well yeah but I was trying to be nice to those here who are still in denial.
> No, this is the type of war you get when you don't adequately plan
> for
> or ignore the occupation that comes afterwards, when you plan to be
> greeted with flowers and parades, and don't plan for a contingency.
> Thi
well, I don't know about you and perhaps it's easy for me to say, but I believe
I'd prefer summary execution to indefinite detention in abusive circumstances.
I think people believe I want us to me *nicer.* Actually I am after fairness,
and summary execution in time of war of someone who has bee
> Dana wrote:
> It doesn't solve the problem of the incovenient neighbor someone commits
> perjury about
The best part about this conversation is that it shows just how
blindly stupid Bush and his team of numbskulls are! These thorny
issues are exactly why many of us said we shouldn't be invadin
> so kill them when you are fighting them. It's what soldiers do.
true.
> This is something worse
> though. And you are more naive than I thought if you think there was no
> unconventional
> warfare in say world war 2 or Vietnam.
And in WW2, non-uniformed (unconventional) combatants were caught
well, that's someone trying to surrender on a field of battle. Slightly
different problem. In my opinion that's where a military hearing might do some
good -- some peoplot involved in the capture talk to him and if he protests
that he is a taxi driver, they enquire right then and there. This has
If it walks like a duck C'mon Nick, if he is on a battlefield and trying to
kill a soldier he is a combattant. Shoot him before his aim improves ;) If you
are going to take him prisoner he'd be a prisoner of war. The hell with whether
he'd do the same for you -- that's ethics at the lowest c
> Nick wrote:
> If we pick somebody up of the battlefield in a foriegn country
Again, dude, the problem is what's passing for "a battlefield" these
days. That's a euphemism for "their home town".
Let's say a sniper takes a shot at US forces who then surround a
building. A cook from the cafeteri
What court? What jury?
If we pick somebody up of the battlefield in a foriegn country for trying to
kill a soldier, then what court should they be sent to?
From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 10/16/2006 7:27 PM
If they have been arrested fo
I'd agree with that. A fair hearing is a fair hearing. But it's not a fair
hearing when your advocate has to choose between his integrity and career
suicide, or agreeing to rubber stamp a Kafkaesque process. It isn't a fair
hearing when you aren't allowed to hear the accusations against you beca
The Danas of the world recognize hypocrisy when they see it ;) Look these
detainees are either prisoners of war or they have been arrested for a crime or
there is some security reason to hold them. Right?
If they are prisoners of war then the Red Cross is entitled to talk to them.
There is the
so kill them when you are fighting them. It's what soldiers do. This is
something worse though. And you are more naive than I thought if you think
there was no unconventional warfare in say world war 2 or Vietnam. I just don't
buy the argument that this is some new and special type of war. It's
really? So because some people are being beaten by authority figures it's ok if
the prison guards do it? I tell you, I really worry about this country
sometimes after reading thhe posts here.
>Anything else is gravy for him. We should now give him the choice -
>death or staying indefinitely at G
> JJ wrote:
> If you move the punctuation, I agree with him.
>
> > No, but most of these things do seem work out. Right in the end.
>
LOL
~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date
If you move the punctuation, I agree with him.
> No, but most of these things do seem work out. Right in the end.
On 10/16/06, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Snort.
>
> >No, but most of these things do seem work out right in the end.
>
>
Snort.
>No, but most of these things do seem work out right in the end.
~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four
No, but most of these things do seem work out right in the end.
> -Original Message-
> From: Russel Madere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 4:13 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Democrats could win back Congress: comments?
>
> Are you a Justice on the Supreme
Hi I am trying to find a phone # or email for Adam, I saw his picture on
this website and was hoping someone could help me!
Thanks!
Brooke
-
Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.
~~~
I doubt it. The reality of the political map makes it too close to call. It
will come down to about 20 seats as far as I can tell. Beyond that it looks to
me like a 207/208 split on the democrat side. It depends on how those 20 seats
go.the repubs need only to take 11 to keep control.
>The
Exactly. He got preferential treatment then and continues to get it now.
Nothing in the media has changed in 23 years. They are still very myoptic when
it comes to political scandals. None of the major outlets are or ever were
balanced in my adulthood.
The political parties are even worse.
> gMoney wrote:
> Tell me again how trying them in a military tribunal doesn't accomplish
> this?
It's fine as long as the prisoner has recourse and access.
The problem is that we, as a country, have invaded and are occuping 2
countries in the Middle East and trying to win "hearts and minds". We
> Zap wrote:
> I'm in the middle of planning my U.K. trip and I'm trying to figure
> out where to stay in London. I'll be there for 3 days 11/27~11/29.
I've stayed in Canary Wharf (at the Hilton) which I thought was
awesome. Very neighborhood but close to Canada Water train station.
http://www.h
Are you a Justice on the Supreme Court to make that decision? Common sence
says it does, but since when does common sence govern anything with the Fed?
>That law would not be legal as it does not satisfy the Equal Protection
>clause.
~
Yes. And it needs to be scrapped and rewritten. There are entirely too many
amendments to the document (over 100 inthe past 5 years).
>Did you read your states constitution about the duties of the states elected
>officials?
~|
Hi
I'm looking to get in touch with Adam Cantrell, I saw his picture on your
website and was hoping someone may know his email address or phone #. ?!?!
Thanks!
Brooke
-
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great r
I never said he didn't have human rights, I said he forfeited them when he
fired on American soldiers.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:43 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> I am
I am not sure Eichmann was tried under the Geneva Convention. It doesn't matter
though. I am saying that what he did was orders of magnitude worse. you seem to
disagree however. There would be every reason to kill her there at the time if
he was shooting at you. I am not sure why he wasn't. But,
Anything else is gravy for him. We should now give him the choice -
death or staying indefinitely at Guantanamo. We all know what he will
choose. 'Cause there is always hope. And the "torture" they are
recieving down there is better than many tax-paying American citizens
are getting right now.
On
Yeah, that is what I thought.
> -Original Message-
> From: loathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:43 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> The right to die.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Nick McClure [mailto:[
The right to die.
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick McClure [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:38 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> What rights did the Geneva convention give him?
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From
Did you read your states constitution about the duties of the states elected
officials?
> -Original Message-
> From: Russel Madere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 2:58 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Democrats could win back Congress: comments?
>
> And this
Even so, the Taliban wasn't a recognized government.
> -Original Message-
> From: loathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:03 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> Signed on with the Taliban does not a Legal combatant make.
>
What rights did the Geneva convention give him?
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 2:46 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> I think this particular kid was signed on with the Taliban a
I was talking about the Nazi when I talked about him getting his rights
under the Geneva convention, not this kid.
He killed an American? Kill him.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:23 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: R
I didn't say it did. I was correcting your assertion that he was in uniform and
got his rights under the Geneva Convention. As to your questions, I have no
idea and most likely neither does anyone else including his legal team. And
that is the problem.
Meanwhile he is very young and has spent
But WHEN was that? 23 years ago? Things have changed in the country.
And many Republicans have made a career out of pursuing sex scandals.
Also, Studds did not (afaik) campaign on "family values", and at the
time, the Democratic party was in control of Congress, and felt they
could get away with an
That law would not be legal as it does not satisfy the Equal Protection
clause.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 1:53 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Democrats could win back Congress: comments?
>
> I would say that
> It sure didn't stick to Studds.
He should have been investigated and, if warranted, charged.
And 30 years ago (or 20, going by the date of the investigations...) he wasn't.
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carrie Fisher
~~
> I had sex with a page and got a standing ovation on the floor.
well done there.
:-)
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carrie Fisher
~|
Introducing the Fusion Au
It sure didn't stick to Studds. I had sex with a page and got a standing
ovation on the floor.
>For some reason, sex scandals only seem to stick to the Dems...
>
>:-\
>
>--
>will
>
>"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
>and that would just be unacceptable."
>- Carrie Fisher
~~
And this is why they ALL need to be fired and new representatives elected.
BTW, where in the Constitution is that duty defined? I just read it and can
not find those words.
Also, I demand a Letter of Marque against North Korea to be issued.
>No, I don't elect them to serve the American people,
Hey kids, I know there are a few of us in the DC metro area, and I wanted to
see how much, if any, interest there would be in forming a NOVA Adobe User
Group?
My company has space and has offered to sponsor and host events.
We have about 22 employees that would be attending and could easily handl
Signed on with the Taliban does not a Legal combatant make.
Was he in uniform? Did he have an official ID card issued by a recognized
government?
I doubt it.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 2:46 PM
> To: CF-Community
>
Piccadilly is in the heart of london, so that would ruin his "not
driving in London" thing.
I think Croydon is an excellent place to stay because of the train
lines. Of course I am biased.
Perhaps the Wimbledon area? Still on the train lines and easy to get
around AND has the tram which goes thru
I think this particular kid was signed on with the Taliban actually. I had
never heard of him before this article so I am not sure of the details.
However the whole point is that no he was not given his rights under the Geneva
Convention. Did you even read the article? He is being beaten up and
I just wanted to say, that if there are any Iron Maiden fans on the list
the new tour is wicked.
I got to see them in Quebec city last monday night.
I used to be a huge Maiden fan years back.. kind of forgot about them. So I
bought the new album and thought it was not bad.
After seeing them
I've stayed in St. James before and that's excellent for seeing the city,
but it wasn't on my dime and it's definitely high rent. I don't know about B
& B's, but maybe the Piccadilly Circus area has something that would suit
you. I guess the Londoners on the list are at home by now, maybe you'll ge
no kidding. How can you forget to release someone for five years in a row? He
apparently did have a false passport and had a hearing about that. That's all
fine. But he served his time and... never got released or deported or anything.
When were they going to get around to him? Did they even kno
that would work if we weren't at war with "forces of evil" or something
>You don't let them go until the conflict is over.
~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date ColdFusion info
I would say that some people are incredibly short-sighted, and would
back something that would be horrible for the rest of the country, yet
good for a very local populace (a tax of 80% of all earnings on
everyone that does not live in Maine, with all money going to people
within 60 miles of Stephen
Maybe, depends on my feelings about the idea. My guess is that if the idea
is absolutely horrible for the rest of the country it wouldn't be any good
for the district.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 1:36 PM
> To: CF-Com
So, something that is good for your district, but absolutely horrible
for the rest of the country, you support for your elected person to
fight for?
On 10/16/06, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, I don't elect them to serve the American people, I elect them to serve
> me.
>
> The FIRST
No, I don't elect them to serve the American people, I elect them to serve
me.
The FIRST duty of an elected official is their district. I wouldn't vote for
anybody that claimed different.
> -Original Message-
> From: Russel Madere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006
> risk of damage to my sanity :)
Ah. gotcha.
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carrie Fisher
~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of har
risk of damage to my sanity :) Last time we were there, we drove not
quite into downtown, but close enough where traffic was a major pain.
Plus, I don't want to pay a fee to be able to drive downtown.
On 10/16/06, William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > we'll have a rental car too, so drivi
> we'll have a rental car too, so driving into London proper is verboten
Warum ist das Fahren verboten?
risk of damage to the car?
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carrie Fisher
~~
I'm in the middle of planning my U.K. trip and I'm trying to figure
out where to stay in London. I'll be there for 3 days 11/27~11/29.
Last trip we stayed in Croyden, did the Tower of London,Herrods,Bus
tour through downtown. This time, we're thinking we need to stay
somewhere else and see what's
They were elected to REPRESENT thier state and district, but to SERVE the
American people as a whole. This might be a high ideal, but it is one to which
I hold my representatives. So far all of them have failed. Bobby Jindal has a
D, the rest have Fs.
If the states had more rights, then I wo
But, it is a coach's decision who dresses.
Therefore, it is a coach's responsibility for those player's actions
on (and somewhat off) the field.
It also reflects on the University, and Donna Shilalah has not
distinguished herself with her comments on this subject.
On 10/16/06, G Money <[EMAIL P
On 10/16/06, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So, regardless of the law, we need to come up with a solution that
> both respects liberty AND protects our troops. If we don't it's a
> failure of leadership, a failure morality, a failure of good, and a
> failure of humanity.
Tell me again
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2627372
On 10/16/06, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anybody got a clip?
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 11:06 AM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Miami foot
I think it's a university problem. Character has never meant squat at Thug
U. That helps you win a lot of football gamesand results in 3 brawls in
8 games.
This didn't just start happening when Larry Coker arrived...it's been the
norm there for decades. Until the culture changes, and these thu
> tBone wrote:
> Wrong, they are saboteurs and spies.
>
The problem is that we've created a whole brave new world. Take
Vietnam for example. Same grey area, but when we left problem solved.
The way this administration is defining the "War on Terror" it's both
ageographical and timeless. Put an
It wasn't just this incident. As the dialogue accompanying every clip
of the brawl reminds us, this is the 3rd multi-player fight in the
last 8 games for Miami.
That IS a coach problem.
At the very least a recruiting problem.
On 10/16/06, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Absolutely. I think
> RoMunn wrote:
> Unfortunately, what this means is that Congres will waste the last two years
> of Bush's presidency
If by "do nothing" you mean pass no spending bills I'm all for it!
> Maybe some good
> will come of it and Rumsfeld will get booted
The problem is that Rummy serves at the pleas
Anybody got a clip?
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 11:06 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Miami football brawl
>
> So, what should happen to the players from that brawl?
>
> My personal take: The players (like #19 for
Absolutely. I think the players who were blatantly attacking other players,
as evidenced by video, should be kicked off the team immediately. Then they
should be prosecuted for assault. (no guilty plea necessary to establish
that they broke team and university rules)
I don't like the idea of dismi
So, what should happen to the players from that brawl?
My personal take: The players (like #19 for Miami) that came in with
boots, or hit people with their helmets should be charged with
assault, and if convicted, kicked off the team.
Anyone who hit another player should be sat for at least a gam
The Republicans have almost certainly lost the House already. The Foley
scandal took away momentum they had going in September and left the House
leadership looking less than worthy of continued power. I think the Senate
is going to stay Republican, if just barely.
Unfortunately, what this means i
Not that, I think it will affect the people closest to it, but I don't think
it will make a difference in other districts.
As it shouldn't. People that knew should be dealt with, people that didn't
shouldn't be punished.
> -Original Message-
> From: William Bowen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tim, I disagree.
I don't care about him specifically, he took his chances, and gets what he gets.
I do care that our government is so inept they don;t even know who is
where. This DOES disturb me greatly.
Who put him in jail? Who does that person report to? Who monitors
these detentions? Every o
He's not a citizen, so I could care less.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 6:26 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> Here for instance, is this ok? This is in today's paper. This guy
He was a uniformed member of a military force, and therefore was given his
rights under the Geneva Convention.
I was NEVER shot at by a person in uniform.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:52 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subj
Wrong, they are saboteurs and spies.
International criminals don't attack sovereign government's forces. They
don't behead American soldiers.
F foreign fighters. They get far more than they deserve.
They killed some of my friends, and tried to kill me on more than one
occasion. I killed them.
International Criminals?
That's not their status under existing international law. Their actual
status would be that of spies and saboteurs, and therefore we can do with
them as we see fit, up to and including summary execution.
Why is this so hard for people to remember? There is international
> I don't think the Foley thing is going to be a major party issue, as
> it isn't turning out to be this huge conspiracy.
For some reason, sex scandals only seem to stick to the Dems...
:-\
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carrie
So far the only thing I can tell that they are able to ban together about is
their stance against Bush.
In many districts that won't help at all, and in others the republican
candidate can distance themselves.
The Republican strength in the past few years has been their ability to come
up with co
Wait, these guys don't serve the American people, they serve their state and
their district.
The Kentucky representatives work hard for this state, and for the districts
they were elected from.
> -Original Message-
> From: Russel Madere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15
Hmm...i went 2 for 3, though I didn't place any of the bets i suggested.
My Chiefs looked good, huh?
On 10/16/06, Ray Champagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I took Tennessee - and I'm happy about it. :) Vince Young supposedly
> looked pretty good for the second straight week. I wouldn't know
:) i love you ray, its ok.
On 10/16/06, Ray Champagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I took Tennessee - and I'm happy about it. :) Vince Young supposedly
> looked pretty good for the second straight week. I wouldn't know, I got
> dragged to Ikea all day yesterday. Which sucked. I hate people so
I took Tennessee - and I'm happy about it. :) Vince Young supposedly
looked pretty good for the second straight week. I wouldn't know, I got
dragged to Ikea all day yesterday. Which sucked. I hate people so much.
> -Original Message-
> From: Tony [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Satu
You don't let them go until the conflict is over.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 3:52 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> yeah but you can't hold them indefinitely without a trial.
Not under the Geneva Convention.
> -Original Message-
> From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 11:51 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Republicans Suspend Habeas Corpus
>
> > Garze wrote:
> > But Gruss, this is not a declared war against a "nation".
Here for instance, is this ok? This is in today's paper. This guy apparently
broke an immigration law and was sentenced to 175 days in custody. Fair nuff.
But that was five years ago, and they still haven't gotten around to releasing
him. He is still in jail for no apparent reason, is that alrig
yeah but you can't hold them indefinitely without a trial. Even Eichmann got a
trial and he did quite a bit more than kill one soldier in the heat of battle.
My god, if you are going to say you can't have combattants out of uniform you
might as well lock up all of Northern Ireland and half the M
gawd knows that the Democrat running against Wilson is no prize. Still, a
Democratic Congress would greatly limit the potential for further harm, which
currently seems pretty much endless.
>> Garze wrote:
>> Democrats banding together? Unified Democratic agenda? Hahahah!
>
>Yeah, a great alten
85 matches
Mail list logo
