truth and not just my > > > > > opinion. If your argument is that this is wrong and we should call > > > > > everyone a pow regardless of military affiliation then that is fine. > > > > > > I'd accept it if someone wrote a 'declaration of intent' claiming to > > > > > be a soldier and posted it on the internet and kept a copy on their > > > > > person and used a red scarf or blue scarf or black scarf or whatever > > > > > tied around their left arm as a uniform. As long as it is organized > > > > > with ranks and bases I'd go along with it even if it was ad-hoc. > > > > > Fine-your a soldier; you get pow status. What these terrorists do is > > > > > hide behind civilians. Under schools and mosques building bombs that > > > > > kill civilians. Civilians are their targets as often as not. They > > > > > set their bomb off or ambush a police station wearing masks and then > > > > > go home and make BBQ. These aren't soldiers iam. These are > > > > > terrorists. It saddens me you and many other people don't see the > > > > > difference. > > > > > > dj > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 2:41 AM, iam deheretic<[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > You do not need to cut me slack because I don't live there > > > > > > anymore.. I > > > > am > > > > > > just not under the sway of the republican propaganda machine. > > > > > > > and just what amm I supposed to do a google search under .. POW > > > > > > Treaty? > > > > > > > Gitmo Is A Prisoner of war camp in the eyes of the rest of the > > > > > > world.. > > > > and > > > > > > the people being held there are prisoners of war... buy all but > > > > > > bushes > > > > > > definition.. Because the weasel bush sez something different,, it > > > > > > is > > > > not > > > > > > his privilege to redefine treaties,, they are still prisoners of > > > > > > war.. > > > > they > > > > > > were combants, they were fighting on the other side of a declared > > > > > > war > > > > so > > > > > > therefore they are prisoners of war by a legally agreed treaty one > > > > > > that > > > > was > > > > > > drawn up by the USA government at the time.. > > > > > > > even an appointed president does not have the right to break a > > > > treaty.. and > > > > > > Gitmo breaks the POW treaty. which makes all officers in direct > > > > violation > > > > > > of American laws and Bush , Cheney and cronies charged wit treason > > > > > > and > > > > high > > > > > > crimes for which they are accountable for even after they left > > > > > > office. > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:48 PM, Don Johnson <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> iam. I'm cutting you serious slack because, since you don't live > > > > > >> here > > > > > >> anymore, you obviously don't pay attention to what should be common > > > > > >> knowledge to a concerned American citizen. I'm not arguing that > > > > > >> torture is good or even necessary in this post. Nor am I > > > > > >> advocating > > > > > >> humiliation. I might do that in another post(or I might not), but > > > > > >> this one is about clearing up some misconceptions you have about > > > > > >> international treaties. > > > > > > >> #1) the detainees are NOT prisoners of war. If you can accept this > > > > > >> fact(any google search should clear this up for you) then it pretty > > > > > >> much negates most of your objections to U.S. breaking international > > > > > >> law. > > > > > > >> #2)Refer to #1 for all other objections. > > > > > > >> 'nuf said > > > > > > >> dj > > > > > > >> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 3:20 PM, iam deheretic<[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > SD sometimes you make me laugh, All pirsoners of war are > > > > > >> > entitled > > > > to a > > > > > >> > certian level of treatment guarenteed by international treaty, > > > > > >> > Which > > > > the > > > > > >> > USA > > > > > >> > is a signing member and it has been approved by the US Senate, > > > > which > > > > > >> > must > > > > > >> > ratify all treaties.. It keeps our soldiers protected in times > > > > > >> > of > > > > war.. > > > > > >> > Keeps them from being lined up and shoot.. as you put it.. > > > > > > >> > Now in Gitmo's case this very valuable treaty was ignored so they > > > > could > > > > > >> > preform torture physical humiliation and other degrading acts for > > > > the > > > > > >> > benefit of their sadistic egos. > > > > > > >> > The truth is gitmo was a shifting of gears,, away from an agreed > > > > > >> > treaty,, > > > > > >> > making the word of the USA worthless and treaties not worth the > > > > paper > > > > > >> > they > > > > > >> > were written on. Personally I am surprised it is such a small > > > > percentage > > > > > >> > that returned to combat. I personally hate war, but if I was > > > > > >> > treated > > > > the > > > > > >> > way > > > > > >> > these POW's were treated by bush and the us military and > > > > intelligence I > > > > > >> > would be sure doing a re-think about my position > > > > > > >> > As for the state of the art hospital well if the picture is > > > > > >> > showing > > > > the > > > > > >> > good side I have seen better facilities in rural Montana.. I > > > > > >> > think > > > > that > > > > > >> > is > > > > > >> > called propaganda,, words are cheap in the bush and us militarys > > > > word > > > > > >> > are > > > > > >> > very very cheap. to the point of no value. > > > > > >> > Allan > > > > > > >> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Slip Disc <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >> >> The recent news about the transfer of the Gitmo detainees had me > > > > > >> >> thinking. > > > > > >> >> I was wondering why and how humanity switches gears from killing > > > > the > > > > > >> >> enemy to taking care of the enemy, once captured and imprisoned. > > > > > >> >> On the battle field we kill the enemy, the enemy that wants to > > > > > >> >> kill > > > > > >> >> us. > > > > > >> >> Why do we expend so much energy caring for these people that > > > > > >> >> would > > > > see > > > > > >> >> us dead tomorrow? > > > > > > >> >> **New Pentagon intelligence asserts that 61 former Guantánamo > > > > > >> >> Bay > > > > > >> >> detainees, or about 11 percent of those who have been released, > > > > appear > > > > > >> >> to have returned to involvement in- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
